#ricki tarr | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

davidwontstopwritingsongs · 1 year

Text

A Non-Exhaustive Deep Dive Into the Character of Ricki Tarr in 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' - PART ONE

Now anyone who's had the (mis)fortune to converse with me recently will know of my newest hyperfixation - Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. In the course of about two weeks, I have finished the book, watched the movie, and watched the BBC TV series from 1979. Anyone who's continued to converse with me will also know that my absolute favourite character in this IP is none other than Ricki Tarr. I love that bitch from Penang. I knew he'd be my favourite the second I read his name.

Those familiar with the IP will also know that he might be one of the most maligned characters in the whole plotline. No one seems to like him. Not his boss, not Smiley, maybe all the women who keep ending up with him, but not anyone within the world of the Circus. I think this is grossly unfair. Not only does he play a huge role in the plot... occurring in the first place, but he seems genuinely competent. His sins cannot be worse than those committed by, say, James Bond, to name another spy with woman and impulse problems.

In this (MULTI-PART) essay, I will be exploring the character of Ricki Tarr, as depicted in the book, by Hywel Bennett in the 1979 TV show, and by Tom Hardy in the 2011 film. Think of this as a sort of explanation of the character. Of course, this is mostly just my own opinion and bias, but I still hope you enjoy this deep dive/high-school-english-literature-essay/video-essay-in-much-more-boring-text-form. Obviously, spoilers abound, so don't click 'Keep reading' if you haven't read the book yet or if you care particularly much about accidentally having plot points revealed to you.

Ricki Tarr: In Defense of Ricki Tarr

The character of Ricki Tarr is one who spends Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy defending himself (indeed, he's probably done so his whole life). While this may to some degree obviously be because he is being interrogated by Smiley, Guillam, and Lacon for most of his appearances, I would argue that he is also written to be particularly defensive of his position. In the book, Le Carre writes: "'She was good company,' he insisted, as if arguing against a trend," His use of language such as "insisted" and "arguing against a trend" establish early on that, even if it is not explicitly written that Smiley et al would disagree with Tarr, that the latter expects disagreement, and has taken the tone of argument and defense instead of neutrality. The content of his argument, that of Irina being "good company", is also relevant here. Tarr is said to have many wives in the book, as well as both being said to flirt and actively shown to at least feign romantic interest in many women, so Smiley et al would likely consider Tarr's interest in Irina and his desire to bring her to the Circus as another example of his womanizing, rather than genuine love or even using her for professional purposes. Ricki's defensiveness of himself is also evident in Le Carre's descriptions of him, such as in the quotes "'Fact, Mr Smiley. Fact,' he declared, with the defencelessness of a man longing to be believed" and "he said with another flash of that false confessiveness". Words like "defencelessness" and "longing" show just how desperate Tarr is to support his point, and how unable he actually is to do so in the face of interrogation. We get a sense that he might almost be used to having to conduct himself in this manner, that this isn't just a one-off incident requiring absolution, but a pattern of behavior and ways that he is treated by authority. The usage of the phrase "false confessiveness" is interesting; on the surface it seems to paint a picture of Tarr's bad character and dodginess as a person, which is certainly how Smiley and Guillam see him. But one does wonder if that character analysis by them is true, or whether they are seeing only what they want to see. Personally, I feel like it's a bit of both.

Tarr's necessity of defending himself is also seen in the movie. In it, he seems much more passive and compliant, one could say a softer character perhaps. I will speak more on that later. Tarr, played by Tom Hardy, says to Smiley: "I know what I am to the Circus, I'm one of the Scalphunters, someone you can hand your dirty little jobs to," In this, Tarr acknowledges his comparatively lowly standing, almost denegrating himself a bit. I feel that he could be doing this before anyone can accuse him of going beyond his pay grade in his actions with Irina, making it clear that he understands his role and his standing in life, so those points can't be used against him. By knowing that he has to present himself as such, he continues to prove my point that he is used to defending himself and his actions.

Another aspect of Tarr's self-defence is snark, being almost cheeky, almost disrespectful. This is evident throughout the story, and can be seen as a character trait. In all 3 adaptations, we can find Tarr referring to George Smiley and Peter Guillam as "Mr Smiley" and "Mr Guillam". Given the way Rick Tarr is characterized, it's almost certain that he is giving them attitude using exaggerated politeness and making himself seem subservient and almost childlike, which juxtaposes his personality. But perhaps this politeness is also a defense. Tarr can't have been rude, can he? He's even addressed them properly!

