I love “simple.”
I can’t do “simple”
but I love it. (My failure at “simple” due,
in part, to my obsessive self-questioning, such as the most recent, “Is it ‘I
can’t do ‘simple’, or is it ‘I can’t do
‘simple’ myself’?” “And should the
words ‘simple’ in the previous sentence have full quotation marks around them or just half?” You cannot do “simple” grappling with
paralyzing conundrums like the foregoing.
Nor can you use the word “conundrums.”
Or is it conundra? You see what I’m talking about?)
It’s not that I automatically love things because I can’t do
them myself. (There, “myself” is
necessary. Or is it? Yeah, it probably is. I’ll tell ya, I can’t imagine Hank Williams
having these problems. Williams’s best
works were described as, “Three chords and the truth.” I bet he never thought, “I wonder if I should
slip another chord in there.” He just
stuck to the three and the rest is history.)
There are definitely things I cannot do myself that I don’t love. Oregami,
for example. I can’t do oregami but that does not make me reflexively
all gaga about it. I mean, oregami’s fine, if you have time on your
hands and an appropriately weighted sheet of paper. Now that I think of it, origami is also “simple”.
Demonstrating that within “simple”, there lies a subsection of “simple” I care minimally about.
I never thought about that before. Look at that, a new insight! And you guys were there at its arrival. You know, we should all get together and talk
about that. “Do you remember what you
were doing when I my illuminating insight showed up?” That could be a crackling good conversation.
Now, before I spend the entire post on the extraneous
“sidetrack” of “simple” – demonstrating if more evidence were required that I’m
not – let me tell you about Maudie.
Maudie is unqualifiedly
“simple.”
And it’s wonderful.
Let me also report that Maudie
is the best film set in Nova Scotia I have ever seen in my life, and I have
seen… another one. Goin’ Down The Road. And Maudie’s better than that one. Though Goin’
Down The Road was not too shabby itself. Better than anything I’ve seen coming out of
New Brunswick or Prince Edward Island, I can tell you. Or Ontario, for that matter, and they’re
supposed to be the English-language, cultural standard-bearers. And there’s little Nova Scotia, beating it
like the proverbial rug. And they’ve got
coal there, to boot!
Maudie is the
biographical depiction of Nova Scotia folk artist Maud Lewis, a physically-challenged
(juvenile rheumatoid arthritis) painter of her rustic, proximate surroundings –
flowers, birds, a team of oxen – who becomes ultimately recognized enough to
merit inclusion in the Art Gallery of
Nova Scotia and catch the enthusiasm of vice-president Richard M.
Nixon. (Which triggered a glimmer of respect
for the disgraced former president.)
Seeking an escape from the domination of her aunt/guardian,
Maudie hooks up with a cold and unbending door-to-door fish peddler named
Everett Lewis, insinuating herself into his one-room-and-a-sleeping-loft abode
as his personal housekeeper.
The movie portrays Maudie’s developing recognition as an
artist, along with Maudie and Everett’s unlikely relationship, which evolves eventually
into marriage, although a demonstrably bumpy one. At one point, after a devastating argument,
Everett reveals to his buddy/coworker,
“Well, she left me.”
To which his knowing associate replies,
“What took her so long?”
That’s an example of the pared-down authenticity of the
exchanges matching, in its screenwriting predilection, the uncluttered clarity
in Maudie’s artwork. Another example:
Maudie and Everett deliver some post-card-sized paintings to
a storekeeper who offers them for sale to the public. When the storekeeper dismissingly remarks, “My
five year-old son can do that” the gruffly protective Everett shoots back,
“Well, he didn’t. Maud did.
And you’re an idiot.”
One final example, because I like it:
Sharing a bed together (‘cause there’s only one bed in the
cabin), Everett experiences some inevitable “stirrings”, and as he is about to
make his move, Maudie, responding with
neither outrage nor trepidation instead calmly inquires,
“Are you going to do that?”
(Spoiler Alert:
He doesn’t. Maudie demanding a
marital quid pro quo.)
Sally Hawkins, whom I have seen and enjoyed before, most particularly
in Mike Leigh movies, is – yes, simple – but also credible and beguiling. Ethan Hawke is too pretty by half – no
visible signs of tattoos or eye-threatening fish hook mishaps – but he’s such a
consummate actor you come to accept that this admirable physical specimen has
not left Nova Scotia behind and traipsed off to Hollywood to find assured fame
and fortune as a movie star.
Not to get too “criticky” about things, but Maudie’s photography is frequently “too beautiful”, clashing with the guileless
unshowiness in Maudie’s paintings. It’s
almost as if the Nova Scotia Chamber of Commerce said, “While you are filming
the movie, could you make it so people will want to come here?” (My research reveals that Maudie was actually shot in Newfoundland and Labrador, so
apparently they couldn’t.) (Further research reveals the relocation
was precipitated by the Nova Scotia provincial government’s rescinding its
subsidizing film credit program. Making me a big smarty-pants.)
Not all movies need to be Maudie.
But I am glad that, once in a blue moon, one of them is.
“Once in a blue moon.”
That’s kind of how Maudie
would put things. Whoa! Could I have possibly caught the “simplicity”
bug?
Maybe.
But most likely, it will wear off.
Hey, at least I didn’t say “dissipate.”
A few things. Nova Scotia is beautiful in many places. There's nothing as wonderful as Peggy's Cove. You'd love it.
ReplyDeleteThere is another terrific movie set there...."Margaret's Museum", starring Helena Bonham Carter. You'd love it, too!