The Servant

The Servant concerns Tony (James Fox); an alcoholic aristocrat who has just bought a five storey house on Royal Avenue in Chelsea, West London. His new man servant Hugo Barrett (Dirk Bogarde) arrives for the job interview to find the front door open and Tony asleep in his chair from drinking. Barrett takes an instant dislike for Tony which he hides for half of the film. Tony’s girlfriend Susan (Wendy Craig) takes an instant dislike to Barrett, she questions his knowledge of art. Tony first defends Barrett, and then snaps when Susan leaves. The conniving Barrett concocts a plan to introduce Vera (Susan Miles) as his sister in order to manipulate Tony and his money through Vera’s seduction. Once Barrett and Vera are kicked out, Tony only knows half the story; he re-hires Barrett a few weeks later. The power dynamic begins to change.

The director Joseph Losey said in one of two video interviews I found (both promoting The Servant) that he had complete creative control with this film for the first time in his career, Losey was blacklisted by Hollywood and moved to England in the early 1950s. Houses and the confinement it brings Losey’s characters recurs often; The Sleeping Tiger, The Servant, Blind Date, Accident, Secret Ceremony, The Go-Between and The Romantic Englishwoman. Losey uses a number of cinematic techniques, such as a zooming camera towards Tony as his life begins to spiral; this is done later in the film near the finale. The close-ups of Sarah Miles are seductive. Losey’s beautiful two-shot of Barrett and Tony in the pub, Barrett’s silhouette of him smoking, the use of mirrors; especially between Barrett and Tony in the living room and the high angles of them on the stairs, signifying power dynamic.

Based on Robin Maugham’s novella which playwright and screenwriter Harold Pinter found to be yellow book snobbery with the first person narration and anti-Semitic towards Barrett’s character. Maugham was bisexual. Many have argued that Tony and Barrett are bisexual. A viewer can interpret many things from the close-up of an actor; I think Barrett’s desire for Tony is psychological. Losey and Pinter’s interest in strangers at the restaurant; the society couple, the lady friends and the Irish priests give the film an interesting brief break from our four characters confined mostly to the house on Royal Avenue. Losey actually lived next door from 1966 until his death in 1984. Bogarde spent his final years a mere ten minutes walk away.

James Fox was only 23 when filming in what is his first leading role, The film rests on Dirk Bogarde’s stunning performance, his character shifts from deadpan kindness to cackling menace. Bogarde’s facial gestures are key to give us subtext, he smiles as he throws Vera out, it’s all a game anyway. Crucially Bogarde’s hand stays inside the door as he talks to Vera signifying his grip of power on the house. Barrett like Stanford in Time Without Pity is a Northerner from Manchester, this continues Losey’s fascination with different dialects; Alexander Knox (Scottish) Stanley Baker (Welsh), Brian Phelan, Patrick Magee and Jack McGowan (Irish). No doubt Susan pigeonholes Barrett as lower working class when they talk about art.

A wonderful fan site called 60sbritishcinema.net reviews The Servant, the critic has read the novella too and has issues with the ending which he finds doesn’t make sense. The last twenty minutes get more surreal as it goes on, Barrett and Tony’s hide and seek which looks like something out of experimental theatre, the party sequence; Barrett blowing smoke in Susan’s face; satisfaction at last. Susan and Barrett kissing, Tony smiling! Tony defeated, drunk on the floor, Barrett throws Susan out. Pinter has often been interested in power dynamics and class systems; Losey is no stranger to manipulation and human weakness. Gilles Deleuze notes ‘a character in Losey’s films who might see himself as a weakling and thus makes up for this weakness with a brutal action.‘

What does Tony need a five storey, five bedroom house for anyway? Is he considering a family with Susan? You forget how young they are, he can barely take care of himself. Raymond Durgnat chooses to focus on Tony in an article on Losey (Films and Filming) ‘The idea of Tony being put in charge of a scheme to shift hungry peasants from Asia Minor to a development scheme in South America is dotty to the point of being hair-raising’. Was Maugham simply having fun with Tony’s characterisation? We only see Tony in a social group scenario at the finale which of course ends badly. Tony’s scene with Susan and her parents open with each character literally staged for the theatre with their slightly over the top postures. Barrett would probably like that idea, the high class nothing but stage puppets. Johnny Dankworth’s score is a companion to Tony’s solitude and Barrett’s deviousness; then again Barrett is lonely too in his way. Durgnat argues ‘Tony is confused between a sort of reach-me-down feudalism he caught from ‘Lord Barr’, and between the middle-class ‘fantasy of goodwill’- he can just drift amiably and aimlessly along while his ‘gentleman’s gentleman’ will dutifully, loyally, run itself. Thinking he has bought Barrett’s soul, Tony loses his own’ (Films and Filming). Tony’s life at least without Susan seems pretty meaningless, of course we don’t see Barrett working for an elderly lady in Bolton Square to know how he struggles if indeed that is the story. Tony’s weakness to be manipulated by Barrett comes from loneliness. Of course the shift in the film and Bogarde’s performance in the second half is striking. Barrett and Tony are brought closer together by conflict.

Like The Homecoming written by Pinter a year later in 1964, power dynamic and manipulation take hold, a lot is left to interpretation. Pinter takes inspiration from Samuel Beckett for his vague and intriguing narratives which are criticised by what people see as a lack of depth.  Robert Murphy argues ‘Underneath this brilliant surface, though, there are serious flaws. Harold Pinter’s script strains for effect and makes nonsense of an already weak story … it is difficult now to see anything more than fortunate timing and a vague air of decadence linking this muddled upper-class nightmare to the real-life scandal of the Profumo Affair which boosted its office box-office potential’ (Sixties British Cinema). But can’t it be argued that these Pinteresque forms of narrative are all the more personal and intriguing by having little background to the characters, to take them as they are and interpret what we can. Of course seeing The Servant more than once Barrett’s deceit becomes more clear. As Bogarde said of his autobiographies; ‘it’s all there if you look at it and read between the lines’

Vera is the most ambiguous character, what motivates her? We only see her truthful when she is alone with Barrett if it is indeed truthful. We know that Barrett telling Tony that Vera has conned them and then Vera returning later looking for money are both staged, a wicked Machiavellian touch typical from Pinter. Fox and Miles’ sex scene perhaps inspired a similar scene in the 80s teen comedy Risky Business with a couple on a chair with the back of the chair to the camera. Losey sometimes has his actors fall dramatically as the low camera angle watches them (Vera in The Servant and Ansell in Figures in a Landscape) for Vera it’s her final scene, for Ansell it’s his first. Vera’s fall is staged; Ansell’s comes as he is in fear for his life. Vera’s crying is quite convincing to fool Tony and us. Tony’s weakness in the end implies that he gives way to Barrett’s total control. Bogarde and Fox are of similar age to Shaw and McDowell in Figures in a Landscape. Likewise Shaw is in control but one would rather Barrett’s manipulation than Shaw’s character MacConnachie’s violence. Then again Barrett’s is an emotional violence throwing Tony into disarray though he was already an alcoholic when the film began, it can only get worse. Typical of Pinter that the final scene could be the final statement; that Susan won the battle but lost the war. There’s always tomorrow.