John le Carre

 

John le Carre (1931-2020)

The recent death of John le Carre has garnered a lot of retrospective consideration of his works, and I feel that I'd be remiss if I didn't join in. I've read most (if not all) of his novels, and I've seen many adaptations of his work (more on these to come). (C has read about as much, as well.) There is something about the grittiness of le Carre that draws me into his work. Of course, there's intrigue, although surprisingly little violence (although nasty enough when it appears). Le Carre studied people in situations, sometimes in committee meetings, sometimes at gunpoint. But his granular lens is always focused on the characters. Of course, this can also make for wonderful adaption to the screen if done well (and it often wasn't). But there is one set of exceptions beyond question: the BBC productions of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Smiley's People, both starring Alec Guinness as Smiley and both staffed with a terrific supporting casts. I haven't changed my opinion about this; indeed, C & I watched both series again this year during pandemic confinement. I've lost track of how many times I've watched these two series, but I don't tire of them, they're so nuanced. 

For a thoughtful reflection on the many incarnations of George Smiley--foremost of which are now those of Guinness and Oldman, but which has also included James Mason--and for contrast with Ian Fleming's (and later imitators) James Bond, read this article by James Parker in the December 20011 issue of The Atlantic. 

Guinness: My favorite Smiley

Also, here's a 40th-anniversary reflection on Tinker Tailor from The Guardian (2019). And here's a photo of the three-plus Alleline: 

A great supporting cast, especially Bernard Hepton (far left) and Ian Richardson (next to Hepton)
Hepton was even better in Smiley's People. 

So to honor le Carre and to indulge in a walk down memory lane of my own, here are some of my earlier blog posts concerning le Carre. And if you must, skip the posts and read and watch le Carre's works. 

Skeptical Anticipation: Tinker Tailor Movie Coming

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy: The Movie (2012)

John LeCarre: Our Kind of Traitor

John LeCarre's A Most Wanted Man

A Review of A Delicate Truth by John le Carre

And from a list of "favorite movies" [sic] I made in 2010: 

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (1979) and Smiley's People (1982). Okay, C already complained that these are not movies. True, they were made for TV; however, because of the quality of the script, acting, and production design, I have to treat them as films. These are to me what the Godfather films are to C. I'm not sure that I can quote as well as her from the script (a frightening ability that she possesses when she quotes Vito or Michael to me), but still, if you want more, I'll give you an earful. Alec Guinness is superb as Smiley. The supporting cast consists of great actors.

John le Carre: RIP. 

"The horor, the horror": A Review of Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, performed by Kenneth Branagh

Anyone who knows me or reads this blog knows that I'm a big fan of audio books. Other than having a loved one read to you, it's it's the next best thing. Of course, some books are better suited to this mode of enjoyment than others; indeed, some books certainly shouldn't be read aloud. (And most shouldn't be read at all!) However, Joseph Conrad's The Heart of Darkness, performed in this instance by Kenneth Branagh, is perhaps best enjoyed in this reading performance. 

About Heart of Darkness:  I first read it for Dave Morrell's Modern Fiction class my senior year in college. He assigned it as the first book, indicating its status at the head of modern fiction. It was quite a read. Shortly after that time, the book acquired some popular fame because Francis Ford Coppola used it as the source text for his film about the Viet Nam war, Apocolypse Now. It's a tale of a man corrupted by what? His greed, his pride, his encounter with a alien land and culture? Well, perhaps all of these. It's a book that bears re-reading for many reasons. 

And as an audio book, Heart of Darkness is perfect for the medium because the book is a tale within a tale. A narrator begins the book as he starts a journey down the River Thames, and then his narrative becomes a recounting of the tale told by Marlow during this same journey. Marlow recounts his journey up a river in the Congo to eventually encounter the man (and the myth) of Kurtz. 

Branagh is an actor of the first order, and his performance of this tale does not disappoint. He delivers his performance with the characterization that brings the tale to life. I have to admit that I have a thing for reading voices that some have for singing voices; while some talk of Callas, Caruso, or Pavaroti as the great voices, I swoon at Geilgud, Olivier, Guinness, Evans (Dame Edith), Burton (ah, Burton!) and younger actors such as Branagh. (My prejudice for the Brits is evident here; not that American actors aren't quite good, but there unaccented voices (to me) can be rather flat out of specifically American contexts. Exceptions, of course, abound.)

In summary, a terrific performance of a terrific book.

The Manchurian Soldier-Spy: A Review of Homeland, Season 1

N.B. Spoilers follow


Iowa Guru and I have now completed Season 1 of Homeland, a gift brought to us from the homeland (would it sell in India?) by the Panda (Inscrutable or Hungry, depending on circumstances). I can sum up my response by suggesting that I feel about Homeland the way that the viewers of Frankenstein's monster must have felt upon seeing it for the first time: an ugly, patchwork, but kind of fascinating. 

Literary critic Harold Bloom has written about the "Anxiety of Influence", how poets and other writers worry about the influence and implicit lack of creativity thereby imputed to them by the work of their predecessors. We now have a test, and this theory appears not to affect the writers of Homeland (based, according to the credits, on an Israeli book).  They seem to want to borrow from two sources, at times rather openly. One source is the great film, The Manchurian Candidate (please! I'm referring to the Frank Sinatra, Angela Landsbury, Lawrence Harvey classic; not the Meryl Steep--Denzel Washington mistake). The other source is John le Carre's Smiley books and the brilliant BBC productions of them. (Again, please, don't go for the Gary Oldman--Colin Firth film, which was close, but no cigar. The New Yorker's David Denby explains quite well the brilliance of the BBC production and the implicit limits of the film.) Great precedents both--but you have to choose! 

