2001 Tarkovsky Prize 3rd Place: Alexandra Hontalas-Adams

SYMBOLISM IN ANDREI RUBLEV

by Alexandra Hontalas-Adams

Andrei Rublev was an icon painter and saint, who lived in Russia during the fourteen hundreds. Though in Italy the Renaissance was flowering, this was a time the Russians were stumbling through the dark ages suffering from cruel and savage war lords. Rublev had a unique view on what Christianity was based on and how it started.. He believed that the crucifixion of Christ was something like a well staged ad for Christianity. If thrown into modern times, Andrei Rublev would be more at home with the Unitarian church then with his native Russian Orthodox church.

The production of this film was stopped many times by the then communist government of Russia. It took almost ten years to make. The Russian government would not show it for many reasons, one of which was that they were suspicious of something they couldn’t understand. They were right to be nervous because the content of this film examines the true meaning of art and realistically shows many aspects of life in this bloody period of Russian history. Especially in the relationship between war lords, and in the struggle of the peasants who are horribly punished for clinging to their pagan ways by the quickly growing and harsh Russian Orthadox world. In this world joy is the work of the devil and famine common place. This was not the Russia that the communist government wanted to be portrayed. They wanted to clean their slate of the blood and pain and forge a new Russia, where brotherhood was second nature, and class did not matter. They were trying to wash away the social barriers that had made life a dark and never ending catastrophe. This film, in their point of view, was like opening a long festering wound.

This is one of the few films that has as many layers as an onion, so that each time you see it you notice a very different batch of fresh ideas and themes.

One beautifully illustrated example of symbolism is in the prologue of the film. The first image is one of a primitive hot air balloon against a white cathedral. As people prepare for the balloon to be sent up, you see people on horses riding toward them, menacing, and armed.  We follow the man that we gather is going to fly on this balloon. As the man runs through a corridor we see a black horse through a doorway trotting away form the threatening men. One of the most stunning dolly shots that stays in your mind forever, is one that moves down from the window view,  past perfectly placed boats, to the ground where the threatening men have reached the balloon. In our first bitter taste of the cruel and blunt brutality, the man holding the balloon’s rope, has his eyes put out. Slowly floating above the cathedral the man calls down to the followers as he pushes away from the white wall of saints that are carved on the cathedral wall.  Although it is a great image it is easy to overlook because of its subtlety. Then we are flying with the man who laughs merrily thinking he has escaped his Christian pursuers. The sound is prefect—breathing— as air escapes the balloon.  You see earth and water in the landscape blend together and the sky is reflected in the water. This is a thread that is woven it all Tarkovsky’s films. He enjoys playing with the idea of earth, water, sky, and fire.  The balloon loses air and falls down to the ground.

In this scene Tarkovsky remains true to reality. The flying man does not speak noble last words or die praying. Instead he is afraid and calls for his companions. Then the truly unforgettable image of this prologue appears: the same black horse seen near the beginning has fallen, then slowly rises up, and trots away while strange, eerie music plays, giving it an unreal quality.  What does it mean? Does the horse symbolize all the grief he has, now leaving him as he dies?  Does it symbolize his life slipping away?  Does it symbolize his soul? Or does it symbolize him living on in memory?  Symbolism is in the eyes of the beholder, and you must answer it as you will.

The horse is one of the symbols that is used throughout this film. Fallen horses, rising horses, dying horses, horses throwing off Tartars, horses galloping, and finally horses peacefully standing in the rain for no apparent reason. Many people ask, why horses? The film is epic, like some endless journey, and the horse seems an appropriate symbol to move its themes forward.

In one of the early scenes our main character is seen leaving a cathedral to go off with his friends. The birds are singing and you hear the sound of animals. It starts to rain, and the three companions seek shelter with a group of peasants that are being entertained by a lively jester playing a drum and dancing.  When the three monks enter all is silence. The jester places a cup on his head. Why, who knows? The monks sit in the back of the shed and the camera moves all the way around the shed at the ragged clothes, and starved faces. The same other worldly music is played, because Andre had been in a monastery his whole life this would have been the first time he has seen people that suffer and have less then he even has. When we go back to the monks, one named Kirill has gone. Then outside a pack of peaceful horses, flee as a group of horsemen ride to the shed, fling open the door, and arrest the jester. The jester comes out bare chested, in the rain, and they knock him unconscious and ride off. Now because this is the first time that Andre has seen the church police in action, it is very important. For although many may not be aware of it,  the church at this time thought that jesters, who the people loved and who gave them laughter in a cold gray world, were sent by the devil  and needed to be punished and tortured as criminals. Kirill, one of Rublev’s friends,  returns from outside and hurries his fellow monk out ignoring their questions.  We learn later in the film, it is he who has betrayed the jester.

