This document discusses different theories about what defines the "modern cinema" and whether it has abandoned narrativity. It notes there is no consensus among critics on this, as some argue the modern film has thrown off narrative conventions while others see it as embracing a new type of realism or freedom from older structures. The author aims to question these analyses and address the underlying "libertarian myth" about the modern cinema, noting these theories generally support films they appreciate.
This document discusses different theories about what defines the "modern cinema" and whether it has abandoned narrativity. It notes there is no consensus among critics on this, as some argue the modern film has thrown off narrative conventions while others see it as embracing a new type of realism or freedom from older structures. The author aims to question these analyses and address the underlying "libertarian myth" about the modern cinema, noting these theories generally support films they appreciate.
This document discusses different theories about what defines the "modern cinema" and whether it has abandoned narrativity. It notes there is no consensus among critics on this, as some argue the modern film has thrown off narrative conventions while others see it as embracing a new type of realism or freedom from older structures. The author aims to question these analyses and address the underlying "libertarian myth" about the modern cinema, noting these theories generally support films they appreciate.
l\letz, C 1974, "The modern cinema and narratlvity",
Language: 1\1 Taylor, Oxford Uniyersity Press, New York. 8 The Modern Cinema and Narrativity I A deep, pennancnt ambiguity the definition of the "mod ern" cinema. Jt is often suggested, and son]{:tillles even aJJinmxL that tIle "young cinema," or the "new cinema," h:1S that dll' modern film is <1n absolute ObJect, a lws work (0 be read in any direction, allll that it has thrown off n:lrra the earmark of the classical fllm. This is the preat :n-pUlllent or the "breakdowll of nnf_""lEn\{i under a frolll a deb:lte For Ren6 which dclilled JVlar ill turn, associated with Pierre Billard, it was the idea of a more direct approach to realitv, a certain type of fUl1danlCl1tal realism which would morc or less Jis place the old narrative hahits,4 For ema or was a "111m-maKer Sc111(,111a," which has takcn the place of thc writer's cincma."6 Or it ,,,,as a cincllla of the "shot," rCDlacin[1 the 18 5 186 THE "1\IODERN" CINEMA' SOME TllEORET1CAL PHOBU2l\lS directly narrative cinema, where Olle galloped from shot to shot ehe! j\llardore).7 Or, finally, it was a CillellJ<l of Freedom, open to Illul a ('inem:] or "contempJatiull" and "ohjcctivity," which authoritarian concatenatiolls of the classical film, the theater, substituting "wise ell presellce" for "mise ell who has rclleeted with greal IHCClSIUIl Oil "cinem,1 of pl)etrv" silllulia l1'luativc. Finally, for ,ill or critics, tbe recent pcriod has witnessed the of a free einclll,l, <l cincm,l perlllancntly 1ibcf<\tl'([ fmlll the Sllp' rilles 0(' clCCOU III 0[' ()r the movie spectacle in fm'oJ' '('rLlffaut), rejection of the too illlpcccahlc ,'/'ruILILlt ag,lill), rejection (IF the to() evident "sign<' that do violence tu the allllligllity of fc,llity CBa/,i rejcctioil ()f the pseu(]oWlltactic arsen,d dl',n t() the old theorctici,111 S (Leell 1wnIt), rejecti()1l of d IC ,1S well as I he lIIuvic spect'ltk. ill favur of a cin d'(:crilllfC'l. a docile ,mel Hcxihle llle,ll1S of J\/Iv purpose ill tllis text is not III take up arllls ,my Olle 01' the,( since cadI one of thclIl contains, to my IlIlnd, ,I grc:ll deal of rather to confronl, by Illl',m, of a sliccessive (and never total) questioning of these different a great libcrt(friall lIIyth, which is nul fully cxpressed ill ,my olle of the analvses. bUl which underlies diem all ,mel aclt],lles them all (ex theatrical, and hv extension, fdmic term for the the crealio;1 "f ,lOts, and til(: ,,1' a n more direct THE MODEBN CINEMA AND NATIRATIVITY cepl for the ideas of Pier Paolo raise dif fcren t though lela ted I)roblcms, will Let 1I1e be clear: '1'lH'se analyses I am about to (lllcstiull have the go,!l ,mel the effect of supporting lilms that J like, films that I still view withollt boredom, They art' decply linked to the gr,ldll,ll risc and cventual t1'iU11]])11-at least fur largc of the cultivated cinema that is alil"c toLla\" - Tu ignore Je<ln 10 excludc oJ]cself able [0 aceOllllt fur 'tructurally----that, in every period ,Jill] for every art, the lI'ord, ,IS diversified as it may be is n('vcrtheless to he rOLlnd ill ,1 sill gle locus, And. even j I' th is loclls GIl1 ,ll first he ]ec()gni7t'lJ only hy t b(, it thM hcc()Jl1t' larger ,llllj l110re intense ,IS we ;lppn ,aell thei r SOil it is dOll htles:.. {his pri Illl' ('vi Ii [sl ('xDcliencvli in I he ('JlIotiulwl our rellcctJoll, :..incc of this rdlcdioJ1 is to reduce the distall('(" inili;11 ellorlllOUS, COll1l1Wllphlcc, ;Illd L!istressl' I he emol iun or the CI viction hom its clarilicatioJ1, the or 1i lin from its 1]]eta ];111 gU'lge. l\IorcOH'I', one IIlLlst1]nt forget t1wt a critic is llCITr altogl'lhel a theoretician, but that he is ,dways something (II' ,I miliulJl! ,111(.1 tlmt two cinen"ls left that call iutcrcsl liS: cillClIla to which article devoted. lhe American uninlcllcctual it lingers on "ftell in the form or the vanl!s1er [ihn t') <.) a great cinema, a cinema without problems, where onc was ncver bored. The the extent that it is llo1 taken tip by the living cinema will, one fean" be assumed by a cinema burdened with ideologics anti dubiolls gOl)(1 will Potato T1ro 1'0/<1/0, Dapid allll Lisa, : intellectual fIlms, replete- with intentiolls, based Oil the ielea that art cnl1 reach the "human" by eli wlwreas it can unly attnin it after a speCific any rate in like our own. 188 THE "MODEHN" CINEMA: SO;\IF. TllEOnETICAL PROBLEMS purpose is not to fi Il11s. but also to he to this extent one eaJl say that cin ema is Nevertheless one will indeed one lm\'c to unuert,l ke the theo rctical it is on th<1t level if not ,1]) the at least 10 tlla! which too oFten lInderlies thelll. II First remark: agrees ill the new cinCIll,l no-; dc lined bv the hlct tlla t it has beyond" or "rejecteu" or "hrukcll hut the of thM slllllclhing---whcthcr spcc " inflexihle significatioll, "devices" of the script writer, etc, --varies considerahly frOill critic tt) critic, as I Iried to :-ohmv in tbe hrieF summary or their ideas ,It dl(' heginning or tllis text. VEATII of '1'111', "SP!:'CTACU:,""2 The c()ncept of the Slx'cl;lcle has a certain 'Ippcal) hut it is not tbe expression or ;In\, rigoruus though!. Olle l11a\' tah' il in its sociological scnse: "spectacle" clJll<lls sociul rill' cllllsisling ill ~ I Inllnan gathcring olielll('d tow:nd a predominantly vislI:d evellt. In this (,:lSt', 1 do not sec huw thc mudern 111m is ill any way less of a specl<\eic than the tmtiitioll,d lilm, unci so the implied rl'vulutioll remains confined to the V()Cnblllan of the criliealmetahm guagc ,1m] doc, 1101 affect the film ohjects for which it is supposeci to aC('(JUllt. Did not the mrc as they were, who were ,1hlc to sec !-loris I/OUS rtPlmflic1li, at ,m ;lppnintcd hour ,It an insti tutional place: did they not pay for their scats :J1ll1 tip the ushcr? In these !crms, ill tIuth, it is not very dillicult to rCLnind the reader. the face of variolls cnthllsiaslic excesscs, that the cinema will remain a spectacle until olle forms of 111m distribution, commer cialization. and viewing that arc so ullusual that the method of "im leaps" too as invoked THn ':\IOIlEnN CINEM./\ AND NAlmATIVITY d Ihe variutioJ1S of the hearl) reminds us' will lip a valid llotion of them from what we IJrt's To Sd\' that the modern CillCllW is I1U longeI a specLwk in the luxury uf d ch<ll1ge that is in hct not a ckll1;Y,c. One may also take the conC('pl or "spcc[;lClc" in a mUll' pSl'chologiC:11 : ,\ spectack is ,111\ essentinll" vislI:d C\Tllt that Pil'Sl'llts ilself to us .in lllode (,l' ex!cflwlity :lntl In' which \VC :IIT c"llsli tilted \\'itn('ss(',. nut il' tllis is so) wlwl pml'r spcl'l,ll'lc is thnc than i\ IFolIl({1I is 17 H 7 oIl1l 11l'-";1 III LIS iCClI (Ullll'ck Silllltit;lJlCOllSJy undermincd ~ I J l d nourished b\ Ihe inlinilciv v:lricd clrcets of sCIl'-l'.lrodv, ami sl .1 IlIIlSic;d cOllll'dy? Th('l'l' is 11" dllllhl 111:11 nOlwislial (ami vcrhal-, 1 liers ;He 111U1'l' imp(lrtanl than cn'!' ill the lllodern CilH'lll:l, that- -ahov(' ;lllthev 11:]\,c ceased to he :Ishalllcd or tiH'Jllscln's (;le; ill the wllell ,;iJl'llt 1Ililvil's were 10 all (,lld: neilL' Clair's SUII' luils .Ie in's !Horlcrn Tilllc,'L or, on 111 tnll; hetter th:m {he COIlCl'pt or c< Illlrihut i"l I he {In spcc1:l- 1'llfC spcdClcll's. to deflnc Wh;lt the\ nature: thcrc['orl' the CIlllccpl ill the (IUl'stion thaI COnCe111S us. DEATH 01' TlIl' "TlJEATEll?" Is it therefore the tllGllf er from which the young cinema has heen FrectI? That iSll't the case eirher.Fof, be fore c.mtinuillg, olle would to llsk: \Vhilt theater, :Jnd what cin ema? There hilS always been rI b8c1 cinema copied Fwm a had the,lter: It alrerldy existed i 11 dlC age of the silent films ,mel despite I he silence T I 190 THE "1\10DEl'.N" CINEl\lA: SOME TllEOHETICAL rTIOBLEMS since the advent or thc talking fillll, we have bad the "psychological comcdy" and the "dralllatic l'(ll1lcdy"--not tu be confused with the /\nll'rican comedy-and they me still with llS. To mention unly the r;rench cinema-which is, admittedly, particularly favored ill r('sneet many hundreds of {] Illls have we not to the genre's rcci pe, thc cake mix or entertainmentl 'I II thc llludem cinema has tu a exten t freed itseH from ;111 while doing so avoid IJolllcl'anl'" 'I- ('11 rather than tbe theatef, and the grclt Ii Ims of the past were ahle t() avuid it just as well: atiel Flaherty tl be sure; bUI also, in a H'fy difrerent wav, Eisenstein. t, on the cOJllrary, the good thcatcr and the IS IlI111hing of'? nut, how C;J11 one forget thal ) ;lJ1d man, VI$COJIll) ,vne mell til the theater, in the full of the terlJJ? How can one forget all t1ut ;1I! ;\iaill Hcsnais or <Ill (0 the so called dWaler of distallce (thec/ire de la Ii/S/((}ICUltlOl'!), as -'em Carta has 511 revealed?'O Hovv can onc that evcry of illlportance ill the thcater of is as far rClIJO\cd froll1 the or "clabow!c intriglle" as arc the film;, of :Milos hlflllan, Bozier, or Jcall Bouch? And, iF olle loob at the Here j, the fur the "psychological (ur "dWJIlalie d ,{)ciell')' etc 2, Olle P,Ir,t invents . hut !lim out to han; 3. A dash or l,rilliant 4. A few m'mbers: presence of Mrs. E. F. dnd Mr. 1:."). 