![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
arishaOff to Toronto tomorrow for zoo and interviewy goodness! To everyone who has wished me good luck, my nerves and I thank you. <3 I even very unexpectedly received a good luck phone call today from someone who is famous enough to have his own Wikipedia page, although if I were to actually tell you who he is I guarantee you'd be even less impressed than you are now. xD
Anyway, I've just finished watching Amadeus which was an even better distraction from my nerves than I had hoped! And since![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
athena_crikey's most recent entry is a fangirly entry, I have found the courage so that mine will be, too. xD
Query: is Salieri an unreliable narrator??
Believe it or not, I had never considered this idea before today. Here are my three main reasons as to why perhaps he is:
1) I noticed this a long while ago and never thought much of it because it's not that uncommon in fiction, but there are a fair number of scenes that Salieri didn't witness and couldn't have heard about that are still included in this movie, and so, we assume, in the story as he tells it to the priest. Basically, everything that happens in the Mozarts' home during the times when Lorl isn't working there, Salieri has no way of knowing about.
2) Wolfie says he'll sleep and then they'll start work on the Lacrimosa. They never do get to work on it, but nevertheless it plays in its entirety over the funeral scene. Is this the movie trying again to push the idea that Wolfie's music was all already finished in his head? Or is this a hint that Salieri has been lying to us a little bit? (hahaha of course when talking about this movie I always ignore historical fact. Yesterday I finished reading Piero Melograni's biography of Mozart and wow, there's actually way more factual issues with the Requiem arc of Amadeus than I realized! I mean obviously the entire movie is fictionalized and I totally accept that, but still I find it really interesting to compare it with what we believe actually happened.)
3) Man you guys, I have seen this movie so many times and I still don't know what to make of the ending. (By which I mean the very end, when we're back in the asylum and Salieri has taken it upon himself to absolve everyone he sees.) Maybe it's just me, I dunno, but I'm always so confused by it. But to fit in with my hypothesis of Salieri the unreliable narrator, maybe the ending is supposed to clue us in that he's crazier than we would have previously thought? And so maybe we can't believe a word he's said and maybe nothing he claims happened actually did? ... ?
And now I am totally reading through all these old e-mails I wrote tothe_wykydtron like two years ago that are filled with analytical brilliance about Salieri's motivations (SPOILER WARNING FOR THE DIRECTOR'S CUT lulz if anybody cares):
1)the_wykydtron said: Why doesn't Salieri sleep with Stanzi, do you think? Does the movie explain this?
I said: Well it's not like they ever come out and say it directly, but I
think we can guess. There's the promise he made to God to live a
chaste life, which I think he uses to explain why he never made a
move on Katerina. But I think really he told Stanzi she had to sleep
with him as a way to get her to stop pestering him about the post. I
mean, we know Salieri doesn't want Mozart to have the job, and
because he can't very well come out and tell Stanzi that, and because
he can't bring himself to lie and say Mozart's work isn't good
enough, he acts like a smarmy dealer and tells Stanzi that there is a
price she'll have to pay. I think he kind of gets caught up in the
moment. I think at the time he said that he figured there was no way
she would come, but later we see him all scared to death that she
will, and then what's he going to do? I don't think he ever intended
to sleep with her, I don't think he ever had that intention at all.
And so when she shows up he can't even think of anything to say. And
when she starts undressing he just panics.
If that makes sense.
But I think it's interesting that he only seems to think of the
"price" ploy when she asks him straight out if he'll get Mozart the
job. I mean, the whole scene up till then is full of Stanzi and
Salieri being all ... I don't even know how to say it. But like, the
way the Nipples of Venus are introduced and the way he's all "Don't
call me 'sir'!" It's like, sexual tension ... but at the same time
it's so awkward. I didn't used to really like that scene but now I
think it's interesting.
And I get a kick out of the scene that comes after he kicks her out
of his house, where he's arriving home and his servant is like, "Herr
Mozart is here to see you," and Salieri is like "OMG I NEED TO LEARN
TO THINK AHEAD" hahahahaha. Well the first time I saw that scene I
didn't even consider he might be scared that Stanzi told Wolfie about
what he did. But now every time I am like, PWNED!!!!!
