Exploring Jewish Identity in Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut
|
EYES WIDE SHUT (1999)
J.E.W.S: JEWISH EYES WIDE SHUT
EXPLORING JEWISH IDENTITY IN LATE 20TH CENTURY AMERICA THROUGH THE EYES OF STANLEY KUBRICK
By Bryn V. Young-Roberts THE JEWISH KUBRICK Until recently, little academic attention has been paid to Eyes Wide Shut (1999), Stanley Kubrick’s final and ‘most personal’ film in comparison to some of his other works such as 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and The Shining (1980). |
Although Geoffrey Cocks explored the theme of Holocaust running through the entire oeuvre of Kubrick in The Wolf at the Door (2004), and devoted a section to Eyes Wide Shut, he only touched upon the theme of Jewish identity, rather than examine it specifically.[1] This article explores Kubrick’s swansong in order to discover what it can reveal about Jewish identity in late 20th century America.
Stanley Kubrick was born in New York in 1928, the descendant of Jewish Austro-Hungarian grandparents. After a successful career as a photographer in his youth, he turned to film directing in the 1950s, the work of Jewish-German director Max Ophuls being one of his primary influences. After a distasteful experience shooting Spartacus (1960) with actor and producer Kirk Douglas, he turned his back on Hollywood and fled to England, where he lived for the rest of his life. Still funded by Hollywood studios, he continued to work in the United Kingdom, transforming locations in London into settings for vast ancient deserts and outer space (2001: A Space Odyssey, 1968), Vietnam (Full Metal Jacket, 1987), and finally, in what was to be his last film, New York City, completed only four days before his death (Eyes Wide Shut).
Stanley Kubrick was born in New York in 1928, the descendant of Jewish Austro-Hungarian grandparents. After a successful career as a photographer in his youth, he turned to film directing in the 1950s, the work of Jewish-German director Max Ophuls being one of his primary influences. After a distasteful experience shooting Spartacus (1960) with actor and producer Kirk Douglas, he turned his back on Hollywood and fled to England, where he lived for the rest of his life. Still funded by Hollywood studios, he continued to work in the United Kingdom, transforming locations in London into settings for vast ancient deserts and outer space (2001: A Space Odyssey, 1968), Vietnam (Full Metal Jacket, 1987), and finally, in what was to be his last film, New York City, completed only four days before his death (Eyes Wide Shut).
Eyes Wide Shut is based on the novella Traumnovelle (1926) by Jewish-Austrian writer Arthur Schnitzler. The plot follows Dr. Bill Harford (Tom Cruise) as he seeks sexual gratification in New York as a response to his wife’s (Alice Harford, played by Nicole Kidman) fantasies of infidelity. The adventure takes him to an encounter with the daughter of a patient who admits her love for him, friendly prostitutes, a meeting with an old medical school friend, a heavily fortified costume shop featuring sex with an underage girl, and a masked orgy with quasi-religious themes that lead to threats against him and his family. However, at no point in the journey does he ever manage to consummate sex with anyone other than his wife. And there are no overt references to him, or any other character, being Jewish.
This does not hamper any investigation into Jewish identity, however. Just because characters are not highlighted as Jewish in a narrative, it does not mean they cannot be perceived as such, as there is also no reason to believe that characters must automatically be considered gentiles unless otherwise stated. However there is a particular argument for reading characters as Jewish in the work of Stanley Kubrick. Most of Kubrick’s films were adaptations of novels, and he deliberately expunged almost all overt references to Jewry in the transition from page to screen, even if Jewish aspects were major themes of the books. Jon Stratton argues in Coming Out Jewish: Constructing Ambivalent Identities that many texts offer ‘an ambivalence of representation’ to readers, so that our reading of Bill in Eyes Wide Shut, just like many other films that do not overtly mention the word ‘Jew’ gives us ‘the possibility of reading him as a Jew – looks, behaviour, name – but no certainty’ (2000: 5). Traumnovelle is a classic example of Kubrick’s Jew-editing, as the novel, by a Jewish writer, clearly states that some of its characters are Jewish. But the omission of references to Jewish character backgrounds does not mean they are gentiles, and so readers of the novella watching the film adaptation would have no reason to assume that the characters are not Jewish. It is likely that Kubrick preferred not to overtly state that his characters were Jewish for financial reasons, perhaps believing that the word ‘Jewish’ would dissuaded gentiles from seeing his movies. |
[1] Cocks explored Jewish identity in relation to the Holocaust, only one aspect of a much larger, historically longer, and internationally expansive mosaic. Jewish identity can be an elusive concept to define as it transcends religion, biology, class and geography. As explained in the book In Search of American Jewish Culture, ‘Jews are still Jews even if they have abandoned the faith and culture, but Jewish culture can not exist without Jews’ (Whitfield 1999: 6). According to American Space Jewish Time, some Jews take ‘refuge in universal creeds that offered to transcend barriers of race, nation, religion and class’, further complicating the matter (Whitfield 1996: 176). In order to begin understanding Jewish identity in the modern age, I recommend European Jewish Identity at the Dawn of the 21st Century (2004) by David Graham, which also serves as a contrast to this article, dealing with the same issues on a different continent.
|
Whatever his reasoning, his comfort at being associated with other high-profile Jews such as friend Steven Spielberg, suggests that Kubrick was not in denial about his Jewish background. He may, in fact, have been commenting through his work on the invisibility of being Jewish despite its simultaneous ‘other’ in an age of assimilation. His addition of the Jewish-coded character of Victor Ziegler (Sydney Pollack) to the story supports this theory, which will be discussed further on.