The next segment dogs are used as important symbols.  The episode starts with an  alarming scene, in which Kirill walks by a large crowd of people watching a man being tortured.  Kirill goes to a famous icon painter and urges him to come to their monastery and ask him to be his assistant. At the monastery you see Kirill washing his hands and lighting a torch although it is day. You see the fire reflected in the water, more of the mixing of the elements theme that Tarkovsky loves so dearly. We hear dogs barking, as Kirill hears that there is a messenger. He runs outside. It is dead of winter—you can see the monks emotions in their breath that comes out in clouds. Filmmakers have tried to capture this effect by having people smoking in their movie, but by using their snowy breath, it accomplishes this much more effectively. The message is from the icon painter who sends for Andrei Rublev to help him paint a cathedral.  Kirill is furious. He feels betrayed. He says that he will leave the monastery, go out it to the real world. The monks in black garb (sharply contrasting with the white snow) try to stop him, but he does not listen and angrily leaves the monastery.  Kirill’s dog runs after him, but Kirill beats him savagely, and leaves him for dead.  What is this trying to say? That we like to take things out on our loved ones? That sometimes the ones who are there for us pay for their loyalty?  The image of the bloody dog laying in the snow is unforgettable.

Then in the scene between Andrei, his young assistant, and the other icon painter each person is seen connected to the earth.  For example, Andre is tracing roots with his finger, the assistant has mud on his face to cure bee stings , and the other icon  painter has ants crawling on his bare feet.  In the end the young assistant finds a dead bird and lifts its wing.  These symbols suggest that you most be connected with the earth to become a great artist. 

This next scene deals perfectly with Andrei’s feelings toward religion. It shows what looks like an Easter pageant, in which a man playing Jesus is crucified, with the voice over of Andrei.  Andrei proposes that maybe those who crucified him, loved him. As the poor victim walks to the hill in the snow, the terrain looks like dripping blood. While he is nailed up on the cross there are horses in the background prancing—one of the few times they look happy.  

This next segment is light hearted, but at the same time seriously symbolic.  Andre leaves his traveling companions to investigate some pagans celebrating Midsummer’s Night, dancing and performing strange ceremonies.  Doves fall from the trees, and the pagans play music. One of the more comical images in the film is Andrei’s robe catching on fire.   He watches a couple making love, escapes capture and then at dawn returns to his friends who could never understand what he saw. This is very well symbolized in the image of one of the boats that was uses in a pagan ceremony crashing into one of the monk’s boats.

In “The Last Judgment” sequence time has passed and Andrei is supposed to be painting a cathedral depicting the last judgment. Andre thinks he can not paint this subject matter because he does not believe in scaring people into submission . We see him with one of his friends who wishes him to do the last judgment. They stand in a field of flowers by a road which divides.  As the friend argues that Andrei should paint what he is told, a rider on a black horse appears in the distance, coming toward them.   Andre says that he must as his duty not paint the last judgment.  At that moment the rider rides past them, and vanishes up the other road.  The rider becomes a symbol for Andrei resolve, and the road the two directions Andrei must choose from.

Back in the cathedral, Andrei decides that he will paint a great feast.  You see the princess  splashing him with milk. He tells her that it is sacrilegious to spill milk. The royal children are spoiled and run through the unpainted cathedral screaming and being brats. The lord of the city’s head man is speaking to the masons who say that they are going to go work for the lord’s brother, who he hates.

What follows is one of the most brutal scenes in the film.  The masons, who are clad in white (symbolizing their innocence or purity)  are moving through the forest and come a upon the lord and his henchmen. The lord jabs out the nearest  mason’s eyes, and his men chase the screaming masons wildly through the forest. The lord’s men leave the blinded masons stumbling through the trees screaming and weeping in pain. One young boy who was left unharmed sees a flask of milk– the milk flows in to the nearby stream.

Does this represent their souls, going back into the earth? For we know that they work by their hands and must see to perform their trade, and so will die. Or is Tarkovsy just trying to mystify us?  To leave us with questions?

