"Sinister Barrier" by Eric Frank Russell

 

“From now on, every time a troublemaker shoots his trap, we’ve got to ask ourselves a question of immense significance; who’s talking now?” He put a long, delicate finger on the article under discussion. “Here is the first psychological counterstroke, the first blow of intended unity– the crafty encouragement of suspicion that somewhere lurks a threat of dictatorship. The good old smear technique. Millions fall for it every time. Millions will always fall so long as they would rather believe a lie than doubt the truth.”

This little, forgotten SF novel (published originally in 1939.) brought me a lot of joy - from time to time I regret not paying more attention to SF genre and somehow was inspired to check this out. In fact, it probably qualifies more like pulp fiction because there was nothing philosophical or epic about it, it was pure, good old fashioned action, with some nasty Aliens thrown for a good measure. The idea behind it is that scientists stumble upon a new discovery, that there is another, “sinister barrier” outside of our visual spectrum and once humans can actually see the world around them differently, they became aware of horrible floating Aliens (who might be original, true natives of Earth) who feed on negative emotions of humanity - wherever there is pain, agony or suffering, they arrive and suck the energy out of suffering people. Once we can actually see them, Vitons look something like some huge Medusa in the sky. 

There is a quite gripping story with sort of James Bond character involved (he is government agent) Bill Graham who is a killing machine, womaniser and indestructible all at the same time - I must admit that it reads like the best adventure novel and I actually couldn't put the darn thing down - but the most interesting is how the humanity is described - when something totally new and unbelievably dangerous comes along, majority of the world refuses to accept it and start believing in all sorts of conspiracy theories, instead of listening to government advices. There is also a very intriguing theory that Vitons use superstitions because they know humans are gullible and often perform "miracles" or all sorts of phenomena, knowing that people will believe in everything: "the priest and the medium have been equally their allies in the devilish work of seeing that the blind masses stay blind."

Photography: Fred Stein and Gerda Taro

Out of curiosity - and since now I am proud owner of a Museum card - I went to a local Jewish Museum. The main reason was to see the photo exhibition of an artist whose work intrigued me, but actually the museum itself was so interesting that I almost forgot why was I there. I have almost exited, when I remembered there is also a temporary exhibition tribute to this guy. Fred Stein was German photographer who was haunted out of Germany and France by Nazis and eventually found a new start in US where he became quite well known. Just reading the details of his biography sounds like a movie - together his wife, he escaped Germany in a nick of time (the son of the factory owner warned him that Gestapo was asking questions about him), their little apartment in Paris was a haven for artists who slept, ate and held long discussions there and when the couple eventually escaped occupied France, they were hiding in the bathrooms of trains. Still, they started a new life in New York where he continued his photographer work and eventually changed his focus from a street photography to portraits. I find his work enormously interesting and wonder can street photography work today, in atmosphere of fear and suspicion, when people would not welcome a stranger taking photos of them? 

Somewhere in the collection, there was a interesting old, black & white photograph of a happy couple smiling together in some Paris bar. Apparently the only photo of them together. That was Gerda Taro and her love, Robert Capa. Both war photographers and very famous in their time, specially for their work in 1930s Spanish Civil War - in fact, Taro died in action, while shooting army retreat. In this photo exhibition they were quite a few pictures of smiling Taro, who for a while lived with Stein and his wife in their Paris apartment - she is immortalised on a series of black and white photos as a vibrant, young woman (and quite a beauty) living in unusual and dangerous times. That one particular picture of a smiling, happy couple somehow intrigued me and made me curious to do some more research about her. The story could make a very good movie or a novel. 

"Fire from Heaven" by Mary Renault

This was a long-postponed read, a birthday gift from a dear friend and something that I planned to read for a very long time. In her time, British writer Mary Renault was famous writer of immaculately researched historical novels set in the world of ancient world - admired for her writing style, Renault was apparently also very well known amongst her LGBT readers for describing same sex lovers in her books, which actually was perfectly natural in ancient Greece. This personal fact I would normally not even mention, considering that I believe that talent is a talent and whomever Renault loved in her life is her private business, but it looks as she is something of a LGBT icon - for describing gay characters in compassionate and even poetic light - and this is actually curiosity because Renault was from older generation that kept lid on private lives and would not associate herself with any movements. According to Wikipedia: "she was suspicious of identifying oneself primarily by one's sexual orientation" - which is exactly my opinion and it means that Renault and I would probably get along just fine, if we ever had imaginary dinner in Durban, where she moved with her female partner. So Renault is very much known amongst a specific part of her cult audience, but herself was not involved in any protests or anything, in fact if you look closely, her female characters are not exactly positive. Judging by this (my very first Renault novel), ladies are actually evil and manipulative. We probably must keep Renault in her times. 

