Multiple narrators tell he story of Charles Foster Kane's life. We see his life in a newsreel format, in Thatcher's memoirs, and as told by Bernstein, Leland, Susan Alexander, and even Raymond, the butler. What is the point of telling the story in this way? Does each narrator give a specific "spin" or have a particular bias? Does each see a distinctive aspect of Kane's personality? Is each section told in a different way, utilizing different techniques of filming (such as camera angles, deep focus, lighting, or even choice of music)? What" bang for our buck" do we get from this jigsaw narration? Is it equal to or greater than the sum of its parts?
The 1941 film, Citizen Kane, utilizes the symbolism of a jigsaw puzzle to illustrate that biographies are never complete until every piece of a person’s life is put together to fully understand who they are. The film follows the journey of a group of reporters to learn more about the life of Charles Foster Kane, an affluent businessman and the owner of the Inquirer who has passed away. As the movie progresses, the journalists find people closer and closer to Kane, giving the viewer more and more insight into who Kane was. The film contains jigsaw puzzles that are symbolic of the reporters’ journey to piece together Kane’s life. As Kane’s wife, Susan, is stuck inside of Xanadu all day, she passes her time by working on jigsaw puzzles. The jigsaw puzzles represent the reporters putting together pieces of Kane’s life so they can finally get a complete picture of who Kane was. Through a newsreel at the very beginning of the movie, the audience gets a slight overview of the life of Kane. The newsreel gives a basic description of his accomplishments, and from this perspective, his life looks pretty grand and fulfilling. However, as the film goes on, different characters in Kane’s life tell their view of who Kane was. Through each story, we gain more insight into who Kane is as a person. To Bernstein, Kane was an idol, as he kept a painting of Kane above his mantle. In Bernstein’s portion of the story, Kane does nothing immoral; in Berstein’s eyes, Kane can do no wrong. However, Susan’s depiction of Kane is entirely different. Kane is very controlling of Susan, as he will not let her out of Xanadu. In the end, he is also abusive, demonstrated when he strikes her just before she escapes. While each story comes with its own biases, due to their dispositions towards Kane, there is at least some truth in all of them. If we do not consider all facets and perspectives of one’s life, we do not truly understand them. If our biography of Kane was limited to simply the information granted in the newsreel, we would not understand any of Kane’s traits and shortcomings. One of the most integral parts of Kane’s life would be missing from the understanding of him, his longing for the return to his childhood. Only through hearing multiple perspectives and finally uncovering what Rosebud truly is, do we get a fuller picture of the life of Charles Foster Kane. Each perspective is like a puzzle piece, and Kane is the puzzle. A puzzle is not a puzzle if it is not complete—it is obscure, and we cannot fully understand it. Thompson, one of the reporters attempting to learn about Kane’s life, explains, “I don’t think any word can explain a man’s life. No, I guess Rosebud is just a piece in a jigsaw puzzle—a missing piece.” Thompson’s statement emphasizes that life stories are not complete without every last piece of the puzzle. Each part of a person’s life plays into who the person is as a whole. As Thompson is never able to find the meaning behind the word Rosebud, he is missing a puzzle piece that is integral to Kane’s life. The more pieces we get, the more we can visualize the unexpurgated image. This applies to all biographies; the more perspectives that we get, the more we can truly understand who someone is as a person.
ReplyDeleteCharles Foster Kane’s life story is told through multiple narrators in order to showcase the different aspects of his life, ranging from those who knew him well, to those who only experienced his public persona. The jigsaw narrative allows for each narrator to input their own personal bias of Kane, therefore giving the most authentic description of him. As the audience, viewing these different viewpoints helps with building the profile of Charles Foster Kane. Our understanding of him as a person starts with the beginning of the movie showing a newsreel generally highlighting his accomplishments. The movie gradually incorporates people that are closer to him and knew him personally, such as those he worked with. We see Bernstein and Leland who worked with him describe him as a man who got what he wanted. But as we get more personal, we see that Kane was actually an abusive man as evident with his second wife Susan Alexander. She tells her side of the story and how he made her sing in an opera house, and also imprisoned her in Xanadu. We also see the narrative of Raymond the butler, who was also able to witness Kane’s true personality as an abusive man. The movie uses these different narratives that range from knowing him publicly, to knowing him privately, to allow the audience to truly feel that they could understand Kane. We experienced the beginning of his life, with him being adopted by Thatcher, then him running for governor but failing, him getting a second wife after his first wife left him, and finally him building a world for himself, but not obtaining what he most wanted. The jigsaw narrative builds up the character of Kane and only through these diverse experiences of Kane do we, as the audience, truly understand Kane as a person.
ReplyDelete