MovieChat Forums > Morvern Callar (2002) Discussion > Who is Morvern?

Who is Morvern?

posted 16 years ago by cine40
21 replies | jump to latest

Spoilers ahead (as usual)!

I’m told (by several, different and reliable sources) that “Morvern” is not a proper name in English. It’s said to be made up by Warner.

Is this a clue telling that Morvern in the drama MC is not for real? That all what she does and think is simply *meaning* different things?

Her ways of moving through life are certainly mystifying: Lying calmly on the floor caressing her dead boyfriend’s body (she *knows* that he is dead!), cutting him up in pieces and burying the pieces high up in the mountains, laughing when nearly being run over, and killed by a cab, following an insect on to a joyful erotic encounter, stealing her boyfriend’s artistic works and selling it for a totally unrealistically high sum to some blockhead editors, taking a really low-key attitude to life, responding normally and not-normally to ordinary social situations, letting her best friend Lanna sleep on her lap/laughing heartlessly at her sitting on a roadside in the middle of nowhere in Spain at midnight, and so on and on. Coming home from Spain she tells Lanna that she is “going again”, and asks Lanna if she wants to come. So who is the *real* Morvern??

*What*, more precisely is Ramsay telling us? Warner doesn’t really count. This is about Ramsay’s *Film*, not about Warner’s novel.

Film aficionado “Jamo” has a very special clue to the Morvern persona. I hope that he will find time to reveal it here.

Soon back

cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] cine40 16 years ago

I just asked: ”*What*, more precisely, is Ramsay telling us?” Well … maybe it should rather be ”*What*, more precisely, is Ramsay asking us?”
cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] Jamo57 16 years ago

Hi Cine!

And thank you for recommending this film to me. As you say, Morvern has some very interesting ways of moving through life, and reacting to what life presents her, too it seems. She is a challenging character and before launching my hypothesis I will say upfront that I have not read the book or seen how her character is presented there as well.

But in watching MC I began to wonder if Morvern has been the victim of an abusive relationship--and her dead boyfriend was an abuser. I also wondered if it was not the first. My PM to Cine was way too long for a post, so I will boil it down to bullet points. I began to wonder if this was at the core of the Morvern character due to:

*Her ambivalent or almost apathetic response to finding his body.
*Lack of grieving.
*How she intermingled with her friends as if nothing had happened immediately afterwards.
*The numb response to opening the Christmas gifts in solitude, and were the gifts a guilty attempt to "win her back" or apologize for abusive treatment?
*Was the suicide itself, and the instructions for how she should carry on motivated by guilt and remorse?
*The apathetic response to "I Love You" and which was immediately followed by erasing his name.
*And of course the slight smile as she conducted the means for disposing of the body when no crime had been committed.

Morvern is also distant in how she interacts with others:

*Her relationship with her boss at the grocery store depicted by the cold stare by the manager through the window at Morvern from a distance. Another male "authority" figure who treats her as an object, from a distance.
*There is a distance it seems between her and Lana as well. It seems there are secrets she keeps from her best friend that are palpable at different times in the film, visually symbolized by the distance they sleep from one another on their final night together in Spain on the side of the road.
*The boater who shines the spotlight on her, to whom she seems to present herself as an object.
*The moody and depressed man she sleeps with at the resort, followed by her wanting to flee immediately (at least she is beginning to recognize a pattern in her life).

Morvern's family life:

*Her reverence for her grandmother, was she the only one who protected Morvern? The only one with whom she had a loving relationship?
*Where are mom and dad, were they abusive too?
*The expression on her face as if she is encountering alien life forms when picked up by the happy, "functional" family when hitchhiking in Spain.

Her ambivalence, apathy, and overall distance from those around her make me wonder. Thoughts?

I wish I was a headlight on a northbound train. I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.

[–] cine40 16 years ago

Hi Jamo!

She is a challenging character and before launching my hypothesis I will say upfront that I have not read the book or seen how her character is presented there as well.

