Tuesday, September 23, 2025

Rethinking The English Patient

Years, decades ago now, in 1996 to be exact, I went with my mom and a friend to see The English Patient at an art house theater in the city. I remember being underwhelmed, confused, unable to connect with the story, and realizing that I was missing layers of emotional resonance, as my mom and my girlfriend both rhapsodized over the film. The story of a terminally injured war attaché whose plane was shot down in the North African desert, being cared for by a young combat nurse at a bombed out abbey in Italy at the end of World War Two, the patient’s flashbacks reveal the tale of stolen passion that brought him there. The film went on to win a slew of Academy Awards including Best Picture, and my confusion deepened. It had seemed a bit like a chimera to me, the threads all frayed and dangling, nothing anchored, nothing I could sink into, nothing that slipped down into my psyche, nothing I could trust to stay with me, provoking meaningful insights, beyond the final frame. 

Tonight, on a whim, I watched the movie again and realized how much I was questing for the tangible and sure back then, but this was a war movie, the world it depicted was upside down, nothing could be relied upon, the moment was all anyone had, everything fleeting, insubstantial and changing before it could be fixed in thought or imagination, there was only the inexorable flow of events, slow and languid, then violently surging, unpredictable, exquisite in the small details of survival if one cared to notice them, and how much more fully I understand all this now, life is an insistent teacher, one might even argue that we are once again under the psychological siege of a world at war. 

What life season must I have been in back when I first saw this achingly tender yet wrenching story of secret passion and betrayal? I seem to have had no bandwidth for ambiguity. Also, the young mapmaker protagonist, Count Lazlo Almasy, played by a stunningly beautiful young Ralph Fiennes, is so very evidently and brilliantly autistic, though I’m sure everyone missed that back then.

All these years later, I get why my mother loved the movie so much. She was a nuanced soul. She had lived through a war and knew more of life uncertainties. She also had that unbound Aquarius sensibility while I was locked in my Taurus practicality and was a new wife and mother to boot, with a four and a two year old at home. I was trying to construct the world as something I could tame, its threads not swaying, now gently, now furiously, with the changing wind. Now I know that life’s story is always open ended, always resolving, and then reshaping itself into something new, the ebb and flow of it never truly complete, the margins always outside our view. 

In my late stage surrender, I enjoyed the movie so much more. I’ll probably never learn to meet life with as brave and blithe a spirit as the Juliette Binoche character of the nurse Hana, however. But this time, I was able to take in lines like these last words of the character of Katherine, the mapmaker’s married lover played by Kristin Scott Thomas: 

We die rich with lovers and tribes, tastes we have swallowed, bodies we've entered and swum up like rivers. Fears we've hidden in like this wretched cave. I want all this marked on my body. We are the real countries.” 

We are the real countries

I completely missed this poetry before. 

Apparently Count Lazlo Almasy is based on a real Hungarian cartographer who was involved in espionage and was stationed in the North African desert during the Second World War. Has anyone here read the far denser Michael Ondaatje novel The English Patient that is the source material for the film? How do the book and film compare, I wonder? I gather the mapmaker is greatly romanticized in the fictionalized retelling of his story. Maybe I’ll read the book next, and try to peer more deeply into what my mother knew


33 comments:

  1. The "English Patient" is one of my favorite books AND movies of all time -- has always been in my top ten. I have long adored Michael Ondaatje, primarily because he writes women so incredibly well. I've read the book over and over since it came out, and don't get me started on Ralph Fiennes in that movie -- or Juliet Binoche or Kristin Scott Thomas -- swoon. Thank you for your beautiful review, too -- I love how you articulated things about the movie that I haven't really thought about...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Elizabeth, why am I not surprised that you would see more deeply into the story, and I imagine having read the book probably gave you access to additional layers of the movie as well. And those young incredibly beautiful actors, swoon indeed. We were their age then, so weird to realize that.

