Vivre sa vie, A Depressing Look at Poverty through the Lens of a Woman within a man’s world.
A Look into the Godard’s 1962 diamond of the New Wave; ‘Vivre sa vie.’
Jean-Luc Godard is a name synonymous with the revolution of cinema. His Choppy edits and handheld camera style became a French New Wave staple. Godard famously said his film scripts were unconventional, often amounting to a few brief sentences on a page, then allowing the actors to run with what he had written. The University of Manchester’s Darren Waldron stated that Godard’s edits were “often innovative,” and “almost anarchic.” Godard shows this through much of his work from Breathless to Le Mépris. Godard also took no issue with moving away from traditional filmmaking tradition, often trimming out scenes that had little contribution towards the plot of a film, whereas other filmmakers may take issue with such an action as disrupting the natural flow of the film. Vivre sa vie is Godard’s’ third full-length feature film and seventh overall work including short films. The film sees Godard once more team up with Raoul Coutard to create a film that would become one of the most influential films of the French New Wave.
Vivre sa vie opens with a side profile shot of our protagonist, Nana (Played by Godard’s lover and future wife, Anna Karina) accompanied by Michel LeGrand’s theme for the film. The music abruptly cuts out until Coutard cuts to a new shot now viewing the front of Nana, she looks morose, almost defeated before the film has even begun. We then shown the final shot of Karina, which is yet another side profile, this is the first indicator of how Godard intends to use the camera throughout the film. Godard stated on the film’s camera that it “was made by a sort of second presence.” In the following scene, this aspect continues with a side-by-side shot from behind Nana and a man named Paul. The camera travels back and forth as though it is inspecting the couple curiously. Much of the cinematography Godard uses in this film is as if the camera is a fellow onlooker, inspecting the scene, and trying to learn more about Nana, just as we the viewers are.
Vivre sa vie’s structure resembles an old novel, across twelve sections, serving as a chapter. Each chapter’s title indicates what we are to see, whilst also raising questions. Chapter 4’s title: ‘The Police — Nana is Questioned.’ The title tells us what we are about to see, but also tells us nothing about the circumstances leading up to what has happened. Chapter 1 mentions “Paul” but who is Paul?
We learn in the opening scene that Nana is speaking to her husband who she has abandoned with their child to pursue a career in the silver screen. Nana here falls into the age-old stereotype of pursuing the Hollywood dream, becoming a star, and alleviating all her problems. To this day, many still fall for this trap. This notion is that by moving to Hollywood and pursuing acting, you can make it big. Often, however, like Nana, this dream remains precisely that, a dream. These dreams and ambitions that the young have in the movies serve as a breeding ground for exploitation, with predatory men in positions of power primed to take advantage. From this opening scene, we see how convinced Nana is of her abilities as well as her priorities, Paul talks about their son to which Nana seems indifferent, instead repeating the sentences she has said to work on her acting delivery. This also serves as a subversion of the traditional gender roles. Often through media, Men are the ones who abandon their families in pursuit of their own goals, here however it is Nana. Later in the film we meet Nana’s friend Yvette who tells her about how her husband Raymond abandoned her in Brest, eventually, Yvette sees Raymond two years later starring in an American Movie. This story only serves to feed Nana’s belief in her prospects of becoming famous. Her attention here is on Raymond, whilst neglecting the pain inflicted on Yvette following Raymond’s abandonment of her and her children.
Throughout the first four chapters, Nana’s destitution is front and centre of our attention. In chapter one, following their conversation Nana asks Paul for two thousand Francs, in chapter 2 we see Nana working in a record shop asking her colleague for two thousand francs. In chapter 3 “Concierge” an overhead shot of a Parisian courtyard shows two children dancing. The camera within this scene almost gives the feel of an onlooker, the viewer is in their window looking down upon the scene unfolding. Nana sneaks into the courtyard to steal the key to her flat from the concierge, The concierge spots her and forcefully removes her from the premises. Following this event Nana goes to the cinema with a man to watch Dreyer’s ‘Passion of Joan of Arc.’ The scene unfolds as we witness Joan of Arc learning her fate that she will be Burned at the Stake. The camera cuts between Joan (Played by Renée Falconetti) and Nana, representing the parallels between the two. The scene acts as a montage of both character’s emotions. Within the scene Godard mimics Dreyer’s famous close-up shots with Karina, to parallel those in The Passion. The death sentence issued for Joan prompts Godard to seemingly condemn Nana to her death. Prostitution in Vivre sa vie acts as a metaphor for women, With Nana being the embodiment of struggles faced by women. Like Joan, Nana’s fate is sealed before the film begins, as she too is guilty of the crime that she is female. Following her date, she meets with a journalist who wishes to take photographs of her, a clear exploitation of Nana for personal gain. He promises her that he knows people and can get her into films, not only does this show the way men manipulate women for their gain, but it sheds a light on the manipulation used against those who are destitute. As evidenced from the prior chapters it is clear Nana is in financial ruin and desperate, the journalist sees this and takes advantage. The foundations laid regarding Nana’s destitution culminate in Chapter 4 where for stealing money from women, Nana is arrested. Nana however claims the money was ‘dropped.’ Whilst we see no evidence on screen to dispute this, the prior chapters show the desperation of Nana, guiding us to believe she is guilty. The police officer before releasing her asks if she has family, a boyfriend, or at least somewhere to go. This digging from the officer puts on display once again her desperation, and asks the viewer, what would you do? Stealing is wrong, but in a position of abject poverty, with nowhere to turn, who could say they would act differently with absolute certainty?
