BOOK AND SAMPLE CHAPTERS
SAMPLE CHAPTER - FALL OUT
The Majesty of ‘Fall Out’. Beyond the power of words, ‘Fall Out’, sears its way into the unconscious.
“I hoped there would be a bit of an outcry...The greatest evil, that one has to fight constantly, every minute of the day until one dies, is the worser part of oneself. And that is what I did. And I would do the same again… this was not an action-adventure show, it was an allegory.” Patrick McGoohan.
“Ambitious, confused, surreal. ‘Fall Out’ bursts upon the scene, rupturing the very institution of television. The result, predictably, is audience outrage” Saul Reichlin.
“With an apparent disregard for television conventions of any kind… McGoohan produced ‘Fall Out’. The result was a major disruption of the Sunday viewing experience, a complete denial of audience expectation, and the absolute assurance that… an important television experiment would now achieve the reputation and cult status it has gained throughout the world.” Chris Rodley.
“He sat in that chair and told me about his trouble with Markstein and others. He said, ‘It's all got out of hand Berty. They want to make it into a Bond movie and, if there’s one thing it ain’t, it’s another ‘Goldfinger’. I’m putting the bloody thing to sleep before it gets up and bites back.’” Patrick McGoohan
“The whole series seems to be happening from Pat’s point of view that it’s almost in his head. I wouldn’t have been surprised if the last episode had said that the Village wasn’t really there and that (he) was lying on a bed in an asylum.” Rachel Herbert.
“Everything that is my father, that I know about my father personally, is in that episode. You think you may see an actor performing. I see my father.” Catherine McGoohan.
The Key to the Kingdom. ‘The Prisoner’s’ Finest Hour!
So, consider this: envisage the situation Patrick McGoohan found himself in. Having had the world at your feet, on a handshake and a blank piece of paper you created the TV series that you wanted to make. Your vision, your ideals, your principles, your passion, and your quest for perfection, But, and there is a but. Eighteen-hour days, sleeping in the office, and the pressure of looming transmission dates. All phantoms invading and crowding into the mind. And then there was one thing more, perhaps more terrifying than any other; the slight matter of an ending. Being you, it had to be so final, a second series could never be. So emerged, ‘Fall Out’, scorching a trail across our screens, sealing the series longevity. Each week, the viewing audience had been hooked by the star’s charisma, by the enigmatic and baffling plots, getting drawn further in. Everyone wanted to know: “What was it all about?” As the weeks went by the stories got more surreal, more puzzling, more bizarre. And the big question everyone was asking was, “How’s it going to end?”
Over the ensuing decades, ‘Fall Out’, has been discussed many times, in various Six of One journals, over forty books, magazine articles, on television chat shows, internet web pages galore, in universities and their ensuing courses. The script to screen, production, its ‘message’, the symbology. (Utilising whatever was at hand; hence the recycled sets, first glimpsed in ‘The Girl Who was Death’, and now fully employed here, from the recently completed film, ‘Battle Beneath the Earth’). The memories of the actors and technical staff, the reception and consequent outrage from the audience, all providing endless comment and debate. Elements of the episode have been dissected and examined, particularly the unmasking of Number 1, the symbolic imagery, (understandably particularly the Christian), and whether he escapes; and if all that happens is a dream, or his thoughts as he drives to tender his resignation. I shall address this shortly. Although there has been much comment regarding various isolated aspects, the number of comprehensive in-depth articles, particularly in Six of One journals, debating the whole, can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Considering its pivotal role, there is far less extensive or detailed coverage of ‘Fall Out’ overall than one might imagine. Elements of, yes, but very few of any length. Even the title, ‘Fall Out’, has failed to generate much debate. My first guess would be its origin is the army command, to ‘fall out’, to cease to obey orders, the end of authority, to regain freedom. Within ‘In the Village’ issue 24, Six of One member, Gez C drew attention to this ‘Fall Out’ deficit. He says he has been a member for over 20 years and: ‘There has not been that much debate about ‘Fall Out’ which is odd considering the fact that this is the episode which resolves it all.’ As true now as it was then. In consequence, I wish to introduce the thoughts and view of a number of those, who have reflected on this episode’s content, and to relay a number of these interpretations.
Then of course there are myriad other views, not least, that of actor, Rachel Herbert, as above, who benefited from being present on both location and set, in the bright, buoyant, confident and enthusiastically expectant early weeks of production, when hope and morale was at its highest, and a rose-tinted future looked assured. Grade’s promise made good, surrounded by trusted colleagues, total control, the atmosphere and confidence must have been infectious and energising. No wonder McGoohan was willing to open his heart to Rachel.
