Essay: If the Shoe Fits, You Must Wear It
Sep. 14th, 2009 12:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
imp3ratrixTitle: If the Shoe Fits, You Must Wear It
Category: Inglourious Basterds
Word Count: 1,132
Spoilers: Yes
Summary: An insight into the Landa/von Hammersmark dynamic briefly touched upon in the movie.
So what began as a totally random fanfic, spurred on by the whimsical notion of Hans Landa and Bridget von Hammersmark in some quasi-twisted romantic setting, soon turned into a harmonious discussion between myself and ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
wickedground as to why this unlikely pairing might actually be of a favourable possibility. And so without further ado, I give you our arguments.
Let’s begin with a basic character analysis of our favourite Colonel. A sinister romantic, the man constantly hides behind a smiling facade that never drops, except when he wants it to. Two pivotal examples of this are when he confronts LaPadite about hiding Jews, and with Shosanna, after he implies he had something else to ask her. Both times, his character shifts have been calculating and deliberate. Furthermore, his charismatic and cheerful personality is abundant throughout the entire film regardless of the circumstance; whether it be giving the order and watching as his men gun-down people, investigating through the carnage brought about by the basterds, or bargaining with the Allies.
This only goes to show that Landa is a man all about control. He doesn’t allow his emotions to overrun him, and everything he does and says displays a level of meticulous planning, analysis and execution on his part. In other words, he doesn’t act in the heat of the moment, so to speak. Now this raises a rather interesting and curious predicament when it comes to his scene with von Hammersmark in the office.
Their exchange begins pretty much as expected; all smiles and games and its all Landa. Needless to say, and I know I’m not alone here, the moment he lunges forward and proceeds to physically strangle her to death was a wholly unexpected surprise that literally came out of nowhere. Clearly, the sudden and brash quality of the attack points towards an utter loss of self-control. He hasn’t taken pause to consider his actions, as he has shown to do on almost all occasions, and is rather allowing himself to get caught up in the moment. In his emotions.
Surely if his frenzied behaviour points towards anything, it’s that there is a great deal of emotion overwhelming him at that very moment. Anger, hate, and grief are just few that come to mind. These are emotions that he has not displayed towards anyone else when he is shown to be in a position of total control. And he was in control throughout that entire scene. Characteristically, he could have ordered someone to quietly take von Hammersmark away, where they would either arrest her or kill her. He could have played the evidence of her treachery down, and instead capitalise from it later on when he's deciding what course to take regarding the explosives in the cinema. Simply put, he could have done a number of things that are in his character to do so, but he didn’t. Rather, he lost himself.
This indicates something personal. For strong enough emotions such as anger to exist and inspire a case of total madness, something even more potent has to precede them. Something that would compel him to feel the way we are given to believe he does. I doubt his outburst is limited to the mere revelation of her treachery, which seems awfully trivial when compared to everything else he’s seen and dealt with. And as aforementioned, there are more practical ways to which he could deal with that. Her betrayal, then, was something entirely personal; as a crime against him as opposed to the Reich (and we all know how loyal he is).
So he proceeds to kill her, and rather physically at that. We don’t actually know if Landa has ever killed anyone before. As far as we’re told, he is the “Jew Hunter”, inspiring more thrill from the chase than the actual catch, as is evident with how he toys with everyone. He had a chance to shoot Shosanna, but he let her go (we won’t go into the physics involved in successfully firing a bullet from a Luger at that range). The Dreyfuses were killed by his men, to his apparent nonchalance and possible satisfaction. Simply, the good Colonel doesn’t like to get his hands dirty, but that is not the case with von Hammersmark.
He strangles her, which according to criminal psychology, is passion-driven and the most intimate way to kill someone. And so it is here, in the very act of killing her – the first and only person we see him kill, and that just makes it all the more personal – that we deduce that he does indeed harbour so form of affection towards her that he himself may not understand or even be aware of. Then there is the way the whole ordeal was displayed, with him on top of her the entire time as she, for a lack of a better word, wildly thrashed about beneath him. Coupled by the way he just lingered on top of her after she finally died, breathing erratic and deep, and looking all too sweaty was an obvious sexual allusion if I have ever seen one.
Next we should consider his state of mind directly following the event, which is just as pivotal, if not more so. As he’s calling the ushers, we see him for the very first time genuinely aggrieved and lacklustre. He isn’t his usual jovial self, and the tone of his voice seems to be all too drained and sombre. Even his expression as he is dialling appears grave and disconnected, which suggests the event is still lingering on his mind as opposed to being instantly dismissed.
