Professor David Peimer
Joan of Arc: In Cinema and Theatre

Professor David Peimer - Joan of Arc: In Cinema and Theatre

- [Lecturer] Okay, so thanks again so much, Emily, for all your help. And hi to everybody, everywhere, and hope you’re well. I have a bit of flu, so I hope you forgive my voice, sometimes will come and go. Okay, so we’ve been obviously dealing with France and moving through the Middle Ages, towards the end of the Middle Ages now, and some of the questions around the ideas of leadership over this last period. And I want to look at Joan of Arc, in this remarkable human being and a couple of things specifically about her. First of all, just a brief history, just so we can recall what actually happened and what she actually did. And then I want to show some clips from a couple of the major movies, where, you know, clips from them of this remarkable historical figure. And then thirdly, I’m going to look at George Bernard Shaw’s play, on Joan of Arc. And briefly Shakespeare’s, Henry VI, where she’s obviously a pretty important character. And I want you to thank at the beginning, Janet, dear Dame Janet Suzman, for emailing and of course she’s probably a wonderful, remarkable, brilliant actress and human being as we know. But also, probably the only person on planet Earth who has acted in both Shaw’s play and in the Shakespeare version of in the Shakespeare, Henry VI as well. playing Joan of Arc in both basically. Which is amazing and fantastic.

So, I also want to look at, you know, once you’ve gone through a bit of a history, so we just get the background, when looking at the films and the plays, is to have a sense of what has happened to this myth or this legend, and how has the myth been seen over the last couple of centuries, and in particular today, you know, how does she resonate as a mythical or symbolic figure in the Western imagination today? And some very interesting contrasts of the last, while, the last century, certainly, and last period in terms of who, who summons her in a way, or which groups summon her as a reference for, of an archetypal symbol of their freedom, fight for independence, for justice, for equality, the underdog against the oppressive structure of power, whatever it might be. So in France, obviously and elsewhere, because I think she is such a huge iconic figure in the Western imagination without a doubt, and of course based on, you know, historical fact. But I want to look at how over the six, 700 years since her life, how she has constantly changed in terms of the myth we relate to, according to different historical periods and different artists, really. Okay so, just on leadership, and I’m going to relate this to Joan. I spoke in the one time about Homer and the Odyssey and mentioned the three main characters. Odysseus, who for me in essence suggests cunning, or as Bob Dylan calls it, trickery or ingenuity or ability to outthink and outwit together with courage as a leader.

Agamemnon, who is the king of the Greeks, who everybody has to kowtow to and organises the whole battle to go to, Troy in Herman’s story, Agamemnon is pry hubris or arrogance at times, but he’s also the symbol of great authority accorded by the country, the nation, and leads to pride and arrogance, which trips him up, but also enables him to lead. And a third example is the Achilles, who is not only the action adventure hero, but also has enormous self-belief. Self-confidence. Believes in the right, beliefs in who he is and what he’s doing. So I, and I think there are elements of all three in most leaders and leadership today. And Joan for me symbolises examples of each of the three as a remarkable leader, a woman in her times at the age of, you know, 17, 18, 19, 20. Unbelievable at that age, totally illiterate from a peasant family farming background. And I think she symbolises some of those three qualities at different times and I want to show how some of the films and the plays especially Shaw, brings that out at different times. Okay, so first of all, a bit of the history. So that’s when she lived, obviously 1412-1431. She’s the patron saint of France, you know, as of the 20th century.

The defender of the French nation for her role in the siege of Orléans, as we know, and her insistence of the coronation of Charles VII of France You know, as we move towards the culmination of the hundred years war between England and France, and I’ll come back to that in a moment. She claimed she was acting under divine guidance, hearing voices from God from the age of about 12-13 onwards. And she becomes a military leader at the age of 17, 18, and has become to seen as a saviour almost for France and has that resonant, mythical, iconic image. As I said, she’s born into a peasant family. Then in 1428, she asks to be taken to see the then Prince Charles, who is a weak king, a weak prince, hasn’t become king yet, and says that it is her job to make him the King of France, to kick out the English who rule large parts of France and the Duke of Burgundy and other allies of the English, French allies of the English. You know, France is pretty disparate and fractured and her job to unite under Charles VII. And she gets an audience with Charles and says Archangel Michael has told her and the voices keep coming. Convinced of her devotion and purity, the purity I’ll come to is important. Charles sends Joan at the age of 17, unbelievable. Imagine this today, to the siege of Orléans as part of the relief army. She gets there in 1429, wielding her banner and bringing hope and inspiration to a very demoralised French army. And it’s the hope, it’s the idealistic dream, the energy that she brings to and Shaw goes into this in the play quite thoughtfully.

First of all, how she convinces prince to make her go with the army. I mean that’s pretty cunning and trickery, that flattery she uses and other things. And of course, you know, God has spoken to her directly through the voices. And in how she gets the troops rallied, gets the troops fired up with passion to go back, fight and fight against the English invader. Then nine days after her arrival, historically the English abandoned the siege of the city and it was regarded as a decisive victory. Later Charles’s Crown King of France with Joan at his side at the coronation. These victories, according to fair number of scholars, helped to pave the way for the final French triumph in the hundred years war between the English and the French, basically. After Charles’s coronation, she participates in the unsuccessful siege of Paris, trying to get Paris back for Charles, in 1429. 1430, she organised a group, of military volunteers to relieve Compiègne, forgive my pronunciation, which had been besieged by the Burgundians. Now this is a group of the French, but they were under the Duke of Burgundy and allied themselves with the English against Charles. So the major factions, part of the fracturing.

