Episode 2:
The Tree of Leeches
Episode Summary
Season 2 continues with the guys whispering wisdom and probing cosmic mysteries in Waco, Texas in Terrence Malick’s The Tree of Life.
Episode Notes
After a rather nosy leech anatomy segment (1:59), Aaron, Banks and Evan dive into The Tree of Life’s leechiest themes (6:55), scenes (18:32), and characters (30:35). To get some relief, the ...
Transcript
Evan 00:25
Hello everyone. Welcome back to the Leech Podcast, the most visceral podcast. I'm your host, Evan Cate, and I am joined by two brothers from Waco, Texas: Aaron Jones and Banks Clark. Hey guys.
Aaron 00:37
Ayy!
Banks 00:38
How's it going?
Evan 00:40
The Leech Podcast is a show about movies that suck the life out of you. But they also stick with you. They may even be good for you, just like a leech. Today on the pod we will be discussing The Tree of Life, a 2011 film written and directed by Terrence Malick. It stars Brad Pitt, Sean Penn, Jessica Chastain, a number of excellent child actors. It was nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Cinematography at the Academy Awards. It did not win any of these awards, but let's be honest, it should have won everything.
Aaron 01:19
Ayy!
Evan 01:20
Agreed, Banks, or no?
Banks 01:23
I think we might have a sense of what the opinions of this film might be. We'll see. We'll see.
Aaron 01:27
Oh, oh, some sweet disagreement! Yes.
Evan 01:30
Yes, that will foreshadow maybe some disagreement down the road. But before we dive into those, we want to remind you that we're always looking to expand our leech pond. So please, find us on Twitter @leechpodcast, on Instagram, @theleechpodcast, and our website, theleechpodcast.com. All right, as always, we want this show to be entertaining and also educational. So Aaron, can you please teach us about the leeches?
Aaron 01:59
Teach us about the leeches? Yes, I will happily [oh gosh]. So folks, I usually like to do some leech research connected somehow to the content of the film we're looking at, and today, I want to point to a moment in The Tree of Life, one of the most controversial, strange parts of the movie: the inclusion of dinosaurs [yes] in the movie [yes].
Banks 02:24
Not going to lie, did not see that one coming.
Aaron 02:26
Ever baffling and mysterious. And I started looking for connections between leeches and dinosaurs. And I ran upon this article from Science Daily, which was also echoed and Nat Geo and the American Museum of Natural History about a discovery in 2010: a special kind of leech in Peru that was found up a girl's nose who was swimming in a river.
Banks 02:53
Oh.
Evan 02:53
Nope. Nope.
Banks 02:56
Yeah. Is that the end? Please let that be the end.
Aaron 02:59
And this is a very special kind of leech that researchers were surprised at the size of its teeth, to quote the article, "enormous teeth" on this little leech baby. It loves to go to these inside orifices of soft tissue and just clamp, bite in. And they named it, because of these teeth, which are among the largest in all of leech kind [yes], the Tyrannobdella Rex.
Evan 03:28
No way.
Banks 03:31
Oh, my gosh, and this is in Peru, you said?
Aaron 03:34
This is in Peru, yes, far away from us at this moment. Be careful where you travel. And I will quote one of the researchers who said, "We named it Tyrannobdella Rex because of its enormous teeth. Besides, the earliest species in this family of these leeches no doubt shared an environment with dinosaurs about 200 million years ago when some ancestor of our T Rex leech may have been up that other T Rex's nose."
Evan 04:00
Wow, wow. We've come full circle – much like in this movie when the kids find a dinosaur bone.
Aaron 04:08
"It's a dinosaur bone!" Yep. And that's all for me on Leech Anatomy.
Banks 04:15
Great. There go my plans to visit Peru.
Evan 04:18
Lot to sink your teeth into there. [Ayy! Ohh.] Sorry. Well, thank you, Aaron. Much to ponder. Banks, let's get into this movie. What happened in this film?
Banks 04:30
Ohh, this movie. Quick spoiler warning: if you haven't seen it, make sure to watch it. It's a fantastic film. It is a film that will test you, something you got to work for, but it is a film that many hail as a masterpiece, even if other people kind of love to hate it. It's a divisive film. In the end, this is a story about a family from Waco, Texas, and them going through the struggles of life. You meet them – this is the O'Brien family – the father played by Brad Pitt, the mom, Mrs. O'Brien, played by Jessica Chastain. And we get to see them coming together, we see the start of a family, and this incredible sense of optimism. And then we also fast forward in life, till when their second child dies, and see the grief that hits that moment. Then again, the movie takes you further forward. And we are introduced to the eldest son, who is Jack, played by Sean Penn, who is still grappling with the own success of his life – is the life that he wanted to live – seeing him struggle with the death of his brother, who he loved. And then the movie yet again takes us further to the metaphysical moments and contemplations of the Big Bang, and creation, and evolution, and all these things. So if there was any question if this movie was asking big questions, you would know that this is a movie that does it. And it is a movie that tries to pull all those things together. If this movie is about a tree of life, it's almost like this family is a leaf, and it's trying to get a perspective on the whole tree from that lens. And it has these grand sweeping views of the Big Bang and the cosmos interlaced with some of the most stunning pictures of growing up. And really, what it shows is this very small moment of just a few formative years in Jack's life, and how they deal with struggle, and then how later in life, he then grows up into somebody different. And the movie ends with this very– with a scene of walking through a landscape that is both metaphorical and dreamlike and real– where there's this hopeful sense and this reuniting with family. And it's this question of, what does it mean?– and how do we deal with these huge questions? So that's the movie, and we have to figure out what to do with it now.
Evan 06:55
Banks, that was so brilliant. I feel like this film is so expansive and full of imagery and sounds and ideas. And you really, I think, pulled out some really nice, a nice summary there. So thank you. Okay. We want to dive into Leechy themes of this film. Aaron, do you have one?
Aaron 07:18
Oh, my gosh, so many Leechy themes here. The theme that I want to start with is a theme, a single word: Repetition. Repetition.
Evan 07:32
Interesting, interesting.
Banks 07:33
Repetition?
