The cinema as a graphic art : on a theory of representation in the cinema (1959)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

THE CINEMA AS A GRAPHIC ART bourgeois cinematography. And just as little fortuitous is the degradation o: the creative group in the system of bourgeois film production. The formalism of the camera-man artist who is satisfied with superficial formalisation of the shot without attempting to analyse its content and thus to arrive at an organic, ideologically expressive construction, is to some extent explained by the social essence of the foreign cinema. The bourgeois art of the ruling class is infected with the spirit of ideological emasculation and decadence which characterises the epoch of decaying capitalism. Consequently the story cinema also, which in its role as entertainment is called upon to mask the unavoidable contradictions of the bourgeois system, cannot direct the cinematographer's creative tendencies along the road of demonstrating the filmed content in all its variety. All that remains to it is superficial pictoriality, and to conceal the intrinsic ideological poverty of its production under formalistic elucidation. With rare exceptions the artistic culture of the bourgeois camera-man is thus determined by his degree of perfection and craftsmanship in the purely superficial * formalisation of the shot '. This aesthetic mannerism of superficial representational formalisation of the shot is one of the symptoms of the disintegration of style characterising present-day bourgeois art as a whole. In camera-man's art genuine style is not determined merely by a simple unity of technical methods of shooting, since the representational treatment of the film cannot be considered in isolation from the theme and content of the artistic production, cannot be parted from the dramaturgical and directorial treatment. The picture might be shot from beginning to end with sharp focus lenses, so revealing the tiniest detail. And yet that might not mean that the film had been taken realistically. In camera-man's art, as in other spheres of artistic creation, the conception of style is determined by a considerably more involved complex than the application of representational resources homogeneous in character. If the camera-man artist realises the art-images in one or another representational composition, that composition bears the imprint of his philosophy to the same extent that the entire film reflects the ideology and social attitude of the dramaturgist and director. , The style of his work is determined by his understanding of the main ideas of the production, an understanding natural to the given artist, and by that form of expression of those ideas which is peculiar to him. And these are closely bound up with his philosophy. We adduce several examples characteristic of a different understanding of style in the camera-man's art from that which predominates in bourgeois cinema. In his note to the film " We from Kronstadt ", the camera-man N. S. Naumov writes : In the picture " We from Kronstadt " the main emphasis in the camera-man's work should be put into endowing the film images with realisticness. We absolutely reject aesthetic decoration of the shot, pretentious compositional construction, studied effects and affectation in composition leading to emphasised pictoriality. We reject the favourite and already traditional foreshortening constructions against a background of sky, we reject all those methods which are usually introduced exclusively to achieve a superficial decorative quality of shot. Maximum simplicity and naturalness without exaggerated compositional accents : such is our task in the representational treatment of the given film. We do not predetermine any particular unity in exploiting technical methods. From our point of view shooting with soft or hard focus lenses throughout the length of this film is far from constituting the style of our work. On the contrary, we assume it to be possible to film certain scenes in a soft focus, and others with sharp focus transmission. This 2l8