5. A touch of the nude: vulgarity. melodrama and marital) THE ,\]()DEI1N CINEMA ,INU NAHIIATIVITY 19 1 from a wider perspective, if, following the of certaill theoreti dans of tile cinema 11 or of the theater ,:- one takes the position that the theater is oPI)osed to the epic to the nove], tlHlt scculiir epic) a Ilction caught in and in its cir cllmstantial thrust is in contrast to that same fiction rel,Hed in words are not those of the proLIgonists, one \vill indeed have to con clude that the CillCllW, altllOugh an art very difFercllt From the thea ter, is nevertheless not on the its n;lture changes radi brcahng till' very ami basic hond that links it to theater. '" '" No lIlore than tile distinction between the "spectacle" alld the "nonspce[,lcle," willthc distinctioll hetween the "thC:lll']," and the "llolltlteater" allow us to establish uur preferellces ill theon', so that we can unc!erstallll Illore deadv whv we like what we like, or wlwt is new about the Ilew ('il1el11a. THE CINEMA OF IMPTIOVlSATION? Is the answCJ', I that the new cinema is a cinc.ma of improvisation? BUI there arc n Lll11efOllS modern films that fall outside of this definitioll, from Knife in 1111; lVa/er to JlIles ll1ul Jilll, passing through the works of Orson Dcwy. l\lain Resl1ais, etc. It is true that, whell he proposed i\1iehd Mardorc was cnrcful to ;1]1ply it ollly to one of the modem cinema. hilt the idea is Cllue.l1l' <lnd one often hears it expressed ;1 IIllich more vanue and uCllcral way. it b b devote<l to ,\escribc, life under OIle cannot agree wil h twu forms, among other \.1:dlnUI1S de Provence, [(jG6, a book cler the title "Cincmuturgic de Paris" in 19('5 issue 011 Pmmol and Sacha to: PI" 'P, '111 "J\[Ol1En", C1NBMA: SOj\lE THEOHET1CJ\L l'nODLE\IS only-alld cyell t11ell with some reservations-on the 01lC Iwud til Jean-tnc Cudmd (bUl the man, we know, has a touch of ,'enius, :mel <'cniLls is 1110rCU\"er, it illljJl'<Jvi'l'S \I"iib gredl ,""'\ ;-'1 CillClll:1"-"ci 11(; ui, 711" is ;1 1:15k 11l:IS[Cr), ,1lld (Ill the uther h;lIld II) a 11ltll1lwr ()I' tCIlc/cIll"ics rchled to the dllellill direct its hro:ldest scnse, '? tend- C]1l']('" for a st:lges oj' ;1 Claude Li'vi-Straus, (lllt t' rt'lll:lrh:dY' The ill cinell/o ilired i, too often the by-procilil'! or lazi" Ilotes,' lUI) oFtell it 1'C11UUllCC'S (IF Ilw linishcd work witi1mlt (:11 Ill'sl': ;IIlV 11101(' t [lith [h:lll ;1 g\J()d d()CllIlll'llLlf\ P')S Sl'SSl'S, II is /1,,1 ellough 101 ,;IV Ih:11 Illc orciill<lrv dir<Tl fillll is 11111 pcr fect, ],"1' il h:1:, ,-cal ii, 11t'1 evell ht'cil linislll'd" J\IH] il is ll()1 jU,l the histot) "I' 11](' l'illl'lll:l, hUI till' 11Iu,t Il:ltur,' (II' till' aesthelic "h jccL ihl'lr, lh:lt will h:1VL: 10 Ch:lllgl' 1)J()j'flulldk hdulc :l vvorl;: or afl is ahll' to ahsorb I:ngc s('<'liolls oj: Illtll:ll1S[orllll'tl rcalilyilll() its own pur IlI)S<:, :\l1d hci'"rc il (',\11 Iruths "Iiln thall [he' ()Ilt', lr,lIlspI,,-,'d ,1lId rl'rUrJllll lhM its illil PI'! l(cd\lrcs h:ll"c Jlut "lIl (II' rl:'Wh. "I 'he go!)d hll', ill pillt :it lc;t;,t. i'lqlJ'UyjsCl's, H, is thl' I()('w, wher" laziness :ll1d till' de 0', ('iI/eli!!!. direct itscll' Cltus!,,,I;), m,,1 1'11/(:111<1 t'CI'ile (C/II'{Jlli'1111' ,"1111 (;k, 1,y lean lil!lIcl,'), hut <Ih" the "camlie[ I"ll1H,,"l" EIlII; the N:lli,)]):)I ['jIm ll",lrtl <,j' C:alllllh It'lldcflCY; ,\speets ,,1' the su'cliled f\!('\\' Yor]; ,,d,,,,,], or or Ih" Iirili,iJ "free CillCllIil": the l\mcricCin i'c::ltlll'l'clucuJI1Cllt,nies (LC:leo,C'\;, ill<' J\JilYslcs br"thl'rs '; tcmknLlcs u[ the televisiun (klein All hvugll be spoke uf a L'll1Cll1(l ur Jjlllnl'fl\(i ... :)t inn lif,t in rull agreeIllent with the eil/elf/II direct; much liLc OWll, But it is tbe COlll'cpt \1[' thl:' cinema that seelllS ullclear to me, THE l\IUnEHN CINEl\IA AND NilnnATlY1TY 93 each other, the cil1('lI1a, TilE CINEi\lA 011 Is lhe allswer Bllt tllCTl' arc no I('al dC:ld a lilm is ;! on]v ill ]ik :IIT spaces," ;\ 1l1011ICnl (';Ill be dllll, "(ll'<ld," only ill J'CLllioll to :Ill The lifteell"minute IvaiL hdnrc :1 decisive j IllCII'il'lV, hCC;IUSI' the pcrsoll J alll 10 s(,c is I:ll(', is indccd a tind of "dcad Sp:lCl"" sincc it is 1](01. whetl I am :ltlClltlill,c; III at the time, But such moments m'isc on]v hl'C<1l1Sl> the Ol'l'UlTClllTS of life an. nol ()llC\ ()I\'11 wi 11: tliey do nut ubey I he urge l() till' a/kel i vc ,lra J)('s'I lIl which cOllsidercd most J'ullillilw ( to fl'j)(:at olle oi f,riclIlH' >, SOl! ria lI'S by an as "dead of the iell al W;l \ S constructcd JIIinutes, Ihe whole liFe ur till' lilm \\'Oldd he clJlltaincd ill "dead spacc." Th(' (lilly Ical dC:ld spaces ill the cinclIl:I arc the III dull 11111 whilc e'xlemal]v vicwer', attcntioll, whieh bccolllcs don H:mt, it inllTll<'dh the ;'I'l'V condiliolls fIJI' Ill<' ''tlcnd in life, It is 011 the 1(,l'd oj culti)]" ;11lt! " is, before the lilm l'xishthal tile lkstill\' or till' "dcad is dCtL'rlllilll'll: Those Ihe lillll-lllakl'l' l'xpl'I'icllCCS as SIlCI! arc hallislll'd frolll the lilll1., and Ill' willllc\ cr sec thcm-l'or, till likclil'l' ill tbis respccl, lilll! IllI':'>1 makc its choices or C(';)SC to cxist al all. Thw" :dl the "lllonlellls" th:11 the Jilm-lllakcr has included in I; 1m wcre alivc cinema is a nCIV-and a prnfullllllll' is lS !lot what or a mcnt" ill and it is !J()t hased 011 "dead," innovation is :1l1 matter, and Antonion] is far more 194 THE i{ MODUHN H CINE]\IA. ~ O M E TlIEOHETICAL PROBLEMS hmmm substance of his films than became excels in showing us the diffuse I ife that ,Ire considered most IlnpOrl<lllt U1mg about the Cinel1111 (Nrect-is [h,lt he was skein of <l mOle subtle Evell llIure: diem fro III that S](ln form of fmc IlO Ijlll1. Or very llu\\,cve r, iricalcs of that shimlllering he lost " He ur I iema I itself: 11 ('\\'srecls. prulllo in the widest scnse. cIlls 11 J('1Il Y' of the alTragc dCCCll t dOl'lllllen taries, A FIlNDA!\IENTAL TIlE ]\IODERN CINEMA AND NARRATIVITY '95 contained a to revert to a mythology that Jean NIitry hm; rightly crHlClZCtl,'" a my that conceals hehilld phenoIllenologica I tial reidislll whose consequellce is the revival, OJ] the level of the of tl1il195." of the terroristic no e> in the name of am- aspects or ;\Ildrc Bazin's alld Munier's theories, It shuuld be noted illcidentally dwt i\lichcl 1\1<1rdorc ;Illd Pierre Bilhrd do llut conceive of ,he notion or "realism" in tlltH SCJlS('; nor docs Mmccl some of It is ('spres slOns that ;1 rc aJld tilL' person lor whUlll tlley me, ill thl' inelllctable "adverse "I hell' is" l'cHlng cinema as ;1 whole, but rathcr ;1 ('erwin crazv has sprung lip around the cil/cllla verite: the belief (cnce or the i!ll;lge, which is SOIl1e1lOw as wclJ as-eVCIl as it lends terns that the slightest dislocation and ,lei llalizcs nol the tll;1t Lind of in110 exempt from discursive introduces- * ('oilled word derived from the Greek /(0"1-<0' Ccosmos) Hll<] ,/,all'ELl' ( to Thus, it indicates the faculty to pre sent the world in its entirety, to show "--TnANsLATOll, THE "MODEHN" SO:\IE TllliORETlCAL PHOIlLEl\lS from tbe enormous of some thcsinn terms, 111 tile the few hcautiful alld the lllany botched works of the Cilll?IlW v()rile, one might recugnize ,I wayward, s,lll, and obstinale sister of the sel1lio logicid appnKlch-at Icast iF the hitter is cOl1sidered in ils k'ilSl teclllli cal aspccls. and in its deepest ,]tfecl in: fOUlIlhlioll. The is (me of distrust for bnglwge, anJ \Yunls i]J'eileillg C[llCS Crcltcri in order t(J question the world, spel,e11 it [he ubicct ()l' (jLlCSliolh: fashiolled ,IS a lonl I'm it is heing asked 1l0VV to aCColillt for of slispicioll ,mel l10hlc neurosis. the Incx tnll' discollrse is onh' ,I true disc(lllI'SC; the word COl1l<1iIlS I than that which is conLlillcd ill ils cmJ'cc( ic usage The cincllw 1'eril(;, Ull the ,lltcllll'ts (0 ,\I'oid (ilco,c diflicu (ies hy supp()sedly rejecting coherent ,mel the lise of iconic atll's(ation; ('VCIl the spccch of the (flllll) llCHlCS is slljlPllSl'lIIU he 1I1l Il<lSCCTlt--il is pint or the illl,lgc, as iF it Wl'J'l' l)cing swept v;lsl circuit of vi::;lldl Uhc prolifcra(i')ll 01 III tcrvicws in tile cinclJliI-rcri{(' lillllS he1s no othcl' SUllfcC It is a P'] thetic InCOllllll!:-. de Iii I!rre, th:11 hav<' hel'!) "0111
