Aesthetics and Postmodern Cinema PDF

Canadi anJ ournal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al
Theory/ Revue canadi ennede t heori epol i t i que

et soci al e, Vol ume XI I , Numbers 1- 2 ( 1988) .
AESTHETI CS AND
POSTMODERNCI NEMA
Frank Burke
Theessays i nt hi s sect i onal l pl ace
t hemsel ves wi t hi ncont emporary post -
essent i al i st di scourse. I naddressi ngcont emporary f i l m,
t hey t urnup yet
moreevi dence of t hedi sappearanceof hi st ory, pol i t i cs, art ,
narrat i ve ( grand
andot herwi se) , si gni f i cance, causal i t y, t hesubj ect , andevengender. At t he
samet i me t hef i l ms t hey address t end, i nt hei r
ant i - essent i al i sm, t o reverse
anof t - ci t ed post modern maxi m. I n hi s
The Post modern Condi t i on:
A
Report on Knowl edge, J ean- Frangoi s Lyot ard t al ks
of post moderni sm
present i ng t he unpresent abl e ( "put [ t i ng] f orward t he unpresent abl e i n
present at i on i t sel f ' ) . ' I ncont radi st i nct i on, many
of
t hef i l ms
di scussed
i n
t hi s sect i on"unpresent t hepresent abl e" - ast rat egy whi ch, I woul dar-
gue, not onl y assert s t hei mpossi bl i t y of represent at i oni napost - essent i al i st
cont ext but al so f rees t he spect at or f rompresent at i on, hence f romt he
domi nat i on
of
t he
t ext .
Muchof what f ol l ows cannot be
def i nedsol el y as post modern
. "Mul t i -
pl e codi ng" t echni ques suchas mont age, col l age, ci t at i on, et c. aremoder-
ni st . What I cal l "ot heri ng" canundoubt edl ybe f oundi nl i t erat ure
of
earl i er
peri ods . Andmuch of what i s sai d of count erf ei t i ng i n To Li ve andDi e
i n L. A. may al so appl y t o Andre Gi de' s Les Faux- Monnayeurs ( 1926) .
However, t heprol i f erat i onof st rat egi es whoseef f ect i s t o ef f ace presence
i n
t hevery met hodof present at i on cani ndeedbe charact eri zedas post -
modern.
Si mi l arl y,
what f ol l ows i s onl y asmal l pi eceof anenormous pi ct ure: one
t hat i ncl udes, f or i nst ance, Derri da' s
ent i re deconst ruct i ve proj ect and
t he
f ormi dabl e cri t i cal apparat us t hat has devel opedaroundi t . z I nf act , sel f -
consci ous st rat egi es of "unpresent i ng" are f oundt hroughout modernand
AESTHETICSANDPOSTMODERNISM
contemporaryl i terature
( phi l osophy, psychoanal ysi s, andl i terary
cri ti ci sm
nowi ncl uded) ,
drawi ngattenti onto thef act that l anguage i s
by i ts very
nature af ormof
unpresenti ng.
Soof course i s
f i l m,
but
i t tri es vehementl y not to be.
In f act, amaj or
l ure of f i l m, as arecordi ng
medi um, has al ways beentheseemi ngauthen-
ti ci ty of i ts presentati ons. Sosel f - consci ous
unpresenti ng- def yi ngthe
seemi ngnature of themedi um- comes
harder to f i l mmakers, especi al l y
thoseworki ngi nanentertai nment
systemsol i dl ycommi ttedtoan
i deol o-
gy of Representati on andthe Real
.
Thestruggl eof f i l m"agai nst
i tsel f " makes f or ani nteresti ngpostmodern
i ssue, parti cul arl y as movi es begi nto
assert themsel ves as avi tal part of
thecontemporary deconstructi ve enterpri se.
Onef i nal qual i f i cati on. Thef ol l owi ngremarks
areprel i mi naryandten-
tati ve.
If therei s val i di ty tothei r general dri f t, therei s
al sogreat neednot
onl yf or
ampl i f i cati onbut f or theref i nement of terms,
categori es, anddef i -
ni ti ons.
Theabovehavi ngbeen
sai d, al l owmetohypothesi ze"unpresentati on"
i nthreemani f estati ons :
"mul ti pl ecodi ng, " "otheri ng, " and"presentati on
under erasure. "
Mul ti pl e Codi ng
By thi s I meanal l theways
i n whi ch atext i s coded"beyondi tsel f " :
al l usi on, ci tati on, col l age, pasti che, etc.
