LAURA
FEIJÓ
Honor de cavalleria / Honour of the Knights (Albert Serra, 2006).
The Art of Passing the Time: Comparing Honor de cavalleria and Waiting for Godot
By Laura Feijó
April 2019
One could consider the film Honor de cavalleria (Honour of the Knights, 2006), by Spanish director Albert Serra, a great representative of what is known as contemporary world cinema. Serra and other directors such as Béla Tarr (Hungary), Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Thailand), Cristian Mungiu (Romania), Jia Zhangke (China), Abbas Kiarostami (Iran), and Lucrecia Martel (Argentina) - to name a few - share a tendency for a minimalist approach, where stillness is often used as an aesthetic strategy.
Considered to be Serra’s first feature film, Honor soon got the attention of the international community. Cahiers du Cinéma, for instance, selected it as one of the ten best films of 2007. (1) Furthermore, “there was a defiant yet jocular Albert Serra proudly standing in front of a full house at the second screening of Honor de cavalleria… at the Viennale making the claim that his feature debut was the greatest Spanish film of the last 30 years.” (2)
Among the film’s formal inspirations are names such as Godard, Ozu, Bresson, and Pasolini. (3) When writing about the film, though, the film lecturer Adam Bingham calls attention to another name: Samuel Beckett, suggesting that particularly Waiting for Godot (En attendant Godot, 1953), is “an important point of reference in understanding Honor de Cavallería [sic].” (4) - what, considering the amount of similarities between both works, could be even considered an understatement.
On the one hand, Albert Serra, an eccentric Catalan director (b. 1975), graduated in Hispanic Philology and Theory of Literature, who started his career as filmmaker to "stop being bored", and who writes, directs, and sometimes even edits his projects himself. On the other hand, the Irish novelist, dramatist, poet, theatre director, and literary translator, Samuel Beckett (1906 - 1989), who published in the 1950s and 1960s what are considered some of the most influential plays in the realm of the Theatre of the Absurd. (5) What might sound as an unusual comparison is actually a reasonable one, which has not yet been fully explored.
Therefore, the goal of the present essay is to draw a comparison between the aesthetic strategies in Albert Serra’s Honor de cavalleria and Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. To achieve this, the two pieces have been divided into the following categories: narrative, space and time, characters, language, and absurdism. Within each category, the works are individually analyzed and compared with each other. Because the study takes into account Beckett’s original text (in English), instead of any specific performance of the play, subjects such as lighting, mise-en-scène, composition, camera movement, montage, and acting skills are not the focus of the analysis.
Narrative
Doing nothing is a consequence of doing a lot.
— Albert Serra
Honor de cavalleria is one of the many adaptations of Miguel de Cervantes’ Don Quixote (El Ingenioso Hidalgo Don Quijote de la Mancha, 1605, 1615), considered to be one of the greatest novels ever written. Even who did not read the books, nor have seen any adaptation, has heard the name of Don Quixote and probably knows more or less what the plot is about. However, if one expects to see great battles against windmills - or any adventure in that sense - he or she will be most certainly disappointed. For the film defines “a radical mode of adaptation, a minimalist distillation of canonical and socio-culturally overdetermined texts… that reimagines these venerated tales as pure, almost trance-like cinematic events.” (6) In other words, Serra’s main concern is to picture Cervantes’ protagonists for its own sake, creating an atmosphere rather than depicting any events from the books. In practical terms, Honor shows Don Quixote and Sancho Panza traveling through bucolic landscapes. “Quixote and Sancho canter off, directionless, in search of adventures. On the way, their discussions tackle spiritual, chivalrous and practical matters... and their friendship deepens.” (7)
While film critics and scholars consider the film to be “minimalist”, many viewers could say that nothing relevant happens. This notion is probably due to the film’s entirely de-dramatized narrative - that is, the lack of conflicts that drive the narrative forward. As Bingham puts it, we will not see the characters do anything “other than walking, talking (chiefly about God), resting, bathing, and other such quotidian functionalities one would not expect to see making up an entire film narrative, particularly in an adaptation of a novel as incident-packed as Cervantes’ Don Quixote.” (8)