whu lws "problellls." Iwo Iypes of ie1coiogy: that of im:1ge and wbich is a sort of curious behaviorism; THE j\lODEllN C1NEi\lA AND NAnnATlV1TY H); Jlc\'crthekss-ilild IS a1'1';11 ell t at the best works of Ibe llew cincllu. viewer;.. with in the trcmciv dillicilit to ddinc 1tis the l'XDctncss of an llslinc vOice. oj' ,I gestnre. of ,I lulle'. Jt for example, till' marvel,llls, <Ibn!)st dal1ced scellt' ill Pierrul Ie fult ,lIlll,Illg the C'lI/I./ Iif!, II I' {Ie c!1iIJ1CC , . I'a li.f.i,lIc de IlilI/e/les , .." "IVfy life line , , . 'Your llip Jint' , : :1 highlv ,(Till' Ile'vcrtheicss. since it is ,I piece uf ch()n'ogcqlliy, :1 rclcrcl1cc to ;\lllcri(JIl Illllsical -we :II'C :1 \\':1)' F!'(JllI lhl' simple-minded ollhc phil' "cuIlLlrist" traditioll, "realism" for libl socil'lics, No other film P:ISS,lgC, JHlweY(.'r--lll1icss (O:I ,,"sset' (',{el1t, the si lcn( SCdUcli()1l ,ccm' durin!.' the pamc\c Struilcim\ P/cddill,f!, crl'ti<>ll IlJ:IL i, all t]wt ,em,lin, "I' tJ.,L"'l' llIClh"d, ,,'hC'1l tl,,\, '" the hands "I' the 'l'(:lialisl" :mel "nc tLl'll witlll'''t'S. "pi ti", icJlenl (,(,"t(,llt, hUI '1 of "g,,[;Iled, )ll(Hlcllcd jng al ur <It l'tlch ll1ller. cr}'jng, ch'lttcring, etc. nIll' Jl():;talgi\,' for the olLll!ll'tJl()l1'1 Id: ('c111catl(lll h:l:"l'd Oil HlnallIH'l..:::J It 1'" ,JeHU,]])' sigllilic"lIt that, ,d,' all thl' Ill",krn lllethod" the "Illy !)'lI: Ihilt is reL, tively ,)(:glcctcd hy the ciJl,.'JJI(( ['cri/e i" prccisdy the "Ill' that i, lll,"! like :t II ill: ill which Ihe sl'cci:ilist\ ],C)'rtllllllllll'C "be)" lHcc'isc "pc)'al",\ dut's not ::jjlH tu cxprc.':-. ..... :-;ulnc truth (Jr IliUcll <I", 1( amI (llllrc,Hed rcsllit: aCllwll',yc]'"allaiysi'; Cl add II('/'llfl con1 that (lP(,I,lle "I' an urekrh- p,o'-'CrlUI the 198 THE "l\10DERN" CTNEl\'IA: SOME THEOl1ETlCAL PHOBLEl\IS TIlE MOD.EHN CINEMA AND NAHHATlVITY 199 Morcf<L-had portrayed with an acclll'acy 8S fundamentally direct, as superbly careless of the external probabilitics of timc amI place, the lllute corporeal agrecments that love produces and by which it is pro duced, the ambiencc of gcstures and tbe thousand minor ae cepl<H1ccs of a docile receptiveness that is no mere obcclic'nce and that mold the vvoman's sunlly face in the directions her lover's hallct of active, amused, and tendcrtlcss I somc or the /\n tonioni variolls films hy cvcn say that rl'lllains to he dcfinedli'---arc, for all their till' most precious comFlcsts or the CiJlClll,l tll,lt, since 1966, we h,lVC (',I\lcd "lllodern." Jt is sllrch' not SOllle principle of ohjecliv, ity, SOlllC faultless IGllislll, that call dcJJ]le tbis modern cinellEI, but rather the liability to certain truths, or to certain {1cclifacics, that make the yuung cincm[1 more ,Hlult and the tradition,ll cinema oc cCisioll,Jlly vcry youthFul. Tile fll1l1s of the past, evcn the Jllost heau JI' [ne f'cncr,llh a lillIe '\!lJOvc themselves." like t1lOSC adolesccnts THE OHDEflED CINEMA, To thaI sHeb accuracies havc be, the or the were or sensitive dl[lIl those of locby; but that exph1l1[ltion is ill,1(!cllw1tc-is to re examil1c that ncw and subtler dramaturgy lhat ,ldmits Ilion' ohjectivc details, details of the kind tb;lt the Iraditional plot film or ovcrwhelmed, Exactness of tunc ,I priccless COlHjUcst that renders a whole arC,l of the cinCllla obsolctemight well be, in turn, only a consecjl1e)lcc. * Sec passngcs of J\lurnau"s Dall'lI Sjlistrom's Willd (certain of Lilliall (the character o[ Marcus), etc. And, (except in Potemkill) and oj' Pudovkill Furthermore olle must not ",wtl'r;70 all of the modern with which one of the films of pI'< j' and text is ,I grc[lt deal more it is ;15 if the il1 realistic potcn tiD I or the [ilill ic veil ick, formcrly the proper! Y of the ('o11\'ention ur a Illoderate degree or discretc'l" thc;ltrical IT;llislll , the CUlle-Preyert films), had no\\' divided it,clf Iw twel'll a "cincllla of passion" (in the scnse that Ollt' spe'l](S of "pas sionate l()\('," ;IS Hen6 Gilson correct!) Jlo[CS),21 a cincllI:! or ('xlIlxr <lncc and discol'cry C:mcl it is this Cilll'lll;! thai is (lcc1siollalh able to C[lpturc those so direct truths I hme iust s]loken ur: Wl' kilO\\, tIll' ill' terest Godard h1S sbown for other ham!. a cinema or ALlin and his SllClCSsiyc that beliCH'S onl" in rccollstrtlcled a J\Jost critic:, ]'lasled i\oHl'S Varda's 111m, Lc HOll/IeUr. Thm was result ,., dUe "f "kind llIisllnderstanlIing. I did not like the Ellll (:itllc1'. bllt to attack it for it;, lack of realisll1 is, to Illy mimI. a serious miscollslruction. Certainly, th, worl,crs' of life, as the Jil)ll presents it, is lJuite fallta:'lic. Uut it had til be so. For the is a philosophical talc, such as the eighteenth ccnlm;, enjoyed, or rather a militant ulopia in the >;lylc of the ninetecnth century (hut Ull- In a Illor(' Iucill "ecUlmt of the actual sucial factorsalld the class factors-that enter into Ihe problel11 c(lnsiclercd) 1t js abo, ill ouc way, an act of courage. For, although it is lrue that a few pers(J1ls in tile social envIronlllcnt where films arc produced dream of a worl,l in whi,']' luve would be truly frce, a wurld both animal and human, where the hudy's carcless;less would also be a genewsitv, a and of women and men, a world in which monster of scntiwel1tlllis)II, as il has come to he since paganism, will be lU1l1ecl-altbough it is true that a futurism of l10urishes some of the cOllversatiollS ill Paris's Left Danlc, the filet is that, aside from Pierre Kast ill La Morle-saisoJl, Le Bel and La Bnllure des mille soleils, no (lne besides Varda had gathered these scattered snch a holdlv l1IOVOCali\'e These human conducted away from such futile sufferinQs of jealous, exclusive emotiol1S, are existed, as if theV were TITE ",\IODE)\;'/' CI"iEMA: 'H1EOJ(P.'IlCAL PHOULl'J\J than i1 is awarc thill orders with meticulous patience ,I c;d <llltl ,I ('111 Clll<l /\1 cariier, at the limc ,,(t the missed vcar at Maricllhad? Was the mnl1('siac O/ISCI1CC tile llllshrrild or not) ('Ic.1; a cillema of tellSe 1Il1c<'rtrllnlv tlwt, ratllci lhtm plescnting t1w ;Ipollas uF Illc;llling ill ;1 f"rl1l intended [,) il1l:utt, their ;Ippearann' in daill experiellcc', dclihcratcly <'<ltlstructs ;1 rinthint' Il1(Jdel SOIll(' hiztllTe Illodernistic ritual "'ithin which th(' 'pI'datllj" will I()se hiLllselr, bnt ill ;ldv;lLHT,';' OLle could sav tllal /\bin Fk.sn;lls lack "I' rc;i1islil. nlll is tkll not aho tile verv definilioll 0\ "plativ(' tf:lllsl;lle([ into the IHC'l'llt or the imlicaiivc Ihesc frec feiatio)bhips are nlre;)dy 1lllC or k" cirde,; but it' !\gll(:S Vard'i had placed the actiu]) ,d' her Ijlm ill such the story--which woul,l then be realistic "\\'rlliid hnve lost all tbe power 01 ih militant impact. For what the film ]]lcans til say that workers, to", cuuld live like thaL In shurt, the mislIJlderSI<llltling d('fivcs frulIl the Llct Il,al Il,e fil))} w:r;, viewed '" if "nc wI>uld sec a G,,,lard Jilm as exalllpk ,,( thc ordered eiDem;" 1 rcpe,lt: I did nut like tbe film, Ilut at all in Lltt. This was h'r rc)s,,"s [" the cnact11ll'1l1 "f the uto!';" ill its details, Dilt \NIlo \vould Inailltajn tli;lt \vas nut a celtllin :llUollnt ot CtJurtlgc ill Ill" fnet that a ll1udcrn \YOllJ<m (all 'pc<lk or sud) lmusllal things, r"rc how Ciln ()Ill' Llil to SVlllllathi7.C wilh the sinccri!\' of her '(- In nor Lll a 1 !i[c, wnnt, the him, resentment tr;ll1sccndCnlal and a liollS (as at the moment of the nHnantic," l:)S Bernard llwc/erlles? But he is aisu, in uf tire French cinema, Goda I'd represent the two film, as opposed to a as for " we find it on one siele as on the stance, the triumph of "mimesis" and of the reconstruction and, in the second instance, a The lillll of the til is of THE J\IODEHN CINEC>.IA AND NAHHATlVITY 201 modem Ii 1m is the 'cinematograph Ie one of dIOse great whose importance in ccr- is well known, lield A FILl\l-I\IAKrm's CINEMA? Whnt "11 I1lI or a maker's cinema" as distinct from cinema"? Can it provide that criterion of since ils conS"(jllellces hut lind il- so difli cult lo ddillC? There is doubt dial lodav', cinema is very often :1 cinem;l," while the old was so frcquently the ulterior and secondary illustration of a worked-out, Gocbrcl's the best exanm1es: criticism like .Michel COLlr not's evel! existence fro]]] tllis fact. it v\'as the Ii Ims of the pasl ( and !lot its prctext in thc sceLlario, But, all of Alain films art' in '\cript-writer's lilms": "fhe SVSICLlltllic way ill which this di[cc rdLlsing to imagine his works sccb out, at the of thl' various colbhortltors of suJlicicnt weight to Iwvl' their OWI1 of things. leaves llS in llO dOl1bt as to his opiniolls on the ie level that the lilm strati/-ies and Jilms derive their intcrest hOlll " <- In lire ulel cinema, there weTe of cmuse Jlonrealistic, m,rrvclOlb, and fan tastic films, Bllt cunstitllted a marginal area, at least ,iJ)ee the 1935- 4 0 period; Hesnai, is not descendant. The ordered einellla is one of the two branches emerging Ollt III a snrl of common realistic trunt that, bctween I940 amI 1950 approximately, had become on the whole tlolllinant Irenel in relation to the various "fantastic" lenelcllcies, THE CINEMA: SOJ\I THEOnE'JlC;\L PHUllLUI!S whole reflectioll on the of tlte of sol1tuclc, a dnt! C11l0 of essell tially exlra of Codnrd himself bear witness (0 a narr,ltivc cl antlsy, docs llut automat priority, hut it cl'[t8inly implies an eSSCll (hat Cmbrd is (lllc of those mell (Jill" he /ired clurillP tile ,lctua] men Illli' arc able to make IlIllIs throngll constant rdlecti()11 (cvell if it is 11"t ordered) ab()lIt the :lIlel who are ahle to creall' ill the hordcrLllld of ;1 pocur tbat is also ,111 e55;1\' OJ] pO('trv (tile' rC:H!cr sur,'ly recognizes here onl' of the lllost Jll()dcrn litcratUl"C'). But even iF, {'ur director like Codard. the cin ellla, IlllTI til Iv prescll t hcFore n;isting, becolllcs tllC nccessarv cat ;dyst 1m lillll creatioll- in the samc wal thM the idea or the "h(lo]z" is 81 ways in the minds uf modern even whell the hoolz t hev ;lre is hardlv Fact rellFlins that WILlt Collard or ;] the mllmlilt of the lIarrative the sea, P;ll'is, ;1 hie with story. " "I do not see why the modem tban ;lJlvtbing else," Eric UIlC point 'Iut t1wt the new prescnt ill t'he cinem;l one forgets that between a dilIcrence uf V',Jhu reached his maioritv. The all' llew novel"] l'c'sclnblancc is Zl.