Nana’s descent into prostitution begins in chapter 5 as she walks the boulevards and a man approaches to solicit her, to which she agrees. Upon entering the room, we see close-ups of Karina, who is elegantly dressed and could not look further from your stereotypical prostitute. The man hands her five thousand francs whilst she only asks for four. The man is unbothered by her not having change and lets her keep it, once again putting into effect the dichotomy between men and women, poor and rich. We have seen the lengths Nana has gone to for two thousand francs, only for this man to hand over five thousand like it is nothing. The camera pans from Nana to a bar of soap on the counter, causing a moment of realisation in Nana about what she is about to do. What follows is an uncomfortable scene where the man tries to kiss an uncomfortable Nana as she twists and squirms to evade the kisses. Despite her reluctance however the male continues, emphasising how little men think of these women. In their eyes, they merely exist to serve them, with little to no thought of how they feel.
Within the next chapter, Nana runs into her old friend Yvette. As previously mentioned, Yvette tells Nana of her husband’s (Raymond’s) abandonment and his subsequent rise to Hollywood stardom. This acts almost as a parallel to Nana, in her ideal scenario she abandons Paul and their child to become famous in the movies, where she has failed, Raymond has succeeded, once again presenting evidence of the challenges faced by women, where the male abandons his family and is rewarded, the female abandons her family and is left with nothing. Nana follows this story with a speech about the freedom that humans have, claiming “I raise my hand, I am responsible, I am unhappy, I am responsible.” Amongst other indicators of freedom. This is an existentialist view of life, Nana believes that she has free will to do as she pleases. She takes a very Proustian approach to beauty stating that everything is beautiful, and all one needs to do to see this beauty is take an interest in things. Nana’s resilience is tested within the first four chapters. She has lived a life thus far that many would struggle to live, and one that would defeat many, yet she remains optimistic seeing the beauty in life, she continues to state, “A face is a face. Plates are plates. Men are men. And life… is life.” This black-and-white view of life can lead to problems, instead of questioning why things are as they are, Nana believes that is just how things are, and there is nothing to change this. Who can blame her, however? Within a position such as hers, this can often be the case, she is powerless to change her circumstances. It is almost natural to cut your losses and accept that this is how things are.
The camera pans towards the Jukebox where Jean Ferrat’s Ma Môme begins to play, selected by the singer himself. We then return to Karina who lets out a smile almost breaking the fourth wall and showing us how Godard views her as his “Môme.” The camera pans to a couple enjoying their time together, then back to Nana whose mood swiftly becomes dampened upon seeing the couple, indicating that this is the life that she desires, she is just not aware yet. The audience is then introduced to the character of Raoul, a pimp who recruits Nana, once more stripping her of what little autonomy she already has, ironically occurring in the same chapter that she discusses how she is free to determine her actions. Before Raoul formally meets Nana, he asks Yvette whether Nana is a “Lady” or a “Tramp.” Giving a clear indication already of Raoul’s attitude towards women, the irony here is without women Raoul has no business, he objectifies and demeans women even though they are his sole source of income. Raoul approaches and insults Nana calling her hair stupid, Nana laughs this off proving in Raoul’s eyes that she is a Lady as opposed to a tramp, presumably if she responded more coldly, or insulted Raoul back, she would be a tramp. Raoul’s test acts as a means of gauging how subservient a woman will be, whilst also testing their resilience. The camera jump cuts to outside where a man is violently shot in daylight, he then runs into the café covered in blood, foreshadowing the danger Nana is in for entering business with Raoul.
