The Coen brothers on Judaism, and Job
Sunday night I went home and took a spin through Job.
Earlier in the evening, I had attended a screening of the remarkable new Coen brothers film, "A Serious Man,'' hosted at Brandeis by the National Center for Jewish Film. The film is being compared to Job because it centers on a seemingly decent man for whom everything suddenly goes wrong, without explanation, and his efforts to seek help from God are as unsuccessful as they are persistent. The film opens in Boston Friday; I thought it was stunning -- mesmerizing, witty, bleak, honest -- but I see that the critics have been all over the map.
The film is attracting a lot of attention, in the Jewish world and the film community, for its portrayal of Judaism, or at least of Jewishness. The film, for a major release, is almost shockingly insider-y, beginning with a short story filmed entirely in Yiddish (don't worry -- it's subtitled), and the body of the film is permeated with Jewish concepts, language, and culture. The depiction of Jewish family and religious life -- in this case, in Minneapolis in the late 1960s -- is often chilling in its nihilism (or is it just emptiness?) -- but many of the scenes clearly struck a chord of recognition among the audience at Brandeis, which laughed often and knowingly at characters such as the mind-numbingly boring, and unaware, Hebrew school teacher, and the string of rabbis whose pastoral counsel often featured a mix of anecdotes that went nowhere and a series of unanswered/unanswerable questions.
The studio production notes include a few observations about the role of Judaism in the film, quoting Ethan Coen saying, "Occasionally people would ask, 'You’re not making fun of the Jews, are you?' We are not, but some will take anything that isn’t flattering as an indication that we think the whole community or ethnicity is flawed." And Joel Coen is quoted saying, "People can get a little uptight when you’re being specific with a subject matter. From our point of view, 'A Serious Man' is a very affectionate look at the community and is a movie that will show aspects of Judaism which are not usually seen."
Looking for a bit of context, I called my friend Cathleen Falsani, who, happily, has just written a book called, "The Dude Abides: The Gospel According to the Coen Brothers.'' Here's an edited transcript of our conversation:
Q: What are the Coen brothers trying to say about Judaism?
A: I don't know if they're trying to say anything about Judaism, in particular. Having looked at all 14 of their films, I see the same themes in a lot of their other films -- this one just happens to be set in an academic, Jewish, milieu. I would hesitate to take it as a commentary on Judaism. I don't think it is a reflection of their faith. And I see a lot of tenderness, frankly, in the way that they are treating a lot of their characters. The rabbis are very faulty people, like we all are, but it's not snarky.
Q: What role does faith play generally in the Coen brothers' films?
A: What I see, almost to a film, is this question of 'Why do bad things happen?' The theodicy question is almost ever present. In 'The Big Lebowski' you have this one wholly innocent man who dies in the parking lot of a bowling alley. In 'No Country for Old Men,' certainly that was a question dealt with there. But they raise more theological, metaphysical, existential questions in their films than they ever answer, which I think is brave. What does it mean to be good? If there is a God, why is there evil? They cover everything from karma and grace to sin and responsibility and community. In 'O Brother, Where Art Thou?,' they are looking at, who is my neighbor, who is my brother? There is divine intervention in some films. And, in the darkest films, we don't learn anything and a lot of people wind up dead.
Q: Do they deal with Jewish themes in other films?
A: There are Jewish characters in other films, but I don’t know that I would say there are explicitly Jewish themes, and I don't know that they're dealing with a Jewish theme in 'A Serious Man,' even though it's set in a Jewish community. The themes are more universal. There's definitely some Biblical themes in some of their films, but I don't think they're trying to say anything in particular about the validity, or not, of Judaism. They're more explorers of the spiritual landscape.
Q: What do you know about their own faith lives?
A: Only what they've said, which is very little. They were raised Jewish, but left that behind after their bar mitzvahs. Their sister is quite religious and moved to Israel. Joel Coen is married to Frances McDormand, whose father and sister are Disciples of Christ ministers. But the Coens don't really reveal much about themselves, or try to interpret their work or explain their work in interviews.
Q: The depiction of the Jewish community in the film seems pretty tough, especially the portrayal of the rabbis.
