Moral Philosophy
Luis Buñuel was always and passionately against the moral double standards found in the most sacred beliefs of religious traditions and middle-class norms. His rejection was as emphatic as his embrace of the elegance of chance, the boundless power of the imagination, and his profound love for all things subversive. The misconception that Buñuel was a mere libertine or someone who used subversive comedy only to defy conventional morals is ironic and incorrect.
In truth, Buñuel was deeply committed to supplanting traditional moral frameworks with his own carefully constructed moral philosophy, one rooted in a profound understanding and appreciation of the illusory nature of chance, the asymmetrical wisdom inherent in nature, and the intrinsic normalcy of what society deems perverse. Buñuel disliked how people often view natural things as immoral or strange; he used his work to challenge and question these outdated social rules. He offered a different take on morality that accepted both natural and rebellious aspects.
Modern Critique
Decades after its release, Buñuel’s brilliantly anti-narrative film The Phantom of Liberty continues to resonate, not only by reflecting many of our contemporary obsessions and human frailties but also by transcending its initial reception as merely a Surrealist satire or comedy. The film is a politically charged manifesto that challenges and deconstructs traditional narrative forms, offering a radical critique that extends beyond the conventions of cinematic storytelling. Buñuel’s work, with its rebellious style and deep themes, seems strangely ahead of its time in looking at how terrorists and mass murderers are often glorified, a trend that’s only gotten worse in today’s media.
More significantly, the film anticipates humanity’s role in the potential destruction of the planet through our reckless and self-destructive environmental practices. By foregrounding these issues, Buñuel’s film not only critiques the absurdities of contemporary society but also serves as a prophetic warning about the dire consequences of our imbecilic and suicidal pollution of the earth, making it an enduring and profound commentary on the human condition.
Chance and Irrational
In many respects, The Phantom of Liberty feels that 21st-century audiences inspired its creation. Buñuel often relished in proclaiming that he made the film in collaboration with Karl Marx—a reference to the title’s allusion to the opening line of the Communist Manifesto. But the title also alludes to a very personal reference to a scene from Buñuel’s previous film, The Milky Way: “Free will is nothing more than a simple whim! In any circumstance, I feel that my thoughts and my will are not in my power! And my liberty is only a phantom!” This idea shows Buñuel’s belief that chance controls our lives, a theme in his films. Buñuel, alongside his long-time screenwriting collaborator Jean-Claude Carrière, sought to embody this philosophy by deliberately incorporating elements of chance into the film’s narrative structure. This strategy further strengthens the film’s relevancy and connection with modern audiences by reflecting Buñuel’s existential viewpoint and adhering to the Surrealist tradition of embracing the irrational and the unforeseen. Through this lens, the film emerges as a cinematic exploration of the illusory nature of freedom, a concept that Buñuel believed was governed not by human agency but by the capriciousness of chance, making the film a timeless reflection on the complexities of human existence.
The Phantom of Liberty is characterized by its structure as a series of loosely connected, unfinished narratives. This deliberate fragmentation reflects the innovative approach taken by Buñuel and his long-time screenwriting collaborator, Carrière, who devoted considerable time and effort to the script creation. Their deep and personal relationship was so strong that they frequently felt they could finish each other’s sentences. This mutual understanding had a significant impact on the plot of the film. Carrière, Buñuel set out to challenge the status quo of cinema by challenging conventional narrative conventions, especially the typical three-part structure of beginning, middle, and finish. This approach allowed them to break free from symmetry and linear storytelling.
Innovative Narrative Structure
In crafting The Phantom of Liberty, they intentionally incorporated elements from their dreams and daydreams, infusing the film with a surreal, almost dreamlike quality. The scenes are loosely linked, usually by a character or a common theme, but even so, the film has a clear direction. By rejecting conventional narrative structures, Buñuel and Carrière liberated it from the “baggage” typically associated with storytelling, allowing for a more fluid and dynamic exploration of ideas. Every time it looks like a scene is heading towards a usual climax, the film suddenly jumps to something new, messing with what the audience expects and highlighting its rebellious style. The film is a trailblazer in non-linear narrative forms because of its persistent disruption of narrative continuity, which questions the audience’s understanding of storytelling and represents Buñuel’s philosophical commitment to accepting life’s randomness and unpredictability.
