Why didn't Eva want to have the picnic with the teacher?


Simple enough question. The teacher made it clear enough that he didn't want to impose himself on her. Was she too shy? Too modest to accept the food?

reply

I think he couldnt take her fear, although she knew it was irrational. Gotta remember she was only 17, then going to a lone place in the woods, with an older man she liked but barely knew face to face. She then felt kinda dumb, but couldnt make the fear go away, and kissed him out of gratefulness

"learned English from cartoons"

reply

to me the key was rather a sign of "i trust you", after the teacher respected her decision and stopped the horse

reply

She wouldn't go into the woods with the teacher because her reputation would be ruined. The mere suggestion of "Immoral" behaviour would have been enough to cost both her and the teacher their jobs and homes. She was even taking a risk by being un-chaperoned on a buggy ride, this would have been unthinkable if the villagers did not already approve of the match to the point of considering them to be engaged.

reply

I think the scene was a plot device to show the teacher's morality. He could've easily pounced on the vulnerable Eva but chooses to maintain their chaste relationship because he has a pure heart. This naivety and innocence only enhances our understanding of the past, for we know what horrible atrocities are to follow.

Haneke portrays the young teacher as an innocent observer who witnesses and finally comprehends the nature of events. The carriage ride exemplifies that he is not complicit in creating the fascism that will ultimately 'collapse' the world. He has none of the vices that the townspeople have. He is an outsider and not indoctrinated into Feudal law. His role in the society is to teach morality to the youth yet he fails because parental negligent is too suffocating. It is also hinted that the teacher could be Jewish and consequently his narration becomes even more prophetic and sad.

reply

Where do you see a hint that the school teacher is Jewish? Did you think his father being a tailor implies that he is Jewish? And didn't the teacher go into the church for Sunday services? I can't recall seeing him there, but, since the story was told through his memories, he must have been in the church with the others. If the teacher were Jewish, Eva's father would have been much less likely to approve of her path to marriage with him. I know that German Jews were more integrated into mainstream culture than Polish Jews were (like my family), but I think that intermarriage was uncommon and usually reserved to the bourgeoisie.

reply

Haneke’s films often don’t reveal too much to the audience. He deliberately makes the audience question what they see or don’t see. Arguing whether the narrator is Jewish or not only exemplifies the power of Haneke’s work.

I believe the narrator is Jewish as it makes the film a stronger experience for me. His ancestry is neither implied or made explicit. Throughout the film he tries desperately to integrate within this rural society. Though he displays leadership within the school grounds, his position is still subsidiary compared to the other adults. He attends the religious and agricultural festivities but he is just a spectator not a participant. He is the only one who reveals the truth behind the accidents to a society who, even today, chooses to ignore the origins and causes of this violence. For this, he is the ideal narrator.

reply

Haneke’s films often don’t reveal too much to the audience. He deliberately makes the audience question what they see or don’t see. Arguing whether the narrator is Jewish or not only exemplifies the power of Haneke’s work.

I agree. Haneke, of course, could have dominated viewers in his film by simply pulling them by the nose to "see" and have reality completely explained in his exposition of a village's life in a moment in time. But life is much more complicated than that and Haneke succeeds brilliantly. I have watched it a few times now and come away with new insights all the time in what I've "seen" and took in.

reply

Haneke’s films often don’t reveal too much to the audience. He deliberately makes the audience question what they see or don’t see.


First time the Teacher talks to Eva he was pretty CREEPY. He also reminds one of Ted Bundy ... due to the way he has those 2 DEAD FISH dangling from the HOOK.

Note the way he also keeps trying to maintain her interest each time she tries to ride away from him. First he points out how they're both from out of town. Then he asks her to take a fish to his father. After she tells him how impracticle his suggestion is, then he also asks her to say hello to his father (a man she also tells him she doesn't know).

One can assume he's just being weird because he's interested in having a relationship with her, but when she doesn't want to have a PICNIC with him in the woods, imo, that also reveals that she doesn't really TRUST HIM for some reason.

And how many guys would let someone's father PRESSURE them into saying they were willing to marry Eva? And then also agree not to see Eva for another whole year?

Wasn't Eva also asked her age by some other man? And isn't another girl (age 14) also asked how old she is? And wasn't that other young girl also raped?

