Diary of a Country Priest (1951)

 Robert Bresson's "Diary of a Country Priest"

Famed French film critic Andre Bazin once called Robert Bresson's 1951 film "Diary of a Country Priest" a masterpiece. His reason for calling it a masterpiece was "because of its power to stir the emotions, rather than the intelligence." To intellectually analyze the film wouldn't be completely uncalled for. However, the true might of the film's resonance lies in the confusing mess of spirituality and emotionality, not in the breaking down of intellectual concepts. It was a revolutionary film in this way, and in another: it was a film that stripped away any 'genre' elements that had become popular in post-war French cinema. In doing so, it paved the way for the more existential films to come in the 1950s and 1960s (Bergman coming first to my mind). These types of films demonstrated that, despite the horrors of the war being behind them, the resulting Nietzschean collapse of spirituality and morality was just as concerning for humanity.

"Diary of a Country Priest" centers on a young man assigned to be the priest the small village of Ambricourt. His plans of a Catholic youth club and sport program are lofty and the wind in his sail are quickly extinguished. Nobody in the village attends mass and nobody really wants him there. After the priest inadvertently becomes involved in a family's drama, he is turned on by members of family. The hostility he receives, on top of his rapidly diminishing health create difficulty and his faith in God is tested. His continued efforts to have everyone around him reconcile with God only creates even more hostility and eventually, targeted cruelty. After several different suicides, the priest leaves his parish and eventually succumbs to his fatal illness.

As I said previously, "Diary of a Country Priest" is not a film to be dissected intellectually. It's a purely emotional experience. However, there are some intellectual musings that one could have about the film, its construction, and its themes. 

Firstly, it was the first time Bresson experimented with instituting a unique performing style from his actors, or as he called them, his 'models.' He used mostly non-professional actors and spent months rehearsing with them to teach them how he wanted them to act. He did not teach them how to act more, mind you. Rather, he taught them how to act less. He wanted his models to intentionally restrain their movements and expressions. He believed this emotive lack would illicit a more complex response from the viewer. The viewer would see these models moving and speaking almost 'automatically.' This effect renders their behavior almost purposeless or without any sense of meaning behind their behavior. As a viewer, I am forced to view their behavior and actions in a purely literal way. One would think this would be antithetical in purpose for a film attempting to be a purely emotional experience rather than an intellectual one. Au contraire, the blankness with which our models perform allows the viewer to project their own unique and interpreted emotion into the fabric of the work. 

If one does dive into the intellectual conceptions of the film through its thematic framework, you could surmise an abstract notion about the general sentiment of the post-war landscape in the 20th century. The priest represents the pre-war theology commonly held at the time. However, the war proved to millions of people the complete absence of reason and the inherent cruelty of the soul. This shook the very foundation of theology and spirituality, leaving nothing but nihilism in its wake. The characters in the story seem emblematic of this post-war notion, as they spend their time dealing with their pain and trauma in destructive ways. Destructive not only to others but to themselves as well. The pain felt by others can be relinquished through mercy. And yet, they do not choose mercy. They choose to drown themselves in self misery and inflict that misery onto other people. Over the course of the film, our priest's ailments and his constant reconciliation with the cruelty of everyone around him completely drains him of his lifeforce by the film's end. You can see this visually as his appearance grows more and more dire and feeble. The more hopelessness he encounters, the harder it is to relinquish oneself to mercy and grace. Our priest's steadfast hope in God only grows more necessary, while also growing more difficult.

Despite the continued suffering and unrelenting cruelty of everything around the priest, it becomes apparent that the key utility in dealing with the suffering of the world is through grace, mercy, God, etc. The suffering itself isn't the problem, as suffering is a permanent fixture of human existence and won't be going anywhere anytime soon. It's how the characters choose to deal with their suffering that is the problem. Despite the suffering, despite the cruelty of the world, forgiving one another of those trespasses and forgiving ourselves of our own is the key to surviving. One cannot escape the suffering. One can only accept it, as our priest slowly learns. 

"Diary of a Country Priest" provides expansive room for discussion and I could probably muse more and more about the film and its perspective themes. That is the beauty of Bresson and his important artistic work. It's a work by a master and something that lives on within me from here on.