Hello all, just wanted to see if anyone had any thoughts in relation to the first part of the movie? It'd prob be good to discuss it fairly well on the blog seeing as we'll be tested on in afterward. I'll just give a brief plot synopsis for the first half an hour or so -
Billy Bud is a ship's mate on the English merchant ship, the rights of man. He seems to be very adept at the skills of a sailor. His captain soon sees a warship on the horizon, and immediately knows it will be impressing his men soon. He avoids their advances as long as he can, until an officer from the man of war boards his ship and inspects his men. He sees Billy Bud, and takes him aboard. We soon find out that Billy does not know how old he is or where he was born. He was found in a basket, seemingly dropped off by parents who could not care for him. This indicates a possible wanderer lifestyle that brought him to the merchant ship in the first place.
It becomes apparent that Billy has adapted well to his duties on the new ship. However, he is horrified to see a sailor whipped in public for no reason. He simply cannot understand the logic of whipping an innocent man, and becomes disturbed. He recognizes the power and no-nonsense attitude of the man who ordered the whipping (Captain John Claggart). In the mess hall, Billy meets several other ship mates, including an old Danish man who has the task of showing him the ropes. Billy reveals that he stutters profoundly in certain occasions, a behavior he rationalizes by saying it only occurs when he cannot find the words for an emotion. Another sailor named Jenkins picks a fight with him for this, though Billy makes quick work of him. The two compromise, though right after it ends Claggart investigates the feud and emphasizes his authority. He is angered by Jenkins for the fight, and proves this further when he knocks over Billy Bud's and several other food bowls during mealtime and makes him clean it up even though he is very sick.
That's all I have for today's viewing. Feel free to comment on any emerging themes/motifs, plot characteristics, etc.
-Colin
4 comments:
I found the movie to be fairly well done, but I have problems with the plot. I find the fact the Billy was hung to be unrealistic. I doubt there is anyone with a high enough regard for the law to hang Billy, despite there own support for him. I found the entire argument for hanging Billy to be unconvincing, whether it be by the weakness of the film, or the plot set forth by the book. The ramifications for not supporting the law should have seemed more imminent, if the point were to be successfully gotten across to the audience.
Viewing the movie for second time I realized that Billy had to die. Although, I wanted Billy to live, his death was inevitable. His death brought balance to the film. The movie stressed the black versus white, or good versus evil theme. Yet it also incorporated a theme of uncertainty, in which, the “right thing” to do is not always apparent. Clagaurd symbolizes evil or darkness, while Billy is the symbol of purity and light. The officers symbolize the gray, and uncertainty of life. In reality nothing is black or white, life is seen in shades of gray. Therefore, for the story line to have a sense of reality, the epitome of goodness and the epitome of evil had to die.
ashley hill
I agree that Billy had to die, however, I also agree with Mike that it is unrealistic for a number of reasons. First, many of the people presiding over that case did like Billy. Second, they knew that killing Claggart was an accident. Third, they knew that Claggart was a liar and that Billy was not going to incite a mutiny.
I also wondered if killing Billy would spark mutinous thoughts among the crew. If I had witnessed someone as innocent as Billy hanged I think that I would be upset and desire retribution. I am not sure if this would be a valid argument for saving Billy but if anyone has some input on this, I would love to hear it.
Kelsey
Post a Comment