By James Bowman on 10.20.09 @ 6:02AM
In a number of ways, this movie is like the AMC television series
Mad Men.
On the same day that An Education opened in the
U.S., the Daily Mail of London
reported on court testimony in the
case of a missing schoolgirl, Tulay Goren, a 15-year-old
Turkish-Kurdish refugee who disappeared in 1999. After ten years
during which she kept quiet, fearing for her own safety, Tulay's
mother told the court that her husband, Tulay's father Mehmet,
together with his brothers Ali, and Cuma Goren, all Turkish
refugees living in Woodford Green and Walthamstow, East London,
had killed her and buried her in the garden. Later, the body had
been moved, she knew not where. It has never been recovered.
Later still, Mehmet had attempted to kill Tulay's much older
boyfriend, Halil Unal, now 41, with an axe. Tulay had been living
with Halil and hoped to marry him, but she was too young. Her
family wouldn't have minded that so much, but Halil came from a
different Islamic sect and so was an ineligible husband.
Even if she had married him, and even if he had been an
acceptable husband to her family, the shame of her having left
the family home to live with him would not have been expunged. In
the words of the Mail's report, "After losing her
virginity Tulay was seen as a 'valueless commodity,' " which is
why, said Jonathan Laidlaw, QC, for the prosecution, "Tulay's
father was outraged and was filled with a sense that his
reputation and that of his family had been destroyed." I only
mention this story because, in many parts of the world, this kind
of "honor-killing" is quite common and has been for centuries. It
is only because so many people from those parts of the world are
now living in London and other Western cities that it has been
forced upon our notice to the extent that it has.
Fifty years ago, at the time when An Education is
set in a very different London from that of Tulay Goren, the
memory of the Western honor culture -- in which honor killings
were not common -- was still relatively
fresh in people's minds. This must have made them more sharply
aware of the new, post-honor society that we now take for granted
but that was then just coming into existence. At any rate, that
social transformation is what the movie, directed by the Danish
director, Lone Scherfig (Italian
for Beginners), to a screenplay adapted by
Nick Hornby from a memoir by Lynn Barber, is all about. Jenny
(Carey Mulligan) is a bright schoolgirl preparing for Oxford
entrance at a time when this was still fairly unusual for girls.
Jenny divides her time between homework, practicing the cello and
verbal fencing with her less well-educated but upwardly mobile
father, Jack (Alfred Molina), who is both protective of her and
eager for her to succeed academically without himself really
understanding what that means.
For instance, he thinks the cello is a waste of time, a mere
hobby. "You don't have to practice a hobby," he tells her. He
thinks that spending all her time on homework is the way to get
into Oxford -- that and a little of the salesman's art of
gamesmanship. Jenny bears all his nagging and prodding and
lecturing with a good humor. When, in one of his many and
frequently offered bits of advice to her, papa mentions the
inadvisability of looking like a rebel -- since "they don't want
that at Oxford" -- Jenny replies with bemusement: "They don't
want people who can think for themselves?"
"Of course they don't," says dad confidently.
One day, Jenny is coming home from orchestra practice in the
rain, carrying her cello with her, when a man in a sports car
pulls up beside her and offers to give the cello a lift. He knows
that she wouldn't get in a car with a stranger,
but he is a music lover and aghast at the idea that the cello
might be damaged. She is charmed and soon gets into the car along
with her instrument. The man's name is David (Peter Saarsgard),
and soon he is taking her to concerts in the West End -- which is
almost like a foreign country to her, though she lives in the
same city -- and promising expeditions even farther afield. That
this sophisticated man of the world should so easily charm Jenny
is, of course, not remarkable, but he is also able to charm
Jenny's mother (Cara Seymour) and father into allowing these
expeditions in the belief that he himself is merely taking a
fatherly interest in her career.
The results are predictable and, mercifully, less disastrous to
Jenny's education and subsequent life than they very easily might
have been. Yet the poignancy of the underlying social changes as
they were to affect the lives of women then growing up and the
country as a whole as a result of new economic, demographic and
cultural trends is summed up in Jack's innocence, so much greater
than that of his suddenly worldly-wise daughter, at the moment
when he finds himself and his understanding of the world stranded
by the withdrawing tide of white, middle-class British culture.
Even Emma Thompson as the headmistress of Jenny's girl's school,
with her not-so-subtle class prejudice and anti-Semitism, is a
semi-sympathetic character on account of her forlorn stand on
behalf of traditional standards and against the winds of change
-- because we know in advance that she has no hope of prevailing.
In a number of ways, this movie is like the AMC television series
Mad Men which one critic, Mark
Greif, has described as belonging to the
emerging genre that he calls: "Now we know better." The emotions
that such artifacts produce in us are doubtless complex ones: a
combination of nostalgia and regret, condescension and
self-satisfaction that, well, now we know better. In the view of
many, seemingly including Mr. Greif, this emotion does not rise
to the level of genuine aesthetic experience but is, rather, a
form of self-indulgence. I'm not sure that I agree. Though I
deplore the self-congratulation that seems to go along with it, I
think there is in the sympathy with which we approach these
old-timey -- but not that old-timey -- people with
their quaint ideas about the world an implicit acknowledgment
that they had something that we are the poorer for not having.
This is an idea of morality that is not merely self-chosen and a
kinder, gentler system of honor than that of Islam, according to
which, even when they violated it, people could still judge the
world and themselves. It may be an aesthetic experience at one
remove, but it is not to be regarded with contempt merely for
that reason.