Nana receives word of a woman she can work for, escaping Raoul’s grasp. Seeing this letter for himself, however, Raoul persuades her to stay, he manipulates her, making her feel special to keep her around. The scene is filmed from behind showing us how Raoul is blocking her in both a Physical and mental sense. He claims that he can make her more money than whoever Yvette directed her towards, once again manipulating Nana, putting on display male dominance, and continuing to strip away at Nana’s autonomy.
What unfolds next is Raoul’s explanation to Nana of the roles and responsibilities of a prostitute, he knows the industry inside and out. He also shows his power in the business and dictates the prices Nana charges, again stripping her freedoms. Behind is a montage of Nana meeting with multiple clients. The montage-like nature in the way these meetings display an automation of the process has become second nature when contrasting this to Nana’s first act of prostitution where she was physically repulsed. It now comes as a robotic procedure to her.
Nana gets some time outside of work which again she spends with Raoul, he brings her to visit his accomplice, Luigi. Upon entering Nana orders a wine that Raoul must pay for and proceeds not to drink it, her way of getting some power back in her life at least, however small. We then get a tracking shot of Nana as she flirts with a man playing pool, again to gain some power over Raoul, and even make him jealous. Luigi to distract Nana and get her to stop acting up, begins to do an impression of a child blowing up a balloon, this further demonstrates the contempt shown for women, Luigi acts as a child’s entertainer, infantilising Nana, as if she is having a tantrum, and needs distracting. Nana heads for the jukebox where we get a shot that follows Nana around the room until we get a first-person point of view from Nana looking at Luigi and Raoul who continue to look upon her with shame and contempt. Nana here is performing for men once more, but the men grow ever disinterested in her. This disinterest continues into the next scene where a client called Dimitri sends Nana to find another woman, implying a Ménage á trois. However, once the new woman enters Dimitri no longer needs Nana, and she sits at the window, brushing off her rejection with a cigarette, these women are disposable to men, if they do not like what they see they can just move on to the next at their discretion, juxtaposed to the women however who are forced to accept what comes their way, or face the repercussions of Raoul or destitution.
Chapter 11 is the most interesting chapter within the film, as it has Nana reflecting upon her own life in a deeper sense than we have seen before. In a café one day Nana sits down and tries to attract the attention of an elderly gentleman, this gentleman turns out to be a philosopher. The Philosopher is portrayed by real-life Philosopher and keen linguist, Brice Parain, a philosopher whose work ranged from Communism and surrealism to existentialism. Upon sitting down with the philosopher, they begin a fascinating philosophical dialogue. Upon sitting down Nana informs the philosopher of the recent issue she is having. She cannot find the words to express her emotions, she knows inside how she feels, and what she wants to say, but does not know the words to express herself. In response to hearing this, the philosopher, familiar with this phenomenon goes on to reference ‘Porthos’ a character from The Three Musketeers and Twenty Years Later. He tells the story of how Porthos a man who has never had a thought in his life has the job of placing a bomb in a cellar. Upon lighting the bomb’s fuse and turning to escape, he has the first thought of his life about how it is possible to put one foot in front of the other. He freezes and the cellar eventually collapses killing him. Porthos only thought kills him. Parain here serves as a warning, that thinking, when one has not done so before can prove dangerous, as with Porthos he became conscious of the consequences of his actions, leading to his demise.
The conversation continues, with Nana questioning the philosopher on why we must always talk, she believes we should often keep quiet, living in silence. Parain responds by questioning Nana on whether one can do that. It is a nice concept but one Parain believes impossible because as words can betray us in what we wish to say, humans are in the habit of betraying words too. There are no ways to think except with Words the Philosopher continues by stating “We must think, and for thought we need words. There is no other way to think. To communicate, one must speak. That is our life.” Nana believes that this, however, is difficult, and she believes life should be easy. The dialogue continues further and develops with the general premise being that of language. The concept of language as discussed here is a social contract among the people, we as humans have mutually agreed upon speaking as a means of communication. For us as humans to function within a society, we must engage in a back and forth, from “silence to words” as Parain states. Our conversations swing in this way as it is necessary to function within a society. For Parain speaking is life, as to think, we need words, as there is no other way to think. For a fulfilling happy life, one must communicate, even if this is in the form of writing. The camera within this scene follows Nana and Parain as if it too is listening in on the conversation as if we the audience are at the table.
