MovieChat Forums > Brideshead Revisited (1982) Discussion > What provoked Charles' conversion?

What provoked Charles' conversion?

posted 13 years ago by angiecoiro
38 replies | jump to latest

I have watched this series countless times. I've listened to the unabridged audiobook over and over. And yet - although I love absolutely everything else about it - the end makes no sense to me. I don't understand what in Charles' life experience leads him to Catholicism - which is beyond ironic, since that's the culmination of everything that went before it, arguably the entire point of the book.

I want to be completely clear as to what I'm asking: I don't mean the book doesn't make a persuasive case, or that I disagree with his reasoning. The fact is, there is no reason presented that I can find. He's scornful and suspicious of Theresa Marchmain's Catholicism. He embraces Lord Marchmain's rejection of it. He takes a perverse joy in boxing in all the Catholics in the room, when he probes the justification of extreme unction. And ultimately he loses Julia, his great love, when she returns to the Church.

All of this is so beautifully drawn. But what in these experiences led him to baptism; why he lost his faith in the service; and what it was about his return to Brideshead during wartime that renewed his faith - barely sketched, and certainly not explicit.

What am I missing?

[–] deeveed 13 years ago

Some things in life, Catholicism, can be a mystery perhaps????. Ryder's time with the Marchmain's I think brought him closer to things within himself that churned but could never get to an outlet. Apparently hanging out with people who are "religious" helped to move it along.

[–] murdoch1111 13 years ago

@deeveed: Your remarks are excellent. You recall that late in the series Julia says, after Charles has raved against Catholicism, that "you don't convince anyone else and you don't really convince yourself." Apparently she senses his underlying needs.

One of the few things I dislike about the series is the amount of time Charles spends in denouncing the faith he will finally embrace.

[–] AllieMDA 8 years ago

the amount of time Charles spends in denouncing the faith he will finally embrace.

This may not inspire the most scintillating of scenes, but it is time well-spent - he turns the idea(s) around in his head, mulling things over. This is a decision that Charles makes after a great deal of thought. Spending time on that intensifies and reinforces the seriousness of his ultimate decision to convert, and make it absolutely clear that Charles wasn't seduced into Catholicism on a whim or a fancy. I think these bits are essential.

[–] wejpasadena 13 years ago

I don't think there's an easy answer to your question, and that's part of the appeal of the book, as well as a source of frustration to the reader. Waugh is suggesting that the working of divine grace in the life of an individual is often mysterious. You may not like this as answer, but I think it is essential to understanding the book.

On another level it's possible to say that the war itself, coupled with so much loss in Charles's life (loss of his marriage, loss of the hope of marriage to Julia, loss of relationship with his son) made him yearn for something more - something deeper and richer. His journey to faith grows out of loss. At the end of the novel when he is in the little chapel at Brideshead seeing the flickering lamp it is the only bright and shining thing in his life. Everything else has been dulled by the war, by loss, by poor choices, etc.

[–] murdoch1111 13 years ago

@angiecoiro
Charles' conversion begins as Lord Marchmain, a lapsed Roman Catholic who is near death, finally crosses himself as a sign that he has repented and has, in a sense, returned to his faith. Charles realizes that what he himself had prayed for was "not a little thing" and that the veil of the temple had been rent. In other words, he suddenly understands the value of religion and begins to feel it working in his life.

Having said that, I shall observe that the later steps in his decision to convert are not made plain.

[–] murdoch1111 13 years ago

On March 6, I posted a short reply to your query about Charles' conversion.

After writing it, I realized that there is a longer, better reply contained in a lengthy comment by "bejasus" titled "Gets Better After Repeat Viewing." Bejasus addresses the issue of Charles' conversion at some length.

[–] deeveed 13 years ago

In other words, he suddenly understands the value of religion and begins to feel it working in his life.

I think that's an excellent point. And the reason that happened is because he surrounded himself for a time with the Marchmains who were really at bottom rich, religious recusants in English society. It's evident that they and the religion they followed held a fascination for him. I think there's something to be said that all that "twitched" the faith that was slowly being formed in his psychology. It's great to have art, fine wines, fine edibles, money, etc but there are other things in this world that matter perhaps more. In Brideshead, Ryder "got" religion because it filled a great need in his being.

[–] joyfarrah 12 years ago

shall observe that the later steps in his decision to convert are not made plain.

I dont think that ther'es any need for them to be. We know that he's lost Julia. But he knows why he's losing her... he understands what is behind her decision to give him up. We know that he tries ot have "faith" in hte army adn the war, believing in the rightness of the war and dedicating himself to militiary life. But (like Waugh) the army isn't what he hoped it would be. He sees its faults too clearly and can't put his faith in it.. He is trying to find soemthing to beleive in that is beyond material things..
I dont think that we need to see him talking to priests or reading up on Catholicism... all we need is ot see that he has found some faith, and is praying in the chapel. He knows that all earthly things pass away, and that Brideshead is now not the beauitful home of an aristocratic family that he once knew it as, but what matters more is that the chapel is being used agian...