( Theterm"i ntertextual i ty"
mi ght
beused, but i ts i mpl i cati ons are
much broader than thetopi c at hand. )
Thi s consummatel y
moderni st strategy, evi dent i nmost of the
f i l ms men-
ti onedi n the
f ol l owi ngessays, unpresents i n avari ety of
ways. For one
thi ng, i t def eats the f eti shi smof uni tary codi ng
( col l apsi ngal l codes wi -
thi nawork i ntoamaster code: the"meani ngof
thework") - f eti shi sm
whi chl ocks theconsumer of thetext
i ntothepresentati oni tsel f . Moreover,
i t gi ves andtakes away at thesame
ti me. Thetext i s there but not
there
becausei t i s
al ways poi nti ngsomewhereel se. Moreover, the
mul i ti pl ycoded
text does
not represent the"el sewhere" ( theori gi nal context) ,
i t onl yref ers
to
i t . Si nceboththecurrent text andtheori gi nal sources are
decontextu-
al i zed, onei s l ef t somewherei nbetween, f acedwi th
thechal l engeof creat-
i ngone' s owncontext or of suspendi ng
theneedf or oneal together.
Ti mei tsel f i s unpresented.
Thepresent i sn' t present but aseri es of ref er-
ences toapast,
whi chi tsel f f ai l s
to
materi al i ze. Si mul taneousl y, thi s a- present
anda- past,
by bei ngj uxtaposed, are i nef f ect spati al i zedanddeni ed
both
thei r temporal
nature andthei r l i near or "narrati ve" comprehensi bi l i ty
.
Fi nal l y,
ref erenti al i ty ( theverytechni quethat mul ti pl ecodi ng
empl oys)
i s
unpresented- at thesameti meusedanddeni edbecause
theref erent( s)
cannot be recovered.
FRANK
BURKE
"Otheri ng"
Toi l l ustrate what I mean
bythi s term, I ' l l begi nwi thanof t- quotedpi ece
of wri ti ngby
Foucaul t :
Transgressi on, then, i s not l i mi ted
to
the
l i mi t as bl ack towhi te, the
prohi bi ted to the l awf ul , the
outsi de to thei nsi de, or as the open
area of a bui l di ng to i ts
encl osed spaces . Rather thei r rel ati onshi p
takes thef orm
of a spi ral whi chno si mpl e i nf racti on canexhaust
.
Perhaps i t i s l i ke a f l ash
of l i ghtni ngi nthe ni ght whi ch, f romthe
begi nni ng
of ti me, gi ves a denseand bl ack i ntensi ty
to
the ni ght
whi chi t deni es, whi ch
l i ghts uptheni ght f romthe
i nsi de, f rom
top
to bottom, and yet owes to the dark the
stark cl ari ty of i ts
mani f estati on, i ts harrowi ngandpoi sed si ngul ari ty; thef l ash
l oses
i tsel f i nthi s spacei t marks wi thi ts
soverei gnty
and
becomes si l ent
nowthat i t has gi ven a name
to obscuri ty'
What concerns meherei s not
so muchFoucaul t' s topi c as hi s i ntel l ectual
methodol ogy, whi chconsi sts
of ef f aci ng i denti ty i n the very mode of
presenti ngi t - byturni ngthethi ng
i denti f i ed i ntoi ts ( or an) other. Fou-
caul t starts bygi vi ngus a term, "transgressi on, "
as part of a bi naryopposi -
ti on
( transgressi on/ l i mi t) . Thi s appears
tobestandardstructural i st procedure
i nwhi ch
eachtermmai ntai ns i ts owni denti ty, i n
stri ct j uxtaposi ti onwi th
i ts
opposi te. However, Foucaul t i mmedi atel y
begi ns to di ssol ve i denti ty by
denyi ngthe
opposi ti on ( "transgressi on, then,
i s not l i mi ted to the l i mi t
as bl ack towhi te") . Then,
usi ngsi mi l e, hedef i nes the
one
thi ngi n
terms
of ( not i n opposi ti on to) the other. Transgressi on
i s l i ke a l i ghtni ng f l ash
whi ch`òwes to the dark thestark
cl ari tyof i ts mani f estati on" andwhose
veryl i ght