French allies of the English. She was captured by the Burgundian troops. She was handed to the English, put on trial for heresy. I’m not going to go into too much detail about the trial here at the moment, a little bit more when you talk about the play. And the heresy charge included blasphemy, for wearing men’s clothes. This is true. Cutting her hair. She looked like a, you know, cropped hair cut like a man. You know, so this cross-gender, this cross, there’s this hair thing and this clothes is seen as very important at the time. Blasphemy, heresy, of course it’s a whole trumped up charge, you know, for various reasons, which I’ll get into, why they’ve trumped it up, why the English and the Burgundians have trumped it up. And of course that her, she’s accused that her visions were actually from the devil, not from God, they were demonic. Because of her refusal to submit to the judgement of the Catholic church in France at the time. Really crucial. She’s declared guilty, burnt at the stake, 1431 and at the age of 19, is burnt to death. And the remains are thrown into the Seine river. 1456, the verdict is overthrown. So a mere, what, 25 years later, she’s declared a martyr. She’s declared an obedient daughter of the Roman Catholic church, a leader, a symbol of freedom and independence for the French. So the story is twisted and turned and the myth begins.

After the French Revolution in the late 1800’s, 1789, et cetera. She becomes a national symbol in France. In 1920, Joan of Arc was canonised as a saint by the Roman Catholic church. So if we could go on to the next slide, please. So that’s to give you an example of basic historical facts of her life. This is the earliest known drawing of Joan, done in France, and scholars are not exactly sure, but they reckon it’s about 15, 20 years after her death. It’s the very first, the earliest drawing ever found. Nobody knows who it’s by or whatever is, you know, but it has been dated to then. Thanks, if we could on to the next slide please. So this is the map of France at the time. So this part in blue is the part ruled by the then Prince Charles. The part in the lighter pink colour, is the part ruled by Henry, the English King. So you can see Normandy, Brittany, Reims, Rue, Paris is inside there as well. So that’s all ruled by the English. And then in Agincourt, you can see at the top, becomes Henry V, the Great Battle of Agincourt, which we’ll get onto next week. And then the Burgundians are ruling the purple patches, if you like, of France. So, one can see from this map the fractured nature of French territory and the blue, the prince at the time, Charles, and one can see the desire to unite, kick out the English, force the French Burgundians back into the French, the Charles camp if you like, and set up the nation of France. This is moving towards the end of the a hundred years war between England and France, that this map belongs to. So France is divided politically, geographically.

Charles is weak and it’s his brother, who’s the Duke of Orléans, who asks for help, because English, control it. And that’s the great battle that Joan helps to win. And that has gone down historically and Mythically. And Charles’s cousin is the Duke of Burgundy, as very typical with all these aristocratic families of Europe. They’re all cousins of cousins and cousins, you know, ultimately it’s a family affair of some madness, and you know, extreme lunacy in some way, although on the other hand can be seen as ambition and the absolute drive for as much power as possible, and riches of course. Okay, so, and the Duke of Orléans, the brother then there’s Charles, there’s a Duke of Burgundy in purple, all quarrelling over who should actually rule, who’s aligning themselves with English and who isn’t, et cetera. And it’s of course Henry V and the English very cleverly divided and rule, classic foreign policy. They exploit the internal divisions and play off one against each other as much as possible, which is classic foreign policy, not only for England obviously, but for many countries around the world.

You know, fairly standard. Okay. In her youth, Joan did, she was a peasant girl, no education whatsoever, couldn’t read or write. Household chores, spinning wool, looking after the animals. It’s her mother that gives her the very religious education. She said when she was around 12 or 13, that the Archangel Michael, Saint Michael appears and tells her what to do, liberate France from the English, get the Burgundians back and make Charles the king of the whole of France, united creates the state. And the voices are coming from God and this absolute devotion to God and the Catholic church and religion and the belief that she is really a messenger of God. That’s incredible, and Achilles like total self-belief and total confidence in who she is and what her purpose, her calling in life is. During it’s, now what’s important is that during Joan’s life in her youth, the English had invaded and sacked and pillaged and raped the village and the areas surrounding her village when she was very young. So she obviously saw that and obviously had an impact, but perhaps even at least equally as important. There was a prophecy circulating at the time, in the French countryside of the area, which was based on the vision of a person called, Marie Robin of Avignon. And the prophecy was in essence that an armed virgin would come to save France. Now we got to remember, this is the early 1400’s.

