|
Sex, lies and videotape:
What is the value of a human life?
The Life of David Gale
Directed by Alan Parker
2003
A film essay by Rose Pacatte, FSP
The Life of David Gale is by British director Alan Parker (Angela's
Ashes, Evita, The Commitments) who has some experience with
the culture American South (he also directed Mississippi Burning).
Parker told journalists when The Life of David Gale
was released that he was not making a movie "pro" or "con"
capital punishment in Texas (symbolic of the whole USA). Instead,
he wanted to make a film that would prompt people to talk about
the subject. I think he reached his goal.

Laura Linney and Kevin Spacey in The Life of David Gale
|
This essay reveals and explores The Life of David Gale
in depth, so if you want to be surprised, save this until after
you see the movie!
In what turns out to be a tale of "sex, lies and videotape,"
Dr. David Gale (Kevin Spacey), is a Texas philosophy professor who
quotes French psychiatrist Jacques Lacan's theory of fantasy to
students: as soon as you get what you want, you don't want it anymore.
Gale is a husband and father of a young son whom he adores. He is
an anti-death penalty activist and passionate spokesperson for an
organization that works to outlaw it.
Gale works with friend and colleague Constance Hallaway (Laura
Linney), who is just as persistent but has a better sense for public
relations. We are led to believe that David Gale is seduced (most
graphically) by a former student. She reports this to the police
and Gale is arrested for rape. Though the charges are dropped, he
drinks, dries out but loses his job anyway. His reputation is in
ruins. Except for his devastated colleague, Constance, even the
anti-capital punishment lobby doesn't want him any more. When she
is found dead, David's semen and fingerprints are found on her body
and he is arrested, tried, convicted for murder and sentenced to
death.
Meanwhile, Gale's wife has left him, taking their son with her.
She goes to Spain where she had been having an affair for months,
even before the drama began.
We are brought into the story at the same time as New York journalist,
Bitsey Bloom (Kate Winslet). David has carefully selected her to
come to Texas precisely four days before his schedule execution
for the murder of Constance Hallaway, for three days of interviews,
each to last two hours. We are on the clock, and so is Bitsey, who
has a reputation for journalistic integrity. The magazine has agreed
to pay a tidy sum to David's estate for the interviews. David knows
his appeals have run out but he wants Bitsey to find out the truth
so his son will know his father was a good man. By this time, we
start to sense that someone is controlling events and we don't know
who. Is this a drama with a social conscience, a crime thriller,
a road movie or all the above?

Kate Winslet as Bitsey
|
Alert film viewers will notice two things right away as the film
rolls out. First, the scenes are obviously constructed with great
attention to visual parallels. Second, the tragic sounds of Puccini's
Madam Butterfly play in the background behind incongruous
scenes of rural Texas roads and beat up pickup trucks. Those are
the only two clues you need to understand the film on a superficial
level. The film's construction is deliberate just as is the story
that David Gale spins out for Bitsey. Gale's direction from the
prison's visitors' room serves as an ongoing metaphor for what seems
to be an improbable premise for a film. Parker is the master filmmaker
who structures each scene and act with deliberate precision. David
Gale wants to be a master of construction as well, by proving that
innocent people on death row are indeed murdered at the hands of
the state. How Gale goes about this is what proves Alan Parker right:
the film will give you a lot to talk about as you deconstruct who
did what and why.
Let's return a moment to the opening sequence in the college lecture
hall because this is where the real key to the film's other dimensions
lies. Gale refers to what the Freudian/lingusitic philosopher Jacques
Lacan said about (sexual) fantasies, which seems a kind of red herring
as far as the film goes. But to even bring Lacan into a discussion
about capital punishment is subtle and even a little subversive.
If you don't know about Lacan (and others like him such as Foucault,
Levi-Strauss and so forth) then Gale's words are a passing remark.
But if you are familiar with linguistic theory (not as boring as
it sounds - honest!), then the script for The Life of David
Gale takes on deeper levels of meaning and shows an intelligence
that goes beyond ordinary entertainment. Why so? Because the reference
to Lacan makes the film become an invitation to viewers to examine
the structures of language, meanings and values that the powers
in our nation, such as government, the news media and the Church,
use to communicate. Whether we think that capital punishment "makes
sense" or not, it behooves us to examine how we reached that
conclusion. Thought and language are inextricably entwined with
how we live within our culture. As Alan Parker hoped, his film offers
us a "space" to examine and "deconstruct" the
place of the human person in society, especially in relation to
capital punishment, and just how "free" we really are.