Both Cocks (The Wolf at the Door) and Nelson (Kubrick: Inside a Film Artist’s Maze, 2000) speculate that a large part of the narrative of Eyes Wide Shut may be taking place in a dream. By understanding the film through dream logic, characters and places can take on multiple appearances, while events depicted can be the expression of the unconscious mind regarding matters that might not be willingly explored in a conscious state. In fact the English and French translations of the novella title it Dream Story and Nothing But A Dream, respectively. Since the use of dream logic is essential in understanding some of the key concepts we discuss later on, we should assume that the entire film takes place in a dream, and since Bill is the main protagonist, we should also assume that he is the one dreaming.
Both Cocks (The Wolf at the Door) and Nelson (Kubrick: Inside a Film Artist’s Maze, 2000) speculate that a large part of the narrative of Eyes Wide Shut may be taking place in a dream. By understanding the film through dream logic, characters and places can take on multiple appearances, while events depicted can be the expression of the unconscious mind regarding matters that might not be willingly explored in a conscious state. In fact the English and French translations of the novella title it Dream Story and Nothing But A Dream, respectively. Since the use of dream logic is essential in understanding some of the key concepts we discuss later on, we should assume that the entire film takes place in a dream, and since Bill is the main protagonist, we should also assume that he is the one dreaming.
|
DR. BILL, I PRESUME?
According to Ruth D. Johnston, citing the work of Jon Stratton in her article ‘Joke-Work’ (2006), post-World War II Jews in America were assimilated ‘on two levels – both ideologically and culturally. In other words, they were accepted not only as American (i.e., subscribing to the Enlightenment ideology of liberalism, individualism, and freedom) but also as White (i.e., embracing Anglo-American culture)’. By the 1970s and 1980s, however, she explains that ‘desire for assimilation waned’ and that modern American Jews found themselves ‘in a peculiar post-assimilationist situation’ that no longer subscribed to the key values of Anglo-America, and were left unsure of how to produce and present difference.
At first glance Bill could easily be mistaken for possessing a typical Anglo-American presence. He is white, middle-class, and played by Goy-boy Tom Cruise. However, it is important to keep in mind that ‘multi-culture involves producing Jewish difference via doubling and performance’ (2006: 209). Quoting Eric Santner, Johnston explains that ‘what marks the Jew as a Jew is a preoccupation with the dilemmas and difficulties of being marked’, so that being a stereotypical Jew is ‘his typical problem’ (2006: 208).
If we are to assume Bill is Jewish, then Eyes Wide Shut suggests that while post-assimilation has created problems in defining modern Jewish identity, there are also still problems in passing for assimilated that have yet to be resolved, probably a more personal problem for Kubrick, who left New York in the ‘Anglo-American’ assimilated period of the early 1960s. Much of Bill’s dialogue in the film / dream is repetition of what he has just heard, suggesting that he is uncomfortable with how to act in society, signifying a lack of clear, confident sense of identity by copying others so as not to betray himself. This parroting is related to acts of cognitive dissonance, common (but not exclusive, as it also happens visa-versa) amongst people from minority groups interacting with members of the larger social hegemony.
According to Ruth D. Johnston, citing the work of Jon Stratton in her article ‘Joke-Work’ (2006), post-World War II Jews in America were assimilated ‘on two levels – both ideologically and culturally. In other words, they were accepted not only as American (i.e., subscribing to the Enlightenment ideology of liberalism, individualism, and freedom) but also as White (i.e., embracing Anglo-American culture)’. By the 1970s and 1980s, however, she explains that ‘desire for assimilation waned’ and that modern American Jews found themselves ‘in a peculiar post-assimilationist situation’ that no longer subscribed to the key values of Anglo-America, and were left unsure of how to produce and present difference.
At first glance Bill could easily be mistaken for possessing a typical Anglo-American presence. He is white, middle-class, and played by Goy-boy Tom Cruise. However, it is important to keep in mind that ‘multi-culture involves producing Jewish difference via doubling and performance’ (2006: 209). Quoting Eric Santner, Johnston explains that ‘what marks the Jew as a Jew is a preoccupation with the dilemmas and difficulties of being marked’, so that being a stereotypical Jew is ‘his typical problem’ (2006: 208).
If we are to assume Bill is Jewish, then Eyes Wide Shut suggests that while post-assimilation has created problems in defining modern Jewish identity, there are also still problems in passing for assimilated that have yet to be resolved, probably a more personal problem for Kubrick, who left New York in the ‘Anglo-American’ assimilated period of the early 1960s. Much of Bill’s dialogue in the film / dream is repetition of what he has just heard, suggesting that he is uncomfortable with how to act in society, signifying a lack of clear, confident sense of identity by copying others so as not to betray himself. This parroting is related to acts of cognitive dissonance, common (but not exclusive, as it also happens visa-versa) amongst people from minority groups interacting with members of the larger social hegemony.