So witchcraft and all these strange, you know, the witchcraft, superstition, all these things. It’s not yet the renaissance, it’s not yet rarely obviously, the beginning of the enlightenment and so on. The end of the mediaeval period. So the clash between, you know, pagan and then of course huge Christianity, the absolute power of the church, the fractured power of the kings and lords and the feudal system, which is a real battle going on, at the same time the role of the witches and you know, it’s estimated between 200 and 500,000 women were burnt as witches over these, you know, a couple of centuries in the mediaeval period, in Europe and England. So, these kind of, on the other hand, there’s the good and the bad, which is, the one which is seen is obviously a prophecy, these beliefs in visions. So she’s not out of her historical period. She’s not mad in that way. She’s actually very much part of it. And the idea of a virgin is so important, because it comes in later in the trial that she’s dressing in men’s clothes, she’s putting her hair as some of the reasons really given for burning her at the sake, because she’s got to be a virgin, if she’s going to be a woman doing whatever or prophecies as opposed to of course, the the devil inspired, witch. Okay, Charles meets her, he’s 26. Can we go onto the next slide please? This is Charles. Weak prince becomes a weak king. Looks pretty depressed, but this is an actual portrait of the guy. He’s 26 when she meets him, she’s 17.

He’s a kid. And she says she’s come to raise the siege of Orléans and his coronation, et cetera. Now what does he do? First of all that he allows her to come and talk to her, is one thing. I mean, remember it’s a peasant girl, in mediaeval period, you know, illiterate, everything. She just looks after animals, sheep and hens and chickens, on a farm. Was she of divine origin, wasn’t she? In this historical period, is it God or isn’t it? It’s before the beginning of the real impact of science, rational thought coming in to take over, certainly. Later the enlightenment. He sends her to be physically examined to make sure that she’s a virgin. And this is really important in these times, because if you’re a virgin in the Catholic, then you can be, maybe this is a good sign from God, you know, because if the prophesied woman saviour of France was prophesied to be a virgin, so a whole lot of women had to examine her, et cetera, et cetera, she’s a virgin. Okay, in other words, she hadn’t consorted or slept with the devil, is the, is the obvious meaning in that. She designed her own banner and she called herself, Joan the maiden, which is important because it echoes the virginity aspect.

The maid, the maiden. And it was only much later Joan of Arc became the name. But in the beginning, Joan the maid or maiden. So what’s in, what is happening historically is that she inspired the hope of divine assistance. So when she goes to the French army in Orléans, it’s the soldiers see her as being inspired by God. That’s a whole difference to just a 17 year old peasant girl pitching up with a banner, to say, come on, we’re going to fight the English. Her belief in her divine origin is absolutely 100%. And her mission to turn the very long Anglo French conflict, over inheritance, as to which duke, which king, which person, English, French, et cetera, who should rule where in this fractured France, she turns it from a conflict of inheritance, of aristocratic power in feudalism into a religious war. And that is a brilliant, it is a stroke of genius, consciously or not. And that’s what I think inspires the soldiers. That’s what I think inspires Shakespeare and Shaw, later. This question, do you use nationalism? Do you use religion? Do you use fanaticism? Do you, how do you inspire people to overcome others? What’s powerful? And I, and whether it’s conscious or not is not the issue, but that’s what it’s received as. So instead of just being a fraction amongst, you know, a family conflict or conflict of aristocratic feudal lords and leaders and England, and, you know, bits and pieces of France, it’s turned into a religious crusade and that’s an entirely different approach to soldiers and battle and warfare. And that’s the inspiration. She even wrote a letter, Joan, where she dictated it to the duke, the English Duke of Bedford, warning him that she was sent by God to drive him and the English out of France. By God. And that’s such a crucial difference.

And I don’t think it’s so far away from our times at all. The ancient Greeks, it was the gods that had sent them, and Troy the God. Here it is, when in doubt they invoke the gods and then the mission becomes a much bigger, whole different ballgame. She was put on trial for heresy, the blasphemy that I mentioned and then executed, et cetera. So the legacy, if we can go onto the next slide, please. This is early 1800’s, I think it was around 1818 or 1819. A painting, so it’s a couple of centuries later, a painting of, at the time the early 1800’s, French percept, French painter, a painting of their perception of Joan, you know, riding through the city of Orléans, in victory with the French all around, with her banner, the virgin warrior, the young, you know, teenager, et cetera, and so on. So this is the perception in the early 18 hundreds of the French perception of their heroic saviour, freedom, independence, the martyr, et cetera. All of those qualities are in this one character and able to inspire through a connection to divinity, not only nationalism, and not only, you know, for the sake of a king, a lord, a leader. So her position is in relation to God and that’s how she claims the leadership role. That’s a very powerful way of thinking. And I think it’s resonant in our times.

Whatever the religion. As I, during the French Revolution, it’s interesting because her reputation was like it was a problem for the French Revolution guys. Because of her association with the monarchy, she believes in the divine right of kings. She wants the monarchy back and the English out. Now they’ve just had the French Revolution to guillotine and get rid of all the aristocrats in the monarchy. What do the French revolutionaries do? There’s a festival that was held in her honour in Orléans, and it was suspended in 1793 after the French Revolution. But in 1803, in comes Napoleon and he authorised its renewal and the creation of a new statue of Joan at Orléans. And Napoleon writes, “The Illustrious Joan”. “She proves that there is no miracle, which French genius cannot accomplish when national independence is threatened”. So what does Napoleon do? He cleverly, turns the religious mixture of Joan and the symbol, into genius, French. And when nation independence is threatened and nationalism, he, Napoleon combines nationalism with religion and brings back the festival in Orléans, which is huge in France at the time. Napoleon understands not only military, of course, he’s a politician par excellence, for me, one of the greatest of all time.