In addition, Lacan was first of all a Freudian, hence Constance's
mention of David's ego, the blatant sexuality in the film, the relationships
between men and women, actually mean something more than what they
seem. This is another aspect of the structuralist theory that Lacan
proposed: language, or visual symbolic systems like television,
print, television and movies, often say something other than what
they say. This sounds like a paradox, but by the end of The
Life of David Gale, you'll know what this means. All media
are "constructions," including this movie.
Lacan, as a "structuralist," explored the idea that there
is a universal order of things into which the "subject",
or the human person, is sucked without the ability to choose. Language,
for example, has the capacity to socialize us, to communicate the
values of those with the loudest voices - and values are the principles
that guide us individually and as a society. The characters make
terrible, irreversible choices in The Life of David Gale.
One wonders if these choices are made freely, and if not, then why?
Now for the "sex, lies and videotape." During the days
of Bitsey's interviews and search for "the truth", lies
are told and unraveled, and the truth is finally revealed by a video
tape after Gale's execution. He is innocent of killing Constance,
who actually took her own life soon after she was diagnosed with
cancer. But it was a set-up from beginning to end. The story was
true, but it was also false. (The way the filmmaker constructs the
story and David Gale constructs the dilemma seems like a sidebar
commentary on how the media construct the reality of the news; and
we are left to "deconstruct" the whole thing in the "space"
Parker has constructed for us.)
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (n. 2266-2267),
David and Constance were right about capital punishment for "Today.
the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute
necessity are very rare, if practically non-existent" but they
were objectively wrong about suicide (n. 2280-2281.) Add to that
the fact that in recent years, more than 100 prisoners in the United
States have been released from death row because DNA testing (for
example, see the story of Ray Krone, in PARADE Magazine, February
22, 2003) proved they were innocent in the first place. The burden
of moral and ethical responsibility on citizens and people of faith
is indeed a heavy one.
David and Constance were trying to prove that what the powerful
say is true and right is actually wrong. The question posed for
people who live in discernment and pay attention to the needs of
the human family might be: if David and Constance did not act ethically,
how will their actions be interpreted by history - or the audience?
Did they act out of some kind of moral desperation? How did their
plan make "sense" to them and to those who acted with
them, such as Constance's boyfriend Zack (Gabriel Mann) and the
lawyer? Who determines what is "ethical" and what do circumstances
and context have to do with what is considered ethical, moral and/or
legal? What other recourse did David and Constance have? What choices
do we have in the face of a logic and rhetoric that sound "right"
but may not hold up under the scrutiny of people willing to ask
difficult, unpopular and uncomfortable questions? How do moral people
act responsibly in the face of gross injustice?
So, was it moral and good for David and Constance to concoct their
own "martyrdom" to prove a point? When the truth came
out, did it make any difference? What is the value of a human life,
each and every human life? Who determines the value of a life?
David Gale, Constance and Zack seem to be zealots or extremists.
They are dedicated to a "cause," and it is a worthy one
because innocent people have been and are being put to death in
Texas and other states. But ethics (moral philosophy) teaches that
the means they chose were just as deadly and immoral as the injustice
they were trying to right. However, what power did they have, if
we follow through on Lacan's structuralism, to change a system that
is so entrenched in its own thought and language as to render these
characters otherwise ineffectual? So, what is the value of a human
life? Does being master of your own death make the individual any
different from that of the state when it comes to wielding death?
Alan Parker has not only created a "space" for dialogue
about the death penalty, but suicide, the rationale and role of
the state in determining who lives and dies, the reality of complex
moral dilemmas that may not exist today but may in the future, and
ultimately the value of all human life, without distinction. The
film is well-written (by Charles Randolph) and crafted, though very
difficult to watch and at times, it seems to stretch credibility.
Perhaps the film tries too hard to get us to think. This is no feel-good
movie, but then again, neither are capital punishment, murder or
suicide (or euthanasia or abortion, though these are not mentioned)
comfortable topics. The Life of David Gale will earn
a place in the genre that deals with life issues, though it remains
to be seen how seriously it's convoluted plot will be taken by audiences.
It's almost too smart for its own good.
If nothing else, we can say that the tragedy of the deaths of David
and Constance in The Life of David Gale witnessed
to the consistent, relentless reality of America's love affair with
violence and death as a way to resolve problems - whether by hand
gun (see Michael Moore's Oscar-nominated documentary Bowling
for Columbine), capital punishment (see Tim Robbins' Dead
Man Walking) and war (see the nightly news.)
Rose Pacatte, FSP is the Director of the Pauline
Center for Media Studies in Los Angeles and is the co-author of
Lights.
Camera. Faith! A Movie Lectionary, Cycles A & B published
by Pauline Books & Media. Cycle C is due out in August). Rose
was a member of the ecumenical jury at the Berlin Film Festival
where she was present at the screening of The Life of David
Gale.
|