Another extract from Margaret Forster's biography of Elizabeth Barrett Browning. Wilson was her personal maid for many years, from just before she was married. She took on the arduous task of maintaining the household in Florence, but also in other places on their travels, taught herself Italian from a book, and spent a great deal of time babysitting the Brownings' only son (known as 'Pen.') In spite of this, when she finally asked for a rise in her meagre pay after many years, the Brownings (who were not badly off) rejected her request. In this extract, some years later, she had fallen in love with the household cook, whose sleeping accommodation was even smaller than Wilson's - and Wilson's private room was smaller than Robert Browning's dressing room. Forster's irritation with the selfishness of the Brownings often shows through in the book, not only in this passage.
Wilson and the cook, Ferdinando, had had intercourse sometime prior to the events described here, resulting in Wilson becoming pregnant. By this time the two servants were married (a crisis in itself for the Brownings) and all four were in London for a few months.
Wilson, unable by the end of August to hide her condition any longer, told Elizabeth she was expecting a baby in a few weeks' time. Elizabeth was appalled. She wrote to Henrietta [her married sister] on September 6th that she was not only 'shocked' but 'pained.' Clearly, the baby had been conceived in the Casa Guidi [the Brownings' longstanding rented accommodation in Florence] by the unmarried couple. She does not appear, for all her acknowledged recognition of the power of sexual attraction, to have thought back to the living accommodation in Casa Guidi, to that room of Wilson's next to the even smaller one where Ferdinando slept. The proximity for two people in love was irresistible.
As usual, it was not only the immorality which shocked Elizabeth, that admirer of George Sand [infamously known for her many lovers], but the deceit. She hated to think Wilson had not confided in her. She had never given Wilson the least cause to be sure of her sympathy and tolerance in such a situation but she was angry that she had not been naturally trusted. But at least her affection for, and gratitude to, Wilson was sufficient to make her try hard in this crisis to 'think chiefly of her many excellent qualities and of what she has done for me...' as she put it to Henrietta.
Quite what she was prepared to do for Wilson in this hour of her need was not at first clear. Obviously, Wilson would have to go somewhere to have her baby: she certainly could not give birth in her employers' lodgings. It was arranged that she would go to her sister's who lived in East Retford (her mother had died two years before). Equally obviously, Elizabeth would need a new maid: managing on her own during Wilson's annual two week holiday was one thing, managing for six months another.
But these were trivial decisions compared to the underlying major one: would Wilson come back after the birth of her baby? Could she come back? Could she bring her baby with her? The Brownings' answer to that last question dictated all else: No, Wilson could not take her baby back to Casa Guidi. The apartment was too small, they could not afford another mouth to feed and Wilson would be unable to perform her duties properly. So they gave Wilson a choice: either she remained in their service, leaving her baby with her sister, or she left their service and kept her child. Where her husband Ferdinando fitted into this choice was for Wilson to work out. If she stayed in England, she lost him, unless he could miraculously find employment and support her and her child; and if she went back to Italy, she kept him but lost her child. She left for East Retford with no illusions, still undecided.
Nobody had offered her the only truly compassionate alternative: to keep both husband and baby, return with them to Italy, board the baby out nearby and continue working. Victorian employers though such magnanimity absurd. Elizabeth was a creature of her time in sharing what they saw as an entirely justifiable viewpoint: her peers would not have expected her to behave in any other way. But the author of Aurora Leigh [i.e., Elizabeth], so concerned with the plight of poor working women, so close to a servant who had proved her loyalty over and over again at considerable personal risk, cannot be judged by conventional standards. Elizabeth failed Wilson as Wilson had never failed her. To take Wilson and her baby back to Italy would have been impractical, inconvenient, unreasonably charitable - but it would have not been impossible for people as resourceful and courageous as the Brownings. [pages 302/3]
The saga continues some pages later. Another maid went back to Italy with them for an interim period, until they returned to London again.
There was one farewell Elizabeth was thankful not to have to make: Wilson was coming with them. She had at last made her 'choice'. A year alone with a baby in East Retford had most effectively decided her. (In fact, she had made her decision within two months of the Brownings' departure for Paris the year before and had told them so but they had said they considered they were bound to her replacement, Harriet, until they returned to London.)
