Zoek in de site...

Giordano Bruno: Martyr of Infinity

By Charles Ajogi

Quick Facts
Year Released 1973
Country of Production Italy
Director Guiliano Montaldo
Lead Actors/Actresses Gian Maria Volonté, Hans Christian Blech, Mathieu Carrière
Awards/Nominations 2 nominations
Runtime 1h 55 min

Introduction

"There is more to it than meets the eyes". This popular saying readily comes to mind when one takes on the task of analysing or evaluating a film or movie. This is because a lot of things go into the making of a film, and every choice (of word, action or costume) is made for a reason. One needs then to move from the surface in order to meticulously read what is not written and to hear what is not spoken in the film.

This work discusses a biographical drama produced in 1973 by Giuliano Montaldo, Giordano Bruno: Martyr of Infinity. The film narrates the story of Giordano Bruno from the moment of his return to Venice after his tour and visits to many European countries and his teaching career in some great universities, till his trial by the Inquisition and the eventual burning at the stake. The film is based on a Statue of Giordano Bruno by Ettore Ferrari, Campo de' Fiori, Romehistorical fact. There was an actual Giordano Bruno who was prosecuted and executed by the Roman Inquisition because of his teachings which were considered heretical by the Catholic Church. Even though many works and articles have been published about Giordano Bruno, this movie is not based on any particular literature by a particular author.

In this essay, I undertake a presentation, an analysis and an evaluation of Giuliano Montaldo's effort at presenting a visual discourse of Giordano Bruno's trial and execution by the Inquisition. This seeks to analyse to what extent reality is represented (or misrepresented), and the image of the Roman Inquisition portrayed therein. An effort is made to dig deep beyond that which meets the eyes.

Portrayal

Some crucial concerns that readily come to mind at this stage border on accurate representation of facts. The question for consideration is: what image of the Roman Inquisition does the film present? Efforts have been made in the past centuries to create images of life and events during the Middle Ages. Academic research and archaeological discoveries have cooperated immensely in bringing the medieval times down to us. Of all the efforts deployed in this regard, the film industry could be said to be the most powerful instrument. However, to what extent a film represents exactly the reality it claims to portray is a question of special concern. In this regard, Marc Ferro, in his book Cinema et Histoire, asks whether "a filmic writing of history exists".1

In the first instance, the film portrays the Inquisition as an institution that claims authority over all thoughts (including philosophical thoughts), and not just on matters of faith. This image stands in direct opposition to the Roman Inquisition which dealt strictly with matters of faith, and not just general ideas. Here the Inquisition is presented as an institution that forbids freedom of thought or expression. This was brought out clearly in Giordano's statement when he said (in the film) that his efforts to prove his case on grounds of philosophy (rather than theology or doctrine) proved abortive. In a world charged with science versus religion controversy, this means a lot. The film shifts the focus of the prosecution from doctrinal teachings to scientific and philosophical thoughts. This gives the image of a Church that is both authoritative and anti-scientific.

A further image of the Inquisition presented in the film is that the Church (represented by the Inquisition) uses force rather than love. In Giordano's words, it is "because the Church uses power instead of love". This leads immediately to another image of the Inquisition as a brutal institution, an institution that has little or no regard for human life; an institution (along with its allies) that places more emphasis on the defence of doctrine than that of human life. This is evident in Bruno's mention of blood several times during his trial. Even though the Church is a religious institution which professes love as its "The Trial of Giordano Bruno by the Roman Inquisition" by Ettore Ferrari, Campo de' Fiori, Romemain tenet, the image of the Roman Inquisition in the film spotlights the Church as a hypocrite, professing love and at the same time championing the course of bloodshed.

In summary, Giuliano Montaldo's Martyr of Infinity portrays the Roman Inquisition as a negative, rigid, authoritarian and anti-scientific institution. Coming from the desk of Giuliano Montaldo who is regarded as an advocate of social democracy and emancipation, it is easy to understand the contrast between the role of Giordano Bruno (as depicted in the film) and the portrayal of the Roman Inquisition as an instrument of suppression. The film is thus to a great extent replete with some historical inaccuracies. The story (as told by Montaldo) was largely modified to accommodate the science versus religion conflict, giving more credence to science.

Cultural Context

As a human product, Giuliano Montaldo's film was created at an epoch in history (in the twentieth century). It is, therefore, naturally expected that the film bears the traits of the time and space within which it was produced. The twentieth century could simply be called a century of change and invention. As scientific and technological advancements saw the light of day, people came to believe more in themselves, new ways of looking at the world emerged and the cry for freedom became louder. It is a century that gave voice to many marginalized people. Albert Einstein's theory of Relativity also influenced society and paved the way for modern thoughts.2 Montaldo's Martyr of Infinity fits well into the mentality of the epoch which sought the liberation and emancipation of the oppressed. The film could very well be regarded as a celebration of freedom from the shackles of the oppressive tradition of the past. And here, the voice of Giordano Bruno stands out as an emblem of the freedom of science in its long struggle in the science versus religion conflict.

Message

Images are a powerful means of communication. More than mere words, images leave a long-lasting impression on the memory. The viewer of the image, like in a football match between two teams, is hardly neutral. Image-makers (either as artists or film-makers) are very much aware of this fact, and they try to pass a message across to their viewers through their innovation and imagination. The spectator is usually and could easily be taken over by the actors' ingenuity. In the film industry, the directors or editors make conscious efforts to communicate their message through the choice of words, stage management, and characters chosen for specific roles. Thus, there is more to the film than meets the eyes. Since every event or action in a film has an effect on the viewer, I would like at this point to outline some of the strong messages I find in Giuliano Montaldo's film.

