Movie Critique
Movie Critique
The precise depiction of the life under the control of the Party Members made the movie “Traces of Stone” very controversial at the time when it was first released-1966. The breaking of the taboos by making a movie which is a reflection of the real life is the reason why the movie became so unpopular with the GDR’s Communist government, which in turn led to its banning in Eastern Germany. The movie scrutinizes different aspects of the GDRs social and economic life through the storyline of the three main protagonists-Kati Klee and two men, Werner Horrath and Hannes Balla. I will here focus on only three aspects which seem to predominate in the movie- the Party control of the private life, the exploitation of the labour force for the increase of productivity, and the treatment of women in the socialist societies.
What made the movie so notorious at the time of its release is its breaking of the socialist illusion. This movie does not try to mitigate or conceal the truth but it tries to break the illusion created by the Communists for a moral, and law abiding society, controlled by the highly decent and devoted Party Members who are concerned for the wellbeing of its comrades. Instead, the “Traces of Stone” shows the Partys abuse of power to interfere in the private life to allegedly achieve higher means i.e. to prevent moral decay in the society.
In addition, the movie shows the Party members as equally susceptible to the amoral urges as any normal human would be. Namely, Kati and Horrath initially are shown as loyal and responsible Party members, who dutifully control the power plant building. However, as the movie develops the inter-human relationships develop as well. Kati falls in love with the married Horrath and enters in a clandestine relationship with him, and eventually conceives from him. This moment shows that even the most obedient members of the Party can put their personal life in prime position, which is not in line of what the Party would expect from its members. Furthermore, the movie shows how the Party Members had to deal with this kind of a problem. They would take an absolute control of the entire life of that person and try to collectively solve the problem in order protect the rest of the society of the spread of amorality. When Kati conceives with a child from Horrath the Party tries to most obtrusively interfere in her life by subjecting her to cross examination to reveal the name of her lover. Moreover, it is not Kati but the Party who decides on what should be done with the baby– to let her have it or to make her abort.
Interestingly enough is that no one suspects Horrath to be the father, but rather Balla, the social rebel and clearly non party member, is more expected to engage in such socially unaccepted activity. We can see that the movie crashes such illusions that there are clear-cut figures in the society- moral Party members and amoral non party members, by making Horrath to be the father of Katis baby. And precisely the allusion that even the Party members can be morally corrupt is what makes the movie one of the harshest critiques of the Socialist ideology.
The next crucial aspect that dominates the movie is the