FINAL GIRL explores the slasher flicks of the '70s and '80s...and all the other horror movies I feel like talking about, too. This is life on the EDGE, so beware yon spoilers!

Oct 6, 2019

SUSPIRIA Day 6: ruth bré


The other day, I talked about one of the film's perfect moments, a reaction shot of Susie that happens during a post-audition conversation with Miss Tanner. Tanner explains that the Company cannot pay the dancers much, so they also offer free accommodations. She prefaces this by saying "We operate as a sort of Ruth Bré collective."

The first couple thousand times I saw Suspiria, Angela Winkler's heavy accent kept me from hearing "Ruth Bré" clearly. On a recent re-watch (for Gaylords of Darkness, natch) I finally parsed it out and made a note of it, because I had no idea what that meant or who Ruth Bré is or was or what. Now I do! And she's worth talking about, particularly in the context of this film.


"Ruth Bré" is the pseudonym of Elisabeth Bonnes, a German feminist poet and author working in the late 19th-early 20th century. She was an eccentric, operating on the fringes, unloved by the establishment, and largely unsuccessful as a poet.

In 1904, she founded the Bund für Mutterschutz, or The Society for the Protection of Mothers. (Sometimes it's credited Liga für Mutterschutz, or The League for the Protection of Mothers.) Essentially, she sought to "end the capitalist rule of man" and make society matriarchal again. Bonnes felt like a second class citizen, at a severe disadvantage not only because of her gender but because she was born out of wedlock. She wanted to change the concept that people could be "illegitimate" due to circumstances of birth. She revered mothers and motherhood, and the "mother-colonies" she founded were meant to be a safe place in the countryside where single mothers could flourish alongside their children.

Eventually in-fighting over the direction of the group led to Bonnes's ouster at the hands of another German feminist/activist, Helene Stöcker. Stöcker expanded the scope of the BFM's advocacy to include varied sexual politics, such as abortion rights and sex education.

It is such a small line of dialogue. Even missing it entirely certainly didn't damper my obsession with Suspiria (obviously). But knowing what and who it means and the weight of it has only made my respect for this film and David Kajganich's incredible, incredibly layered script even more.

Making a seldom-known, all-but-forgotten early 20th century German feminist artist central to the Tanzgruppe's model and philosophy is a masterstroke. Of course the Markos Company is "a sort of Ruth Bré collective"–she was an outcast, operating outside of (and unappreciated by) the patriarchy. She certainly understood the importance of a woman's financial autonomy. She venerated mothers. Even the fact that her visions of a matriarchal utopia fell to infighting amongst the women, speaks to the Tanzgruppe.

This deliberate inclusion, this example of the research and care behind Suspiria is, in part, why I'm always taken aback when I see criticisms of the film's politics. I've read claims that none of it means anything, that it has little to say and it's all on the surface. That there's no weight to it. I wonder if those people saw the same film I did? Maybe they, too, should have taken some notes.

5 comments:

CashBailey said...

In ten years time so many of these snotty critics and nerd bloggers who dismissed this movie will be claiming that they loved it all along.


But God bless the mighty Red Letter Media. Jay Bauman over there had the sense to recognise the movie's genius right off the bat.

Stacie Ponder said...

Agreed. I think this film is going to get a huge critical reassessment in...oh, ten years? The way we're seeing JENNIFER'S BODY reconsidered these days.

CashBailey said...

With JENNIFER'S BODY I think at that time both Diablo Cody and Megan Fox were ready for their backlash for having the nerve to become successful. I find that movie delightful.

Stacie Ponder said...

For sure. And same! I'm seeing it all over the place right now (10th Anniversary and all that) (10 years, good lord) with all these WAIT, THIS IS ACTUALLY PRETTY GOOD takes and it's like...where were all of you a decade ago? But, I suppose horror and horror criticism were in a very different place then. Not sure what the excuse is for SUSPIRIA, but I do expect appreciation of it will grow over time.

IT'D BETTER

William Quiterio said...

“This deliberate inclusion, this example of the research and care behind Suspiria is, in part, why I'm always taken aback when I see criticisms of the film's politics. I've read claims that none of it means anything, that it has little to say and it's all on the surface. That there's no weight to it. I wonder if those people saw the same film I did? Maybe they, too, should have taken some notes.”

I’m tempted to believe you specifically had Richard Brody’s (of the New Yorker) terrible review in mind with this. That guy is the Armond White of the left.

The political backdrop of the 2018 Suspiria is one of its most fascinating features. It kinda invites an allegorical reading of the whole film, but the historical specificity and realistic detail attending the whole thing also seems to point to something more complex than mere allegory? Does that make sense? A whole thesis could be written about how this film uses the supernatural events at the dance company as a mirror for the depicted contemporaneous real-world politics... It’s probably significant that radical change prevails at the company-coven but not in the wider world with the RAF etc.

In any case, these posts are awesome. Keep ‘em coming!