2) I said: So today at work I was thinking about Salieri and how you asked what
I thought the reason was for Salieri not sleeping with Stanzi. Well,
I still firmly believe that he never intended to sleep with her and
never believed she would even come, but the only way he can get her
to leave without denying the greatness of the music is to act like a
sleazy higher-up and tell her that nonsense about a "price." And
Stanzi surprises him by being willing to pay that price and he
panics. Well anyway I've already said all this I believe.
(btw, I never replied to it I don't think but I really like your
comment about how Stanzi may not actually qualify as an upper-class
woman but as she and Mozart are trying to act the part of an
upper-class couple she is not able to go out and get a job and work.
And so I guess that's part of the reason that she's willing to sleep
with Salieri; they need money and she knows they need money and she
only has so many venues she can use to get money and so when she sees
a chance she takes it. But you've already said this before I think so
anyway.)
But I was wondering -- pretending it would be in character for
Salieri to sleep with Stanzi, how do you think that would affect the
movie as a whole? His character as a whole? I think one thing that
the movie does nicely is portraying Salieri's actions against Mozart
as actions you can see the source of. Like, yeah, he's crazy, he
knows he crazy, he admits it; but at the same time his actions all
make sense, you can see why he does them even if you would never do
the same thing yourself. Like, I don't think we're meant to identify
with Salieri, but I do think we're supposed to understand him. And so
I wonder if Salieri actually going ahead and sleeping with Stanzi
would push his character too far. Like, it's one thing to drive your
rival into poverty and overwork him and freak him out by dressing as
his dead father. But sleeping with your rival's wife? Maybe that
would be pushing his character out of that range, maybe that would
make Salieri too unlikeable for the audience to accept as a
sympathetic protagonist. I mean, I don't know for sure, I'm just
wondering about it.
And also I wonder how much it would affect the rest of the movie, if
he had done that. You could say the rest of the movie would have been
the same. Except I wonder -- if Stanzi and Salieri had slept
together, would Salieri have felt so guilty that it would lead him to
give Mozart the post? Or if he didn't, what would Stanzi's reaction
be? Would she tell? But she couldn't tell, could she? What would
happen to her then?
Hahaha, I suspect we are entering into the area of AU fanfiction
which I am not going to be the one to write. Hahaha. :p
(Speaking of which, could "Amadeus" itself be considered AU
fanfiction? Hahaha, I get the hugest kick out of this kind of thing.)
ANALYTICAL BRILLIANCE!! (I'm currently too lazy to fix the formatting. Maybe upon my return.)
And although it's only midnight, I guess I should get some sleep ... I've been trying pretty well in vain to adjust to a much better schedule, considering the interviews on Tuesday start at six a.m. our time ... D:
Longer letter later~! :D
Edit a day later: MAN I only JUST realized that in the Director's Cut, the scene where Salieri recommends Wolfie to that dude with the dogs comes right after the scene where he promises to do everything he can to block him. So ... does he know the lesson will be a failure? Or is this early evidence of his "splitting in half"??
SO MANY QUESTIONS--!
Anyway, I've just finished watching Amadeus which was an even better distraction from my nerves than I had hoped! And since
athena_crikey's most recent entry is a fangirly entry, I have found the courage so that mine will be, too. xDQuery: is Salieri an unreliable narrator??
Believe it or not, I had never considered this idea before today. Here are my three main reasons as to why perhaps he is:
1) I noticed this a long while ago and never thought much of it because it's not that uncommon in fiction, but there are a fair number of scenes that Salieri didn't witness and couldn't have heard about that are still included in this movie, and so, we assume, in the story as he tells it to the priest. Basically, everything that happens in the Mozarts' home during the times when Lorl isn't working there, Salieri has no way of knowing about.
2) Wolfie says he'll sleep and then they'll start work on the Lacrimosa. They never do get to work on it, but nevertheless it plays in its entirety over the funeral scene. Is this the movie trying again to push the idea that Wolfie's music was all already finished in his head? Or is this a hint that Salieri has been lying to us a little bit? (hahaha of course when talking about this movie I always ignore historical fact. Yesterday I finished reading Piero Melograni's biography of Mozart and wow, there's actually way more factual issues with the Requiem arc of Amadeus than I realized! I mean obviously the entire movie is fictionalized and I totally accept that, but still I find it really interesting to compare it with what we believe actually happened.)
