Monday, September 26, 2016

The Year of the Refugee (Essay by Bob Racine)



The sea was as indifferent to human suffering as it had always been.  All it provided for the body washed ashore was a stretch of sand.  It could have been a beached whale or a diseased fish or even a seagull struck down in flight.  The sight was bizarre; it looked as if that sea had no room for it, that it had decided as a thoughtless matter of course to spew it from its depths and leave it for vultures of the air to have a feast, as if it cared a whit for the survival of even those predators.  The photograph was taken from a medium range position, the forehead turned in the direction of the camera, the face snuggled into the chest so far that the countenance could not be distinguished.  Only the size and clothing of the body revealed that it belonged to that of a male child of somewhere between six and ten years in age.  The beach was otherwise devoid of any human traffic.

Whose progeny is he?  And how did parent and offspring become separated?  Were his adult companions aboard the leaky, fragile boat also fatalities of the disaster that claimed the child’s life or was he snatched by a capricious wave from the loving arms meant to protect him?  How many were on the makeshift vessel? 

If you stare at the picture long enough you begin to imagine that the child is only sleeping, perhaps an afternoon nap.  I want to shout through the frame for him to wake up, to stretch himself and stand on his feet.  I want to ask him where he lives and suggest to him that he go home where parents are waiting for his return, where love and caring wait to shelter him and bestow upon him again their warmth and protectiveness.  Go home, little one, and find a softer more snuggly bed on which to lie and dream your dreams.  If your family is too far away for walking, someone to be sure would be willing to give you a ride, maybe the photographer who took your picture.  I would, if I were not on the other side of the world.
 
In the days following my first viewing of the photograph I have been catching glimpses of elementary school age children making their way to and from school, climbing aboard or off the school bus or playing in my neighborhood, totally abandoned to their games and oblivious to world events.  The music they make has been momentarily soothing to a soul stung by the nightmare of displacement and persecution.  But that photograph keeps popping up in my head and I feel careworn again for those in flight from atrocity and the immanent possibility of death.
    
So little can be known about the kid’s origin or the circumstances of the drowning; those who gathered up the body at some point after the picture was snapped must have faced the question of how these remains could be disposed of.  Was an autopsy performed?  Hardly necessary!  He had drowned for sure.  What respectful burial rites were observed and by whom?   Was there any way he could be identified and entombed along with the family that took him to sea, or is the family still surviving somewhere?        
 
The image has gone viral; it has become a larger than life symbol of the desperate migrations.  The whole world has been called upon to witness one of the singular shocks of the current refugee crisis into which all nations have been drawn in one way or another.  Are these the ones who are supposed to be our enemies?  Is shutting the door on such as these by the construction of a wall what so many are calling for?  Would the barring of them really make our country safer? 

We in our relatively safe environments have all been wondering how children such as these ever got jammed into one of those boats, how parents could bring themselves to uproot them from their former nests.  It tells us something about just how cheap and dangerous life has become for innocent people in those war torn countries, when rugged life over water becomes a more desirable option, when the cruel sea is a more attractive alternative than the terra firma from which they seek escape.  It is hard for us Americans to imagine, but the endless armada speaks most convincingly.

The independent Christian church in Columbia, Maryland, to which my wife and I belong, called Kittamaqundi Community Church, has cast its lot with those in many parts of the country who are ready to roll out the welcome mat for the thousands to whom our President has extended the invitation to find a home in the U.S.  On the evening of September 15 an assembly of caring people took place in our small sanctuary.  The meeting was called forth by what is known among us as a Focus Group, organized, instituted and led by a committed member of our congregation named Don Link.  Fifteen others have joined him to pursue the commitment.  As I understand it, it was that photograph of the lifeless corpse on that remote and lonely beach, among many others generated by the international press, that seized upon Don’s energy and imagination to initiate our church’s part in the resettling of refugees.
             
