RavenintheRain:AConversationwithBrunoDumont

InBrunoDumontsHadewijch,Céline(JulieSokolowski,inacompellingfirstturn)hastakenonthenameofHadewijch,thepatronsaintoftheconventwhereshehasbeenreceivedasnovice.Attheconventherself-mortificationinthenameofChristisdisruptivetotherulesofthenunnery;herbehaviorperceivedasevidenceofvanity.Aspenance,sheissentbackintotheworldofherformerlifeinhopesthatshewillgainaclearerunderstandingofhowherspiritualcallingmightapplytotherealworld.Reluctanttore-enterthebourgeoisworldofherParisiandiplomatfather,CélinestruggleswithfindingawaytoreconcileherpassionforGodwithhersocialworld.ShebefriendstwoMuslimbrothersYassineandNassirwhointroducehertothedangersofreligiousextremismandforcehertomakealife-determiningchoice.BrunoDumontsHadewijchboasteditsworldpremiereintheSpecialPresentationsProgramatthisyearsTorontoInternational,whereitwasawardedtheFIPRESCIPrize.HereatTheAuteursDaily,DavidHudsonhasgatheredreviewsfromthefilmsscreeningsatbothTorontoandtheNYFF.MythankstoStephenLanforfacilitatingthisinterviewandtoRobertGrayforhisinterpretiveassistance.MICHAELGUILLÉN:Areyou,bynature,areligiousman?Ormoreaphilosophicone?BRUNODUMONT:ThesedaysIamveryinterestedinmysticismbecauseitgoeswaybeyondphilosophy.Mysticismtakesustoareasthatarebeyondquestionsofreason,beyondspeech,andbeyondourcomprehensionoftheworld.Ittakesustoanareathatisveryclosetocinema,andIthinkthatcinemaiscapableofexploringthatareaandexpressingit.Thatswhy,necessarily,Iamattractedtomysticism.Atthesametime,itsacomplexarea.Imnotmyselfreligious—Imnotabeliever—but,Idobelieveingraceandtheholyandthesacred.Iminterestedinthemashumanvalues.IplaceTheBiblealongsideShakespeare,forexample;notasareligiouswork,butasaworkofart.TheBiblehasthedefinitevaluesofaworkofart.GUILLÉN:HadewijchstagesafailingofprotagonistCélinesfathertoprovideherspiritualsolace.Itbecomesnecessaryforhertoseekitelsewhere.Afterbeingsentbacktotheworldbythenunsattheconvent,shecomesundertheinfluenceofNassir,adevoutMuslimwhobecomessomethingofaspiritualfathertoher.DUMONT:Célinesfatherisapolitician.Hesunabletofollowher.ButIseeNassirasbeingmoreCélinesbrotherinspiritthanaspiritualfather.GUILLÉN:InthescenewhereNassiriscounselingCéline,sheaskshimaboutinnocenceandheresponds,quot;Cananyonebeinnocentinaworldwherepeoplevote?quot;Idneverthoughtofdemocracysculpabilityinquitethatwaybefore.Idneverwonderedifdemocracycouldaffordinnocence?CanyouspeakmoretowhatyoumeanbyNassirsstatement?DUMONT:Ibelieveinthatstatement.Iagreewithitcompletely.Weareallresponsibleforeverythingthathappensintheworld.InourWesterndemocracies,weappeartoberesponsible,wevote,andwecompletelydontcare.Webrushthatoff.Céline,however,isnotlikethat;shesresponsible.Today,ourdemocraticsocietiesaredevoidofasenseofresponsibilityandthatssomethingthathastobedeveloped.Thatswhy—whenshegoestotheMiddleEastwithNassir—Célineacknowledgesandrecognizesherresponsibilityandguilt.GUILLÉN:Sheweeps.DUMONT:[Nodshisheadyes.]GUILLÉN:OneofmyfavoritecharactersofChristianliteratureisMaryMagdalen,whoseloveforJesus—and,later,therisenChrist—IvelongreadastheloveoftheSoulforSpirit,andthedesireoftheSoultobewedtoSpirit.Herstoryexemplifiesformethelongingofthemysticstobe—almostphysically—connectedwithSpirit.Thatlonging,thatdesire,thatdalliancerunsthroughallofyourfilmstoonedegreeoranother;but,neverasconsciouslyaswefindithereinHadewijch.Thecorporealityofyourfilms,thebodiesofyouractors,haveinferredtheincorporealandthespiritual;but,inHadewijchtheyaredirectlyreferenced.DUMONT:Whatyouspeakofispresentinsomuchofthewritingsofthemystics—thephysicalexperienceofthepresenceofGod.Itswhatyoufindinsomanyaccountsofthevisionsofmystics,thisdirectcontactwithGod.HadewijchinherwritingsalsospeaksofdirectcontactwiththebodyofChristandthepleasureshetakesinhisbody.Mysticsareabletoexperiencethesenseofinfinitythroughtheirbodies.Theyrefusethemselvesfood.Theydontallowthemselvestosleep.Itsthroughtheirbodiesthattheyreabletoexperiencethesacred.GUILLÉN:Thepleasuresofrenunciationandabstinencearemultifold.DUMONT:Oui!Abstinence,chastity,yes,verymuch.GUILLÉN:Why—atthisjunctureasafilmmaker—haveyoubecomespecificallyintriguedbythemystics?Though,admittedly,evenyourearlyfilmsexhibitquot;theupwardglance.quot;Atsomepointyourcharactersalwaysseemtolooktowardstheskyforguidanceorsolace.DUMONT:ItssomethingIfindenormouslyinteresting.Theyrevisionaries.Theyhaveaccesstotheinvisiblethroughtheirgazeonexternals—perhapsthesightofapasture,awindingpath,asmallriver—but,theyaccesstheinvisiblethroughthevisibleworld.Theyknowhowtosee.Becausetheyknowhowtosee,theycanseewhattoothersisinvisibleandinterior.GUILLÉN:Sowhentheylookupwards,theyseeintotheinvisibleworldthroughthevisibleworld?DUMONT:Voila!Throughtheirgaze,becauseoftheirgaze,becausetheyknowhowtosee,thevisiblebecomesanevocationoftheinvisible.Theyarelikespectatorsatmovies.GUILLÉN:FromaveryearlyageIvefeltthatthewordquot;throughquot;isoneofthemostbeautifulwordsinthehumanlanguage.Howoneseesthroughphysicalorvisibleobjectsintotheinvisiblefascinatesme.Scrying.InmytrainingasaMayanist,IwasfondoftheMayantermilbal,whichbasicallymeansquot;seeinginstrumentquot;,anappellationthatcouldbeappliedtovariousobjects—arockcrystal,watercoursinginastream,aleaffallingfromatree,acloud,abook,aMayanstelae—anynumberofthingsthatcanhelpyouseeintotheinvisibleworld.Inyourcase,Iwouldsayyourcameralensandthephysically-projectedfilmsthemselvesareilbals.WhatdistinguishesHadewijchfromyourearlierfilms,however,is—asImentionedearlier—Célinesconsciousness.Thoughinyourearlierfilmsyourcharactersmaybevisionarieswhoglimpseintotheinvisible,theydontseemasconscious;theirlongingisnotasarticulated.Wouldyouagree?DUMONT:Yes,youreabsolutelyright.Inthisfilmtheprotagonistisconsciousforthefirsttime.Thereisanelementoflightandclaritythatsnotinmypreviousfilms.Hadewijch/Célineisalighterperson—quot;lightquot;inthesenseofillumination—andhercleargazeisabletotransformtheworld.GUILLÉN:Ihopetounderstandyourfilmonitsowntermsandnotreadmoreintoitthanyouwouldperhapswantmeto;but,IwonderaboutCélinesstatementthatquot;thesweetestthingaboutloveisitsviolencequot;?Isthatastatementspecificallytakenfromaspiritualtext?Whatwereyoutryingtosaybythat?DUMONT:ThatsaliteralquotefromHadewijchswritings.GUILLÉN:Itsetsupadissonanttensionbetweenloveandviolence,justasthereisatensionbetweenCélinesspiritualquestandherinvolvementwithreligiousfanaticism.BycontrasttothepoliticizedmartyrdomofIslamicfanatics,Célinesspiritualquestseemsalmostanachronisticandoutoftouchwithcontemporaryevents,oratleasthazardouslysusceptibletothem.IcouldfullyunderstandwhyYassinesaidtoher—quot;Yourenuts.quot;DUMONT:IneededYassinebecausehessoreal.Hestheonlycharacterwhosintouchwithreality.Ineededhimassomeonespectatorscouldidentifywithandalsobecause—throughhisgaze,throughwhathesays—heputsCélineinacertainposition.HesetsherupinacertainwayandIneededtheaudiencetorelatetoCélineinacertainway.Yassineistheonlypersonwhosquot;normalquot;inthefilm.Everyoneelseisabsolutelycrazy.GUILLÉN:[Laughs.]ThecharacterofYassine—aswellasthefilmitself—exhibitsmorehumorthanIveseeninyourpreviouswork.Yassinewasclever.IlaughedoutloudwhenCélineclutchedhimandhesaid,quot;Youreneedingloveorsomething?quot;DUMONT:Heisveryfunny.GUILLÉN:AnotherdistinctionfromyourpreviousworkisHadewijchsaspectratio.YouvesetScopeasidetocreateamorecontained,intimateframe?DUMONT:The1-66projectionratioisbestsuitedtothesubject.WhenImdeterminingafilmstechnicalaspects—whenImchoosingfilmstock,whatmicrophoneImgoingtouse,whatcamera,whatcameralenses—itsalwaysintermsofwhatImtryingtoconvey.Here,Iwastryingtousesomethingashumbleandasclosetothecharacteraspossible.Thisalmostsquareframeissimpleandhumble.CinemascopeisfarmorespectacularandconveysaforcethatIdidntneedintryingtocomeclosetoCéline.Ichosesomethingmuchsimplerwhichworkedbetterforthefilm,Ithink.Thatwasthesamereason,forexample,thatIchosetomixthefilminmono-soundandnotusestereobecausethesoundstaysrightinthepicture;itdoesntgooutsidetheframe.GUILLÉN:theaccordionband,thechurchensemble,thesungMuslimprayer,andtheuseofBachsquot;PassionofSt.Matthewquot;ascoda.WereyoutryingtoshowthroughsuchdiversemusichowitexpressesthedifferentvoicesofSpirit?DUMONT:Yes.Mysticshavealwaysusedmusic—Bachscappella,forexample—toexpressfaith.Throughmusic,onecanobtainaglimpseofthehiddensideofthesoulthatotherwiseisdifficulttoexpress.***[Thefollowingisnotforthespoiler-wary!!]IranoutoftimebeforeIcouldaskDumonttheburningquestionIwashesitanttoask,whatactuallyhappenedatfilmsend?WasthatsceneaftertheexplosionintheParissubway?WasitaflashbackbeforeCélinewassentawayfromtheconvent?Wasitsomekindofdream?Isthatwithholdingofinformationpurposeful?Thiselisionprovesprovocativeandfrustrating.AtindieWIRE,MichaelKoreskywritesthatquot;atfilmsendthereremainsabafflingopaqueness,bothintermsofthedirectorsandthecharactersmotivations.quot;AtVariety,JustinChangconcursthattheParisianactofterrorismisquot;quicklycalledintoquestionbyarain-soakedcoda.quot;AtNotComingToATheatreNearYou,MikeDAngelomuses,quot;Ivereadatleastthreedifferentinterpretationsofthefilmsperplexingcoda,whichmakesnologicalsenseunlessyouconcludeeither(a)thatitprecedescertainothereventschronologically(myinitialassumption),or(b)thatcertainothereventswerentreal.quot;IhavevacillatedbetweenthesevariouspossibilitiesandimagineIwilldosoforsometime;but,today—conjuringtheimageofaravenhunchedintherain—Ihavedecideditisaportent,anomenandthatthesceneisaflashback.Whatdoyouthink?■