In the same way you see Andrei angrily splashing black paint on to the pure white walls of the cathedral when he hears about the assault.  A young woman walks in and is very distressed at the paint and, crying, tries to rub it off.   What does that splash of paint mean to her?  It’s a bit like all the symbolism in the film.  You know it’s important, but it’s frustrating because it isn’t easy to interpret or understand.  You think about it long after the film is over. 

Another shining example of symbolic imagery is a scene in which three monks stand under a tree in the rain.  Three figures, a tree, the rain.  Is this another visual connect to the elements.  Earth, water, nature?

In “The Raid,” the theme of pointless violence and death is played out. The jealous prince invades his brother’s city by joining his forces with those of the Tartars. More imagery with horses! As the prince tells the Tartar prince his plan, his horse starts getting nervous, and kicking. When the Tartars start to come down to the town by bridge one of the horses bucks the Tartar off into the river. And more symbolic acts to come! The lord tells of having to kiss his brother as a sign of friendship, then in a flash back we see this meeting, the brothers hug and kiss but then we see their feet for a brief moment.  One presses his foot on top of the other’s shoe. Later this image of pressing down is used when the prince pushes his brother’s headman’s face in the snow with his foot. One of the more startling images is a cow in flames and the owner screaming hysterically and very confused. You also see the realistic fog of war. A lot of time is spent waiting: for walls to be broken, for the other side to attack, for a cathedral door to be rammed open.  One of the key images is of a bewildered horse falling down the stairs and being killed by a spear, silently. Does the horse represent the innocent victim, or the people of the city? Maybe Russia itself? No matter what it represents, this is one of the unforgettable images that stay with you.

An image that will be embedded in my mind forever is that of Andrei’s assistant, shot by an arrow,  falling in a stream with a cloud of milk around him. This trail of milk was used earlier when the masons were blinded.  What does it mean? It occurs before or after violence. Does the milk represent the soul slipping away?   Or of what we first we take as a baby from our mother’s breast  being given back to the earth?

Inside the cathedral you see people in terror, praying.  After the Tartars have broken through the door, they subject a bystander to torture in hopes of pumping him for information as to where the gold is kept.  After he does not tell them what they want to know, they pour hot lead down his throat and tie him to a horse to be torn apart. The horse refuses to move till it has been whipped many times.  Is this yet another symbol? Among the dead you see a young mad girl, braiding a dead woman’s hair. This image is odd and alarming because it seems so out of place.

In the last episode, “The Bell,“  we lose Andrei and are introduced to a new character—a boy who is given the task to make a bell for a cathedral. This was a Herculean task under the best of circumstances, but it was unheard of for a teenager to undertake it. In one image as he is digging the casting pit he finds a root and follows to its source, a nearby tree. He falls a sleep under it.  Is this meant to show that because his dead father was a bell caster he is finding his roots?  

Andrei is not totally absent form this segment.  He is in the background of many key moments. Watching the process of the bell making is amazing. The mass of people needed and the enormous amount of time it takes is extraordinary. Near the end film the two artists, Andrei and the boy stand together in a bleak landscape.  Andrei reaffirms his faith.

Watching Andrei Rublev, you can do one of these three things:

• Ignore the symbolism and just pay attention to the bare plot.

• Ignore the disturbing images and try to twist it into the bright positive film it is not.

• Simply take it in, confusing though it may be, and try to understand and note the symbols the best you can, and give the film its due.

This film deals with themes and ideas, not through wordy monologues and dialogue, but symbols that tell a story of their own.  Many filmmakers are not so enlightened. Tarkovsky uses symbols to create an unearthly state of reality.  He views images as important when they look very dramatic and he lavishes them on this film like sugared violets on a cake. It’s important for him to find the prefect place to put them and match them with the prefect atmosphere, otherwise the effect would be lost.  But do we interpret them correctly? Does the horse represent the people of Russia? What does milk symbolize?  What do all those roads and doorways mean? We can never find out what Tarkovsky thought it symbolized, or the inner working of his mind.  But we can guess and search for a theory that rings true.

2001 Tarkovsky Prize 2nd Place: Stella Lochman

IMAGES IN TARKOVSKY’S ANDREI RUBLEV

by Stella Lochman

The images in Tarkovsky’s Andrei Rublev may seem convoluted or unclear to the untrained eye. After first viewing the film a person feels as if they had just awoken from a dream where their mind was bombarded with more images than they could ever make sense of. But very much like a dream, after letting it settle into the mind everything begins to make sense.