"Fire from Heaven" is about Alexander the Great and his formative years, up to the point where he becomes king. This is not just some writer sitting around with a bottle of wine and flying on the wings of a wild imagination, but Renault actually did serious research - at the end of the novel she quotes references by Plutarch, who is our only source about Alexander, since all records by his own contemporaries have perished. So things that she have described are known in history, hers is only a style - and what a style that is! I would genuinely place her somewhere between Robert Graves, T. H. White and Mary Stewart - giants of historical/fantasy fiction who all had their own particular voice. The only reason why I don't think of her highly as say, Marguerite Yourcenar is because Renault can be (in my personal opinion) so extremely cautious when dealing with her gay characters, that I would read the sentence three times and still was not sure what am I reading. I understand she was from different generation and very, very touchy about it, but this specific signposts and hints are too complicated for me. Take for example this sentence: "Hephaistion thought, I am in the King’s gift too, a favour he can take away. Presently, having no more words, he offered instead the sadness of Eros, for this at least brought sleep." What does this mean? Am I imagining things? What IS the sadness of Eros? All trough the novel we witness beautiful friendship between Alexander and his friend Hephaestion and we are told that everybody suspects they are lovers but everything was always left unspoken and now suddenly there is the sadness of Eros? 

Renault's writing might be a little bit too vague for me - she has excellent, flowery style and is a master of describing the atmosphere and the place - but to be honest her Alexander was so idealised that I had a constant gnawing feeling that he is just a symbol, not a real character. He was constantly described as a young God whom everybody loves and idealises, his golden locks and strong muscles and noble character and the divine smell of his armpits - and everybody has sex except him, because he is not that kind of guy. His parents are far more realistic - I had a genuine affection for his father, one-eyed Macedonian king Philip (whom history conveniently remembers as a bully, in comparison to glowingly blameless Alexander) and was terrified of his perpetually angry, scheming and manipulating mother Olympias. Curiously, the main reason why this novel is remembered and loved - gay bromance between Alexander and his friend Hephaestion - interested me far less than the story itself. I read fiction as escapism and for me its all about the plot (or the style), not so much about identification, since my favourites are not necessary main characters but some supporting person who might come and go on one page. There is enough action, passion and intrigues here to make it into a very exciting movie (or even TV series) - though it took me a while to go trough Renault's writing, I might explore some more of her writing, since this was actually a beginning of a trilogy. I might even need to re-read this one again, with different perspective next time. 

"The Father" by Florian Zeller (2020)

This is something I wanted to see for a long time, but postponed because in the last moment it occurred to me it probably might disturb me. But since I gravitate towards serious movies, it was inevitable that I will eventually go and see it - one of those strange days when deciding to have some quality time by myself, without anybody around. I took a beautiful, long walk towards the cinema, admiring window shops, inhaling the beautiful, sunny day and being very much aware of myself walking along the streets. No headphones - sometimes its enough just to listen to the buzz of life around. So I was actually in a good mood. 

"The Father" is adaptation of a highly successful French stage play "Le Père" that had previously won truckloads of international awards and have been staged in Paris, London, on Broadway, in Los Angeles, Australia and in more than 45 countries. Nothing of this would ever come to me if was not for Anthony Hopkins who has won "Oscar" for this role, against highly expected Chadwick Boseman. I have seen Boseman's role in "Ma Rainey's Black Bottom" and he was electric - however, his one scene can't compare with full-length-movie virtuosity of Hopkins who switches between charming and menacing to lost and weeping. It was really tour de force and sensationally good role for any actor and I must say, I have never seen Hopkins acting better. True, in "The Remains of the Day"  he might have been more reserved and in zillion other roles he showed different types of personalities, but this one is extremely moving. 

The movie was directed by its original writer Florian Zeller who came on brilliant idea to show us dementia from the point of the view of The Father (Hopkins) - because he constantly forgets where he is and often gets disoriented, the space around him changes suddenly - the rooms in apartment switch and now he is in a waiting room of a hospital. Even better, his daughter Olivia Colman goes into the kitchen and comes out as a completely different actress (Olivia Williams who later comes as a nurse in a hospital). People around him are not who he expected them to be, he rages, laughs, argues and constantly fidgets about his hand watch that he suspects people want to steal. The whole story kind of goes in circles, where we slowly understand that he suffers from dementia and his long suffering daughter keeps him in her own apartment (with her marriage falling apart under pressure) while trying to arrange caregiver who might endure father's nasty personality. 

Its two-people show: Anthony Hopkins is heartbreaking as elderly eccentric who obviously was previously a strong man and a commanding personality but now is just a frail, old man holding to some ideas about still bossing people around. He even confides to a caregiver that younger daughter Lucy was always his favourite, not Colman (who is listening, in tears). But Lucy is nowhere around and he wonders why she doesn't come to visit him. Its very refreshing to see Olivia Colman out of period costume and she is excellent - she does not have to say much, because her role is one of a long suffering daughter who keeps the burden of the world on her shoulders. She does not have to scream and shout to project quiet tenderness and affection for her father. But we are aware that she is falling apart under the pressure and that eventually she will have to place him in the institution.

I must say that the movie affected me very much - left the cinema disoriented and had to take a long walk to go back to my senses. And its wonderful when movie can affects us so much, this was not just some entertainment but genuinely great art. I recommended it to everyone and will probably see it again.