Close Up (Mar-Dec 1933)

Page scan 000215 from Close Up

Record Details:

Title:
Close Up
Date:
Mar-Dec 1933
Publisher:
[London, etc., Pool]
Volume:
Close up ... devoted to the art of films
Leaf #:
000215
Language:
English
Subjects:
motion pictures, Motion pictures -- Periodicals
Collection:
Switzerland, Early Cinema, and Global Cinema
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
Library of Congress, MBRS, Moving Image Section
Sponsor:
Library of Congress, Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
As an active film magazine, CLOSE UP lasted only a short time, from 1927 to 1933. Yet the legacy of this English-language periodical, which was published in Switzerland, continues to matter. Edited by Bryher and her husband Kenneth Macpherson, CLOSE UP became THE magazine for energetic debates about the nature of cinema and manifestos imagining new forms of filmmaking and spectatorship. The magazine published articles by filmmakers, such as Sergei Eisenstein, and female literary modernists, such as H.D. and Gertrude Stein. As film scholar Anne Friedberg explains in the anthology CLOSE-UP, 1927-1933: CINEMA & MODERNISM, 'CLOSE UP became the model for a certain type of writing about film -- writing that was theoretically astute, politically incisive, critical of films that were simply 'entertainment.' For six and a half years, CLOSE UP maintained a forum for a broad variety of ideas about the cinema; it never advocated a single direction of development, but rather posed alternatives to existing modes of production, consumption, and film style.' Like Friedberg's own writing, CLOSE UP continues to be essential reading for anyone interested in the history of film and media theory. -- Eric Hoyt, 2014
Date Added:
June 20, 2024
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 203 THE CENSORSHIP IN PORTUGAL " It seems indeed that the institution of censorship was created only to sustain that which works against the cinema and to leave in peace all that which could justify scrutiny — much as one must admit the idea of a legal " control " in the domain of art." These are George Altman's words. They are the beginning of a remarkable chapter from his book, Ca, c'est du Cinema, in which he takes up arms against the censorship, attacking it with all his strength. In Portugal this official institution is no more intelligent and no> less cunning and stupid that it is elsewhere. And if, for instance, we have seen on the Portuguese screens such Soviet masterpieces as Mother and Old and New — forbidden in many other lands — this fact must not atone for the erroneous and stupid decisions of the Portuguese cinematographic censorship authorities. As in other places and circumstances, when to find a calm intelligence and an honest and clear spirit might reasonably be expected, up comes a host of prejudices and incompetent judgments. One hears stories of this nature : The Director of the censorship inspection questions two inspectors about a picture he has not himself seen for some reason. " It's perfectly alright," they tell him. " But ... is it not true that the film is about Russia ? There are no revolutions or anything like that?" " Yes," the others say, " but of no importance." " What? ... Of no importance, you say ! . . . You have seen a film about a Russian subject and you have let it gO' by without cuts ? . . . Please, gentlemen ! You must cut some bit, mustn't you ? . . . Well, go on !" So something has to be removed, more or less at hazard, and thus we are reminded they are there for something. Recently the Portuguese censors made two decisions which would have caused certain trouble if the papers had been at liberty to state what they think. But the press is likewise muzzled. Firstly they forbade the French picture A Nous la Liberte by Rene Clair. They found a political excuse. Of course! But another tale passes from mouth to mouth. It appears that the director of a certain theatre signed a contract to show the film, paving a large sum for it, but daunted by what he distinguished as lack of commercial appeal, and as it was already too late to refuse the picture, a whisper in the ear of influential people of the censorship department, and the trick was done ! Is it true ? Sometimes these tales are not only tales ! Some months ago Les Gaites de VEscadron was also forbidden in Portugal. Everybody knows that Tourneur, the director, " took the liberty of ridiculing the military profession." Tourneur, the routine craftsman of the big interests ! But the ban comes from a country which is under a military dictatorship. . . . Alves Costa. G