After the return from the Isle of Wight and Somerset, Wilson had her baby Oreste brought down from East Retford for a final leave-taking before committing him to her sister's care. Elizabeth described him as 'a pretty, interesting baby...with great black Italian eyes.' His parents proposed sending part of their wages back to East Retford each month to support him until they could be reunited. When that would be, or how it would come about, nobody was optimistic enough to speculate.
Nowhere in Elizabeth's correspondence at the time did she express any compassion for Wilson's agony. The mother who adored her own child and had been overwhelmed by the violence of maternal feeling, and the poet who was about to publish a poem full of the tenderness of women for children, and a defence of the exploited working-class girl [Aurora Leigh], both seemed untouched by her own maid's anguish. This was a severely practical matter. Nobody had exploited Wilson, nobody had forced her into marriage or motherhood. She was a servant, she had married, she had had a baby: the rules of the game were laid down and Elizabeth abided by them.
But it is not, strictly speaking, true that she was obliged to do so. It was not even true that no Victorian family could take in a servant's baby. Josephine Butler, soon to be famous for the campaign she led against the Contagious Diseases Acts, wife of an Oxford don, had already done so: she took in an unmarried girl who had been seduced by a Balliol man and had borne his child. There are enough isolated examples of that kind of courage, that sort of deliberate flouting of social convention, to suggest that Elizabeth could have taken Wilson's baby home with them if she had really wanted to, if her compassion had been large enough. [pages 315/6]
There is something of a 'happy ending'. After leaving the Brownings' service, Wilson eventually set up a boarding house in Florence, where she looked after the painter, Walter Savage Landor, among others. He had stayed with the Brownings in Florence some time before, after his wife left him. Wilson's son, Oreste, joined her at the boarding house when he was seven. (He had a younger brother by then, as well.) Later, she abruptly left Italy and returned to England, setting up another boarding house there, but this venture failed. She returned to Italy, destitute except for ten pounds a year Robert Browning had allowed her for old times' sake. When the Browning's son, 'Pen', brought the Plazzo Rezzonico, he remembered the old servant and took her in. She lived with him there, then went to Asolo with him, where she died in 1902. Her husband Ferdinando seems to have parted company with her in the late 1870s, but turned up later and was also taken in by Pen. Plainly the son had more compassion than either of his parents.
Showing posts with label Browning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Browning. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 01, 2014
Monday, September 29, 2014
Piece de resistance
When I was acting recently in the play, Hamp, I used an old book of poems by Robert Browning as my character's 'prayer book.' (I played a military padre.) I looked at the poems in odd moments during rehearsals: they were laid out in two columns per page, dense and in smallish print, and there were pages and pages of them. Perhaps a couple of hundred pages. Some of them were Browning's long dramatic poems which I think were intended for stage performance.
I'm not sure whether it was as a result of this that I looked a bit further into the poems written by Browning's wife, Elizabeth Barrett Browning. Like her husband's poems, these seemed to me to have a kind of dated air about them, though some of them are still highly regarded.
Recently my son alerted me to the book, The War of Art, by Steven Pressfield, and I read it - very quickly, because it has one basic point and that's repeated in a variety of ways. But essentially it's about the need for artists to overcome the resistance to doing creative work; procrastination is a great bugbear for many artistic workers, and can excused on the grounds of 'writer's block' or other pseudonyms.
Shortly after this I began reading Margaret Forster's excellent and detailed biography of Elizabeth Barrett. It's long and there have been times I've been tempted to give up on it, but it's so well written that it's quite hard to put it down. Barrett suffered ill-health during much of her youth and early womanhood; possibly it was a major bronchial issue that was never properly dealt with. She traded on it to a degree, making herself something of a recluse in her own household, and excusing herself from going out because she was too 'frail' to exercise (the frailty was encouraged by her doctors, regrettably). It became a bit of a vicious circle, aided by her own father overdoing his concerns for her, and allowing her to keep herself from other people.
But Barrett also used this time to establish herself as a poet, and to learn, and to communicate (mostly by letter) with other writers. She published some poetry and made a small name for herself. This style of life continued well into her thirties and then her life changed substantially. By this time her mother had died suddenly and at least two of her brothers had also died, and her father's personality had become increasingly possessive of his remaining children. He refused to allow any of them to marry - though in due course some managed to.
Elizabeth began a correspondence with Robert Browning, and began to meet him secretly at her home when her father was out. (Browning never met his father-in-law face-to-face, amazingly.) In due course they made plans to be married, secretly, and after the marriage fled the country, going to Italy, where the climate was much more congenial to Elizabeth's health.