"gi ves a denseandbl ack i ntensi ty
to theni ght whi chi t deni es . "
Fi nal l y, the
ori gi nati ngterm( as si mi l e) di sappears
al together i ntotheother:
"the f l ash l oses i tsel f i n thi s
spacei t marks wi th i ts soverei gnty andbe-
comes si l ent nowthat i t i s has gi ven
a nameto obscuri ty. "
Most i mportant, what Foucaul t
descri bes i s not a si ngl eevent cul mi nat-
i ngi ncl osure. ( That woul dbemeremetamorphosi s
: onethi ngturni ngi nto
another. ) I nstead,
as
hi s
useof thephrase"a spi ral whi chnosi mpl ei nf rac-
ti on can exhaust" makes
cl ear, he i s posi ti ng a never- endi ng process i n
whi chonethi ngi s al ways turni ng
i nto, wi thout permanentl ybecomi ng,
another. ( The act of di sappearance
at theendof thequotati onthus be-
comes provi si onal rather than f i nal . )
As was thecase wi thmul ti pl e cod-
i ng, we are presented wi thsomethi ng
that never i s, i n f act, "i tsel f. "
Thi s i s al so the strategy of Rene Magri tte' s
TheFal seMi rror - as wel l
as
Arthur Kroker' s
strategy i n di scussi ngtheartwork i n a
recent i ssue of
the
Canadi anJ ournal of Pol i ti cal andSoci al Theory. Magri tte' s pai nti ng
presents aneyewhi chref l ects theskyi t presumabl y
observes . Eyei s sky
andvi ceversa. The
i denti ty of seer andseeni s al ways that of theother,
but wi thout the ori gi nal
i denti ty ever compl etel y di ssol vi ng. As Kroker
7
2
puts i t : Àl ways thesi te of theskyi s di sturbedandmedi atedby
thei nner
hori zonof thedi sembodi edeye:
al l
amatter of
ressembl anceandnoni den-
ti ty. Aperf ect ref racti ontakes pl ace i nwhi chtheobj ect vi ewed
( si gni f i ed)
ci rcl es backand, i nani nstantaneous shi f t of perspecti ve,
becomes the
l o-
cus . . . of si gni f i cati oni tsel f
.
"4
1brni ng
to
f i l m,
a
compl ex
exampl eof
"otheri ng" i s provi ded by Wi l -
l i amFri edki n' s ToLi veandDi ei n
L. A.
( l ater
treatedat l engthbyChri stopher
Sharrett) . Here the opposi te
terms i nvol ved are arti st andcri mi nal . The
antagoni st, Masters, i s apai nter turnedcounterf ei ter. Themoment he ap-
pears onscreen, so does theasserti on"di rectedbyWi l l i amFri edki n, " i den-
ti f yi ng the arti st i n the f i l mwi th the arti st of the f i l m. Thei denti f i cati on
i s at l east twof ol d. As an"creator" i nvol ved i n the mechani cal reproduc-
ti onof i mages Fri edki n i s a counterf ei ter. As a maker of vi ol ent movi es,
whoof ten"murders" thehumani mages hepresents, Fri edki ni s anti - soci al
anddestructi ve, not merel y acounterf ei ter. Counterf ei ti ng andvi ol ence
uni te at the f i l m' s endwhenFri edki n, havi ng ki l l ed of f hi s protagoni st,
Chance, repl aces hi mwi ththedupl i cateor counterf ei t Vukovi ch. ( Chance' s
f ormer si deki ck, Vukovi ch begi ns doi ng thevery thi ngs Chance di dearl i -
er
. ) ThenFri edki ngoes onestep f urther and
ends
the f i l mwi th a com-
pl etel y unmoti vatedi mage( the dupl i cateor counterf ei t) of Chancehi msel f.
( The very arbi trari ness of
Fri edki n' s
abrupt
narrati ve shi f ts f romChance
to Vukovi ch to i mageof - Chance deri ves
f romFri edki n' s
l i cense
not j ust
as arti st but as ki l l er andcounterf ei ter. )
Of course the arti st- as- cri mi nal i s not an uncommon20th- century
metaphor ( and
i n
i nstances suchas J eanGenet, bothmetaphor andf act) .
