'Death in Venice' connection?


I saw another post on this subject, but I am intrigued enough to write another one.

This movie is a moving modern-day retelling of a short story by Thomas Mann, "Death in Venice." In that story, a circumspect, spartan, newly-widowed scholar, who has lived his entire life in the realm of books and ideas, suddenly finds himself middle aged, freaks out, and goes on a vacation to Venice to try to figure things out. There, he sees this young boy named Tadzio and absolutely flips over him. He becomes obsessed with Tadzio, although he never speaks to or touches him. At the end, he succumbs to a plague of influenza that is plaguing Venice at the time and dies alone on the shore, looking at Tadzio play in the water.

Mann wrote this story in the early 20th century. Many argue quite fiercely that there was nothing gay about the older man losing his marbles over the boy, that the situation was a representation of a deprived soul looking for beauty in the world. I, myself, think that explanation is only partially correct. The longing for lost beauty is part of what is going on, but, hey, the situation is what it is.

And so it is in this film, "Love and Death on Long Island." John Hurt finds himself in the same life circumstances as does the man in "Death in Venice." But this story took place at the end of the 20th century, not the beginning, and a lot had changed. It would not have made sense for him to pine away for his subject without reaching out to him on a personal level. So, the boy character becomes a young man, the aspiring actor played by Jason Priestly, and John H. can pursue him at will.

In "Death in Venice," the man and the boy seem to connect at the end by looking at each other, the boy seeming to point at him. In this film, the characters connect at the end when the younger man pats the older on the shoulder. Both gestures are the same: the connection of the old and the young, in a gay framework, a deeply emotional interaction that is not overtly sexual but bristles with sex under the surface.

The older man in "Death in Venice" dies at the end because for such a story at that time it was a great artistic flourish. In 1997, there was no need for John Hurt to die -- in fact, that would have seemed pretty stupid. So they just changed his name to "DeAth" and that was that, topic covered.

I love how "Love and Death on Long Island" retells "Death in Venice" in a manner that is much lighter in its approach even if the themes are just as heavy.

Does anyone else see this "Death in Venice" connection? I described it here because in the other post I think the author assumed everyone knew what "Death in Venice" was and I don't think everyone does.


reply

Actually, the title is an allusion to Woody Allen's masterpiece "Love and Death".
(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073312/)

I'm sure you can spot the connections yourself.


reply

I think the "Death in Venice" connection is spot on. I thought of it immediately when Giles first sees Ronnie on the screen. Like you, I also enjoyed the lighter take "Love and Death" has with a similar theme to that found in "DiV."

reply

I think it's very clear that it's a modern reprisal of the theme of Death in Venice. But there are some crucial differences. Mann's Tadzio is 14 years old and traveling with his mother. There is almost no possibility that Von Aschenbach can ever fulfill his dream of union with him. The story ends of a tragic note when Von Aschenbach dies as a consequence of his obsession, which led to his having stayed in Venice too long and thus succumbing to fatal illness.

For Giles, it's somewhat different. Ronnie is an adult. Though there is a 30 year difference in Giles' and Ronnie's ages, it is still possible that they could have a romantic and sexual r'ship. Giles' infatuation with Ronnie has led to an expanded life; first, in his entrance to the modern world - the machines, food, contact with people through doing the lecture, and finally traveling to the US and interacting with the locals. And secondly, it has awakened Giles' heart to new emotions and exploration of his own nature, sexual and otherwise. The ending is in fact hopeful, as Giles puts on the sunglasses Ronnie has given him. He is seeing the world through new eyes.

Both stories are very beautiful, especially as films.

reply


Both stories are very beautiful, especially as films.


Yes, but this film has the advantage over Visconti's of not taking itself or its protagonist nearly so seriously. Mann tried to make Death in Venice into a profound tragedy, when the story should have been mined for its dark comedy, as Nabokov did with Lolita (even more so in Stanley Kubrick's adaptation) and what this film does to a great extent.

reply

Finally, a reply - thank you.

I think there are crucial differences between these two stories/films, and they account for the reason one is comedic and the other is pure tragedy.

The first is the 100+ year time difference in the settings of the stories.