A: Larry (the main character) is asking a question that there is no good answer to. Whatever religious tradition you're in, when you're suffering and asking why, there is no adequate answer. The answers the rabbis give are as ineffectual, and as good, as anybody is going to give you. I'm a Christian, and I have yet to hear anybody give anyone else a good answer from a Christian perspective. There is no good answer -- whether you're Buddhist or Muslim or Hindu, the answers don't satisfy the yearning that question comes from. So yes, it's a rough depiction, but it's reflective of what they live. I don't see it as meanspirited. It's fairly tender. And frankly the clergy come off better than the overtly religious characters in their other films, like the Bible salesman in 'O Brother, Where Art Thou?' In 'A Serious Man,' the clergy are more nuanced, more human.
Q: How does their depiction differ from that of Woody Allen?
A: I think Woody Allen is far more caustic. Maybe the Coens believe religion or faith is utterly foolish, but it doesn't come across that way. In Woody Allen's films, it is the height of stupidity to believe in something other than what's in the here and now. And he's much more obsessed with death than the Coens. And I don't think any religious character comes across particularly well, except for maybe in 'Crimes and Misdemeanors,' where the rabbi came across well, but then he made him blind.
Q: What do you think of the parallels to Job?
A: There are always the obvious themes in the Coen films, but it's usually what's happening beyond the obvious that's powerful. Sure, he (Larry Gopnick, the main character) is Job, and he's a shlemiel. He doesn't curse God, but he questions why this is happening, and is therefore a lot more like most of us than Job is. But it's a fair parallel to make, and the way the film ends is far more Jobian than the rest.
Q: Do you think the film will be accessible to non-Jewish audiences?
A: I think it's extremely accessible because of the universal themes. This is a really spiritually important film, because of that question of what's the meaning of suffering. That's not Jewish -- that's everything, that's universal. It would be really shortsighted to call it a Jewish film and leave it at that -- it certainly is that, but it's more than that.
(Photo, by Wilson Webb/Focus Features, shows Aaron Wolff (center) as Danny Gopnik in Joel & Ethan Coen's "A Serious Man.")
Comment
Permalink
E-mail
Hi Michael,
ST: NO Easy Spins through the Book of Job
Back in a bit, yet first I want to comment on your easy Spin through Job. I did this book myself first and then I did it with my son for a project in BSA Scouting. I have advised others to read this book when really gone with a purpose in their life. It is just a huge baby step back-upwards provided to us by our ancients.
It is NOT an easy Book for us in the USA with 1 minute solutions, yet can help to answer the question of "Who is GOD, and Who am I and my Worth". Our buddy from Harvard (Cox) has a book called "The Future of Faith" that is not as great a work as the Book of Job yet works on the same Question.
This book has to be read with the same patience it was written pre-Abram, pre-Hebrew, Jew. Sitting with Job, hearing him cry, and advising him wrongly.
It has to be read SLOW
Hi MikeyP, Harvey, Cathleen
ST: Yeah it Sounds Good, Critiques Flawed
"The film, for a major release, is almost shockingly insider-y, beginning with a short story filmed entirely in Yiddish (don't worry -- it's subtitled)"
I got tell you the Yiddish were funny and could twist a topic to the n'th degree. I think Mel Brooks is related to that great legacy of the Yiddish in the USA. There is a great audio archive of the Yiddish in America.
"Q: The depiction of the Jewish community in the film seems pretty tough, especially the portrayal of the rabbis.
A: Larry (the main character) is asking a question that there is no good answer to. Whatever religious tradition you're in, when you're suffering and asking why, there is no adequate answer. o - o -
First OFF, I have learned to like most rabbis. Whenever I call they look stuff up.. And some of them can really carry a Tune with a good voice.
Job helps to answer the Why question
"Q: What do you think of the parallels to Job?
A: There are always the obvious themes in the Coen films, but it's usually what's happening beyond the obvious that's powerful o - o -o "
Well she hasn't really read JOB has she, or integrated herself to Job's experience. SO she is a Faulty commentator. Again JOB is a difficult book to be read slowly with great patience and empathy.
Yours in JOB, A Great BOOK to be read slowly from The Ancients, MA/NY MrDave
When you leave at 13 and don't go back, you are stuck, somewhat, with a 13 yo perspective on the subject. Only cynicism can fill the void. I would be interested as to what part of the spectrum the Coen Bros. were associated. Orthodox, Conservative and Reform rabbis can be quite different in their approach.