During the Vichy period in, during the second World War, it’s fascinating, because Pétain uses Joan of Arc in Vichy, as a hero for the Vichy French, but she’s also a model for de Gaulle and the leadership of the free French in the French resistance. An example of resistance against tyranny. They both sides in the French themselves use her. Recently, her association with the monarchy, but more importantly, what Napoleon brought in, nationalism, has made her a national liberation, is the phrase used by the far right, Marine Le Pen and others, the far right, in contemporary France today. So what’s really interesting to me is one can see how the myth constantly gets rewritten. How the symbol constantly redrawn, used by different leaders at different periods, who understand what they need as leaders to inspire or get the people behind them. The entire spectrum of French politics going way back centuries and today. She’s a saint and she’s heroic and of course, she’s a woman. Okay, if we can go onto the next, the next slide please. This is from the Otto Preminger movie, Jean Seberg, who was cast, Jean Seaberg. He auditioned over 3000 in Europe and in America, elsewhere, before casting her, Otto Preminger in the movies. But I’m not going to show a clip, but it’s just to look at the image that is created, the visionary, the eyes, the teenager, the short hair, the androgynous boy, girl, teenager look, university student, boy, girl look. It’s all there, in Preminger in his period, in the 20th century doing it. It’s all there in the look, you know, that she creates, fascinating I think. The movie is absolutely, is panned by many of the critics and all the rest of it.

But what I’m interested in, is how he’s tried to put some of these elements of nationalism, religion, divine origin, militant, you know, and revolutionary into an illiterate teenager who comes from a peasant background. You know, and I think, this, for me, this image, really captures that. Thanks. If we can. Okay, let’s hold it there for a moment. So, freedom, militant, fighter, rebel against injustice, prejudice, the underdog, a patriot, a martyr, for the beliefs, symbol of national French unity, the pure virgin, in inverted commas, the maid, so she can fit into the Catholic church, can absorb her and use her after using her to burn her the stake. Supporter of the French monarchy, the aristocrats, today, the far right nationalism, and the idea of national independence as opposed, against the EU and against, and, if you’re like incorporating elements of Catholicism. Take your choice almost, whatever one wants, one can use in different ways in plays in films and literature and politics, how to use the myth of this remarkable, remarkable woman who lived. And of course, you know, if we can go to slide 13, please, Emily.

Okay, this is just a fascinating image for me. This is, she was, Joan of Arc was also used by the British suffragettes in the suffragette movement in the early 1900’s and in America. Now this is a suffragette, Annan Bryce, dressed as Joan of Arc in 1911, in London. And I think it’s fascinating that the suffragettes is brilliant ‘cause of course she’s going to, you know, she’s central to feminism and to the whole notion of women and equality and rights and justice. Not only the vote, but much more, equality. Crucial and here, she is, and Joan of Arc is invoked, you know, in an English context, in the suffragette movement in 1911. Of course this is an absolutely central part. So this iconic figure spans centuries, spans so many different struggles and battles for change of a certain kind. Take your choice again. Whatever one wants to appropriate the myth, one can, if one is clever. Of course, even contemporary physicians, in the last 30, 40 years, have there been papers written. She was psychotic, she was psychopathic, epileptic, neurological conditions, brain conditions, seizures, epilepsy. And that’s why she could be sound so reasonable in her defence in the trial and so passionate in battle. Well, anybody’s going to try and sound reasonable usually in a trial and passionate in a battle, especially if you’re a teenager of the age of 17, 18. I mean, it’s ridiculous.

So anyway, all, you know, even the medical community has jumped in, you know, into this. But let’s go back. She’s a middle ages. She’s young, she’s illiterate, inexperienced, no military experience, no knowledge of reading or writing, a peasant girl again and rises to this extraordinary life, if you think about it. For me, on the biblical scale. And shortly after her death, she was equated with some of the great biblical heroes, you know, Esther and others. So, one can see how the individuals lived and then how the myth gets used and then created and then appropriated. The Irish feminists, fascinating. And of course most of them were also Irish nationalists against British colonialism at the time, the same time as the suffragettes, early 1900’s. So they, the Irish feminists, interestingly, they did not share the British counterparts pride in empire, 'cause the British suffragettes wanted the vote, wasn’t about empire or nationalism. The Irish feminists, took Joan up as supporting Irish nationalism and women’s rights against British colonial occupation, freedom for Ireland. So the love of country and the love of equal rights for women was brought in here, a different turn on the, on the feminist history. Maud Gonne, one of the great people we know, one of the great individuals we know of, a friend of WB Yeats and many others, who was a founder of the Nationalist Irish, the Irish Nationalist Women’s Organisation, called, The Daughters of Ireland. She actually spoke about being an Irish, Joan of Arc. Okay, so if we can go to slide. the next one please, slide seven, Isn’t the first movie I’m going to show, from the Milla Jovovich film, with John Malkovich. Made about eight, nine years ago. The trailer.