In The Location of Culture author Homi K.Bhabha’s terms, Bill’s ‘mimicry is like camouflage not a harmonization of repression of difference, but a form of resemblance’ (1994: 128). Likewise, Bill asks the prostitute Domino (Vinessa Shaw), what she recommends that they do, almost to the point of annoyance, instead of telling her what he would like to do. In dream terms, this can be viewed as ambivalence in his mind regarding identity, perhaps too afraid to be himself in case he comes across differently to how he appears, which might reveal his assimilated surface and force him to be an ‘other’ that he does not fully know how to be, at least in front of non-Jews.
|
Instead of struggle to ‘produce and present difference’ Kubrick is suggesting that middle-class American Jews have retreated into their professions as a form of identity, Dr. Bill happily telling everyone he meets about his job, but avoiding any revelatory conversation by limiting them to banal platitudes. He cannot escape from confronting his Jewish identity within his own mind however, which appears to be mocking his assimilated façade.
Although he himself does not seem to understand what the joke is within the context of the dream / film, the name Dr. Bill is amusing to the audience due to its juxtaposition of the formal and informal. But the joke has even deeper roots. Bill is a shortened version of William, a name that in its original German ‘Willahelm’ means ‘will, desire’ and ‘helmet, protection’, all words that apply to the Tom Cruise character who is on an expedition for sexual gratification (will, desire) and is masking his Jewish identity (helmet, protection). Doctor, and various other higher-education vocations on the other hand, have become synonymous with middle-class Jewish New York, and so is a slight betrayal of his Jewish origins; a cliché his conscious-state seems unaware of, and so he is naive to the fact he has failed to escape from the typical Jewish problem of coming across as a Jewish stereotype.
It has not entirely escaped his unconscious mind however, which dreams up a gang of Yale jocks threatening him. There is no plot point in the narrative that excessively explores Bill’s sexuality as anything other than heterosexual, and so the scene where the youths push him and call him a homosexual initially seems out of place. However, when we take into consideration the anti-Semitic history of Yale, it is possible that this is Bill’s unconscious again mocking his façade. Anti-Semitism has long held an ‘undermining of Jewish masculinity, and a subsequent analogical relation between Jewish men and gay men’ (Whitfield 2006: 243) which may be linked to circumcision, an act that left Jewish males feminized in the eyes of others. In this context then, the Yale youths are unaware of Bill’s Jewishness, but they are still able to perceive him as ‘other’ due to his mask being one largely of self-delusion.
Although he himself does not seem to understand what the joke is within the context of the dream / film, the name Dr. Bill is amusing to the audience due to its juxtaposition of the formal and informal. But the joke has even deeper roots. Bill is a shortened version of William, a name that in its original German ‘Willahelm’ means ‘will, desire’ and ‘helmet, protection’, all words that apply to the Tom Cruise character who is on an expedition for sexual gratification (will, desire) and is masking his Jewish identity (helmet, protection). Doctor, and various other higher-education vocations on the other hand, have become synonymous with middle-class Jewish New York, and so is a slight betrayal of his Jewish origins; a cliché his conscious-state seems unaware of, and so he is naive to the fact he has failed to escape from the typical Jewish problem of coming across as a Jewish stereotype.
It has not entirely escaped his unconscious mind however, which dreams up a gang of Yale jocks threatening him. There is no plot point in the narrative that excessively explores Bill’s sexuality as anything other than heterosexual, and so the scene where the youths push him and call him a homosexual initially seems out of place. However, when we take into consideration the anti-Semitic history of Yale, it is possible that this is Bill’s unconscious again mocking his façade. Anti-Semitism has long held an ‘undermining of Jewish masculinity, and a subsequent analogical relation between Jewish men and gay men’ (Whitfield 2006: 243) which may be linked to circumcision, an act that left Jewish males feminized in the eyes of others. In this context then, the Yale youths are unaware of Bill’s Jewishness, but they are still able to perceive him as ‘other’ due to his mask being one largely of self-delusion.
‘ALICE? ALICE? WHO THE ‘‘FUCK’’ IS ALICE?’[2]
A further part of Bill’s cover may even be his marriage to Alice. Although according to the criteria as set out by Nathan Abrams in ‘The Jew on the Loo: the Toilet in Jewish Popular Culture, Memory, and Imagination’ that Alice should be ‘most likely coded as Jewish’ because she is seen on a toilet, there is also a case that supports her as being gentile (2009: 2). While her non-black or brown hair (it may be blonde or red) does not exclude her from being Jewish, it certainly does not code her as such, particularly as it is worn in a style similar to Christiane Kubrick’s, Stanley Kubrick’s non-Jewish wife, who also sports similar spectacles to Alice.
It does not seem unlikely then, that she may be his shiksa[3] wife, not only because it is Kubrick’s ‘most personal’ film that may be reflecting his life, but also due |
to it being a reflection of the high percentage of Jewish intermarriages in America, that means almost fifty percent of Jews are now married to non-Jewish partners (About.com).[4]
According to Stephen J.Whitfield in American Space Jewish Time, intermarriage is an ideal mask within assimilation as it symbolizes ‘the burden of an Old World past [that has] been successfully jettisoned’, allowing immigrants and their descendents ‘to reject the parochialism and marginality of the past and seize all the splendor and open promise of America itself’ (1996: 154).