[–] murdoch1111 12 years ago

joyfarrah, first, thanks for responding, and, second, in my original 2011 post, I was commenting on aspects of the series as televised--lack of smooth editing in certain scenes, for example.

On another topic, do you proofread your comments before you post them? I ask because in the comment made on Sunday April 29, 2012, you type "hte" for "the" as well as "adn" for "and." I myself am a terrible typist [I found an error in this post while composing it], so I always proofread first.

Again, thank you for your remarks.

AGAINSTALLWARS, PAST, PRESENT, & FUTURE.

[–] murdoch1111 13 years ago

I am responding to remarks made by angiecoiro in January 2011.

In the part of the series that is set in Venice, Charles observes that as a boy he had no faith. He adds that his mother, he thinks, was devout but that his father was not. He also adds that at the time he himself had no interest in religion.

The fact that the series begins with scenes of Charles in military service during the 1940's is one thing that may initially be confusing. Put another way, Charles did not lose his faith in the service. Rather, his conversion begins (as shown in a series of flashbacks) when he watches the dying Lord Marchmain cross himself as an indication of repentance and a return to his faith. Charles realizes that what he has witnessed is "not a little thing."

At some point that is not portrayed in the film, Charles becomes a Roman Catholic. Hence at the conclusion of the film, he visits the chapel and says a prayer--"an ancient form of newly learned words"--that indicates his conversion is complete.

[–] AllieMDA 8 years ago

"an ancient form of newly learned words" - this is just one of so many lovely phrases to be found here.... Things like this somehow help me NOT hate the religious aspect of it all; it is written so beautifully.
Thanks for mentioning it.

"When you say Dylan, he thinks you mean Dylan Thomas...whoever he was."

[–] donwc1996 13 years ago

Having just viewed it again and with particular interest in the last part because of the discussion here, I can only say that Charles' conversion is the result of what is called a "hole" in a script - in other words - an event or development for which there is no logical explanation and which has not been grounded beforehand so we are prepared for it.

[–] angiecoiro 13 years ago

I think, having read all these comments (for which thanks, all!), I have to agree with you. Listening to the audiobook again, I came to the same conclusion as murdoch1111. And in fact, I can hear Jeremy Irons giving that moment every thing he's got as an actor, realizing it's the culmination of the story.

But yes, it's a flaw in the book and script that such a sumptuous, brilliantly drawn tale, with even seemingly trivial moments hovered over lovingly with detail and breadth, ends with a three-paragraph anticlimactic development. It seems almost trivial.

I wonder if the mistake is in the very conceit of the story: having Charles, the least colorful, least fascinating, in fact the least-developed major character in the line-up experience the story's life-affirming transformation. Frankly, only very late in the book do we start to get a feel for his personal religious struggle - after Lord Marchmain is back at Brideshead and starts divvying up his estate. It's an odd time for Waugh to decide we should care about this vanilla, indifferent person who, up to now, has functioned largely as a stand-in for the reader. By then we care passionately about the Flyte family members - or at least know them in great depth. Then, bingo! - it was about the narrator all along. That's just ... clumsy, and dare I say bad writing?

Thanks for helping me think this out. Great conversation!

[–] deeveed 13 years ago

But yes, it's a flaw in the book and script that such a sumptuous, brilliantly drawn tale, with even seemingly trivial moments hovered over lovingly with detail and breadth, ends with a three-paragraph anticlimactic development. It seems almost trivial.

You know I agree on that and I don't think though it takes away from Waugh's inquiry. If we think about it, Brideshead is a meditation on death. Death pervades the whole book. You wonder at times whether Ryder's view of life was too pessimistic. Dodging the "flaw" discussed, it can make sense that his conversion came about since with that it happens that when he dies he's set for eternal life. That's one way of dealing with the Reaper..;-)...

[–] donwc1996 13 years ago

In retrospect I have to agree with murdoch1111 - in fact I think he's right on the money.

[–] murdoch1111 13 years ago

@angiecoiro on Mon Mar 21 2011

I agree that it's a flaw. A similar flaw can be found in the failure to inform the audience that Charles has married Celia and has two children. Also, early in the film at the luncheon Sebastian hosts, there is an abrupt break after Anthony Blanche sits down and Boy Mulcaster says, "Oh my God, Blanche," when the latter has done nothing to merit the exclamation.

Perhaps the delays in filming and the consequent changes in editing account for these flaws. The scene with Anthony Blanche in particular needs smooth editing.

