Jenny is a bright schoolgirl who is capable of excellent with pen and paper or with her cello. Her parents want her to study at Oxford – as if the university admission would provide symbolic approval of their parenting skills – but she wants more in life. She seeks to broaden her horizons and is frustrated by the strict boundaries at school and at home. An Education is set in 1961 London and based on the autobiography of journalist Lynn Barber; it seems Jenny may follow her intellectual spirit and become a member of the feminist movement in the 1960s.
A chance encounter with a man named David enables Jenny to access a life hereto forth unavailable to her. She cherishes the opportunity to attend clubs and theatres and visit Paris with David and his friends. David seems congenial at first but director Lone Scherfig deftly foreshadows that this older man may be a scoundrel. (One might also suggest that the title provides plenty of foreshadowing as to what will occur, but I would say “no more than any other film.”)
David is able to take Jenny everywhere that she desires; school seems plain and irrelevant. She admires her teacher but isn’t willing to blindly follow the path of post-secondary education simply to teach. It is a crude rebuke of Miss Stubbs but a representative of Jenny’s desire for something more than this.
Jenny’s discussions with the headmistress are not simply examples of teenage rebellion as she is seeking answers. Why are Latin translations and cello performances necessary when David has achieved her goals without a university degree? It is a question that all teachers should consider for their students. Why is this significant, relevant, and practical? Show it with actions rather than merely saying it with words. Nobody enters a school with unquestioned naivety any longer.
Jenny is no different from any other student. She is not insubordinate but she feels entitled to reach for the stars. The cold logic of her teachers is not effective compared to the warm passion of David, a man who can talk his way into any situation and convince others to join him. Briefly, the schoolgirl lives her dreams until the inevitable rude awakening, which thanks to Jenny’s perseverance is not the end of the film.
In an interview, Lynn Barber sardonically blames Albert Camus and the existentialist works that she had studied at school. She claims that she never questioned “David” about his life because existentialists don’t ask questions and don’t feel emotions. This is totally fallacious. Camus would argue that fulfilling one’s humanity is the ultimate goal of life. Live life to its fullest and be all you can be — that’s why Sisyphus pushes the rock up the mountain.
It is true that Jenny abandons the objective facts of school for the subjective fancies of a life with David but she was not practising existentialism. She did not fully consider her choices and how they would change her. Having published an autobiography this past year, Ms. Barber may be more capable of reflecting on the consequences that she suffered by she did none of this at the time.
Camus is an absurdist. (I suspect that) He would say that irrespective of your situation, it is your duty to find meaning in your life, not to escape it. One’s dilemma may be paradoxical, but it is imperative that they find solace, however possible. There is never an easy answer. Likewise, teachers cannot abandon those who are not enthralled by learning; they must convince them by inspiring their souls, not simply their minds.
The film is beautifully shot. Jenny’s small town comes to life on the screen and the audience understands why she wants to expand her life beyond the school walls. There is a big, bright world out there. Paris is vibrant; I still miss it. The characters and story are compelling. These events occurred in 1961 but it could just as easily been yesterday. Both young and old – teachers and students – can learn and be entertained by this work. ****