CLIP BEGINS

• [Milla Jovovich] I was about 10 years old. I was taking a shortcut on through the forest, when a strange wind began to blow. It was such a strange sound, almost like words calling me. Everything was moving so fast. I couldn’t move, I couldn’t breathe. God had given me a message, a message to deliver.

• What was the message?

• [Milla Jovovich] He said, I must save France from her enemies and bring her back into the hands of God. Follow me.

• [Movie Character] She was on her white horse facing the whole English army and she drove them away.

• That’s too easy.

• We must be absolutely certain that she is not an instrument of the devil.

• The girl is crazy.

• We are of course, enormously grateful for your past efforts, but now your task is done.

• I want that girl, burned.

• You are not helping yourself by refusing to submit to our judgement .

• And you who claim to be my judges, you’ll be careful.

• Do you think that God made the right decision to take an ignorant girl to save the kingdom of France?

CLIP ENDS

• Okay, thanks. Thanks Emily, we can hold it there. So this is a very contemporary, the most contemporary version of the story. And for me it combines nationalism with a bit of the achilles of absolute self-belief in her mission in who she is, that she can be a warrior. I mean, the reality is she only carried a banner, historically. She never carried a sword and wasn’t actually involved in physical fighting, although she was wounded twice, badly. But that doesn’t matter. Here, she’s an action adventure hero, which fits part of the films of our times. She is absolutely 100% clear, the word is from God and the the voices are from God. The mission is clear and everything is, she’s a voice for God, really, to liberate the French and put Malkovich back, as Charles, back on the on the crown. And then of course she’s eventually the, there’s a church, the Burgundians, the English, and the French partly, even Charles, turn against her because they’re scared, too much power. Now it’s fascinating, which I think the movie does show a little bit, not that much, is that the church becomes scared that she’s going to show French nationalism as more important than the church. And secondly, that she is getting her message from God, directly. So she obeys God, not the Catholic church leaders. And that’s a threat to them. And the threat to not only the Burgundians and the English, you know, in terms of inspiring the troops, but the threat even to Charles is that whoa, she’s inspiring such nationalism, she might become more popular than Charles who’s going to become king. So all of them turn against her. So what happens when that position goes further and we see the result?

Okay, could we go onto slide nine please? And this is where I want to show, where you see the aristocrats and the church in particular, turning against her. This is Carl Dreyer, the remarkable early 1900’s silent film on Joan.

CLIP BEGINS

♪ When everyone is hidden ♪ ♪ Everyone is cruel ♪ ♪ There’s no shortage of tyrants ♪ ♪ And no shortage of fools ♪ ♪ And the little white shape ♪ ♪ Dancing at the end of the world. ♪ ♪ Is just a wish ♪ ♪ That time can dissolve ♪ ♪ That hope ♪

CLIP ENDS

• Okay, thanks. You can hold it there. So this is Carl Dreyer, early 1900’s silent movie of her. It’s a, I think what he’s done is quite brilliant and it’s also memorable, over 110 years later, of the eyes, the faces and how you tell the story. Eisenstein’s idea of montage and you know, how you cut and how you use editing and so on, how you tell the stories, but, it’s the images and the eyes and the faces, you know, and not, and how he pushes the religious leaders, the faces in some of the aristocrats. Okay, if we can show, in the last one, which is I think perhaps my favourite together with the silent one, is with Ingrid Bergman, playing Joan and Victor Fleming directing. This is slide 11, please. 11, Emily.

CLIP BEGINS

• [Narrator] In the year of our Lord 1920, with holy right and ritual, the Church of Rome makes its utmost reparation to one who 500 years ago stood a heretic accused before her enemies. St. Joan of Arc whose history is recorded here, lived only 19 years on this earth.

• [Minister] Acting upon common report, public rumour and various information obtained by us. We have summoned you before us as a suspect of heresy and sorcery. Will you speak the truth, on matters concerning the faith?

• I swear to speak the truth on questions concerning the faith.

• What is your name?

• My name is Joan, at home I was called on that.

• How old are you?

• I am 19, I think.

• [Narrator] Joan, the maid who is to become Joan the Blessed, was born in 1412 in the village of Domrémy in Lorraine, the daughter of a farmer. She was a half literate child, deep immersed in religion. She lived by 20 years on this earth. Yet of all the people in France, in her time, it was she whom God called to the greatest and heaviest destiny. From the time she was 13, Joan had been driven in secret by heavenly voices ordering her to take her place at the head of an army, expel France’s enemies from the land and crown, it’s dauphin king.

• How can I save France? How can I lead the dauphin to his coronation? I’m only a poor girl of the farms. I’ve never seen a king or an army. I’m not fitted to speak to great people or go among them. All this time I have tried to make a beginning, but I can find no ways, so nothing is done. I know that every day now we lose France, I still don’t know how to go about what is asked for me. So I do nothing. Forgive me, forgive me. I am helpless and in anguish.

• [Narrator] In Joan’s time, the France she loved had almost ceased to exist as a nation. It had become a collection of feudal states, whose lords while owing a nominal allegiance to the king, were more often his rivals. Burgundy, the most powerful among them, was allied with the English, whose armies held most of France down to the gates of Orléans. For England’s kings claim the French throne, by lawful right of descent. The kingdom of France had been reduced to a powerless remnant in the south and its government to a corrupt and bankrupt court at Chinon.

