Niccolo Machiavelli believed that Man, being half beast and half man, should make the best use of both natures, prudently switching between the two. Thus, Prudence should serve as a decision switch between the two natures. Today, neuroscience uses a triune model of the human brain, the neo-cortex layered over a mammalian brain which in turn sits atop the lizard brain. The lizard brain is responsible for survival, adaptation - pure animal instinct. The mammalian brain takes care of motor skills, memory and emotions - things we associate with humans. It is a rough analogy, but could the lizard brain be the beast within us?
The premise of Equus is quite strange: Martin Dysart, a psychiatrist begins to treat a stable boy who has blinded 6 horses with a metal spike. By all accounts, this boy loved horses. Then what happened? As we learn the truth, the psychiatrist, played by Richard Burton, begins to question himself and his role in society.
Spoilers alert
This is what happened. The boy, who loves horses, grows up in a strict household under the influence of his religious mother. He does not like riding per se, but when he does ride he feels a connection with the horse, a connection that turns into empathy. The boy synthesizes religious symbols (Equus) with his feelings and begins to identify with the horse. He becomes one with the horse. He is the human part, and the horse is the beast part but they are one. His mystical connection with the horse goes into extremes; he feels the pain of horses tamed and ridden by men, he feels the "chinkle chankle" in his mouth, and he flagellates himself with a crop in the secrecy of his bedroom. Naturally, he wants to move this mystical identification to the physical level. He rides horses secret at night, naked, primaly screaming "Equus!!".
“Afterward he says, they always embrace. The animal digs his sweaty brow into his cheek, and they stand in the dark for an hour, like a sated couple.”
So why does he blind the 6 horses? Enter a girl. He's not interested, the only thing on his mind is Equus. He is cajoled into a date, and afterwards, there is a half hearted attempt (on his part) at sex at the stable. He fails to perform, telling the psychiatrist afterwards that he could not feel her. When he touched her, he felt Equus, the mane, the sweaty horse-skin he embraces after his mystical rides. He's unable to perform the male sexual function. Above all, his failure has been witnessed by Equus. As he apologises aloud to Equus, he realizes the power the beast has over him. And then he rebels, "No more!". He takes up a sling blade and stabs the horses in the eyes.
And what happens to the psychiatrist? At first, he thinks the boy is a regular nutcase. But as the facts of the case begin to unfold, he begins to understand what has happened. Looking at the boy's experience from the outside, he begins to envy him. The boy is connecting with his animal nature, he is living in the moment, he is going to the extremes by combining the physical with the mystical. Him, a 17 year old stable boy! And here he is, Martin Dysart, in his study, trying to help children, living an anti-septic, intellectual life with no hint of the beast. He has no children, his relationship with his wife is stagnant and he is good at nothing but carving into minds, trying to repair them. But what is he really doing? Is he trying to make these children normal by smothering the beastly part of them? He is trying to make them normal, but is normal good? Is he killing the beast in the process of carving their minds?
So on one hand, Dysart envies the boy for connecting with the beast, and on the other hand the boy has connected far too deeply with the beast. The boy knows he is in trouble, he must return to civilization. Dysart, on the other hand, wants to step out of his study never to return again. He wants to move to an island in Greece, where the Gods once lived, to somehow connect with his beast. Richard Burton gives us a tour de force performance. One of his monologues, especially, is the finest I've seen in cinema.
So what is it better to be? The beast or the man? That is not the question. Why should it one or the other? Man and Beast are locked in battle inside us. Sometimes the beast is good to us, saving us from dangerous situations, but often it puts us at odds with society, creating dangerous situations. Many times, the man conquers the beast, but at the cost of subduing all that is good about the beast. Sometimes, the beast conquers man.
The real question is when to be man and when to be a beast.