The unique construction of The Phantom of Liberty is both a source of frustration and liberation for the viewer, as it deliberately challenges our innate desire to impose order on chaotic events. This tension is like waking up from a dream where you try to make sense of its random and scattered images, but they just don’t come together clearly. Precisely, it’s the sensation evoked by Buñuel’s film; it immerses the audience in a world governed by the illogical and unpredictable flow of dreams. The Surrealists, of whom Buñuel was a leading figure, were famously preoccupied with accessing the subconscious and rendering the phantasmagoric quality of dreams in their art. The film is one of the most successful Surrealist texts precisely because it effectively captures the enigmatic and often irrational manner in which our dreams unfold.
In the same way, the film’s plot breaks conventional storytelling norms; the dream logic eludes us with its fluidity and resistance to logical explanation. A character declares, “I am sick of symmetry,” as he whimsically rearranges objects on a mantelpiece, including a conspicuously framed spider, encapsulating this theme. This moment, quintessentially Buñuelian, invites the audience to engage actively with the film’s dream logic. It encourages us to abandon the conventional expectations of narrative coherence and instead embrace the film’s playful and surreal subconscious exploration. The Phantom of Liberty is more than a film because Buñuel forces us to face the absurdity and unpredictability of dreams and reality by upending conventional storytelling patterns. But, it’s a profound and immersive experience in Surrealist thought.
Provocative Content
Buñuel and Carrière might intentionally unsettle and challenge the viewer with their provocative content, making them appear somewhat sadistic in their approach to the spectator. But they offset this seeming harshness with generosity: they allow for interpretive flexibility, allowing each viewer to sense the confusing and bizarre events that play out on screen. The events depicted in the film are quintessentially Buñuelian, laden with themes often considered taboo or perverse. These include necrophilia, dining while expelling excrement, pedophilia, incest, sadomasochistic flagellation, foot fetishism, voyeuristic priests, and a myriad of other forbidden desires. Rather than being gratuitous, these elements carefully weave into humorous yet deeply subversive tableaux that confront societal norms and challenge the viewer’s comfort zones.
The film’s structure, with its loose narrative and reliance on dream logic, presents these themes in a way that liberates and inspires awe. The scenes are bound not by traditional narrative constraints but by the rhythm of film editing and the viewer’s imaginative engagement with the material. Buñuel and Carrière’s decision to employ such a structure is a testament to their commitment to Surrealist ideals, where the freedom of interpretation is paramount, and the boundaries between reality and the subconscious are deliberately blurred. By packing the film with a series of provocatively staged yet darkly comedic scenarios, they invite the audience to explore the complexities of human desire, morality, and the often contradictory nature of societal taboos. In doing so, The Phantom of Liberty becomes more than just a film; it is an open-ended exploration of the human psyche, offering a liberating experience that challenges viewers to confront and question their perceptions of reality and morality.
One of the insightful lessons imparted by The Phantom of Liberty is that notions of perversion are often products of our minds rather than inherent qualities of the objects or actions themselves. The film begins with a scene set during the Napoleonic Wars, where Spanish rebels vociferously proclaim their desire to remain in chains—”long live chains!”—a provocative statement that sets the tone for the film’s subversive exploration of freedom and societal norms. The story then suddenly jumps to a modern park in Paris, where a man distributing postcards to young girls appears to be a pedophile. The ensuing reaction from the parents at home, who are initially shocked by the seemingly pornographic nature of the postcards, highlights a disconnect between their assumptions and the actual content of the postcards, which turn out to be innocuous images of France.
