The following is commentary on Episode No. 2 ("To Die for Spain") from members of AFAMILYATWAR-LIST. If you wish to add your thoughts to what is being said on this page, become a part of our discussion group by clicking the "Join" button.
Paul Cook
My appreciation of Episode 2 has changed with this recent viewing. It helps me to see the programme title more as a question, as a topic for enquiry or argument, rather than as a statement.
How do we all cope with war? Idealism does drive man to war, but what happens to a man both in, and after, experience of battle? At home in Liverpool, how do the Ashtons cope with this conflict? Using the backdrop of the Spanish Civil War provides a perfect canvas for John Finch to explore these issues.
Phillip plays a prominent role in “To Die For Spain.” I see him in a rite of passage, as the story line unfolds. From the opening sequence, we see Phillip anxious and pre-occupied. Margaret points out how “touchy” he is. We discover he is to soon to rejoin his former comrades in the International Brigade, fighting the fascists in the Spanish Civil War. We know Phillip previously spent a short time there, but that he did not engage in any military action. I wonder if this is particularly important for the story line, to get a sense of this young man, moving from the simple idealism and determinism of youth at the start of the programme, to something far more complex by the end.
When Margaret tentatively asks Phillip whether he experienced any air raids whilst in Spain, his demeanour changes markedly. He sits back in the chair, puts his hand behind his head, and reminiscences with almost romantic fascination, about his witness to the German Junkers flying above him. He says to Maggie, “I know you don’t approve, but it was exciting”.
Phillip’s agitation shows us that it is not a simple act for him to return to Spain. His intention is to leave a letter of just 4 lines giving reasons for his departure. Phillip wants to leave without the pain of saying good-bye, but, as the plot mirrors life, this pain cannot be avoided. The best that can be done is to delay the acceptance of loss – it has to be dealt with eventually. The resultant scene between Edwin, Phillip, Margaret and Jean is beautiful in addressing the complex emotions involved in this impending loss. Jean, the mother, is interestingly the silent witness.
I like one small interaction between Edwin and Phillip, where in the course of their conversation about the rights and wrongs of war, Edwin tells Phillip to drink his tea. Phillip drinks his tea without question, simple acquiescence, no defiance. I see this as a precious moment between them, providing some kind of solace communicated on an unconscious level. Here a father can tell a son what to do, and he does it easily; beautifully simple. This line from Edwin adds weight to my impression that we not only see Phillip as the maturing 21 year old, “I am 21 dad, you can’t stop me” but also as the boy who is scared, and who might be persuaded to stay. Phillip loves his dad, but he also has his own mind.
Edwin is torn by the dilemma of accepting that his son is becoming a man, who needs to rebel and assert himself, but he is also the father who is screaming inside for his son not to go, “Please stay” – “I want you to stay alive son”. There is such intimacy within the script here between father and son giving added pathos to Phillip’s decision. Edwin is understandably angry and upset, but to his great credit, shows great empathy towards his son. He does not allow his anger to dominate the scene, but wants Phillip to know he is indeed angry about his decision. Yet, we know from Edwin’s self disclosures that he does understands his son’s dilemma, as he also has done, in turn, with his own father. He is trying valiantly to be balanced in opinion, and realises that preventing Phillip to stay would be futile. It is poignant when neither can face each other at the end, with Edwin crestfallen, and Phillip finally resolute on leaving. Both now have to accept the finality of the decision.
Phillip returns to find his company in Spain in a neurotic state, disillusioned, war weary, and under constant stress verging on psychosis. My experience of Phillip in these scenes is not so much that of an active member of the group, but more a neutral contributor, mediator, or observer. Through the characters of Norton, Parket et al, it is as if Phillip is confronting those very issues that could not be properly addressed with his father back home in Liverpool.
In Margaret, I see a daughter who now has to accept that Edwin is no longer the idealised father of her childhood; no longer the father who can make everything right in her world, but is a vulnerable man in his own right. It takes the violent scenes of her confrontation with Phillip’s leaving which forces this to the surface. Her emotions are raw and primitive, almost ranting. It is a visceral scene, whereby Margaret can not physically let go of the world she has been so comfortable living in. “If you go, I will never forgive you”. Dismayed at Edwin not being able to maintain her protective shell, she retreats into herself again, unable to face her father, who she believes has failed her.
However, once Edwin can hold her once again in his arms, we can see some kind of acceptance from Margaret. Edwin is a real, caring father. Edwin opens his arms, and so his heart to her, them both realising that something important, yet essential is happening with their relationship. By seeing her father vulnerable in this way, he has paradoxically become more real to her, and not the fantasy figure of perfection she wanted him to be. In episode 1 David makes a wry comment on Margaret, about “still waters running deep”. This is true of Margaret, but also a comment on us all.