Aaron 07:35
Exactly. Exactly. So I mean, the film actually is literally filled with repeating images that continue to accumulate meaning and to therefore kind of sink deeper and bite deeper into us – T Rex style. But what I mean by repetition– so I'm going to pull in a quote here from my old friend, Irish philosopher John O'Donohue, who talks about us needing "to heal patterns of repetition," that are in us and can kind of catch us. And I'm thinking about the pattern of repetition that is in Jack, the son in this film, who finds himself wanting to be a new creation and wanting to be his own person, but caught in the repetitive cycle of living out the ambitious, harmful, and even vicious lifestyle and character of his father. And to see the painful conflict between Jack and his father, and the way that he almost can't seem to resist the cycle of repetition, becoming his worst enemy, his own parent– it's so painful to me. It's so leechy: sticks with, takes out, but also there might be something good for me there. That's the leechy theme for me, is this repetition.
Evan 07:36
Can you say it again?
Banks 09:00
Man, you can tell, it's gonna be this kind of episode, isn't it? First go, we're already pulling in the philosophers.
Aaron 09:09
It is yeah.
Banks 09:10
The repetition, the cycle– it's cycles, right? The sense of cycling and yeah, the whole idea of Jack being this conflicted person who that conflict, it never leaves him, right? And that's the thing that strikes like the sense of discomfort in Sean Penn's character, and sort of adult Jack. Like, that sits with me, and I don't know, I really– what are other moments of repetition throughout that you see?
Evan 09:38
Oh, I have something.
Aaron 09:38
Yeah, Evan, jump in.
Evan 09:38
There's the flame that shows up. I counted, I thought it was three, but I think it's actually four times in the film at major moments: at the beginning, before the creation sequence, and then at the very end. There's also sunflowers at the beginning and the end of the film. There's the sound of birds with the flame often, but also the bird at the end of the film near the bridge. There's these sand, or like, cliffs, which remind me of Petra, in Jordan, or maybe in parts of Utah. Those show up again and again. There's doorways the characters walk through [doorways!], there's underwater scenes, there's waterfalls,
Aaron 10:17
I mean, and the tree imagery, let's go for the tree imagery. [Yeah, trees!] I mean let me let me say what's going on– I mean, something else that's going on here. I mean, the whole title of the film 'Tree of Life,' right, is this echo, or this repetition, from the kind of Genesis story, the original origin and creation story in the Judeo-Christian tradition. But I also think this idea of repetition, this cycle, is connected to that old kind of Augustinian idea of original sin, right? [Yeah.] Which is this kind of idea that that which is wrong with me is something inherited, that there's a generational sense that harm and bad habits and bad character are passed on and on in this terrible, unbroken cycle.
Evan 11:03
And then it gets personalized too– so Jack finds himself wrapped up in it himself, even though he doesn't want to be. I think a question– and maybe we'll get to this later– is: Are there also virtuous cycles in the film? [Ahh!] Well, I think there is one, but I'm just gonna put a pin on it. And we'll come back to it.
Aaron 11:18
Yeah, let's get some other themes, other themes that are on y'all's minds.
Evan 11:20
Yeah, yeah, Banks, do you have a theme?
Banks 11:21
So the thing that I've always been fascinated with about this film, is the way that there's a boldness to this artwork. You know, when this movie came out, it was both immediately considered a masterpiece and immediately just blasted by critics. People loved it and hated it. You know, theaters were putting up disclaimers saying, 'this is not a normal film, we will not refund your ticket,' because people were walking out so much – it was a problem. [Ha!] There's a boldness, and for me, that's the leechy thing about this film: it's that Terrence Malick, who's always been, you know, a very bold, creative, risk-taking director willing to be very artistic in the way that he conveys stories. But this is a story where it's not about resolution, this is not something that gives you an answer. This is such a story about living and process. It's about how there's a joy in thinking and experiencing that is not from it telling you any sort of answer that you are not going to have to come up with on your own. Right?
Evan 12:21
Yes, yeah.
Banks 12:28
You know, if Aaron's gonna quote a philosopher, I'm gonna quote a philosopher. I'm gonna pull out– so I'm gonna pull out a little Viktor Frankl [okay!], a little more psychology in here. But Viktor Frankl talks about the meaning of life and Man's Search for Meaning – he talks about, it's not about what the meaning of life is, it's recognizing that we are being asked, What is the meaning of life? We are the ones who have to enact the answer to that question through our lives. And there's something about– that resonates with me in this film– that I think about every time, because it's about the experience, it's about how– what you get from it– not about it telling you what you should. And for me, that theme is throughout because it is disjointed, because there's tons of this film that is just hard to– it's very personal– but there's gonna be tons that nobody can make sense of. And I think that's okay. So I don't know, for me, irresolution and process.
Evan 13:31
That's lovely.
Aaron 13:33
Well, I think, Banks– I think what you're kind of picking up on is– I think that this film kind of takes us through the experiences of an individual's consciousness, most of the time, in this really weird, fragmentary, blurry sense of memory– of an adult trying to recall their own childhood. [Yeah.] And we're never told that that's happening, but I think it's kind of clear that when adult Jack is looking backwards, he's trying to make sense of all this stuff that he only has pieces of. And that's where I think that the making of the meaning– he's having to do that, and we're having to do that, simultaneously.
Evan 14:11
Yeah, I hadn't thought about it as such a deeply existentialist text or film until you described it that way, Banks– that the audience has to make meaning of this piece of art, and I think you're right, and that Jack has to as well.
Aaron 14:25
Well, I think what's interesting is that Jack never actually says out loud some answer that he's come up with– he never does. And in fact, the only answer I think the film gives is through visuals. It's all through imagery that we're meant to sort of come to an understanding.
Evan 14:40
And the whispers [Ayy!]. *The whispers*
Banks 14:43
It's true.
Evan 14:44
"Mother, brother, it was they that led me to your door."
Banks 14:50
Just insert that. We just have to have a segment, we'll just like play some like intense organ music, right, and just have us whispering, you know, esoteric truths into– that'll be fun.
Evan 15:04
Oh, what do you think Leech on a Beach is going to be?!
Banks 15:06
Oh, it's great. Pull out the organs. We're gonna have an organ donor. [Ohh!] Anyway, a funny– just one last thing about that is– Sean Penn, who played you know, adult Jack, ended up at one point saying in an interview, like, 'I don't even know what my character is doing in this film.' And so like, the very– some of that has to do with like the editing and like post production– but some of it, like– it's so interesting that the character playing it, themselves, were a little bit confused about, What am I doing with this? And he delivers a profound performance, it's not unsuccessful, but it just speaks to the challenge of processing one's own life. And really, this film is hard to process. It is not easily digestible.