Similarly, Waiting for Godot is a play “in which nothing happens, twice.” (9) Vladimir (Didi) and Estragon (Gogo) are on the side of a road, waiting for the arrival of someone named Godot. While they wait, the characters talk, think, rest, and interact with each other and with elements around them - again, quotidian functionalities. The play is divided into two acts, and there are no huge differences in terms of narrative development between them. “But despite surface similarities, the second act is strikingly different in texture, tone, and implication from the first, and it provides a marked intensification and development of the play’s central subject: what people do to pass the time while waiting.” (10)
In fact, waiting is what orchestrates everything that happens to Vladimir and Estragon during the play: what they say, how they say it, the rhythm of their movements and reactions, their ideas, their games, their emotions, their decisions. “One may say that ‘waiting’ is the larger context within which ‘passing time’ by playing games is a subsystem, protecting them from the sense that they are waiting.” (11) In Honor, we cannot know if Quixote and Sancho are actually waiting for something to happen or only passing time without further reason. Still, “time seems to stretch out immeasurably” (12), to a point where, in both cases, the viewer also feels the time passing, and a two-hour viewing experience might in reality feel like a lot longer.
The use of repetitions dominates Beckett’s play and is also present in Honor. Repetitions illustrate the creation of habit, which is associated with the capacity for self-protection and evasion (13), acting as a defense mechanism. Besides, the recurrence of actions and sentences also reinforces the idea of stillness, of nothing happening. Time passes, but things remain the same: Vladimir and Estragon keep waiting for Godot; Quixote and Sancho keep wandering. There is “nothing to be done.” (14) This statement, almost a hopeless conclusion, is a recurring motif in Godot and translates very well the atmosphere created in both pieces.
With this in mind, one could say that both narratives are made of middles. (15) Unlike traditional narratives, in which a hero goes through a journey with a beginning, a middle, and an end (overcoming difficulties in the way, making friends and enemies, and transforming himself), Honor and Godot picture a static condition. There are changes, the characters evolve in some way (at least our perception of them), but the narrative does not reach its conclusion. As Lawrence Graver puts it, “thoughts about the interim, the provisional, what happens ‘in the meantime’ are more relevant to the adventures of Vladimir and Estragon than notions of termination, attainment, and closure”. (16) Interestingly, Graver’s comment fits perfectly to the adventures of Quixote and Sancho.
In this context, the characters' minds play an extremely important role. Firstly, because the works explore themes such as conscience, moral sense and inner thoughts. In addition, some of the central subjects in both cases are the effects of boredom, the reflections about human existence, and the distinction between reality and imaginary (Godot also strongly rely on the characters’ amnesia and ability to think). As a matter of fact, Albert Serra explains that Honor portrays
the intimacy and fascination of a reality that exists purely in the mind, the only reality of importance in a film about Quixote. The tension between this mental reality and the actual daily life of the two protagonists is the recurrent theme of the film. It dominates the film to the extent that it takes the place of narrative development. (17)
Honor de cavalleria / Honour of the Knights (Albert Serra, 2006).
Space and Time
A country road. A tree. Evening.
— Samuel Beckett
These are the only three indications one gets of where and when the protagonists in Waiting for Godot are. Vladimir and Estragon find themselves in a desert place, at night, with only one tree as reference. They are pretty much nowhere and, at the same time, could be anywhere. This indeterminacy of time and space is just as present in Honor de cavalleria, the difference being the naturalism from the surroundings. Quixote and Sancho interact with nature during the whole course of the film, to a point where this physical contact (with animals, soil, wind, fire, leaves, river) becomes itself one of the film’s subjects. (18)
Though rare, nature in Godot - specially the tree - is of great importance. Firstly, because it represents the passing of time, minimizing the uncertainty about when things happen. The moon rising, for example, marks the end of the first act, and when the second act begins “the tree has four or five leaves.” (19) Secondly, the tree represents both life and death: it is the only living being around (“everything's dead but the tree.”) (20), and, at the same time, creates the possibility of suicide. Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, the tree symbolizes the place where Didi and Gogo should meet Godot. It is a point of reference that helps them recognize the place when their memory fails. It also acts as an “anchor”, not letting the protagonists go away.