3) Man you guys, I have seen this movie so many times and I still don't know what to make of the ending. (By which I mean the very end, when we're back in the asylum and Salieri has taken it upon himself to absolve everyone he sees.) Maybe it's just me, I dunno, but I'm always so confused by it. But to fit in with my hypothesis of Salieri the unreliable narrator, maybe the ending is supposed to clue us in that he's crazier than we would have previously thought? And so maybe we can't believe a word he's said and maybe nothing he claims happened actually did? ... ?
And now I am totally reading through all these old e-mails I wrote to
the_wykydtron like two years ago that are filled with analytical brilliance about Salieri's motivations (SPOILER WARNING FOR THE DIRECTOR'S CUT lulz if anybody cares): 1)
the_wykydtron said: Why doesn't Salieri sleep with Stanzi, do you think? Does the movie explain this?I said: Well it's not like they ever come out and say it directly, but I
think we can guess. There's the promise he made to God to live a
chaste life, which I think he uses to explain why he never made a
move on Katerina. But I think really he told Stanzi she had to sleep
with him as a way to get her to stop pestering him about the post. I
mean, we know Salieri doesn't want Mozart to have the job, and
because he can't very well come out and tell Stanzi that, and because
he can't bring himself to lie and say Mozart's work isn't good
enough, he acts like a smarmy dealer and tells Stanzi that there is a
price she'll have to pay. I think he kind of gets caught up in the
moment. I think at the time he said that he figured there was no way
she would come, but later we see him all scared to death that she
will, and then what's he going to do? I don't think he ever intended
to sleep with her, I don't think he ever had that intention at all.
And so when she shows up he can't even think of anything to say. And
when she starts undressing he just panics.
If that makes sense.
But I think it's interesting that he only seems to think of the
"price" ploy when she asks him straight out if he'll get Mozart the
job. I mean, the whole scene up till then is full of Stanzi and
Salieri being all ... I don't even know how to say it. But like, the
way the Nipples of Venus are introduced and the way he's all "Don't
call me 'sir'!" It's like, sexual tension ... but at the same time
it's so awkward. I didn't used to really like that scene but now I
think it's interesting.
And I get a kick out of the scene that comes after he kicks her out
of his house, where he's arriving home and his servant is like, "Herr
Mozart is here to see you," and Salieri is like "OMG I NEED TO LEARN
TO THINK AHEAD" hahahahaha. Well the first time I saw that scene I
didn't even consider he might be scared that Stanzi told Wolfie about
what he did. But now every time I am like, PWNED!!!!!
2) I said: So today at work I was thinking about Salieri and how you asked what
I thought the reason was for Salieri not sleeping with Stanzi. Well,
I still firmly believe that he never intended to sleep with her and
never believed she would even come, but the only way he can get her
to leave without denying the greatness of the music is to act like a
sleazy higher-up and tell her that nonsense about a "price." And
Stanzi surprises him by being willing to pay that price and he
panics. Well anyway I've already said all this I believe.
(btw, I never replied to it I don't think but I really like your
comment about how Stanzi may not actually qualify as an upper-class
woman but as she and Mozart are trying to act the part of an
upper-class couple she is not able to go out and get a job and work.
And so I guess that's part of the reason that she's willing to sleep
with Salieri; they need money and she knows they need money and she
only has so many venues she can use to get money and so when she sees
a chance she takes it. But you've already said this before I think so
anyway.)
But I was wondering -- pretending it would be in character for
Salieri to sleep with Stanzi, how do you think that would affect the
movie as a whole? His character as a whole? I think one thing that
the movie does nicely is portraying Salieri's actions against Mozart
as actions you can see the source of. Like, yeah, he's crazy, he
knows he crazy, he admits it; but at the same time his actions all
make sense, you can see why he does them even if you would never do
the same thing yourself. Like, I don't think we're meant to identify
with Salieri, but I do think we're supposed to understand him. And so
I wonder if Salieri actually going ahead and sleeping with Stanzi
would push his character too far. Like, it's one thing to drive your
rival into poverty and overwork him and freak him out by dressing as
his dead father. But sleeping with your rival's wife? Maybe that
would be pushing his character out of that range, maybe that would
make Salieri too unlikeable for the audience to accept as a
sympathetic protagonist. I mean, I don't know for sure, I'm just
wondering about it.
