The Power of the Dog is one of the most talked-nearly and busy films of the past twelvemonth, garnering twelve Oscar nominations , including all-time picture show, best actor, best supporting role player, best supporting actress, and best director. It is indeed a fine pic to look at, the interim is uniformly marvelous, and the story is brooding and tautly rendered. At the same time, it's a movie that leaves the viewer (or at least this item viewer) a bit confused, and more than a little uneasy. Many accept in fact debated what exactly was going on every bit the picture came to its conclusion. The Ability of the Dog is a meditation on family unit, friendship, repressed sexuality, and, above all, the way that powerful people come up to dispense and abuse one another. It is precisely the way in which Jane Campion, the crafty manager, presents this last theme that I would similar to analyze.

The flick is set up in Montana in the early role of the final century, and its focus is initially on two brothers, Phil and George Burbank, who are wealthy ranch owners. While on a cattle bulldoze, they see Rose, the proprietor of a boarding house. The kindly George is smitten, and he and Rose marry. She moves into the brothers' rambling business firm, along with her son from a previous spousal relationship, an exaggeratedly effeminate young human named Peter. Though we learn that he had studied classics at Yale, Phil is now a hardened cowboy, an bawdy, grim human, securely suspicious of others, and he positively detests both Rose and Peter. Seeing his brother's wife as an opportunist, he mercilessly belittles her, causing her to resort, increasingly, to alcohol. And the fragile boy becomes the object of his ferocious verbal assaults and mockery.

Word on Fire Liturgy of the Hours

Larn More than

Introducing the Word on Fire Liturgy of the Hours

Only Peter is no shrinking violet, and we soon acquire that, despite his weak appearance, he has impressive reserves of intelligence and cunning. Sensing correctly that the ostensibly macho Phil in fact is suppressing powerful homosexual desires, the immature man commences first to seduce, then to manipulate, and finally to destroy the 1 antagonizing both him and his mother. At the close of the film, nosotros see Peter reading the Psalm verse that provides the movie'southward championship: "Deliver my soul from the sword, my darling from the power of the dog." Many of the interpreters of the moving-picture show capeesh it equally an expose of "toxic masculinity" and exult in the way in which a nontraditional form of masculinity manages to trump it. A conventional type of power is bested by an unexpected and underestimated type of power.

If the blunt, gruff, straightforward violence of Phil is undermined past the subtle, insinuating violence of Peter, how are nosotros any better?

Simply if that is the bulletin of the film, I'm tempted to quote the Who's Won't Become Fooled Once more: "Meet the new boss; aforementioned as the old boss." Under the baleful influence of Nietzsche and especially Michel Foucault, our postmodern civilisation is obsessed with power and its exercise. We investigate, over and again, who has power, who is victimized by it, and how the tables tin can be turned. It is no blow that the revenge fantasy (think all of Quentin Tarantino's movies) is such a popular genre today. Simply if "toxic" masculinity is undone by a masculinity that is unlike just only as toxic, how have we made whatever progress? If the blunt, gruff, straightforward violence of Phil is undermined by the subtle, insinuating violence of Peter, how are nosotros any better? Nosotros might experience a certain rush of satisfaction at the ending of The Power of the Canis familiaris, since our sympathies are naturally drawn to the put-upon immature man, but if he proves to be just equally heartless as his persecutor, so then what?

The reason that Nietzsche and, afterwards him, Foucault put such a stress on the plays of power is that they both denied the objectivity of moral value. If there is no real adept or evil, and so all that finally matters is, as Nietzsche put it, the "volition to ability." Only this is dangerous nonsense. The classical tradition appreciated power as the capacity to effect change and hence as something, in itself, morally neutral. What mattered far more to authors from Aristotle to Aquinas is the virtue with which power is wielded and the moral purpose which information technology serves. I imagine that if Thomas Aquinas were assessing the characters in The Power of the Dog, he would critique, not and so much Phil'southward power, as his cruelty. And therefore, he would certainly non exult in Peter's exercise of power in service of an answering cruelty.

Daily Gospel Reflections

Bishop Barron's Gospel Reflections straight to your inbox.

And this brings me back to the enigmatic championship of the flick. The line, drawn from Psalm 22 , does indeed beseech the anointed Lord to deliver the Psalmist from the wickedness of an oppressor. Merely how wonderful that this very Psalm was on the lips of Jesus equally he was dying on the cross. The deliverance of the Lord would come, not through the violent do of power, but through tapping into the forgiving beloved of God. At the stop of the solar day, it is not the possession of power that matters, only rather the honey with which that power is wielded.