This attitude can be seen again when he is talking with Aldo in the cafe. He is his usual cheerful self all until he’s asked about Bridget, at which point his personality shifts once again to utter severity, both in voice, body language and expression, and back again when he brings up Donowitz and Omar. In an apparent contradiction to his character, the ordeal has thus affected him in quite a significant manner. In other words, it mattered.
Then there are the little things, but which matter all the same. The way his gaze just lingered (and for quite a while) when he spotted her from the staircase. Being totally in her space when he was asking her when and where she went climbing (and his little “I tease rough” was ripe with insinuation). The near-revered attention he displayed whilst removing her shoe. And finally, that little indirect kiss he placed on the handkerchief she had signed and pecked after his face totally lit up on its discovery.
So after due consideration of all the above points, I would humbly propose that Hans Landa does indeed seem to harbour some sort of twisted affection for Bridget von Hammersmark.
Thoughts?
no subject
Date: 2009-09-13 07:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-14 01:36 pm (UTC)Really, it was a pleasure. And thank you for reading. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-09-13 07:32 pm (UTC)(and the whole shoe thing is a screwed-up Cinderella story)
no subject
Date: 2009-09-14 01:56 pm (UTC)Landa/Von Hammersmark OTP?!
Absolutely! It may have been even more fruitfully obvious if we had more back-story on them, seeing as they themselves have stated that they've known each other for a long time. Honestly, they were so made to be together. The proof is all there!
And if Fredrick/Shosanna can be classified as a potential pairing, than these two only rightly follow.
(As only fitting of a twisted romantic such as Landa, drawing parallels like that.)
no subject
Date: 2009-09-13 08:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-14 02:03 pm (UTC)And that is so good to hear, because these two seriously need more love and appreciation from shippers.
On a totally unrelated note, your Don Draper icon is ♥
no subject
Date: 2009-09-13 09:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-14 02:11 pm (UTC)And I'd love to hear your take on it all after a re-watch. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-09-14 12:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-14 02:14 pm (UTC)Well, I'm pretty much doing law at the moment, but I don't think I could ever be a lawyer. XD
A career in politics is much more appealing.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-15 04:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-15 04:12 am (UTC)(I am neither Hans nor Bridget, lol.)
no subject
Date: 2009-09-15 06:56 am (UTC)Speaking of which...
Date: 2010-01-03 06:10 pm (UTC)Now, he definitely would be pretty mad that she switched from "HANS, you embarrass me!" to "What now, COLONEL?"
Wouldn't you all agree?
Re: Speaking of which...
Date: 2010-01-06 01:55 am (UTC)Her choice of words may too be perceived as slightly mocking, but I believe Bridget was too terrified at that point, seeing as he'd exposed her treachery, to keep up with any pretences. But if Landa was truly infatuated with her, than yes, the shift may have just been the last straw as far as personal insults go, hence his lapse into madness.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-16 09:46 pm (UTC)VERY nicely done!
no subject
Date: 2009-09-17 03:47 am (UTC)I'm kind of disappointed that she didn't fall into his 'honey pot'. It could have given us so much more canon love, but I guess we have fan fiction for that sort of thing. XD
here from operation_kino
Date: 2009-09-23 04:59 pm (UTC)This essay has actually made me rethink that scene and Landa's character a bit. One first glance, his killing her like that struck me as somewhat misogynistic, but I now think that your interpretation is more accurate - that she was different to others, that her betrayal is constructed as personal rather than against the Nazi party. Yes, yes, it all fits.
The above commenter alluded to the idea of her being 'the one that got away.' Perhaps for him part of the attraction was that he had to really work as catching her, that she was never just going to fall into his hands? And now that she's betrayed him, he'll never get the chance to hunt her again?
(And I end ramble now.)
Re: here from operation_kino
Date: 2009-09-24 05:32 am (UTC)madnessfandom!I'll admit when I first saw it, I didn't know what to think. It was just so random and surprising. Later on when I actually paused to think back on it, all of his teasing leading up to the event and his demeanor following made me think there was more to it. It just seemed too pivotal and important a scene to be taken for face value; a high-ranking Nazi Colonel exacting judgment and punishment on a traitor.
If that were the case, I believe it would have been handled with more clinical detachment, as opposed to the fervent way shown to us. And so it was only fair to deduce something of the personal, particularly in Landa's case.
Definitely. Books could be written on his possible motivation and attachment in true Freud and Foucault fashion, and we'll still be left wondering. I guess that's were Landa's appeal lies; in that he is so complex we'll never truly know for a fact what he is thinking.
But I concur with your reasoning; the thrill of the hunt and the prize to be won were certainly part of his motivation.
And that's the end of my rambling. XD
Thanks for reading; I'm glad it offered you a different perspective to consider!