Like I said, and I am really serious about this: Warner’s novel does *not* count here!! This is *Ramsay’s* story and her very own piece of art! It’s *Ramsay’s* Morvern we are dealing with. I’ve read (well … sort of, since its written in Scottish English – which means some heavy guesswork for me) the novel, but I do *not* let it sway my relation to Ramsay’s film. This is all between Ramsay and me, not Warner and me.

Yes, Morvern certainly moves in mysterious ways, but I strongly feel that some of the mysteries are “explained”, or, rather, made more understandable, by your way of seeing her and her history. E. g.: The very patronizing tone in her boyfriends message on the comp, starting with the order: “Read me”, and then ordering her (not friendly asking her) to do this and that. It always felt strange to me, but with your interpretation it now seems more intelligible.

It also puts some kind of credibility to her strange behavior at the railway station; answering a phone call from a total stranger, and almost “habitually” starting to comfort and pleasing him: “Oh … don’t worry … I’m sure she’ll be fine … oh, yea; Merry Christmas”.

And Morvern showing off her private parts to the “eyeless” strange stranger on the boat (Charon crossing river Styx to me) fits in as well. It does add, not subtract, to my own “decoding” of this surreal scene: showing her genitals (origin of life) to Charon is like wordlessly telling Death to piss off! Only a woman can do that! Death is always male, so … well, you see the consequences! That’s my fave scene in MC.

I’ll soon watch MC again, and with your way of decoding her it will be even better than before. And it was *very* good at the out start!!

BTW, Ramsay’s “Rat Catcher” is great cinematic art as well. It’s depressing and very uplifting at the same time. But still never boring. And it’s a must-see for every Brit-fan there ever was (count me in on that!). On my Criterion release (#162) there is also included her totally brilliant short “Gasman”. OMG, that chain-smoking and hysterically speed talking Scottish woman is definitely one of my cine art heroines! Her heavy accent is pure music to my Swedish ears, I understand like 60 percent of what she is saying, but those 60 percents are like linguistic heaven to me! And her films … [not yet invented icon for “swoon”]

cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] Jamo57 16 years ago

Hi Cine!

Which brings us to the ending.

Was the scene in the cemetary a scene of symbolic forgiveness? Now that Morvern has been "provided for" in a sense, does the fact that she immediately wants to go to the cemetary indicate to us she can forgive her abusive boyfriend?

And when she gets back to her hometown she finds Lanna and asks her if she wants to go again, is it because home is such a place of suffering and pain for her. Now that she has some financial independence, she no longer has to stay there to survive. And I suspect that on this trip, she is not coming back. She no longer has to.

I wish I was a headlight on a northbound train. I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.

[–] cine40 16 years ago

Hi Jamo!

Was the scene in the cemetary a scene of symbolic forgiveness? Now that Morvern has been "provided for" in a sense, does the fact that she immediately wants to go to the cemetary indicate to us she can forgive her abusive boyfriend?

A long time ago the clever and inspiring poster “Arturobandini” sent a very interesting answer (now deleted by the admins) to me about this scene. It’s the one and *only* break of the fourth wall in MC. I asked him “why” and “what for”, and he suggested this: the “impossible” pan is like visualizing Morvern *confronting* herself. Her old life buried (together with the remains of her boyfriend up in the highlands) is shown at the start of the pan, and her new life as an economically independent, and totally free person, is shown by the reversed stopshot of the pan. Opposing ways of living; a new life post mortem! Arturo’s reading makes a lot of sense to me. As do yours.

BTW … this pan reminds me of yours and mine fave pan in LiT. Using the cam to move us not only from one physical place to another, but also from one *conceptual* place to another. In LiT the cam is panning from one location to the *same* location (the bed)! Great filmmaking by clever female filmmakers !

And yes, Ramsay is using this kind of pan in “Ratcatcher” as well. A “phrase” in her own, and very special film language? She surely knows how to use a cine cam! (It’s said that Film School initially refused her a couple of times because she was “too thin and too fragile to handle a cine cam”. Silly enough to be totally believable!)