This scene, while humorous, serves a purpose by scrutinizing the definitions of prurience and immorality, as well as the societal constructs that enforce these definitions. The Mother, who is sexually aroused by what are ultimately ordinary postcards, embodies this irony. Her reaction underscores the film’s critique of how subjective and culturally constructed our perceptions of what is considered immoral or perverse can be. Buñuel and Carrière put us immediately in the line of moral judgment by making the audience respond reflexively to the man and his supposedly obscene postcards. This self-reflexive approach forces us to confront and question our preconceived notions about morality and examine how much they shaped societal norms rather than objective truths. The film challenges viewers to critically consider moral judgments and how society and personal ideas of perversion create and maintain themselves through this prism.
As Buñuel explained to José de la Colina and Tomás Pérez Turrent, each episode in The Phantom of Liberty transitions seamlessly into the next, functioning metaphorically as if each segment were opening “like a door” into a new, distinct world. A scene at a hotel exemplifies this narrative fluidity as a group of Carmelite monks engages in an unconventional poker game using holy relics. Simultaneously, a young man arrives at the hotel with his older aunt, intending to engage in an incestuous affair. As the scene moves toward its romantic consummation, an unexpected turn of events happens: the older woman undresses. When someone pushes the sheet away, the scene reveals her body as that of a much younger woman.
Buñuel suggested that the interpretation of this scene is open to the viewer’s perspective. One might interpret that the young lover perceives the woman’s body as younger, or perhaps the woman envisions her body as youthful in her imagination. Alternatively, you could interpret that the woman genuinely possesses a youthful physique. Buñuel also noted that many older women retain remarkably beautiful, “surprisingly firm and well-formed” bodies, which could be a deliberate commentary on ageism. Buñuel may have societal attitudes towards aging and the often unfair judgments about older women’s bodies. By subverting expectations and presenting an alternative, more nuanced view of physicality and desirability, Buñuel invites viewers to reconsider their assumptions about aging and beauty. This approach reflects his broader critique of societal norms and the arbitrary nature of the conventions that govern perceptions of morality and attractiveness.
Although he made it clear that he had never seen his mom in her underwear, Buñuel described how, in her later years, she exuded a youthful vibrancy that demanded attention. This anecdote underscores how he explores portraying taboo sexuality as both natural and innocuous. In The Phantom of Liberty, the depiction of taboo subjects, such as incest, is approached with a level of detachment and irony that subverts traditional moral judgments. The scene in which the older woman’s body transforms into that of a younger woman can be interpreted in multiple ways, including as a form of sexual play or as a pun, complicating the narrative of familial relationships.
Buñuel even entertains the possibility that “an erotic miracle occurs” with the appearance of the youthful body, suggesting that this transformation may evoke a profound, if unexpected, sense of eroticism. This narrative choice is particularly intriguing as Buñuel frames the story predominantly from the older woman’s perspective, paralleling his approach in Belle de jour. In both films, Buñuel shifts the focus towards the experiences and perceptions of older women, challenging conventional representations of sexuality and age. By doing this, he shakes up the usual views on aging and gives a more detailed look at the complexities of being a woman. This perspective aligns with Buñuel’s broader thematic preoccupations with the subversion of societal norms and the exploration of the often unacknowledged dimensions of human sexuality.
In another scene set in a hotel room, a dominatrix whips a man wearing bottomless pants, once again positioning the female as the dominant force in the sexual dynamic. The man’s disappointment arises when the guests, either out of disgust or politeness, choose to leave the scene. His evident annoyance highlights his need to and reveals a more nuanced side of his sexual inclinations. This scene exemplifies Buñuel’s fascination with exploring a diverse range of fetishes and sexual behaviors, highlighting his interest in the complexities and nuances of human sexuality.
Despite Buñuel’s frequent examination of unconventional sexual themes in his work, he maintained a remarkably conventional personal life. Throughout his long marriage, he maintained near-total fidelity, suggesting that his sexual fetishes largely remained confined to his imagination and cinematic creations. Buñuel’s interest in dressing up as a priest or a nun, often seen in his films, can be interpreted as a manifestation of his artistic engagement with taboo and subversive elements. But he is moral on multiple occasions, implying a complicated relationship between his outward creative provocations and his private commitment to ethical values. This duality reflects Buñuel’s broader thematic exploration of the tension between societal norms and personal beliefs and his ability to navigate and interrogate the boundaries between artistic expression and personal conduct.
