I saw this last night for the first time - been seeing a lot movies lately - and immediately watched it again with the commentary track (first time I’ve ever watched a film all the way through with the commentary track… these comments are not based on the analysis in the commentary track -- in fact they're quite different -- but it did help me notice certain things).I found it interesting that in Isak’s dreams/memories/imaginings he was seeing things from his past that he wasn’t actually present for (like the whole strawberry gathering and brunch scene that exposed Sarah and Sigfrid). I find this significant.
In some ways his journey down memory lane reminded me of “A Christmas Carol†but instead of being shown – by others - how his greed destroyed his humanity he was being shown (or showing himself) how his coldness/softness/isolation had destroyed much of his humanity… or did it?
I find it very interesting that we are told, by his daughter in law twice (who could very easily have been projecting the - mighty - sins of the son onto the father) and his dead wife once (who could well have been acting out from the place of knowing that she wasn't Isak's true love), that he was cold and heartless and even cruel but we are shown none of this in the actions of the character. Not in present time and not in his dreams/memories.
I think THE key moment might have been when the bickering husband reappeared as a professor and was interrogating Isak. He (Isak) was found guilty of guilt and reminded of his oath to forgive, and this is, I think, the moment that tells us we are not necessarily watching a story about a cold, heartless or cruel man (indeed in most every scene that includes another person and isn’t a dream/memory he radiates warmth, humanity and humor) who needs redemption; but a hurt man riddled with guilt for not truly loving his wife and judging himself harshly for the self perceived parts of his character (and extrapolating those perceived flaws onto the rest of his life) that made Sarah choose Sigfrid in the first place.
He MAY have been the quintessential “nice guyâ€, lost THE girl and spent the rest of his life in mourning over it and then in guilt from the effects of the mourning (and the effects of losing her). By the time we see him there’s so much repressed in his psyche about his own self worth in the world of relating to other people that he’s, obviously, in bad shape.
With the spectre of death looming he finally, really digs into his psyche and that combined with some key positive reinforcement (from Max Von Sydow and wife at the gas station, the new Sarah and her two men, the people honoring him and ultimately his son and daughter in law) he finds that elusive peace by forgiving himself for being so hard on himself in combination with recognizing that he is loved (and therefore worthy of love… no matter who Sarah chose).Another general thing I find interesting – and it’s one that makes me question what is and isn’t REALLY happening – is the transposition of characters. For instance the “real†bickering husband and wife show up again as “dream†characters in the interrogation scene and the “dream†Sarah (and Isak and Sigfried?) show up as the “real†Sarah and her two men.
Anyway, whether I’m onto to something or just thinking about too much I thought it was great film.
Don't piss on my shoe and tell me it's raining.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Wild Strawberries… “A – Swedish – Christmas Carol� A “Scrooge†of the soul? Or…? - sjb 18:36:11 03/18/07 (17)
- Maybe all and none: Bergman had a pretty deep knowledge of Jungian psychology, and... - orejones 04:44:32 03/20/07 (2)
- I don't think that's very different from what I was saying/experiencing. - sjb 07:38:21 03/20/07 (1)
- "Journey of his psyche" is good. I like that. nt - clarkjohnsen 10:57:18 03/20/07 (0)
- WS was my first IB, in college. And only my second foreign flick! - clarkjohnsen 10:19:41 03/19/07 (2)
- One thing I couldn't help thinking about - sjb 17:25:34 03/19/07 (1)
- "...when it was more revolutionary." It certainly looked that way to me! - clarkjohnsen 10:52:14 03/20/07 (0)
- Well, I'm glad you just "let the film take you away" and don't - tinear 06:14:49 03/19/07 (6)
- :-) - sjb 08:28:45 03/19/07 (5)
- "post facto ascribed subtexts" - afilado 11:30:00 03/19/07 (4)
- phenterine - phenterine 07:15:31 04/27/07 (0)
- "Did [Beethoven]... set out to make great art?" Certainly not *lasting* art; he had no concept. (But Mahler did...) nt - clarkjohnsen 10:54:51 03/20/07 (1)
- Beethoven had no concept of lasting art? What's scary is that you mean it. nt - tinear 16:56:31 03/20/07 (0)
- Re: "post facto ascribed subtexts" - sjb 17:18:52 03/19/07 (0)
- Re: Wild Strawberries… “A – Swedish – Christmas Carol� A “Scrooge†of the soul? Or…? - Victor Khomenko 05:44:30 03/19/07 (3)
- It's the first. - sjb 08:15:01 03/19/07 (2)
- Re: It's the first. - Victor Khomenko 11:33:34 03/19/07 (1)
- And don't forget your cod liver oil! nt - tinear 13:33:58 03/19/07 (0)