-S At tbe vcry least nile sllUuld narrative," etc). cinema as llovd is almust an slllluid be lllore in "L'/\n('icl1 certain Siln] and the l1'-'W as extent pheUOJ1lella as Too such there exists old m;lll, ;lIJd the and the same THE ]\IODERN CINE"IA J\ND NAI{HAl1VITY ever "hroken and unfamiliar the 1ll8Y fact never is olle of the most proliJic of mudern remains true even when, as is oftcn the scenario is horn in the midst of way, only the COIlSC (jUcnce or thc of the sccnario froll! the modern cmelila. or 10 t1wt the only scenarios me those that ::lrt' Ii!\C the of mlll Bust. A CINEMA OF TIlE SHOT? Is the lllodem cinelli a ctlll'll1;1 or the "shot," as distillgllishcd frum the old cincllw, which W;IS JJl(lrc cOllcerned with racing fwm shut to shot, strais:ht to the But jf that is the case, what is (lJlC to say the expressionist CCrlll;Jll eXI )ressi,)Jl iSIll the LIst Jilms or is ;111 (lId OJH'. that cOllnotations at cinellla not ilctcristics of the Ilew cincma? Is not the of kind of V:lst C:\istclltiai failure ohserves, Cll]111IlIl11ic;Jtcd J1]Olltage) Is not Sa/1'alore. GiuliallO a mOlltage lilill lIiusie cinl'ma --and tllM was grounded to a hirgc extcnt OIl the of inducing a IJorizolltal leading of tbe lihn that I\'ould COllSidcf cadi at length? J\lJd Wll<ll, on tIw olber Iwnd, is OJlC to sal' the grcllt f1!llaisSIlII('(' of wOllla,:';") whicll, after a period dominated hI' the from encl (0 end? As for the yuuthflll dynamisllI (If Claude l.cl()uch's [lUI'. Fillc des fusils, is it not derived as lI1uch fWIll the of the 111m as from the wonderful exuberance of its lllOllt:lge? ;\nd Wh;ll of the imDort:mc(' (If SIOJlS in the nd r thought. Tire fact j,;, huwever. SOlllC(;;le says, H$ one hears, that thc cincma is "far, of htcratlll'l\ one must C(lll elude he n{ust never have read anvthiw> at all. 204 THE "jVl(JDEI1N" CINEMA: S01\JE THEORETICAL PROllLEMS rative flow, also confessions of 2 to 7 ,mel 111 Vivre sa vie? And the and in Hiroshima /11011 omour, a counterpoint lhat, despite its modern cent, seems to emerge straight from the editing table of a Balilzs, an Arnheilll, a Pudovl,in, or;1 Tilllocilcnko? And all the {JIm one sees , J\ CINEMA 01: POETP,Y'? rem;llIlO;, lmall y, the !lotiOIl, IT' by Pier Paolo of a dislinction between the "cincma 01' and the "cinema of poctry," As attract inc as il illay se(,IIl., the idea nevertheless basicll1)' fragile. For llle of "prose" and "poclry" arc too linked to lhe use of the verbal to he cClsilv carricd over to the cinel1w, Or elsc, if "poetry" in sense (>1' whether 'lln:essful or nOI, sidcrs poetl\, ill its tcdmical SC]lSC Ihe lise of Icrbal idiom restrictions a sC(JlHI code cappillg Ihl' iirsl--'()IlC idi()m, 1\lsolini is with its I)f()adest SCI1Sl'--'as the illlllledi,ll(' Ilrcsenn: of the world, the cncoun seems SIUll101ll1l:1hlc: The ,dlSl'IHT or code ill (he cincma, th;ll is, the absCllce of aware o[ Ihis precision:!l gut Ill' believes ,111 things c()nsidercd, it can he circ1ilIly<;nted, I helieve, UIl tbe ,md bter I will show wIn, Further more, t() these obstacles one must add still ,1!lOtlwr: The prose," in Wh,l(c\'('r S(,llSC it is gin')], has 11(1 the cincma: and iF ,I pros(' docs exist in the lexical in distinction to poetrv and because a long rhetorical tradilioll has divided into two a domain that is initially litemry (for prose, that of a Chateaubriand or of a Sten spca is aJ and nol from ready the artistic use of language anu IItiliti1rian language; it creates ohjecls that have their own and ilwt leads trulll Ihe l'lTI;lin \','av frolH THE 1\IODEnN CINE:\IA i\T"D ,'US at which lhru:;t or tor the it IS lie I'cr thCe! CUllllllllnicHiul1: it lTCiltCS work;;, The poetr\' and prnsc J1JS IfIc,1l1ing <1nly within (111(' that 1:'cparatcs literal.lIre fmlll thl' I"c' of idiom :IS a to()1. ;\nd it is this Lllim:lrv distin,'fiOll (licit is ill cinema, S(I Ihat no 11111] Gill sIT iel sellse, ll( Ir, Su oj' Pas(,lini';-; :II least for rdurn 10 tilC'111 1:11<..'1'; let us l'X;l11J ine Ilis Ihesis i,;(o]v ur til(' l'illl'lll;!. If tJlcrc is sil]o\c trelld h IJ or Ihi, histo!'\'. it is indeed II1l'. U!le' eillCll];1 tu Jill' J](.\'('I,'i111'1I1il,tl1al i.... II) ,Sci \ , the "C1111..'111;1 "f jll'l'lr\'" til till' '",inl'ma o[ l)fose," and 11"1 (he othn \Va, around, Pasolini Itlllis Ih'CI'III.I-which arc nol rart' in die modern CinellI;] struclllrt's; I1l' lcnds also (0 tll(' must hC:llltifu fillllS 10 (be dullest li'ddilil)]);tl movies, <llId he tI( Iwl L'ol)sidlT lhl' poeln il) 1\ J)ollhle /0111', PUllr Iii Suile ill! 111001ilc, or Dewier aloul, of fillllS, Olwj()lIsh' lhere is more till' {'iallo Preside III , ill( Cmu" pli/rulI, C,1l) onc uf which fur Olle l(l scc fnr tl.1C Ill' SLlhst:II1CC :lud Corm of cadI nnc ,mel less ladie;! I h (he older Ii djll'ers >Ill be suilieiclltiv CC'lt,lln tlla( IhL' Pasolin 1 sJl( ';( b rCl'fCSCll ts <l in it il](' ,,, bC<'illll CillC'Ill:1?2<i !\nd is it Jillal ;1ll;]lys]s, ('(Infused with il1;11 inevilable slIbjedive l'OIUmlioll oj' the filmie objccth its {llming is ;) Ch;llUCil'l'i,lje of aJI tillCmil-SO that the olliv real dilfercnce \\.uuJcl Jillal/v he tlw ,mel prose perceptions, whith can only he dnrilicd hy d1C ul' eaeh film and docs no(, with Ihe existCJlcc of general restrictions from ____ _ 206 THE "MODEHN" ClNEI\Ij\: SO:\IE THEORETICAL PROBLEMS further is it not, alllong the liIllls that scem the must outmoded todi1\'but not always righth,-that one encounters the most cohercnt and systcmatic attempts to COllstmct a hIm as one :1 poem? \i\lhat ahout Pudovl<in's "lvrical " which Jean iVIitl"y has so well \iVlw! ahollt the corOlWlion scene in [van lilC Terri or th: proccssion hefore Vakulintchllk amI the scelles of mist in Po/clllbll( What ,Iil()Ut Abel Ganee in Nupo/coll and La Roue? AmI ttlt' attCII1Dts of the "pllre cinema" to substitute a einl'll1<l or tlzellles And Jean Lpstein's enthusiastic analyses of the value of the c1ose-ujl shot? And the lise of slow motion in the in Zero for Conduct? And ;111 the systems of montage mentioned earlier, vvhose aim \vas to forlllalize the various 'ilmic 10 solidify the thematic "depth" in the normative pre a formal svstcm? I\m] the accelerated ing in the scene with the hlack coach ill N ()SfefUflI? j\nd the inered iblc ;Icrial traveling ,hot in me ali, indeed, in$t,1I1CeS of those "gramlllatical elewellts ,IS flillCtiom:'2B that P,Isolini tellds to idclIt ifv wi th the new cinema, III trulh, though tmlay's cim'm<l is at times rich in resonances, tl}()['gh the had films of every I)criod hy definit elude the s(j,clilcd puetry "of thillgs" ,llld the or their zaliull, the fact remain;. that the only attempt, that havc been lInder taken toward Ilut only a poetic eincnla bUlals() a cinema as organized idiulII-sinec this is what Pasolini is talking about-were, pre ill tllC old cinema," I\ml the fact is that, since its hirth, the cinema has pr<lctically nt:Vl'r ceased to evolve ill the direction of an ideal (technicallr prosaic) lIexihility and a freedOil I that arc ", T" mv mind these atlempts have culminated in a failure which, 01\ the level uf general C<lllllOt be overcome hy the few ll1uglliliccnt but isolated suceesses, A Iilm may a poetic novel, it C8l111ot be a (except in the case uf purely thematic, nUJ1story-telling short lilms, like Berlill ur SucksdoriFs Rllyt111H of a Git)', In a poem there is no fable, amI nothing ill trudes between the :)uthO! alld the reader. The novelist draws up a world; the I'oet of tIle work!. The fiction film still seems to me to be closer to the novel tu the poe111, And, finally, the period in which one believed that a film cuuld be a pOl!m is that of the old cinema rather than that of the lIew cinC111a. _ ____ ._".__ , __.. , _____., ____, __, ______________________ __ THE f-l0DERN CINEMA AND NARllATIVITY 20 7 W<l\S, of Frall (tbe cinema "s a modern suciological novel), /\ndrc llazin ;lnd the to the novcl rather than or i' iou peCl! lia r to mUll y lISC or the powers of (he within the framework of til(' rclatiVl'lv "realistic" lilm's verisimilitude), More gcnerally, one will obcrvc tIle sCH'alied fantastic cinema, whieh ill certain carlv periods emile vcry close to merging with one of the ILIainstreams of the cinema as a whole (Gcrm,m-Swcdish expressioll ism hOlll 19 1 t() 1<)3 0 , the fant:Istic lilms of the period 19:jo'\5, sllch ,IS FraJlkeN stein, T/lC J1H,isilJlc 1\11(111, and Kill,!!, J(OIJ,!!,), eventually became ,I ,!!,Cllfe, and a ralher special genre ,It that, which even ill part over "vhat the French call the ei!l(;11111-/;is: horror films, gmdc>Bltalian sadistic Japanese lilms, Soviet fantasy' etc. As a tllC so called realistic film, which has long been contrasted to Ihe fanta,tie film or to the film or the marvclous as ir were the two poles or the cinema mel this is the famolls theme: "I "ull1icre l'S A;JcIiJs"), blS taken uver ,limosl the whole or modern film, Ihe new cinellIa ;lS the JIO/icca/Jic jJl'CS<'llc'l' in traditional lill11s, Oil the contrary, the camcra tried to JIlake its prcsence unfelt, to ll1,llzc itselF invisible hc' rore tbe spectacle it was presenting. But, whilc it is true that this may apl)l), to certain filllls or the 11(1I-s(Hlistant classical Americall comedy, for example, and in III e films related to what called editing" cia,, was made to appear invisible-it cannot describe tllC various tenclencies or the very cinema whose on the were based on the presence of the call1era: mOll or Abel camera movcmcnts in films, the optical clistorriom and ...L.. TIlE IO[IEHJ'< CINE:\[!I: St),\H', TJll'UCETlC\1 1:.