As a number of views on the allegorical interpretations of ‘Fall Out’ were being featured in ‘Number Six’, in the early 1990s, and in general, the debate about the meanings of the series was very lively, the then editor cleverly decided to stimulate this promising correspondence by inviting members to write-in their choice of, ‘Asking Patrick McGoohan your ultimate question about ‘The Prisoner’’. Some 50-or-so submitted their questions, and an ensuing article resulted. The editor wrote: ‘In the final analysis, not one, but two contributors share the ultimate answer by identifying two specific strands of thought about the source(s) of Patrick McGoohan’s inspiration’. The first was Joanna P, who, referring to a passage in C. S. Lewis’s 1943 book, ‘Mere Christianity’, asked: ‘Since this quoted passage would seem to have engendered the denouement of ‘The Prisoner’, are you indeed a devotee of C. S. Lewis, and were his writings as great an influence on your life as your guidance of the development of, ‘The Prisoner’, would indicate. The passage reads: ‘For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two’. The editor went on, ‘Another writer whose work has been identified as a possible source of inspiration for, ‘The Prisoner’, is John Fowles, and, in particular his book, ‘The Magus’, which, in turn, appears to have been inspired by the work of the philosopher Carl Jung’. The editor continued, ‘The Fowles/Jung connection was first postulated by Californian David Pearson in an address at the 1998 Convention, and the theory was developed by Peter Preston, in an article, ‘The Jung Ones’, in an issue of Number Six’.’ Peter’s question was: ‘I say that, ‘The Prisoner’, is a visual expression of at least three philosophies, (those of Patrick McGoohan, John Fowles, and Carl Jung), welded together using the theme of, ‘The Magus’, as its foundation. Is this the ultimate truth surrounding, ‘The Prisoner’ enigma?’
Consequently, I want to explore the inspiration, the ideas, the imagining, the intent, the resulting imagery, in short, what Patrick McGoohan’s ultimate aim was, as he determined to combine and resolve all the various strands that had tantalised the audience throughout this captivating and compelling series. Whatever we may think of others who claim a degree of creative input it was ultimately the drive of one man to put his reputation on the line, to bring this inspiring, remarkable, thoughtful, and thought-provoking series, to our TV screens.
Before we weigh and consider a number of the theories, possible interpretations, and perhaps a fuller understanding of, ‘Fall Out’, we should first prepare ourselves to observe and attempt to glean as much information as possible by listening to the thoughts of those who were involved, which should enable the reader to see the vision more widely, then to read the episodes unfolding trajectory, which I shall comment on as appropriate. Ideally, the reader should view this episode through the prism of allegory.
To set the ‘scene’, perhaps I should begin with a small number of extracts from my 1996 booklet, ‘The Long and Winding Road’, specifically the final essay, from whence the title of this chapter is employed again.
‘The realisation occurred that a cardinal sin had been committed. The entire investment of energy had been focussed to produce a product of extraordinarily high quality, even embracing the production detail of adopting the Albertus typeface, destined to forever represent and symbolise the series. The sin? In the euphoria of creativity, a conclusion had not been formulated. If, ‘Once Upon A Time’, is a minimalist psychological drama, based upon a blend of McGoohan’s life experiences, and Shakespeare’s ‘Seven Ages of Man’, McGoohan’s verbal intention for the series, ‘Fall Out’ goes beyond the power of words, it is the creator’s symbolic intent, a sprawling, unstructured, breathtaking display of ideas that ensures the seal as the classic television series. Never before and never again would the product of one overworked, brilliantly creative and single-minded man have the opportunity of assaulting an unsuspecting audience, without regard for convention or expectation.’
‘Both this episode and ‘Once Upon A Time’ were conceived and scripted by McGoohan, the former signalled the actor’s intent. He had ideas and nothing was going to stop him expressing them. Both are riveting, exhausting pieces, but for entirely different reasons. The former is claustrophobic, revealing, based upon psychological principles, edge of the seat stuff, at the end of which Markstein’s structure and reason concede defeat. McGoohan then threw down the gauntlet with, ‘Fall Out’. An expectant audience awaiting answers to the growing number of puzzles and questions, found themselves assaulted. Without a conventional plot, the episode ‘bit the hand’ that fed it. Confused and confusing, undisciplined yet a triumph of surrealism. The madness and kaleidoscope of ideas breathed new and future life into this enigmatic series, forcing the viewer to re-evaluate all that has gone before.’