ESTRAGON: Let's go.
VLADIMIR: We can't.
ESTRAGON: Why not?
VLADIMIR: We're waiting for Godot.
ESTRAGON: (despairingly). Ah! (Pause.) You're sure it was here?
VLADIMIR: What?
ESTRAGON: That we were to wait.
VLADIMIR: He said by the tree. (They look at the tree.) Do you see any others? (21)
Even though Quixote and Sancho are free to wander through the landscape, portraying movement during almost the entire film, there is not a huge sense of traveling from point A to point B. Perhaps due to the fact that - with exception of the river - the nature surrounding the protagonists looks constantly the same; or simply because the viewer does not receive any information regarding their actions. Nevertheless, even watching the pair move, we also get the impression that they belong to that place and start to realize that seeing them outside this environment is highly unlikely.
In fact, the sense of stillness in the film is created despite the depiction of movement. Apart from the naturalistic mise-en-scène, Serra creates this atmosphere mostly by using extremely long shots, few and short dialogues, slow movements, and non-diegetic soundtrack in only one circumstance. Moreover, there are no point of view shots, meaning that what the audience sees is frequently Don Quixote himself watching something. This way, “the film begins to narrativize the process of looking” (22), of thinking, and of waiting.
In both cases, one does not know in which year, month, or day of the week these characters are; for how long they have been there; or how much longer they will stay. Even when Vladimir and Estragon mention the days of the week, their lines are full of uncertainty (“He said Saturday. (Pause.) I think.” “But what Saturday? And is it Saturday? Is it not rather Sunday? (Pause.) Or Monday? (Pause.) Or Friday?”). (23)
Time in Godot is linear, and the situations are divided into what happened yesterday, what is happening today and what will “surely” happen tomorrow; there are neither flashbacks, nor flashforwards. Because in Honor these moments are not mentioned, and the only evidence of time passing is the sun’s presence or absence, it is possible that the film depicts a nonlinear time. After all, the characters’ actions do not have consequences, and what happens in the beginning of the film might have actually happened much later on.
Finally, the cuts between the shots in Honor often represent compressions of time, although it is not specified how long these last (minutes, hours, days). On the other hand, the constant dialogues in Godot and the lack of cuts between scenes create the impression of an uninterrupted time (with the exception of the transition between acts one and two).
Characters
But at this place, at this moment of time, all mankind is us, whether we like it or not.
— Samuel Beckett
There are many points in common between the characters of both works. However, before analyzing these similarities, it is crucial to understand that there is one fundamental difference: the amount of background information the audience has about the characters.
A person watching Waiting for Godot for the first time will find him or herself in front of two male, middle-age characters. The spectator could have read on the play’s program that the men are called Vladimir and Estragon, therefore would also know their names. Apart from that, the audience has no other information about them. Everything being presented is new, and there are many questions to be answered, such as “who are these men?”, “how are they related to each other?”, “why are they together, and alone?”, and “how long have they been here?”.
