You were our patron saint, yet still they blame us for only praying to be famous

[sovay]

Late last night, I discovered this photograph:



It's David Lean in 1943, on the set of This Happy Breed. I found the image unattributed on a site devoted to his movies; I thought it was a film still. I had never seen a picture of him before. He could have been one of his own leads. I wouldn't wish him out of his directing career—for all I know, he was a block in front of the camera—but that's a character actor's face if ever I've seen one. He looks like a very ascetic faun.

Comments

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

He looks EXACTLY like a very ascetic faun.

He could have come out of one of your stories. He could be Justin or Alex. (Well, actually, he looks too old for Justin, but he still does feel like he could come from a story of yours, even if not a *precise* story.)

[sovay]

He looks EXACTLY like a very ascetic faun.

I want to bring a poem out of this image, except I don't think I could come up with one that's better than the photograph.

(Well, actually, he looks too old for Justin, but he still does feel like he could come from a story of yours, even if not a *precise* story.)

Thank you! I like interesting faces.

faun poem

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

You are going to do it. It came to me while I was washing dishes just now. It's those eyes, those faun eyes. They will keep staring at you, challenging you, and you are going to rise to that challenge.

And when you do, that faun face is going to smile and say, "I knew you wouldn't fail me."

[gwynnega]

What an amazing photograph.

[sovay]

What an amazing photograph.

I still don't know how to read his expression.

[nineweaving.livejournal.com]

In which he looks like a sardonic owl:



Nine

[sovay]

In which he looks like a sardonic owl

When was that taken? Those are brilliant eyebrows.

[nineweaving.livejournal.com]

Insanely brilliant. Not a clue: late 1940s? early 1950s?

Nine

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

That is very cool. I should think that three years of living on wartime rations brought out the cheekbones in everyone who wasn't married to a butcher, but the shape and angle of his knee is equally eloquent. Lean David, indeed.

[sovay]

I should think that three years of living on wartime rations brought out the cheekbones in everyone who wasn't married to a butcher, but the shape and angle of his knee is equally eloquent.

I didn't think he'd ever worked with David Lean, but I wondered at first if I was looking at a very young Peter Cushing. It was the cheekbones.

[ap-aelfwine.livejournal.com]

My, that's a brilliant photograph. I'd love to know who shot it.

And I think you're right about the very ascetic faun thing.

[sovay]

My, that's a brilliant photograph. I'd love to know who shot it.

I have no idea. Someone for a magazine?

[ap-aelfwine.livejournal.com]

Someone for a magazine?

That would make sense, I suppose.

[leahbobet.livejournal.com]

I keep wondering if it's the medium of black-and-white film that makes people look so distinct and interesting, or if people were just fundamentally more distinct and interesting before colour photography.

[ap-aelfwine.livejournal.com]

I've wondered about that as well. Maybe it's our reaction to black and white, or maybe it's that the photographs which are likely to be places where we see them are generally the best of the lot, but it certainly does seem as if there's something like that going on with the old photographs.

One thought that occurs to me is that it might not be B&W per se (I shot a fair bit of it, back in the day) but the specific films, or the cameras, or maybe the lighting or the lenses or even the paper they printed them on.

I know a couple of photographers who might have some insight into the subject. I'll try and remember to ask them.

It's ironic, actually--a friend of mine recently got a Thirties-era mandolin, of the sort that used to be sold through Sears-Roebuck, which sounds amazingly good, and we were having a similar conversation about instruments of that vintage. Is it the wood, is it that they built them well, or is it just that the bad ones mostly haven't survived?

[sovay]

I keep wondering if it's the medium of black-and-white film that makes people look so distinct and interesting, or if people were just fundamentally more distinct and interesting before colour photography.

I think there has been a change in the fashion of faces, and we are going through a boring patch. I continue to hope that popular tastes will weird up again. I also think there's a sorting process at work, in the same way as the 1930's and '40's produced some amazingly unremarkable movies, but no one bothers to rediscover them. That said, I really like black-and-white as a medium—because it is not (and cannot be) naturalistic, it may automatically transform its subjects into art.

[negothick.livejournal.com]

Reminding us of that evocative book title, taken from Sunset Boulevard.
They Had Faces Then: super stars, stars, and starlets of the 1930's By John Shipman Springer, Jack D. Hamilton

(snippet view only on googlebooks)

[papersky.livejournal.com]

He could have played the Glue Man.

[sovay]

He could have played the Glue Man.

Michael Powell said his Colpeper had the face of a medieval ascetic. Yes.

[gaudynight78.livejournal.com]

Hell, he looks more like Peter Wimsey than anybody else I've ever seen, including Roy Ridley.