Disillusionment+Nationalism= Bad Luck

Alicia Chmielewski
1-11-07

Andrzej Munk, Bad Luck (1959)

Bogumil Kobiela stars as a sort of ill-fated yet directly responsible comic character in Andrzej Munk’s Bad Luck, as he plays the role of Piszczyk, a naïve, incompetent and whole heartedly sincere man who finds himself collaborating with whatever political group interests him from moment to moment. In some cases, he does so as a way of saving himself from mobs who always seem to persecute him, in others,because it seems to offer him a potential window into attaining a love life, such as when he becomes involved in the resistance against the communist government in order to capture the attention and attain the love of Basia. He is a comic character, always desperately attempting to gain the favor of every person of superior standing in his life, yet “fated” to fail in his quest for social acceptance, in part because of his unrealistic, suspicious “over enthusiasm” and Polish nationalism.
It is difficult to explain the self-deprecating humor many Poles possess. It is clear that Munk is indeed drawing off of it in the way he is able to highlight the absurdity of the need to belong to a particular political group, when, in reality, the reasons and understandings of the politics behind the choices Poles had to make in terms of which political agenda to adopt were not clear-cut, as Wajda’s Ashes and Diamonds (1957) has already made us consider. It is as if attempts to become a part of either opposing vision of Poland are futile, given its historical losses of identity and national power/unity. There may have been a little bit of Piszczyk in every Pole during the historical time period of approximately 1930-1950 that the film deals with; the desire to wholeheartedly establish and believe in one unifying national identity, but the lack of knowledge in how to go about fulfilling that desire. On this note, a further comparison between both Wajda’s Ashes and Diamonds and Munk’s Bad Luck can be made. Both films feature the aesthetic of the lost or blinded Polish citizen striving to create a diamond out of ashes, constantly questioning whether the side and means he has chosen to do so is ethical, just, and most effective, or, as was more the case in Bad Luck, unable to fully comprehend the politics of this time of confusion and constant danger under German and Soviet rule.
One concept that I found to be particularly intriguing, and I believe more important to the overall understanding of the ideology of the film as a whole than it may be given credit for, is that of the escape through imprisonment. Piszczyk presents the case, by telling us the story of his life of “bad luck”, that the only place he has been able to escape misfortune has been prison. Only by cutting himself off from his broader society can he find peace. It is almost as if Piszczyk is resisting both the hypocrisy of insincere enthusiasm and the reality that there is reason to be insincere in regard to evaluating the new Poland of this time. First, Piszczyk unknowingly isolates himself by living his life in such as way that he cannot help but encounter “bad luck.” After he lives out this type of personal isolation, arising from his inability to grasp any notion of the politics behind his actions, he encounters the isolation of prison, where he can perhaps focus solely on an internal, personal life. Within this situation, there is no need to contribute to any politics outside the prison walls. Avoidance in itself becomes a type of lifestyle choice- a way of coping with confusion and disillusionment.
The fact that Bad Luck turns tragic situations to comedy highlights a certain need to distance oneself from actual historical events. By being able to showcase ridiculousness and exaggerate, to wildly comic ends, subjects that may have been seen as politically incorrect under the communist government, the devastation of the actual events is lessened and a national identity of some sort can begin to be established. Comedy allows a sort of isolation from realism and is freeing to the society in a way similar to how prison is freeing to Piszczyk. There are still no diamonds to be found, but there is an attempt to come to terms with the past by placing its events within a framework of utter ridiculousness. In doing so, the present is also commented on because viewing past events in such a comic light allows contemporary audiences to understand the effects of extreme nationalism coupled with a history of displacement. Piszczyk is a product of a specific history and environment just as much as he speaks to a deeply humanist instinct in all of us with his desire to belong to the best nation in the world – his Poland, which unfortunately cannot be simplified to suit his enthusiasm any more than it can be promised undoubted prosperity.

Andrzej Wajda's Ashes and Diamonds (1957)

Alicia Chmielewski
1-10-07

Andrzej Wajda, Ashes and Diamonds

As I read the Paul Coates review of Andrzej Wajda’s Ashes and Diamonds I was struck by one statement in particular which helped to clarify the film a bit for me, but more importantly, which got me to think about just how ambiguous a film it really was and continues to be. Coates writes, “…tragedy is precipitated not by any flaw within a character but by the collision of two figures, each of whom advocates a one-sided good. Tragedy becomes a matter of situation, not character” (3). This situational view of tragedy applies to both Maciek and Szczuka as each man represents a one-sided political vision for Poland; Maciek dedicated to the Home Army and Szczuka to the communist faction. It is never made clear whether Wajda, or many of the film’s characters themselves for that matter, really desire to side strongly with either side. Yet, this observation does not allow us to conclude that the best solution is to take both sides equally either. The only character to play both sides without commitment comes to ruin as well, though not through death as Maciek and Szczuka do. Perhaps one reason why the film was able to make it through the censorship of its time was because it offered such a mixed message; a message that in itself held the truth about Poland during this era of the thaw – that Poland became a nation of blindness, confusion and loss of national identity during World War II, as the Nazis threatened to strip many Poles of their identity and to wipe out entire groups of people.
The religious disrespect and corruption that is highlighted throughout the film with images of the upside down crucified Christ and the sacrilegious act Maciek performs in attempting to fix Krystyna’s shoe while the bodies of the two men he has wrongfully killed lie on the alter in front of him, symbolize the loss of national identity throughout Poland after the war. Poland is a deeply Catholic country and the strong sense of religious disrespect illustrates that something is threatening it within the core of its people’s being. Both the communist faction and the Home Army bring about the religious corruption, however, as is clearly displayed in the ethical dilemma of Maciek over his wrongfully committed murders, the bodies from which linger on the altar. If the Church symbolizes the broader society, than Maciek’s anguish at seeing these two bodies symbolizes the reality that innocent people are dying as the Home Army stages war on communist Poles; that the Home Army is no more heroic than the communist faction once this reality is fully realized. Both sides may be hoping that diamonds will come one day from the ashes of the current political situation, the diamonds being extra-political life experiences, such as love and relationships.
Maciek calls Krystyna a diamond because she is his love and is the reason he comes to consider abandoning the blindness he is living under, killing fellow Poles every day. However, after considering opposing scenes offering sympathy for both sides, I understand why Coates’s final statement about the film was: “There are only ashes, no diamonds” (3). Even Krystyna is pulled into the final disillusioned Polonaise at the film’s close, thus being transformed to the same collective ash of the entire nation. The dance typically opens stately balls of high Polish society, yet during this scene there is no true joy, only the need to follow the communist faction without question. It corresponds well with the rest of the film in that no matter what side of the conflict one follows, the outcome is the same – there is no ethical resolution and no truly unifying freedom in either the choice.