CLIP ENDS

• Okay, thanks. So I think what they show, they show the historical background and then go from the big picture of history and then straight into the personal story. What I like with Ingrid Bergman here and Victor Fleming, what they’re doing is, it’s not just the action hero, it’s not just the, I was saying the Achilles thing earlier. You know, I’m strong, I’m self-confident, I’m full of self-belief, I know. But she’s questioning with God. It’s a bit like, you know, David in the Psalms, constantly debating and arguing and doubting. She’s plagued, with, almost like Hamlet. Plagued with self-doubt. Yes, she hears these voices. God says, go and do this, but whoa, you know, can I? I’m just a peasant girl. Who am I? What will people believe, et cetera. The self-doubt and the anxiety, is so contemporary in relation to that. And I think that for me, that contrast between the huge, if you like, almost geopolitical picture and the end of feudalism and together its ally of the Catholic church and the beginning of a major change happening. Together with this very, very internal journey of the character who has self-doubt but nevertheless overcomes it to achieve so much. If we can go to the next slide, please. 12. So, these are a couple of of phrases from Joan. All battles are first one or lost in the mind. Fairly obvious that we all know today. You know, Sun Tzu, the great Chinese military philosopher, says a very similar thing.

But let’s not forget this is, the background she comes from, you know, illiterate peasant, all of that would lead to a stereotype where of seeing her, which she isn’t. One life is all we have and we live it, as we believe in living it. But to sacrifice what you are and to live without belief, that is a fate more terrible than dying. Joan of Arc. I mean the insight, the thought. Hold the cross, this is on the, this is when she’s about to be burned to the stake. Hold the cross high, so I can see it through the flames. And at the bottom right, and I think it’s a fantastic picture from the early sixties, is a wonderful, brilliant, Janet Suzman, acting in in the Henry VI play , playing Joan of Arc. Okay, so I just want to, a couple of thoughts that I want to bring in about the Shaw play. George Bernard Shaw. In 1913, he visited Orléans. He was obsessed to write a play about her and he saw the 15th century sculpture a head of a certain Saint Maurice, who was traditionally believed to have been modelled after Joan. And he wrote, Shaw wrote, it’s a wonderful face, the face of a born leader. What did he mean? What did he think? And we see in the play that St. Joan, in Shaw’s play , is really a dialogue between the ancient and the modern worlds. Obviously there’s the modern show trial. This is a show trial, sham trial in, in as I’ve shown, and you know, you seen a couple of examples in, in the movie, in the play. Based on the original show trial. And Shaw wrote, “Joan was killed by the Inquisition”. “Well the Inquisition is still with us, I do believe”. “The fanatics have not gone away, fanatics of many kinds”. That’s Shaw himself. So he’s interested in the idea of the fanatic.

Joan is a fanatic. We really think about it. You know, she sticks to it no matter what her belief, this is God talking to her. It’s not the church leaders, the bishops, the popes or anybody, it’s not even the king. Nobody. It’s God. That’s a whole different approach to religion. Fanatical one. But the fanatics on the other side, who are determined to keep the power of the church and the institution of the church, in stock so that it keeps power. 'Cause if God is telling us, then it’s not mediated through of course the church leaders. And of course he shows that, and Shaw, and I think he also shows the idea of the French state coming together and the rule of divine authority. The strong man, the strong leader, et cetera. This is Shaw writing in 1931, some of his interesting comments on the play. He almost is sensing what’s coming in the war. Well, of course you’ve seen the first world war and what the, you know, this fractured nature of aristocratic leaders and all these empires of Europe breaking up, mixing their own individual aristocratic interest with, with nationalism in the first World War. And I think in Shaw’s views, that Joan was a bit like Jesus, an agent for change. He has the bishop, the one who’s primary leading the Inquisition or the trial against Joan. The bishop, cries out, “Must then at Christ perish in torment in every age, to save those who have no imagination”. Joan tells the court, “I am God’s child and you are not fit that I should live among you”. So he shows that connection of the nuance of the fanatic. If I’m fanatical that God is speaking to me, then all you popes and religious leaders are nothing. Whether I’m a 19 year old, illiterate peasant child, doesn’t matter. Her religious fanaticism, is shown in a mixture in Shaw’s play, for me.

It’s a religious fanaticism together with individual conscience. And that’s an extraordinary, powerful position, I think for a leader, but also a source of conflict. Internal conflict. Individual conscience, allied with religious fanaticism, is such a powerful position and we see it in many leaders all over. Joan asks in the play, “What other judgement can I judge by but my own?” That’s her individual conscience, but it’s linked with God. Bernard Levine, the writer wrote, “Joan was the only woman who ever managed to swipe the smirk from Bernard Shaw’s face”. She was Joan, as the outsider. And she listens to the voice of the, she has to listen to the voice of the opinions of her day. But her own voices are timeless. They echo from God. That’s powerful. That’s Achilles on the level of that, it’s stubborn, it’s absolute conviction in faith and belief, what I’m doing is right. Lady Gregory, the fascinating Irish person, who helped so much with arts and theatre and Irish nationalism, visited Shaw in 1923. And she said, “The two people most on Shaw’s mind, were Joan of Arc and Lawrence of Arabia”. So seeing both as outsiders, both as, the one obviously a woman and the other’s a man. But you know, trying to see, understand religion, nationalism, geopolitics, et cetera. Unconventional military leaders, who are obviously brought down by the political and religious leaders of their day. That’s her opinion. And then in the play, he has another bishop say, “Mortal eyes cannot distinguish the saint from the heretic”, mortal eyes cannot, distinguish the saint from the heretic.