Honor de cavalleria, on the other hand, is about two very well-known literary characters. This means that a person watching the film for the first time is very likely to expect something from the protagonists - not to say from the whole narrative itself. Actually, part of the beauty in Honor comes from the fact that Serra ignores in a way the viewer’s expectation of what the protagonists should do or how they should behave. This formula worked so well that the director ended up regularly using literary and historical characters in his films (the Three Kings in Birdsong; Dracula and Casanova in Story of My Death, to name a few). He explains:
In the beginning it was because it was simply easier for me to work with historical and literary figures, as if you use subjects or characters who nobody knows, you need to take too much time telling something about the character. You know, you need some practical shots, some development, so people will understand who the person is, why, what’s happening…so in Honor of the Knights I decided to use Don Quixote so I could focus on atmosphere, on details, on things I love better than just showing the plot or trying to give information about the characters. With these characters you have more or less all the information and, well, then I can do whatever I want, I am free, and I don’t care about being more or less faithful to the original source or character that comes from literature or history. (24)
Both works have two men as protagonists, who are together most of the time and yet separated from the rest of the world. This circumstance contributes to the development of a friendship. After all, there is nobody else around, so they are obligated to get along and take care of each other. In Honor this concern is more subtle than in Godot: Sancho takes care of Quixote’s armor and is constantly around him, awaiting orders; Quixote tells Sancho to rest and swim to cool his body down, for example. (25) In addition, it seems that Quixote has a strong influence over Sancho, who is in a way a passive person. From another perspective, their formal relationship (knight and squire) and age difference create a paternal bond between them, while in Godot it is more of a fraternal one. Didi and Gogo have a long partnership (“fifty years maybe.”) (26), they are more or less the same age, and have a mutual need for attention and care (“It's because you don't know how to defend yourself. I wouldn't have let them beat you.” / “Why will you never let me sleep?” “I felt lonely.”) (27).
Indeed, both pairs have a high degree of interdependence, meaning that each man needs his companion to continue their journey - they cannot do it alone. Even when Quixote is by himself, facing the sky and thinking out loud, he uses his squire’s name, saying “Sancho, Sancho, mira el cel” (Sancho, Sancho, look at the sky) (28). On a rare moment when Sancho interacts with a third character, he gets questioned if there would be a Sancho without Quixote. Similarly, Didi and Gogo are continuously reminding themselves how much they mean to each other: “There are times when I wonder if it wouldn't be better for us to part.” “You wouldn't go far.” (29).
It is interesting how connected Quixote, Sancho, Vladimir and Estragon are with nature and the space around them, and how this is translated into their physical appearances and personalities. In a nutshell, one can compare (Serra’s) Quixote with Vladimir and Sancho with Estragon.
Although Vladimir and Estragon are never characterized in traditional ways (we know
virtually nothing about their histories or inner lives), they do have distinct personalities.
Usually played by a short, stocky actor, Estragon (in Beckett’s formulation) is on the ground
and belongs to the stone.… “Vladimir is light,” Beckett once observed, “he is oriented towards the sky. He belongs to the tree.” Convention now dictates that the actor playing this part be tall and thin, so that he might be thought of as reaching for the sky, mirroring the tree. (30)
Likewise, this is how Albert Serra chose to picture Cervantes’ characters in Honor. “Quixote is almost always framed on the sky,” he observes,
with a lost look (this will be repeated throughout the film). He seems caught up in a movement of ascension (helped by the lightness of his body).... Sancho, on the other hand, remains stuck to the ground. The heaviness of his body favors this sensation. Often, when alone, the camera frames him from the ground, with grass in front of the lens. (31)
In both narratives, the protagonists encounter unknown characters at some point, who cause an interruption, a disturbance of the pair’s original condition. Here, Beckett and Serra have very different approaches. When men riding horses appear and take Quixote away, nothing is said about it. They only accept what is happening without questioning anything. The visitors have no identity - no name, no background story - and their influence seems to affect neither Quixote nor Sancho. It is a whole other story in Godot: each time Pozzo, Lucky, and the boy arrive, they profoundly affect Vladimir and Estragon, who get mad, confused, and anxious. Not only these characters have their own names and stories, they represent change in a world where “nothing happens”.
“Waiting for Godot” at Gerald W. Lynch Theatre (Photo: Richard Termine)
Language
In the meantime let us try and converse calmly, since we are incapable of keeping silent.