At this point, things on the poetry front became most odd. Here were two major poets living together with plenty of time on their hands in a country where they knew very few people, and where they had little in the way of domestic duties to contend with, yet they spent the first decade or more of their marriage barely writing a word of poetry! It seems extraordinary; they made excuses about one thing or another putting them off from working, and at times did make efforts to work, but very little was produced.
Browning had never had a real job in his life - his parents had subsidised him at home in London; Barrett, of course, being a woman in a well-to-do family, had never been required to work either. She had almost no domestic skills (Browning wasn't much better) and relied almost entirely on a long-suffering personal maid (who eventually also became the nanny to the Brownings' one and only child) to look after their every need. Their life-style was funded by some ongoing payments Elizabeth received in relation to a ship an uncle owned, and small amounts from their books, and an annual sum paid to them by a friend.
There was every opportunity to produce great poetry during this time, and yet both of them fell into the trap that Pressfield talks about. They put off the work continually, in spite of having no excuses for not working. Even when their one and only child came along, they were still molly-coddled in terms of actually looking after the child's physical needs: first a wet-nurse suckled the boy until he was well into his second year, and the maid, Wilson, basically cared for him in the day-to-day. Worse, Elizabeth was excessively indulgent of the boy, and even Robert regarded her mothering of him as most peculiar.
The moral of the story? If you have talent, don't waste it by procrastinating. You only have so long on this planet. Make the most of what you've given and use it.
I'm not sure whether it was as a result of this that I looked a bit further into the poems written by Browning's wife, Elizabeth Barrett Browning. Like her husband's poems, these seemed to me to have a kind of dated air about them, though some of them are still highly regarded.
Recently my son alerted me to the book, The War of Art, by Steven Pressfield, and I read it - very quickly, because it has one basic point and that's repeated in a variety of ways. But essentially it's about the need for artists to overcome the resistance to doing creative work; procrastination is a great bugbear for many artistic workers, and can excused on the grounds of 'writer's block' or other pseudonyms.
Shortly after this I began reading Margaret Forster's excellent and detailed biography of Elizabeth Barrett. It's long and there have been times I've been tempted to give up on it, but it's so well written that it's quite hard to put it down. Barrett suffered ill-health during much of her youth and early womanhood; possibly it was a major bronchial issue that was never properly dealt with. She traded on it to a degree, making herself something of a recluse in her own household, and excusing herself from going out because she was too 'frail' to exercise (the frailty was encouraged by her doctors, regrettably). It became a bit of a vicious circle, aided by her own father overdoing his concerns for her, and allowing her to keep herself from other people.
But Barrett also used this time to establish herself as a poet, and to learn, and to communicate (mostly by letter) with other writers. She published some poetry and made a small name for herself. This style of life continued well into her thirties and then her life changed substantially. By this time her mother had died suddenly and at least two of her brothers had also died, and her father's personality had become increasingly possessive of his remaining children. He refused to allow any of them to marry - though in due course some managed to.
Elizabeth began a correspondence with Robert Browning, and began to meet him secretly at her home when her father was out. (Browning never met his father-in-law face-to-face, amazingly.) In due course they made plans to be married, secretly, and after the marriage fled the country, going to Italy, where the climate was much more congenial to Elizabeth's health.
At this point, things on the poetry front became most odd. Here were two major poets living together with plenty of time on their hands in a country where they knew very few people, and where they had little in the way of domestic duties to contend with, yet they spent the first decade or more of their marriage barely writing a word of poetry! It seems extraordinary; they made excuses about one thing or another putting them off from working, and at times did make efforts to work, but very little was produced.
Browning had never had a real job in his life - his parents had subsidised him at home in London; Barrett, of course, being a woman in a well-to-do family, had never been required to work either. She had almost no domestic skills (Browning wasn't much better) and relied almost entirely on a long-suffering personal maid (who eventually also became the nanny to the Brownings' one and only child) to look after their every need. Their life-style was funded by some ongoing payments Elizabeth received in relation to a ship an uncle owned, and small amounts from their books, and an annual sum paid to them by a friend.