Environmental Issues
The film has shocking moments, but the dinner party scene—where guests go into another room to eat while sitting in the toilets and going to the bathroom—is one of the most famous. Buñuel presents a provocative study on morality and social conventions by comparing private meals and public excrement. Buñuel challenges us to interrogate why we often find eating socially acceptable while considering it more distasteful than public defecation. A historical anecdote underscores his point: during wartime, soldiers initially felt profound disgust at the prospect of being in such proximity to one another while defecating. However, this discomfort quickly dissipated, and the act became normalized, illustrating how perceptions of what is considered natural or acceptable can shift over time.
Through sequences like these, The Phantom of Liberty challenges us to examine and question the moral standards for granted. It also makes us reevaluate what we assume to be “natural.” By placing seemingly incongruous elements—such as public defecation and private dining—side by side, Buñuel invites viewers to reflect on the arbitrary nature of social norms and the fluidity of moral judgments. The film challenges accepted ideas of appropriateness and promotes a closer look at how societal norms are created and changed in response to shifting circumstances.
What renders the dinner party scene in The Phantom of Liberty particularly relevant and modern is its implicit commentary on environmental issues, particularly in light of contemporary concerns regarding the pollution of waterways by human waste. Recent reports have highlighted how pharmaceuticals excreted through urine are contaminating aquatic environments, leading to the phenomenon of fish being born with multiple genders. Buñuel’s scene, where guests in formal attire sit on toilets while discussing environmental destruction, is not merely a humorous juxtaposition but a deliberate critique of humanity’s impact on nature.
The conversation among the characters about the massive destruction of the earth underscores Buñuel’s use of the scene to address pressing environmental concerns. It reflects his broader critique of human activities that contribute to ecological degradation. In an interview with Colina and Turrent, Buñuel expresses profound disapproval of the irrational destruction of nature, likening it to a form of collective suicide. He has a feeling of urgency and hopelessness about how humanity keeps creating all sorts of waste—body waste, industrial stuff, and atomic waste—that poisons the planet’s air, water, and soil. His critique resonates with contemporary environmental discourse, positioning Buñuel as an early voice in the eco-critical movement. By framing these issues within the context of his film, Buñuel provides a prescient commentary on the destructive tendencies of human behavior towards the natural world, reflecting a concern that remains deeply relevant in today’s discussions on environmental sustainability.
Within the moral paradigm developed by Buñuel, animals seem to have more innate wisdom than humans. The final scene of The Phantom of Liberty poignantly reflects this perspective by concluding with the unsettling and surreal image of an emu staring directly at the audience. Accompanied by the ominous sounds of tolling bells, gunshots, and the distant clamor of human conflict and destruction, the scene is visually and audibly disorienting. Many critics may find this final shot perplexing or enigmatic, but Buñuel likely intended it as a deliberate statement. The emu’s direct stare at the observer makes human behavior look absurd and harmful: the connection between people and animals.
Buñuel himself regarded this shot as “the best in the film,” suggesting that he felt a profound significance in concluding his work with the gaze of an innocent animal. This choice underscores his intent to juxtapose the innocence and perceived animal moral clarity with the backdrop of human violence and turmoil. With this framing of the film’s ending, Buñuel positions himself as an early proponent of environmentalism while criticizing humanity’s irrational and self-destructive tendencies. His depiction of human foolishness and environmental deterioration reflects a more comprehensive knowledge of human nature’s inherent defects and our potential to cause pollution. This last scene pushes against traditional moral and story norms; it shows Buñuel’s idea of tackling environmental issues as hot-button topics in the global conversation. In doing so, Buñuel reveals his deep concern for the impact of human actions on the natural world, reinforcing his status as a pioneering figure in both cinematic innovation and environmental critique.