Evan 15:52
Yes, agreed. So my theme is, I think probably the most straightforward of the three of ours. And it comes from a line of the film, which is "love every blade of grass." And this line is pulled actually from The Brothers Karamazov. So if you guys are going to quote, famous writers, I'm going to quote famous writers. n The Brothers Karamazov, there's a famous monk named Father Zosima who's known for his wisdom and insight. And a large section of the story is just him narrating his life and the spiritual wisdom that he's accumulated. And there's a famous passage where he says, "Brothers, have no fear of men's sin. Love a man even in his sin, for that is the semblance of divine love and is the highest love on Earth. Love all God's creation, the whole and every grain of sand in it. Love every leaf, every ray of God's light, love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things." This is embodied very particularly in Mrs. O'Brien, the Jessica Chastain character. And I think in ways in RL, the second brother, as well. [Right.] We'll talk more about them. But I picked this as a leechy theme, in part because– I mean there were other ones we could have picked: transgression, the loss of innocence, loss in general, the violence of nature. I thought about all those, I think they're worthy themes, and they are there. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought, loving all creation in this full sense that Father Zosima describes, and that Mrs. O'Brien basically paraphrases at the end of the film, that's actually very difficult to do. And it's painful. It's painful for Mrs. O'Brien. It's painful for RL. It's painful for me as I watch the pain that they experience because they try to love everything in the film. Mrs. O'Brien tries to love her husband, who is emotionally and physically abusive. And she continues to love him. It's uncomfortable. That sticks with me. And yet it's also loving all creation. It's inspiring, in a way, and the images that stick with me in this film that I want to take forward are these moments of deep forgiveness, love, beauty, and joy. So that's my theme. I don't think it's a typical leechy theme, but it is one that– it is painful for me in this film, but also, I think, really profound. [Wow]
Aaron 18:17
Yeah, I think it's this beautiful fruit that is a– if you cut it open, there's seeds of pain inside. There are the seeds of deep pain and hurt inside it. Yeah, absolutely. But it's beautiful. Ohh, let's talk about some scenes, right?
Banks 18:32
Oh my gosh
Evan 18:33
Yeah.
Aaron 18:34
I mean, they're already getting conjured here. I mean, this is a film of fragments. So like, which ones of these are the leechiest? What do you think, Banks?
Banks 18:42
Well, I mean, one of the hard things about a scene is– it pulls out how, in the film, the scenes are fragments, almost like broken memory, right? And it makes it incredibly hard, at least for me, to pick a single scene, because there isn't the normal narrative peaks and valleys that build the sense of continuity that sometimes make it easier, oddly enough. Because it's so fragmented. [Yeah.] It's actually harder for me to pick one [yeah] when I think about it, because there are so many. The thing that I have thought about most when I go back to the film, it's a very simple scene and it's the scene when– it's after Jack, when he was a kid, has sort of hurt RL. They go back to a bedroom and Jack hands RL pretty much a slab of wood. It's like a club. [Yes.] And he says 'you can hit me as hard as you want.' And in that moment, RL, who is this really sweet kid who's kind of trying to figure out his own way, but clearly kind of takes after his mom a little bit more than Jack does, kind of pretends, but in the end just has all this love, and you can see the processing getting played out. What do I do with this? What do I– how do I process this? And this idea of, What does it mean to love? What does it mean to put aside hurt, to let yourself be hurt? And to not seek to do that hurt back? What does it mean to live in this way, and so much of that is just pumping through the veins and arteries of this film. And this is towards the end of the film, and for me, it just spoke so profoundly. And it's so clearly haunting to Jack, into his – at this point – late adulthood, because it's just a piece of irresolution he was never able to find. A forgiveness that he was still seeking. So for me, that's it.
Evan 20:41
I love that word haunting, Banks, because I think in a way he is haunted by the goodness and the forgiveness of RL. I think there is something haunting about that for him, which is really interesting.
Aaron 20:51
And I even wrote down, you know, he asks a question, the whispers come back at that moment, and he asks, "What was it you showed me?" Like, that is a moment of profound mystery to him. Because it is so out of alignment with his own nature and his own inclination. 'What was it you showed me? I didn't know how to name you then,' he says right after that gesture from his brother. It– that's a moment that cracks open the mystery for him, honestly. [Yes.] Yeah, I think that is a leechy moment that kind of cracks open the mystery of– maybe of goodness, of the possibility of goodness amidst pain? But I want to look at this moment– ugh, like this film sticks with me, it just hurts me, because it so profoundly captures these moments of disorientation in childhood. [Yes.] Where you don't understand what's happening to you, you don't understand the problem of evil, just the fact that the world doesn't operate in a way that's safe or meant to make you feel secure, or meant to make sure that everyone gets to live forever. And so the moment where they're swimming in the river, [right], and all of a sudden, there's a boy who looks very much like one of Jack's own siblings, who's floating dead, who has drowned. And the film lends this chaotic sense of disorientation. And it's one of the– also a time where the film, where Jack starts to whisper, and where the boys have questions like, 'Was this child bad? Such that he had to die?' They asked the mother, 'Will this happen to you, too?' And Jack actually says one of the– kind of the prime questions of the film– that the mother asks of God after RL dies. So after RL dies, the mother whispers to God, "Where were you?" And this is the moment when Jack says it himself. He sees a boy die in the river. He has to go to the boy's funeral. This boy resembles his brother, the mother, who cradles that child, looks like his own mother, all of this. And again, it's a repetition, it's a mirror. And he says to God, "Where were you? You let a boy die. You let anything happen." And that moment– of those children coming into direct contact with mortality, and the senselessness of loss? I can't– that doesn't let go of me.
Evan 23:30
It's so painful.
Banks 23:31
There's so much about that scene that– you're right, it is about disorientation and this sense of chaos. And this– this frame that you keep returning to, Aaron– I'm really struck by it, you know, of seeing the whole film in this– from the avenue of being all of Jack's unresolved memories coming to the fore. And that really speaks so profoundly to that moment, like, especially the way– like the perception of the Father as well. Here's this guy who is trying his best, but yeah, he's abusive, but is somebody who is seen as somebody who can do things and get things done and here's– he could not even save. So here's a father who could not do what needed to be done. And also, I might add, was not doing proper CPR on the child! And so [oh man!] I would be lying if I wasn't very distracted by the last the by the distinct lack of chest compressions.
Evan 24:25
CPR protocols have changed. This film is set in the 1950s. But I appreciate– again, this is a public service announcement. In fact, chest compressions are more important now than not breathing.
Aaron 24:47
Oh God. This took a very grim turn.