And the second is that although it is a long shot, there is always the possibility that Giles will succeed in his romantic obsession. Giles and Ronnie would not be the first couple with a 30 year age difference, provided both partners are of age. This possibility keeps the viewer riveted. With Aschenbach and Tadzio, there is never any question that Aschenbach is doomed to failure. Tadzio is 14 years old, and even though there may be the same 30 year age difference, Tadzio is a protected child. Additionally, it is highly likely there is a language barrier.

The third is the ending. Although Giles has failed in his pursuit of Ronnie, the film ends on a hopeful note. He wears the sunglasses Ronnie gave him as a gift of friendship, metaphorically looking at the world with new eyes. And as I have said in another post, Giles has proven himself so resourceful and resilient, we can easily imagine he will fulfill his true desire - homosexual love with a young, beautiful partner.

Mann compounded the Aschenbach's inevitable failure with even greater tragedy, where Aschenbach succumbs to the epidemic as a consequence of pursuing his doomed obsession. It may relate to the morality of the times, where he is punished for his illicit desire - nemesis follows hubris.

reply

And the second is that although it is a long shot, there is always the possibility that Giles will succeed in his romantic obsession. Giles and Ronnie would not be the first couple with a 30 year age difference, provided both partners are of age. This possibility keeps the viewer riveted. With Aschenbach and Tadzio, there is never any question that Aschenbach is doomed to failure.


Part of the film's humor is on account of the fact that once Giles becomes infatuated, his grasp of reality becomes quite tenuous. He compares a third rate actor to Olivier. He compares his fourth-rate films to Shakespeare. He really believes that a heterosexual young man will abandon his girlfriend, his life, and his career to elope with an eccentric old closet queen. In a sense, Giles was as unhinged as Aschenbach, and so Aschenbach's slipping grasp on reality should have been milked for comic fodder too (though the problem with Death in Venice, as with all of Mann, is that he/it takes the material so damned seriously, even when writing about something that's pathetically absurd and begging for humor).

adzio is 14 years old, and even though there may be the same 30 year age difference, Tadzio is a protected child. Additionally, it is highly likely there is a language barrier.


Well, it didn't stop Humbert Humbert.

What Aschenbach does do is try to convince himself that his infatuation with Tadzio is strictly aesthetic rather than pederastic lust. In a sense, Giles does the same, twisting his mind into knots to convince himself that Ronnie is actually talented and more than just a pretty face.

reply

>>He really believes that a heterosexual young man will abandon his girlfriend, his life, and his career to elope with an eccentric old closet queen

Not just any heterosexual young man, a teen idol! I don't think Giles became unhinged - blinded by his infatuation; I think his behaviour is reflective of Giles' shuttered, protected life, along with his ignorance of popular culture and modern technology. Giles' final speech and letter to Ronnie, whilst heartrending, showed a dignity and self-regard which elicited admiration, as well as pity for his hopeless position.

>>Well, it didn't stop Humbert Humbert.

As her stepfather and guardian, Humbert Humbert had unlimited access to the young object of his desire, sanctioned by society. She was as much a captive as the poor trapped Austrian girls.

I don't think that Giles really believed the nonsense he spouted about Ronnie's acting ability or the comparison of HC2 to Shakespeare. That was sheer flattery. But as someone here pointed out, he was correct in seeing that Ronnie had a beautiful soul.

Giles was free to romanticise Ronnie; after all, the only thing that stood in the way of them having a r'ship was getting Ronnie to agree. But Aschenbach's infatuation with Tadzio was completely forbidden, by law and common morality, then as now. Naturally he would attempt to conceal the true nature of his feelings from himself.

One big difference, in my reaction at least, to both films, is that I pitied Aschenbach. Watching his pathetic attempts to make himself look younger via beauty treatments was heartbreaking. Giles was also pathetic but he was heroic as well. We - the audience - are on Giles' side, hoping that at least he won't be crushed by rejection and derision.

The theme of both novels/films is 'there is no fool like an old fool' and of course that is equal parts comedy and tragedy. Perhaps other readers/viewers of Death in Venice thought Aschenbach was hilarious. Ultimately we are left with Woody Allen's statement - "The heart wants what it wants".

reply

There is no doubt about the "Death in Venice" connection. Gilbert Adair who wrote the original novel on which the film is based also wrote later on the subject of "The Real Tadzio (2001) – a biography of the boy (Baron Władysław Moes) who inspired Thomas Mann's Death in Venice."

(In fact, Adair also has a cameo in this film.)

reply