Edwin presented arguments against the futility of war, father to son. As Phillip turns his back on the war, are we seeing a man in some agreement with his father? Does the end justify the means as Parker keeps saying? – or is the reality for Phillip, as Lieutenant Norton believes others may view it, as the participants being a group of “Fools, martyrs, or a ridiculous rabble”.
I think Stan Barstow’s script in the next episode gives some impression of the consequence of Phillip’s experience.
John Finch
What can I add to this detailed and perceptive summing up of Episode Two by Paul. Very little, I think, except that for anyone interested there's a little story attached to it.
People rarely think of snow when they think of Spain. With this in mind I had set the episode in the heat of a Spanish summer. Needless to say, with our minuscule budget we couldn't even contemplate actually filming in Spain. What we did was find an area in Derbyshire (I think it was Derbyshire, though it might have been Cheshire) which viewers would accept as being Spain even though it was Britain in winter. In this we were driven by a schedule which left no alternative.
The Director, the crew and the actors all went off, and I settled down to finish a later episode I was working on. At some point a white-faced producer came through my office door. "We've had a call from Derbyshire, "said Richard, " and Tim says they'll have to pack up and come home because it is snowing and the long term forecast is bad". Catastrophe stared us in the face. We were on such a tight schedule that the loss of even a couple of days shooting would be disaster.
I was as shattered as Richard was, but some little thought came into my head from something I might have read when I was researching the Spanish Civil War. Tell Tim to stay put until he hears from us, "I said. I got hold of Margaret Lord , the researcher, and told her what I'd like her to do. She went away, but soon came back. "You're right," she said, "there was fighting in the Pyrenees and at that time of year it would be quite likely that it was snowing. So that's how Norton died for Spain in the snow.
Looking back I think that almost every episode had some little incident that marked it out; that caused us to say, months or even years later, "Do you remember?................" With future episodes I shall try.
Richard Veit
John Finch already has answered one of the questions I had about this episode — where were those Pyrenees scenes shot? His interesting account of that production challenge only goes to show that sometimes an unexpected predicament (Derbyshire snowstorm) can be turned into a plus. I think the snowy landscape added much to this episode, as did the actors’ visible breathing in the chilly air.
In my opinion, the role of Parker has to constitute one of the most thoroughly reprehensible characters in the series. For that, I think John Ronane deserves much praise for a taut, memorable performance. Parker would seem to have precious few redeeming qualities. Much later, after four and a half years have passed, he will turn up again in “Clash by Night,” and again he appears dangerous, not to be trusted. Of course, by then he has disavowed communism, and the character, now a diabetic, has become a bit more vulnerable because of his need for insulin injections.
One philosophical thought: I wonder why Parker did not fire a second (fatal) shot at Philip, as he did at Norton. Was it because he was distracted by issuing orders to the other men, or did he have some ulterior motive for allowing this other “deserter” to walk free?
I am intrigued by the relationship between Lieutenant Norton and Podmore. The fact that Podmore was once Norton’s student at school somehow cultivates my sympathy for both men — a fragile, tenuous connection to the past, before the nightmarish turn both of their lives would take.
Meanwhile, back in Liverpool…
Again, as in the first episode, John Porter is received coolly at the Ashtons’. Philip is decidedly uncommunicative with him, almost to the point of being rude. In this case, I suppose it can be attributed to the fact that Philip is (as Paul puts it) “anxious and pre-occupied.” Preying on his mind is the fateful decision to return to Spain and all of the heartache his departure is sure to cause. Still, I feel sorry for John, who is shy and not much of a conversationalist in the best of circumstances. Later on, particularly during the post-war election, his social skills will develop more fully, and he becomes a passionate and even eloquent advocate of the Labour cause.
I cannot close without mentioning that touching scene when Margaret and her father are reconciled — wonderfully acted. It clearly demonstrates the strong bond of love that exists between the two.
Paul Cook
Richard's comments about Parker, makes me think again about the characters we see in Spain. Although Parker does come across as a nasty piece of work, everyone in these scenes is trying to survive in a mad world. As we see throughout history, brutality is a depressing feature of all wars. I feel Parker is as scared as any of the other men, but hides this with his bravado. I don't think he had any real intention to shoot Phillip. If you notice, when Parker talks with Phillip in their scenes together, there is something just a bit calmer about him, with an objectivity that we don't see in his interactions with the other men.
I perceive Parker as wavering in the final scenes of confrontation with Phillip . His defensive guard is down here. His emotions seem to surface for a moment, which is in direct conflict with his beliefs, the intellectual argument of "the end justifies the means". It is interesting he quotes this several times during the episode, as if it is some kind of mantra he needs to say to convince himself. I see some insecurity and doubt, however small. However, Parker has to believe in the communist cause, otherwise he will not be able to function, so he shoots Phillip, not I think in cold blood, but as momentarily confused. I believe that is why the second shot does not happen. Of course, these doubts are short-lived and he takes full charge of the men in a very forceful way, ensuring any remaining doubts he has are well and truly suppressed again.