The Lutheran Social Services sent two representatives to our gathering to introduce us to their “Good Neighbor” program.  Prior to the meeting that Focus Group had been collecting materials for Welcome Kits that LLS distributes to the hundreds of refugee families they are resettling this year.  All members of our congregation were invited to attend, after the fifteen people who had joined the Focus Group had talked it up.  Our Pastor Heather Kirk-Davidoff, herself an enthused member, shared in an email to the community the following day that they had been expecting something like thirty people to be in attendance.   But no less than sixty-two showed up including many from other congregations who had caught wind of it.  It was an ecumenical gathering, including Jews, Muslims, Unitarian-Universalists, and Quakers.   Our church has entered into a “Level One” partnership with LLS, a one-year commitment to a refugee family that includes rent assistance, employment assistance, completely furnishing an apartment, providing help with clothing and food and transportation and all other things a family might need.  It is a project that is estimated to cost at least $20,000.  Pledge cards were passed out and considerable money was collected by the end of the evening, $4,825 in checks and $7,750 pledged.  And that was just a start.

I could not begin to describe to you the current and force of the excitement that permeated that meeting.  Heather started things off by reminding us that there are prominent voices in our country who are prepared to say “NO!” to these refugees.  But then she asked all of us present that if we feel inclined we should answer those voices back.  She called upon us to say a loud and decisive “YES!” to them and to say “WELCOME!”  The entire room as far as I could tell did just that; we all shouted “YES!” and “WELCOME!”
and we were then off and running.

Hanging over our heads is the cloud of worry as to whether for all our efforts we will ever lay eyes on the family for which we wait.  It is my earnest prayer that if the Republican candidate is elected, he will have grave second thoughts about turning all these suffering people away.  If the United States government were to do that, it would be a moral and humanitarian disgrace.  Of course each refugee entering our country should be thoroughly vetted upon admittance, but no one should be denied entrance simply because they come from a war torn country or because they are Muslim or any other religious persuasion.  If we did, our relations with the international community would be poisoned, perhaps beyond recovery, especially those European countries that have already commenced opening their borders and taken on the resettlement process.  They who are overwhelmed with the refugee flow would be justified in asking why we, who are not so overwhelmed and reside at a greater geographic distance, cannot do our part in the crisis.  Of course it is our hope and expectation based upon information that the Lutheran ministry has supplied that the family will reach us well before January 20, when the new President takes office.  

Finally, at our meeting, a woman named Ann Ivester, whom we have personally known for at least twenty years, put the case in the most profound and persuasive terms of all.  “Tonight, when we take a step to help a refugee family, we draw a thread of connection between our lives and theirs.  With this thread, we start re-weaving a fabric that has been torn, the fabric of human community.”  Local churches, mosques, synagogues and civic organizations all across America can do a lot to help bring this about.  There have been enough bodies of drowned children and adults floating on the seas.  2016 is the year of the refugee, and it behooves our nation to step up to the timely plate.


To read other entries in my blog, please consult its website:  enspiritus.blogspot.com. To learn about me consult on the website the blog entry for August 9, 2013.

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

45 Years (Movie Review by Bob Racine)



                             1 hr & 35 min, color, 2015
                            
Much can be conveyed in movie terms despite a minimum of dialogue!  Silence for a stretch between players can speak volumes, assuming the facial expressions and body language are vividly portrayed by an astute photographer and a skillful lighting designer.  Human countenances can tell stories if shot in appropriate close-up and imbued with the seasoned talents of choice cast members.  We in the twenty-first century have become so speed oriented in our motion pictures, so hyped on flashy scenes and mouthfuls of words and movements and explosive collisions of people and objects that I sometimes think perhaps we have lost much of our capacity to enjoy low keyed fare.
                            
“45 Years” is the kind of deceptively simple storytelling that reminds me of much of art theater film product that prevailed during the 1950s and 1960s.  The British production revolves around a retired married couple, Kate and Geoff, who undergo a quiet, subtle sea change in the weight and substance of their almost five decades of matrimony, incited by the uncovering of a secret heretofore buried amidst moldy memorabilia. 
                            
I do not know how many of you if any remember a British actress of that period by the name of Charlotte Rampling.  It has been a good half century since I had the chance to see her at work; she is what I consider the star of this film, with strong support from Tom Courtenay, whom some of you may remember from a movie of a few years back which I reviewed, “Quartet”.  (He is the tenor of the bunch drawn back into a romance with a soprano to whom he was once married and who treated him most horribly.)  I took great pleasure in watching Charlotte and Tom fill these two splendid roles, two distinguished veterans at work.
                            