So who does? Who is the saint and who’s the heretic and how does it change? You know, who is seen as the evil, the terrorist, and later becomes the president of South Africa, who is seen as, we go on and we go on, In, situations. Shaw shows obviously that the judges, the priests of the church and the princes, the leaders of the world, they are ultimately the ones on trial more than Joan. And that’s a part to what I think he sees as her sainthood. It’s a sophisticated fanatic, if I can use a phrase. The even the inquisitor gives us an eloquent warning, of where the toleration of fanaticism, where if we allow fanaticism to go on, where it can lead. The inquisitor denunciates, Jones masculine dress, cutting of the hair as a fearful condemnation of change. But he is aware of where fanaticism can go, if that link to God is taken too far. But there’s also something fanatical about the inquisitors or the trial priest judges and their desire to fanatically keep power at all costs of the Catholic church. Well, you know, we may think, clothing is not so, you know, whatever and a cutting of a hair, but in Iran today, women and men, women mainly are dying, you know, for marching in the streets because they don’t want to wear, you know, a piece of cloth over their heads, or faces. I mean you know, it resonates in many places. Not only that specific item of clothing, but you know, many different things all over the world. What’s also fascinating for me about Shaw’s play is that the characters believe their intentions are good. And he writes about this in an article, Shaw, you know, it’s not that these people see themselves as evil, ever. And I’m talking about the judges, the priests, the kings, all of them, the aristocrats. They believe what they’re doing is good intention.

They don’t obviously see themselves as terrible and evil. And he’s fascinated by that kind of character that is a fanaticism of opportunism and a fanaticism of self furthering of its own. Okay, I think just one or two other quick points here, you know, that if we go back to it, she goes back to the king, who, and, convinces the king, in Shaw’s play, he makes a big point out of this, you know, and this is her for me, the trickery, the cunning. She’s able to flatter the king and convince, God has spoken, go and be the leader. She’s ridiculed, but at the same time she’s given a chance. The voices sent to command the troops. It’s a combination of flattery, negotiating, leadership, militant, the skills. All of those things are mentioned right at the beginning. The leadership qualities of a Agamemnon, of pride and stubbornness, of absolute self-belief of an Achilles, of cunning and trickery and leadership and courage of Odysseus, all in one, and she’s a woman, up against, and she’s a teenager, you know, daughter of a peasant family. It’s quite extraordinary to me. I think also we cannot ignore this conflict between the feudalism and the church rising and nationalism. All of these things play out in Shaw’s play and in the story. Here’s a fantastic speech in the play, as the trial speech, where they offer her a deal, which did happen. We won’t burn you at the stake. If you agree to recant, you know, that it wasn’t quite God who spoke to you, all the rest of it.

But you know, the church is really, you know, your allegiance. And instead of burning her at the stake, at the age of 20, we’ll imprison you for life. So she rejects that out of hand and that’s what finally leads to her being burnt at the stake. And Shaw has this beautiful speech. Forgive me, I could ever read it like a really good actress, like Janet to anybody else. But the words resonate. “You think that life”, this has been said by a teenager, 1920, “You think that life is nothing but not being dead.” “It is not the bread and water, I fear, I can live on bread.” “It is no hardship to drink water, if the water be clean, but shut me from the light of the sky, and the sight of the fields and flowers, chain my feet so that I can never again climb the hills to make me breathe foul, damp, darkness.” “Without these things I cannot live.” “And by you wanting to take them away from me or from any human creature, I know that your council is of the devil.” And now, that for me sums it up in the end. All these qualities of leadership, trickery, cunning, absolute self-belief, courage beyond imagination almost, and a certain stubbornness, which is part of her absolute greatness. TS Elliot saw the play, in 1924, Shaw’s play in London, and he was furious at the portrayal of the heroine. And this is what TS Elliott wrote, “Mr. Shaw’s, Joan of Arc, is the greatest sacrilege of all Joans”. “For instead of the saint of the legend, Mr. Shaw has turned her into a great middle class reformer, and her place is a little higher than Mrs. Pancoast, the militant leader of the British Suffragettes.” TS Elliot. Okay, I was going to go onto Shakespeare’s play, but it isn’t ready time for that, so I’ll hold it, with, with all of that. Thank you very much everybody. And I can even do some questions.

Q&A and Comments:

Dennis. I think it’s noteworthy that their wonderful song satirising Charles de Gaulle, floundered and swan of the punchline, delusions this old man thinks it’s a Joan.

Yeah, exactly. Martin.

Q: The origin of Joan of ARC’s title?

