by Allan Fish
(West Germany 1974 110m) DVD1/2
Aka. Every Man for Himself and God Against All/Jeder Fur Sich und Gott Gegen Alle
Are you a tree-frog?
p/d/w Werner Herzog ph Jorg Schmidt-Reitwein ed Beate Mainka-Jellinghaus m J.Pachelbel, T.Albinoni, Orlando diLasso, W.A.Mozart art Henning V.Clerke
Bruno S. (Kaspar Hauser), Walter Ladengast (Daumer), Hans Musaus (unknown man), Brigitte Mira (Kathe), Michael Kroecher (Lord Stanhope), Willy Semmelrogge (circus director), Henry Van Lyck (cavalry captain), Elis Pilgrim (pastor), Enno Patalas (Fuhrmann), Volker Prechtel (guard),
Through his series of memorable collaborations with actor Klaus Kinski (particularly those great studies of ego- and megalomania Fitzcarraldo and the earlier Aguirre, Wrath of God), Werner Herzog is guaranteed his place in movie history. It is therefore perhaps ironic that his greatest film does not showcase the undoubted talent of Kinski, but an anonymity, in every sense of the word. Unlike many films dealing with such enigmatic mysteries, it does not even attempt to explain the central mystery, but rather to see the world through the eyes of its protagonist. And a very cruel but beautiful world it is.
In 1828 a young man, Kaspar Hauser, is dropped off into the town square in Nuremberg and left there by the man who has been his only contact with the outside world. The letter he carries in his hand informs those who read it that he has been kept effectively imprisoned in a small dingy cellar for his entire life, since being left to the unknown man’s care as a foundling. Though some of the everyday townsfolk show compassion, it is a well to do gentleman who teaches him the finer things in life. Sadly, however, Kaspar Hauser’s happiness is short lived.
Enigma truly is a gut-wrenching film, right from the opening caption (“don’t you hear all that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence?”) It reminds one subconsciously of Browning’s Freaks and, especially, Lynch’s later The Elephant Man. Indeed, both these nineteenth century enigmas, Hauser and Merrick, were reduced to sideshow freaks, had physical deformities and died young. Yet the tones of the films themselves could not be more different. Herzog’s film analyses man’s inherent naivety in believing in logic as the answer to everything. Kaspar’s very being, his very existence, and his arrival as if from outer space, goes against everything that society believes can be taken as fact. Outwardly he may look like a village idiot, but inside Kaspar is a soulful man of great tenderness, trapped forever in the horrors of his youth, but drawn towards beauty. And few films have so perfectly captured the wonder of nature more vividly than Herzog’s film; Herzog’s photographer refusing to prettify the surroundings and letting the visuals speak for themselves. And none was more powerful than that epic shot of people climbing up and down a mountain towards and away from Death himself, Kaspar’s very own premonition of his own demise.
Above all things, however, the greatest factor in the film’s success is the central performance of non-professional Bruno S.. It’s a performance to truly strike awe into the viewer, and one which a trained actor would have been hard pressed to match. Herzog’s intentions here are of course open to debate but, in using such an actor, he effectively had a blank canvas on which to draw his performance. Bruno, in turn responded from a blank canvas of his own, one all the more suited to the central character. (Kaspar himself was taught everything from scratch, so Bruno’s performance is all the more appropriate for it.) With his ragged hair and his truly uniquely intense eyes, he’s a truly unforgettable figure, and when he finally meets his end, it’s one of the most touching demises in film history, just as the real life cause célèbre was one of the most tragic figures of his day. Not only Herzog’s greatest film, but one of the great films of its nation’s cinema and modern cinema in general. Furthermore, I guarantee you will not hear Pachelbel’s ‘Canon’ or Albinoni’s ‘Adagio’ again without thinking of Bruno S..
Though of course I’d heard of this film, I did not know much about the story. It sounds quite fascinating and, though it’s not your favorite subject, the parallel to a certain recently deceased individual – brought to mind by your mentioning of the Elephant Man – is striking.
Perpetual innocence (whether childlike or primal) can be seen as a curse or a blessing, depending upon where you stand, and my guess is that a true innocence would contain elements of both. Are the negative qualities only activated by a (tainted?) contact with society and knowledge? Or do they exist, as Herzog seems to suggest, in the screams of silence?
I have also not seen The Wild Child, but my understanding is that in that film, Truffaut celebrates the emergence of reason in the primitive boy’s mind, while Herzog, by your description seems to take a more ambiguous view – “trapped forever in the horrors of his youth, but drawn towards beauty.”
I’ve been re-reading a book lately which is about mysticism, psychedelic drugs, and metaphysics, and it confronts the question of reason vs. “intuition” for lack of a better word – though most of the figures the author deals with see the intellect as a trap, one person who KNOWS the primal state like few others, has a different view.
Here’s a quote from the book:
“Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that the meta-experience offers an accurate perception of ultimate reality. We still must ask whether it is wise or prudent to seek that experience and achieve that perception.