It becomes clear that Tarkovsky wanted to divulge relationships between pictures and events with new and organic images. Tarkovsky believed that deliberately leaving his images open-ended would allow their meanings to continue to grow in the mind of the viewer, and refused to limit imagination with easy explanations that would manipulate the viewer. Tarkovsky had said, “What I’m interested in is not symbols, but images. An image has an unlimited number of possible interpretations.” Tarkovsky was using what is called poetic reasoning. “In my view poetic reasoning is closer to the laws by which thought develops, and thus to life itself, than is the logic of traditional drama.“

With that in mind, one can go over the recurring images in the film.

The first one that comes to mind is that of birds. The concept of flying has been haunting human minds for centuries now, but never in the same haunting way as in Andrei Rublev. The opening scene is of a man betraying all human laws and flying. Alone this could be a fairly simple image, but when you parallel it with the other images of birds in the film—including a constant rain of feathers inside a cathedral, and a disfigured swan, and any number of falling white birds—the idea of this man flying takes on a whole new level, particularly the fact that he fails. The birds in this film represent something pagan, or ritualistic. The fact that this man fails to fly could represent the downfall of all that is pagan. There is also a chicken that appears above the boy, the bell maker’s son, in the last sequence called “the Bell.” The bird is framed in a black window over the boy’s shoulder right before then men come to take him away. Though this chicken is nothing pagan, it’s docile attitude might represent something else: the end of this boy’s life on the farm, and the beginning of something big.

Another prominent symbol in Andrei Rublev is snow. Not only does the element give the film making a very “black on white” style, but it also symbolizes martyrdom of some kind. This is pure Tarkovsky to relate snow with martyrdom, a very unlikely match. Yet several times in the film people and things are seen eating snow. The first time snow is eaten is by Jesus Christ himself minutes before being crucified. The next thing to eat snow is one of the monk’s dogs, right before the dog fight scene in the “Charity” section. Minutes later the dog is attack by a Tartar’s dog. And finally snow is eaten in the Charity scene again. The deaf mute girl is shoveling handfuls of it into her mouth only minutes before being carried away on horseback by the Tartars.

Finally, there is the symbol that Andrei Rublev is famous for, the horses. Hundreds of horses of all colors and builds are seen through out the film. Tarkovsky makes a special point in his “poetic reasoning” to give each scene with a horse image a separate meaning. This first thing that’s important is the color of the horse. White horses are used in much different circumstances than black ones. Black horses bring up darker, more immoral ideals—all of the Tartars ride dark horses—where as white horses give the sense of purity. The most poignant example of the color difference is in the Crucifixion scene where in the front with the peasantry are six black horses, and alone at the top of the hill with Christ on the cross is a single white horse.

An extremely dramatic use of horses in the film is to associate them with the violence of man. During the Raid sequence, where a town is attacked and its inhabitants massacred, countless horses are slaughtered, the most stunning being, of course, the black horse that falls down a flight of stairs and then is stabbed to death with a lance. This single image stays in the mind long after leaving the film, and its meaning makes the viewer contemplate everything about life that seems unfair and horrible. There are also scenes where the horses regain their strength, as if coming to life again, and others where they buck their riders off. What all of this “horse business” comes down to is that Tarkovsky is able to change the meaning of his symbols in the running narrative of the film, while juxtaposing the images as well.

Andrei Rublev’s imagery and tone is summed up in the epilogue when the film transforms from black and white into color and scans over the real Andrei Rublev’s surviving work. What is amazing about this extraordinary sequence is that all of the images in the film reappear in this ten-minute scene. All of Tarkovsky’s imagery is paralleled in the actual work of Rublev. Two artists, hundreds of years apart, are working together to create an unforgettable dream. A dream one can always get lost in.

