Monday, September 8, 2014
Richards' Commentary on Ben-Hur (1925)
For the most part, I agreed with Richards' commentary on Ben-Hur (1925). I had noticed the dove/pigeon mistake, but seeing as a few people have already commented on it I'll simply acknowledge it. Richards' note of the conflict between the values of Rome versus those of Christianity was insightful, but I felt that the conflict between the expectations the Jews had of Christ (an Earthly king with a literal kingdom) versus who Christ actually was (a pacifist ushering the Jews to live a life of love) takes a higher precedent, though this conflict may be subtle in comparison. This conflict is easily seen when the women are washing clothes at the spring and even in Ben-Hur himself when he finally understands that Christ's kingdom is "not of this world"and disbands his legions. To some, including Richards, the conflict of Rome and Christianity is greater, but personally I felt that the conflict of expectations is more important.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You hit the nail on the head: Richards conflates Christians and Jews in a way that actually obfuscates what the movie is trying to show us, namely how Ben Hur's thoroughly Jewish expectation of a secular Messiah that will liberate his people from Roman oppression changes to a proto-Christian understanding of a Messiah whose "kingdom is not of this world".
ReplyDelete