Buñuel demonstrates remarkable prescience in his critique of the postmodern world, particularly by highlighting the illogic in our media landscape, where graphic depictions of mass shootings and terrorist acts inundate us and where perpetrators of such violence often achieve celebrity status. Buñuel expressed deep dismay at the phenomenon of turning mass murderers into public figures; it’s a concern that reflects his broader critique of societal values and media practices.
In The Phantom of Liberty, Buñuel employs humor and subversive tactics, which may lead some viewers to perceive the film primarily as a source of light-hearted satire. This view, nevertheless, runs the risk of ignoring the movie’s most pressing and severe criticisms. In addition to providing entertainment, Buñuel’s mixture of surrealism and dark comedy highlights his strong distaste for violence sensationalized and trivialized in contemporary culture. By juxtaposing humor with grim realities, Buñuel highlights the absurdity of societal responses to violence and the perverse nature of media culture that celebrates infamy over accountability.
Buñuel’s critique also digs into environmental issues with the same sharpness and determination as his take on violence and crime. His repeated ecological concerns throughout the film reveal a distrust of humanity’s ability to confront and stop environmental devastation. Buñuel’s approach to these themes is not merely an artistic exercise but a commentary on the failures of contemporary society to address its most pressing issues. In integrating humor with critique, Buñuel crafts a multifaceted exploration of modern malaise, using his film to challenge viewers to reconsider their complicity in these systemic problems and reflect on their cultural practices’ ethical and environmental implications.
In a notable sequence from The Phantom of Liberty, a poet transitions into a random assassin, killing several people without any discernible motive. This narrative element presciently foreshadows the regular occurrences of mass murders and terrorist attacks that have become distressingly commonplace in contemporary society. The sequence captures the senselessness of such violence and critiques the societal responses to these acts. The poet-turned-assassin receives a death sentence but paradoxically transforms into a celebrity, with people clamoring for his autograph. This ironic twist underscores the perverse nature of how society often glorifies individuals who commit heinous acts.
The subsequent development, where the poet is released instead of remaining incarcerated, further satirizes the absurdity and futility of the death penalty. Buñuel uses this scenario to subtly critique the notion of capital punishment by suggesting that, on a more existential level, everyone is already given a “death sentence” simply by their mortality. This perspective serves as a reminder of the inherent absurdity in the legal and societal mechanisms designed to address or punish violence.
Critique of Contemporary Society
Buñuel articulates his concern about the glorification of mass murderers in his conversations with Colina and Turrent, where he expresses genuine disturbance over the media’s tendency to sensationalize such individuals. Buñuel lamented that he would censor these stories to prevent their proliferation in the media if he had the power. However, he recognized the inherent impossibility of such censorship, acknowledging the challenges of curbing media sensationalism in a society that continually feeds on and perpetuates such narratives. Through these critiques, Buñuel highlights the absurdities and failings of societal responses to violence. He reflects on his anxieties about media practices and the ethical implications of public fascination with infamy.
Buñuel’s personal value system featured quixotic idealism and surprising contradictions. His work reflects a complex relationship with humanity; he often expressed a profound disdain for human nature, and his perspective could simultaneously be detached amusement akin to observing an insect. As a prominent figure in surrealism, Buñuel is rightfully associated with themes of subversion, rebellion, and critique, frequently challenging established norms and conventions. Yet, his work also reveals a deep reservoir of empathy for individuals and the human condition.
One of the most endearing and humorous episodes in The Phantom of Liberty encapsulates this empathy through the portrayal of an ordinary, seemingly trivial experience that resonates universally: the phenomenon of failing to see something that is literally in front of one’s eyes. This sequence highlights Buñuel’s ability to infuse ordinary, everyday moments with a sense of humor and relatability. By focusing on such a mundane yet universally experienced situation, Buñuel invites viewers to engage with his film personally, recognizing inherent absurdities and minor frustrations.
This scene demonstrates Buñuel’s complex understanding of human nature. His films frequently address existential and societal absurdities and acknowledge the experiences and frailties that characterize human existence. Buñuel’s capacity to balance subversive critique with moments of gentle humor and empathy underscores the complexity of his artistic vision and his multifaceted engagement with the human experience.
