George Polti's 36 dramatic situations on film with Hannaleena Hauru


Verikosto, eli siis sukulaiseen tai läheiseen kohdistuva kosto. Teos on ETLsydänYT-klubilta 27.4.2011.Kyseessä oli Elokuvataiteen opiskelijoiden ja Ylioppilasteatterin yhteistyö, jonka tuloksena toteutettiin 5 live-lyhytelokuvaa pääsiäisen aikana.

Tämä video yrittää olla tallenne live-elokuvasta ”Kellukkeet”. (Ekat 5 minuuttia puuttuu, koska unohdin painaa rec).

Kuvaus: Mikko Kamunen, Jan-Niclas Jansson ja Hannaleena Hauru

Rooleissa: Freia Stenbäck ja Emilia Tuovila, Marjut Maristo (Gerbiili), Maija Muinonen (Kike), Katariina Jumppanen (Eno) ja juhlavieraat Sanna Rämö, Topi Patjas, Pilvi Hämäläinen ja Juha Heikkinen.

Tavoitteista ja tekotavasta

Halusin uhmata lyhytelokuvakerronan rajoja laajentamalla tilanteen olosuhteita sen äärilaidoille – ja no nyt ylipäätään kokeilla erilaisia juttuja. Koulutöissä aiheen rajaus on ahdistava asia, lähdin demoilemaan käsikirjoituksessa laajempaa kokonaisuutta. (kirjoitan enemmän myöhemmin tästä)




(Elements: Avenging Kinsman; Guilty Kinsman;
Remembrance of the Victim, a Relative of Both.)

Augmenting the horror of Situation XXVII (”Dis-
covery of the Dishonor of Ones Kindred”) by the
rough vigor of Situation III, we create the present
action, which confines itself to family life, making of
it a worse hell than the dungeon of Poe’s ”Pit and the
Pendulum.” The horror of it is such that the terrified
spectators dare not intervene ; they seem to be witness-
ing at a distance some demoniac scene silhouetted in
a flaming house.

Neither, it seems, do our dramatists dare intervene
to modify the Greek tragedy, such as it is after
thirty appalling centuries.

For us it is easy to compute, from the height of our
”platform” to use Gozzi’s word the infinite varia-
tions possible to this theme, by multiplying the com-
binations which we have just found in the Third Situa-
tion, by those which the Twenty-seventh will give us.

Other germs of fertility will be found in turn in the
circumstances which have determined the avenger’s
action. These may be a spontaneous desire on his
own part (the simplest motive) ; the wish of the dying
victim, or of the spirit of the dead mysteriously appear-
ing to the living ; an imprudent promise ; a profession-
al duty (as when the avenger is a magistrate, etc.) ;
the necessity of saving other relatives or a beloved one
(thus did Talien avenge the Dantonists) or even fellow-
citizens ; ignorance of the kinship which exists between
Avenger and Criminal. There yet remains that case
in which the Avenger strikes without having recog-
nized the Criminal (in a dark room, I suppose) ; the
case in which the act of intended vengeance is but the
result of an error, the supposedly guilty kinsman being
found innocent, and his pseudo-executioner discovering
that he has but made of himself a detestable criminal.

A (1) A Father’s Death Avenged Upon a Mother:
”The Choephores” of Aeschylus; the ”Electras” of
Sophocles, Euripides, Attilius, Q. Cicero, Pradon, Longe-
pierre, Crebillon, Rochefort, Chenier, and of Guillard’s
opera; the ”Orestes” of Voltaire and of Alfieri;
Sophocles’ ”Epigones;” the ”Eriphyles” of Sophocles
and of Voltaire ; and lastly ”Hamlet,” in which we recog-
nize so clearly the method by which the poet rejuven-
ates his subjects, by an almost antithetic change of
characters and of milieu.

(2) A Mother Avenged Upon a Father: ”Zoe
Chien-Chien” (Matthey, 1881) in which the parricide
is counter-balanced by an incestuous passion, and is
committed by the daughter, not by the son.

B A Brother’s Death Avenged Upon a Son (but
without premeditation, this accordingly falling almost
into the situation ”Imprudence”) : Aeschylus’ ”Ata-
lanta” and Sophocles’ ”Meleager.”

C A Father’s Death Avenged Upon a Husband:
”Rosmunde” (Rucellai).

D A Husband’s Death Avenged Upon a Father:
”Orbecche” by Giraldi.

Thus, of twenty-two works, eighteen are in the same
class, seventeen in the same sub-class, thirteen upon
the same subject; four classes and one sub-class
altogether. Let us, for the moment, amuse ourselves
by counting some of those which have been forgotten.

A father’s death avenged upon the brother of the
avenger. Upon his sister. Upon his mistress (or, in
the case of a feminine avenger, upon her lover, for
each of the cases enumerated has its double, according
to the sex of the avenger) . Upon his wife. Upon his
son. Upon his daughter. Upon his paternal uncle.
Upon his maternal uncle. Upon his paternal or mater-
nal grandfather; his paternal or maternal grand-
mother. Upon half-brother or half-sister. Upon a
person allied by marriage (brother-in-law, sister-in-
law, etc.) or a cousin. These numerous variations may
of course be successively repeated for each case: the
avenging of a brother, a sister, a husband, a son, a
grandfather, and so on.

By way of variety, the vengeance may be carried out,
not upon the person of the criminal himself, but upon
some one dear to him (thus Medea and Atreus struck
Jason and Thyestes through their children), and even
inanimate objects may take the place of victims.