Evan 24:49
I have another grim turn– in Jack's– in the scenes where Jack is growing up and heading towards cycles or repetitions of bad behavior, we might say. And I do think it's interesting– it comes after the scene that you described, Aaron, where he begins to ask these questions. It's also in a part of the film where Mr. O'Brien's misdeeds are ramping up. He's become much more aggressive, much more abusive, but he goes out of town. And when he goes out of town, the boys are initially celebrating with their mom. It's very playful and fun. And Jack also finds himself with time alone. And so the scene I want to talk about is the scene where he goes into the home of a neighbor woman. He goes through a doorway, into her home, he knows that she's left the house. And he proceeds to look through her things and eventually look into her her drawers, her dressers, and actually takes one of her night gowns. It's a very intimate garment that he takes. And I think it's incredibly uncomfortable to watch. Maybe one of the most foolish things I did as a teacher was show this film to 17 and 18 year olds. This was the scene that I felt most uncomfortable watching with them. I felt like I didn't quite know what to make of the scene, and I don't think they did either. But it is incredibly uncomfortable. You're worried he's gonna get found, that she'll come back. But even more so, you're worried about, what does this mean for Jack? What is he doing? And the way the neighbor woman has been presented, she also echoes his mother in some very unsettling ways, I think: in what she wears, and how she puts her foot in the sprinkler, all these little details. And eventually Jack takes the night gown, runs to the river, and hides it in the dirt under a board. It is this image of shame, I think. [Yes.] This deep shame. Do you hear a boat in the distance, almost like someone's watching him? And I just feel in my bones this shame and discomfort that this young boy is experiencing. He's perhaps coming of age. It's sexually charged, I would say, this moment. [Yes.] But it's really disorienting. And I just– this scene is painful to watch. It sticks with me and is a very significant moment, I think, in his cycle of misbehavior and sin. But it's also, as he looks back on it, I think an important moment later on.
Banks 27:29
Yeah, for me when I just– what a portrait of shame, this physical object that he doesn't really even want, but he takes, and he can't get rid of it. Right? He puts it under the board. But then he like– he gets worried. And he throws it in a river and it just gets washed, but you can't destroy it. Right? It just lives on. And it's like– it flows into the ocean of Jack's subconscious. Whatever it is. It's still there. And that garment keeps returning in different ways.
Evan 28:03
Yeah. And I would say too, just to add to that– afterwards, when he goes home, he doesn't tell his mom what happened. She's suspicious of something. And he says to her, 'I can't talk to you anymore.' [Yeah.] This moment, has built a wall actually, between him and his mother. That, in the way it's presented in the film, I don't think that's resolved until the scene on the beach later on.
Aaron 28:23
The very end. [Yeah. Go Aaron.] Yeah. I mean, so I think what is so painful about this is that Jack is both doing this action, and it's also just happening to him. You know what I mean? Like, this is part of childhood transgression is– there's this very real sense in which you don't understand the choices you're making. And he says, he whispers, "What have I started? What have I done?" He doesn't even understand, kind of this– the ways that the quake, the seismic impact of that moment, will reverberate through the rest of his life. Like, you can't just send that moment away. You can't just throw it into the river and let it go out of sight. Because it's always with you.
Banks 29:07
Absolutely. [Yes.] And I liked this idea of him being– like throwing it into the current. Because it's, you know, it's almost like he himself is trapped in the current of adolescence. I mean, doing stuff like this– it's just hard being a teenager, right? Like, kids do stupid stuff. Like, there's rebellion, and there's a need for that, right? There's a real need, and that's part of how we grow up. That doesn't mean it makes sense. It doesn't mean that there's– you know what to do with it. But I really liked that way of putting it, Aaron, this idea of him being trapped in it as well. Right?
Aaron 29:43
Yeah, I think that's where the idea of thresholds and doorways becomes so potent– that he's entered a new space. He's walked into a space, and actually, the moment where he hurts his brother at the end– closer to the end where he shoots his finger with a BB gun and starts to feel that similar terrible heat coming up in him, of pain and regret– he walks into this abandoned cabin. He's literally walking into a space that cannot sustain life and passing through these doorways of poor decisions that will actually become a new home for you, and that it's not easy to leave.
Evan 30:25
Okay. We've already begun to unpack some of these characters. Let's think about our leechy characters.
Aaron 30:31
Oh, oh, come on. Wahh, leechiest characters in this film.
Evan 30:35
It's difficult. I'll start us off. I'm tempted to say Mr. O'Brien, or Jack, those both jump out to me as very worthy candidates. But to stick with my theme of loving all creation, I'm going to talk about RL. [Wow.] And I want to come back to that word 'haunt' that Banks said. I actually wrote in my notes, I didn't talk to banks, but I wrote, 'Can goodness haunt you?' [Wow.] Does it take something out of you to be around someone who is so clearly pure of heart, winsome, creative, and loving? It clearly does that to Jack. He's both drawn to RL, he loves him. But he also at some level knows he has his dad inside of him. You know, he says, 'Mother, father, always you [wrestle] inside me, always you will.' And we don't get the same sense that RL has that war inside. And maybe he does, but we only have Jack's perspective. [Right.] And so I feel like this jealousy of RL that Hack has – he wants to toughen him up, he wants to fight with him. And so in a strange way, RL's life and witness–
Banks 30:35
Another lychee scene–
Evan 30:39
Yeah, oh my gosh. I guess his life just sticks with me in a way that not many other characters do in the film. I think about the scene of him playing guitar on the porch, right. And he is finding harmony with Mr. O'Brien while he plays the piano. [Yeah.] Mr. O'Brien who has been abusive and cruel in so many ways, and yet, can appreciate beauty and art, and RL too, and he seeks to make harmony with him. Which echoes actually– his posture on the porch echoes Mrs. O'Brien, luxuriating with cats on the porch, like, in harmony with all creation. It's a strange image, but the harmony of these two characters who seek goodness and love even in the face of difficult brothers and husbands and fathers. So it takes it out of me to watch him suffer at the hands of those characters. But it's sticking with me so much, that notion of making harmony even in painful places.
