Wiccan Priestess Margo Adler on the religious stereotypes & sensual pleasures of 'Chocolat'
BY: Ellen Leventry
Soon after their arrival in a tranquil French town in the winter of 1959, the mysterious stranger Vianne (Juliette Binoche) and her spirited daughter open a chocolate shop. Soon it becomes clear that Vianne has a talent for seeing her customers' desires and satisfying them with a bon-bon made just for them. Fearing her power to make the townspeople abandon themselves to temptation, the mayor, Comte de Reynaud, tries to run her out of town.
In the movie, the Comte is miserable, in denial that his wife has left him, and he uses religion to make everyone as miserable as he is. Organized religion, the movie seems to say, lends itself to this kind of perversion.
I would put it differently. All religions, including earth-based, or any person involved in a spiritual quest of any kind, are vulnerable to self-delusion, just because it makes one more open to certain things.
I think the movie attempted to show, sometimes succeeding and sometimes failing, the sacredness of life in this world, the notion that you don't have to die to get the good stuff. It shows that the body, the earth, sexuality, food, are all part of the joy of life.
What I thought odd was that there wasn't a moment where the protagonists suddenly understood their connection to ultimate reality. I liked that it showed that something as simple as opening a chocolate shop can have huge consequences in the lives of people. Vianne was, in her own way, a minister. She listened, much more than the priest listened, and intuited everyone's problems. She knew how to make people feel good about themselves. The priest and the mayor are the forces in the town, yet they aren't listening to anybody.
One of our columnists, Frederica Mathewes-Greene, wrote that "Chocolat" completely misunderstands the concept of spiritual self-denial. What would you say to that?
As I understand it, you're supposed to give up something that's a little more important than chocolate. I don't think making the analogy to Hindus and cattle and pork and Jews works. My question is, how prevalent today is the Catholicism that's being criticized? It was pre-'60s, pre-Vatican II; that kind of Catholicism did exist then. But I don't think it's so much a critique of Catholicism as it is a critique of an old-time, rigid Catholicism. It wouldn't have resonance for someone growing up Catholic in America today, I wouldn't guess.