There was every opportunity to produce great poetry during this time, and yet both of them fell into the trap that Pressfield talks about. They put off the work continually, in spite of having no excuses for not working. Even when their one and only child came along, they were still molly-coddled in terms of actually looking after the child's physical needs: first a wet-nurse suckled the boy until he was well into his second year, and the maid, Wilson, basically cared for him in the day-to-day. Worse, Elizabeth was excessively indulgent of the boy, and even Robert regarded her mothering of him as most peculiar.
The moral of the story? If you have talent, don't waste it by procrastinating. You only have so long on this planet. Make the most of what you've given and use it.
Sunday, September 14, 2014
Elizabeth Barrett Browning
She [Elizabeth Barrett Browning] had decide that poetry, whatever language it was written in, was most certainly work. To write poetry was the most worthwhile work in the world because poetry was truth and there could be nothing more noble than trying to express universal truths. She did not feel shy about calling herself a poet - even when she recognised that she had only managed to produce 'sickly poetry,' She had absolute confidence that with time she would do better and that the struggle to do so was worthy in itself. A good poet was always 'one of God's singers.' Trying to become one of this select band was an ambition she was proud of and did not conceal. It had nothing to do with what she called 'versifying,' that scribbling in commonplace books so beloved of young ladies at this time. This she found contemptible and not to be confused with real poetry which was dignified, serious, sacred and pure. Her family accepted her interpretation of her vocation reverentially. Only her father was tempted to make the occasional facetious comment and he quickly came to appreciate that his daughter's poetry was no laughing matter.Nobody at Hope End [the family home] sneered at or ridiculed the role of poet itself - in the first quarter of the nineteenth century poets were the most admired of all creative writers. The end of the eighteenth century had seen the beginnings of the Romantic Revival, marked by the publication, in 1798, of Wordsworth's Lyrical Ballads. In the decade of Elizabeth's birth Byron published his first collection of poems (Hours of Idleness,1807) and when as a nine-year-old she was starting to write poetry herself, Queen Mab. Playwrights no longer dominated the literary scene though Drury Lane and Covent Garden were still enormously popular theatres, and novelists, in spite of Jane Austen, Richardson and Fielding, had not yet begun to do so. To be a 'real' poet was judged a most suitable occupation by Elizabeth's parents who had no objections just so long as this did not tax Elizabeth's health.
Shelley had just finished
...public acknowledgement was important: she was honest enough to admit that it was not sufficient to write poetry but that having it read was part of the process. It was more than that. Seeing her work in print excited her and she did not underestimate the significance. Her excitement had nothing to do with feeling she was successful - she rated popular success as shallow - but was more a feeling of intense joy here was tangible proof that she was communicating through her poetry.
Pages 34/5 of Elizabeth Barrett Browning, by Margaret Foster.
Friday, October 05, 2012
3 movies
Caught up with three movies over the last week or so, one online and the other two on DVD.
I discovered that Orson Welles' extraordinary movie, Chimes at Midnight, was available online for free. This is a movie he made in two sections over a period of several months, as finances allowed, and in which he used doubles for some of his actors when necessary, and which has an audio track that is often less than excellent. The film has no appearance of having been made piecemeal; the photography and editing have a surprising consistency, given their origins. Certainly the soundtrack is muffled at times, particularly amongst some of the younger actors, and even Welles can be hard to hear, but when it's good it's very very good.
Welles' performance is very much focused on the body - and of course he has plenty of reason for it to be so, given that many of the other characters spend a great deal of time insulting this obese man in an enormously wide range of language and metaphor. John Gielgud gives a marvellous performance, with every word clear as a bell. He moves very little, his regal status relying on the immense strength of personality Gielgud brings to the part. Keith Baxter, who had played Prince Hal in the onstage version of Welles' collation of Shakespeare's historical plays, swings from the skipping, laughing fool of a youth to the strong new King in the later scenes after going through a period of self-discovery.
Margaret Rutherford appears randomly throughout as Mistress Quickly, and eschews her usual slightly daffy screen personality in favour of a woman who knows what she's about and yet has a soft heart for her most recalcitrant customer. Jeanne Moreau is Doll Tearsheet, an odd piece of casting that doesn't quite work. (There's also some question as to whether it's Moreau speaking on the soundtrack, or some other actress.) There are a number of European actors in the movie apart from Moreau - Marina Vlady, Walter Chiari, Fernando Rey, Jose Nieto - and the film looks at times as though it isn't about English characters at all; the extras, for instance, are plainly European. The film was shot mostly in Spain, so even the countryside has a look of not being English either.