[–] angiecoiro 13 years ago

Now see, we were all in such happy agreement and you had to go and post that. ;)

I thought I recalled Mulcaster's provocation, but just in case I pulled the DVD and looked again. He's reacting to Blanche's overly-theatrical entrance, his all but devouring Charles with his eyes, and his flirtatious comments, while Charles was clearly uncomfortable. Look at it next time you get a chance; it's pretty clear.

I don't know what Waugh was trying to accomplish with springing Celia on the reader like that. Clearly he wanted some element of surprise - he was well into that portion of the book before he has Charles refer to her - but it seems a stunt, rather than a dramatically justifiable choice.

By the way, thanks to everyone contributing to this conversation. It's such a joy to finally discuss this book and series with other devotees! Good quality conversation, too.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] joyfarrah 12 years ago

I can't see that any of these are flaws. We are told in the book that 10 years passed, and Charles has become a succesful artist, married and had children. Its kind of expected that a man of his age would probalby marry, and as he says Celia is a perfect wife for an artist. He isn't in love with her, but she fills a void...
I dont remember the scene wtih Boy and A Blanche but I can well imagine he's disgusted iwth Blanche's theatrical behaviour.
As for Charles' conversion, it is the whole story. At first he has no interest in religion becuase all he has been offered is the anaemic (as Waugh sees it) Anglicanism of hte upper classes. Any faith he might have has been undermined by his being taught that the bible texts are faulty and its never being suggested that he shoudl pray or that religion might mean more than a social ritual. He is then fascinated by the Flyte family. Tehy fill hsi need for romance and love and excitement. but Sebastian proves a broken reed since he is immautre and selfish and is not capable of being a steady friend to Charles. So he drops the search for meaning for life and goes on with his work. He finds Julia and falls in love with her, and then he's angry that her possibly returning to her childhood faith is going ot ruin his chances of happiness iwth her. He rails about the "religious atmosphere" at Brideshead, wehn Ld M is dying, because he is afraid. He is afraid that he may be tempted to believe in it too, and that it will destroy his chances of becoming master of Brideshead AND of having J as his wife. But when he loses Julia, he realises that what she gave him up for must be soemthing very important and I imagine begins to read up on the Catholic faith and is converted.

[–] murdoch1111 12 years ago

@angiecoiro on Fri Mar 25 2011

I've viewed the scene in question again, and I still believe it needs smooth editing, or at least some verbal transition to assist the viewer. I understand what you mean about Mulcaster's provocation, but his remark seems abrupt to me.

[–] murdoch1111 12 years ago

@ angiecoiro on Fri Mar 25 2011

I've just viewed the scene in question again. It seems to me that Anthony Blanche makes some sort of rude gesture that is not evident to the viewer and that it is this gesture which makes Mulcaster say, "Oh my God, Blanche."

[–] rgcustomer 13 years ago

Once you accept the work as propaganda, it makes sense.

[–] murdoch1111 12 years ago

In what way do you see the work as "propaganda"?

[–] joyfarrah 12 years ago

It is, I suppose,in the sense tthat Waugh wrote it as a pro Catholic work. But I dont think that anyone could accuse him of lying to make Catholicism seem more attractive.. He's well aware that Catholics are not necessarily better than anyone else and shows them as faulty and weak, but overall, his belief was that Catholicism was true and that living by its tenets might not make you "happy" in a worldly sense but it provided a bedrock of principle to help you through crises. As Cordelia said, Chalres and Julia might think that SHE was frustrated, working at a dull task, losng her looks etc in the service of Catholicism, but she thought that he and J were frustrated in ther love affair and eventually their affair comes unstuck and they lose each other.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] deeveed 12 years ago

In a way it's amazing Charles was one big fellow for "art" and where it stood for him. Took him a while but he realized that "faith" was really at bottom more important in the hierarchy of things. Apaprently life at Brideshead showed him that.

[–] murdoch1111 12 years ago

@angiecoiro

Re-reading your original query, I think the easiest answer to your question as to why Charles converts is "because Waugh did." In the series, Charles is to some extent a stand-in or spokesman for Waugh.

[–] deeveed 12 years ago

I believe that is true though if you asked Waugh he'd probably say his characters could have nothing do with real life. At the least I could see him give an oblique answer on that.

And regarding Charles' conversion, I did notice that Charles did go through a sign-of-the-cross motion at least one time. It seemed at the time he simply mimicked Sebastian's motion. I don't really think he "understood" the significance of what he did as such. Now I'd argue that when Waugh showed that about Ryder, he was suggesting that Ryder with that motion was starting to undergo a change, an unconscious one at that when it came to his spiritual side. Of course he wasn't fully "converted" but you can see that "ancient", spiritual things were representing themselves in that physical motion that he followed through on.