Aaron 32:38
Yeah, I want to talk about– I do want to talk about Mr. O'Brien. I think your emphasis on RL's playing of music is really crucial here. Because Mr. O'Brien is someone who didn't have to be the person that he became. [Yes.] He's someone whose original life ambitions were to make art, to make music. He's a wonderful organist and pianist. He wanted to be a professional musician, but then, sort of, reality took over or something, right? Like, the demands of a family provider– masculine family provider of the 1950s kind of took over. And he is living a life that is so out of alignment with his own true nature, his own best nature, which was to be this musician, to be someone who could hear and participate in the glory. And because of these external demands, he puts on a different set of clothes, the wrong set of clothes. And as he does, he begins to act terribly. [Yes.] To become arrogant, and selfish, and cruel, and small. And because he's so disappointed by the ways that his efforts to be ambitious in the world are continually rejected, and he fails, and he takes that out on other people. And we talked about in our Season 1 review episode, this idea of people who are very deeply insecure, being leechy characters. [Yeah.] And people who don't understand their own insecurity, who are both 'bold and pathetic'– to quote that episode. [Yeah.] And I think there's a way in which, if you watch that man trying to work out in the garden, the words 'bold and pathetic' apply to his efforts. And I mean, so he's very much an archetypal– like– He's God the Father. There's a moment where Jack whispers, "Our Father," and you can't tell if he's talking about 'Our Father who art in heaven,' or 'Our father, who art in this house hurting people.' You don't know which father he's talking about. And to see him as the archetypal Adam. He's the failed gardener. [Oh man.] He's the failed 'our father.' He is the one who hurts those who are just trying to love and forgive, because he's insecure and he's small. And he is leechy to me. It hurts me to be inside that film with him.
Banks 35:10
But he does play a mean organ.
Aaron 35:14
Doesn't he play a fugue from Bach?
Evan 35:17
He really likes– was it Brahms?
Aaron 35:19
Brahms! Wow!
Banks 35:23
He is such– you know, I think especially [of] the dinner scene where you see the most profound physical conflict. And it's so scary. And so– that scene does stick with me. Again, there are all these leechy scenes and these leechy characters and they just come together. You know, this movie, good heavens. It's leechy and it's sharp and it's fragmented and those fragments can cut ya. But for me, the fragment that cuts deepest is Jack. And Jack, like– this isn't fair, because Jack is like a double, right? There's both young Jack and old Jack. And so I'm going to combine them and see if I can't win by you know, cheesin' the system a little bit. But I'm gonna say that, you know, you have– I think it's Hunter McCracken is the child actor who does wonderful job– with Sean Penn obviously plays adult Jack. But this is a character who is woven into the story like a thread that doesn't fit. It's both him, and– but the ways in which the adult Jack sequences fit in, they are disorienting, because it breaks up an already broken up story. And you don't know how it all fits together, and you never do. It's like everyone dances and comes together on the beach at the end, and he walks through the door. Okay... What do we do with this character? And for me, you know, this character is– he is this state of confusion. As an adult, he is just that same confused kid. He is still trying to– he's successful, I think he's an architect. Right. And, you know, for me, it reminds me of this thing my granddad used to say, you know, "Be very, very careful what you wish for. Because the great irony of life is that you have a very good chance of getting it." And Jack, here, like my granddad's name was Jack, and so like that also is a bit of a weird thing. [Oh wow.] But anyway, the point is like, here's this character who does not know what he wants, doesn't know what to do. He's pulled in all these different directions. And I even now– you can hear me struggling to convey who this person is. Because this movie itself struggles to– because Sean Penn himself is like, 'I don't know.' And for me, a movie that has spent so much time and effort and intentionality to say something, and still can't finish that circle, and that asks such a profound question, that that sticks with me. And that's why he's my leechiest character, because it is the epitome of irresolution, which was my leechy theme.
Evan 38:05
I love that.
Aaron 38:05
I do think we should talk later about whether there might not be ways to solve some of the riddle here, whether there might not be some resolution. But I want to– I just want to affirm what you're saying about Jack. And for me, just to go back again to Season 1 in review, one reason that Jack is so potent for me is because I just see myself in him and my own childhood in his childhood. And that mirror, and the intimacy that he feels with his difficulties and that I feel with him, gets him under my skin– gets the proboscis in and the blood pumping out. So Jack's very leechy for me, too.
Evan 38:45
Yeah, and, you know, I made an argument for RL and I'll stand by it. But you guys probably convinced me that it's Jack or Mr. O'Brien. And I think the film does interesting things too, visually, to tie them together. So in the adult Jack scenes, it's these tall buildings that are artificial, right? They're steel and glass, very crisp edges, 90 degree angles, almost like you're in a maze, a modern maze. And early in the film, when we see Mr. O'Brien at the oil rig or oil refinery where he is ,it's also– it's like pipes. So it's a different setting, but it's these right angles, artificial setting, very strong lines, whereas when you see RL or Mrs. O'Brien, they're near trees, which are organic and not at sharp edges. So I think visually, and in many other ways, the film is wanting you to draw that contrast, but then also see the connection between Jack and his father, visually.
Aaron 39:49
I just want to point to one more image there, which is that the smokestacks at the oil refinery look so much like some tree trunks you've just seen in the film. [Yes.] There's this mirroring, this duplication, but then you get to adult Jack's office, and there's literally a big tree and it's sitting in a wooden box. [Yes.] Like it's about to be planted, but currently it's a tree in a coffin, right? Getting planted in this artificial–
Evan 40:15
Yeah, and the smokestacks are also parodies of trees, right? They literally push smoke– that destroys the atmosphere– out. Whereas trees suck in things that make the the atmosphere cleaner.
Banks 40:28
Yeah, no, completely. Something really interesting that you said, Evan, that you're getting convinced– it just makes me wonder something. [Yes.] Why is it that you feel the need to run from RL as leechy? Because why is it that the complicated, the bold and pathetic characters, are the ones that we have always gravitated towards as leechy? [Yeah.] And why is it that the Mrs. O'Briens and RLs of the leech world have never gotten that? I don't know how to answer that.
Evan 41:01
Well, that's one reason why I was wanting to make a case for him. [Yeah.] And it reminded me actually of our Pan's Labyrinth episode, I think we talked about Mercedes as potentially a leechy character.
Banks 41:12
That's right. I was thinking the same thing.
Evan 41:14
Yeah, I do– I think that's a fair question. And I think RL haunts this film, and haunts Jack and Mrs. O'Brien, in particular. His loss haunts the film profoundly. It's not anything he intended, or did. He's not a bad actor in the ways that Mr. O'Brien is. But his presence haunts the film in a way that's deeply leechy for me.
Banks 41:36
It's a thing that I'd like to explore more: How is it that the good and the wonderful can be leechy, just as [gasp] the despicable, the bold, and the pathetic? [Yes.] That's a question for me. And maybe there's a way that we can focus on the good in another way. So what do you guys think?
Evan 41:56
Yes.
Aaron 41:59
Is it time to go on vacation?