The debate lingers on among scholars and historians as to whether Giordano Bruno was actually murdered for his scientific convictions or for religious reasons. As Alberto Martinez puts it, the debate is "an explosive topic in the alleged conflict between Christianity and science. Scholars defuse this bomb by saying Bruno was no scientist and that the Inquisition condemned him for religious transgression, not cosmology".3 Historian Frances Yates maintains the same line in declaring that "the legend that Bruno was prosecuted as a philosophical thinker, was burned for his daring views on innumerable worlds or on the movement of the Earth, can no longer stand".4 In portraying only an aspect in his film, I feel Giuliano Montaldo took a partial position, trying to convey the sentiment that Bruno was prosecuted and executed for his scientific and philosophical beliefs. The deliberate desire to portray Bruno as a martyr of science (as the title of the film suggests) could be seen as a calculated attempt to gain support in the science versus religion debate.

Bruno is Executed at the Stake in "Giordano Bruno: Martyr of Infinity" (1973)There is another subtle but strong message to reflect on in the procession scene to the stake where Bruno was burnt. Bruno is shown walking alone ahead of others, with the inquisitors and others following in a dark and shadowy atmosphere. The effect of this depiction is that scientific discoveries and new philosophies (here represented by Bruno) now take a commanding lead in the movement towards emancipation. Bruno walks alone, yes. But it is a way of saying that liberation/emancipation does not necessarily need the crowd to succeed. Having the inquisitors and the crowd walk in a somewhat dark environment is a clear message that truth may not necessarily be on the side of the crowd; and that the reality of the emancipation from darkness to light (for which Bruno stands as a symbol) is yet to dawn on the executioners. Thus, I consider the choice of light and darkness as reflected in the film to be a deliberate choice (by the producers) with a deliberate message leading to an intended effect on the viewers.

The frequent reference to blood could also be easily associated with the Black Legend conspiracy. Why did the film producers focus clearly on this aspect while undermining other points of the interrogation? While they may have their reasons for this, I believe that one message that is hard to miss here relates to an effort to spell in bold letters that the Church and her allies were blood-thirsty. The choice of language is a very powerful instrument. Maryellen Weimer talks about the power of language to influence thought and action. According to her, "language influences thought and action. The words we use to describe things—to ourselves and others—affect how we and they think and act".5

Bruno is Gagged in "Giordano Bruno: Martyr of Infinity" (1973)In the final analysis, while being led to the stake, Bruno's mouth was gagged to prevent him from talking and cursing. In his description of the execution scene, Michael White relates that "a long metal spike was thrust through Bruno's left cheek, pinning his tongue and emerging through the right cheek. Then another spike was rammed vertically through his lips. Together, the spikes formed a cross. Great sprays of blood erupted onto his gown and splashed the faces of the brotherhood close by. Bruno spoke no more".6 But in Montaldo's film, this device never prevented Bruno from speaking freely, even from the stake. The possible effect of this scenario on the viewers is that no amount of threat or force could stop the truth from being spoken. Just as the inquisitors could not prevent Bruno from talking, so also no institution or tradition can hinder emancipation from seeing the light of day.

Conclusion

This work set out to present and evaluate Giuliano Montaldo's film. Like many twentieth-century films that attempt to bring the day-to-day life, imagery, and architecture of the Medieval and Early Modern Eras back to life, Montaldo put his intelligence and capacities into use here. He deserves some credit for his efforts at giving us a visual discourse through what Hayden White calls "historiophoty".7 Storytellers often have their motives, some set out to capture reality (though hard), but some historians (especially image makers) can consciously manipulate their presentations for particular purposes. Some of the questions that call for answers include the following: what is the film producer's intention? What message is he/she trying to communicate? Is there any historical accuracy in the film presentation? Or is history being hijacked or falsified for some purposes? What happens when history is twisted? What is the effect of presenting a one-sided view of reality? As demonstrated in this work, these questions are not meant to cast doubts on the efforts of the film producers, but rather a guide to a proper understanding of the re-written or reproduced version of history.

Footnotes

1 Marc Ferro, Cinema et Histoire (Paris: Denoel Press, 1977), 81.
2 This theory holds that the speed of light was constant but both space and time were relative to the position of the observer. A Modernist interpretation of this was extended to mean also that truth is constant, but we can approach it from different dimensions. This argues against any institutionalized claim to the monopoly of truth.
3 Alberto Martinez, "Was Giordano Bruno Burned at the Stake for Believing in Exoplanets?" Scientific American, March 19, 2018, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/was-giordano-bruno-burned-at-the-stake-for-believing-in-exoplanets/.
4 Frances Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), 355.
5 Maryellen Weimer, "The Power of Language to Influence Thought and Action," June 26, 2015, https://uocutjlt.wordpress.com/2015/06/26/the-power-of-language-to-influence-thought/.
6 Michael White, The Pope and the Heretic: The True Story of Giordano Bruno, the Man who Dared to Defy the Roman Inquisition (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2002), 181.
7 Hayden White, "Historiography and Historiophoty," The American Historical Review, 93, no.5 (December 1988): 1193-1194. Hayden White is an American Historiographer. He distinguishes between historiography and historiophoty where he noted that "one of the main sources of friction between History and Film is the problem of translating from a written discourse (hence the –graphy) to a visual one (-photy)."

Bibliography

All material from Martyr of Infinity: © Compagnia Cinematografica Champion/Les Films Concordia, 1973.