Averyrecent mani f estati oni s theQuebecoi s
f i l m
Unezoo
l a nui t ( whi ch,
i nci dental l y, ci tes the workof Fri edki nthroughout) . However, metaphor
tends
to
mai ntai ni ts twoterms i narel ati onshi p that preserves thei denti ty
of
each. I woul darguethat Fri edki n,
by
i ntroduci ng the
i ssueof
counter-
f ei ti ng, andthus i ncorporati ng hi s ownrol e as movi emaker i nto hi s con-
f i gurati on, creates adynami csl i dei nwhi chonetermcan' t behel dseparate
f romtheother andal ways i s, i nf act, i ts other. Inwatchi ng hi s movi ewe
are wi tnessi ng the cri mi nal i ty of art andthearti stry of cri meal ways sl i d-
i ng i nto oneanother wi thout theprocess of transf ormati onever becom-
i ng compl etes
Presentati onUnder Erasure
Perhaps the most di sti nctl y postmodernstrategy f or unpresenti ng the
presentabl ei s of f eri ng theartwork/ text/ movi e "under erasure, " to borrow
anoti onusedextensi vel ybyDerri da. 6 Thef i l ms di scussed i nthef ol l ow-
i ng
essays
provi de
numerous exampl es. YvonneRai ner' s TheManWboEn-
vi ed Womeni s, as Peggy Phel andemonstrates, a f i l mof "evacuati on" -
onewhi chref uses to f i l l i ts narrati ve space wi th substanti al presences ( as
conventi onal ci nema tends to do) , but i nsteadconti nual l y empti es i tsel f
FRANK
BURKE
out . Characteri zati on occurs al most enti rel y as unpresentati on. Tri sha, the
f emal e protagoni st, remai ns vi sual l y absent . The
i denti ty of the
mai n
mal e
character, J ack, i s
ef f aced by doubl i ng: he i s pl ayed by two di f f erent ac-
tors, he has a
gi rl f ri end
namedJ ack- i e, he speaks l i nes that aremerequo-
tati onsf romother sources (Raymond Chandl er, Foucaul t) , he has "vi si ons"
that are scenes f romf i l ms
. '
The
most prof oundi nstance of presenti ng "under erasure" i s contai ned
i n Tri sha' s concl udi ng thoughts as she seeks to redef i ne hersel f i n rel a-
ti on/ opposi ti on to gender : "Not anewwoman, not non- woman, or mi s-
anthropi st, or anti - woman, and not non- practi ci ng l esbi an. Maybe
un- woman i s al so the wrong term.
A- woman i s cl oser
. A- womanl y.
A-
womanl i ness. " Here,
wi th
theuse of thel etter "a" wehave bothanarti cl e
that desi gnates ("a woman") and a pref i x that negates ("a- woman") . Or,
perhaps moreaccuratel y, thevery act of def i ni ng i s anact of erasi ng, the
very mode of presentati on def eats presentati on.
(Havi ng di scussed the compl ex
sui tabi l i ty of "a" - we
wi l l nowf ol l ow
Tri sha' s exampl eandshi f t to "a- presentati on" f rom"unpresentati on" Onl y
theawkwardness of the f ormer, wi thout anexpl anatory context, prevent-
ed i ts earl i er use. )
J ust as TheMan WhoEnvi ed Women tel l s i ts story under erasure by
themati zi ngevacuati on, doubl i ng characteri zati on, and "a- def i ni ng" wom-
an, ToLi veandDi ei n L. A. ef f aces i ts narrati ve i n the very act
of
presenta-
ti on
by
i nsi sti ng that everythi ng i s counterf ei t . Al l
val ue,
al l enduri ng
substance, di sappear once story, f i l mmaker, and medi umare reduced to
aprocess of mere f raudul ence and repl i cati on. (The f i l menters Baudri l -
l ard' s si mul acrum, whi ch i s contemporary hyperreal i ty enti rel y under the
si gn
of
erasure. ) "
I nsi gni f i cance, the recent Ni chol as Roeg f i l m, perf orms asi mi l ar act of
ef f acement, begi nni ngwi th i ts ti tl e andconti nui ng wi th i ts recreati on of
hi stori cal f i gures (Mari l yn Monroe, Al bert Ei nstei n, J oe Di maggi o, J oe
McCarthy, Roy Cohn) , under theerasure of total f i cti onal i zati on. (See Shar-
rett' s more extensi ve di scussi on. )
Fi nal l y, we ci te Fel l i ni , whose
recent
work
i s a
vi rtual cel ebrati on
of
a-
presentati on. The ti tl e of Amarcord means(accordi ng to Fel l i ni hi msel f )
"I remember, "
but
there
i s no
"I , "
no
Fel l i ni , i n the f i l m. I n
f act
there
i s
no
mai ncharacter
or
narrator -
j ust asuccessi on of
vastl y di f f erent narra-
tors whoseparti al andf ragmented "story" deni es thepossi bi l i ty of coher-
ent memory
on
the part
of
a uni f i ed subj ect
or
"I . " (Thi s
i s
i n del i berate
contrast to Fel l i ni ' s twoprecedi ngf i l ms, TheCl owns andRoma, i n
whi ch
Fel l i ni
was i ndeed
the mai n
character and
narrator. )
Casanovai s af i l mmadeenti rel y under erasure. I t i s, i n Fel l i ni ' s words,
Àf i l mon nothi ngness . . . . Atotal absence of everythi ng . . . rendered
wi thout emoti on- thereareonl y f orms that are outl i ned i n masses, per-
specti ves arti cul ated
i n
a
f ri gi d
and
hysteri cal
repeti ti on . . . .