But this is a minor point, and ultimately irrelevant to Welles' wonderful interpretation of the various sections of Shakespeare's plays that are slotted together. Given a subject he was passionate about, Welles could make marvellous movies on the most meagre of budgets and under the most trying of circumstances. (Othello was even more of a struggle to put together - and was shot spasmodically over three years.) This movie veers between utter energy and comedy, and stillness and drama.The Boarshead Inn is a complicated series of rooms where people often bang their heads on the inappropriately set crossbeams, or run in under doors that aren't quite high enough, or come through openings in the wall up above other characters, or where a host of people suddenly appear out of nowhere. There's even a privy stuck in the wall in a dining room, with just a gate to hide the incumbent. The palaces, on the other hand, are huge, and dwarf their inhabitants. Gielgud often appears as a tiny figure on his throne, perched on a platform above forbidding stairs, and stuck between high and solid walls. The only light comes in from a window far above. And the battle between Prince Hal and Hotspur, and their armies, is one of the most horrific battle scenes filmed. It takes between eight and ten minutes (depending on who's counting) and becomes so sickening that I, for one, could hardly bear to watch it after a while. It seems to include hundreds of soldiers, but in fact there were only 100 - perhaps a 150 (the reports vary). The editing chops and changes endlessly as weapons fly and soldiers groan and there are horrible noises and bodies flung into the mud (and the occasional horse as well). Unpleasant as it is, this is superb movie-making.
And so onto another filmed play: The Browning Version. There have been at least two film versions of this play, and up to four television adaptations. In the version I saw, made in 1994, Albert Finney stars as Crocker-Harris, the late middle-aged teacher who is about to retire from a prestigious school position because of trouble with his heart. (There are hints that he's being pushed out, in fact.) He's unpopular as a teacher (he's nicknamed Hitler), and himself feels that he's failed his pupils. Yet his pupils do achieve under his teaching, and eventually appreciate his work with them. His wife is having an affair with another teacher (played by an American in this adaptation) and she is bitter about the way Crocker-Harris has disappointed her during their marriage because he gives into those who have power. A young pupil makes a break-through with Crocker-Harris on the day he is about to retire, and shows him that his work hasn't been in vain, although perhaps it could have been done better.
This 1994 version includes some 'obligatory' use of the F-word, as though that makes it more relevant to a new generation. The original script is not only completely opened out, scenes are shifted back and forth, and new characters and scenes included. Overall it works, and there's little sense that it's constricted to any one setting. Finney is excellent in his role, and makes the film worth watching. Ben Silverstone, as Taplow, also gives a top-notch performance, considering his inexperience.
And lastly, we watched Edward Scissorhands again. This relatively early collaboration between Tim Burton and Johnny Depp is an oddball but charming movie. Depp's performance is spot on, and the cast of suburbanites are a nicely varied group. Winona Ryder's hair is annoying, and you wait in vain for Edward to give her a decent haircut in the way he cuts and styles the hair of all the other women, but Ryder herself gives a winning performance. Alan Arkin provides a wonderfully laid-back husband to the earnest (and slightly dotty) Dianne Wiest; even if he does seem a bit oblivious to some of the strange things going on about him.
The fairy story-cum-allegory is a bit heavy-handed towards the end, and you have to wonder why on earth Edward was ever given scissors as a temporary substitute for hands in the first place by his crazy inventor (Vincent Price - who else?). Still, there is some wonderful humour, and a warmth about this movie that isn't always obvious in Burton's movies.
I discovered that Orson Welles' extraordinary movie, Chimes at Midnight, was available online for free. This is a movie he made in two sections over a period of several months, as finances allowed, and in which he used doubles for some of his actors when necessary, and which has an audio track that is often less than excellent. The film has no appearance of having been made piecemeal; the photography and editing have a surprising consistency, given their origins. Certainly the soundtrack is muffled at times, particularly amongst some of the younger actors, and even Welles can be hard to hear, but when it's good it's very very good.
Welles' performance is very much focused on the body - and of course he has plenty of reason for it to be so, given that many of the other characters spend a great deal of time insulting this obese man in an enormously wide range of language and metaphor. John Gielgud gives a marvellous performance, with every word clear as a bell. He moves very little, his regal status relying on the immense strength of personality Gielgud brings to the part. Keith Baxter, who had played Prince Hal in the onstage version of Welles' collation of Shakespeare's historical plays, swings from the skipping, laughing fool of a youth to the strong new King in the later scenes after going through a period of self-discovery.
