T/F Day Two: “Gypsy Davy”

Toward the end of Rachel Leah Jones’ film Gypsy Davy, screening at the True/False Film Festival, the filmmaker alludes to a classic lyric by concluding that her estranged father “was not strumming [her] pain, but his own.” The same could be said of her own film, which strums her own pain without the grace provided by her father’s gift.

The standard story on David Serva (aka David Jones) is a starry one: from humble American roots, he followed his muse in the 1960s from Berkeley, California to Moron de la Frontera, Spain, where he became a respected virtuoso guitarist in the Flamenco tradition, considered as a native and a master of the style. His glamorous performing career came at a cost, though, which his daughter seeks to expose.

Jones was also something of a serial monogamist, which Rachel reveals by peeling away layers of domesticity, interviewing five different children with five (or so) different women. It’s hard not to see the film as motivated by disappointment, which colors all the discarded women in Jones’ past, his children, and also, perhaps unsurprisingly, Jones himself. But Rachel’s own disappointment has been channeled more into anger than the others – so much so that even her conciliatory coda is punctuated by nastily passive-aggressive phrases.

The most meaningful scenes are the ones between David and Rachel. Rachel channels her radical political past: confrontational, direct, almost unable to control the pointedness of her questioning. But her father is diffident, disarming, and almost at ease in acknowledging the pain he has caused and that he still feels. One only needs to see the progression from David’s dashingly ambivalent young man to the smirking face and worried brow of the present day to see that it flows through him as strongly as Rachel resists it. In their final onscreen meeting, in Spain, David asks Rachel what she wants, and she doesn’t know what to do with the question, having lost her gusto.

Although David Jones is right to acknowledge his extreme domestic shortcomings, the younger Jones seems to gloss over her father’s abundant artistry, indicting him as a man and letting his music speak for itself. Her film is so clouded by bitterness that it’s hard to tell what that means, but for the dazzling beauty of the musical interludes.

Advertisements

About Travis Bird

New Orleans musician and writer
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to T/F Day Two: “Gypsy Davy”

  1. Travis Bird hello,

    A small correction: My father’s stage name is David Serva, not “Silva.” And a thought: you might do well to remember that I didn’t just direct the film, I also edited it, so when you write: “But her father is diffident, disarming, and almost at ease in acknowledging the pain he has caused and that he still feels. One only needs to see the progression from David’s dashingly ambivalent young man to the smirking face and worried brow of the present day to see that it flows through him as strongly as Rachel resists it,” keep in mind that this too is my creation… As for my father’s music, it really does speak for itself. What doesn’t get mentioned, but speaks volumes in your review, is that as a musician and a man the film made you feel indicted too.

    Warmly,
    Rachel Leah Jones

    • Travis Bird says:

      Rachel:

      Correction made, highlighting the amateur nature of my commentary.

      I thought the film did tellingly contrast the current man against his younger self by using the archive material. I was speaking in the passage you reference about a progression that I saw vividly in the film, so I think you showed this quite well.

      I’m glad that you point this out: “as a musician and a man the film made you feel indicted too.” I was aware of this as I was watching the film and as I was writing, although of course that didn’t make it into the post. I was surprised at the extent to which I felt I “identified” with Serva as a guitarist, artist, man, etc. Without getting into the nature of that identification (for a more private moment), I do think it’s obvious that there were some complex and even defensive feelings influencing my response to the film. In a sense it’s a film about expectations – of what it means to be a father, an artist, or a child – which everyone responds to differently. Certainly people in the film comment on expectations, but for me as a viewer, it touched a peculiar nerve. Regardless of other reactions, I appreciate sincerely that the film engaged me in that way.

      • Right on. Glad you responded; glad you engaged — both me and the film.
        –rlj

      • SERVA, SERVA, SERVA — if you liked the man so much, please get his name right. SILVA is lingering.

        (upon re-reading your response, i’d say: do consider being more subjective in your own writing, because the thinking/feeling that informs one’s iterations always are. all the more so if my own subjectivity was off-putting to you in the film, which is totally legitimate; the most honest and powerful response to that would have been to reject it — but in kind.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s