\ ,,; TIlE ]\IODIlRN CINEi\Ti\ AND NAHnATIVITY ii, the lIS ()f dlc T'rellch s cI"oc-up< in TI;;; Pussioll of /\re ill ,,('sthet ics [kit th,,! IITt i('i,ms Iike ]' i;;cllstcill in lI,iml whcll thel' imisled [illl1ed deri It'S hi the rilmimf, '\Ild ('(In ',) verselv, \\ilhill Ill(' 111<ldcrn cinlma tiICI'C is ;1 lcndclHv Dill' ivis\"-JtdlJllCr. SOIlIC "I' i\llj()l)iol1i. "F Dc St'I!I. ,mel Ill' the cil/('lI!(f ele Ilel thilt card'ulh "crilSCS" ,lI1\' C,IIlICr;! cI Fcc!s; tilliS, (Ill thiS 110im [ am ill a,'ilccnwlll with nuillllcr, III , dUII1l/Ill/ali(HI Ihc'!ill'l ;lIld I :11111 !llld Ihe invisihlc f()r Ihe the dll'Sl' Ulllll'plu;ti pC! found ill till' lilills "f Licit )\'[sul :11111 I",,,k rell CI's ('111('111:1, t' Illl' m:l, hese or I hc ['.,'allln' ,lllti ISll! !'!lel LIIJltr[Vancc, [ihn maker's shut c'illCllI<I ililel sequence (ilWllld, prusc Cill(,lllil lhc Cillll('f.l-in'l'ICSl'lll"t' alld tillcliOlls s('cms to me to ,ICCOUill lIludern cLlililcd ,I, "Illodcm" i, too ol'lell to" ,,1'1('1i is bcLillg ill W;ls PI(lp"s('d with ('1(,J]('l' II' n'r!;] IIiIlI:, 01 tll(' 1"1:,1 10 ClTlclill llIodClil lill]IS;11ll1 hal !ruc-hut wilh ll!l drOll ,1I11'1,iCI1I Ill)ssihk, I1l1111IK'1 01' !l n d llempl is l!t(; few p"gcs III,,! follow, "t1V;llIcC lhe inevitable lui h Sill is! i",I til In: (Ill(' n()le. lirsl, tlwt il all l'\!llll[lll'd ,11,\)\,(, rC:1S(lIJ. Tlle'v ,11'(' Sil the cinCllW was IS S( l is s(, <,It 10 a much kSSCI extent. I hdievl' "11 til(' the modern film is IllOl'e ll,lI'I'<itin', <Ind IlWIT silli,,1 the main contribulion of the new cinema is lu have flhllic narrative. cunll.lry t1J<1t so, ,md th;ll enriched the lVlore or less :lssociaLecl with this idc,l of a presumed ur wea kcu ing or 1I:11TMi viI y is, <llllOJ] g lll,my critics, Ihe 11 ()tion oJ a hrcahlow11 or Ihe "gramlllar" ()r "sVlltax" uF the cineilla. I wuuld s"),, on the contrary, that the cim'lll;) hilS lIe!'(?/' h;ld cit her ,1 r or ;t in tile prccise linguistic sense or thest' tenliS (S()l1le Iheort'li, that it did, hut [I)M is allot her Illatter 1'<111\('1', il toela\' still a certaill Illlllll,CI' of rUllciulllL'll that pcr!ilin 10 the mosl profolilld necessities or !ransmissiu11 of inform:,I;,," ''''l11inl,,,,;,.,,1 !;IIVS dl:11 arc ex, arc to he sough! in and no! ill tile gl'<ll1llllill' or 1a1lgU<lgl's. TIll' wjl()1c Illutldll' or til(' the fact tIl"( Olle looks for <l1l1()I1U the aud spcciJic " V(TV rClllovcd !'rom rl'a Ii t\' ') i,] iOIlI;1 ti (' without laws all' lliost prohahly bC\,Ol1d the expects to lind is 10 sal', Ull a IIlllch ill some WllyS prior to lhe dilfciCllli:lti()1l or \lcrbnl all il e , idiOilis') Frolll othcr lllllllan semiotic wstems, \Vc told was suited l<J sv11 Lu.:" llO ['xists, Iklt the livill<' rJ11il s t() do with sllch iI hurden, Bul Ihml beiliU acllwIlv synt<lclir ,"" articubliolls ,ralher de S;llIS CIIlCI1lH elll be VOlin, , , ,':") excesses of Ihat, during the period of "dill; !lInglle"J1, amI C\'l'1l IaLer, was considered to be as strict a;; the grammar of a verbal gU:Jgc, But the new, more Hexiblc, forms or the cinellld arc gov erned just as mllch the fundamental without wllich 110 information would be possible; a discourse of SOIllC' is al wavs, in olle way or another, divisible. The - these rule, have llothilll' to do ('rab1<, little "cleviees," was on tile '/;;lm York, 10,",1, To Ilush them aside-as 2IO THE ";\,IODETIN" C1NEIIIA: SOi\IE THECmrrnCAL l'HOBLEMS it tried to he nOI'I11<1 aim is to but it admits tu verbal Imwu;we, the ollr lilLlguages, And we know the CXtl'llt or the gap bctwcen the and the normative "gt"allllllariall," ",hiel! was illustratl,d ill j()6::; by the l'XrlWllgC, puhlished ill Arts, hct\\,(,l'l1 Elil'l1lhll' ;llld M;n tind,:;' Evcn the l1)ost "allv<lnccd" filllls still pertain to ;J <q11)],OdCh, tlwugll ill order to apprclll'I1l1 new ()\Jjecb, the 1;lttlT llla\' have (,) bccomc mure Hexiblc, ns I will show ill s(,veral her (lll, hI ;,hmt, tW() \'crv llilTcfCI11 "rules" or the cincma: On derivcd i'rolll a 1/ul'!/lal irc hc considered outdated or tbell'Ssl\, restrictive:."c,! 011 till' other 11a!ll1, there arc a certaill 1l1l111 Jwr of' stJ'llctllralcol1liguratiulls th;lt are ill ill'll!:ll rnLl laws alld whose details arc consLllltly evolving, When OIlC S;IV, tbc I,lllls (IF the "lll'W w;nc," for cxmllplc, have ullnplctclv "dismantled the Ilarra livc," or th'lt tbey h:l\C(, "Clltirel\' displaced Wllt;lx," OllC is fC;III" tak illu ;1 ven limited vicw of the ,,", "llalT,lt ive" :lllt! , \vith ll() rdatioll a purely 11ll'OlogIC:l1 (lr COlllIlll'! Ud! cudi to the llimic vehick as :I wh(1lc It is prl'cisdv t() the extellt th;lt tlll'\' rl\l<,'l' ..,. Of the two, the lingui,t Wlb Andre' 1\1:ntincl. <"\C j\nother suurcc or lllisllndcrs18nJing: The ne\\' cinema has very rightly so-a !lumber of "mIl'S," sueh (lS the prohibition the 180 degree angle shot ('I' the taboo gnillg from an establlshlllg shot tu a close up with no change of axis, or n<rainst the actor at the cam"ra, etc, THE l\IODEHN CfNEi\IA AND NAImATIVITY II tklt the inl1o\'<uiollS of the youllg cillellla arc so, far frol1l delllonstrating tile llonexist (,lJeC' o[ lIlev ,Ire rcallv discovering new syntactic regions while rellwilling (at least as long as thc\.' arc intelligihle, :IS is the case ;tlmost ;tlways) elltirely submissive tu the rUllctional lI1cnts of [iImit discourse, llllJiwl'illc nnd Last Year at j1,joril'llZ)(ld arc still, from one l'nd to the other, /iIIllS, and <1ny ""l'ludes the (Icsniptivl' SYlltagllla; ;til inl\1m'l<lW "lid l'lld ill Paris r.";lt least ill the present slatc or Cilll'lll:Jt(lgraphic t",'hniqucs); a 11(1I](li cgl'tic illl<lgC must ill (lIlC way (If ,m()ther he linked t() a diq.:ctic ill! n,(;,l', ()J' it will not ,Ippear to he lllllldil,(;,ctic, etcY:: But sllcll hm'l' llcvcr l)('cil seri()tlsly triL'd hy Ii I1ll-11ml,crs, ulliess ]lcrll<ljls--aml CVCIl ,itl'll OJll' would han' to ('-"<Imine the lIlatkr 1ll()l'C sUllie (,SlrelllC aV;lilt gardist who drort to lIlake hilllscll' understood Ci1]('11I<ItO to the Jlarrat fictioJl liiln /\nd lilllllllakcrs Ill'Yl'I' :ltlC1ll(lt tt) C()llstl'll('t stich \0 thaI thc\' l'xist, is precisely hCl,lllSC the llIain Ilglll'l's or cillclliatogr,lphic illtclligihilit\C illll:lhit their Illinds Ii) a IllLlel1 grcater l'"kllt than the\, arc ;nvarl' oF, Sillli Imh', (he lIlost (lrigil1;d \c\'ritcr d()l's ]]((t attempt tu L1SlliOll ;111 t'llt Ilew Llilguagc, IV That is wlly HOW of tht' cillema and la ke a more and lechnical and from this return to the d the tbcories, which, more than any other attempt at defining lill1lic I l10llcrnity, Irv [0 delillc tbeir subjcct precisely and go beyond thc stage of gencral im pressions, '1 212 THE "I'\,lODEHN" C1NEi\fA: SOM,E THEOHETICAL Pl\OBLEi\lS TIm "nH:;F,GNI" on [CONIC ,\NALOCY? 1\t lirst: glance, our 311tllOr s;lys, there is nothing in the cinema correspondillg to what idiom is for tbe writer. Tbat is to say, there is no codaied instance prior to the actual aeslk,tic undertakillg, Fine. Nevertheless, Pasolini contin lies, one Hlust assume that there is something in the cinema that, in olle way (It another, assumes the sallie role as language in sincc the constant fact is thai' tlll' l'incJI)il is not all "abortion," that it is able (II cOllllllunic:ltc.: 14 It is at this point, I hclievl" Ihat the lllore statclllell ts : An artlsllc semiotic svstcm, Sill'll as the cinema, can functiol1 pcrfec(l" "vel I withoul the assistancc ()f an initial codified The cincma is in the same as Ilrativc 1ll Claude LeviSI ra uss's T'I/(; Hall' mId the Coohed: The first level of articubtioll hv the "natural" tllill in the ill the picture 011 the screen). Literature res languagc. hecause the soulld hy tlte vocal org,lllS possesses no intrinsic llll';llling. Thcreron' it 11;]s to hc arliculaled 10 ,ll'lllirc mean \Vhidl is withheld from "inarticulate Ihe two arliculatiolls dIal C(lllsli1l11(' languagc,,that of ami Illat 01' the J1l0nClllCS, in 1\ndre Martinet's other dwn the illcvit,lhlc eTl',ltiH' iIlSI;II1CCS or .('., dl'l1otatcd i/icatiull), hlckillg which Ihe OJ] which to project Ihe illtl'l'play uF l'onno' lations. But the Ii 1m 'I na ker docs 1101 work wi th voea I suullll in iti,l His ray\' maleri;ll is (he illlage-thin is to sav, whieb always or aI lcust codi liable, language, delines as an inJeJ' thelll, tbe lilm maker is as the writer (keeping in mind the the written). 1\s for "real noises," raise essen the SilllIC problems as do images, to the auditive dimensilJn. One mllst nut confuse sonorolls and yflOllic: sound of the worl,l has its (J,vn meaning (the locomotive's whistle, etc.); a phouic sound acquires pre- only by means of the linguistic ' THE ,\WDEIIN AND NAnnATIVITY