Try to get hold of criterions edition of her “Ratcatcher” some time. It contains some totally wonderful Ramsay shorts; “Gasman” is a real film gemstone!! I know you well enough by now Jamo, to know that this film will really touch and move you. It’s about working class people, rising kids and handling separate lives and shared kids. This is a little masterpiece that truly fulfils Hitch’s great idea: “A good movie is reasonably understandable also if the sound track goes down”. This one definitely is! There is especially one shot (a night shot) that is almost impossible; How did she (and her cam and lighting folks) put bright light only on the rail, and nothing else!!?? Yes, yes, I know that metal is more reflective than grass and gravel, but still … how did they do it?

cine

Edit: yes, i'm repeating myself on the issue of "Gasman". It IS a great short, you will definitely love it!!

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] Krustallos 12 years ago

Ramsay is using this kind of pan in “Ratcatcher” as well. A “phrase” in her own, and very special film language?

I think you'll find she nicked that from Tarkovsky. "Mirror" would be perhaps the best example. Nothing wrong with that of course. If you're going to steal, steal from the best.

I used to want to change the world. Now I just want to leave the room with a little dignity.

[–] cine40 12 years ago

Hi Krustallos!

Thanks for the info. I’ll try to get hold of “The Mirror” (with Margarita Terekhova), since Tarkovsky is one of my fave filmmakers. His visualization of Lem’s “Solaris” is totally breathtaking. I can, and I will, watch that film over and over again until the end of my life.

I very much doubt that Ramsay has to, as you say, “steal” ways of storytelling. She, like any other artist, is dependent on what other artists have done before. It’s an ongoing process of conceptual evolution. But Ramsay definitely has a very personal stamp on her films.

But, if Ramsay nicked it from Tarkovsky – from whom did Tarkovsky nick it? Or did both of them nick it from a third source? Or wasn’t there a source at all? This is what makes film history so thrilling and amazing. Is there *ever* any brand new ways of telling a story?

Exactly what is the difference between ‘stealing’ and ‘being inspired by’?

And now to something totally different:
I really like your signature. Is it a quotation from literature, or is it your own statement?

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] Krustallos 12 years ago

Hello Cine40.

My sig is a quote from the movie "Shortbus".

Regarding 'nicking', I was thinking of Stravinsky's maxim: "Lesser artists borrow, great artists steal".

Tarkovsky of course had plenty of inspiration from Bergman and Kurosawa.

With you 100% on "Solaris".

cheers
Chris

I used to want to change the world. Now I just want to leave the room with a little dignity.

[–] tooncesaaa 11 years ago

Thanks for an interesting discussion. You've helped illuminate an intriguing yet enigmatic film.

[–] cthulhulurks 11 years ago

Ordet's is Tarkovsky's worst, yet it is a homage to Bergman...

As to Morvern, isn't this a bad taste to use a novel or anything related to literary writing as a plot device?

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

[–] cine40 16 years ago

Hi Pearl!

Spoilers ahead as always. We are here to comment on FILMS! Surprise!

Long time and no see indeed!!!

So nice to have you back again, and most certainly on such a great film as Ramsay’s “Morvern Callar”.

I fell in love with this film from frame one, and Jamo’s reading of it made it even more amazing and bewildering. It “explains” (ohh, … this is high art, so the word “explanation” is maybe not totally proper, but you know what I mean…)

Your reading of it will most certainly add further to both Jamo’s and mine reading of this fantabulous film (have you ever heard such a perfectly in-visual-sync-soundtrack before!??). Whether you agree or disagree, your comments are very much appreciated.

By sheer random: I melt totally when Nico’s thin and mesmerizing voice starts up with Reed’s ”I’m sticking with you” (… cause I’m made out of glue), and goes on with the very compelling and appropriate ”Saw you're hanging from a tree
And I made believe it was me”, when Morvern starts to partition the body.

Like I said: this is Ramsay’s piece of art, not Warner’s. But *one* thing from the novel is of some importance: in the novel it’s made clear that Morvern worked in the “butcher and meat department” of the store. Which makes it a lot more plausible that she knew how to butcher a body. Most people do not. On the other hand: you can’t stuff a male body in a backpack like the one Morvern uses. It’s just impossible. But this is high art; not a doc on body butchering. The shots from high up in the Scottish highlands, when Morvern buries the remains of her oppressor (?? -- Jamo’s reading) are totally amazing. At last Morvern is *freeeeeee* (yes, Jamo’s reading makes these shots all so clear and understandable). And when she washes her hands in the clear fresh water (virgin spring?): it probably does not make sense in real life, but this is art, and here it certainly makes sense. Makes me feel akin to Morvern: free and cleansed!

