Mansion on the Hill

What is judged by the world these days to be a mansion is relative to income and location. The American dwellings of some at the low end of the spectrum with their flat screen TVs, microwaves, refrigerators, central heat and air, laptops, etc. would be viewed as "mansions" by millions of people in the world.

But in the U. S. at least, we're pretty sure we know what a mansion is. The "mansion on a hill" theme has run through culture for many generations. In songs, TV shows, and movies, we've seen them setting high above the town on the hill, or behind a fence far off the main road; they're always isolated in someway from the rest of us and our seemingly mundane lives.

To satisfy our curiosity, we buy books, or magazines, or view TV shows that take us inside the mansions to sneak an intimate view of their opulent furnishings and get a glimpse of what the lives of the people who live there are like.

In the film appreciation class that I regularly taught, we viewed Orson Welles' famous "Citizen Kane." The mansion that Kane built is called Xanadu (modeled after Hearst's San Simeon). Welles deftly shapes our perception to make us see that Xanadu is not a happy place. One of the themes of the movie (the movie that's been ranked #1 film of all time for decades by critics around the world) is that the American Dream--that anyone here has a chance of earning great material success and that that success will make you happier--is really a nightmare, a lie.

Welles' Xanadu from "Citizen Kane"

The thousands who still come to America each year to pursue that dream probably demonstrate both the power that the American dream has and how powerless film critics are.

Many leftist films attack capitalism by focusing on the downtrodden in society, the false implication being that our economic system is the cause of these ills. "Kane" instead, focuses on the wealthy, the topmost tier of the class hierarchy supposedly created by our "unfair" system.

In my opinion, capitalism isn't built on a false assumption, it's built on human nature. It is a mirror of what we all are. People are naturally self centered. They want things for themselves. Capitalism uses this desire as its prime motivating factor.

After Kane matures, he uses his tremendous wealth to buy media power and a beautiful wife. He gets both but at a terrific personal and psychological cost. The brilliantly conceived narrative told in several flashbacks from different points of view is structured to show that ultimately Kane's wealth can not buy him happiness/love, which is what the famous image of the burning sled, "Rosebud," at the end of the film is all about. It's interesting that the Beatles delivered the same message in four words: "Money Can't Buy Me Love."

In spite of all this, I still like "Citizen Kane" as a movie. Orson Welles was at the peak of his creative powers and it shows. The film is full of cinematic innovations. It's a great and very influential film. Too bad about the leftist subtext. Before we leave "Kane," and to bring us back to the subject of mansions, let me tell you a slightly altered version of an old joke.

Two guys are looking up at a mansion high on a hill. One's a conservative and the other's a liberal. The conservative guy says, "Mr. Van Snoot has a fine and beautiful home and one day I'm going to get a big house like that myself."  The liberal guy says, "One day I'm going to get that bastard."

Mansions have been a theme in country music as well. Usually there's a lady who chose to marry a wealthy guy instead of the narrator in the song who ain't so wealthy by a long shot. He's imagining how sad and lonely she feels in her "Mansion on the Hill," so this song and probably a hundred others like it in country music picks up that same theme: money can't buy love/happiness. 

Judging by his statements, Bruce Springsteen may accurately be labeled a liberal/leftist. What about his famous and very beautiful "Mansion on a Hill" song? Is it just a nostalgic memory from childhood, or does it carry a leftist subtext? What about those iron gates that "completely surround" the place? Considering the dirge like music, are we supposed to admire or condemn owner of the mansion, the man who also owns the mill and makes his money off the backs of the common workers like the narrator's father?