Can't wait to see it. Many faith traditions have cogent answers to the Theodicy question. Some people don't like the answers, so they like to say there are none. Some say that to understand the why of the universe would be to BE "God", which clearly we are not. Since most of us are incredibly self-centered, we don't want to face that inevitability. Some say that the most important thing to understand about pain and suffereing is that we are all called to be God's answer to the pain and suffering around us. Most of us just say "Check, please!"
"Whatever religious tradition you're in, when you're suffering and asking why, there is no adequate answer."
Nonsense!
There is an answer: God, being strictly an imaginary being, exists only in the words and imagination of men, and therefore cannot answer your prayers.
If there was something you could have done to prevent your suffering, then you must accept at least part of the responsibility.
Otherwise, you're simply at the mercy of the Laws of Nature.
If you can't accept this answer, it's because you only want to hear an answer that validates your beliefs.
Hi Atheist Anti-GOD Jack,
Glad to have you OnBoard,
ST: Source of your Note, A Tad more..
First off I wondered about your launch point. OK I found it in MikeyP's discussion with his more informed friend Cathleen.
Jack: "Whatever religious tradition you're in, when you're suffering and asking why, there is no adequate answer"
MichaelP's write up
v - v - v
Q: The depiction of the Jewish community in the film seems pretty tough, especially the portrayal of the rabbis.
A: Larry (the main character) is asking a question that there is no good answer to. Whatever religious tradition you're in, when you're suffering and asking why, there is no adequate answer.
---------------
OK in my thus far reading of Harvard Harvey's Pride/Faith Cow book I would advise you to try praying. I don't know and you won't know who you are praying to yet it is innate within you and man according to one of Harvey's references. Maybe it is to your higher self which is also part of the AA program. When you pray see the hopefullness, and strength. I know I am BAD.
Jack: "If there was something you could have done to prevent your suffering, then you must accept at least part of the responsibility."
Again you haven't read Job. Job, a practicing man of GOD makes the same argument over and over again. I mean JOB was anal about giving unto GOD lest he or his family got into GOD trouble. YET Job, a leader, did get into a horrid health situation and had to ask the question that Harvey Cox calls "Homo quaerens"
Harvey strives to make a distinction between faith and belief. I have faith and knowledge that there is GOD. Yet beliefs are a tad different according to Harvard Harvey.
OK a Test: What did Job's wife say to Job?
and what are the various interpretations over the milleniums
If god favors one and not the other, does that mean the one that suffers has a right to question god and the one he favors has not? Why do you favor me god, when all i can see around me is suffering? So in away god i also suffer, so in favoring me god now you have an enemy. God not once in my life have i had your favor, every day i see people get richer in life and still you make me suffer. I am going crazy here trying to work it all out, at least Job had seen both sides of the coin before making his mind up about you. Faith is all i have now, for I know how much you suffer for all of us.
Hey godsword,
ST: A German Theologian / The Suffering GOD
godsworth: "Faith is all i have now, for I know how much you suffer for all of us."
A German Theologian once wrote about that aspect of GOD that most people do not appreciate. The suffering - watching - quiet GOD. I can't remember the Theologian's name and don't want to pull out my books, yet probably Harvey knows it.
A Christian televangelist guy gave a radio sermon on this same topic that once I thought so wrong. Just why would you sit, wait and watch someone suffer. Only a few years latter I understood and since then have seen countless reasons. I just can't remember his name right now or find him on the Web yet he gives good sermons and is not in the top "God wants you to be rich" group of televangelists.
On a human level with growing adult children you begin to understand that this waiting, suffering should be an aspect of GOD. No matter how much you teach, No matter how much you are there for them, No matter how many pointers you leave THEY have to learn and come on their own.
godsworth: "God not once in my life have i had your favor, every day i see people get richer in life and still you make me suffer"
In one of his books M. Scott Peck http://www.mscottpeck.com/html/archives.html discussed more than one individual who could only see the bad and delimited any and all good in their lives as stupid luck. I think it was People of the Lie and not his famous book.