Margaret Rutherford appears randomly throughout as Mistress Quickly, and eschews her usual slightly daffy screen personality in favour of a woman who knows what she's about and yet has a soft heart for her most recalcitrant customer. Jeanne Moreau is Doll Tearsheet, an odd piece of casting that doesn't quite work. (There's also some question as to whether it's Moreau speaking on the soundtrack, or some other actress.) There are a number of European actors in the movie apart from Moreau - Marina Vlady, Walter Chiari, Fernando Rey, Jose Nieto - and the film looks at times as though it isn't about English characters at all; the extras, for instance, are plainly European. The film was shot mostly in Spain, so even the countryside has a look of not being English either.
But this is a minor point, and ultimately irrelevant to Welles' wonderful interpretation of the various sections of Shakespeare's plays that are slotted together. Given a subject he was passionate about, Welles could make marvellous movies on the most meagre of budgets and under the most trying of circumstances. (Othello was even more of a struggle to put together - and was shot spasmodically over three years.) This movie veers between utter energy and comedy, and stillness and drama.The Boarshead Inn is a complicated series of rooms where people often bang their heads on the inappropriately set crossbeams, or run in under doors that aren't quite high enough, or come through openings in the wall up above other characters, or where a host of people suddenly appear out of nowhere. There's even a privy stuck in the wall in a dining room, with just a gate to hide the incumbent. The palaces, on the other hand, are huge, and dwarf their inhabitants. Gielgud often appears as a tiny figure on his throne, perched on a platform above forbidding stairs, and stuck between high and solid walls. The only light comes in from a window far above. And the battle between Prince Hal and Hotspur, and their armies, is one of the most horrific battle scenes filmed. It takes between eight and ten minutes (depending on who's counting) and becomes so sickening that I, for one, could hardly bear to watch it after a while. It seems to include hundreds of soldiers, but in fact there were only 100 - perhaps a 150 (the reports vary). The editing chops and changes endlessly as weapons fly and soldiers groan and there are horrible noises and bodies flung into the mud (and the occasional horse as well). Unpleasant as it is, this is superb movie-making.
And so onto another filmed play: The Browning Version. There have been at least two film versions of this play, and up to four television adaptations. In the version I saw, made in 1994, Albert Finney stars as Crocker-Harris, the late middle-aged teacher who is about to retire from a prestigious school position because of trouble with his heart. (There are hints that he's being pushed out, in fact.) He's unpopular as a teacher (he's nicknamed Hitler), and himself feels that he's failed his pupils. Yet his pupils do achieve under his teaching, and eventually appreciate his work with them. His wife is having an affair with another teacher (played by an American in this adaptation) and she is bitter about the way Crocker-Harris has disappointed her during their marriage because he gives into those who have power. A young pupil makes a break-through with Crocker-Harris on the day he is about to retire, and shows him that his work hasn't been in vain, although perhaps it could have been done better.
This 1994 version includes some 'obligatory' use of the F-word, as though that makes it more relevant to a new generation. The original script is not only completely opened out, scenes are shifted back and forth, and new characters and scenes included. Overall it works, and there's little sense that it's constricted to any one setting. Finney is excellent in his role, and makes the film worth watching. Ben Silverstone, as Taplow, also gives a top-notch performance, considering his inexperience.
And lastly, we watched Edward Scissorhands again. This relatively early collaboration between Tim Burton and Johnny Depp is an oddball but charming movie. Depp's performance is spot on, and the cast of suburbanites are a nicely varied group. Winona Ryder's hair is annoying, and you wait in vain for Edward to give her a decent haircut in the way he cuts and styles the hair of all the other women, but Ryder herself gives a winning performance. Alan Arkin provides a wonderfully laid-back husband to the earnest (and slightly dotty) Dianne Wiest; even if he does seem a bit oblivious to some of the strange things going on about him.
The fairy story-cum-allegory is a bit heavy-handed towards the end, and you have to wonder why on earth Edward was ever given scissors as a temporary substitute for hands in the first place by his crazy inventor (Vincent Price - who else?). Still, there is some wonderful humour, and a warmth about this movie that isn't always obvious in Burton's movies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)