A mere five days before they are to attend a party celebration of their forty-fifth anniversary conducted by friends and acquaintances, Geoff gets a letter from Switzerland informing him that the remains of his old German flame Katya, with whom he scaled the heights in the Swiss Alps fifty years ago and who fell to her death into a glacier on one of their treks, have been found, preserved in ice as she was seen at the time of the disaster.  Geoff appears at first to be only minimally concerned about the news, but over the following days and hours he begins to evidence short fits of restlessness and irritability not in character for him.  He even resorts to smoking again, something they have both quit doing long before.  He tries to enliven their English countryside dwelling by drawing Kate into a lightweight dance in their living room and afterward urging her to go to bed with him and make love, things they are not apparently in the habit of doing.  But the attempt yields quite disappointing results.  It seems quite fake in retrospect, an act of quiet desperation on the husband’s part to stabilize a marriage that probably he too fears may have suffered a mortal wound.  Then during the wee hours of the night she finds him thrashing around in their attic in search of pictures of Katya.  Visiting the attic at such an hour is also something that Geoff is not accustomed to doing. 
                            
Kate begins to observe that he is fixated upon the woman; she begins to feel threatened and a mite insecure, not to mention worried.  All this behavior on Geoff’s part is seen through her eyes, from her point of view.  We are reminded that what is not spoken can speak as disturbingly as what comes off the tongue, sometimes much more injuriously, and what one is then forced to say when pressed for the unspoken message can sound fatuous and counterfeit.
                            
The way Kate finds out just how important the young German woman was/is to her husband I will leave for the viewer to discover.  What she learns without his knowledge is like a knife in her ribs, and what she decides to do about it involves as much secrecy as Geoff has practiced over the years on her. 
                            
The pace of the film is quite slow – slow but sensitive and studied.  The imagery of the sprawling countryside seems to reinforce the aura of distance and solitude that enshrouds them.  Life in their immediate environment is itself slow, measured and deliberate in habit and form; “the rush of days” is unknown to them.  But the space between them is never dead; their minds are active, their spirits alive and as fertile as the ground on which they reside.  They never quite reach the point of quarrelsome exchange, though anger at moments simmers beneath the surface of things and in one important instance clears the air of indecision about what the next move should be.
                            
We learn that five years before, when the fortieth anniversary was to have been observed, Geoff had bypass heart surgery, which explains why they are celebrating the forty-fifth instead.  The two of them are somewhat decrepit, and in one quite honest disclosure Geoff comments: “The worst part of decrepitness is losing the purpose of things to be done”.  And in another conversation it is Kate who seems to reinforce that homemade maxim by remarking: “Funny how you forget the things in life that [once] made you happy”.  This reflection impels her forthwith to unearth some old piano music she once practiced and have a go at it.  What we hear coming off the keyboard sounds decent enough at her age to suggest that she has neglected a musical talent that once must have impressed family and friends.  It seems significant that she plays all by herself, when Geoff is not home.  The music appears in the context of the story to be her means of reassuring her heart and mind in the midst of her shattering discovery about Geoff and the woman he once loved and may still.
                            
There are two things that puzzle me about the scenario, as sensitive and well portrayed as it is.  It is obvious that they have never had children, but we are never given any suggestion as to why.  Or did Katya have something to do with that too?  We are also not informed about their chosen livelihoods before retirement.  I suppose that they were both professional people and that their careers may have made having a family close to impossible.  Maybe! 
                            
They do make it to the party, an apparently pleasant affair, with some laughter and some fond remembrances.  But Writer/Director Andrew Haigh, who has based his work on a story entitled “In Another Country” by David Constantine, shoots the scene in a most ingenious manner.  As is the custom in western society the bride and groom are the first to take to the floor to dance, and he has his camera stay with them all through the singing of their chosen ballad, right up to the second the song concludes, using a very slow zoom shot that draws Kate’s face into gradual close-up, the other dancers including Geoff fading from sight.  What happens in a split second after the music ceases and just before the movie ends underscores again how strong the body and face without accompanying words can speak. 
                            
How does the crisis get resolved, or does it?  The tale signifies with great care the manner in which unwritten bargains and contracts become established between the parties to a marriage and point the way to an uncertain future.  Viewers under fifty may be at a loss as to how to relate to the film, but older adults should connect with it, especially those who have tied the marital knot and have many years with their spouses behind them. 


To read other entries in my blog, please consult its website:  enspiritus.blogspot.com. To learn about me consult on the website the blog entry for August 9, 2013.