The Modern Fool

[Candlemas]

This may get a little long, so my apologies before you even get started.

I was recently reading Roger Ebert’s review of a movie called Max Keeble’s Big Move (What can I say? I’m a reading junkie. I’ll read about damn near anything.) and an idea came to me as I read it. The following is a little chopped up, but taken directly from that review:

*"I found a message from Brendan Staunton of London, who writes: “Don’t you think that kids are a little, or perhaps even a lot, too wise in American movies–yes, even in serious ones? It’s an understandable fault, I suppose, but I’ve never in my life come across the kind of kids you see in movies or TV dramas.”

Brendan, I couldn’t agree more. We have a touching faith in childhood wisdom in this country, matched only by our cynicism about adults. I am reminded of our poet e.e. cummings who wrote, “down they forgot as up they grew.”

Kids in comedies are especially clever. They see through adults in a wink, outsmart their opponents, plot to get what they want, and are cute, articulate and never have pimples."*

After reading this, I began thinking about all the films I’ve seen that portrayed children in this way and do you know what I realized? There are a million!

Modern movies are filled with wisecracking little brothers or sisters standing on the sidelines taking potshots at the powers-that-be and all their pretensions. They’re chock full of wise-beyond-their-years sons and daughters that can bring incredible insight and an outsider’s perspective to their parents lives. Think of all the quick-thinking kids you’ve seen in movies that constantly outwit adults and repeatedly best them in physical challenges, or all the child detectives that unravel the most complex mysteries, or the entertaining child friends of adults that speak the plain and simple truth. Etc, etc, etc. I could go on and on. I could easily name several titles right off the top of my head that feature children like this and I’m sure anyone reading this could as well.

Anyway, once I started thinking about all this I couldn’t help but notice that many of the characteristics of the children in modern movies are strikingly similar to the qualities of the archetypal charcter of The Fool in literature and drama of the past. Take a look at the characteristics I described above and think of Coyote, all the fairy tale fools and jesters, King Lear’s Fool, Mercutio, Feste, Jacques, Falstaff, etc. They’re very similar. I just finished reading the Fall 2001 issue of Parabola, which actually focused on the recurring character of The Fool. In an article by Gary Eberle on the great fools of Shakespeare titled, interestingly enough, “A Child of Providence” he outlines the criteria by which a fool may be defined. Following are some excerpts from that article:

*“At his best, the natural fool shows us that our carefully constructed plans, our identities, our notions of reality are fragile tissues. The reality beneath may appear chaotic, but resolves itself into a larger and more perfect order. The fool does it all by simply being what he is.”

“Like the catalyst in a chemical reaction, the fool is necessary for the comic transformation, but remains himself unchanged, inviolate, and eternal.”

“[The fool’s] archetypal role is to stand on the border, whispering in our ears that we are mere mortals, flawed creatures. If we stifle our inner fool, we pave the way for tragedy. If we listen, however, we may learn to achieve a happy ending on this stage of fools.”*

All of the characterisitcs and duties of The Fool listed above are consistent with the characteristics displayed and the duties performed by many of the children in modern films.

So here are my questions…

Have children taken on the archetypal role of The Fool in modern movies? If so, why children? What is it about children that American writers have decided to portray them in this light? Or put better, why has modern American society chosen the child to be our modern fool? Perhaps we believe that since children are unencumbered by the chains of logic, education and intellect, that they somehow see more clearly? Like Borachio says to the highly intelligent court about the idiot fool Dogberry in Much Ado About Nothing, “What your worships could not discover, these shallow fools have brought to light.” (5_1_216-217) That’s just the first idea that popped into my head. I’d love to hear any other ideas that you might have.

Another question, is this actually a modern phenomenon? I seem to remember that in quite a few fairy tales (Grimm’s especially) whenever several siblings were portrayed, the youngest one (the much-maligned child) always turned out to be the wisest and many-times was the hero of the story.

Last question, is this portrayal of children a good thing, artistically speaking? One movie that I saw recently and really enjoyed was You Can Count On Me. Reflecting on that movie I realized that one of the reasons I felt so strongly about it was due to the depiction of the young son, because the film was unafraid of presenting the child as a child. He depended on the adults in the film the way real children in real life depend on adults, not just for a ride home after school or dinner on the table but for support, love, education and guidance. Isn’t this an important idea?

Anyway, thanks for reading this far and I’d love to hear what any of you smart people out there might think of all this, even if you think I’m totally off base here.

[Zebra]

Well I don’t know about the fool but maybe writers indulge in a little re-writing of their own childhoods. So of course the main character is basically has super human intelligence and wit.

Look at the current tv show Malcom in the Middle. Sure Malcom is a super smart kid and indulges in some adult observations but look at his brothers. They are pretty realistic IMO.

[Freudian_Slit]

I’ve noticed that too, before I read the thread. Like “The Simpsons”- Marge points out how Bart and Lisa caught Sideshow Bob on three (actually more) separate occasions, got Krusty reunited with his estranged father, and attempted to get Itchy and Scratchy back. Plus don’t forget Lisa’s solving the Who Shot Mr. Burns mystery- well…sort of. Even Maggie’s a freaking genius.

I guess it’s because if they used real kids, it would get a bit dull. Oh yeah, I think the 80’s might be a bit responsible for some of this. Remember the John Hughes movies…and of course, Ferris Bueller, the kid (well, teen) who manages to get away with everything and a bag of chips.

Yeah, well, my theory is it’s fun that way. There’d be no Rugrats, Simpsons, Powerpuff Girls (well Bubbles is pretty real), Dexter’s Lab (and then there’s DeeDee), etc. if the kids weren’t smarter than the adults. And come on. Deep down, you know there were a few adults you were smarter than even back as a child.