In the TV show, Tarr introduces his story by saying: "'Well, I guess I'd better make my pitch. I've got a story to tell you. It's all about spies. And if it's true, which I think it is, you boys are going to need a whole new organization,'" This is both a compelling introduction to the plotline, but also serves very well to characterize Tarr and to show the way he diminishes things in the way he speaks in order to contrast them with the seriousness of the matter. He talks about a "pitch", as though he were a salesman, trying to sell his story to Smiley et al. This can be seen as a defense in the way that he's trying to make the matter seem much less serious, maybe for his own emotionality but also maybe to juxtapose that with the content of the story, so that Smiley and his associates can be more fully convinced of how important it is. The usage of words like "story" and "you boys" also make the matter seem trivial, fictional, but to the characters it is of course real. This is both a nod to Tarr's cheeky characterization, but also diminishing the respectable Circus men by demoting them to the status of "boys" who are listening to a "story". This might also be an example of fourth-wall breaking by Le Carre.

In the book, Le Carre writes the following exchange: "'Common-law marriage,' Guillam said drily. 'Unofficial but permanent.' 'There's a lot that are the other way round these days,' said Tarr with a sharp grin at no one, least of all at Smiley, and Guillam shot him another foul look." This can be seen as an example of Ricki's impulsivity and social inappropriateness, especially in the eyes of people in Smiley, Guillam, and Lacon's social class. Reading this, I also thought it was an attempt by Tarr to equalize the power imbalance between the men who are deciding his fate and himself, by making a crass joke at the expense of perhaps the most powerful.

Tarr is also seen to be defensive though his cheek around other characters. For example, to the man who has been guarding him in the safe house: "He gave the door a playful tap. 'Come on, darling, it's me. Ricki,'" When he could easily be harmed or given up to the Circus at someone more powerful's decision, and in fact the guard is very well-trained and possibly stronger and more experienced in combat than him, he still acts jovially and calls the guard a pet name, one that could maybe be considered insultingly feminine in the time period that Tinker Tailor Solider Spy was written. This could make him seem both friendly and light-hearted, or using such techniques as a double bluff to defend himself against anyone who might wish to use his true emotional state to undermine him.

While Ricki Tarr is spoken about and portrayed as someone cavalier who does not have very strict morals or care very much about other people, and while that may be true to some extent, I also feel that he uses not caring as a defense mechanism. This might be evident to other characters as well, as the guard in charge of him in the safe house says, in relation to Tarr's wife and daughter, "I think he's shut them out of his mind in view of the emotional side," This might be an example of Tarr using the psychological defense mechanisms of repression or suppression, where one unconsciously blocks unwanted thoughts or impulses. He is also shown to unsuccessfully attempt to care less (this time about Irina) in the film, where he tells Smiley "she wasn't even my type," however in this portrayal he is unable to control his emotions as he is visibly emotional to the point of tears.

His actions speak just as loud as his words in this regard. In the television portrayal, Hywel Bennett slouches in the chair as he is telling the story of Irina, only sitting more upright when making a impassioned point or when reading her diary. And in the film, Tom Hardy is shown reclining on a couch smoking. He is clearly acting casually, like it's not that serious to him, like formality isn't something that matters to him in this situation, even around his superiors.

One can also interpret Ricki Tarr's violence against Smiley as a last defense of himself, the only way he can think of, the only way he knows. Smiley is calmly suggesting that he might have abandoned his wife and daughter in order to save himself, deliberately triggering Tarr into the emotional instability and impulsivity that he is known for in the Circus. Tarr might have been aware of this, but still unable to restrain himself from feeling anger. And as someone who has probably been spoken about time and time again as a unrepentant womanizer, someone who always goes too far, someone uncaring, uninhibited, this would be yet another thorn in his side. One can imagine that being spoken about so often in such negative terms, with little regard for what you perceive as your successes, would wear you down and make you very defensive about your own character. And as such, when he could bear it no more, Tarr attacked Smiley. This usage of violence could also be an echo of Ricki Tarr's upbringing, as I will further elaborate in a future installment.