Alice’s position as shiksa would even tie-in with Bill’s failure to escape Jewish stereotyping. Whitfield claims that the Jewish stereotypes of ‘sobriety, security and responsibility’ are what makes ‘Jewish partners so attractive’, and so Bill’s confession to Alice at the end about his quest for sex diminishes her reasons for choosing him as a partner, hence why she gets so upset despite his lack of sexual conquests (1996: 185). Of course his lack of sexual success is also stereotyping, as his interactions with all women other than his wife are bungled and clumsy, as though they were dramatic versions of scenes from a schlemiel[5] film starring Woody Allen, Ben Stiller or Adam Sandler.
Alice’s position as shiksa would even tie-in with Bill’s failure to escape Jewish stereotyping. Whitfield claims that the Jewish stereotypes of ‘sobriety, security and responsibility’ are what makes ‘Jewish partners so attractive’, and so Bill’s confession to Alice at the end about his quest for sex diminishes her reasons for choosing him as a partner, hence why she gets so upset despite his lack of sexual conquests (1996: 185). Of course his lack of sexual success is also stereotyping, as his interactions with all women other than his wife are bungled and clumsy, as though they were dramatic versions of scenes from a schlemiel[5] film starring Woody Allen, Ben Stiller or Adam Sandler.
[2] Line from the song Living Next Door to Alice (1995) performed by Smokie, featuring Roy ‘Chubby’ Brown. The word ‘Fuck’ is also the last line of dialogue in Eyes Wide Shut, said by the character Alice.
[3] A Shiksa is defined by Dictionary.com as ‘a girl or woman who is not Jewish’. Its origins are given as emerging from Yiddish. Dictionary.com [online]. Available at: http://dictionary.reference.com/ [Accessed 6th May 2010]. [4] About.com [online]. Available at: http://judaism.about.com/od/ americanjewry/a/amjews2000.htm [Accessed 4th May 2010]. [5] ‘An awkward and unlucky person for whom things never turn out right’ is Dictionary.com’s definition of a Schlemiel, the origins being given as Yiddish. |
Another indication that Alice is gentile is witnessed in the opening shot of the film, as we watch her getting undressed. This shot immediately distances her from a Jewish codification, as the dominant discourse of mainstream cinema rarely eroticizes the Jewish body, and never in an ‘Americanized, middle-class present’ setting (Biale 1997: 222).
But there is also a somewhat more obscure element that indicates her as non-Jewish. By comparing the opening shot of her getting undressed with a similar shot of Bill a few seconds later, which apparently takes place in the same room, we notice that there are some major differences in the mise-en-scene. Apart from a lamp and some sporting equipment, the major difference is that the shot of Bill features a large bookcase. Whitfield claims that books are an inherent part of Jewish life, not only as words are the ‘Jew’s weapon’, which enables ‘the mass production of intellectuals’, but because of a ‘religious tradition [that] encouraged them to think of Life itself as a book (sefer ha-hayim)’, and because they found their homeland in text (1999: 23). Therefore there is a possible Jewish codification of Bill, (whose name is also a reference to pieces of paper such as dollar bills and cheques), which is deliberately missing in the establishing shot of Alice in the film. There is also a rug in the room with Bill, which has a style 'of Eastern origin'. On the other hand, there are some indications she might be Jewish. |
There is an assumption by many Jewish men that Jewish women are asexual. ‘For a Jewish woman to adopt a sexual identity’, says David Biale in Eros and the Jews, ‘is to challenge the myths of the asexual Jewish woman’ (1997: 225). Considering that the entire film is about Bill’s difficulty to cope with Alice’s admittance of sexual desire, it would reflect the attitude of a typical Jewish male toward a Jewish woman who has upset his sexual world-view. If this were the case, then Alice would belong to a modern variety of Jewish women that are seen as wanting ‘to break free of neurotic Jewish men’, as her fantasy about a naval officer seems to suggest she desires the authority, assertiveness and power of a military man, the antitheses of a schlemiel. Her maturity in discussing sex, and lack of fear in using the term ‘fuck’, support the notion that only ‘Jewish women, are erotically healthy’ as claimed in Marge Piercy’s novel He, She and It (as quoted by Biale 1997: 225-6).
The name ‘Alice’ also suggests she is Jewish. Although not a traditional Jewish name, it does carry connotations of a Lewis Carroll character that finds herself in a strange and curious land ‘through the looking glass’, a situation akin to Jews adapting to a gentile world. Since ‘Alice’ is a name associated with fantasy, it may well be a façade in the way that ‘Bill’ is a mask for her husband’s true identity. While their daughter’s culturally ambiguous name (Helena, played by Madison Eginton) does little to help us understand Alice’s cultural origins, it does suggest the couple have an active desire towards assimilation.
