Hey all! Welcome back to another episode of the Film fancies series here on you’re listening to radio revel. This week I wanted to share some thoughts I have about both a German movie I saw a few weeks ago and maybe even some thoughts about institutionalized education in general. Let’s give it a go. Oh wait, there may be some bit of information some would consider spoilers. They’re not big details, nor will they ruin the film for you, but well, if you’d rather, go see the film then come back to listen. I end up recommending it, so it won’t be time lost! And I’ll warn you if you want to skip over the paragraph with the spoilers.
Those of you who have listened to my film comments already know that I’m a fan of a theatrical more that I call “dramatic action”. Studying direction at university, my professors based their entire directing curriculum on Francis Hodge’s text Play Directing: Analysis, Communication, and Style. That sound serious. The text is a true manifestation of Stanislavski’s belief that “Art loves order.”
In that text, Hodge considers “dramatic action” to be the give-and-take between characters in the drama, the action of one inciting the action of another, a chain reaction that feeds the rising action and leads to the final conflict and climax of the story being acted out.
My professors, though, and especially Gene, who I’ve talked about warmly in an earlier episode, I’ll leave a link somewhere, expanded on the concept of “dramatic action”, or maybe, better put, Gene whittled it down to one particular moment in the drama: that moment in which the chain of actions leads a main character, be they protagonist or antagonist, to undergo a fundamental change in character. Gene was also an actor and acting teacher, so it was not uncharacteristic for him to focus this bit of script analysis vocabulary on character development. But one does not cancel out the other.
As an example, think of “dramatic action” as that sudden change you might experience upon having been betrayed. The wife who discovers that her husband has a lover. The friend who finds out that he’s been lied to. The Everyman who realizes that he’s been conned. A dramatic change in attitude, or behavior, may come suddenly, it will always be the result of that long chain of actions and reactions between the actors in your drama.
Where is the dramatic action, then, in The teachers’ lounge? Does that dramatic action belong to the main character, the young 6th grade math and PE teacher, Carla? Does it manifest itself in the school secretary? Or is it what makes the secretary’s young son, a student in Carla’s math class, realize his true colors? This film is simply overwhelmed by dramatic action.
Carla is a school teacher from Poland who has landed a job in a German school, can’t tell if it’s a public or private school, that serves middle and high school-aged students. She is liked by her students, maybe because she’s closer to their age than other teachers, maybe because she’s introduced modern non-authoritarian classroom control techniques to manage the students. Maybe because she’s just a nice, vocational teacher who hasn’t yet been burnt by the only system that will pay her for her skills.
The school has been plagued by a not uncommon situation: petty theft. Someone is pinching money from bags, from wallets, from wherever someone has carelessly left it vulnerable to sticky fingers. There has been a growing feeling of paranoia as the thief keeps thieving. The school administration feels it needs to step in and get to the bottom of things.
Now, why is the film called The teachers’ lounge? Well, probably because the core metaphor is that secret place teachers huddle in, their getaway from the bustle of the hallways, the routine of the classroom, the responsibilities of having students.
I was in my freshman year in high school hell and for some reason I had to give a message to my English teacher, Mrs Lindsay, or I wanted to speak to her about something, I don’t remember. anyway I somehow knew she was in the teachers’ lounge, so I went to that door and knocked. I don’t think I opened it myself, but when the door opened I could see familiar teachers’ faces sitting around a long table, there was Mrs Lindsay, she was smoking a cigarette! Horrors. That bluish haze and the stink of burned tobacco in a poorly ventilated room stayed with me for years. Was I traumatized? No, don’t think so.
Anyway, in the film the teachers’ lounge is that place where teachers could be human beings and show some of their true colors, at least among their fellows. The microcosm within a microcosm, so to speak. It’s the realm where Carla allows herself to enter a world of self-righteous paranoia. She feels that the school principal, an older former school teacher Peter Principled into the position, isn’t handling the petty thefts appropriately and, on spying upon another teacher pinching coins from the mug where teachers left them to pay for their coffee or tea, she decides to investigate, passively, on her own.
Here’s where some spoilers may begin. Skip forward to where I say “That’s a lot of dramatic action.”
Carla plants money in her jacket. She lowers the screen of her laptop after having opening a webcam recording app. She leaves the teachers’ lounge. She returns, the money is gone. The video recorded on her laptop shows the arm of the thief wearing an unusual, patterned blouse. The same blouse the school secretary is wearing that very same day.