A: Oh, of the Arc title. Well there’s debate as to what her surname was, and the different names, I mean, Shaw users more the original name, and it’s either linked, 'cause there was no apostrophe at the time, either rarely for names, and very few peasants would’ve had the privilege of a surname. So it could’ve been linked to place or origin, you know, where people were born or resided, and there’s a link to possibly to, you know, one of the names, the surname anyway. Romaine, thanks.

Q: Do you see this as a cautionary tale?

A: It’s a really interesting question, Romaine, I see it as a tale of an extraordinary character, who becomes bigger and bigger in the western imagination anyway. And when it becomes myth, can be taken up by any side from the far right of Marine Le Pen in contemporary France. Absolutely she’s taken up by them, you know, in terms of nationalism and freedom of the French nation. Taken up in other western democracies and countries around the world. And yet the opposite is taken up, the fight for women’s rights. We can imagine, a Joan of Arc perhaps in Iran or elsewhere, perhaps even maybe one day in Saudi Arabia. Who knows? I don’t know. But we can also see the freedom fighter, the militant, injustice, you know, nationhood. And the martyr idea, suffer for your cause, die for your cause. There are so many elements which are archetypal I think, inside the Joan of Arc story and life, you know, that I’ve tried to tease out. And then of course some of the greater, of the nationalism and religion and individual and how sees these patterns playing out in history, again and again.

Sandy, Jean Seberg looks so very polished, not like a hardworking peasant at all. It’s a great, lovely point. Thank you. It was more the look in the eyes and the face. True. In modern times, in Judaism, who purports to be sent by God? Okay, thanks.

Thanks Marcel. Well that’s a great question. I think I’ll leave that for those who know their bible much better than me. I’m ducking out of that question, but I really don’t know it as well as others do.

Susan. Politics, reinvent the story to fit your cause. Absolutely. You know, that’s part of the political, you know, game and so on. But the knowledge of understanding it, I think for the masses instead of just, you know, singing and believing it so quickly is the trick. And for artists in how they’re going to do it in a film or in a play. I like to think Greta the 20 year old, fighting the climate change as a present Joan of Arc. Well I’m sure that she’s read about it, be very interesting, that’s fascinating to ask. To see if she has, if she knows about it. Probably.

Neville. Great to see you, hope you well.

Q: Do you agree in France, the supreme actress of her time, was Sarah Bernhardt?

A: Yes. She continued working into her seventies. Yes. Even though she had a leg amputated. Still playing Joan of Arc on stage, the openings of the curtains being slowly drawn with a single white light piercing onto the back of the actress. Yes. Sarah pivots very slowly, 'cause of her amputated leg and declaims, I’m 17, I’m a virgin. The audience erupts into huge applause. Brilliant. Neville, thank you so much. I agree entirely. You know, in the end it’s play, play. As my daughter when I took her to the first play of Scrooge when she was four and I said, it is about Scrooge. He’s a horrible guy. He’s not so nice. You might be a bit scared and you’re only four years old. She turned to me and she said, “Dad, I know that plays is all about, It’s play, play.” Chaff, chaff. It’s not real. Okay. She got it. And I think if she can get it the age of four, anybody can get it, any age, Sarah Bernhardt.

Rose. Thank you. Joan of Arc was andromorphic, that’s in with increased testosterone. Maybe to give her the physical strength, possibly. Different to Queen Esther, who had Mordecai instrumental in directives. Yes, very true. I think what some of, some people have argued that, Mordecai and the Arc Angel, Michael, whatever, but you know, it’s such a academic type of approach. Her visions could suggest psychosis, not psychopathic behaviour. Yeah, thanks Rose. And these are all fascinating interpretations for today, which we can absolutely draw on. Okay. Gail, hi and hope you’re well, in Joburg.

Q: Did Freud ever write about it or give insights about Joan of Arc?

A: It’s a fantastic question. I don’t know, I’ll have to have a look.

Q: Margaret, who were the inquisitors?

A: They were English and Burgundians. The Duke of Burgundy, who were French, who had allied themselves with the English and they were set up. Although they were brought in obviously, they were representatives of the Catholic church, together. Margaret, I never considered all the aspects of Joan. Thank you.

Q: Ron. How much of the Preminger film was taken from the Shaw play?

A: Yeah, Graham Green, as you say here, Graham Green restructured and rewrote the film script. Absolutely. And as you say, Ron, Catholic Church is a large topic in Graham Green’s writing. Absolutely. So Graham Green wrote the final script, for Otto Preminger. I think Graham Green was influenced by, but I don’t think he literally took, you know, many lines from the Shaw play. I think they tried to use from a different series of sources. But I’d have to go back and look at the screen play itself, to really to be honest, to give you an honest reply there.

Q: Great question. Michael. Have you seen the Shakespeare Globe theatre new play, I, Joan?

A: I haven’t had a chance to see it yet, so if you have, maybe if you can email or tell us about it, that’d be great. When I do, we can share it.

Q: Barbara. Was she a real figure?

A: Absolutely. I mean, those are her real dates of when she lived, 13, 14 hundreds and so on, in this whole historical period. And then the last one. I ask the question of modern day supposition, response to what I thought this thinking sort of exists today. Okay, thanks. Marcel, thank you very much.

Okay, I think those are most of the questions. So thank you very much everybody. Thank you again Emily, and hope you have a great rest of the weekend.