I t i s nonl i f e
wi th i ts empty f orms whi ch are composed and decomposed, the
charm
74
of
anaquari um, anabsentmi ndedness of seal i ke prof undi ty, where
every-
thi ng i s compl etel y hi dden andunknownbecause there
i s no human
penetrati onor i nti macy" Wi thi ts del i berate
manneri st excesses, i ts de-
basement of i ts ownsi gni f i ers (oceans constructedout of
garbagebags) ,
i ts themati zi ngof poseandarti f i ce, Casanovacounterf ei ts
i tsel f , i ts story,
andi ts "hero" f romstart to f i ni sh.
AndtheShi p Sai l s Onef f acespol i ti cs andhi story by
si mul ati ngtheout-
break of Worl dWar I but f i cti onal i zi ngbeyondrecogni ti on
theassassi na-
ti onof ArchdukeFerdi nandandthesi nki ngof theLusi tani a. Thi si s
i denti cal
to
themethodof hi stori cal f i cti onal i zati oni nInsi gni f i canceandi s not so
muchanerasureof
thef i l mi tsel f as presentati onof thehi stori cal ref erent
under erasure. (Both
Fel l i ni andRoegareworki ngi nthereal mof mul ti pl e
codi ngas wel l
. ) Agai n
we
canci te Baudri l l ard' ssi mul acrumof purepresen-
tati on wi thout
ref erenti al i ty.
Thephenomenonof a- presentati onI' ve beenseeki ng to address
l ends
i tsel f
to
several responses. Onthel evel of content, di vi si onsmi ght bemade
between"posi ti ve" and"negati ve" f orms. For i nstance, Tri sha' s concept
of "a- womanl i ness" i n TheManWhoEnvi edWomenappears to
be con-
structi ve: awayof themati zi nganescapef romgender
f ormul ati ons (and
bi nary opposi ti on) rootedi nl ogocentri sm. (Her vi sual absencei nthe
f i l m
al so f rees her f romf i l mi c obj ecti f i cati on, i f weassumethat thegaze i s
i n-
herentl y mal e. ) Fri edki n' s, Roeg' s, andFel l i ni ' s versi ons of erasure, on
the
other hand, seemto ref l ect a paral yzi ng senseof f uti l i ty
wi thregard to
bothart andhi story.
As methodol ogy, however, a- presentati oncan,
i n al l i ts f orms, be seen
as ausef ul tool f or de- substanti al i zi ng the
artwork andour responses to
i t . By denyi ngi denti ty
i nthevery means
of
presenti ng i t, by f orci ngone
beyondthegi vento the
real m
of erasure(the
excl uded, thesuppressed,
thei deol ogi cal l y
determi ni ng) , a- presentati ondef eats theki ndof cl osure
upon
whi chtradi ti onal narrati vehas depended. By tuni ng onei nbothto
thepresentati onandi ts deni al , i t promotes theki ndof both- and,
mul ti rel a-
ti onal , thi nki ng that i s struggl i ng to repl acel i near, bi nary thought.
Vi ewedi ni ts most f l atteri ng l i ght, a- presentati onaccords wi ththe
earl i -
est, most utopi anstrai ns of postmoderni sm,
whi chenvi si onedanexpan-
si onof consci ousness promotedby
revol uti ons i nmedi aandi nf ormati on
systems. Vi ewedi n l ess but
sti l l f l atteri ng l i ght, a- presentati on of f ers a
methodof
resi stanceandopposi ti on, as wel l as ameansof recoveri ng the
erased.