'1/, _etc') awl thai til(' ";llll(jIllOhilc" froll! "Ira rite Cillc'IlI;1 <1ITiv('s at the sallie results not wh()se cJllci,hltion llnCliol1 i!llu ;m additional illSLlIlcc ,thclic;d ,mel ;](h'Cnllll'Ous:: G , il is, 1l1!11'h JI10re lest and least connoted plll)logr;lph of ,1l1 ;lll I (I I Ill' ",lli,'h ;1 "Illy 1)\ hall' "aul<llllo],ile" h))' its mlinlbliol1s Df its 1l101H'1lH'S alld cIII, /Inti \'l'J'\ ,J.i I 1'1)1" ill (lIlI' p;lrlicul;lr lilms, .. hnl I]()I dl'(l)('si IlI(Th:lllislll of lillllic inlellcelioll. 1101\ is OIH' to ulHlcrsl:IIHlli P;]solil1i asb, wilhoUI SllIl1cho\\' ;1 LI1()wl cd"c "I' till' s\llIh"/ie \';lll](,s Ill' tlll'Sl' I'islial 1111,1;'(',' "1'(';1111 illl;I"('S, '" " ,'") III' ilH' JIll'lllor", Ill' l'IlJllli0I1;1 d d;lih Iii \liill [heir \1 lli.le lo;ttl or i1ll pi leit l'\tcllsinllS fill' ('ilch S' \ :llld ('ilch givell 111 \Vulll" Il" OhSClIl'l' hUI (Illile red iL tu Llkc' ;1 Cdr III CO/lsiliS W;IS ;] spprts ('ill', with all t11;lt this implies ill IWl'lllit'lh dic!illlli!lV l'\<1J11/'ll', \H' til(' [ul;1i tllllkrsl:llldiIH' or a Ii" Pasolilli [;db "hout: );11')\\ thai lilY Fnullc, (hl' peri()d pI' dlt: jilIn. But :dl !lIe' S;1111l' 11'(' beCilw;c we would sec it, Ib;n it is ;] C<1r, illld that w(Julll us t(J grDsp the dl'lll!/ct/ mcanin,g of tltl pilssugl'. Ll'1 that ;1Il Eskimo wilh no ('\jlcricllCP Dr induslrial /;]liOIl mighl not evell be ,'Ihk 10 recogni/c the car! For ",h;lt Ihe Es kimo \Flllid he laclzil1!! ill would Jlot he tJ 1(' abiJitv lu it would nut he his 21-} THE "MODEHN" CJNEl\lA: SOME TlIEOHE't'ICAL PHOBLEflfS that would he dcficiclIt hut of social car-as soon ,IS it exists in the like ,111 other objects (lj' and a child in our society Iws IlO more (rouble idcntifying a (rllck th:111 he docs a ('It.'' " As the readE'r C:l11 see, this passage devoted to the ideas of Pier Pool" P:ISO' lini-which was writtcll carly in 1966-is ,I llli:\tlll'C of alld mgU]JlCllt. The rC<lsom for this dUl1blc aitilllllc, whicll has nut the llle<llltimc bccn lllodified, mc clearer 10 'I](: [odav. to the cxtent that graphic :md (,lila. h:rs becoLllc Pasolini's as this discussion shows. the icon _ to cach sociocultural group :lIld themselves would have llO [ am I](,t in the l\\istCllCC PI' such instances; ,illlply, what] l'nsolillian ilk" that thcse ('()(lilications ,,)rc!/(/]' the\' are of lbe sanle IHlture '\'iIH'lll:lt{; Inllgllage," wI"", li,:st I,'vel they \nlllht cOI1.;.tilllt(, ;." that till' fllili' iI' !,Jlcll would always he constrained 10 handle (or partially to invellt') two lang11:lges that of the "illlSl'gni" and thai "I the cinellla. Tll('rdorc, ,virat seellled to Ill(' to be "cl(Hlhtful" and a "bunlcIlSOllll' artifact." and all "addil ioual ;notancc "penly pre;.clltccl by Pas()lini himself ;];. thing "civcntllJ'(Jl]S ;]n() hypotheticaL" is not the "imse,!no" itse1l'. jmlilicd elc\'atiol\ to the levcl or with the conseqllellcc '" the code of of our mnch mOle tlwn to cillclllCltogr;1l'hic insist so IIlIlC], on the idea that, for a l'rt!j!criy sClI1ioli,.'. the lirst level of (i.e.. the onc that is 10 the lillnmaker a;. hnguagc is to the writer) is not made tip of "imscgni" but of visual and auditory <lIlal,, gie" If tIle llovel's readcr is able to recll.oniLc a ill the it is tlwllLs II! the linguistic 'mit "clog," lind if the firm.viewer within tllc lilm's stury t hat is Ihanks to Ihe image's visual analogy with a This does nut prevent, for a more genera I semiotics, many of t he that Pasolini deSignates as from being reintroduced mId within analogies (sec abOl'c, p. 1 J for it is the pecnliaritv codes cudcs) THE 1\lODEnN CINE,\tA AND NARHATlVITY 2I5 Froll1 the presumed existence of Ll primary of "imsegni" (which is codifiable, but never really c(ldiliecl), Pasolini deduces the idea th:lt the f11111llwker is ohliged to invent:l bnguage {lrst (i.e., the altelllpt (0 j,oLttc c!c;lrh the "im-scgn and then an art-whereas the writer, wllO .theady possesses the can allow himself to the mis the fact lhat it is visual and auditory information. Tn otlin words, when very hroadly cultural [jlmsas thcy do l'fl'ljllC'ntly, especiaU): whcn ';IlC thinks of the contents of individnal /illlls-thcy em: orten prcscnt i'11 fir" hlll/.!!,!' ilsc1f (or ill Ibe soulld ibeIr)-that is to say, within th(' "analogy," or at a )Joillt that. in relationship tu the total CCOIlOIllY "I' the Illmic signilication;., is disti1lCt from that occllpied hy the codilicltions that constitute what olle calls "cinclIlato graphic language." The image uf the wheels of the traill derives from w,t frolll thc cinema; wlicll it appcars on the scrcell it is identified hy \ allalogy with the r(,:11 wheels of a train, and il is thanks to this resemblance that the Ellll is able to carry all the 3ddilional si"llillcatlolls associated with this image in culture. Bnt if till' image is ordered alternalc J111 >ntager one that ami is sll])erimposc(I CillCI1Ltlo ()J1('C lire] ore
large seglllcl1 ts 01 such as alternation, to dIe eillema is tbe in relation to c:I('h uther-that of the syntagm<ls, On cuntrary, there is no system are sel'erai of these films, but that is matter). -1 216 THE "1\\ODEnN" CINI\1\IA: S()\1E nlTIOHETlCAL pnOBlF1\IS his aesthetic inlenlions and his that- he is occasiona\lv able 10 onn liahle to hccolll(, a "Fact of conventional dCllotat inll t(lda v result of the 111,NHvVAL OF SYNTAX" vVc kllow t1wt structures, such as thc the allnnatc :" ll the hr;lcLl't scquellccs, etc" which :,lructll res, ,uch for jlJTce,sioll) lor ('x sllccession as the sigllilier rur disLml Stlccl's:ii()lI), c[(',-:Ir(' <lIl1"llg th()se lIgllrcs or (,(JIIll(lt;!ti()!l tll:lt h:l\T, ill tillil', :!lso hCCOllll' inll'lli,gihlc pM(cms ur dCIl(ILltio)l, N(lW, what is illiporLlllt t" noll' i, Ih,lt IIlW,t of thcse sctlliol()gicli figures h:1I'C' ll(Jt Llllcil <lut (If lIse :tt :Iil hut <Ill', oil the C(}lltr:l1'\', ill currelll lise ill the lllmll'rli l-inClll:]' Not, ur course, th,ll the oj' figures has rClll<lillCd 11Ilch:lIJgl'll frolll (:rillith 10 (Jur tillles. III the cillCtl1<l, t(IU, there is ,I diachrony. It wUllld he easier tll I)icl, olll pnl('('durcs lhal IWH' aged: the l101ll1icgclic llH'upllo[ as rC!H'\\Td hv ( as \\l' will Sl'C ill :111 c)"llllpll' further Oil ). s]()\Y-JJlo(iol1, :tcccicrated IlH,tiull, Ihe usc or the iris dinpllr;lglll (cXL'ent for lloswl"ic :llld llll lllorollS "(Iuutatiun": S/u)ol II-n' OIl this techniquc: the I1rst SC![lll'IlCt' ill UIIl' iITVlTSC-,,]]()t in it:, lllcchanical f()i'1ll the Sl clle in the Paris THE MODERN CINE)'IA AND NARRATIVn'V 2 17 Ie fou, with Anna Karina's lovc song, is handled in a lIlorc llcxiblc form of these normal evolutiolls, one should think I \Vice hdorc that cinematographic svntax has been "completely throvvn overboard." The license of poctic inspira" tion must not be confused with sOllie impossihle license un the level of the deeper 'lI'tieuhItiollS, whidl, evcn if they are partiall\' arbitrary and arc Furthermore ill ,I cOllstant state of evolution, nevertheless guar,llltcc, within givvn s\l1clmmic conclitiolls, the correct transmis sion uf information, Only the and th(lllghl--if 'illch a thing exists-Gill (perhaps) hl' rC1l1()\'cd from such a i<lw, FWIll thc llloment tll,lt sayin,l! occurs the desire to COl1l111lllliGlIe, con CCrtl for the public, a certain number of rest ric tiOIlS ;Ippcar, which ch,tr,lcterizc the cxnrcssioll of t hOll[1ht r,ltller thall thought itselF, thaI is, if tllC two til Hather thall ic syntax, wc arc trend of dCl'd or less '> II IIII J, which scene, flgu res , Let LIS COlJ- SI) f,lr, I have idclllified, hum dIe origills or tlte cinCIll;1 to dH' a limited number of ]Jllsic sVl1t<lgm;ltic Now, there is a passage in G()dard's Pierrol 7(' fOil that Gml10t he reduced to any of these models, or 10 any variation of these mod " 1 am 1I0t using (he wort! figllm in tll<' sense of a uf (or of is (0 say, as a means or connotation-out in a much hwadcr sense: ,IS any characteristic and recognizable synwgmatic This use of the wore! is justified hy thc confUSion, pEculiar (0 the COI1 nutative al1ll dCllotative patterns. 21 THE II .MODEHN " CINEIIJA: SOME THEOnETfCAL PllODLEl\lS le:1\'(' the :1l1d Hee 1Il " red which is ill the sidc\valk ill Frollt the frOI! t of the of the d"\'arF egctic point of occur sevenl1 minute,; bier since we now sec the 404 rapidly alollg the hallks 01' the rivcr. The P<lSs:lge I hus sever:]1 lllHlSlWl From the h;mks ()j' the rin'J' we go hIck to the drainpipe; the clltrance or the car :It the root ,,(, Ihc huildino is ilselF showll two or three limes ,,""> slight vmi<ltiolls ill Ihe 11()sition :mel in tile 1ll0VClllCllts or lhl' ch:!r ,lclers (vuri:lti(lns th:lt remind LIS rat]ICT or :l COllstrlldioll dear to Crillct: 1'(' IIoycur, 1(1 1\-1 uisOJI de rC/ldc:;:; TllCrCrmc, ill this synt<lgllw, tilllc' d,)l's not fllnctioll <ll'conllllg III a vectori:l1 SChclllc--a schellll' t Iwt ('oITCSI)OlHIs [0 Ihe simplest :md ll10st l'Ol1ll1l01l n:urativc procedure; it C:IllIlO! he " lincar lwrr,ltivc (i_e" sccne, ordin:!ry sequellcc, (JJ' cpisodic sccluellce). Nor IS II <Ill :dlcrlwte synt:lglll.l, for tll(' ;lltCIII:1lillg illl.lgcs do Ilot reFer to silllultaneous lTl'llts hut to l'learlv slicceeding events (the shots of the roadw:! v :lIllIE' t hc river "a!tcrn:l tive" variatioll or the <Iltcrn:!tc ists h;l\T Illade several trips hack :mel amI the river IXlllk still less docs it it that of sp:Jtial cocxistcnce, since the passage ill THE l\JODEHN crNE;I.[A AND NArmATlVITY 19 tive action, but quite c1c:nly a sillgle succession of uni(]ue (lL'CUr rences. Nor is it an eX:llllplc of the bwckct syntagnw, for in tIlis illst:ll1CC the fillll obviollsly shows ;1 singliLir event ill its OWll lL'lI1lS and not in tefms of SOIlle' other ['vellt (that is, there is !lot the slightesl at c<ltegorizalion). Last, it is not;1Il mllOIlOIllOllS silot. since it cont<lins sevenl images corresllOlHling to n single unit of the dicgcsis. It is in bct ,I killd of disloc<l\ed SC<JUCllCC, highlv c)'prcssivl' of the Ihe fever. :lnd the rdndOllllll'SS 1)[ existence r1y idcn of dellot:]tion). In tlK Illidst ()f the frellzy of the (lenotation!, it presenls :1<; equal a sort of scM-confessioll of narmtivit\'. :lJ] awarelless of its O\\,ll fahlic nature sevcr:lI different \':lri;l of' a rr:llltic csc:m('. suilicil'lltiv similar to each other nevertheless \\-hi"h we will never know I'll lake its uutlined ()CCLIITClill'S, , Llccd curate sellse 01' (JthC'r claimed lIe \\';IS acttwllv he realized. tiun curresponds fai llis own experience: There ,He of 1Ilind diet tbe possible outcome to psvcbol(lgical ,lCntClll'SS ill the imagin:llivl' v;uinnts tlJ:lt, ill [he given context, :Ut' hility th'lt is realized.) .In the passngc we CodaI'd would S(,('lll to lw]ollg to the second sinc(' Ill' is ahle to suggest with :1 grC:J1 deal of truth, hut wilhout clclCrIllin the out CO]l1C', s('vcr,1i possihilities at tbe samc time, So he llS a sort or I'otclltial SCfIIWI1CC--,lll ul1(ktermined Hew tvpC' ur s),nt;]glllil, :l IlOVel form of the thai remaiJlS entirely (/ figure of IIm-falit';t)' difTerenl l'V('llts, places, timC's, Ulle ctc,-iil tbe same IVaI' that ill the same film the shots of the HClloir p<lintillgs COllstitute a 220 TilE "1\IODEHN" CINE:\lA: SOME 'rHEOHE'J'ICAL PHOBLEl\IS relitalizHtinn of the old nondiegctic the sillce the of Eisenstein statnes of Octol)el', ["here would be lllany other examples to examine: The still grapll, which IHid been little used up to now and to whieh Rudolf Arnhcim gave ol1ly n very modest ill his montage c1lart 'i- is 110W, ilf' Jeanne lVTorcnu's Face ill you nm't do JIl !