— Samuel Beckett
Part of having a de-dramatized narrative means having dialogues that do not necessarily drive the narrative forward. Apart from the fact that Vladimir and Estragon are constantly reminding themselves (and us) that they are waiting for Godot, their conversations do not provide us with new relevant information. In fact, perhaps the most important questions one could ask oneself while watching the play are never answered: who is Godot and why are they waiting for him? Instead, “common talk of boots and hats, of eating, of peeing or buttoning one’s fly, of feeling pain, goes on simultaneously with dialogue about the nature of existence: of solitude and desire, disappointment and grief, of hope deferred and fulfillment (perhaps even salvation) longed for.” (32)
Similarly, it seems that the dialogues in Honor de cavalleria exist to create this constant, naturalistic atmosphere, rather than to tell the story of Don Quixote and his loyal squire. As a matter of fact, viewers watching the film without knowing who its protagonists are will have to wait for about one hour to receive any kind of explanation regarding the plot. The central theme implied by the title (chivalry) is only verbally mentioned after 80 minutes; Quixote’s name is spoken only by himself in the third person until almost the end of the movie (Sancho’s, on the other hand, is repeated several times); nobody mentions where they are, or what they are doing. Instead, Quixote murmurs mostly about his armor, what Sancho should do, and God.
Religion is, in both cases, an important subject. Not only Godot is interpreted as an image of authority and divinity who represents hope and salvation (33), Didi and Gogo often talk about God, Christ, and the Bible (“Christ! What has Christ got to do with it. You're not going to compare yourself to Christ!” “All my life I've compared myself to him.”) (34) Even though these moments help the characters express their feelings, they are mainly distractions, something to talk about to pass the time. In the film, Quixote communicates directly and indirectly with God (staring at the sky), asking him to help and orientate Sancho. Besides, he teaches his companion the importance of talking to God, almost indoctrinating him.
But if until this point the film and the play have shown many similarities, it is perhaps the use of language that differentiates both works the most. Waiting for Godot is a play in which each word appears to be carefully chosen, and where dialogues are marked by repetitions, alliterations and assonances. (35) Actors usually respect the original text and there is little to no room for improvisation. In Honor this is quite the opposite: not only does Serra ignore the original books, he uses a method of “non-communication”, meaning that his (non-professional) actors have the freedom to do whatever they want, including improvise their lines, which are spoken in Catalan. This choice prevents the actor from demonstrating that he is waiting to say what he must say, what in Serra’s point of view happens to professional actors. The improvisation creates ambiguity and brings more life to the screen. (36)
Moreover, the film’s narration does not diverge from a thoughtful, almost introspective locution that contributes to reflection and contemplation. (37) In this context, non-verbal communication plays a crucial role, especially with regard to Quixote. As Adam Bingham argues, Honor is a film about faces, where the actors’ countenances carry a lot of
meaning, and where shots of Quixote staring out at the landscape picture “his eyes frequently darting to indicate a mental process taking place”. (38) On the other hand, Beckett’s characters regularly communicate with exaggerated gestures, using not only facial expressions, but their whole bodies.
Both worlds are apparently made of silence, but Vladimir and Estragon feel the need to fulfill theirs with words, while Quixote and Sancho have apparently learned to live with it. Although, to be fair, the environment in Honor is not completely quiet. On the contrary, sounds (insects, water, wind, armor, steps) are essential for the construction of the minimalist atmosphere and control the rhythm of the film and even its narrative. For example, when editing the scene in which Quixote “fights” the wind, Serra decided to desynchronize sound and image. This way, it is not obvious that the wind is responsible for the character's movements. He suggests: “Maybe he fights against invisible enemies?... The sound of the wind is very concrete, but the desynchronization creates the sensation of a mental agitation.” (39)
In Godot, on the other hand, the sense of stillness is created despite the constant dialogues. Silence here appears as pauses between phrases and words, as things not said. (40) It breaks the rhythm established by the dialogues and movements, and it is responsible for some comic, ironic moments - as the following passages show.
ESTRAGON: All the dead voices.
VLADIMIR: They make a noise like wings.
