Widower Jens owns an extensive lay of land, the one-room cottage annex stables that goes with it, and a few cows. But a series of set backs plunges him and the little congregation of family members he has taken under his wing, into starvation. He tries to save his daughter by marrying her off to a (just a little bit less poor) neighbour, whom Signe, the daughter, loves. The fortune of Signe would not include her 2 young cousins who would probably end up in the poorhouse. Almost simultanuously a far better opportunity presents itself. Jens marries Signe off against her will to a very wealthy land owner who promises to take care of all 4 of them.
I am not in favour of the reviews that state "lost his soul for money". In fact, it is the opposite. Jens is a gentle patriarch, a rarity in those days, who puts the well being of his protégés first (he himself gets the short end of the deal, resigning all his possessions). But life is harsh, especially in 19th century agricultural Denmark. At every turn of the road the viewer is forced to think beyond the old "sold his soul" and "good vs bad" clichés. What would YOU do? Can you blame him for at least trying to include the 2 brothers in the good fortune of his daughter? Definitions of good and bad tend to blurr when you plunge into history, when not all was "neat and tidy and everybody lives in comfort". "Good vs bad" is the privilege of the well fed.
A huge bonus in the good/bad balance: Signe ends up loving her rich husband, who turns out to be kind and just. So you can say: Jens has done the right thing there. That he didn't succeed that well with the nephews I can not account him for. The case of the first was an accident (yes I know, because of shady manoeuvres, but still, an accident), of the second the result of his own thirst for revenge, fueled by grief. The latter was even given a chance of escape.
If there is someone to blame, then the beastly manager. Jens, who is left to deal with a bad conscience, has done everything he could, given his ghastly circomstances.
I am not in favour of the reviews that state "lost his soul for money". In fact, it is the opposite. Jens is a gentle patriarch, a rarity in those days, who puts the well being of his protégés first (he himself gets the short end of the deal, resigning all his possessions). But life is harsh, especially in 19th century agricultural Denmark. At every turn of the road the viewer is forced to think beyond the old "sold his soul" and "good vs bad" clichés. What would YOU do? Can you blame him for at least trying to include the 2 brothers in the good fortune of his daughter? Definitions of good and bad tend to blurr when you plunge into history, when not all was "neat and tidy and everybody lives in comfort". "Good vs bad" is the privilege of the well fed.
A huge bonus in the good/bad balance: Signe ends up loving her rich husband, who turns out to be kind and just. So you can say: Jens has done the right thing there. That he didn't succeed that well with the nephews I can not account him for. The case of the first was an accident (yes I know, because of shady manoeuvres, but still, an accident), of the second the result of his own thirst for revenge, fueled by grief. The latter was even given a chance of escape.
If there is someone to blame, then the beastly manager. Jens, who is left to deal with a bad conscience, has done everything he could, given his ghastly circomstances.