So maybe Eva got fired from her job due to the attention that she was getting from the other older man? Because her employer was also afraid that Eva was in danger of being raped?

Doesn't there also seem to be a pattern where anytime an Older Man asked a girl how old she was ... it was also because that Older Man finds her physically attractive? And isn't the Teacher also in his 30's (and therefore also an OLDER MAN as well)?

What if Eva's father forces the Teacher not to see his daughter for another year because he was also molesting his daughter like the Doctor did his daughter?


Gina to Paul: You begin by questioning your value as a therapist - you end by questioning mine.

reply

Pubbly, I think you are totally wrong on this.
I personally didn't find the teacher creepy at all. I thought his intentions were always good, I never saw anything about him that made me suspect him of being dangerous. I don't think Eva did either. His first conversation with her was a bit awkward, but that is because they were both a bit shy. It was clear to me the suggestion that she bring his father the fish was just something he came up with at the spur of the moment because he didn't know how else to get to know her.

I don't think Eva was afraid of him at all. It was very obvious to me that she was quite fond of him and comfortable around him by then. Besides, remember that night she came to the classroom after she had been fired by the Baron? If she was afraid of him, would she had come to him at night, and even ask to spend the night there? He could have raped her then, but she trusted he was an honorable and good man. Perhaps she had sensed that from the first time she met him.

I think she refused to have the picnic because she was just very careful and afraid that someone would find out that she had gone into the woods with a man she wasn't married to and that her reputation would be ruined. Back then people were very conservative, premarital sex was so strongly frowned upon that even the mere rumour of it could turn a woman into a social outcast and have her entire family disgraced. She didn't want to take that risk. When he agreed to turn back, she kissed him to show her appreciation for him being so sweet and understanding to her.

reply

Did anyone notice how the teacher tells Eva about his playing the piano with the Baroness with four hands?

Then he also mentions the new Flute player that she got to replace him?

If one considers that remark ... and the other scene where the Baroness seems flirtatious with the Flute player ... then perhaps she was also having an affair with the teacher at one point?

And if that was the case ... which also seems likely ... due to the other affair that she has with the Banker in Italy ...

then maybe the reason why the teacher becomes interested in Eva ... was in part due to the humiliation that he felt ... at being dumped and replaced by the Flute player?

So his relationship with Eva may also become a form of revenge ... or a way to let the Baroness know that she didn't mean that much to him ... because he's also got another new girlfriend now?

And that attitude may have also played a part in the reason why the Baroness fires Eva ... because she may also fear that the teacher might say something to Eva ... something that she would repeat ... about the teacher's former relationship with the Baroness?

Perhaps the Baron also got the other woman pregnant ... the one who falls down from the loft in the barn?

So sending her up there with that rotting floor may have also been a way he could get rid of both her and the unborn child?













reply

Pubbly: Eva was NOT asked her age by any other man. I was confused at first by that, too. Then I went back and watched almost the whole movie again. The teacher was the only one who asked her.

The DOCTOR asked his daughter how old she was when he got out of the hospital. When she replied, "14" he noted how much she looked like his wife.

I'm not sure he raped her. But he definitely "fingered" her.

I do not believe Eva was molested by her father. I think he really loved her as a daughter and was looking out for her chastity by imposing the 1-year engagement.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I don't believe the narrator to be Jewish, mostly because at the end of the movie he states that he opened a tailor shop following the war (which wouldn't be likely with the tension towards jews rising at that time and place).

I don't see this as a wrong interperatation (I'm a strong believer of following your own interperatation, especially in Haneke's films).
What I see in the narrator though is a bystander. He's not cast out of this village/society, but he's watching. And while he does attempt to "reveal the truth"(if we can even call it that), he can barely name any of it. To me, he's representative of a bystander to WWII crimes; he's neither flued by hate or jealousy, nor a target, just in the middle as an observer. Maybe the telling of this story is a way for him to repent, or maybe finally speak up? (considering especially that, as he states at the start of the film, that this story "could perhaps clarify some things that happened in this country").

reply

I like your explanations.

reply

Agreed - one of the themes of the film is oppression, and one of the ways that oppression takes hold of people is by them internalizing it. Eva was terrified, and I think it's significant that she couldn't explain exactly why (though I think it's pretty clear that it had to do with what other people might think). Even in the middle of nowhere, where no one WOULD see them, the fear is still there. When they're leaving, Eva's reaction is mainly one of relief.