\ \Von/all is 1.1/ 1Il is the voice or an with the modern cinema, cXDericllcilH' its first real Howcrim>: tbe cx- CIlld Jilll, the SCCplCI1Ce "I het (i ,mel, composed variuils modern lilms IS anunymolls COIIl lIlcntator, much less the inc<Imatioll of the mlll101' than of 1l,IITCItivit y :1S /\lhcrt, Laffay observed in another Clmtext 3H occasionally il is that 01' thc film's Ilrot:Hlonisl llcldressilw hilllself llirectlv !o the dicllcc--a new form of aside: lkb Iluudo's voice in Vierwt Ie fou, the lirst seq llCllce ill l\1uriCllvad, To these I wo olle Illllst add the on-screen voicc ill dialo!211cd sccncs :llld the I'retl LlClit LIse of writtcn titles ,mel also the (lIl-StTeCIl voice itself when it assullJcs the rccitative mode and acquires a that pulls il away hom the illiage ,md trunsforllls it from within into;1 kind of oIl' screen voice, thus 10 some cxlcnl suhtract rrml1 the (/lirosliilll(J IlJOIIIllIIO'Uf, La Poll/Ie ('ourle, etc.), TilLIS til(' lilm is ahlc to pLly Oil five levels of ranges, live "personac," One could wrile a whole study of in a Codard or Hcsn;lis lilm Oil the problclll of "Who is Ami onc could write ,mother study Ull the revitalizatioll of what lISed to he ca11(;<1 "suhicClivc irll;wcs"' in Fellini Juliet of tile '[1lJ "SYNTAX" IS NO'!" S'llcHEOTYl'E: Thus "syntax," still as Funrly named as ever, is nevertheless alive and well. But many mislIl1dcr derive hom the fllct that is often confused with cliche), An ori2inal 111m is cOll1lllonl\' urcsllmed to " Fil", liS 1957, p, 131. TliE MODERN CINEl\ll\ AND NAHrl,\TlYllY :>.:>. I gralllma r upSide down": ci !lema tu grdlllllI<ir is eH:'dited only with mediocre films, That is 10 con- ruse the l:lIlgUilgC process with the aesthetic stylistic) process, Bc' tween <1r( and l'lllgu'lgC there me COll1plex scmiulogicnl Ic1<,li(ll1sh art is nol act\lilliv I:lllguagc; it in OJle \Vil \ (lr illllltilcr "c the ()r 7!Csitie it, and tbat is whv dolts lIOt llbert tlll'nc:d illscrilwd II] tilt' j"rcnClI lilliguagv, r)llt UIC IIIl[lcrtcct W,lS (:Int! stili ami lill is ill IHJ \Va, dilkrcilt 1'1'(1111 the is the OJ](' syntactici,lIls ,m,d It i" ,I SillliLIr\V, the llSC (II' ])()"cl'cr lloVel and intcrc;.t s(JllIe of llCI'l'lt]W!cSS slili iTDITSCIl[S a hanal livlIrc SlIllT It lIILiIlCl'S LIS 10 reCollstrllct hip,Htilioll of till' screen space, must not rcal/)' COlli lied {illll-maker's artistic l'Jl(kanlr, sincc he now stalL's that the first (limic cudiflcatioll is slylistic, i1ll1s overlapping Oil my OWll VIlW that it is the striVing for conllotatioll thal in the cinema has ultillwll'Iy till' enrichmcnt awl codifying ur dellotation; and 011 the [Jlher ized image of the wheels or a train the lIIisLlllderstnnding surfaces ag<lln whell Pasulini ;1Il gives l1S all conventions," I-Ie ci tes the common, COil ITIl" ;11' full a cloud of sllloke, This is ]lot, he says, a grmll111aLical a "stylcme." J don't argue with this, But such Ilothing to do with "cinelllatoQranhic svnlax," For the latter illmlies ,('I us return to Pasolini, I-Ie hclievcs Illar" has nol hecll ahlc gmllllllar," tlwt is tl) say It is never, he sa\,s,;li urDl rcaJ gmnllnar, bllt r,lthcr SYSICIlI hetwcell ,1I'l ;Inc! CUl1lTlltiullS tbat han' till' "pcculiarit\' or grallllllaticu I." 'I'his <lIl,Ilysis, which unllll ,":> C<lI1 ;1l'l'Cpt, ca lIs for t 1\10 remarks: believe ill the shuws tklt Pasolinl hililscif of allli ,I cinclll:llograpbic stratulll o[ prior to tile 222 THE "MODERN" CINE:\IA: SOl\JE THEORETICAL PROBLEI\IS a certaill numbcr of filmic constructiOlls and not just a certnin num ber of fil1lled objects. The image of the wheels of the trnin refers neither to some "by-passing of syntax," nor, on the other hand, to some fixed, com'cntionalized synt;lctic expression; it constitutes a fact that is foreign to syntax, a specific vismd element-having its own "form" ,mel its own "content"-liable tu being ftlmed. Any properlv filmic syntagmatic Llct implies the conjunction of at two visual c1elllents, ()ccllrring ill twu im;lges (lllont8ge) or in the S,lme image (camera muvelllent or, even, st;ltic implication). To say that the illlage 01' the wheels of the tr;lin is a fact uf stylc is cor rect but insullicient; it is a c1ich(\ a stereotype. And it Gin he so only because it is ;1 ,ingular bct. Crammar h;ls never dictated the content of thought that cach sentcncc should have; it mcrel) rcgu Lltcs thc [!cl1er,ll un!alJilati()n of the sentences. !l UmllzlIll1tic([1 faci CIlII he 0 neither (.{cliche 1101' ([ IIUVelty, unless it is so at the mOlllcnt of its first historic;11 occurrence; it exists beyond the level where the ;llltithesis clichl"/n(,\elLy even begins to have a mC<ll1ing-that i, to SCI\" it re mains COil lined to the st;lge of the initial idiolll and not to t1wt or the secondarv language or art. The present or the imlicltin', as used hy HohheCrillct, is still :1 vulgar of tbe indicative, entirely "ba n:d," :Jnd vet Jl() olle :](,(,U5(,S it of l)('ing ;1 clich{'. And llO one ,ICClises Malherhc III' ror using the ohjective prcdiclte, or Victor Hugo ror lIsillg the reLlti\'C clause, or Baudelaire ror the conjullc tion o{' two ;ldjcctivc,. The image of tbe whcels or the train is in IllJ way the Iilmic equiv;llcnt to these examples; mthl'l' it would corre sp()nd til iVblhcrbe\ 1l1et,lphorical comparison or ;1 voung girl tu a rose, which is a silli_'.I1/or eOllstructi()n (formal and and must accordingly he judged ;lCcurding t() the Gltcgorie, of originality and tritcncss. j\s long ;lS one consider, such examples, one will have the clements not of a "stylistic grammar" of the cinema, hut ()r ;1 jiure r71ctoric tbat has nothing grammatical, ;lllel not very much cinelllato gr<lphie, about it, for the image of the wheels 01' the train (zl1ld similar images) most commonly represent cultural stereotypes, which if they ;He picked up-or even partially varied-by the cinema me picked up and varied by other forms of expression as well. There is a grammar of THE J\IODEJ1N CINEMA AND NAHHATlVlTV 223 the cinem;l (or, to be eX;lct, there is a large syntagmatic categorv of the liction lilm); but its location lies elsewhere: In the scene, in the se quence, ill the different syntagmas, in the other "types" ] have men tioned oilly too briefly, in the structured, signiFying, <lI1d stahililed wntagmatic orderings, which arc never clicht's, ;md were nm'clties unly once, but which nwke up tbe scattered and disconnected cle ments of a code of lilmic intelligihility ("analogy" ;ll1d dialogue COIl stituting the rest), the st,llllillcring eljuinlent of a real syntax, :lIld not of;l list of singular cuntents or forms. Cinematugr:lphic grammar docs not consist in pn',cribing ",hat should he lilllled. Alternate lllonl<lge, For exmnplc, simph dcterillinc, that the altern:lting of ill1;lges ",ill the simultaneitv or the ('or re,pollding referents, hut it says Ilothing ahout what is to enter those illlages. TIl(' distinctioll hetween a lllcch;lllic,ll and stcre(}tYjwd lll<ll''' ;md;l Free, ;lgralllllwticil miginalit\ -;] distincti()n that seeills t() underlie S,) lll:lIn discu'5ions or the lllod('fTJ cilll'nl;l- -is profoundly llll('sti()J]'lblc.h)J- a grallllllar, since hv dcJlnitioll it is composed (illl)' uF stereotypes, cannot he stercotyped, and a certain free creative origi n:llity is necessarily "gr;llllm;ltical" in one respect Of another From the lllOlllent its llle"age hecOIlles intelligible.'" " I wallt to avoid a confusion that cn>]'s up fre(ll,cntly ill this type "I' dis ell"ioll. The analysis (lcveloped in tl,is section is Hut in ;my way intcnded to <Iistinguisl, ],etwccn "form" ill liln" (which would bc a general categu,.v. be yond \1", subdilisions of the original and thc banal\ "colltent'; (;vhich :::()uld he on the original or, lwnal). 1 he d"tlllctHln between Imlll ('Dntent IllUSt be abs()lutcl v rejected, I believe; the ullly solutioll Ihat seellls satis[aetorv to me is the one advanced hv the linguist Lm:is Iljellnslcv, which places the facls uf Ihe _sigllificale (content') to one side. ,mel the {acls uf I he sigllifier (which is erroneously considered to he the constituent or "form" and which, ill I-Ijelmslcvian tcrminulugy, constitutl" ((expression") to lhe other side, \Nilh <:8ch 1111'11lbcr possessing its o\vn fortn nnd substance. (For the possible application of these cOllcepts to cinemato graphic ,malysis, see Chapter 8 of this \'olume.) The purpme of this discussion \\'(1S to Lctnrccn cUllstructiuns :..pecitic fa CillCJJlniograpl1ic 11111guoge ill gel/em1 and comtructions that occur in particular hlms. Both have their signi ficr and their significatc (which is to say, in ordinary bnguagc, thcir "form" and their "content")' and these signillers and significates each have their own form and their own suhstance (form, in this casc, is taken in the sense that secms to me to bc the correct one). In other words, I want to insist on the presence of a specific level of "figures" that by (lcfinition, relatc to thc hlmic \'chicle itself-and thcsc arc thc hgurcs that actually dehne "cincmatographic 224 THE CINE;\! A: SOI\[E rr.OBT EJ\l!'