Close Up (Jul-Dec 1929)

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.

CLOSE UP no compromise with the spectator's prejudice and habit of mind. Its unity is its only determinant. ^ In these days unity must pre-occupy itself mainly with the unity of compounds. Most objections to the sound fihn — though the objectors themselves seldom know' it — are assertions that the sound or talking film contradicts unity. In the journal issued by Charles Dullin, " Correspondances a writer dwells upon the nature of this contradiction. The article is not written with the film in mind, but the view expressed pertains to the cinema. The view is this : we are single-minded, and compounds of our senses achieve no singleness because one sense or another dominates. If this is true, then a movie can be seen only and not seen-heard simultaneously and equally. But I am not sure that the writer is correct. Indeed, I am sure that he is not. It may be true that we have not until now apprehended multiple articulations because these have not been aimed in harmonized concurrences. It may be true that one sensory medium has been so emphasized that it was predominant. But I think this is not ^ I have omitted certain major concerns of unity, especially important to the absolute film. They are the direction of a movement, the texture and the volume. I may take as an example of all three Mme. Dulac's Arabesque. The texture and the movement here are not sustained nor are they patterned exactly. The play upwards of the water-hose annoys the forward horizontal movement, and, because it is a concentrated slender force occupying only a portion of the screen interrupts the crystalline texture occupying a major part of the screen. The use of the woman as part of the Arabesque intrudes two distractions : one of a human subject not sufficiently impersonalized into an objective detail, and of a detail differing in volume or solidity. But this Arabesque was offered by Mme. Dulac as a tentative in design endeavoring to utilize a variety of details. It is most instructive. 174