The final part of the conversation revolves around the relationship between words and honesty, and that to express oneself, one must see life with detachment. If words and thoughts work in harmony alongside one another, why is it that we feel lost for words or struggle to verbalise our thoughts? Parain admits that speaking comes naturally with lies and errors and that we as humans must consciously try to get across the truth. Even if what we say is incorrect, there is truth within what we say due to the thought that sits behind it. Nana’s concern with living authentically draws in existentialist ideas stemming from Jean-Paul Sartre. Looking at Sartre’s ideas on existential freedom we can conclude that to live an authentic life, one must distance oneself from one’s own life enough that one becomes aware of the choices that they are making the only way to arrive at truth, is through detachment. This conversation with Nana serves as an awakening and develops her character into what we see in the twelfth and final chapters.
The scene opens with Nana in a room with a young man. This encounter differs however as this is not a client, Nana has a genuine connection to the male. The young man sits in bed reading Edgar Allen Poe’s ‘The Oval Portrait.’ The voice reading the poem however is not from the young man but Godard himself, which adds an extra meaning to its use within the scene. Not only is this a young man reading to Nana, but Godard himself reading a poem to his lover Anna Karina. The Oval Portrait follows the story of a narrator as he paints his wife as she sits posing for the painting. Upon completion of his work, he steps back to look at his work with considerable pride. One looks to his wife however, she is deceased. The poem is a beautiful poem about how art is everlasting, yet love is finite, Mortal and does not last forever. The Oval Portrait resembles the works of Godard in the sense he tries to capture life as vividly as possible. Making a concise effort to display the realities of being human.
Nana is in a noticeably changed frame of mind, she is happy, getting ready and putting on make-up as he continues to read. She informs her lover that she wishes to go to the love, but he does not. She tells him that Art and beauty are life as they hug. She tells him he adores her and that she will tell Raoul it is over between them. This newfound passion for life we find within Nana stems from her conversation with the Parain in the previous chapter. For the first time in the film, we see Nana have an honest and authentic interaction with another person. Sadly, for Nana, however, Happiness is not destined for her, as foreshadowed by the trial and death of Joan of Arc, and the Death of the painter’s wife in ‘The Oval Portrait.’ Nana is destined for a preordained fate.
The camera leaves Nana’s last scene of happiness to meet up once more with her and Raoul again. We see Raoul and Nana arguing in the courtyard where her landlord forced her away in a previous chapter, again he is still there. Henchmen force Nana into a car with more men and drive off. The next shot is from a point of view sitting in the car at the Louvre Museum. Nana says in the very same scene she wishes to go to the Louvre, where she now is at the Louvre, but forcefully, and unable to go inside. The car parks and we arrive at a location where Raoul has arranged the sale of Nana to another man. Once more Nana’s Autonomy is torn from her by the men in her life. Even more painfully so this time given she was beginning to envisage a new life with her lover, away from the suffering she has faced daily. The man purchasing Nana is trying to defraud Raoul who quickly notices one hundred thousand francs are missing. Raoul grabs Nana as he looks down the barrel of a gun, once again showing how expendable Nana is to him. The man fires as Nana begs for her life, The gun is empty. He turns to his accomplice and orders him to shoot. Without hesitation, Nana is shot without a second thought, the men purchasing Nana are equally as uninterested in her life as Raoul. Nana scrambles back to Raoul’s car only for him to turn and shoot her too to retaliate against the other criminals. Nana falls to the floor as Raoul drives off. The fact he drives off and is initially more concerned over the missing money that Nana further drills home the attitude towards women that men have throughout the film. To Raoul and the other criminals, she is merely a commodity and one that is replaceable. The scene concludes with the camera already fairly zoomed out panning down slightly with Nana’s lifeless body in the shot. This is purposefully done to show us how small and insignificant she is throughout the film and remains in her death. As quickly as she is killed, the camera cuts to ‘Fin’ and black.
Throughout this movie Nana is on a journey to find meaning in her life and create a feeling of self-worth, she wants to be successful, she wants to be a film star but faces rejection through no fault of her own. It is easy to look at the character of Nana and deem her a criminal and societal reject, she has stolen, and become a prostitute. But her only real crime is being a female within a patriarchal capitalist society. A society that deprives her of opportunity then chastises her for seeking out solutions. Nana’s story still holds significance today and puts on full display the challenges and decisions faced by those in poverty today, act completely against your moral compass, or face ruin. A choice that leads to Nana’s demise.