. certain linguists h8ve turned thcir <lltenti<lll tu the proh lel1l "f "purek sClllantic" ,mom,1lies (sentences that appem to be grmllll1atic,dly correct, hut whose n1css,lge doesn't "COJllC thrnllgh"), ['idmple: "'l'he natali:111 hr,1ssie]'l' wol;l' Ujl SLlddl'llly :1 too :1p Il,nclld,T p()stpr:1J]clial rictus," But, in G1SeS lil;e this, it is OllCe' ll1ure frolll the misundcrst,llIcling of cerL1in structur,d 'C'luircments oj' ;Illd I() it i'roln an()ther sCllli()logiL'<I\ level, \\'hich is, jnci dcntdllv, ,lulI/,I], ullltr;lSted t() the first ill th"t it is h;,th les" (since it C()lll'l'n'l:-' fllllls 'j and /llOrc p,cllcnd (since it illC()fl)()r;ltcs SYStClilS arl' I'cry Lwadly cllltliral and l!,elt e"tend bevund thc cinema ibeln, ()ll this sl'c(Jlld lcvcl ()nc GIll SPL")l.. Dr the Ii()riginaiity" Of of individu:tl fl1nlo..; ("r {tim l'ClsSaul:S, <>,. jJlm "JUtcULs," etc,') 'lCc()rding (" whether the cultural hare l':C'C11 integrated dIe), arc illt() tlH' 'lilIn (i.e., (If ",hl'lhcr Oil till' ('untcarl' the has rejected illC'lll, dispbcl"! Ihelll, "I';d;ed" thclIl, 'T\ iLdi/.e,l tlll'Ill, etc. l\ll'vcrtllekss it is true Ihal "cillc,lEltovral,lric Lliwllagc" itsl'li' is liable to be jUdgl'cJ ill ,)1' origillality (Jf l);Jllalit); 'fhis 'friJIll ("('rUin or its aLlcristics I hal, ,drc:ldy Illl'llli'''lcci: lt dues ll"t really cunstitutc :1 bnguagc "YStC'1I1; it 1;.. Il(Jt a pure but ;111 In<iisl'crllildc Illi\turt' ()r ,!2,rllllllll:ll Clm! rhl'luri,': jt i e ; 111<)]'( ild!uellced hv till' illciiviciu,d l'1l':ltiuIlS "j' maLers th:"l w,ittl'll verb:d 1:1I;gllagcs :lie by 'the iIHlivid,,:d crcatiuns "r writl'l's, j\ true vcrb:ll ()r Frcllcl;--jc.; LH'\'Cr ill ibcll' \lr 1>'lna1 (ur, i[' jt is, it i" sr, ill a u,mp1ctely dilJ'crent way :m,] Olle that is r"reign t" t11is as whcll (Inc ullllparcs (lllt' vl'rl)'I1 l:lllgu<lgc to uthcr vcrlnl ]angu:lgc.:;'j, III th,' dOIl,,,ill ,,1' tile cinema, un dl(,' c()utrary, it is ]1)ucL easier to find w'mb th(l[ Cdll 1)(' l'h;lr:ll'tcri:;,('(] ,\.<.., l)('illg 11l(l!(' ()r (Irigilla1 Oil 1/1(' /e(,('1 0/ dIe 11111 il,cl) 'lLul 11t Pllh pn thc lell'! ,,[' Iheir stvlc (examl,k: the "P"iClltjcll '('''ILiellec'' ill COllard\ film all<ll) /,ed earlier'" IF 'Jill' uscs 1\ ol:t IH1 Dartlws\ triple lJd\\'('cll Idll,0,IIC, ('crillfrc, SVStl'lll. '\vritillg," ill ',C /)cg,ft) :'i..:r() (Ic !'l;cril/lrc 7cru), ULlC wi]] llotice thJt IicillCIlWl\)graphi{' langllJge" resclllhlcs ill"St ill Ihat it r('I"TsC'Llh a distillCI illslancl' ut' individual ,tyles, hut that it hO\\'C\lT, Il(lt {'(Infused \\'itl1 (I bllgU(lgC (llc\'crthck;-..s therc rCllldins a t..1iJ" fercllcc betll'een the eincllla am1 til(' dUllwin "r the 1'l'L'h"l: III the btter, '\\Til ing" is distillct fCOlli langlLage) \vhicl! exists: in tllL' einclna! it is JistillL'l [rUll} what might lie called a IaUgUClgC, if that language l'"isted, It is precisL'1y the (d' t/)(' cinCllla tlwt \\'llat jt ,IS bllgU'lgC is.. in filet) ..1 '\vril illg,"-tl](lt tt) sOlllcrhillg that Ilut a hut is less rddicalh T distjnct fnHll a style thall a is. lJcsp-itl' Olle still be canti()ll.<.." \<\lhell speaking uf "origi nality" or ''twllality'' in the cinema, not tl) h:lIld1c the,e (""nec]'ts ill the sOJJle WH)" ()r on the sanlC lc\'cl, acc{)rding to vvhether onc js c()nsjderillg individllal Elms, <>r llH,](' "r less original aspeets ,,[ the general hlllguage of lilllls, Thus, ,1 libn that I\'(wld borrow only what W:1S m()st IJallal from cinematographic language coulclnevertheless be an original wurk, whel'eas a Ii!m in which all the particular construetiollS would be banal w(>uld necC'ssarilv be a banal work, THE J\IODERN CINEi\JA AND NAnr.ATIvITY 225 course that the unintelligibility of the message derives, It is nOl, to bc sure, a matter of the grl71l1lJllltic((/ strllcturc itself' (at le,lst in the usual meaning of the term), but of' the SClJll7ll1ic structurcs (that is to say, again grmmnatic81, in some way) of the French [or ill the case of this translation, of the English langL18ge-THANsLATon] (i\. J. Greimas)-or then, depending on the lingllistic schuol, it is ,1 qlll'S tion of certain actllally gramlllatiG11 "subrulcs" (Je;l1l Duhois) that :11'(' sui1ieienti v Jine to be generally omitted from "oHicial" gramm:1rS, hllt the ign(ll'<mcc of' which results in sentences posscssing Farious de of agrallllllilticislll (Noall1 Chomskvl, Thl1s the verb "to \\,:1 lee up" is scm,mticall\' L'()]np,1tihlc within the same minimulll statcment onlv with ,111 animate subjcet or OllC l11cl<ll)horically :lssimibtcd tu :1Il :lllimate subject ('Thc dog wakes up," "Hojle W:1S ':l\v:1tcncd"'i; it cuuld l10t ll:lvC For subject the term for a llonpers()nified itl'nl or clothing (hrassierc in lilY cX'll11plc). The adjel'livC' J'{)st},rt711diu/ is used onlv with sllhstanti\'es helonging to tll(' c:ltcg0l'\' of coclH'still'sis (sensations of f!lUIICSS, helwillcss, acidity, slcc},illcss, ('lL',) :md C()llse lll1cntly excillcies (exccpt in :1 specdly il1diC:1tin' contcxt) a subst:ll1 tin: like rictus, Utc, Now, rcmemhcr tll:lt "cinem:1togr:1phic gralllm:H" is not a "re:1l grmnm:1r" in the llsllal scnsc of the word, hut simplv :1 budv of p:nti:tlly codified scm:llltic implications (.or rinc gr:lllllll:lticd llllcs ). One of the lllost striking ch:lr:1ctcristics of modcrn Jl1ms is that they me in lllost cases highly umlcrsl<111cbble: 111 this respect they (liffer from vmiolls cxperimcnt,ll films, with their ,lvaLmchc of gratllitous and :marchic images against a hackgrollnd oj' heterogcncous siolls, capped by some ovcrblown :want-gmdist texl, On t'he contrary, thc "cmancipated" storics that the best modern Jllms me occasionally able to tell liS Jiml, in order to make themselves llndcrstood, ven' di rect paths, and they mobilize a sllflicicllt lIumber of true ,1ceents, of memories peculim vet eommoll to everyone (and becomc so m:lll)' analogical systcms in the intellection 01' the Jilm) for evell the slightly experienced Spcct<1tor to underst,lnd them more rapidly th8n hc would understand the conventional narr:ltives 01' commercial production, whose advertised-and very real-conFormism does not cxclude (but 226 THE C1NEi\lA: SOi\lF TllEOHETlCAL l'nOI3LEMS JIll illl tha I arc never they differ too mueh From To contrast gralllma alld is, thcrcFurc, to eontmuimltc lwo On the one hand there arc, in the CinellE], anel others tll;]t arc less so. Oil the other hand there is "Cilll'I11;ltogr;q)ilie gmllllllar," with the mnbigw)lJs status of its COllllot;ltioll that h,ls hccollll' a means of denutatiun, a thM has hecolllc ;] \Thicle';l status that is urccisclv rcsIJol1siblc for the con fusion I have been For it i, indl'cd trUl' t1wt the com- Illunicatioll of the literal One sh()t lwriz()ntal and fWlltal, ",ith no calll era IllOVClllt'llt at ;]11, and no optic:d d!\:ct (,dissolvl', ctc.), with Ill) tempor:,1 ellipsis, no lighting othl'l thall Ollc that would be lllliful'Jlll" lIat, ,111d 1I() voices Iwsidcs thosc that would he strictly dicgetic scrccn voices), l'te. But sllch a lilm w()uld h,lrdlv the cineJlla wunld he llHlf(' lih- ,] all recorded hv the ('<lIlll'fa. Eycn Bouch's (;urc dll Nord \\.'oldd like tfllClllcllt inc.IJ Olle at is that ;\ film IllltiU/is 111 Fact is that even dlC most "colorless" prose, ;l zerodegrce .' if :,llch a tlling still ret,]ill the codc of its '.whosc fUllction ill the cillema is guarantecd by perccptual <IlHllogy tll<lt allows OllC if neccssary to economize on ,my like ('1l(liIic;ltion}. Hovvcver, semiological description must address it self to the rc,ll cinema, llot to an imaginary cinema. Now, /he II1OI1Jellt tllnt the cinewa encounter whose eonse(lucnces eire, if not inEnite, at least not appears it has sUDcrilllDosed over tbe message a second conmlex of TIlE MODERN CINEt>IA AND NAHHATIVITY 227 the image, something tlwt has to GrifIlth, mainly), <llld though it was originally intcnded to render the story more living (to Hvoid a monotonous, continuous iconic Bow, ill shurt, to connutc), has nevertheless cnded bv multiplyillg thc modes of denotation, and thus articn/ntillg the ll]Ust litc[<llllll'ssagc of the films we know. v of the and richllcsS of the ll1od ern and mOIl' unalyzL'll; OJlC dct;]il than I have done tlWl all thcse llCW arc made ill n:hitioll to thl' diegcsis, and th:lt lhc llCW cill CilIa, I'm from lwving ,]h:ll1dollCd the ll[lrrntiv(', gives llS Jl,llT<llivcs thilt ,11'(' more diversilied, 1llore r:llllificd, ,mel more havc the spacc herl' (I) bring this analysis, which I hm'c gUll, 10 its proper cOllclusioJ1. how strfllHiC it is to hear the "breakdown 01 dlC narrative" lit a timc whcn ;] new of cinematographic narrators has COllle t(J the whell vve have heen ,lblc to see [lJIllS like 11 Grido, l.'APIJCII/ltf(l, 111011 11IJ10 It r, lH11 riel, Julcs ami Jilll; at a lime whcn it ;]p pears that the autlHJI' or B;ca/hlcss and Pierro/ Ie folt'! is only begin- Ilis career, and though this jihnmaker docs not ;,ppcal til cvery unc, he lws 111l1llagcd nevertheless til impose himself (lJl the attention, amI it secms dillicult 110! to ill him a richness of inventioll and a power to devclop and change, in which it is thnt lIot everyone can the L1l<lL ils forms have bcen spccific lemUCf that characterizes the IJteat tdlers of tales, "The films mentioned in this text have heen chosen among those that had already heen produced and distributed ill the of 1966, when this article was written,
(Advances in Film Studies) Wildfeuer, Janina & John Bateman - Film Text Analysis - New Perspectives On The Analysis of Filmic Meaning (2017, Routledge) - Libgen - Li