#cinemania
Parthenope
A film by Paolo Sorrentino, 2024
A bewitching, unhurried and atmospheric film. Measured and calm, yet dense in content and complex in the way its main storyline is interwoven with metaphors and surreal images that heighten the subtle shades of a hidden meaning. It is impossible to say at first what this film is about. Quite a few symbolic dimensions are deftly woven into the plot. That is possible only if everything that happens has something in common. In the film, this is not the heroine, as it seems at first glance, but the question she asks: “What is anthropology?” Or, roughly speaking, “What is a human being?”
So, the director shows two main destinies: those of a brother and sister, Raimondo and Parthenope. I have defined them as two opposite vectors: towards life and towards death. Parthenope is born in the sea. Her life’s path leads from the sea into the future (Naples) and is symbolised by a gift, a golden carriage in which, like a queen, she begins her journey into the future. The only thing that clouds the celebration of life is Parthenope’s question, on the verge of despair: what is life, and what is she in it? Meanwhile, her brother Raimondo is troubled by the fact that Parthenope, with whom he is hopelessly in love, is completely free in her sorrow. This sorrow is bound up with a liberation he finds unbearable and cannot cope with. His question is: who is Parthenope to him? In the end, Raimondo commits suicide, returning to the sea and moving in the direction opposite to Parthenope’s: out of life and into the depths of the sea. At this point Raimondo’s carriage appears for the first time, at his own funeral, symbolising his final journey. The brother’s funeral coincides with the return of a cholera epidemic to the city, the signs of which were discovered immediately after his death. By returning to the sea, the brother set off a pathological process. In the element of water one is born, but one does not die. The appearance of cholera also symbolises the guilt that arose in reaction to Raimondo’s suicide. Like an epidemic, guilt infects those close to him, turning them into the living dead.
Parthenope first mentions cholera at a picnic with an ostentatiously wealthy suitor, shortly before her brother’s death. She refuses the mussels the rich man offers her and tells him that they were once the cause of the spread of cholera in Naples. But she refuses more than dinner. She refuses the man everything, unafraid of seeming impolite. She understands that this liaison runs counter to her, holds no mystery, is repellently banal and contagiously dangerous if she follows that path.
Parthenope always comes OUT of the sea, answering a call whose source is a thrilling unknown. She is driven by a question, which is, among other things, herself, and she is in no hurry to answer it. And if Parthenope knows in advance where a chain of events is leading and how it will end, she disappears. The question shapes her destiny and transforms the despair that eclipses the joy of life. Her brother Raimondo, in turn, seems to receive an answer to his question but is unable to cope with it. In utter hopelessness, he reverses the trajectory of his life, into the sea water, and the result is death, guilt and cholera. What did he understand? Two moments point to it. In one of the dialogues, Parthenope names the reason for her brother’s suicide: “he confused the trivial with the essential”, continuing her thought about young love that is worth nothing.
Parthenope seems to believe that Raimondo was a prisoner of his illusions. Later, in one of the episodes, a Catholic priest, spoken of as the devil, says that “those who know the inexpressible die young and alone”. Here the director points to Raimondo, introducing the version that he understood something truly important, implying a certain truth. Parthenope speaks of total illusion; the priest of total truth. The truth Parthenope seeks may have become accessible to her brother too early and proved deadly for him. Or perhaps total illusion, as a refusal to acknowledge a truth that had already emerged, destroyed him. What caused Raimondo’s death remains unknown. Parthenope receives the answer to her main question many years later, when she is ready for it. The knowledge of what she is had been with her since birth; she simply needed to see it.
So, the director shows two main destinies: those of a brother and sister, Raimondo and Parthenope. I have defined them as two opposite vectors: towards life and towards death. Parthenope is born in the sea. Her life’s path leads from the sea into the future (Naples) and is symbolised by a gift, a golden carriage in which, like a queen, she begins her journey into the future. The only thing that clouds the celebration of life is Parthenope’s question, on the verge of despair: what is life, and what is she in it? Meanwhile, her brother Raimondo is troubled by the fact that Parthenope, with whom he is hopelessly in love, is completely free in her sorrow. This sorrow is bound up with a liberation he finds unbearable and cannot cope with. His question is: who is Parthenope to him? In the end, Raimondo commits suicide, returning to the sea and moving in the direction opposite to Parthenope’s: out of life and into the depths of the sea. At this point Raimondo’s carriage appears for the first time, at his own funeral, symbolising his final journey. The brother’s funeral coincides with the return of a cholera epidemic to the city, the signs of which were discovered immediately after his death. By returning to the sea, the brother set off a pathological process. In the element of water one is born, but one does not die. The appearance of cholera also symbolises the guilt that arose in reaction to Raimondo’s suicide. Like an epidemic, guilt infects those close to him, turning them into the living dead.
Parthenope first mentions cholera at a picnic with an ostentatiously wealthy suitor, shortly before her brother’s death. She refuses the mussels the rich man offers her and tells him that they were once the cause of the spread of cholera in Naples. But she refuses more than dinner. She refuses the man everything, unafraid of seeming impolite. She understands that this liaison runs counter to her, holds no mystery, is repellently banal and contagiously dangerous if she follows that path.
Parthenope always comes OUT of the sea, answering a call whose source is a thrilling unknown. She is driven by a question, which is, among other things, herself, and she is in no hurry to answer it. And if Parthenope knows in advance where a chain of events is leading and how it will end, she disappears. The question shapes her destiny and transforms the despair that eclipses the joy of life. Her brother Raimondo, in turn, seems to receive an answer to his question but is unable to cope with it. In utter hopelessness, he reverses the trajectory of his life, into the sea water, and the result is death, guilt and cholera. What did he understand? Two moments point to it. In one of the dialogues, Parthenope names the reason for her brother’s suicide: “he confused the trivial with the essential”, continuing her thought about young love that is worth nothing.
Parthenope seems to believe that Raimondo was a prisoner of his illusions. Later, in one of the episodes, a Catholic priest, spoken of as the devil, says that “those who know the inexpressible die young and alone”. Here the director points to Raimondo, introducing the version that he understood something truly important, implying a certain truth. Parthenope speaks of total illusion; the priest of total truth. The truth Parthenope seeks may have become accessible to her brother too early and proved deadly for him. Or perhaps total illusion, as a refusal to acknowledge a truth that had already emerged, destroyed him. What caused Raimondo’s death remains unknown. Parthenope receives the answer to her main question many years later, when she is ready for it. The knowledge of what she is had been with her since birth; she simply needed to see it.