On the surface, the theme is about revolt, (presented by three specific cases). Enshrouded, the episode is awash with allegory and symbolism. As I have touched upon before, the series, this episode could be interpreted in any number of ways: there has been speculation that all that occurs might be: a nervous breakdown, a dream, a near-death experience, Tibetan Bardo (a state of existence between death and rebirth), thoughts as he drives intent on resignation. Or, a highly subjective view of reality as portrayed in the films, ‘The Cabinet of Dr Caligari’ (1919), and more recently, ‘Shutter Island’ (2010), amongst others. Even, as Tilsley will suggest, he is checking his own security system. Again, here we have the Day of Judgment, temptation, resurrection and other Christian symbology. Up until now, Number 1 has been a mystery to us. It may have been conjectured it was a Bond-type villain, perhaps the Butler, or a political force, human-kind in general, or, abstractly, progress and 20th century technology, maybe even God. Well, given all that we would see, no wonder the switchboards were jammed, highly emotional letters written, McGoohan going into hiding. Let us embark on our roller-coaster.
Will All Be Revealed?
Consequently, before we embark on our exploration of, ‘Fall Out’, to prepare us, and to set the ‘scene’, let us hear from a number of those who contributed to the project, whether they be technicians, contributors from both in front or behind the cameras, including Patrick McGoohan himself.
Patrick McGoohan. Visionary and creative power. “When I wrote the last episode, everyone thought I was mad. And, in effect, I was! Good thing too, deliberately so! I wanted something oblique. It’s up to the public to work it out. To each his own interpretation. I still don’t want to give one answer. What I have in my head is an allegorical conundrum. Unravel it yourself”
“The object of the television series, ‘The Prisoner’, was to create a feeling of unrest about life today. It was an abstract impression of the world we are living in and a warning of what would happen to us when gadgetry and gimmickry take over from creative people. From the beginning of the series the character called ‘No 1’ was responsible for death, torture, war. So the worst enemy of man is surely himself; the evil in him the worst thing on earth.”
Frank Maher. “We were shooting, ‘Girl’, on the Thursday, finished on the Friday. Pat went into his dressing room, and at the time I was living opposite the studio. I kept taking stuff in over the weekend – scotch, a plate of sandwiches… On Monday, the whole crew was kept waiting. We had a few pick-up shots to do, so we busied ourselves doing that. Tuesday the same. Wednesday morning, he appeared, absolutely shattered, really miserable, with the script”.
David Tomblin. Producer.
“Pat had lots of ideas he never explained, so you took them on face value”. Referring to ‘Fall Out’, he added, “It was a sort of fragmented idea. Things we had discussed over a long period of time, which obviously stuck in Pat’s head. And there was a lot of sense in it. There was a reason; there was a theme, in his own sort of thinking. It may have escaped some people. I understood it. It was completely his episode, but I understand it better than most because I knew Patrick and the way he thinks. But I’m not surprised other people found it oblique. It was oblique because Pat is an oblique person.”
Leo McKern. Actor. “I think the idea behind the series was an excellent one, and with a particularly subtle appeal to almost everyone. We are all prisoners in one way or another, and only a minority manage to escape. Not from physical conditions – even, sometimes of our own temperament, personality, and mental attitudes. The insistence on remaining an individual I hold with completely – and this is becoming more difficult, with great pressure continually being exerted to persuade us to buy this, believe that, or do the other. Equality, understanding and tolerance are only to be achieved by education, not legislation. Laws will not change the personal convictions and prejudices of anyone.”
Kenneth Griffith. Actor. “A few days before we went into the studio Patrick told me that he hadn’t got the time to write my long speech. (He was working too hard at the time: writing, producing, directing, acting). So would I write it myself: which I did. He is a hard man, but he can be an open giver. But his mood and attitude can change in a moment. Yet overall – over the years – he retains his remarkable quality which I value much”. In an interview given to Six of One, Griffith elaborated: “On ‘Fall Out’, about a week before we started filming it – and this gives you some idea of the pressure we were all under – he said: ‘You know the President has got to make a big speech which must be explanatory, you know, what it’s all about. I’m not going to have the time. You write it.’ Now, this is absolutely true. So I wrote that long speech, and one or two other things too and gave it to him. ‘Yes,’ he said, ‘that’s alright’. That’s the truth. It demonstrates I think, the enormous pressure that everyone was under; because what he was attempting to do is something that I’m very much involved with these days. And that is trying to be ambitious, trying to stretch oneself with small resources for what you’re aiming at. So, what he was aiming at was something bigger than the resources; and you know, he pulled it off. So, when you wonder how, ‘Fall Out’, was shot in a couple of weeks, it really is that drive to be better than the finances should allow.”
Mark Eden. Actor. “He said, ‘This is going to be the last one and I’m writing it, and that’s it. And I said, ‘You’re kidding,’ and he said, ‘No, that’s it, we’re not going to go on, I’m going to finish… this is how it’s going to end. I don’t want it to go on.’”