I saw the film in Minneapolis last weekend, during its premier, while visiting a Jewish friend who knew most of the people in it, as they belong to her synagogue. I thought it was the most anti-Semitic, self-loathing Jewish film since "Good-Bye, Columbus", screaming "dirty laundry" from beginning to end. There isn't one positive Jewish character in this film. Larry Gropnik could have been Job, but instead he is portrayed as an over-the-top nebbish with no self-respect or backbone in even the most trying of circumstances. Calling him a doormat would be like calling Hamas a bunch of thugs. How Larry handles a certain funeral (I wouldn't want to give away this precious plot) is pathetic. The wife and her boyfriend are portrayed as reasonable people while sneaking around and successfully throwing Larry out of his own house. Larry's brother is an over-the-top schnorrer. The kids do nothing but fight. Getting stoned is the highlight of the bar mitzvah boy's bar mitzvah, sending a message to the Gentiles that a bar mitzvah is meaningless. Larry's boss at the university, who appears to be Jewish, is a sniveling creep. I was embarrassed as a Jew to see a film that Gentiles will judge us by. For the Coens to say they are looking at Judaism affectionately makes me wonder how they would portray it if they were being critical.
in a dream I heard these words ""rahim mishma Yahweh cre". I am not sure about the spelling, i wrote them based on the phonetic sounds. I really need to know the meaning. Can you help me please?
The previous commenter, Ms. Sherry Alpert, echoes a predictable, uncomfortable Jewish perspective, because she is partly right: this movie does not reflect positively on the Jewish community or religion. This movie, however, is not anti-semitic; rather,in my opinion, it raises a very sincere and honest question ( and at the same time makes a statement): Does Judaism work? (apparently, in 1967, not so well...) Can two Jewish brothers bring up these issues without being accused of being self-loathing? I grew up in the same St. Louis Park as the Coen brothers and I can attest to the fact that the Jews of my locale and generation have a certain sense of self-confidence that was lacking in their parents' generation or even of that of Jews from Eastern United States. The fact that the Coen Brothers have the intellectual freedom to put out this movie is sure to jar other Jews who are self-consciously obsessed with what Gentiles think. Quite frankly, as a Gentile, I can say it was a brilliant movie. This was a well crafted movie with a strong story line; it was well acted, and it deals with an important issue. I was amazed. Mazel tov, to the Coens for not worrying about stepping on other Jews' toes! It will become an important piece of art in our culture for years to come. Is it just coincidental that these brothers carry the priestly surname of Coen? Or are they prophets? At least it can be said that in their comments they are not turning their backs on G-d.
Ms. Sherry Albert is right, if a little too sensitive. lAnd so was the earlier commentator who said that, "when you leave at 13, you end up stuck with the perspective of a 13 year old." Like that person, I too wonder what denomination of Judaism the Coens were raised within. I can prewtty much guarantee that it was Reform or Conservative. And, as a Jew who was raised Reform (with many Conservative friends) I can tell you that those watered-down homogenized versions of Judaism leave kids bored, confused and uninspired. Not that Orthodoxy is perfect, but it sure does fill in a lot of holes which those denominations leave out.
As someone who discovered Modern Orthodoxy later in life, I can see the truth and beauty within my religion much clearer than the empty, hypocritical "Reformed" Judaism which I grew up with.
I do enjoy the Coen Brothers...but I am saddened by their portrayal of Judaism in the film. That said, growing up Reform/Conservative, who can blame them?
I will also make a prediction: In years to come, I think at least one of them will become an Observant Jew. They will rediscover their faith, and see it differently. Just like their sister did.
And Michael, for a Goy, it's funny that you write G-d.
Blogger
E-mail mpaulson@globe.com.
Articles of Faith on Twitter
views
featured comments
Faith-based gardening: A rose for the popebrowse this blog
by categoryEVENTS
CAUSES
BLOGROLL
Headlines
Media blogs
Media criticism
Politics
Catholicism
Episcopalianism
Evangelicalism
Islam
Judaism
Mormonism
Unitarian Universalism
ALSO OF INTEREST
From our archives
Ma Siss's Place
Benedict visits the US
O'Malley's elevation
The new pope
Pope John Paul II
Parish closings
Catholic church abuse
INside Boston.com