MovieChat Forums > The Field Discussion > Unnecessary Plot Element?

Unnecessary Plot Element?

posted 14 years ago by nickkarner
18 replies | jump to latest

Just watched it. Loved it. Absolutely loved it. But one thing that was odd to me was the whole bit about the donkey. Of course, I realize its both symbolic and ties in with the donkey being under water as well as the (ahem) body, but remember how the owner of the donkey was threatening that he'd get the blood money? Far be it for me to say, and this is just my thought, but I never thought that was explored very far. Harris never pays, and then the father and his son are near the lake where the donkey is under water, and then he says "we'll get our blood money" and then they walk away. And then John Hurt is accused of being the informer. Now, I thought that maybe the blood money man was the one who became the informer, and even though I don't need things spelled out for me in a movie, if he WASN'T the informer, then really, what was the point of him always getting on about the blood money when he never really did anything about it except stew and break a bottle and brandish it at Harris, which he pretty much ignored.
An interesting situation, where if I'm to believe he was the informer, then it makes total sense and that whole plot device is cool, but if we're to assume that he wasn't, then really, was it at all necessary to the plot?

"Now you go get me a beer and a woman. I'll give that waterbed a workout!"
AQUA TEEN HUNGER FORCE

[–] FilmFan50 14 years ago

I rewatched this over the weekend and you raise a very good point. It's possible that I totally missed something, but I don't recall the informer issue being resolved either. If it was filmed, perhaps it was edited out.

I had even considered the possibility that McCabe's son may have confessed about the donkey also and once it became known he had taken up with the Tinker's daughter she may have fought to defend any repercussions against him from her people and the matter was laid to rest. Perhaps that why we don't see any interference from her folks when the two of them take off together.

FilmFan50

[–] BobStage 14 years ago

Consider how they threatened to curse McCabe if he didn't pay. I always took that as a dreadful foreshadow.

And look what a cursed head hangs upon McCabe's shoulders.

[–] Texas-Jack 14 years ago

Bird let it slip about what happened to the tinkers donkey in the pub. When Bull was putting the money together for the auction he clearly stated that he also had the tinkers blood money and money to pay his easter dues. Looks like you need to re watch it again without falling asleep.

[–] ksiden1 9 years ago

Bird DOES inform... well, he accidentally does. At the auction when the American doesn't show up, the others say they'll wait for him, and Bird accidentally says: "He's not coming." The people just laugh at him, but later when they realise that something awful has happened to the American, they know that Bird knows the truth. Whether they question him about it or just put 2 and 2 together we'll never know though.

[–] caracallac 14 years ago

It's a fore-shadow of what is to come, but it's also illustrative of Mc Cabe's thought processes. Throughout the film parallels are drawn between people and animals down to their names, (Bull, Bird) and their situation, (Tadgh, a pun on tied, Seami, a pun on shame). When Tadgh and the American fight at Mc Cabe's order the American yells at him "You're an animal and you're turning your son into an animal." For Mc Cabe there is no difference between a human and an animal, each are equally worthless. All that matters is land.

[–] IrishLumog 14 years ago

Bird tells the tinkers about the donkey when they are in the pub; "A grey stallion donkey stepped into that field, but he never stepped out again".
Bull then admits to the tinkers that he killed the donkey; "The next time a tinkers donkey walks into my field, i'll kill the owner, not the poor dumb animal". (We later find out it was actually Tadgh who killed the donkey).

Then at the end, Bull automatically assumes Bird "informed" about the yanks murder because he has done so previously (With the donkey).

[–] IrishLumog 14 years ago

"For Mc Cabe there is no difference between a human and an animal, each are equally worthless. All that matters is land."

There are parallels drawn between people & animals which is reflected by the characters names. Animals (Cattle) are part of what the land is. The characters names just reflect the closeness of the people to the land (Their farming tradition).

However, it is incorrect to say that Bull does not value an animals life as much as a humans. How could you come to such a conclusion when you see the remorse & guilt that Bull shows just after he kills the yank. Would he have been as torn up if he had killed an animal? No.

[–] caracallac 14 years ago

I have to disagree with you there, Animals and People are alive, but the land has an almost talismanic quality for Bull as the source and sustainer of life that must be protected. "It's my field. It's my child. I nursed it. I nourished it. I saw to its every want. I dug the rocks out of it with my bare hands and I made a living thing of it!"

The scene that spells this out is Mc Cabe's conversation with the Priest. As him Mother lay dying in the field rather than call a Doctor or a Priest Bull tells his father "Let's bring the hay in first". This episode has about it for me anyway, the quality of a sacrifice to a pagan God.

I also felt that Mc Cabe didn't really care about the fact that he'd killed the Yank and that given the circumstances he'd probably do the same thing over again. What he really cared about was his reputation in the community and the thought of failure in his role as the guardian of the field. The repeated shame motif. Otherwise he would have tried to get help for the Yank or at least ensure that unlike his son he gets a decent burial, instead he weighs the corpse down and dumps it in the lake in exactly the same way as he did with the donkey. This indicates to me that he values one no more than the other.

[–] IrishLumog 14 years ago

"I have to disagree with you there, Animals and People are alive, but the land has an almost talismanic quality for Bull as the source and sustainer of life that must be protected. "It's my field. It's my child. I nursed it. I nourished it. I saw to its every want. I dug the rocks out of it with my bare hands and I made a living thing of it!"

The scene that spells this out is Mc Cabe's conversation with the Priest. As him Mother lay dying in the field rather than call a Doctor or a Priest Bull tells his father "Let's bring the hay in first". This episode has about it for me anyway, the quality of a sacrifice to a pagan God. "

But this does not suggest that he values animals above humans?