This brings Part One of this essay of an unhinged length to a close. In future installments, I will address the topics of Ricki Tarr as a so-called "bad boy", his emotions, and compare and contrast the portrayals of this character in both the television show and the film. I hope you enjoyed it. I promise I wrote this in a completely healthy mental state, just in one of special interest/hyperfixation

#tinker tailor soldier spy #ricki tarr #literature #this is so long that i recognise that it's UNHINGED #it's literally only part one out of... a few #i'm sorry he's my favourite character #i'm also sorry this reads like an english literature essay

12 notes · View notes

m1211nasu · 2 years

Photo

#tinker tailor soldier spy #ttss #peter guillam #ricki tarr #commission #瓶子

17 notes · View notes

hitchell-mope · 16 days

Text

Good movie. Rather confusing. But good.

#tinker tailor soldier spy #control #george smiley #jim prideaux #oliver lacon #ricki tarr #peter guillam #jerry westerby #connie sachs #percy alleline #roy bland #toby esterhase #bill haydon

0 notes

surumarssi · 9 months

Text

Period inaccurate costuming in high budget films is really annoying, especially if it's set in the 70's or something. There is photographic evidence of high-waisted jeans on men

#this is specifically about how they dressed ricki tarr in the 2011 tinker tailor soldier spy

1 note · View note

loving-n0t-heyting · 1 year

Text

Maybe it’s different in the books, but one thing that’s strange looking back on the Alec guinness John le care adaptations (spoilers) is how little the partisans of capitalist democracy—that is, the protagonists—seem to believe in anything. The communists certainly believe things! They believe things very ardently, and just about every scrap of dialogue from a real committed communist drips with it (as long as they’re not undercover). The true reactionary militants (Gen vladimir et al) from smileys ppl in league with our protagonists also seem to believe things (albeit insane things), as do some other assets of the circus (like ricki tarrs Christian gf).

But smiley and friends themselves never seem to evince any deep ideological devotion to anything or anyone. They never break into rhapsody about the humane efficiency of the free market, nor do they even seem to care that much about Britain, except as their employer. Nor are they “negative nationalists” defined in opposition to the madness of socialism: there are as few tirades on the evils of collectivism as there are paeans to individual liberty. When connie late in life openly wonders whether the communists were in the right all along, it doesn’t even come across as shocking or offensive, just a bit world weary. In fact, smiley consistently sneers at avowals of zeal or ideological devotion as such (with Karla, obviously, but also for his friend Gen vladimir, as well as lesser figures), and seems unwilling to elevate his ideological commitments above his enemies’ in categorical terms. And of course, given that they are all spies, they’re hardly prone to exalt personal loyalty and friendship where grand visions fail them; personal relationships are seen as principally an avenue for emotional manipulation and blindness. The profession, as they all repeatedly indicate, exerts a selection effect about that

And what makes this strange is they are all still absolutely, fanatically committed to their work. They are willing to kill, bleed, and die for a cause they all sort of casually settle into by default. And you can’t brush it off as charge of the light brigade-style “following orders whatever our opinions on them” Duty-worship either: smiley is portrayed as the perpetual outsider underdog who doesn’t play by the rules, forced to subvert and sabotage his superiors in their own best interest. He cares about protecting the circus’ stakes at all possible personal costs, when he can’t once pressed offer up anything better in their defence than “seems better on balance than the opposition”. Lifetimes of cunning and sacrifice, all for the sake of… nothing

#the court chaplains of democracy indeed

97 notes · View notes

noloveforned · 3 months

Text

no love for ned is all set for our friday night slot on wlur from 8pm until midnight. join us live if you get the chance or catch up with last week's show on mixcloud any time you'd like!