ESTRAGON: Like leaves.
VLADIMIR: Like sand.
ESTRAGON: Like leaves.
Silence. (41)
VLADIMIR: Say something!
ESTRAGON: I'm trying.
Long silence. (42)
“In addition, each early silent episode is a graphic vignette announcing a paramount theme of the play: man struggling against despair, man thinking about thinking, man dejected in his solitude, man looking for consolation in his abandonment.” (43)
Finally, the way each character communicates influences his relationship with his partner. Pozzo has a “terrifying voice”(44) and speaks violently, demonstrating how powerful he is. Lucky, a highly submissive character, remains quiet for most of the time, speaking only when he is told to. Didi and Gogo speak in the same proportion and intensity throughout the play, often repeating what the other said earlier and even sharing sentences. “Thus we have a sense of their ‘pairdom,’ while we are entranced by the rhythm of their language.” (45) Besides, they constantly use the pronoun “we” instead of “I” to refer to themselves, reinforcing their interdependence. Quixote, the knight, creates monologues during the film and frequently tells Sancho what to do, how to feel, and what to say - even to God. Sancho, the squire, mostly listens.
Absurdism
This is the power of images, the ambiguity. You are never completely sure of anything.
— Albert Serra
In a chapter on Beckett, Martin Esslin explains that “the Theatre of the Absurd strives to express its sense of the senselessness of the human condition and the inadequacy of the rational approach by the open abandonment of rational devices and discursive thought.” (46) That is, absurdism is usually connected with the illogical, the unreasonable, the contradictory.
Waiting for Godot is perhaps an extreme example, since it is made of several illogical elements. Distinctions between what is real and what appears to be disappear (47), and time does not affect life the way it is supposed to. For example, in the second act, which takes place one day after the first, several changes occur that one does not expect to happen in such a short period of time in “real life” (Pozzo is blind, Lucky is dumb, the tree has four or five leaves). The play also lacks solid facts, partially due to the characters’ amnesia (“I don't remember having met anyone yesterday. But tomorrow I won't remember having met anyone today.”) (48)
The point is that [in Waiting for Godot] the moments of waiting, of temporal paralysis, comprise life and reality… In a comparable way, Serra’s Honor de Cavallería [sic] is a text scarred by lack, by absences…. At a thematic level, the point is similar to Beckett’s: the moments in-between, moments of interstitial emptiness, form one reality in the absurd present, but the life of the mind can narrate, can bring-into-being, its own time, space and reality from which the individual can construct at least a workable identity and sense of self. (49)
This can be seen specially when Quixote wanders alone, “fighting” the wind, and during a very brief shot of him wearing his complete armor, standing motionless, as if enemies could attack at any second. But Serra’s absurdism goes one step further: Quixote’s hallucinations never materialize - at least not in front of the camera. Furthermore, both of these scenes start and end without further notice. Hierarchy between the scenes is not established at any point, and what could be considered a “key moment” in the film is shown with the same importance as Quixote and Sancho simply sitting on the grass.
Finally, although absurdism is not present in the film’s dialogues as it is in the play, it is not completely absent either: when Sancho gets questioned by one of the men who took Quixote away (in another illogical moment), he talks about their “multiple chivalry adventures”, which is exactly the opposite of what they did in the past hour.
Conclusion
It is not possible to say that Beckett’s Waiting for Godot has directly influenced Albert Serra when making Honor de cavalleria - simply because there is not enough evidence. Serra himself does not include Beckett on his list when talking about his formal inspirations, and this theory has not yet been fully explored by critics and scholars. However, one can certainly state that these two works have many things in common, coincidence or not.