2001 Tarkovsky Prize 1st Place: Daniel Kleinman

CLEAR SYMBOLS IN THE CONFUSING IMAGERY OF ANDREI RUBLEV

by Daniel Kleinman

Throughout his professional career Andrei Tarkovsky would deny the presence of symbolism in his films. He preferred to call it imagery. It may not be easy to spot and when it can be, it is often very complex, but the film is indeed rife with symbols. Some, such as the use of horses, are so multifaceted in the context of the whole film it is nearly impossible to decipher them as a whole, though on a scene-by-scene basis they become much clearer. Other symbols, such as roads, doorways, etc. have such broad connotations that discussion of them is equally difficult. There are, however, several clear themes which are illustrated by the symbolism which accompanies them. One of the most interesting and consistent throughout the film is the presence of birds. Throughout Andrei Rublev, Tarkovsky masterfully uses many types of birds to reveal beautiful and insightful meanings and enhance the film in general.

Rublev’s portrayal of a white bird as an emblem in one of his paintings, (which are featured in color at the end of the film), served, I predict, as the perfect inspiration for the use of this symbol. Though this bird symbol, particularly white birds, does not morph into various meanings throughout the film like the symbols of horses do, it does carry numerous related connotations that reveal themselves more prominently in specific scenes than in others. Chickens and roosters, for example, do not consistently carry the same themes as the other birds discussed here, though they definitely do have specific meaning and specific purposes, the clearest example being that of the rooster in the window when “The Bell” sequence first begins.

The first major scene featuring the imagery of birds is during “Theophanes the Greek.” Andrei and Foma, his apprentice, run across Theophanes in the forest while Andrei criticizes Foma’s faith and character. Theophanes promptly agrees and reinforces what Andrei says when he tells Foma that, “He should be beaten every Saturday like a dog.” At this point Foma comes across a dead white bird, presumably a goose. He stares at it for a while, and then removes a beetle from it with a stick. The scene ends with Foma examining the bird’s lifeless wing. In this scene the bird represents Foma’s faith. Foma has never heard such an interpretation of his own faith and character from someone as prominent as Theophanes the Greek, and those harsh comments lead Foma to reexamine and improve his faith, symbolized in his removal of the beetle and examination of the wing.

The next major scene featuring the symbolism of birds is “The Holiday.” Four or five birds are seen falling from the dark trees as Rublev treks through the forest towards the Pagan rituals. He knows that sacrilege and sin is there waiting for him, but his curiosity pushes him forward. The falling birds shouldn’t be interpreted as a lack of faith of the Pagans, as they had no faith to begin with. Rather, the birds should be interpreted as the crumbling of the strict form that Rublev’s faith expresses itself in. Though he won’t be truly awakened to his true understanding of his own faith until the end of the film, the birds here symbolize the beginning of the end for his severely limited “Monk’s form” of Christianity.

 In case the audience has not picked up on the constant theme of birds and their symbolism of faith and Christianity they are reminded very clearly when the stonemason remarks twice how the carvings of the Prince’s church are like the song of birds, light and beautiful.

In the most dramatic scene featuring the symbolism of birds, two large geese are seen flying/falling down from the Cathedral roof into a huge fire and total chaos below in “The Raid.” These birds symbolize the Prince’s loss of faith as well as a general assault on Christianity and God Himself, as we can be led to believe by the preceding shot of the remorseful and regretful Prince with his men stripping the gold from the top of the church.

In an interesting and insightful scene, towards the beginning of “The Bell” a bird is seen flying across the screen, staying level and not losing altitude. Below it the bell casters are digging the casting pit. Here the bird symbolizes not a loss of faith but rather a progression of it because people are coming together in unity to glorify God.

The last, momentary shot of a bird, aside from the bird on the emblem featured in the color sequence, is the most difficult to decipher. Also in “The Bell” Kirill and Andrei take refuge under a tree in a storm, and Kirill is holding a small black bird. If one is to look at the film in terms of black and white carrying their common connotations of bad and good, respectively, then the small black bird could symbolize Kirill’s vanity and betrayal, which have fueled his life for as long as we, the audience, have seen him. These weaknesses caused him to leave the monastery, and they also caused him to come back to Andrei, indirectly. At this point in the film, however, though vanity and betrayal remain a major part of his history, Kirill now has them under control, hence the black bird he is holding.

Tarkovsky paints a myriad of emotions in Andrei Rublev.  The pictures are so rich and so complex that the term imagery may be more appropriate to use than the term symbolism. These birds, however, remain clearly symbolic.  They reflect the faith and character of the people, and they come together as major symbols not only in this film but in all of Tarkovsky’s works: the enduring nature of Mother Russia, the Russian people, and the faith that Tarkovsky so strongly believed in.