no love for ned on wlur – january 19th, 2024 from 8-10pm

artist // track // album // label allo, darlin' // kiss your lips // allo, darlin' // fortuna pop! soft covers // the ballad of ricki tarr // soft serve // little lunch special friend // bête // wait until the flames come rushing in // skep wax maria t // wind down // (bandcamp mp3) // (unreleased) marty brass // meet me outside // painted glass cassette // just because the yawns // i win // the yawns // records records records sleater-kinney // untidy creature // little rope // loma vista bar italia // glory hunter // the twits // matador mali obomsawin and magdalena abrego // believer // greatest hits // (self-released) acetone // come on // cindy // new west meernaa // as many birds flying // so far so good // keeled scales titanic // te evite // vidrio // unheard of hope elkhorn // guinnevere // lagniappe sessions // (self-released) evan parker // from saxophone and trombone four // from saxophone and trombone // otoroku alex cunningham, patrick shiroishi, jessica ackerley and damon smith // slick with slime // five lines indecipherable cassette // profane illuminations mary halvorson // incarnadine // cloudward // nonesuch sun ra arkestra // astro black // live in roma, 1980 // holidays o.c. // time's up // word...life // wild pitch blu and nottz featuring shad and quelle chris // marcus garvey // afrika // nature sounds ego ella may // take it easy (miles' song) // field notes, part iii ep // (self-released) b. cool-aid featuring ladybug mecca // chalk round it (talk abt it) // leather boulevard // lex j. raise, jr and alijaa featuring mick jenkins // don't sweat it // call for you // universal (italy) julia mcfarlane's reality guest // precious boy // whoopee // night school tenniscoats // i am you are me // chippi tyoppi // majikick linda smith // salad days // nothing else matters // captured tracks grade school // i wish i looked as good as you do // how to make wooden planes // kingfisher bluez the siddeleys // when i grow up i'll be a god // slum clearance // matinée

#wlur #radio shows

3 notes · View notes

gwinforth · 1 year

Text

Who was Gerald in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy?

In John le Carré's novel "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy," Gerald is the codename for a Soviet agent who has been passing information to the Soviet Union from within British intelligence.

so far so good

The identity of Gerald is unknown to the British intelligence community, and it is only through the efforts of George Smiley and his team that they are able to identify the Soviet agent as

*drumroll*

Ricki Tarr's lover, Irina.

#it's not an easy book

2 notes · View notes

sule-skerry · 1 year

Text

1970s Castro clone Ricki Tarr. Is that anything.

#incessant circus talk tag #lord help me i'm back on my bullshit #anartext

2 notes · View notes

kinetic-elaboration · 1 year

Text

February 5: Tinker Tailor (Movie Version)

Just finished re-watching Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. That was... an interesting experience. Last time I watched it, it was before reading the book, on purpose to see how well I could follow it blind, and this time I just finished a re-read.

Overall impression: this was made for people who've read the book. It's not that it was difficult to follow exactly... that's too hard for me to judge at this point. It's more that I think it might be hard to see the point or to really get invested without the book. But maybe I'm wrong because I think I was pretty invested after my first watch, with just the movie to go on.

Often times, what it reminded me of was a sort of summary, picking out the most important part of each section or scene and presenting it with minimal context. When I was a kid, and the internet had like 3 sites on it, I would amuse myself sometimes by using the summary function in Word to make summaries of various lengths of things I had written. This movie felt at times, especially early on, like such a document. It was accurate in picking out the most important bits but they weren't presented with much context and they had no particular room to breathe, no time for excess detail. (Which is sort of understandable because it's a 2 hour movie but also not understandable because there are a lot of quite random interlude scenes of Smiley... walking? swimming?)

I did think it did a good job of compressing important plot points when necessary. For example, cutting out Dani and her mother but still having a reason for Guillam to suspect Tarr was lying, or simplifying the confusing situation with Haydon at the club.

The relationship between Smiley and Peter was so good, and I thought there was a subtlety to the performances that really brought a lot that was unique while still being in keeping with the book. Smiley's "You're going to do something for me" really sent me. He didn't get to show off that much of his softly powerful interrogation style, but he had moments--"Yes, I am a better spy than Bill Haydon" moments--like that one, or like when he had Guillam pulled off Tarr, that really drove his character home.

The Karla encounter story was also really well done. That's a long story that seems like it should be a flashback in a movie, and yet it can't be a flashback without showing Karla, and they way it was done here really solved that problem beautifully. The smoky brown room and they're both fucking plastered and Smiley's re-enacting the whole memory to a blank chair on the second half of the screen... Karla is the empty space, the eye of the storm, the vortex around which everything else whirls.

I really liked Tom Hardy's portrayal of Ricki; it seemed a stand out performance to me this time around. He's certainly more sympathetic, but he still retained that coiled up nervous energy.

