Bill Murray in The Darjeeling Limited
There was some discussion with my friends about a number of elements in The Darjeeling Limited, including the role of Bill Murray’s character (simply called “The Businessman” in the closing credits). The Businessman appears twice in the movie: once, at the beginning, and then later in the train-metaphor scene (where he is reclining, drinking sweet lime, with a package of Darjeeling Limited savoury snacks on the table beside him).
The Businessman not only symbolically represents the father of the Whitmans, but his appearance and failure to board the train prefigures one of the final scenes in the movie: the releasing of the father’s baggage by all three sons. Admittedly, Wes Anderson sort of hits the viewer over the head with symbolism here, but it works.
Beyond the similarity of The Businessman and luggage not boarding the trains, there is a parallel between the way that Peter looks back at the businessman (he removes his father’s glasses to have a better look at the person left behind) and the way the Whitman’s look back at the released luggage. I find that both scenes bring to the fore a present moment consciousness—a reflection on the self in the world—in the characters. I interpret this both from the expressions on their faces and by reading symbolically the scene.
To be clear, the present moment consciousness is represented by the scenes where the brothers look backwards, even as they are moving forwards and away. They reflect on that which is left behind, as they stand in their choice to move forward. These scenes disclose that the Whitman’s familiarity of the past and the known requires pause and reflection, even as they journey into what comes next (homecomings, reconciliations, relationships, and fatherhood).
The final scene of the movie—where the brothers go for a drink and a cigarette (exactly as they do at the beginning of the movie)—does not testify to an absence of personal and relational change in the Whitman’s: rather, that inner reshaping of a person is not always cataclysmic, but incremental and unvarnished.
These scenes support a hopeful interpretation of Anderson’s representation of people: humans can change and experience personal transformation, albeit slowly. Or, to return to the specifics of the film, the Whitman’s will leave behind their father’s baggage throughout their journeys; the process is life-long and ongoing. It is important to note that, although the bags have been discarded, the father-figure is still on the train (recall the scene that shows how everyone associated with the Whitman’s is on a train, except the man-eating tiger). Even as the Whitman’s leave the baggage behind, they have not discarded completely the influence of their father on their lives. Rather, they are coming to terms with it in a significant way.
I have already noted that I approach The Darjeeling Limited as a story about the spiritual journey. Through this lens, I see that every journey presents an opportunity to surrender the past—and the self associated with it—and become.
I must emphasize that Murray’s character represents a father figure, but is not actually the father of the Whitmans. What I love about this figure is that he functions on a very simple level (symbolic of the father they are trying to leave behind) but the character’s untold story (why he is in India, why he wanted to board the train, who he is) also begs more complex questions, which the viewer cannot answer.
I have yet to investigate the connection between Rudyard Kipling’s Kim and The Darjeeling Limited. I am particularly interested in the use of the spectacles that characters acquire to change perspective on the world.
Related posts:
Very good interpretation. I’m currently writing a big assignment on “The Darjeeling Limited”, and I would like to use your interpretation in it. But i don’t know how to write you in to my bibliography. What should I write?