I’ll watch for your upcoming comments.

cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] Jamo57 16 years ago

Hi LP!

So nice to 'bump' into you again!!!

OK, I guess I will have to get MC back for a repeat viewing. I will put it in my Netflix queue and move it up to the top.

Detached is a very good way to describe Morvern. She goes through the story in such a foreign way (from my way of moving through life) that of course I had to come up with a reason *why*. So I will take another look and see if the 'theory' holds up. And any theories you might have would be great to hear.

I wish I was a headlight on a northbound train. I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cine40 16 years ago

Hi Pearl!

… is it a way of controlling her still beyond the grave?

Great, Pearl! Just a beeping great comment that is! The very same second I read it, my guts roared YESSSsss!... of *course* … that’s it! That’s it, indeed!!

And you also now further confirmed Jamo’s reading of the character Morvern. The more I apply his interpretation to MC, the more, previously “loose”, bits and pieces fall into place. There is of course not even the slightest hint from neither Warner, nor Ramsay, that Morvern was a victim of abuse. But, seeing her as such a persona “explains” so many strange situations. Jamo’s reading of her, ads a lot to this enigmatic film. Her sense of joy and newfound freedom when running down from the burial scene up in the highlands, and her, almost compulsory, habit to always comfort and console, made clear in the mysterious scene at the railway station when she answers this phone call from a total stranger, is emotionally “understandable” with Jamo’s take of her persona and history.

She is/was sort of “programmed” to please and obey. So her faint smile, and the totally, and perfectly “misplaced” Lou Reed song (sung with Nico’s wonderfully childish and innocent voice), makes lots of sense now. She does not hand “him” over to the authorities. She actually *is* sticking with him; taking care of his remains herself and in her own way. But also: Butchering his body is like butchering (and burying) an unpleasant and ungrateful past.

And I also very much like Ramsay’s subtle socking the ridiculously pretentious nitwit “high art publishers”. The stupid male publisher telling Morvern that he liked “to hear such a distinctive female voice” . Through my job, I have met some of these blockheads IRL, and I can assure you that Ramsay’s rendering of them is totally accurate!! IRL they are even ten times worse!

Great that you woke this board up again Pearl! Have to locate/find the songs that grabbed you. You are some forty years my junior, so our musical heritage differs a bit. Just give me some time, and I’ll catch up with you.

I’m so glad that this little cinematic gem from Ramsay hit home with you!! Art bridges ages and mores indeed!

Soon back!

cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Jamo57 16 years ago

Now that I have seen 'Morvern' for a second time, I think we really are on an interesting and worthy track here. As Cine has pointed out the instructions from the computer are rather patronizing, but I also read some real guilt into them as well:

Explaining the suicide, 'It just felt like the right thing to do.'

About the book, 'I wrote it for you.'

On the outside of the cassette box, 'Music for YOU'

All of that seems to be compensating for some abusive behavior, either psychologically or physically, but at the very least very controlling behavior. In fact even the Christmas gifts in general seem to be really nice gifts, probably the most expensive he could afford which could be seen as compensating for some past misdeeds.

And Cine is correct. Morvern seems programmed to please at the beginning of the film, or at least to always apologize. There is a scene of Morvern taking money from her BF's wallet to go to the party. She leaves some money in the wallet either to make him think it is all still there, or to leave him some (like a dead body will need the money). She closes the scene by whispering 'Sorry'. When she meets Lana in the next scene, the first thing she says is 'Sorry' I guess for being late.

Its interesting that you both talk about the BF communicating with or controlling her from the grave. When she first leaves the apartment after *we* discover the body, she is sitting at the train station when the phone rings. I immediately flashed on all of those horror films where the ghost/phantom that is terrorizing the heroine is on the other end of the line. I am sure that was probably intentional by Ms. Ramsay.