Buñuel regarded the mundane phenomenon of failing to see something directly in front of one’s eyes as profoundly humorous and fundamentally human. This episode in The Phantom of Liberty illustrates his perspective through a sequence involving a middle-class couple convinced their young daughter has gone missing, even though she is visibly present with them throughout their search. The couple’s escalating anxiety and the subsequent interrogation of the little girl at the police station further emphasize the absurdity of the situation. Buñuel’s use of this scenario highlights the disjunction between perception and reality, a theme that resonates with the broader existential concerns explored in his work.
Buñuel drew a parallel between this phenomenon and his experience of frequently misplacing his lighter despite it being in plain sight. He likened this common lapse in perception to the broader, more profound issue of humanity’s inability to recognize and address its environmental destruction. By doing so, Buñuel underscores the absurdity of human behavior and the tendency towards ignorance or denial in the face of glaring problems.
Gaze of the Emu
Buñuel’s fascination with life’s inherent absurdities reflects his broader interest in chance and surrealism. Such commonplace follies fed his creative imagination, which he saw as abundant sources of inspiration. Through his films, Buñuel sought to capture the randomness and irrationality of human existence, using these elements to challenge conventional narratives and provoke reflection on the nature of reality and human behavior. This approach underscores his commitment to Surrealist principles and demonstrates his enduring engagement with the whimsical and often irrational aspects.
Buñuel brings up everything from everyday stuff to taboo subjects. By doing so, he grants audiences the freedom to derive their meanings from the narratives he crafts. This approach allows for a participatory experience where the viewer’s imagination plays a crucial role in constructing the significance of the film’s content. Buñuel’s method is characterized by a blend of playful subversion, provocative elements, and socio-political commentary, reflecting his unique capacity to challenge conventional storytelling norms.
Personal Values
Using his subversive wit and the interplay of chance and choice, Buñuel achieves a level of narrative intricacy and impact that many other storytellers cannot match, which sets his artistic vision apart. His films are not merely exercises in artistic expression but serve as vehicles for exploring philosophical questions about freedom, reality, and human nature. Buñuel highlights the possibility of chance and imagination as doors to individual and group liberation.
In his autobiographical work My Last Sigh, Buñuel articulates this philosophy by asserting that “somewhere between chance and mystery lies imagination, the only thing that protects our freedom, even though people keep trying to reduce it or kill it off altogether.” This statement encapsulates Buñuel’s belief that imagination is a vital force that safeguards human freedom, even in the face of societal pressures to conform or suppress individual creativity.
Ultimately, The Phantom of Liberty embodies this philosophical perspective, functioning as a testament to Buñuel’s commitment to exploring the boundaries of narrative freedom and the role of imagination in safeguarding personal autonomy. The film reflects his broader artistic endeavor to challenge conventional storytelling limitations and to engage audiences in a meaningful dialogue about the nature of freedom and the power of the imagination.
Bibliography
- Bazin, A. (1967). What is Cinema? (H. Gray, Trans.). University of California Press.
- Bell-Villada, G. H. (2007). The inventions and reinventions of Mario Vargas Llosa. Salmagundi, (153/154), 148–167. Retrieved from JSTOR.
- Buñuel, L. (1983). My Last Sigh (A. Israel, Trans.). Alfred A. Knopf.
- Buñuel, L. (Director). (1974). The Phantom of Liberty. Les Films du Losange.
- Francis, C. (2006). Slashing the Complacent Eye: Luis Buñuel and the Cinema of the Surrealist Documentary (Master’s thesis). Rhode Island College.
- Maunsel, J. B. (2014). Susan Sontag. Reaktion Books Ltd.
- Pérez Turrent, T., & de la Colina, J. (1993). Buñuel por Buñuel. Plot.
- Preston, A. (2021). “I was Buñuel’s double”: Jean-Claude Carrière at home. Sight and Sound. Watch and discover.