Origin – first-look review | Little White Lies

Festivals

Ori­gin – first-look review

06 Sep 2023

Words by Anahit Behrooz

A man and woman embrace, their faces close together in an intimate moment.
A man and woman embrace, their faces close together in an intimate moment.
Ava DuVer­nay adapts Isabel Wilk­er­son­’s 2020 non-fic­tion book Caste: The Ori­gin of Our Dis­con­tents’ with some­what mixed results, inter­weav­ing Wilk­er­son­’s per­son­al sto­ry into one of sys­temic subjugation.

Pub­lished in August 2020, bare­ly three months after the mur­der of George Floyd by the Min­neapo­lis police, Isabel Wilkerson’s Caste: The Ori­gin of Our Dis­con­tents’ found imme­di­ate res­o­nance against a con­text of ongo­ing Black Lives Mat­ter protests, sud­den­ly main­stream abo­li­tion­ist dis­course, and the loom­ing pos­si­bil­i­ty of a re-elect­ed Trump gov­ern­ment. Now, three years after its pub­li­ca­tion, Wilkerson’s study of the entan­gle­ment between Amer­i­can racial pol­i­tics and caste sys­tems finds a strik­ing­ly sin­gu­lar new expres­sion in Ava DuVernay’s adap­ta­tion, which drama­tis­es not only Wilkerson’s book, but the process of research and writ­ing that first brought it to life.

Through this col­lapse in inti­mate and polit­i­cal nar­ra­tive, Duver­nay crafts from Ori­gin a work of sweep­ing, unnerv­ing scope, draw­ing togeth­er mul­ti­ple threads and time­lines – the sick­en­ing killing of Trayvon Mar­tin, the hor­rors of the Jim Crow South, the swift ris­ing tide of Weimar fas­cism, the vio­lent dehu­man­i­sa­tion of the Indi­an caste sys­tem – into a com­plex and poly­phon­ic por­trait of engi­neered oppres­sion. They wit­nessed events that would change the world,” Wilk­er­son (a com­mand­ing per­for­mance by pre­vi­ous DuVer­nay col­lab­o­ra­tor Aun­janue Ellis-Tay­lor) says of Black anthro­pol­o­gists Alli­son and Eliz­a­beth Davis, whose under­cov­er research in 1930s Mis­sis­sip­pi threads through Wilkerson’s book and the dra­mat­ic nar­ra­tive of the film. Yet the same could be said of DuVer­nay her­self; her work has always posi­tioned itself at tip­ping points in his­to­ry, exca­vat­ing sig­nif­i­cant events with gran­u­lar atten­tion only to pull back and reveal a larg­er, haunt­ed pic­ture, more sprawl­ing than we could have ever imagined.

In this light, Ori­gin is a huge­ly ambi­tious polit­i­cal and nar­ra­tive feat, illu­mi­nat­ing mil­len­nia of oppres­sive sys­tems through the lens of one woman writ­ing against a per­son­al back­drop of loss and grief. It large­ly suc­ceeds, thanks in part to a mov­ing visu­al lan­guage that artic­u­lates the inter­lay­er­ing of polit­i­cal stra­ta that Wilk­er­son was so arrest­ed by. In one scene, a recur­ring flash­back to a Ger­man man who fell in love with a Jew­ish woman in 1930s Ger­many cal­ci­fies into a mono­chrome still that becomes a pre­sen­ta­tion slide, against which Wilk­er­son deliv­ers a lec­ture. Cot­ton fields bifur­cate the screen, echo­ing the mir­rored mon­u­ments of the Berlin Holo­caust Memo­r­i­al that lat­er encase Wilkerson’s fig­ure. These are all, Ori­gin tells us, the same sto­ry, draped in dif­fer­ent costumes.

There is an immense polit­i­cal com­plex­i­ty to this argu­ment of con­nec­tive tis­sue that is both for­ti­fied and under­mined by a nar­ra­tive and cin­e­mat­ic insis­tence on raw emo­tion. Wilkerson’s own world-end­ing loss – both her hus­band Brett (a charm­ing Jon Bern­thal) and moth­er die at the start of the film – bleeds through­out, an aching inti­ma­cy that mar­ries and grounds the indi­vid­ual and col­lec­tive grief that her the­sis con­tends with.

Yet DuVer­nay increas­ing­ly slips into sen­ti­men­tal­i­ty as the film con­tin­ues, with a con­clud­ing seg­ment that ties its bows too neat­ly – histri­on­ic score, slow motion flash­backs – in the light of such dif­fi­cult, unyield­ing ideas. I don’t write ques­tions. I write answers,” Wilk­er­son tells her edi­tor when she is first approached to write about America’s fraught racial fault lines. Yet Ori­gin is best when it rejects the lat­ter and embraces the for­mer, refus­ing the com­fort that fic­tion­alised nar­ra­tive can give.

You might like