In fact, I doubt either precedent really works in the current climate. Jihadism and World Communism both have strong religious elements to them. But the Cold War is quite different from Jihadism, whether fought through the science fiction of total brainwashing (coming as it did out of the Korean War) or through the true-to-life betrayals by British elites buying into the Communist utopia. OBL's efforts to reestablish the caliphate had no mass appeal. Who, among any developed country (Muslim or non-Muslim), has a desire to see Jihadism succeed? Exceedingly few, I wager. While a large segment of the well-educated and the intelligensia supported Communism (openly or covertly--including some in high-ranking and prestigious government and academic institutions), Jihadism holds no such allure. So we have a problem with the basic premise: Brody's motivation. 

Over the course of time, Brody is defined as a convert to Islam (it's happened millions of times before, but to U.S. Marines captured and tortured by Jihadists?), and he's defined as an avenger for the killing of the boy Issa. Alas, I don't doubt that drone strikes and the killing of innocents are generating huge resentments against the U.S. and are a recruiting tool for Jihadists, but to a Marine serving in combat, does this seem so awful when his life and that of his buddies are at stake? Against this premise, we must consider Brody's love of country, family, friends, and self: all seem overridden, but not by someone brainwashed or turned into some kind of automoton. Of course, Brody suffers from PTSD, but then the writers, while demonstrating this, choose to ignore it. (Would we really ignore and fail to treat the extreme injury that Brody or any POW in this war must suffer? If so, shame on our government for its callousness and stupidity, but I hope that this is a scriptwriter's ignoring reality.) This guy, despite the torture, despite the yawning chasm of loyalties and motives, chooses to stick with his Jihadist goal of revenge killing. So Brody's a robot who acts crazy yet remains ready to fulfill his mission to the death--until he heeds the call from his daughter. (Under these circumstances, it's so easy to forgive the just-in-time call in the plot.) One of the two main characters doesn't work. How about Carrie? 

I hope that she has no real life model. Claire Danes does crazy really well, but I pray that we have no loose canons in the CIA or State like her. (Well, perhaps we do. See this NYT Mag article, but I hope no certifiables.) Her character is wrong in some many ways (I know, I know, except the big one, off and on), but she gets hard to take. No wonder Saul turns her in. 

And the vice-president. What a dick! How realistic is he? Such a dick . . . dick . . . Dick . . . Dick Chene . . . . Okay, his character works. 

Mandy Patinkin as Saul is very good. Indeed, the acting is excellent pretty much throughout the cast. 

Okay, will I watch Season 2? Would I look away from Frankenstein's monster? And also, we have reason to believe that there really is a mole in the C.I.A. Somebody is spilling beans that isn't Brody and never was Walker. The scriptwriters have withheld information, and  I expect that I'll have to tune in to see where it goes, this monster. 

 

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy: The Movie (2012)

Gary Oldman as Smiley

The acting and the casting is solid with fine performances. The script makes sense. The staging and setting are well-done in 70s Britain drab, and the score (except for the final piece) creates an appropriate atmosphere. But in the end, you feel like you've just tried to enjoy a 60-minute Hamlet. Yes, we see the plot, we see some of the characterizations, we view the ending. But there's so much more!

I can say this not just because I've read the book, and I find LeCarre a rich writer who can use detail to set contemporary scenes in a world of bureaucrats and spies as well as anyone could imagine. In fact, even modest literary efforts can get become lost in translation to the screen. (An exception, I expect, is The Godfather, but I speculate because I've not read Puzo's book.). No, the reason that I hold this criticism against this film is that I've viewed--on multiple occasions--the BBC production of it from 1979. It's not that Alec Guinness's performance is better than Gary Oldman's--it is, but Oldman provides an admirable performance. No, rather, it's the time that the BBC took--about seven 45-minute episodes--that allows the richness of the plot and relationships to develop and reveal the characters and the intrigue. This pace allows the viewer to absorb the intrigues and relationships, much as one would when reading the novel. And in the case of this novel, it will not be completed in a single sitting. The Odman film starts and moves slowly in the beginning, I think trying to capture the rich texture of the novel and its television predecessors, but in the end, to get in all of the main plot elements, it has to speed up. There has to be a sacrifice, and in this film, the screenplay sacrifices much of the backstory of the other (non-Smiley) characters.

Thus, it's a good, solid movie, worth seeing. However, to give yourself the best experience, watch the BBC production (free on Youtube). It's a terrific show. You'll appreciate the difference, and for this one occasion, television beats the movies hands-down for the quality of the experience.

Skeptical Anticipation: Tinker Tailor Movie Coming

This interview with lead actor Gary Oldman, who plays George Smiley, is very interesting. I will say, the Brits do take there acting very seriously. In addition, consult this Atlantic article about the incarnations of Le Carre characters. Anyone who knows me, or who has had to sit through some spare time with me, will know of my passion for the two BBC productions starring Alec Guinness as Smiley (along with a superb supporting cast). However, I do like Oldman's take on doing a role that Guinness so made his own: classical roles, such as Hamlet, require actors to step into a prior great's shoes all the time. Who's your favorite Hamlet? Gielgud, Olivier, Burton, Jacobi, Branagh? Just to name a few. And while LeCarre isn't Shakespeare, these characters are rich. So, yes, I'll go, although Iowa Guru threatens a boycott. It can be tough, my beloved James Mason played Smiley in Sidney Lumet's A Deadly Affair, an alteration of the first Smiley book, A Call for the Dead, but it really didn't work all that well. No, it's a tough role to fill.

Here's the link to the movie site. Save me a seat.