The
film Burnt
is a tale of personal redemption complete with reflection, atonement for past
sins, vindication and, ultimately, success. The film takes the audience into
the world of elite chefs in London (and to a lesser extent Paris), where family
exists in the form of a tight-knit kitchen and where a combination of intense
passion, dedication and ego is necessary to produce what can only be described
as culinary art. It is a seemingly glamorous world that masks often ugly
realities – addiction, broken personal lives, and personality disorders to name
the most prominent.
Within
this setting, there are many forms of unofficial laws and rules that inform the
culinary community and keep it together as a functioning entity while at the
same time serving as an educational environment in which chefs are challenged
to invent and reinvent themselves while they teach the chefs who work with
them. The kitchen is presented – with some great degree of accuracy – as an
autocracy in which the head chef is the ultimate source of authority and
approval. Chefs with particular specialities are tasked with ensuring the
perfection of their jurisdictions and ensuring that those who work under their
oversight comply with the rules of their jurisdiction and the larger kitchen.
From this point on decreasing power and authority granted to those in the
kitchen, and each member of the kitchen is required to know his/her place in
the governance structure.
As depicted
in the film, in this hierarchy the failure of one level to comply with the
requirements of appropriate jurisdiction have disastrous impacts and potentially undermine the
kitchen both as an internal matter and among members of the outside
communities. There is perhaps no better illustration of this than when there is
an (erroneous) encounter with supposed Michelin restaurant reviewers and one of
the sous chefs commits a deliberate act of sabotage that completely undermines
the integrity of the kitchen to the outside world while also creating turmoil
in the accepted strictures of conduct within the members of the kitchen
community. In the aftermath there is a good deal of soul searching by the chef,
which leads to a reorientation in many of his policies in order to create one
unit of functioning and authority where each of the sub-units of jurisdiction
work together. When the real Michelin reviewers arrive, the kitchen is able to
execute the menu perfectly as a cohesive unit, leading to the advancement of
the kitchen’s standing in the culinary community.
As is
perhaps expected from most films, Burnt
takes audiences on an allegorical adventure, seeing the main character through
from failure and self-loathing to success and stability. Beyond this, however,
the film provides insights into an often unseen community that functions on a
unique governance system based on autocracy on hand but interlocking dependence
on the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment