Burmese Harp: Comments on McDonald

I haven't read the discussion board posts yet, but I just want to say a few things about the McDonald article.  As I mentioned in class, I was a bit reluctant to assign it, but I wanted the class to read some analysis of the film, and there isn't all that much that is available.

McDonald is a very sincere and engaged critic of film.  You can sense her earnestness through her writing.  However, I have a few comments to make.

She basically uses a structuralist approach that seeks to name things and organize them into categories.  The "Heroic Altruism" term is one example of naming (complete with capital letters).  The division of the theme of the film into such conceptual categories as "value systems" also seems to impose a structure on the film, rather than derive an analysis from the film.  I myself don't think it's as easy to define "individualism" and "collectivism" as she does.  And while I agree that time is an issue in analyzing the film, I'm not sure that I buy into her analysis about the "repudiation of time" vs. "acceptance of the flux of time."  I know what she means, but I'm not convinced of the value of her approach.  I would probably express many of these ideas in terms of ideology, for example.

Because of her attachment to the concept of Heroic Altruism, and because of the schema she seeks to find in the film. she overstates the tragedy that she associates with Mizushima.  After reading her discussion of Mizushima's "tragic knowledge" on page 96, I watched the scene with the letter again, and I discovered what I recalled--that his mission is to transcend, not wallow in, this "tragic knowledge."  He doesn't get affirmation from "tragic knowledge."  Rather, he gets affirmation from Buddhism, which seeks to transcend tragedy.  I think there's a big difference here.

A few other comments:

89.  Her translation, "Blood red are the soil and peaks of Burma," is a mistranslation.  The subtitles of the film are correct.  "The soil of Burma is red.  And so are its rocks."  ビルマの土は赤い。岩もまた赤い。

91.  She says this is "a film about a spiritual quest."  Well, it's certainly about a journey, but is it about a quest?  For me, a quest implies purpose from the beginning.  What the film shows me is how a sense of purpose develops in response to the circumstances that Mizushima encounters.

91.  The villagers were not the Japanese soldiers' "protectors."

92.  She says that Mizushima was robbed of his clothes and is forced to "don the garb of a Buddhist priest."  Actually, he steals the priest's robes while the priest (or monk) is washing himself.  No thief involved (other than Mizushima, I guess).

93.  The ruby.  Yes, the ruby can be a symbol of purity, but it's also a symbol of Burma.  It's also a reference to the Three Jewels of Buddhism (you can look it up).  And most importantly for me, it's a reference to Indra's Net, which imagines the human cosmos as a gigantic fishing net, with a jewel at each knot.  Each jewel is the spirit or soul of an individual.  These jewels glow softly on an individual basis, but seen together in the net, they reflect brightly off of each other (that is, each jewel shines brighter because it reflects the light of the others).  I find this a great image of how inter-related all of the cosmos is (starting with human society).
94.  Does the cross-cutting in the scene of the reclining Buddha create "a mood of detachment in the viewer"?

A final point: I get the author's emphasis on "altruism,"  "Heroic" or "cosmic."  After all, it's as if Mizushima takes on his task for the benefit of all the Japanese people (to engage in a bit of hyperbole).  So you could say that he is sacrificing himself for the sake of others.  But I prefer to center my analysis around the concept of (Buddhist) compassion.