The surname ‘Harford’ bears connotations of being half Jewish (Harrison Ford), and even outright anti-Semitism (Henry Ford), and appears to have roots in old English, meaning ‘one who came from, or lived near Hartford’ (Meaning-of-names.com).[6] Not only is the name ‘Harford’ Anglo-Saxon to generic proportions for a Jewish American, but the idea of changing one’s name to a place name (and with an alternate spelling, as though it were being recalled from the memory of a place name one saw on a board during a long journey) is typical of immigrants in the first part of the twentieth century. According to Imdb.com, Frederic Raphael, the Jewish writer who adapted the Traumnovelle story to the screen for Kubrick, claims that ‘the final form of Bill's family name (Harford, as opposed to Scheuer in the original story) was inspired by a debate about Bill's character. Raphael felt Bill should be Jewish as in the original, but Stanley Kubrick insisted Bill and Alice be "vanilla" Americans, without any details that would arouse any presumptions. Kubrick said that Bill should be a bit like Harrison Ford - hence the name Harford’ (Imdb.com).[7]
The surname ‘Harford’ bears connotations of being half Jewish (Harrison Ford), and even outright anti-Semitism (Henry Ford), and appears to have roots in old English, meaning ‘one who came from, or lived near Hartford’ (Meaning-of-names.com).[6] Not only is the name ‘Harford’ Anglo-Saxon to generic proportions for a Jewish American, but the idea of changing one’s name to a place name (and with an alternate spelling, as though it were being recalled from the memory of a place name one saw on a board during a long journey) is typical of immigrants in the first part of the twentieth century. According to Imdb.com, Frederic Raphael, the Jewish writer who adapted the Traumnovelle story to the screen for Kubrick, claims that ‘the final form of Bill's family name (Harford, as opposed to Scheuer in the original story) was inspired by a debate about Bill's character. Raphael felt Bill should be Jewish as in the original, but Stanley Kubrick insisted Bill and Alice be "vanilla" Americans, without any details that would arouse any presumptions. Kubrick said that Bill should be a bit like Harrison Ford - hence the name Harford’ (Imdb.com).[7]
[6] Meaning-of-names.com [online]. Available at: http://surnames.meaning-of-names.com/harford/ [Accessed April 10th 2010].
[7] Imdb [online]. Available at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120663/trivia
[Accessed 6th May 2010]. |
DIASPORA DILEMMA
Victor Ziegler’s name hides nothing however. ‘Ziegler’ not only makes blatant his German roots, but its meaning of bricklayer, or brick-maker, hints that his family were of an earlier Diaspora to the Harfords, having laid their foundations much earlier. The name ‘Victor’, meaning victory, and his affluent wealth, suggests that they were successful in doing so. Appropriately, ‘Victor’ is a name that found a revived popularity in the nineteenth century, |
a time when there was a mass migration of German Jews to America (1840s), and therefore a heavy indication of this being Ziegler’s background. The German Jews of this period ‘Americanized by identifying “up” with the Anglo-American Protestant elite’, unlike the later ‘far larger group of East European Jewish immigrants and their progeny, who preserved an enduring memory of their marginality’ in a ‘host’ society, identifying ‘downward’ and feeling ‘no compulsion to engage in an Anglo-American conformity’ (Lederhendler 2002: 249). These were the Jews of Galicia, who started immigrating to America in the 1880s, and included Kubrick’s ancestors.
Bill’s profession of doctor suggests he is of this later Eastern European Diaspora, as these Jews ‘became professionals rather than business people’, with careers such as ‘physicians, attorneys, academicians, scientists, and engineers’ that allowed them financial security, but as a result were ‘less philanthropic (and often less wealthy) than the successful self-employed’, which further indicates Ziegler’s position as the descendent of nineteenth century immigrants, and highlights a Jewish immigrant class divide between the two men (Whitfield 1996: 185). The acceptance of a wage has therefore brought benefits of financial security, allowing a middle-class status to this later generation who took to higher education, but it has also limited them from entering the realms of elitist power by curtailing their philanthropic ventures.
Bill’s profession of doctor suggests he is of this later Eastern European Diaspora, as these Jews ‘became professionals rather than business people’, with careers such as ‘physicians, attorneys, academicians, scientists, and engineers’ that allowed them financial security, but as a result were ‘less philanthropic (and often less wealthy) than the successful self-employed’, which further indicates Ziegler’s position as the descendent of nineteenth century immigrants, and highlights a Jewish immigrant class divide between the two men (Whitfield 1996: 185). The acceptance of a wage has therefore brought benefits of financial security, allowing a middle-class status to this later generation who took to higher education, but it has also limited them from entering the realms of elitist power by curtailing their philanthropic ventures.
|
Nick Nightingale (Todd Field) serves as a doppelganger for Bill, highlighting this divide. Since Nick abandoned medical school to become a wandering musician, his social status should arguably be less than Bill’s, who has merged the idea of one’s profession with his identity, hence his proudly mentioning it as often as possible. By his way of thinking then, Bill regards Nick as a socially ‘lesser’ man. However, for all his hard work at medical school, Bill is no better off in social-status terms then Nick, as they are both hired by Ziegler as labor, ’performing’ their skills as musician and doctor, respectively. The only difference is that Nick keeps his eyes closed to the divide, happily playing blindfolded at Somerton, and seems to find Ziegler’s world amusing when discussing it with Bill, who in contrast finds it an aspiration, and has his eyes wide open to the appeal of its exclusivity.
In a similar vein, while Bill appears to be pro-capitalist, (the materialism of his grand New York apartment, sports equipment such as tennis rackets and golf clubs, and expensive clothes are inescapably noticeable even to a casual viewer), his ‘naming’ of servants in the dream as Roz (Jackie Sawiris) and Rosa (Marianna Hewett) suggest an Eastern European socialist consciousness. Rosa Luxemburg was a Polish Jew who founded the German Communist party with Karl Liebknecht in 1915 (a Carl played by Thomas Gibson also makes an appearance in the same house as Rosa), and would have added to the experience of being Eastern European in the early twentieth century. This would have been missing from Ziegler’s cultural make-up as the descendent of nineteenth century immigrants, as suggested by his disregard for anyone beyond the nobility, such as ‘hookers’, whom Bill, unlike Ziegler, treats very well and shows compassion for.[8]
In a similar vein, while Bill appears to be pro-capitalist, (the materialism of his grand New York apartment, sports equipment such as tennis rackets and golf clubs, and expensive clothes are inescapably noticeable even to a casual viewer), his ‘naming’ of servants in the dream as Roz (Jackie Sawiris) and Rosa (Marianna Hewett) suggest an Eastern European socialist consciousness. Rosa Luxemburg was a Polish Jew who founded the German Communist party with Karl Liebknecht in 1915 (a Carl played by Thomas Gibson also makes an appearance in the same house as Rosa), and would have added to the experience of being Eastern European in the early twentieth century. This would have been missing from Ziegler’s cultural make-up as the descendent of nineteenth century immigrants, as suggested by his disregard for anyone beyond the nobility, such as ‘hookers’, whom Bill, unlike Ziegler, treats very well and shows compassion for.[8]
Perhaps this is why Milich’s (Rade Sherbedgia) daughter (Leelee Sobieski) suggests that Bill ‘should wear a cloak lined with ermine’, an expensive fur traditionally worn by European nobility, in order to blend in at Somerton, a place of ‘nobility’. This is not an item Bill could acquire at a costume shop, a place of imitation, and so his dream is telling him that he cannot successfully disguise himself amongst the nobility, even before he has failed. The lining of ermine suggests an identity that goes beyond the surface, hinting at the bloodlines of the elite that can not be imitated, guaranteeing exclusion despite how culturally integrated one could ever become.
|
[8] Bills encounters with these women also brings an element of heroic hope to his lust-seeking journey, as in filmic terms ‘the upper-middle-class Jew can only find passion in the working class’ (Biale 1997: 222).
|
Although these bloodlines refer to nobility, they are not necessarily limited to gentiles. Victor Ziegler is a participant at Somerton, despite his obvious Jewish appearance (his facial features, spectacles, hirsute body and the casting of Sydney Pollack in the role immediately code him not only as Jewish, but as a vulgar Jewish villain stereotype). But there is a key difference between Ziegler and Bill that allows his presence there. This relates to the Hungarian Sandor Szavost (Sky Dumont) as being a kind of double for Ziegler.
Szavost’s Old World manner make him seem out of place in late twentieth century New York, and better suited to nineteenth century Europe. His displacement in time emphasizes that of Ziegler’s, and his character embodies a Jewish middle-class dating back to a time before the turbulence of Europe’s emergence into the twentieth century. Jews had founded the Hungarian middle-class of the nineteenth century, but the country turned against them at the turn of the twentieth century with the formation of the Hungarian nation-state. This means that the Szavost character (if we are to view him as Jewish) is a fantasy that cannot exist in the present time, as nationalism, fascism and communism have since eroded such Hungarian (and other prominent European) Jews out of existence within Europe. In this
|
context Bill must view Ziegler (a double for the sexually confident Szavost) as a sexually promiscuous Jew (which equates to power, confidence and a care-free attitude) that he himself cannot be, as coming from a family background that remained in Europe to witness a Jewish persecution, has characterized him as ‘victim’, and therefore ‘impotent’.
Unlike Ziegler then, whose ancestors identified ‘up’ in America, Bill belongs to the Jewish community that identified ‘downward’, and so feels ‘the impotence of the Diaspora’ (Biale 1997: 204). He is in America as a victim of persecution, not as a successful exploitative capitalist. His meek identity contrasts sharply with Ziegler’s, hiding his true name under masks of generic gentile facades such as ‘Bill’ and ‘Harford’, while Ziegler proudly retains a name that bears no shame in being shared with Adolf Ziegler, the Nazi in charge of ridding Nazi Europe of ‘degenerate’ art (a fact that would unlikely have escaped Kubrick due to his wife being an artist, German, and from a prominent Nazi family). So while Bill takes great care to hide his identity as a fearful victim, by assuming a better assimilated surface, Ziegler lacks the same motivation, having avoided the European struggle, he does not feel compelled as Bill does. Ziegler does not identify with the word ‘victim’, as his wealth and shared name allow him to identify more with the term ‘oppressor’, just like his Nazi counterpart.
Unlike Ziegler then, whose ancestors identified ‘up’ in America, Bill belongs to the Jewish community that identified ‘downward’, and so feels ‘the impotence of the Diaspora’ (Biale 1997: 204). He is in America as a victim of persecution, not as a successful exploitative capitalist. His meek identity contrasts sharply with Ziegler’s, hiding his true name under masks of generic gentile facades such as ‘Bill’ and ‘Harford’, while Ziegler proudly retains a name that bears no shame in being shared with Adolf Ziegler, the Nazi in charge of ridding Nazi Europe of ‘degenerate’ art (a fact that would unlikely have escaped Kubrick due to his wife being an artist, German, and from a prominent Nazi family). So while Bill takes great care to hide his identity as a fearful victim, by assuming a better assimilated surface, Ziegler lacks the same motivation, having avoided the European struggle, he does not feel compelled as Bill does. Ziegler does not identify with the word ‘victim’, as his wealth and shared name allow him to identify more with the term ‘oppressor’, just like his Nazi counterpart.
