CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Arts & Letters

Man of Flowers

1983 film by Paul Cox

Manuscripts, fine bindings, an engraving plate and preserved performance ephemera
Arts and lettersInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionApr 30, 2026
Entity authorityQ6746388
Source-derived summary

Man of Flowers is a 1983 Australian film about an eccentric, reclusive, middle-aged man, Charles Bremer, who enjoys the beauty of art, flowers, music and watching pretty women undress. Werner Herzog has a cameo role as Bremer's father in flashbacks. The film was directed by Paul Cox and was screened in the Un Certain Regard section at the 1984 Cannes Film Festival.

Plot

Charles Bremer (Norman Kaye) is a wealthy, reclusive man. He finds erotic satisfaction in the beauty of art, flowers, and a young woman (Alyson Best), who undresses for him. During the undressings he listens to operatic music such as Donizetti's Lucia di Lammermoor. Throughout the film, he reads letters he has sent to his mother. His mother had long since died, and the letters, it is later revealed, are addressed to himself.

Cast

Production

The idea for the film came out of a discussion between Paul Cox and Chris Haywood where they decided to make a low budget erotic film, along with Haywood's then-girlfriend Alyson Best. Paul Cox wrote the first draft.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Man of Flowers” is 1983 film by Paul Cox. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Flowers, film and Paul, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewBest approached as a cultural-object dossier: authorship and date matter, but circulation and reception often explain the wider significance. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1983, 1984—that can be checked directly. The authority record carries competing date values—1983, 1985-04-19—which should remain separate until their references and qualifiers are resolved. For this dossier, Flowers, film and Paul is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “1983 film by Paul Cox” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Object files, edition statements, performance records and contemporary criticism preserve different stages of the work’s history. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 30, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6746388. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1983 and 1984.

Critical limits

Later fame can flatten the distinction between original context, subsequent adaptation and institutional collecting history. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Separate the work, its editions or performances, and its later reception. Catalogue records, publication histories and object files often preserve different parts of that story.

Best used for
  • Identifying works and editions
  • Tracing reception history
  • Finding collection records
Verify next

The original object or edition, catalogue raisonné, performance record, rights file and holding institution.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Man of Flowers”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Man of Flowers primary sources, Man of Flowers archive and Flowers research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Man of Flowers”?
  2. How did later circulation or interpretation alter the work’s reception?
  3. Which edition, object, performance or recording is being described?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Man of Flowers” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.