Banks 42:00
I think we can use a little vacation.
Evan 42:02
There– I think we should. I mean, let's do a little Leech on a Beach.
Banks 42:08
Ohh, get into the sun!
Evan 42:21
Okay, now, interestingly, like 'The Master,' there is a beach scene in this film. However, it's very different than 'The Master's' beach scene.
Banks 42:31
I'm grateful for that.
Evan 42:33
I wouldn't necessarily call that– this beach scene in 'The Tree of Life'– comic relief [I would not] like our normal Leech on the Beach. So I'll just kick us off here with my own Leech on a Beach in this film. I think the whispers are deeply profound, and I want to make an argument for why they're great, and I can do that down the road. But they are also, from a different angle, kind of funny, and easy to parody. And I think Malick's later films become sort of a parody of himself. But it made me think about– and part of this is because I've had a head cold this week, nd so I've had to whisper a little bit– so I thought about what I would want to whisper to you guys during this segment. [Haha!] So... "Aaron, Banks, it was leeches that led me to your podcast."
Aaron 43:20
[Hahaha] No way.
Evan 43:26
And sorry, sorry, one more: "Leeches, always you war inside me, always you will."
Banks 43:37
Are they in your nose? That's the question.
Aaron 43:39
They're warring one in one nostril, one in the other. Oh God. I think for me, it's just like, it's the moments of their childhood that are temporarily beautiful. Like when they're chasing the mother around with a lizard that they caught outside. [That's right.] And everyone is just shrieking with joy and terror and running around the house, running amok, or they're out in the fields just kicking around– at the points where they're not harming animals to be clear. And the points where they're finding the 'dinosaur bone.'
Banks 44:18
'You let a frog die.'
Aaron 44:20
That poor frog! "It's an experiment!" I have to say, that like one really wicked child, who was kind of like the devil and the tempter tempting Jack into misdeeds, that he's kind of comically villainous. I would also almost call him a Leech on a Beach figure.
Banks 44:41
I don't know like– if anyone said like, 'I need comic relief,' I would not point them to 'Tree of Life' as a movie in general. [No.] Like, there are other movies, you know, like, 'There Will Be Blood.' Evan you said with 'The Master' even, you return to these movies and they get funny in ways that you wouldn't expect. [Yeah.] Maybe that's true for this movie, but for me, it just like, it doesn't have the same comic relief. But what it does have is incre– like, the visual impact, and the musical impact– the synesthesia of this movie will hit you. And it has some incre–, it's just, what it does is it creates this atmosphere of sentimentality, this atmosphere of safety of childhood. And like, I'm watching this movie, I'm like, Waco, Texas? That looks like a good place to grow up at times. And like, the way that they're able to create that feeling for somebody who's like, I will never go to Waco, Texas ever– but like, the ability to create that sense, and that atmosphere of innocence is, in my opinion, just– it just took my breath away. And it took me back to those– my own moments of innocence, the ability to evoke that–
Aaron 46:02
I mean, the film looks like paradise. [Ooph.] It's a paradise, it's Edenic man, it's Edenic, this film.
Banks 46:09
Edenically Synesthesia, there we go.
Aaron 46:12
Oh, gasp.
Banks 46:13
It's the name of a jazz album.
Evan 46:16
Oh gosh.
Aaron 46:17
More album titles from the Leech Podcast.
Evan 46:23
Okay, well, Banks, I think actually you've hit– you're transitioning us really nicely into Hirudotherapy with that comment. Because we want to think about, Why do we need this film? What is the medicine? There are very painful moments we've discussed. But why do we need it? What do we learn from watching this, experiencing it? As you described it, Banks, we exist, and are active in the watching of it. Why do we need it?
Aaron 46:47
You know, I want to go back to this imagery of doors. [Yeah.] I think, I mean I have some theories and some ideas about why we need this film. And one is that I think it places this emphasis on thresholds: of being in one part of your life, and knowing that there's another place you could be, but not knowing how to get there. And I want to go back to that quote about repetition from John O'Donoghue earlier, and just share a little more of it. And then another quote that I think's going to help tie it together, where he talks about thresholds. He says "a threshold is a line which separates two territories of spirit." And I think you can see ways that's true in this film: the door in the desert that leads all of a sudden to a beach, it leads to a different territory of spirit. And O'Donoghue says, "I think when we cross a new threshold, if we cross worthily, what we do is we heal the patterns of repetition that were in us that had caught us somewhere." And I'm wondering how does one cross into a threshold? And I actually think that this film poses an answer. How do we cross worthily a threshold? And I think that the answer has to do with asking questions. Because this whole movie, I think, from start to finish is peppered with questions. 'Where were you? Why did this happen? Who are you? Where are you? What have I done?' And I think that questions actually– like, agreeing not to answer questions, but to live with questions, is part of the way that you cross the threshold. To quote Rilke now– oop, I had to!–to quote Rilke, he says, "I want to beg you as much as I can to be patient toward all that is unsolved in your heart" – irresolution, – "I want to beg you to be patient with all that's unsolved in your heart, and try to love the questions themselves, like locked rooms – [wow] still going – "and like books that are written in a very foreign tongue. Do not seek the answers now, which cannot be given you because you would not be able to live them. And the point is to live everything, live the questions now." And I think actually, what helps Jack cross this threshold is that maybe for the first time in his life, he's able to ask why, and ask 'Where were you?', and to not get– to not be too scared to live with the question, but to accept it. And I think there's something beautiful for me there: about threshold, and about questioning, and about not getting every answer I want, but being led through memory and through beauty and through pain, into a new spiritual territory, a new territory of spirit.
Banks 49:48
I think this movie does such a good job of signaling this, but also asking the viewer, in watching, to practice a little bit of it as well. Using the artform of movie, which is normally, traditionally in our current world, a space of consumption. [Passive.] Let's let's make this an active space of, how can this movie be an impediment and a threshold and a– like an impediment to just– it refuses just to be consumed, it is an impediment to that. This is why people walk out of the theater. It is an invitation to enact a little piece of that work in some way. I don't know. Were there a movie that sat unsolved in my heart, it would be 'Tree of Life.' And it is a movie that I think deserves the patience of that. And so, I don't know, I agree with you. And I– that speaks to me really profoundly, Aaron.