The song that is playing while Morvern dismembers the body has already been mentioned, but what about the lyrics, 'Anything that you might do, I'm gonna do to' (as the blood splatters on her shoulder). She sure seems to do the job with some real satisfaction.

But on the whole, Morvern seems really disconnected from those around her. During the Christmas parties, the bar scenes, and the parties at the resort Morvern is always apart and observing from the outside. And there is always some subtle distance between her and Lana. Lana is oblivious to it, but Morvern cannot share everything with her.

Cine, you mention Morvern washing her hands in the 'virgin spring' after burying her BF. I also noticed that she seems very intent on the smaller details of the setting as well. She sees all the little bugs and activity around her. She focuses in on the little buds sprouting from the shrubs (another spring has sprung? The season of Spring along with your virgin spring? And what is the season of Spring, but the returning of life from dormancy.) To me that really dramatizes that Morvern is emerging from a fog and actually 'waking up' and becoming aware of what is around her. Up to that point she has been really in a mental and emotional fog. Some may say it is from the shock and mourning of her BF, but it is entirely possible she was in a fog as a defense mechanism during the relationship.

BTW, do you think Morvern 'came cheap' in her negotiations with the publisher reps? It is always said that you never take the first offer. I think they could have come up another 25K or 30K pounds it would seem...

I wish I was a headlight on a northbound train. I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.

[–] cine40 16 years ago

Hi Jamo!

Its interesting that you both talk about the BF communicating with or controlling her from the grave.

Jamo, this very compelling insight was *entirely* Pearl’s – not mine. But the very same moment I read it, it hit me: yes *of course* -- that’s it; Pearl’s totally right on this one! Great, and a very useful, comment from Pearl. And it also so powerfully boosts your reading of the Morvern character.

Jamo, your interpretation of Morvern’s history has certainly added a lot to this wonderful film. It also supports Arturobandini’s reading of the ‘impossible’ pan (breaking the fourth wall) at the cemetery in Spain: Morvern is *confronting* (=the pan stop shot) her earlier life (the pan start shot).

MC can now be read as a drama about ‘breaking out’. From being a prisoner, and other peoples ‘possession’, to living a life of ones own (Morvern: “Lanna … I’m going again”). But that will also bring forth Morvern’s strange distance to people around her (which Pearl pointed out quite clearly). Is Ramsay telling us that Morvern’s past has destroyed and killed her ability to relate normally to another human being? If so, how are we supposed to read the moving and touching scene in the cab, when Morvern lets Lanna sleep on her lap, caresses her hair, and smiles softly and lovingly? I can’t see Morvern as an emotionally disabled person. Just look at her eyes when she looks at Lanna’s Grandma, when visiting her alone in her house (having tea with her). Morvern is emotionally hurt, that’s for certain, but she’s not disabled.

And then the erotic encounter. It’s initiated by Morvern (inspired by the tiny insect, aimlessly wandering out of her room and into the corridor and into new and unknown agendas?), but when it’s over the male tells her that he has to leave. Like her BF did earlier (“to another country?”), but that time it was a more definite departure.

That one night stand. It puzzles me. I’ve been through a couple of such experiences IRL, and they still stay with me. Not as ‘wonderful’ memories, but more like intriguing and almost unpleasant memories (oh, the *sex* was good of course, but still …). Didn’t we actually *abuse* sex? Shouldn’t sex be a confirmation of deep and *lasting* relations? And engaged in *after* -- not *before* -- the relation has deepened? Well, I really don’t know, but Ramsay’s film, and my own real life experiences, keeps me wondering. That’s what good films do to you: keep you alert, up and running, and forever questioning your own petty life.

Three, forever, unforgettable lines in MC:

Lanna: (to Morvern at the almost painfully beautiful sea shore early in the morning after the party) “I’m f /ucke-d” (which she actually *was* indeed!). I love the ambiguity of the line.

Morvern: (to Lanna in the bathtub scene after Lanna asking her where Morvern’s [now dead] boyfriend went) “To another country?”