‘I DON’T WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WOULD HAVE ME AS A MEMBER’ – GROUCHO MARX
Initially, the activities at Somerton may seem completely void of Jews, the visual expressions of grotesque masks the antitheses of a people ‘who have distinguished themselves in the performing arts’ through the ‘verbal, the quick wisecracking, the arrangement of dialogue, rather than with the display of décor’ (Whitfield 1999: 24). Likewise the WASP-style postponing of pleasure on entry to the house, which requires several gates and doors manned by seven men followed by a long ritual before the sex commences, mimics what Abbie Hoffman, as quoted by Stephen Whitfield, exclaims is to ‘keep Jews out of country clubs and fancier restaurants’ by prolonging their delay as much as unwelcomingly and un-embracing possible (1999: 27). In addition to this is the location of Somerton out in the countryside. As Abrams states in his essay ‘The Unnatural Jew’, ‘Jews are considered to be an extraordinarily urban people’, which in dramatic terms would codify Somerton as an unlikely place for them to congregate. ‘It has thus long been a trope of Jewish literature that Jews have an uneasy relationship with nature’ which would make Somerton at best a place of ambivalence, and at worst a threat (2010: in press).
It is this unease and lack of familiarity with the countryside that betrays Bill when he attempts to infiltrate Somerton. By arriving in a yellow taxicab, one of New York City’s most recognized icons, he is bringing a part of the city along with him. Asking the driver to wait for him by the gate however, is a clear sign that he does not belong, is in unfamiliar territory, and is slightly fearful, as he is ensuring he has an immediate escape route back to the city. Bill is not acquainted with the customs, which in conjunction with his limited social status (all the other guests arrived in limousines and did not have receipts for costumes in their pockets) makes him an instantaneously recognizable pariah.[9]
Initially, the activities at Somerton may seem completely void of Jews, the visual expressions of grotesque masks the antitheses of a people ‘who have distinguished themselves in the performing arts’ through the ‘verbal, the quick wisecracking, the arrangement of dialogue, rather than with the display of décor’ (Whitfield 1999: 24). Likewise the WASP-style postponing of pleasure on entry to the house, which requires several gates and doors manned by seven men followed by a long ritual before the sex commences, mimics what Abbie Hoffman, as quoted by Stephen Whitfield, exclaims is to ‘keep Jews out of country clubs and fancier restaurants’ by prolonging their delay as much as unwelcomingly and un-embracing possible (1999: 27). In addition to this is the location of Somerton out in the countryside. As Abrams states in his essay ‘The Unnatural Jew’, ‘Jews are considered to be an extraordinarily urban people’, which in dramatic terms would codify Somerton as an unlikely place for them to congregate. ‘It has thus long been a trope of Jewish literature that Jews have an uneasy relationship with nature’ which would make Somerton at best a place of ambivalence, and at worst a threat (2010: in press).
It is this unease and lack of familiarity with the countryside that betrays Bill when he attempts to infiltrate Somerton. By arriving in a yellow taxicab, one of New York City’s most recognized icons, he is bringing a part of the city along with him. Asking the driver to wait for him by the gate however, is a clear sign that he does not belong, is in unfamiliar territory, and is slightly fearful, as he is ensuring he has an immediate escape route back to the city. Bill is not acquainted with the customs, which in conjunction with his limited social status (all the other guests arrived in limousines and did not have receipts for costumes in their pockets) makes him an instantaneously recognizable pariah.[9]
On closer inspection however, there is something suspect about the gentile nature of Somerton. First of all, the name itself and the building appear too Anglo-Saxon to be genuine, as does the exaggerated English accent of Red Cloak (Leon Vitali), even if he really is English, as Whitfield points out, ‘whatever else American civilisation is, it is not Anglo-Saxon’ (1999: 45). Likewise, the Christian / Catholic elements appear too theatrical even for the Vatican, while Pagan / Saturnalia themes are emphasised to the point of ridicule, blending Venetian, Egyptian and a plethora of other types of mask (including a cubist Picasso-style mask) into uncanny rituals. While elements of many religions can be found amongst the spectacular at Somerton, Judaism does not seem to be one of them. This ‘guilt by omission’ may be a telling sign that the participants at Somerton are Jewish.[10]
|
[9] The concept of pariah in relation to Jewish identity is explored further by Hannah Arendt, who believed that it is only as an outcast that the ‘political actor’ can display who he is as an individual. ‘The concept of pariah in Hannah Arendt's political thought’ (Tuija Parvikko, 1996) is recommended for further study.
|
[10] In addition to this is the fact that Ziegler is present and possibly Szavost, who we interpreted as Jewish earlier on. Either way, his accent still marks him as foreign to America, and at the very least makes the argument that Somerton is full of non-Americans and ethnics rather than gentiles.