If we apply Hodge’s definition of “dramatic action”, then the film gives us a wealth of dramatic actions that should build to the climax. The teachers’ representative interrogates two young student representatives. The two students snitch on another student. The principle calls the student’s parents. The student is exonerated. A teacher robs some change. Carla films a theft from her jacket. Carla tries to negotiate a confession from the secretary. The secretary denies the theft. Carla goes to the principle. The principle accuses the secretary. The principle sends the secretary home on leave. The secretary’s son, who is in Carla’s class, finds out his teacher is responsible for his mother’s depression. The son turns his classmates against the once beloved teacher with gossip and false accusations. Carla agrees to be interviewed by the student newspaper. Those student journalists interrogate Carla and print a wildly exaggerated and biased story that passes the borders of fake news. The secretary’s son steals Carla’s laptop and tosses it into a river, gets expelled. The son comes to school the next day, refusing to respect the order to stay home. The police are called.
That’s the end of the spoilers.
That’s a lot of dramatic action. The film takes on a pastiche of every-day thriller, no one is killed, but everyone takes action that only makes things worse for everyone else and themselves. Let’s look at Gene’s take on dramatic action, that moment when, because of the chain of actions presented, a main character undergoes a significant change.
There are plenty of mini-dramatic actions. The parents of the student accused and exonerated suffer a blow to their confidence in the school, they suspect the accusation was racially based. The school secretary changes from the pleasant, self-important efficient clerk to a spiteful, vengeful woman who neglects her son and stirs up shit in parent-teacher meetings. Carla herself changes, gradually but dramatically, from a young, enthusiastic, vocational teacher to a paranoid, self-doubting, anxiety attacked mess. Even Carla’s colleagues change, from supporting fellows to suspicious and accusing collateral victims.
I’m not being original in considering institutionalized education to be a purposefully designed training scheme for programmed, useful future members of a complex society. Others have recognized that the basic structure underlying institutionalized education is meant to produce adults who are able to manage basic mathematics, understand texts at least through 8th grade level, are able to sit still and obey for six hours a day while completing mindless, mind-numbing, meaningless tasks, a day divided into controlled periods by the periodic ringing of a bell. Programmed moments for lunch (at the standard hour) for play (at a standard hour) for arriving (at the standard hour) for leaving (at a standard hour), all of those standard hours perfectly coordinated with the standard hours and activities those young people will grow into.
The material beyond basic reading, writing and arithmetic can be a bonus for some of those students; however, the majority will conform with the basic mold and move on, upon graduating, to fill the waiting standard adult mold they have institutionalized into for 12 years.
And part of that programmed, institutionalized education mold necessarily involves a gross mimicry of post-educational adult molds. What happens within the halls and classrooms of a school full of kids is not only a preparation for what comes after, it is a faithful reflection. There will be incompetent CEOs occupying positions of authority and decision (the principal); there will be more-or-less competent managers who oversee specialized projects (the teachers), there will be a small army of administrative personnel who manage, and sometimes obstruct, logistics (the secretary) and there will be the majority of the group, those who are beneath all the rest, who must fit the mold or be expelled (the students).
The teachers’ lounge gives us a simplified opportunity to look at that microcosm and understand how it reflects that macrocosm we adults move about in. The sanctuary of the lounge is not a sanctuary, but rather an escape room from which those seeking peace, not only don’t find that peace, but can not really escape. The outside world will enter the sanctuary and demand attention. The microcosm of the school will spread out into the community and demand attention. Who will the macrocosm of the real world demand attention from? Will it be the “Lord” of religious mythology or the “Lord” of the 3 Body Problem? That’s foreshadowing of a future Film fancies episode, by the way.
Well, this film is not for everyone. I watched it because I like dramas involving education and teachers. I enjoyed it because of the well-structured story, the almost universal theme and some pretty good acting on the part of everyone. The ending might not be clear and satisfying, but the tension, the dramatic action, be it that chain of action leading to a climax or that personal, dramatic change in individual characters was thrilling and engaging. I don’t know if the film has been dubbed into English, it was presented at the Oscars last year, so maybe, but see it with subtitles, it’s worth hearing the German spoken, the vocal interpretations of good actors.
It got a pretty high note in my rating scale, but I’m too lazy to go look what grade I gave it. I recommend the film but, again, warn that it’s not got special effects, nor car chases, nor gun fights. The violence is of an emotional nature and the resolution is pending.
Thanks for listening!
Cheers.
you're listening to radio revel 