In general, a lot of the characters came off more sympathetic here, in particular Ricki, Connie, and Westerby--though Westerby was arguably just a name, really, since he didn't have either actual Westerby's personality or the personality of Sam, the actual duty officer on the night of Jim's shooting.

There were some bits that were added that I liked quite a bit: in particular, Haydon bringing his bicycle into the Circus, because it was a quick, fun way to show how quirky and likable he is; Tarr using the mirror to draw light on Irina's face, because it made them both sympathetic very quickly and it was beautiful; and the use of the Mr. Wu song while Guillam was stealing from the Circus. It's hard to depict on screen the sort of paranoia that is so obvious on the page, especially in Guilliam's arc, but having him pass by Roy singing on the stairs did that super well, and in a way that fit the medium. Is he singing it because he was listening to the same radio station, or because he was listening to Guillam on the phone? You simply can't know!

I'm also pro-recurring Christmas party scene, though I wonder if that's a controversial take.

Though there were places where I felt the summarizing was well done, there were other places where I felt like shortcuts they'd put in created inconsistencies, or where things were cut I would have liked to have seen kept in. For example, Smiley tells Jim when they meet that it's presumed that he blew his networks to save himself--no, it's presumed he died immediately from being shot. You can't have both. Seems a weird thing for Smiley to lie about and yet it doesn't fit with the movie timeline. It makes sense in the book--but then the networks were a much bigger deal in the book as well. Similarly, I get why they depicted Karla shooting Irina in front of Jim--it established she was dead and showed what kind of torture he endured, two birds, etc.--but the timeline, fudged as it is, doesn't make sense. Either Tarr sat on his info for even longer than in the book, or she hadn't been captured yet.

I also think the movie was too coy about Bill and Jim. I've heard both takes--it was too coy and it was (somehow) too explicit--but I'm bothered that one completely legitimate interpretation of this movie by itself is that Jim's feelings were not requited. It's true Bill takes the photo of them, and that he mentions having both a man and a woman he's attached to in England (aka canonically is bisexual) but the Christmas party scene makes it look perhaps like it's only Jim who has those feelings. Also, the truly fucked up relationship between them and the depth of Haydon's betrayal are not clear enough in my opinion. It wouldn't take much to make them so. It could be as little as adding "because he loved you" in the middle of the line "He came to warn you. Because he knew all along it was you."

On a related note, I think it was important to make clear that Operation Testify was not a legitimate operation that the mole fucked up. It was a set up from first to last. Again, there isn't a lot of excuse for keeping this unclear in my opinion. Smiley's last talk with Haydon is extremely short--very much one of the 'summary scenes'--and adding in a few more lines wouldn't have made it run too long. They do talk about it! After Haydon saying "Dammit I got him back," Smiley could have asked if the operation was ever real, for example, and he could have said no.

I also think it was unnecessary and mean to make Jim reject Roach at the end. That's completely made up, not just truncated from the book, and I think both characters deserve more than that.

I realize I'm harping on Jim stuff (I wonder why) but it also bothered me that the kids talked about his hunchback but he absolutely did not have one??? Am I just not seeing it? He seemed fine to me.

Another nitpicking detail: Witchcraft was the name of the intelligence product, and Merlin was the name of the source. I don't get why they didn't differentiate those two things. Jarring to hear "Witchcraft" used as the name of a person.

Overall.... the structure of the film seemed softer and less precise than the book, and I realize this is book bias talking but... I was a little frustrated. Why does Ricki tell his story so late? Why isn't Operation Testify given its due? There was a real build up to Smiley and Jim meeting in the book; in the movie it's just another interview, like with Connie or Westerby. Even really big scenes, like the Jim interview, or the reveal of the mole (which could have used more violence imo), or the Haydon scene at the end, seemed like, eh, just another scene. The pacing was too even, I suppose is what I'm saying, and the placement of scenes too random. I think that's what people find hard to follow: the when of each scene seems quite arbitrary most of the time. It isn't always, but I think if the movie followed the larger structure of the book, which is really quite smart and well thought out, I mean it's all done for you right there, it might have been easier to parse.

But that's easy for me to say as someone who's never written a screenplay I suppose.

Now where's my movie that's all about Thursgood's?

#the year 2023 #2023: movies

6 notes · View notes