[–] murdoch1111 12 years ago

@ deeveed on Tue May 29 2012

Charles also crosses himself in the chapel near the end of the flashback. To me that's a sure sign that he has become a Roman Catholic, even though I'm aware that members of other churches which claim Catholic traditions also cross themselves.

[–] hermione47 12 years ago

It is such a pity, I really liked Charles. And in the end he is just as bad as the others. It's a bit as if Luke Skywalker had gone to the dark side...#

[–] murdoch1111 11 years ago

@hermione47 on Sun Sep 23 2012

What in the world do you mean? Why is it (by "it" I assume you mean Charles' conversion) "such a pity"? And why do you claim that "in the end he is just as bad as the others"? I do not understand your comments--or, to speak more colloquially, I do not understand where you're coming from.

[–] Poe15 11 years ago

I've enjoyed reading this thread - some uncommonly intelligent remarks on the book. What about - in Lacanian terms - a series of identifications, proceeding from the imaginary to the symbolic forms? Charles is clearly desirous - I think - of something like a family life; Sebastian charms him, but as someone in another thread pointed out, he ends up sacrificing Charles when Lady Marchmain et al. coopt him to spy on his alleged friend (and here, I have to say that I am relying on the tv series, which is fresher in my mind that the book). When Sebastian takes him to the chapel that first time, he crosses himself "to show respect" - i.e., in order to act just like Sebastian (imaginary identification - based on the image, without any real understanding of what Catholicism means, even to Sebastian). After he becomes Julia's lover, he rejects the religion - in part because religious fervor is associated with his mother, but also because Catholicism is the one thing most likely to sunder him from what he wants the most: Julia and Brideshead (which symbolizes for him both family and aesthetics). After he loses these things - the things he had wanted more than anything else in his life - he ends up identifying - at the symbolic level - with the family and converts; i.e., though he's not able to become a member of the family through marriage, he is able to join them in a way through adopting the belief system to which he himself was earlier sacrificed.

And if I remember correctly, Charles suggests that there is something Platonic here - that just as his love for Sebastian anticipated his love for Julia, his love for Julia anticipated his love for God.

Finally, I have to say that the "hole" (the lack of detail re. Charles' conversion) always suggested to me that there had to be some psychological interpretation; I never was much convinced by Waugh's own characterization of the book ("the operation of divine grace ..." etc.). But that's probably because I'm an atheist.

[–] MidniteRambler 11 years ago

" in the end he is just as bad as the others"

Spot on. Charles's conversion spoils an otherwise fabulous piece of literature. It shouldn't be that much of a surprise, however, since Waugh was a bit twisted in real life.

[–] deeveed 11 years ago

midnite..So you want to change Waugh's story, eh? Well he's going another way than you and he can you know....;-)..I'm not sure in retrospect if Waugh had second-thought about the conversion but hey it's fiction and a writer can do anything he or she wants on the pages. We got the conversion. Now I could indubitably see it. Charles was a crippled guy you know? He needed something to get himself out his spiritual squalor. He was in a real bad way. So thank God for Bridey and the entire household. Moral of story: when you want to convert get involved with rich Catholic people, they know the way, the truth and the life...........;-)....And as for Charles, I think the old boy did the right thing under the circumstances. He was as you say "spot on" in that respect.

[–] MidniteRambler 11 years ago

deeveed

No, of course I don't want to change Waugh's book and give it a happy ending with Charles and Julia inheriting Brideshead and living happily ever after in a rational world bereft of Teresa Marchmain's mumbo-jumbo. Whatever next?

I think that we both know that any reader's response to Charles's conversion and the denouement to the novel is dependent solely on whether or not one is a believer in a Christian god. For an atheist like me the problem is that all through the story Charles is a rational man in an irrational, superstitious world of others burdened with various degrees of Catholic belief. Then at the end, he joins the world he has been watching for 95% of the book. Very sad.

[–] deeveed 11 years ago

Yes, I see your point regarding Christian beliefs. On the other hand, I'm just wondering if Waugh's portrayal of Charles stems from another character, i.e. CS Lewis. I'd think he was a "rational" and learned man who ultimately came to the conclusion that "the way, the truth and the life" sat well for him. He came to understand some of that particular "mumbo-jumbo" that floats around like superstitious flotsam in our world. That particular "mumbo-jumbo" apparently represented the Truth to him.

[–] murdoch1111 11 years ago

@deeveed (Mon Jan 28 2013 09:46:29)

Good point, deeveed. Thank you for making it.

[–] murdoch1111 10 years ago

@ MidniteRambler » Fri Jan 25 2013 14:02:30

Teresa Marchmain's remarks are scarcely "mumbo jumbo" to viewers who understand something about Roman Catholicism. They are certainly not "mumbo jumbo" within the context of the film.