There's just a pervasive sense of dread over everything, and that's what I got from that scene.

reply

Nice observation, I think you are quite right. Even suspicion of sin is sufficient to justify ostracism.

reply

This is highly plausible. Moral codes were different then.

Does this scene mean more than a simple bow to the proprieties of 1913? When you make a film with so many questions, one can fall into a trap of questioning every act.

reply

Exactly. In that time, it would have been considered very inappropriate for an unmarried couple to go into the woods alone together. Regardless of how innocent the picnic would be, there would be gossip and her reputation would be ruined.

reply

Gotta remember she was only 17, then going to a lone place in the woods, with an older man she liked but barely knew face to face.
She wouldn't go into the woods with the teacher because her reputation would be ruined.
--------------------------------------------------------
They already spend, didn't sleep, a whole night together!!!

I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.

reply

Exactly, Eva went to his house to pass the night, when she had no other safe place to go. She obviously trusted him.

Considering her kiss, she had passion for him and he had passion for her. Eva probably felt that being alone in the woods might tempt them both.

reply

Yes! My impression was that she trusted him, but didn't fully trust herself. Her face was expressing all sorts of things during that scene: she did want to go into the woods with him, but had to fight against her own desire. When he agrees to turn around, that's when she puts her hand on his. Moreover, she is the one who initiates the kiss!

reply

Did you happen to notice how men treated women in this movie? What could she possibly be fearful of?

reply

LOL. You've said it all with your commentary!

Amazing movie by the way. I was overwhelmed by its powerful development of story and characters

reply

I don't think she trusted herself. And he accepted it as part of his wooing of her.

She stayed at the school when she had no choice.

Not everything has to be consistent; life is not like that.

reply

[deleted]

I don't think I see any hint at all at the teacher being Jewish...

"The Love you take is equal to the Love you make" The Beatles.

reply

My take on this whilst watching the film was that Eva had some premonition of awful events to take place in the woods involving the children. She is little more than a child herself [17 years old] and this is emphasised in the film as others have noted. Remember also her closeness to the world of children as exemplified by her role as governess before her dismissal by the Baron. Is she like the child who dreamt of harm to come and is questioned by the teacher and the police? Has she conscious or unconscious knowledge of how events will unfurl? Maybe I'm clearly off beam here.

reply

It is a good thought. I also see that a major element of the story is the two co-existing worlds of children and adults. Two alien races semi-united by a single language. Eva is the one deaparting one world for the other.

I liked Eva's father as well. People back then were just a smart as anyone today. Don't confuse your manipulation of technolgy with some sort of general superiority to the cleverness of those people of a hundred years ago.

reply

Eva's fears
It was indeed because the children were in the woods, and this is what Eva was afraid of. The narrator also observes that while after school the little kids dispersed to their homes, the elder students went into the woods right after school.

Eva knew about the children in the woods, the Baroness knew somehow or at least suspected, and so did the Pastor; each in their own way.

That is why the Baroness had gone at first on a vacation, and then to maintain a longer stay in Italy, because it was really her escape from the village. She ony returned briefly to check if anything had changed. As the life of her son was threatened, she had no other choice than to leave in order to protect herself and her children.

The Baroness had Eva fired not because of any pretense, but because she knew that Eva was in danger, and firing Eva would force Eva to leave the village. The fact that a girl from outside the village was hired to look after the Baroness's two babies, meant that the Baroness did not have any trust in the many young women native to the village.

Maybe Eva's fate was of little consequence to the Baroness, but she didn't seem to need Eva's babysitting services anymore, because she might have thought it safer to look after the babies herself.

The Doctor, the Midwife, and their illegitimate child
Someone has the Doctor and the Midwife's illegitimate child's eyes destroyed. I think that the midwife was next, and this was just a preparation for things to come, so that the small child couldn't witness who would hurt the midwife. Note that the small child indicates high fear just as the doctor prepares to leave.

