Personal Reflections on The Old Oak

 

Anthony Frajman writing for the BBC quotes Director Ken Loach articulating the themes of Mr. Loach’s film, The Old Oak.

Firstly, the importance of setting the film in “…. the area where the old industries have died….” affecting English communities “…. who'd been abandoned” after defeat in the 1984 miner’s strike who, years down the track are still struggling economically.

Secondly, the depiction of the “plight of refugees” that “…. had suffered the trauma of war”, taking the form of torture and destruction of homes resulting in these people being housed within the aforementioned deprived English communities.

Thirdly, Mr. Frajman, quotes Mr. Loach asking the critical question: “Could these two communities find a way of living side by side, or would the potential that racism could emerge, would that occur, and would that dominate?"

In the Film the spectre of racism did emerge, but it did not, for me dominate as a theme. The reason can be found in the power of empathy; in the shared trauma experienced by the English working-class people, represented by the ex-miner TJ and the refugees by Yara, each within their own contexts packed full of adversity. Mr. Frajman quotes Mr. Loach observing that “showing understanding and finding common ground was the key to both characters navigating their own difficult situations.”

The Guardian reviewer, Peter Bradshaw offers a reason for Mr. Loach’s sympathetic treatment of the working-class protagonists which draws out the context in which Mr. Loach’s film is set. Mr.  Bradshaw writes regarding the two victimised communities and what they have in common: the “wretched” refugees and the “…. ‘deplorables’ of the white working class….” that “…. Market forces and geopolitical interests have put them in the same position …. “

Such film reviews point out the manifestations of neglect and resentment and the ugly aspects of the reaction to the arrival of refugees. Forces that control the destinies of working people are referenced but to a certain degree are placed in the background by the BBC and The Guardian reviewers.

What follows are my own takeaways from watching this poignant, sad and uplifting film. What follows are my personal insights that Mr. Loach as Director, and Paul Laverty as the Writer may have or have not intended to trigger in me.

There is more to this film than meets the eye. The realities of deindustrialization in the UK and geopolitics in the middle east that the director in my view gently wants to convey to the audience of the film. The manifestations of political and economic forces that impoverish and divide peoples are all subtly laid out in this film. The divisions in British society manifest in the long shadow of the miners strikes of the mid 1980s during Prime Minister Thatcher's union busting government and the neoliberal austerity which in the years since right up to the present have caused much suffering. This social and economic reality casts a shadow over the film.

What came to mind while viewing the film were the effects of neo-liberal ideology on the coal mining north. The effect of the proxy wars and regime change in Africa and the Middle East and the West's involvement in these. With respect to Syria Mr. Loach does not paint a complete picture of the causes of the vast movement of people out of that war torn country. There is reference to the Assad regime and the fate of Yara’s Father. The context of Yara’s suffering being the devastating geopolitical and proxy war and regime change. The consequences of all of this manifest on the Syrian population causing millions to flee to seek refuge in Western Europe where they have received a generally unwelcome reception. Mr. Loach could have offered a more nuanced picture of the Syrian War.

Mr. Loach cleverly creates a kind of cognitive and moral dissonance to play out in my mind and I would not be surprised in the minds of the rest of the audience watching the film. At a general level, I felt sympathy for the refugees and Mr. Loach plays on this in the opening scenes of the film showing the reception of the refugees when they arrive in the neighbourhood. I can also sympathise with the English locals despite the views held by some of them who suffer the drop in real estate values, lack of services and employment and children living in hunger.

The English working-class protagonists experience this dissonance themselves as well. In the film they arrive at an understanding, which they initially lacked, of the suffering endured that forced the Syrian refugees to leave their homes. Contact with the refuges soon disabused many of the fears and prejudices. By the way, I think that this lack of knowledge of what has been happening in war torn Syria is something that is shared by many in Western society.

Mr. Loach’s skill at creating a dissonance in my mind, at least can be seen in the way he treats the bitter ex-miners with sympathy, rather than condemning them. This dissonance is particularly jarring if you are a liberal viewer whose natural reaction to exhibitions of racism and resentment is to judge the perpetrators of this as morally deficient.

In the Film the refugees, on the one hand have a right to dislike the way they are treated by the working class hosts and I would not blame them if they do. They also see the better nature of the fellow English working class hosts and once again I would feel the same way. Mr. Loach thus expertly manages to leverage this dissonance effectively forcing me to think in a different way than I would have normally seen things.

One scene plays out in my mind. Yara escorts the sick girl home from a sports event to find that the house has no food, a bare kitchen cupboard and empty fridge. The Mother of the girl discovers the shocked Yara in the kitchen and throws her out. However, one may feel angry with the mother and sympathy for the Syrian girl who had good motives but can't when one places oneself in the mother’s shoes. The humiliation the mother must have felt. Mr. Loach resolves this dissonance in a later scene when the mother calls out the Syrian girl in the street and expresses her apologies and invites Yara to a soiree with the local ladies at the local hairdresser. Yara takes up the invitation and is warmly accepted by the ladies. The dissonance in my mind skilfully resolved by Mr. Loach.

Another moving segment which illustrates the way in which Mr. Loach effectively manages the viewers emotions. This involves the death of TJ’s pet dog Marra. Something which the many who have lost a much-loved pet can relate to. From this we not only understand the back story of Marra’s owner but also feel the dark forces at play in the form of the thugs and their inappropriate pet dogs. At a deeper level these represent the dark authoritarian forces at play in British society as a whole and the way they have savaged traditional values and the working class.

The death of Marra signifies the spiritual element inherent in the film, something which the above movie reviewers do not mention but which nonetheless plays, in a low-key kind of way significant aspect of the film. Mr. Loach exploits his skill in producing a cognitive dissonance especially in the minds of viewers who do not believe in the power of spiritual or mystical factors.

Why did TJ take the death of Marra so badly asks Tara? It had to do with the way that tiny creature came into his life at a decisive moment when he stepped out into the sea to end his life. He is stopped by the sudden appearance of Marra on the beach as if by divine design. TJ acknowledges this when he explains this mystical event to Tara even though he admits he is not a religious person.

Traditional working-class and religious values, in contradiction to the current neoliberal world view are made manifest by Mr. Loach. This is apparent in the subtly depicted contributions made by the Fireman’s Union and the Cathedral in providing food and equipment to set up the community kitchen in the disused Old Oak dining hall. These entities, as forms of social cohesion still exist as shown in the film quietly enabling the community kitchen through contributions of food and equipment.

The film ends on a note of optimism and how the English come forward and show their generous nature in ultimately accepting the refugees. Also, and more importantly the sentiments of solidarity of all peoples in the community, as expressed in the shared meals and the gathering where the who neighbourhood gather to marvel at the projected images of community members, both locals and refugees alike to the haunting accompaniment of the Lude. Here the camera is used as a lens recording the true humanity during the time of the strikes, during the Syrian war and currently showing people at their best.

Optimism is also expressed in the final moving shots while the closing credits are rolling onto the screen. This scene of the people marching in procession reveals the way forward to challenge the social and geopolitical generated divisions between human spirit of solidarity. These are expressed on the iconic banners held high in a procession that reminds those old enough of the religious and socialist processions and powerful iconography of such events. Movie credits are usually a signal for the audience to quickly exit the theatre but in my case the audience stayed on to the very end. I assume that the audience connected with such images as much as I did.

My overall personal takeaway from this Film is that there is still hope for community life based on the idea of mutual support and working-class solidarity as a challenge to the neoliberal agendas that are behind so much disunity and hatred between peoples.