No Boundaries

"The perfect human in a room with no boundaries and
with nothing and a voice saying a few words."
Jørgen Leth's The Perfect Human (1967)

Points for Reflection

The Bible: John 8:33-36

1. How does Jesus appropriate and redeploy the concept of slavery?

The Bible: Romans 6:16-23

1. Why might Paul describe righteousness as involving a kind of slavery instead of, saying, willing devotion?
2. What is the end product of the process of sanctification Paul describes?

The Bible: I Corinthians 7:21-24

1. Does Paul think you should obtain your freedom if currently a slave, or not?
2. The Greek word doulos (Greek: δο?λος) is variously translated as "slave" or "bondservant," depending on the translation. A slave in the Greco-Roman world was completely owned and wielded no authority, at least for a time, though sometimes slaves had sold themselves to pay off debt. (They were not customarily treated with the barbarism associated with slavery in the North American South.) The word "bondservant" captures the notion of willing surrender and conscious devotion, and avoids modern connotations associated with "slavery." Which English word do you prefer being used to designate the difference between being under the authority of humans and under the authority of God?

The Bible: Philippians 2:5-8

1. As described by Paul in this letter to the church at Phillipi, did Jesus hold tightly to a sense of equality with God the Father when taking the form of a human?

Jørgen Leth's The Perfect Human (1967)

1. The narrator refers to the "perfect human" as a “number” and “it” towards the opening. Does the film which follows render the characters in a way that strips them of their humanity, or in a manner that frames and accentuates their individuality?
2. Having finished the film, does this short film's title strike you as either ironic, parodic, absurd, accurate, or something else?
3. Which everyday activities does the Danish filmmaker, Jørgen Leth, decide to include in his portrait of the perfect human? Do you believe he has omitted anything important?
4. Is the musical accompaniment soothing, or stimulating?  Also, does it congrue with the visuals, or work against them?
5. Recall the film terms handout; upon what types of framing does the film rely most heavily?
6. Are these two perfect humans actually ideal in some way—does anything about them strike you as superior?
7. Is there anything overtly sensual about the way the subjects are shot?
8. Does Leth achieve gender parity in terms of what he reveals, physically, of each male and female actor?
9. Does Leth appear committed to requiring similar actions and behaviors of both actors?
10. Why might Leth have used a white background throughout this film?
11. Does the film answer the questions it asks?
12. The man falls, whereas the woman lies down (3:19-4:30). What does this difference suggest about the respective natures of the two sexes?
13. Does the perfect (male) human seem constrained, or freed, by inhabiting “a room with no boundaries, and with nothing”?
14. Is the robing and disrobing of the characters in any way sexual, or does it feel perfunctory?
15. What pieces of furniture does the minimalist set deign to employ?  [a chair, bed, dinner table]
16. The narrator describes the perfect humans as making love, and we get to see them cuddle a bit--nothing salacious (7:18-8:03). What does the way they cuddle suggest about their sexual roles?
17. Why adopt a bird’s-eye view for both the love-making scene and eating dinner?
18. Can you decipher this enigma, uttered towards the end by Claus Nissen’s character?  “Around my left hand was shining a ring of hazy white flames. I considered carefully the left side of my own dark coat. In the middle of my heart there was a small white spot. I don’t know what it’s supposed to mean" (8:40-9:00).
19. The narrator, no omniscient narrator, wonders what the perfect human is thinking while he eats dinner--whether it concerns the room he's inhabiting, the food he's consuming, happiness, love, or death (10:40-55). What answer does the perfect human provide himself as he proceeds to eat, interrupting a bite here and there to tunefully articulate a few deep questions (11:39-12:17)?
20. Does the perfect male's hand talk at the end suggest hope or despair--possible rapprochement with the now-absent woman, or the renewal of mere meaningless banter? Or, do you read this moment as having nothing to do with the woman?

Lars von Trier's The Five Obstructions (2003)

1. Does Lars von Trier’s experiment feel as playful as it is intentional?  How seriously does he approach this project?
2. What ideas appear to drive the limitations Lars von Trier sets before Jørgen Leth?  What does von Trier wish Leth to face, and feel?
3. How does von Trier come up with the specific limitations of the first obstruction?
4. Does Leth’s interest in the physical appearance of his actors seem unnecessary, or quite practical?
5. Is the First Obstruction film what Leth worried it would be, a “spastic film”?  Is it capable of being enjoyed, or does everything move too quickly?
6. Does Leth divide his time between male and female more equally in his first remake then he did in the original from 1967?
7. Which questions articulated in the original film are reiterated in the first obstruction and answered?
8. Right after von Trier likens this project to therapy, he notes that he wants to move from the perfect to the human.  What does he mean, and how does he elaborate his agenda?
9. Do any of the elements of the Second Obstruction resemble elements from the First Obstruction?
10. Leth says von Trier wants to see whether the experience will rub off him in a noticeable, quantifiable way. Does Lether appear to be changed by this process?
11. Is Leth able to reproduce the spontaneity of Claus Nissen, the original man in the film, when he attempts to play the perfect man himself?
12. Leth thinks he responds creatively to the imposed limitation “Don’t show the real drama" for the second obstruction.  What do you think?  Does he break the rule?
13. What do you feel while watching Leth eat some of the lavishly prepared meal in the Second Obstruction?
14. How does von Trier punish Jørgen Leth for breaking the rule against showing the real, nearby drama?
15. Why spend so much time showing Leth wandering around a hotel in Brussels, Belgium, trying to find his filming crew, during creation of the Third Obstruction?  (The same goes for the long shot of him standing in a hallway listening to noises from bedrooms down the hallway.)
16. Is the Third Obstruction, set in Brussels and using the French language, a tonal departure from what has preceded it?  It obviously accomplishes something quite different stylistically.
17. As we move from one obstruction to the next, do women appear to progressively gain or lose agency?
18. Following the Third Obstruction, von Trier observes that his efforts to trip up Leth keep running up against the older filmmaker’s cleverness and adaptability.  He wants the Fourth Obstruction to be crap, an outcome he thinks he can guarantee by requiring what?
19. Is Leth okay with creating “crap,” or does he fight against it?
20. What elements of the previous iterations make it into the Fourth Obstruction, and how does Leth transform them?
21. At what points does the Fourth Obstruction feel like a film noir?
22. Where does von Trier find the material for the Fifth Obstruction?
23. The Fifth Obstruction is woven together by von Trier himself, with narration provided by Leth.  Why do you think von Trier requires Leth to cite himself (Leth) as the director, instead of von Trier?
24. To what does von Trier confess in the script he has written for Leth?
25. Did von Trier ultimately achieve what he set out to achieve with this project?

The Burning Giraffe (1937)
oil on panel
Salvador Dali

Dr. Paul Marchbanks
pmarchba@calpoly.edu