"I also felt that Mc Cabe didn't really care about the fact that he'd killed the Yank and that given the circumstances he'd probably do the same thing over again. What he really cared about was his reputation in the community and the thought of failure in his role as the guardian of the field. The repeated shame motif. Otherwise he would have tried to get help for the Yank or at least ensure that unlike his son he gets a decent burial, instead he weighs the corpse down and dumps it in the lake in exactly the same way as he did with the donkey. This indicates to me that he values one no more than the other. "

Bull clearly shows afterwards that he did not intend to kill the yank. He intended to beat him up & scare him. I think we can safely assume that his reaction was different after the donkey was killed.

[–] caracallac 14 years ago

But this does not suggest that he values animals above humans?

---------

I never said that he did, just that they were both equally worthless to him, whereas the land was what mattered.

Bull clearly shows afterwards that he did not intend to kill the yank. He intended to beat him up & scare him. I think we can safely assume that his reaction was different after the donkey was killed.

---------

Sure, killing the Yank was not the plan, but it was the end result and it was not the idea that he'd taken a man's life that bothered Bull, or that the law would catch up to him or even that he'd damned his own soul. What bothered him was the thought that by this act he'd failed in his sacred duty to the field.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Agreed.

[–] IrishLumog 14 years ago

"I rewatched this over the weekend and you raise a very good point. It's possible that I totally missed something, but I don't recall the informer issue being resolved either. If it was filmed, perhaps it was edited out.

I had even considered the possibility that McCabe's son may have confessed about the donkey also and once it became known he had taken up with the Tinker's daughter she may have fought to defend any repercussions against him from her people and the matter was laid to rest. Perhaps that why we don't see any interference from her folks when the two of them take off together."

The informer issue is unresolved. According to Birds story, the tinker girl was the one who spilled the beans but that does not fit in with how she acted around Tadgh. My own opinion is that the tinker girls father overheard herself & Tadgh. Otherwise, the priest just put 2 & 2 together.

[–] IrishLumog 14 years ago

But this does not suggest that he values animals above humans?

---------

I never said that he did, just that they were both equally worthless to him, whereas the land was what mattered.

---------

Well, ok. But my point still remains. He cant have seen them as "equally worthless" because he does not show the same amount of guilt after the donkey was killed.

***********

Bull clearly shows afterwards that he did not intend to kill the yank. He intended to beat him up & scare him. I think we can safely assume that his reaction was different after the donkey was killed.

---------

Sure, killing the Yank was not the plan, but it was the end result and it was not the idea that he'd taken a man's life that bothered Bull, or that the law would catch up to him or even that he'd damned his own soul. What bothered him was the thought that by this act he'd failed in his sacred duty to the field.

---------

I just cant agree with this. Once he realised, he killed the american, We see somebody who knows he has gone too far and I think we see regret in Bull's character.

BTW, Can I ask you where you are from?

[–] caracallac 14 years ago

No probs, I was born in Co Down but I now live in London. Normally I would agree with you that Bull by his reaction is consumed with guilt for taking a man's life, but Bull's exchange with the tinker is telling "Next time a tinkers donkey puts a hoof on my field I'll kill the owner and not the poor dumb animal". Now this may be just talk, but it's the conversation with the priest and the Yank is the thing that swings it for me "...if you think I'm gonna face my mother in Heaven or in Hell without that field, you've got something else coming. No collar, uniform, or weapon will protect the man that stands in my way." I believe him when he says this and with that in mind I can only conclude that it's not the fact that he has murdered a man that fills him with horror, but the thought of failure in his role as guardian of the field.

[–] IrishLumog 14 years ago

"What bothered him was the thought that by this act he'd failed in his sacred duty to the field."

How did he fail? He bought the field in the end, keeping it in his family (Which was the ultimate aim as he explained to Tadgh).

So his guilt must be related to the american he killed and the fact that he blames himself for Seamie's death.

I dont see how he "failed in his duty to the field"

[–] caracallac 14 years ago

Ok, Keane's getting biblical here. Bull has already equated the abuse of the land as he sees it with sin, "God Almighty, tis a sin to cover grass and clover with concrete" and he goes further, vowing to protect the field "My only want is that green grass, that lovely green grass, and you want to take it away from me, and in the sight of God I can't let you do that"

When the Priest denounces McCabe and the whole community from the pulpit he describes the field as "A Field of Blood". This phrase, field (or agros) of blood is the one used in the Gospel of Matthew to describe the field bought with the 30 pieces of silver Judas received for betraying Jesus and as such it was believed that any reward reaped from it would be tainted, so it was used for the burial of strangers.

This is the central irony of the story, it no longer matters that Bull eventually owns the field, by his actions he has defiled it and so failed in his vow and his duty " I cursed myself, I cursed my mother to hell to get the field".

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JacintoCupboard 9 years ago

I'm open to correction on this, but my take is that even tho McC had accounted for the blood money initially, when the price doubled and he was struggling to get that amount, it got put on the back burner. The tinkers confront him at some stage afterwards demanding their money, so he hadn't paid it yet.

The donkey floats to the surface and later the owner of the donkey is seen thanking a young boy for 'finding' it and he says to the boy that they will get their blood money yet. I think the story hinges on the tinker figuring that McC would have put the American's body in the same place. How this profits the tinker, or how this means he gets his blood money, remains a mystery to me. Perhaps there is meant to be a reward in the story somewhere, but I caught no reference to it, nor would it makes sense even it were.