Evan 50:55
Banks, I want to pick up on the word 'active' that you said. I think that's true for the viewer. And I also think within the film, a certain kind of active love – I want to call it a blessing. I'm thinking of the hand of RL on Jack when he forgives him after the BB gun. I'm thinking of Jack's hand on the neighbor boy who had survived a fire. I think of Mrs. O'Brien's hand on adult Jack on the beach. [Right.] And adult Jack's hand on Mr. O'Brien on the beach. And– this is a stretch, but I maybe even want to consider the dinosaur's hand on the hurting dinosaur in the creation sequence. [Yeah, that's right.] To go back to my philosophical text, 'The Brothers Karamazov,' that book is haunted by questions. Why does God allow suffering? Why do children suffer? Why didn't Jesus stop that when he came? And countless other questions. And in that book, the questions are not answered directly. Again, we're given Father Zosima, who describes his insights and wisdom. And if you could sum it up, it would be something like, 'active love.' The only response to the questions, or a way to live the questions, is in active love and blessing. And I think that touch, that blessing of Jack, he doesn't know it in the moment, but it will set in motion a cycle, a virtuous cycle, that I think will allow him to step into that threshold you describe, Aaron, much further down the road, but it is that moment of active love that begins to transform him.
Aaron 52:40
What does the mother say? 'If you do not love, your life will pass you by?' The only way to sort of– to have a full life and a beautiful life– with pain. Now this is the thing that [yes] I think the mother learns, and that all the characters learn, is that having a good life and a beautiful life doesn't being immune from pain, just like Job. I mean, the story of Job is at the core of this film. And of course, that question, "Where were you? Where were you?" that the hu– [It's from Job] – the human people ask of God is the question from Job, where when Job wonders, 'Why am I suffering? And why am I hurting? And why is the world like this?', God asks Job a question. And this is where I think living with the questions becomes all the more interesting, when it's not even your question. But you're living with a question that has been given to you– maybe as a gift, and maybe as a hard gift. 'Where were you when I laid the foundations of the world? Where were you when I made the stars and they were singing for joy?' And I love that moment– where this film shows us the making of the stars. [Yeah.] And as the stars are being made– because this is a story– I mean, the making of the stars leads to the making of the sons, to the boys. [Yeah.] It's 16 minutes of birth scene. [Yeah.] Where everything that has been born is born leading up to these very exact children. And as those stars are being made, songs are being sung, and Evan, this gets back to your point– What song is being sung? In the text of Job it says they're singing for joy, and in the film, the Lacrimosa, which means weeping, and it's the song of the Mother of Sorrows. Mary, the Mother of Sorrows, our Mother of Sorrows, the Lacrimosa the song of tears, is the song that's being sung. And I think that it's this reflection on questions, 'Where were you?', and your very point, about love and creation being mixed with pain.
Evan 54:49
The Lacrimosa also shows up later in the film. [Yeah.] The chords of it play in the background after Jack shoots RL with the BB gun, when Jack is whispering his paraphrase of Romans 7– [Right]– "I do what I hate." That weeping over the pain of the universe, over the pain of human beings and their relationships, somehow that is woven into that moment, just as it was woven into the creation scenes. It's strange, I don't often– I don't quite know what to do with that– but this film poses those questions. Somehow there's a there's a connection between creation, and these moments of deep pain, and the tears of the Mother of God.
Banks 55:32
And there's a connection with beauty and love. [Yes.] You know, as Evan, you were saying this movie does– I think I agree– like, there is a repetition of goodness, there is a cycle– right?– that is a counter-rhythm to the destructive cycles [good word] that is resonating throughout the film. And it really– the dynamic between those two, right, they talk about– you know, the Way of Will versus the Way of Grace to go back to the old scholastic– [nature and grace] – Yeah, nature and Grace, I'm sorry. But the way that you see RL, the way that you see Mrs. O'Brien, the way that you see Jack at moments, really showing this incredible goodness– and that being a repetition. And I think that a lot of the music and a lot of the lighting and imagery– this is not a dark, low key film, like– this is a bright film that conveys a sense of beauty that is like Eden. And I think there is something to that throughout. And that is just as connected to the Lacrimosa and all these other things.
Aaron 56:41
I mean, is the point of this film that– like– the Tree of Life has never died, and the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden hasn't been locked away. But it's what the Father learns– it's a choice, right? "I missed the glory."
Evan 56:53
"I didn't notice the glory."
Aaron 56:55
I didn't notice it. Like the Garden of Eden wasn't locked away. I just didn't know I was in it.
Evan 57:00
Do we want to start to think about rating this movie? [Well–] Or is– I'm also open to more medicine. I think there's a lot of medicine here.
Aaron 57:08
Evan, I'm kind of pausing here. But I didn't know if you want to talk about any things that I know you might be reluctant to talk about. Or about the mother– [Yeah]– at the end. And if you don't want to, you don't have to.
Evan 57:21
Yeah. One of the ongoing medicines of this film for me, seeing it many, many times now, is toward the end when, before Mrs. O'Brien on the beach goes through her own threshold, she raises her hands to heaven, with what seem to be angels surrounding her, saying, "I give you my son." And it's this moment that brings maybe full circle her grief from the beginning of the film, where she eventually, like Mary, is able to say to God, "I give you my son." And it is a scene and a phrase that has lived with me in the three years since we lost Moses, my son. And I am not currently at a place where I can say that to God. I'm not ready to give him up. And yet in the film, her saying it is earned, it's authentic. I don't have any problems with it. In fact, it's almost inspiring. I long one day to be able to say something like that. But that moment in the film has, I don't know, it's been encouraging and has sat with me in a really personal way, in the last three years, in ways it didn't when I watched the film before Moses.
Aaron 58:47
I think, Evan, there's something you said at the end of Season 1, I wrote down this quote. You said, "I see the world differently having seen these films." [Yes.] And I think I'm just hearing that. You see this film differently, and you see the world differently.
Evan 59:07
Yeah, this film lives with me. It shapes my experience. It's been, I guess, a companion, and I don't know– some kind of counselor almost in the midst of my grief. Thanks for asking
Aaron 59:21
That's been on my mind all night.
Banks 59:25
Thank you for sharing that, Evan. Your words– the gravity of them– I can feel them. And I think that it's to the point where I'm just grateful for you saying anything and I'm not sure what to say. I'm just grateful that you said something– really grateful for you. You too Aaron. Love you guys but–
Aaron 59:54
Yeah, big love, guys. I'm just thinking about the ways that this film actually becomes I think its own kind of scripture. It performs the role of Scripture– to instruct, and to console, and to inspire, and also to challengem and to, I don't know, to cause conflict. I mean, yeah, like you said Banks, I mean, this is definitely a bit of a scholar's stone, right? That hits folks over the head. And they're like, What just happened to me?