      Delete
  2. I don't think I ever saw that movie. In '96 I had four children, ages 11-20 and I don't think I went to many movies. I wonder what I would have made of it then? I should watch it now to see what I think at this age and stage of life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary, you had four teenagers! Of course you had your hands full! I'd be curious to know how the movie strikes you now. It could be that even now, it might bear watching more than once to get the resonances.

      Delete
  3. I read the book years and years ago and can't really remember it. I never saw the movie. Even though I don't remember it, I think you should read it. :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kristin, I am curious to read the book, even just from that quote at the end of the movie. His use of language attracts me..."bodies we have entered and swum up like rivers..."

      Delete
  4. I've neither seen the movie nor read the book. But your thoughts on wanting things to be concrete and never changing versus the surrender that life cannot be contained like that resonated with me. I'm fairly free floating, going with the flow but my sister was not and it caused her a lot of stress and unhappiness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ellen, going with the flow is truly an art. for some, maybe for me, that kind of surrender is the work of a lifetime.

      Delete
  5. I read the book and I think I saw the movie as well, but found them both underwhelming. Perhaps I need another look.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pixie, I've talked to a lot of people since writing this post who, like me, found the movie underwhelming at the time, and yet it won all those awards, so enough people agreed with my mom's view. I am very curious about the book now.

      Delete
  6. That was such a lovely and thoughtful review! I haven’t seen the movie nor read the book but I’m definitely looking for it at my library.
    Xoxo
    Barbara

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barbara, we may be reading the book together, then. Do let me know how you find it, and if you ever watch the movie, what you think.

      Delete
  7. Absolutely read the book! I discovered Michael Ondaatje through his (fictional) memoir "Running in the Family" at a time we were considering a work offer in Sri Lanka, Ondaatje's homeland - the job didn't materialise but his writing style was so unique I had to become a fan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sabine, I somehow knew Micheal Ondaatje would be familiar to you, just as I rather knew Elizabeth would know him, too. Yes, I shall read the book. am intrigued to discover his writing style and let whispers of it infiltrate the voices in my head.

      Delete
  8. You write so beautifully, Rosemarie. Like Mary Moon, I was busy with my 5 children and only went to the movies for Disney films with them back then! ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ellen, thank you for that kind word. Five children definitely would keep one away from a film like The English Patient, which in retrospect, was an artistic indulgence i allowed myself because I was seeking to entertain my mom, who was visiting me and her grandchildren.

      Delete
  9. I was deeply moved by seeing the movie in a theater back then and afterwards I read the book. The movie experience is the one that stayed with me. I wonder how I would feel if I watched the movie again all these years later. Would it bring back memories of that time in my life when the man I loved who was traumatized by war was still alive?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. am, I can imagine that the movie slipped into a different psychological groove for you because of R,. Your comment brings home how very much we bring ourselves to every experience, and how much art is transformed by the one who beholds and experiences it. Thank you.

      Delete
  10. Oddly enough I was thinking of this movie not long ago, why I don't know, perhaps I saw it mentioned somewhere. I know I saw it all those years ago but I barely remember what it was about. I do remember that I didn't see what all the fuss was about. Maybe I will watch it again someday.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deb, that was my experience too, the movie felt very impressionistic, I couldn't nail down its details afterward, and on rewatching it, i realized that all i really recalled was the bombed out abbey, and the flashbacks of the passionate love affair had evaporated almost entirely, how odd, because that was supposed to be the most vivid part of it all, at least I suspect that might have been the director's intention, though I can't be sure. It did feel more vivid this time around.

      Delete
  11. Codex: The book is very lyrical and poetic. The movie provides the images that the book does not. I had a hard time visualizing it. The movie supplements the book. It's beautiful and heart wrenching. There were many truly beautiful foreign movies made in the 90s many with a war theme. Ondatjee has a style that reminds me of Kundera; he plays with words.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Codex, lyrical and poetic writing yet it didn't evoke a world you could visualize? Hmmm. I wonder if that will hold me? I tend to see pictures unspooling in my head as I read. I can't imagine not being able to visualize what I'm reading about.