Tony Sloman. ‘The Prisoner’ Film Librarian. “It is Marmite, isn’t it? In one camp, there are the folk who say that it’s a mess, a let-down and rushed nonsense. But to me, it’s work of genius. ‘Fall Out’ *IS* ‘The Prisoner’. Without it, you get what George Markstein wanted: a straightforward spy thriller about a man held prisoner. With it? You get 55+ years of debate and discussion. There was no other way McGoohan could have ended it. Pure genius.”
Vincent Tilsley. Scriptwriter. “At an adventure level, it struck me at the time, that we should meet Number 1 and Number 1 should be the prisoner. That’s what I thought at an adventure level because I could make a kind of sense out of that. If you had a State, not far from where we are now, where Number 1 in society becomes so removed, so protected and so powerful for him in a paranoid situation to put himself through his own security network to see if it works. Particularly as they wouldn’t know him as he is so removed from them. I could see the point at that ‘plotty’ level. Or he could have done it in a totally different way which was much more inside the guy’s head, a prisoner of himself. I would have done something different. It wouldn’t have had nearly so much action in it and rockets and stuff, it would have been much more set and focussed in one’s head.”
Terence Feely. Scriptwriter. “The series was about creative people for once running the asylum. We were doing what we wanted and showing what the medium was capable of. And also showing what a marvellous tool television is for surrealistic expression. ‘Fall Out’ I think was one of the best examples of total surrealism. No prisoners taken.”
Jack Shampan. Set Designer. “… and I remembered that some years before I’d worked on a film which was like a ‘Shangri-La’ where everything was underground, inside a mountain… and this was more or less the embryo of how the last episode started – from the set point of view, not the action”.
Jack Lowin. Cameraman. “Pat used to be in the studio at an unearthly hour, like six o’clock in the morning, and he would go home at midnight. He just could not do everything in the hours of the day, and so everything got behind… I think Ken Griffith had some influence on that last episode. …He obviously got quite closely concerned with Pat about that last episode, and whether he had some part of the final episode, I don’t know. He is also a very intense person…I had a feeling that he had probably been involved in it. He seemed to know what it was all about… I think he must have had several possibilities in mind, but I’m not convinced that the final outcome was the one that he originally started out with, I think it built up.”
Bernie Williams. Production Manager. “I knew the meaning of ‘The Prisoner’, insomuch as we talked about it every day, and that I am… David is… Patrick is… we are all self-made guys, we are all private, we are all individuals, we care about morals, we care about principles, we care about censorship, we care about a lot of stuff which people would say is rebellious, political, whatever. But we do care about all that stuff, and that’s why it wasn’t difficult for me to understand where we were going. What I didn’t know was, where were we going… He’s such a good actor, Patrick, he worked so hard. He got burnt out, he did too much, it’s a shame. I have so much respect for him. I mean, I spent seven years with him. I was very broken-hearted when we all broke up, very upset. I was very close to Patrick, very close indeed. We weren’t mad then, we weren’t mad. We believed in ourselves, you know. Against all odds. There were a lot of hidden messages there, about control, about losing your identity and selling out. A lot of morals there. It was a mirror on life, really. Pretty intense stuff…. The Beatles, because of ‘Fall Out’, thought he was the best thing since sliced bread. They wanted him to direct all their material after that. They just thought he was really ‘with it’, and crazy enough to be right for their material.”
For a work of art to survive, assume status, to possess longevity, it must transcend its constituent parts; it must have an elusive quality, a Mona Lisa smile, which continues to enthral the audience. It must in addition possess qualities that may be indefinable, intangible, and ethereal. ‘Fall Out’ qualified, crowning the series, going beyond the power of words, relying on imagery rich in both symbolism and ambiguity.
More than any other episode, ‘Fall Out’, operates on a number of levels, and certainly is the most complex and deepest of all, as McGoohan confirmed his assertion that, “What I have in my head is an allegorical conundrum. Unravel it yourself.” As a whole the episode may appear confused and confusing, undisciplined and bewildering, surreal and symbolic; however, it is riveting, deliberately enigmatic, surreal, even cryptic and hugely ambitious. It remains one man’s daring and virtually impossible dream to reach the unreachable. To some admirers it is both majestic and a triumph.
The obvious qualities that come to mind when analysing this episode are both these allegorical elements, and the symbolism employed to illustrate them. The evidence? Descending into the depths of the Village, (the descent of Orpheus into the underworld), the corridors, doors themselves, keys - all very symbolic - can all be found in the writings of Jung and psychoanalysis. The use of archetypes, judge; the three different facets of rebellion, the butler, (representing Everyman), as further examples.