Morvern: “In the kitchen” (Reply to the old male friend in the bar asking her where her ‘Dostoyevsky’ was). Sure he was ‘in the kitchen’: flat on his face, and stone dead.

I think that Ramsay (like her Canadian ‘sister’ Rozema) has developed a film language where the border between realistic narration and poetic narration is pretty hazy and very hard to pin point. Which of course expands the emotional area and domain available. Slowly swaying between saga and reality is a very attractive way to tell a story and pose a problem. At least to me it is.

So now: what next?

cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] Jamo57 16 years ago

Hi Cine!

It also supports Arturobandini’s reading of the ‘impossible’ pan (breaking the fourth wall) at the cemetery in Spain: Morvern is *confronting* (=the pan stop shot) her earlier life (the pan start shot).

I paid particular attention to this scene on this viewing (I had to, as you had compared it to the wonderful pan in LIT!) and there is a very interesting quality to it that I had not noticed before. After the pan from left to right where we see Morvern twice, there is a cut to the publishing reps watching her. They are located camera left. Then we cut back to Morvern putting some offerings back in order on one of the graves. I expected Morvern to walk back towards the publishers in exiting the frame, but she walks away from them in exiting the frame, camera right.

That changes the interpretation of the scene in a very subtle way for me. My memory of the cemetary scene from my first viewing is that it was a scene communicating forgiveness. Upon realizing she was suddenly financially independent, I interepreted her immediate visit to the cemetary as one of forgiving dead BF and putting things in the past. But for some reason that I can't explain, that sentiment would be communicated in her walking out of the frame camera left back to the publishers (rejoining humanity).

But in exiting camera right, away from the reps, it strikes me as much more independent and remaining 'on her own'. She walks away from the people who have just made her rich. And she also seems to walk out of frame with some independence and some anger or disdain. I think the scene is much more of 'burying her past' and leaving it all behind rather than forgiveness and reintegration.

This interpretation is all on a visceral level and something I cannot explain any more in words than I have.....but as you always point out, Cine, that with art we don't have to!

Is Ramsay telling us that Morvern’s past has destroyed and killed her ability to relate normally to another human being? If so, how are we supposed to read the moving and touching scene in the cab, when Morvern lets Lanna sleep on her lap, caresses her hair, and smiles softly and lovingly? I can’t see Morvern as an emotionally disabled person. Just look at her eyes when she looks at Lanna’s Grandma, when visiting her alone in her house (having tea with her). Morvern is emotionally hurt, that’s for certain, but she’s not disabled.

That's a hard one to discern. I'll throw out a possibility. Perhaps she is still able to find compassion for their fellow humanity, which she can see as Lana is sleeping, and she feels safe in expressing it then. But in the things we say (perhaps not always true), the promises we make (and break), etc.; Morvern is at a place where she cannot, will not depend on those things. She has seen too much disappointment, conflict, and untruth to trust anything in the realms of human interactions. IOWs, talk is cheap.

I don't know if that makes any sense, but its the best I can do right now.....

I wish I was a headlight on a northbound train. I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.

[–] cine40 16 years ago

Hi Pearl!

Step one done: I managed to trace “Some Velvet Morning” (Lee Hazlewood and Nancy Sinatra, 1967), and I agree totally with you: the juxtaposing of this music and Morvern, totally blank and off, off, off; moving toward us, and then the wide angle shot of the supermarket with the “cruising” disabled old woman is just overwhelming. Sight and sound forcefully boosting each other. And this mythical and mystical woman “Phaedra” … she reminds me of Pirsig’s ”Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values”. Have to reread that one once more before I die. Loved it a lot way back when.

cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Squeeth2 7 years ago

I only half watched it as I was writing an essay but she seemed to me to be a personification of life. At first she was surrounded by death and winter but after the man's death she slowly came to life. It was as if burying him emancipated the character. I thought that Samantha Morton was very well cast because she looked so fertile but that might be my hormones. For once a film director showed a woman in long, long-shots, instead of cutting all over the place.

PS I used to know someone called Morvern, it isn't a made up name.

Marlon, Claudia & Dimby the cats 1989-2010. Clio the cat, July 1997 - 1 May 2016.