      Delete
  12. Codex: A novel is a mirror walking down a road

    Michael Ondaatje

    Just one example

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A mirror? That reflects worlds, no? I'll have to report in on how I find the book!

      Delete
  13. Codex: Sorry keep getting interrupted. He was not autistic, but a little strange and remote as if he was never there, if I remember correctly. Saw it twenty years ago. The book is better, but imo Ondaatje tries to hard when he describes love. The movie had great cinematography, but felt like a play. I could not connect with the characters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Codex, the comment about autism was only a subjective idea not a declaration of fact. Your comment about not connecting with the characters is so interesting! Even on second watch I found that to be somewhat true—I connected more, but it was an intellectual connection rather than an emotional one, and I remain perplexed by what stood in the way of that deeper visceral response to each character's story. Whatever it is, it's the thing that left me shut out the first time I saw the film. The second time, I appreciated the art of it, and the storytelling, but your comment makes me realize I was still standing apart, looking on, rather than being immersed, responding with my thinking self rather than my feeling self.

      Delete
  14. Codex: Reading the responses above. Definitely read it, especially as a literature major, which is how it should be read. The book is not descriptive of its environment and I personally liked that it's tol through letters flashback and memories. You described it well; I was emotionally detached eventhough the story is so tragic. He loved the idea of her bit we do not fall in love with her. I watched a couple of clips and would like it less now, Scott Thomas is in perfect makeup even after the plane crashed. War is horror and this movie wrapped it in beauty if that makes sense? The quote is in the book. We reflect what happened in the past but we do not feel the tragedy of what happened to people. I don't know if that was his intent. All that's left are lives not lived and letters. Ondaatje pulls you out of the story with sentences one needs to think about. It is intellectual and thought-provoking, so I think your initial reaction was probably true.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, the horror of war was somewhat at a distance. To be honest, that was a relief.

      Delete
  15. Then there is this out of a literary criticism post. I couldn't put my finger on it(I was young) but their relationship made me uncomfortable now I see why. Pillowbook did the same; the ancient tradition in certain cultures of writing on them. Objectifying.


    "The Body as a Site of Meaning: 

    The female body, particularly Katherine's, is depicted as a site of male inscriptions, desires, and projections, creating a complex network of imposed meaning and entrapment within the narrative."

    I write in the back of my books: Intellectual mast....he doesn't love her. He loves the idea of her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know Codex, come to think of it, the affair made me uncomfortable too. On rewatching it, I was struck by how little Almasy struggled with the idea that he was betraying his colleague, how easily he lied to him. I think it struck me as selfish and so I couldn’t fully root for their love, if that’s what it was. It was more like obsession.

      Delete
    2. Codex: What Ondaatje does well is the fragmentation of memory of a mind through what happened to him. Wisps of memory out of chronological order. What he doesn't do well is using women as archetypes the compassionate nurse, the object of unattainable desire that is well preserved in a cave years later. Read him but it was not the great novel/movie people made it out to be.the war was just a backdrop. The characters were not characters because this was his perspective and he did not care about who the other people were. Your quote would have been better if we swim up minds rather than bodies. Obsession, yes that's what it was. Good point.

      On the flip side how many soldiers get through what is asked of them with a little photograph and letters to that "special lady".

      Delete
  16. I read the book many years ago but what I loved about it was Carravagio, the man with bandaged hands, a thief with everything stolen from him by war. Carravagio felt like the main character to me; I barely remember the film. I too could not engage fully.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Db, In the movie, I thought the character of Caravaggio was criminally underdeveloped. I could tell he had an interesting backstory but we were left to infer almost all of it. Based on your comment, I’d be interested to meet him in the book.

      Delete