For one thing, the experience suggests that symbols serve only to distort our view of the actual world. But I can never forget Helen Keller’s story of that day at the well house, at the age of seven, when she first learned the meaning of language. Before that, she said, she had only been a wild little animal lost in the dark, unable to give love or receive it. ‘Before that supreme event there was nothing in me except the instinct to eat and drink and sleep. My days were a blank, without past, present, or future, without hope or anticipation, without interest or joy.’ Then Anne Sullivan held one of her hands under the running pump, and into the other she spelled out ‘w-a-t-e-r.’ The meta-experiencer would say of course that ‘w-a-t-e-r’ and water are two different things; but Miss Keller has given us her own reaction. ‘I knew then that ‘w-a-t-e-r’ meant the wonderful cool something that was flowing over my hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, joy, set it free!’ Or again: ‘All at once there was a strange stir within me – a misty consciousness, a sense of something remembered….Nothingness was blotted out….That word ‘water’ dropped into my mind like the sun in a frozen winter world.’ And we might do well to remember this before we decide to blow out that sun.”
Allan, I just wrote about this film at The Movie Projector, and I unequivocally second everything you say about this remarkable movie. Music, mysticism, the strangeness of everyday things that seem ordinary to the rest of us, the ultimate inexplicability of life’s fundamental mysteries (in the middle of the Age of Reason), the childlike purity of Kaspar–you touched on everything that so impressed me about the movie. And has there ever been a more felicitous match of performer and character? Those shots of Kaspar’s vision of the people climbing up and down the mountain (“with Death at the top”) are actually shots of the pilgrims at Croach Patrick in Ireland!
I was ready to jump in here with THE WILD CHILD parallel, but I see Movie Man has beaten me to the punch. LOL!! But certainly Tarzan of the Apes is the more obvious connection. I saw this film in the theatre upon release and it most definitely made a profound impression on me. It is most interesting to note that the actor “Bruno S.” was a former mental patient, which certainly would seem to have “enriched” the characterization. Of course there have been numerous studies of the film over the years that have posed that Kaspar is a Christ-figure, a saint who is both persecuted and sacrificed.
Of course, his appearance threatens their serenity, their lifestyle and their faith in God.
This may well be (aesthetically Herzog’s most beautiful film; none of his films are as exquisitely photographed or scored (Allan gleefully mentions the latter by noting those two immortal compositions).
Beautifully-written piece, with two fascinating embellishments (above) by Movie Man and R.D. Finch. Mr. Finch’s coincidental review is liked here:
http://movieprojector.blogspot.com/2009/06/brief-reviews.html
I will be there later today.
oh and by the way, Movie Man, you are a tropper Sir!! I salute you.
Well, I would say it’s close to his greatest film, Mr. Fish. I assume you are thinking of ‘Fitzcaraldo’ and ‘Aguire the Wrath of God’. Tremendous review. I never saw this in the theatre, only on DVD two years ago.
The theme of man being usurped by his natural surroundings and/or being enveloped by them, is one that Herzog has been honing and studying through most of his career. I have not had the pleasure of seeing this film as of this date but from what you beautifully describe (and, yes, I think this is your best written review so far) it seemsd the director has also hit upon another theme; that of the “dummy” being more enriched by his surroundings than those who are more readily able to do so. I am, like others, immediately drawn towards Truffaut’s WILD CHILD, as well as Lynch’s ELEPHANT MAN. I’m also drawn to see parallels in the “sheltered and deprived individual” unleashed into the big world between this film and Ashby’s BEING THERE. Wondering though dear Allan, how do you feel about Herzog’s NOSFERATU and the directors theme of the untamable nature released upon “modern” society? I love that film. You?
Not really, Dennis, nice central performance, but otherwise a failure…
I’ve often noticed people overlooking a lot of Herzog’s narrative films for his brilliant documentaries and whenever the subject ever comes up, Aguirre, the Wrath of God, (and sometimes Fitzcarraldo) gets most of the attention. Now I love those films and the documentaries, but i wish people would take some time to seek out gems like the Enigma of Kasper Hauser. Its such a unique film and showcases Herzog’s gift of storytelling and his great use of creating picturesque shots. A few come to mind like the unforgettable shot of Kasper sleeping while we see the mysterious man in Black sits behind him (the shot was used for the cover of the US DVD cover), or a shot of the midget dressed as a king sitting depressed on his throne during the sideshow act. I also want to say that your review was awesome and easily my favorite review given so far on your 70s countdown. But as much i love this film and your review, I have to disagree with you when you say it’s Herzog’s greatest film. I’ve always felt it wasn’t as good as Herzog’s second feature starring Bruno S. Stroszek. I was disappointed to see it left off the the list. Any thought on that film?
Anubhavbist.. Aside from the more readily available films of this director on DVD and some revival showings on the big screen during festivals in the city, Herzog is little known to the average American film-goer. FITZCARRALDO, AGUIRRE and particularly NOSFERATU are consistantly shown on BRAVO and some of the US public stations but further than that in this directors canon are few. His documentaries are up front and center as most of them have been made within the past 15 years and there subjects are “hot” topics. Both Blockbuster and Netflicks offer the three I have mentioned and unless your willing to shell out bucks at KIMS video these other titles fall at the waistside. A pity. This is one of the great directors of the past 40 years.
I adore Herzog.
Great to see your name in print again Evan! Best wishes with that film you are working on!