And also I wonder how much it would affect the rest of the movie, if
he had done that. You could say the rest of the movie would have been
the same. Except I wonder -- if Stanzi and Salieri had slept
together, would Salieri have felt so guilty that it would lead him to
give Mozart the post? Or if he didn't, what would Stanzi's reaction
be? Would she tell? But she couldn't tell, could she? What would
happen to her then?
Hahaha, I suspect we are entering into the area of AU fanfiction
which I am not going to be the one to write. Hahaha. :p
(Speaking of which, could "Amadeus" itself be considered AU
fanfiction? Hahaha, I get the hugest kick out of this kind of thing.)
ANALYTICAL BRILLIANCE!! (I'm currently too lazy to fix the formatting. Maybe upon my return.)
And although it's only midnight, I guess I should get some sleep ... I've been trying pretty well in vain to adjust to a much better schedule, considering the interviews on Tuesday start at six a.m. our time ... D:
Longer letter later~! :D
Edit a day later: MAN I only JUST realized that in the Director's Cut, the scene where Salieri recommends Wolfie to that dude with the dogs comes right after the scene where he promises to do everything he can to block him. So ... does he know the lesson will be a failure? Or is this early evidence of his "splitting in half"??
SO MANY QUESTIONS--!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-26 08:53 am (UTC)GOOD LUCK! I didn't actually realise you were leaving tomorrow. Today, in fact. But yes. I HOPE IT GOES WELL. ENJOY THE ZOO.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-26 04:34 pm (UTC)THANK YOU~!
Is Salieri an unreliable narrator?
Date: 2008-10-26 08:32 pm (UTC)[Besides, perhaps a word like "unreliable" gives Meyer too much credit - I don't think she even took into account things like critical distance.]
Anyways.
Salieri. I don't know if this is me falling into the seductive perspectival trap of the film medium, but I think it is more difficult to determine an unreliable narrator in a movie than in a novel. The hints and suggestions that are possible in a novel are less obvious or sometimes completely impossible on the screen. Therefore (and I realize my logic is weak here) I think that unless the viewer is clued into the narrator's bias in a fairly straightforward way, my inclination would be to trust the camera's perspective. Maybe this is laziness on my part, my willingness to trust concrete visuals in a movie where I would have doubted the words that made up the same scene in a book? Or my lack of familiarity with the movie?
Yet I always (lol, for the maybe two and a half times I've see this movie) felt that crazy!Salieri framed the story but was not of it. I think the very fact that he is narrating events that he couldn't possibly have seen or even perhaps have known about is a signal to the viewer that his narration *isn't* unreliable, because it's no longer his. I think the fact that Salieri frames the novel is intended to give the movie greater thematic and emotional impact, and I think it totally works, but I don't think this framing technique is *insisted upon*. I think that the mechanics of the movie dictate that Salieri gives up his narration to an omniscient narrator in between sanatorium scenes.
Re: Is Salieri an unreliable narrator?
Date: 2008-10-27 12:59 am (UTC)Re: Salieri, I dunno. Probably shallowly, I always just assumed the movie used him as an entrance and exit, but sort of forgot that the story was supposed to be being told through his eyes for the majority of the actual plot... Perhaps I should give directors more credit. IT WON AN OSCAR, IT MUST BE DEEP.
Re: Is Salieri an unreliable narrator?
Date: 2008-10-28 03:44 pm (UTC)osoi henji
Date: 2008-11-09 08:45 am (UTC)You totally should, because I would totally read them. xD
MY COLLEGE BUDDIES, THEY LEAVE ME BEHIND.
(Secretly this is how I feel whenever
IT WON AN OSCAR, IT MUST BE DEEP.
TRUFAX.
(And actually, it won eight Oscars? kthx!!)
belated reply
Date: 2008-11-09 08:49 am (UTC)Yeah, I won't press too hard upon my first point because definitely a ton of movies include scenes the narrator couldn't know about and it's not intended to mean anything special.
Do you have no thoughts about my second point? xD Thinking about it again I guess this is the only real argument I have about Salieri maybe being an unreliable narrator, haha.
Unrelated, I totally want to write something now that involves an unreliable narrator. xD It seems really tricky though!!