There is another version, whereby the Midwife willfully hurts her own child once sired by the Doctor whom she loved, but who emotionally very hurtfully rejected her. The child was the symbol of their love, and the Midwife was intent on hurting the child as a form of revenge. We see her coming out of the forest, and we see later how afraid the child is of being left with only his mother.

It's duly possible that the Midwife left the child in the forest, perhaps thinking that it might only scare the child and the Doctor. But as the child is found damaged, then I came to a thought that he was found by the youth in the forest. The reason the child's eyes are destroyed is that he inadvertently became a witness to the kids in the forest, and his seeing the children was to be avoided.

Another version is that the Midwife hurt her child, and left him in the forest — presumably to die, because the child no longer served the purpose of tying the Doctor to the Midwife. Unfortunately for the Midwife, the child is found by kids in the forest, and returned to the mother, of whom the child is really afraid of to everyone present. The very next day, the Doctor leaves early, taking the child, and the Midwife is left alone.

Because it was the youth who the other night found the child in a poor state, the Midwife commandeers the bicycle from the Teacher, having promptly realized that the kids are soon going to take their revenge on her. That attempt eventually transpires in a scene where a bunch of kids are looking for the child around the Midwife's house, which is really a ruse to get at the Midwife herself.

Now, the Doctor realizes that the mother of his child has been far too reckless with the child, so it's safe to assume that the Doctor left early next morning, took the child, and also because the child needed treatment in the city.

Whether the Midwife herself did anything or not, she realises that because her child was in the forest and was hurt, someone had to have been there, and it could only have been the children who were in the forest, given that most everyone knew that the older ones went there after hours. Since that someone, then, was also aware of this, she comes to a rather simple conclusion that she's next.

That the Doctor left the practice and the village in a hurry and with their child, is a sign for her to leave, too, given that the practice was closed, and if she still wants to ever see her child again. It's possible that she had the chore of closing her home.

If we suppose that the Midwife was reasonably innocent, then both the Doctor and the Midwife arranged for the Doctor to go with the child on a postal carriage. The Midwife was left behind only because there was no more space left in/on the carriage. Assuming that the postal carriage came by only once a day, the Midwife planned to ride on the next one. But then she discovers from some distance that the children roam around her house, by which time she concretely realizes who the culprits are, and that they are there after her. Desperate, she takes the bicycle away from the Teacher in order to escape.

At least from the Doctor's perspective, he finally takes ownership of his illegitimate offspring, and leaves. Since the Doctor didn't take the Midwife with him (if we suppose there was enough space in/on the carriage), then is a sign that he was looking to part ways with her, as she has shown herself to be very irresponsible with their child.

The Pastor and his children
The Pastor most likely knew what was going on with his children, but didn't know which of the elder children was responsible, so he forced the two of them to wear white ribbons; for if anything happened, his chilren and their whereabouts were easily identifiable. I think this happens after the Doctor falls down the horse.

After that, most dangerous events happen in the dark of the night, because the easily-identifiable white ribbon constricts the pastor's elder childrens' movements. I suppose the Pastor's child or cihldren still call the shots.

The Pastor even has his elder son tied to the bed on the pretense of his touching himself inapporpriately. I think that the son is in fact innocent, and his crying (as seen on the poster) is not because he got the white ribbon, but because he knows that his sister is the culprit, and he is innocent, and he is dismayed that he has been falsely accussed. Strangely enough, he ends up defending his older sister anyway.

The fact that the Pastor only has his son tied down at night, is his way of finding out the culpability of his daughter, which in short time emerges to be true; because her brother is tied down, and she isn't, while dark things happen. The daughter at some point realizes this, but cannot stop herself, because she has a posse to run.

The Pastor gave absolution to his daughter not because she deserved it, but because he was afraid of her, hence his momentary hesitation when performing a ritual on her at church near the end of the film. Killing the pastor's bird was simply a warning.

reply

As someone in one of the replies to this question mentions, it was due to Eva's desire to avoid any perception of impropriety. She wanted to maintain her reputation as a pure, virginal young woman of good character. This was indeed a common attitude in most societies pre-WWI. A young lady's reputation was highly valued, and it would have been risky to be with a man, unchaperoned, in a secluded location.

reply