Evan 1:00:29
It is a whole world though, Aaron, like you said about the scholar's stone. It is– it's not a metaphor for a world, it is a whole world.
Aaron 1:00:37
Yeah, from the first moment of creation, it's a world.
Banks 1:00:39
Absolutely.
Aaron 1:00:41
Shall we take– shall we stab? Should we get out our skewers and take a stab at some some Leech Ratings? I mean, I don't want to– and then we can talk more after but–
Banks 1:00:50
I think we need to.
Evan 1:00:51
Yep. Let's rate this film on leechiness. As always: one leech, not very leechy. Four leeches, very, very leechy–
Aaron 1:01:03
Maximal leech tank.
Evan 1:01:05
–and could be anywhere in between.
Aaron 1:01:09
So– go ahead.
Evan 1:01:10
I think– I don't know what my number is, maybe I'll know by the end of this comment. But this film, again, is so different than some of the other ones. It's not depicting certain kinds of vice in the ways that 'There Will Be Blood' is depicting greed, maybe. It is, again, a whole world that has lots of pain, a lot of difficult things to see, but also these staggering images of beauty and joy. So I think it's going to challenge us to rate this I think. [Oh man] I'm gonna go out on a limb put a three on it. In part, because I think even the beauty, as we've discussed, involves a lot of pain, like there is– there is weeping in these beautiful images of creation. That is woven into the film. And I think the film doesn't give you anything cheap in terms of beauty, the beauty is earned. But it is a painful beauty that has consequences for everybody involved. And so that's painful. That's takes something out of me. But, like I said, I live with this film. So it has stuck with me. So I'm at three and maybe could be tempted to four.
Aaron 1:02:13
Wow. I was just thinking about this film in contrast with 'The Master'. And I think this film, the world that it offers, has as much evil and deformity and disillusion as 'The Master' actually. [Interesting.] I think that Freddy Quell can like– lives in the same world, right? This 1950s America. He might live in a different state, like he might be over in Pennsylvania or California, but–
Evan 1:02:40
Aaron, do you feel like the at the end of 'Tree of Life,' and there's that bridge, do you feel like the Alethea boat is just about to sail underneath it?
Aaron 1:02:47
You're like, 'Oh my God, is that Freddy Quell?' No, but I I think that as I look back at last season, like– so many leech films are tragedies. And even Freddy, like there's this kind of– just a breakdown of a relationship– it's kind of a breakup movie at the end. And Tree of Life– ha, the 'Slow Boat to China,' I can't get away from it, okay? But Tree of Life, ultimately, it has a tragic event at its core. But that's not the focus of the movie, actually. [No.] We're never shown RL's death. The film isn't interested in showing us. And I think by the end, we're meant to read it as a story of redemption. Right? That there's this person who has gathered up these fragments, has asked these questions, has walked across the threshold, walked through a door out of one territory of the spirit into another. And I think that that for me kind of creates this light that is so bright that it takes away that third leech– like it burns away that third leech and takes it down to a two.
Evan 1:04:03
Nice. [Oh, wow.] Polarizing, just like audiences, right? Four or two?
Aaron 1:04:08
Yeah, yeah.
Banks 1:04:09
At least it's not like Fargo for me last season as a zero leecher.
Evan 1:04:13
Bold, bold.
Aaron 1:04:15
That was the shocker of the whole season, right?
Banks 1:04:16
This is certainly not a zero leech movie. 'It's a funny-lookin' movie.' I think that this is a three leech movie for me. I've gone back between four, three, and two, depending. And part of it is like– I'm gonna be really curious to be thinking about this movie come end of the season. How does this movie sit? Because for me, the thing that holds this movie back– it's the thing that I find leechiest about it– is it's irresolution. It is that I still don't know what quite to do with this movie. Does that make it leechy or not? I'm not sure, but it doesn't feel as leechy as some of the others, and part of that has to do with the narrative not having the fullest sense of coherency. It is very disjointed. And you really, like– if leech movies make your work for it, this movie really makes you work. And maybe, I don't know, by the end of the season, maybe my leechy muscles will be in better shape, and I'll like, be able to appreciate it more, I'll have the stamina to get all of the leechiness out, it'll move to four. But at this point, it's sitting at three, it almost slips to two. But I think it deserves a three because I'm hopeful that it'll earn it and I can appreciate the art and the risk and all the things that went into it. So I'm gonna sit at three.
Aaron 1:05:42
And I think I'm just so excited for the contribution this film makes to the pod, which is this new question about, Can there be leechiness that is also attached to a species of goodness? [Ooph.] And maybe that– maybe that does boost it to a three? Honestly, just the very raising of that question. The leech sort of reappears within the light. And there's a third leech there again. It's about the questions, right? That's what I just said the whole pod, it's about the question. So–
Banks 1:06:11
Yeah.
Evan 1:06:11
I think in terms of degree of difficulty, like you said, Aaron, this is– I wouldn't say it's a comedy, but it has sort of that trajectory, the classical definition of comedy– like this move towards resolution or redemption. [Right.] And yet, I feel like it's earned. I feel like this depiction of– if you think Jack is on some path of redemption, by the end of the film, I think it's earned. I mean, the opening lines, "Mother, brother, it was they that led me to your door." He walks through a door, he encounters reconciliation. And so I think this film is– seen from that lens– it is an earned depiction of a journey of faith or reconciliation or redemption– that has gone through questions and doubts. Which is why– if you'll allow me– I want to read a poem from our friend Christian Wiman. It's called, "When the Time's Toxins." "When the time's toxins / have seeped into every cell / and like a salted plot / from which all rain, all green, are gone / I and life are leached / of meaning / somehow a seed / of belief / sprouts the instant / I acknowledge it: / little weedy hardy would-be / greenness / tugged upward / by light / while deep within / roots like talons / are taking hold again / of this our only earth."
All right, well, that is our episode on 'The Tree of Life.' Thank you, listeners, for tuning in. Thank you, Aaron and Banks. There is so much to talk about with this film. We would love to hear your questions, your comments, your musings. So please reach out to us on Twitter @leechpodcast, on Instagram @theleechpodcast, and our website, theleechpodcast.com. It's been a pleasure being with you all. See you next time.
This episode was hosted by Evan Cate, Banks Clark, and Aaron Jones. Editing by Evan Cate. Graphic design by Banks Clark. Original music by Justin Clump of Podcast Sound and Music. Production help by Lisa Gray of Sound Mind Productions, and equipment help and consultation from Topher Thomas.