|
|
By blending so many varied belief systems on top of one another, they are creating a religion full of the mechanics of ritual, but removed from original substance, a double for the Jewish experience of Christmas, lip service for the hedonistic sexual acts to follow.[11] It is a gross exaggeration of the American ideal of assimilation gone awry, American Jews rejecting their religion and history in order to survive in a secular and post-traditionalist world.[12]
Is it any wonder that the password to such a place is ‘Fidelio’, a word referring to fidelity? As Whitfield points out, assimilation had lured many ‘children of Israel’ to forsake ‘thy Covenant’ even in Biblical times, it featuring as a complaint of Elijah’s in First Kings 19: 14. ‘One of the constants of Jewish history’ says Whitfield, ‘is the fear that surfaces in every generation that it may be the last, the final link in the chain that bound it to its ancestors. Knowledge and piety were supposedly so weakened, the threads of community were so frayed, and the fidelity to the Covenant had so palpably lapsed, that no more Jews could be imagined’ (1996: 190). With this in mind, the denying of one’s Jewish heritage in the manner of the guests at Somerton, would certainly require them to leave their ‘fidelity’ to Judaism at the door upon entry.
They are Jews playing at being Christians. Although from a Christian perspective it might not appear so, from a Jewish perspective of Christianity being a cult off-shoot of Judaism, it takes on more of a semblance, as they have categorized Christianity along with other, equally un-Jewish belief systems such as Paganism. The masks also serve a need for Jews to disguise themselves within a ‘Christian’ setting, as Pope Innocent III declared in 1199, that Jews ‘faces must be covered in shame. They are under no circumstances to be protected by Christian Princes’ (Whitfield 1996: 173). |
[11] Kubrick sees people ‘mechanistically, as determined by their world, sometimes by their erotic passions, always by the rituals and structures they set up for themselves ‘ says Robert Kolker in The Cinema of Loneliness, highlighting the Kubrick theme that characters, tragically, forget ‘that they have set these structures up and have control over them’ and so ‘allow the structures to control them’ (2000: 106).
[12] Sandor Szavost shares a first name with the founder of the church of Satan, who was Jewish. It is likely that Kubrick would have been familiar with him as he was featured in an issue of Look magazine, although not during Kubrick’s employment there. Sandor was a promoter of materialism and individualism, and is an extreme example of a Jew who has radically changed by living in America. |
In a less over-the-top and literal sense, the idea of Jews playing at being Pagan-Christians may not be as far-fetched as first assumed. In the early days of Hollywood, Jewish movie moguls, not unlike Ziegler in terms of wealth and power, ‘minimised or abandoned formal religious observance and a pagan ethic of hedonism prevailed when they transplanted themselves to the West coast’ (Whitfield 1996: 156). These same moguls also forbade Jewish portrayals on screen, allowing their fellow Jewish actors to play only Native American Indians, again omitting any hints of Judaism from a ‘performance’, such as occurs at Somerton.
But why would the powerful Jewish elite want to play at being Christian? According to Biale, ‘Traditional Judaism is at the root of the masochism of the Jewish male’. In the Woody Allen film Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Sex (1972) a rabbi fantasises about his wife eating pork chops at his feet, emphasising how ‘violation of the law becomes a source of perverse pleasure’ (1997: 206). However when one considers that participation of Jewish people ‘in religious cults appears higher than their proportion of the general population’, then perhaps this too links in with a desire for assimilation (Whitfield 1996: 184). Perhaps, with the grotesque portrayal of assimilation at Somerton, Kubrick is commenting on how by distancing themselves from their roots, well-assimilated Jews become excessively more an ‘other’, as ultimately they lack categorization from both gentiles and Jews.
|
Although Bill may have felt rejected by Somerton for being Jewish, his twisted discovery later on that they were Jews (by the revelation from Ziegler that he was present at Somerton) clearly disturbs him more, hence the sense of betrayal he feels in Ziegler’s poolroom. This seems to make Bill realise the hypocrisy of his own self-deluding, coming to understand that Jews are not ‘Jews by choice’, as the ‘erosion of a stable identity’ would allow them to think of themselves as (Whitfield 1999: 9). Upon returning home he becomes self-reflective, able to see his mask from an objective point of view (laying on the bed), and switches off the Christmas tree lights, part of his own Christian façade.
Before You Go...
Looking for more Kubrick, and Eyes Wide Shut in particular? Then it's your lucky day, as our next article is on:
The Oedipal Odyssey of Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut: Psychosexual Dynamics of a Cinematic Masterpiece
Also Worth Checking Out
Looking for more Kubrick, and Eyes Wide Shut in particular? Then it's your lucky day, as our next article is on:
The Oedipal Odyssey of Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut: Psychosexual Dynamics of a Cinematic Masterpiece
Also Worth Checking Out
- Wanting even more Kubrick? We take a darker look at his body of work in our article How The Holocaust Is Reflected In The Films Of Stanley Kubrick
- Issues of race and identity also feature in our article Planet Of The Apes And 1960s America
- A very different film in tone released the same year as Eyes Wide Shut, yet also concerns itself with issues of identity is Human Traffic. If you'd like to get to know it better then we recommend reading our article Clubbing As A Post-Modern Perspective Of Ambiguous Reality
|