Book Review - Wolf Hall (Hilary Mantel)

This isn't really a review as such, due to both the book's complex style and my general ignorance of the period. The best I can do is sum up by experience reading it.

For three years, my copy of Wolf Hall sat on my shelf having only been opened once. The story of a lowborn man rising through the ranks through his own cunning was a fascinating one, but I was daunted by both the length of the book, and its present tense prose, of which I'm not a huge fan. I was also largely ignorant of Tudor England (and still am) so this was another factor that put me off reading for quite some time.

Having read the book, it's clear that you'd have to read it several times to really pick up on the nuances of the text and its characters. Unsurprisingly, you also need an indepth understanding of the period, not just the events, but the people and their personalities. I admit, it got quite frustrating trying to remember which Thomas or Mary was which, or who was related to whom. This obscurity made it hard at times to engage with the text and made reading it feel more like a chore than a pleasure.

That said, I can understand why Mantel wrote this way. The intricacies of the “plot” work to entice the reader, but she holds things back to entice the reader into studying the period more. While I didn't instantly start reading up on Tudor history after I'd finished reading, I can see myself returning to this book repeatedly to try and make sense of it. While not the easiest read, it certainly poses a fascinating challenge. Before returning though, I see I will have to study the period more to gain more from the text.

Mantel's ambiguous approach to history can be seen especially in her treatment of Cromwell himself. Although the whole book is from his perspective, he remains a shadowy figure throughout. There are hints of his ruthlessness (like when he imagines pushing George Cavendish into the Thames), his humanity (when he remembers his lost family) and his beliefs (when he raves against the idolatry of the Catholic Church). These moments of clarity struck me all the more because for the most part, Cromwell was hard for me to figure out.

Perhaps Mantel was trying to hook the reader as I described earlier. Or perhaps she wanted to pay homage to Cromwell's cunning by making him an enigma to the reader. One novel touch was that for the most part, Cromwell isn't referred to by name, but as “he”. This is just one more way to make him seem more like an element instead of a person. In this regard, I can't really say that this book humanizes Cromwell as such, but it still leaves a strong impression all the same.

I can't speak for Tudor experts, but if you're a fan of history or courtly intrigue, I would still say Wolf Hall is worth a look.

Film Review - Night of the Hunter

Night of the Hunter opens with Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum), a preacher from the Deep South who does the Lord's will by murdering women he finds promiscuous. When Harry ends up sharing a cell with a condemned man (Peter Graves) who's stolen and hidden a considerable sum of money, he hatches a plan to marry his widow (Shelley Winters) and take the money for himself. But his stepson John Harper (Billy Chapin) cottons on to him, and flees with his sister and the money.

Night of the Hunter feels more like two ok films instead of one great one. The second half focuses more on John than Harry, and feels more like a children's drama than a thriller. The movie has a clear angel/devil dichotomy, with Harry as the murderous parental figure contrasted with Miss Cooper (Lillian Gish), the stern but good-natured Christian woman who adopts the Harper orphans.

The strongest link between the two halves (more so than the plot) is the portrayal of Christianity. The first half not only focuses on the psychotic Harry, but also shows him corrupting Mrs Palmer, turning her into a bible-thumping zealot who fails to protect her children. Christianity is represented by Miss Cooper in the second half, showing it in its more idealistic form. Whereas Harry teaches that we are all sinners and must be punished, Miss Cooper teaches about Exodus and overcoming adversity. Both figures have a profound impact on John – at first he's frightened off by Christianity in the form of Harry, but eventually embraces it in the form of Miss Cooper.

The acting is on the whole very good. Mitchum has a ball playing the insincere preacher, and I felt it was a bit of a shame that we saw less of him in the film's second half. Gish gives Miss Cooper a good mix of authority and compassion. Chapin does a decent job as John, portraying a stubborn child without veering into sentimentality. One interesting character who I felt should have been expanded more was Icey Spoon, a shameless gossip who sings Harry's praises at the start, only to lead the mob when he's convicted of murder. I felt the movie could have better explored the hypocrisy and bigotry that can bring out the worst in people's religion, to parallel with Harry's own bigotry.

Harry's motivation is one of the film's weaker points. It opens strongly with Harry targeting women for the way their promiscuity, introducing him as a megalomaniac. This is also done very well when he admonishes Mrs Palmer for trying to get in bed with him on their wedding night, showing he's a predator of women, but not the type we usually think of. However, Harry's greed is his main drive for the rest of the film – if not for that, he wouldn't have an excuse to pursue the kids. I felt this was a much weaker motivation and cancelled out Harry's earlier characterisation. Harry's puritan crusade at him start made him seem like a more powerful threat, especially as it speaks to centuries of religious violence which is still around today. By the end of the film, this has been replaced by his greed, which makes him seem less of a monster and more of a pathetic sleazebag.

As I said before, the film changes so drastically in the middle that it feels like two shorter films. The Christian motif transcends the two halves well, but the tone and characterisation suffers. Night of the Hunter is worth seeing for its handling of the theme of faith, and the performances also make it worthwhile. But the film doesn't tie together as well as it should, and for that it's merely good but not great.