To start with, both Godot and Honor have de-dramatized narratives, in which two male characters are pictured “doing nothing”. Beckett’s Vladimir and Estragon share many similarities with Serra’s Quixote and Sancho: The pairs are together most of the time and yet separated from the rest of the world; they develop a friendship and the need for attention and
care; and they are very dependent on their companion. Their physical appearances can also be compared (while Vladimir and Quixote are tall, thin and light, oriented towards the sky and the trees, Estragon and Sancho are short and belong to the ground). This illustrates how deeply the protagonists are connected with the place where they find themselves - and how unlikely they are to leave it. As a matter of fact, their condition is put to the test with the
appearance (and absence) of other characters, who profoundly affect Didi and Gogo, but who do not seem to influence Quixote and Sancho.
Furthermore, Beckett and Serra create static atmospheres, where the indeterminacy of space and time, the recurrence of actions and sentences, the lack of conclusions, the emptiness of the space, the dialogues about ordinary things, the interaction between silence and sounds, and the presence of nature contribute to the notion of stillness. In other words, they reduce external stimuli to a bare minimum, creating quite constant circumstances. The characters, then, are confronted with absence and expectations. Consequently, they occupy themselves with the most basic tasks, while thinking about their existence, death and life, their beliefs, and salvation.
The works are also marked by the use of absurdism, which is essentially the lack of rational devices and the use of illogical elements. Beckett and Serra question the distinction between reality and imaginary and propose situations which sound unreal for the viewer (the way life changes in Godot between two days; the absence of chivalry adventures in Honor; the behavior of the characters in both cases). In addition, the two rely on the characters’ minds, exploring conscience, moral sense, inner thoughts, personality traits, lucidity and insanity, for example.
Moreover, Godot and Honor share the ability to immerse the audience in their atmospheres, to a point where the viewer starts to engage with the characters’ emotional, physical, and mental journey, and feels the effects of that (quiet and absurd) atmosphere himself. For instance, the audience is likely to feel time passing slowly as a consequence of waiting for something specific to happen: the arrival of Godot in the play; the famous chivalry adventures in the film.
Although the similarities outweigh the differences, it is true that certain strategies vary from one work to the other. The use of language is perhaps where most of the distinctions are, followed by the establishment of time (not to mention that the "plot" itself is completely different). For example, Beckett uses constant dialogues with repetitions and exaggerated gestures, while Serra lets his actors improvise their lines, which are few and introspective, and values the meaning created by the actors’ faces. Time in Godot appears to be linear and uninterrupted, while it is possible that Honor depicts nonlinear time and ellipsis. That said, it would be interesting to see how Godard, Ozu, Bresson and Pasolini influenced Honor - if the film has more in common with the oeuvres of Serra’s formal inspirations than with Beckett. Future studies could also compare other films by the Catalan director with Beckett’s plays, looking for coincidences or patterns.
Finally, one could say that Serra establishes another way of experiencing cinema, just like Beckett revolutionized the theatre experience back in the 1950s. In fact, when writing about Waiting for Godot, Anna McMullan argues that “we could talk forever about its meaning but I actually think, like Beckett, it is about experiencing the play. You go and take
your seat in the theatre and you absorb what’s happening” (50) - which is a statement one could also make about Honor de cavalleria, as well as many other specimens of contemporary world cinema.
Notes
1 Andergraun Films, La muerte de Luis XIV: Un film de Albert Serra, accessed February 21, 2019, http://andergraun.com/files/CINEMA/PRESSKIT_LLXXVI_DP11low.pdf.
2 Mark Peranson, “Battles of Honour and Humanity: Albert Serra’s Quixotic Experiment,” FIPRESCI, accessed February 22, 2019, http://www.fipresci.org/festival-reports/2006/vienna/.
3 Andergraun Films, Honor de cavalleria: una pellícula escrita, produïda i dirigida por Albert Serra, accessed March 03, 2019, http://andergraun.com/files/CINEMA/HONOR-pressengl.pdf.
4 Adam Bingham, “The Romance of Certain Old Clothes or They Don’t Make ‘em Like That Anymore: Honorde Cavallería and Art Cinema’s Last Stand,” CineAction 75 (Winter 2008): 44.
5 “Samuel Beckett,” accessed March 9, 2019, https://samuelbeckett.com.
6 “Albert Serra, Radical Classicist,” Harvard Film Archives, accessed February 22, 2019,
https://library.harvard.edu/film/films/2009janfeb/serra.html.
7 Andergraun Films, Honor de cavalleria.
8 Bingham, “The Romance of Certain Old Clothes,” 42.
9 Barry McGovern, “Beckett 'twice' without italics,” The Irish Times, February 19, 2011,
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/beckett-twice-without-italics-1.576861.
10 Lawrence Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 2nd ed. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 54.
11 Richard Schechner, “There's Lots of Time in Godot,” in Bloom's Modern Critical Interpretations: Waiting for Godot, ed. Harold Bloom, new ed. (New York: Bloom’s Literary Criticism, 2008), 12.
12 Bingham, “The Romance of Certain Old Clothes,” 44.
13 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 48.
14 Samuel Beckett, Waiting for Godot: A Tragicomedy in Two Acts (Grove Press, 2011), 4.
15 Normand Berlin, “The Tragic Pleasure of Waiting for Godot,” in Bloom, 61-62.
16 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 41.
17 Andergraun Films, Honor de cavalleria.
18 Cyril Neyrat and Albert Serra, Honor de cavalleria: Notes D’Albert Serra, Que Fabriquent les Cinéastes, ed. Thierry Lounas, Cyril Neyrat and Camille Pollas (Nantes: Capricci, 2010), 35, my translation.
19 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 164.
20 Ibid., 306.
21 Ibid., 20-21.
22 Bingham, “The Romance of Certain Old Clothes,” 43.
23 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 26.
24 “The Beauty of Horror and the Horror of Beauty: An Encounter with Albert Serra,” interview by Mark Peranson, CinemaScope 56, 2013, accessed February 28, 2019, http://cinema-scope.com/cinema-scope-magazine/tiff-2013-cinema-scope-56-preview-albert-serra-on-story-of-my-death-albert-serra-spainfrance/.
25 Honor de cavalleria, directed by Albert Serra (Andergraun Films, Eddie Saeta and Notro Films, 2006), DVD.
26 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 159.
27 Ibid., 171, 292.
28 Honor de cavalleria, directed by Albert Serra, my translation.
29 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 30.
30 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 30-31.
31 “Quichotte reste presque toujours cadré sur le ciel, le regard perdu (ceci va se répéter tout au long du film). Il semble pris dans un mouvement d’ascension (aidé par la légèreté de son corps)…. Sancho, au contraire, reste collé au sol. La lourdeur de son corps favorise cette sensation. Souvent, quand il est seul, la caméra le cadre depuis le sol, avec de l’herbe devant l’objectif," Neyrat and Serra, Notes D’Albert Serra, 33, my translation.
32 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 23.
33 Ibid., 39.
34 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 156.
35 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 56.
36 Serra, interview by Mark Peranson.
37 Bingham, “The Romance of Certain Old Clothes,” 42.
38 Ibid., 43.
39 “Peut-être se bat-il contre des ennemis invisibles?... Le son du vent est très concret, mais la désynchronisation crée la sensation d’une agitation mentale.”Neyrat and Serra, Notes D’Albert Serra, 82, my translation.
40 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 24.
41 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 182-183.
42 Ibid., 185-186.
43 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 33.
44 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 37.
45 Schechner, “There's Lots of Time in Godot,” 11.
46 Martin Esslin, “Introduction: The Absurdity of the Absurd,” in Bloom, 29.
47 Graver, Beckett: Waiting for Godot, 66.
48 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, 288.
49 Bingham, “The Romance of Certain Old Clothes,” 44.
50 Anna McMullan, “'When Beckett wrote Waiting for Godot he really didn't know a lot about theatre',” interview by Daisy Bowie-Sell, The Telegraph, January 2013, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/theatre-features/9780077/When-Beckett-wrote-Waiting-for-Godot-he-really-didnt-know-a-lot-about-theatre.html.