Vi ewedneutral l y, i t compri ses a methodol ogy of f ree pl ay "j ust
f or thef unof i t . " Seenat i ts worst, i t becomespart of l ate capi tal i sm' s
cam-
pai gnto di vorcethei ndi vi dual f rom
meani ng,
causal i ty,
andhi story and
f uel the
ki nd
of
schi zophreni a(al l si gni f yi ng chai ns ruptured) onwhi ch
l ate capi tal i smdepends. '
7
5
FRANKB
URKE
Returni ng
tothereal mof fi l m, l et' s j us t
concl udebys ayi ngthat, al l other
thi ngs
as i de, a- pres entati onal l ows movi es
to di s engage thems el ves from
" al l the
Real ' s bi g numbers " ( Baudri l l ard) andto' more ful l y
as s ert
them-
s el ves as amedi umnot of repres entati onbut
of the " pos t" or ( to take our
l ead agai n fromRai ner) the " a" - real .
Notes
1 .

( Mi nneapol i s : Uni vers i ty of Mi nnes otaPres s , 1984) , p. 81 . I t s houl d be emphas i zed
that Lyotardi s not advocati nga return to pres ence
or
s ubs tanti al i ty The
pos tmodern
" s earches for newpres entati ons , not i n order
to enj oythembut i n order to i mpart
as tronger s ens e of theunpres entabl e" ( I bi d
. ) .
2.

Myus eof " eras ure" i s , as I acknowl edgei n
thebodyof mytext, deri vedfromDerri -
da. However, other
Derri dean s trategi es s uchas themarki ngof s uppl ements , the
producti on
of
di fferences
andundeci dabl es , andthe overrunni ngof borders andmar
gi ns are equal l y
rel evant exampl es of " unpres enti ng" - as arethemethods of " mi s -
readi ng"
devel opedbyAmeri candecons tructi oni s ts s uchas Paul deManandHarol d
Bl oom.
3.

Mi chel
Foucaul t, Language, Counter- Memory, Practi ce, ed. Donal dF. Bouchard( I thaca:
Cornel l Uni vers i ty
Pres s , 1977) , p.
35
.
4.

Arthur Kroker, " The Di s embodi edEye: I deol ogy andPower i ntheAge
of
Ni hi l i s m, "
theCanadi anJ ournal of Pol i ti cal andSoci al Theory,
7, no.
1 ( Wi nter/ Spri ng,
1983) ,
p. 200, 202. Repri ntedi n Arthur Kroker andDavi d
Cook, The Pos tmodern Scene:
Excremental Cul ture andHyperAes theti cs ( New
York, St . Marti n' s Pres s , 1986) .
5.

What
I
cal l " otheri ng" has much i n common wi th Baudri l l ardi an " revers i bi l i ty. "
However, muchof Baudri l l ard' s thought tends not towardthedynami s mandrel ati ve
" di fference" of revers i bi l i ty, but towardthecol l aps e of thi ngs , throughi mpl os i on,
i ntoan undi fferenti ateds tate.
See" The I mpl os i onof Meani ngi ntheMedi aandthe
I nformati onof theSoci al i n the
Mas s es , "
i n Kathl een
Woodward, ed. , Myths of I nfor-
mati on: Technol ogy andPos t- I ndus tri al Cul ture ( Madi s on:
CodaPres s , 1980) , pp.
137- 148. See al s o J . Baudri l l ard, I n theShadowof the Si l ent Maj ori ti es ( NewYork:
Semi otext( e) andJ eanBaudri l l ard,
1983) . ( " TheI mpl os i onof Meani ng. . . " i s repri nted
i n
I n the Shadow. . . . )
For acri ti queof Baudri l l ard' s el i mi nati onof di fference throughi mpl os i ons eeJ ames
Col l i ns , " Pos tmoderni s mandCul tural Practi ce: Redefi ni ng theParameters , " Screen,
28, no. 2( Spri ng, 1987) , 12- 13
.
6.

Seees peci al l yhi s di s cus s i onof thes uppl ement
andRous s eau i n Of Grammatol ogy,
trans. Gayatri ChakravortySpi vak ( Bal ti more: J ohns Hopki ns Uni vers i ty
Pres s , 1976.
7.

Rai ner' s
di s fi gurement of thevi s ual i mage - her " opti cal l y degenerateds hots , " to
us eher ownterm, i s not i ncons i s tent wi th
thenoti on of " unpres enti ng. " However,
di s fi guri ngwhat i s pres ented
i s s omewhat di fferent frompres enti ng" under eras ure"
- i . e. , gi vi ng andat the s ame ti me taki ng away.
8.

Ones houl dnot, however, confus ethe whol es al e contami nati onof counterfei ti ng i n
To Li ve andDi e i n L. A. wi thBaudri l l ard' s muchmore res tri cted us eof thetermi n
Si mul ati ons , trans
. Paul Fos s , Paul Patton, andPhi l i p Bei tchman( NewYork: Semi -
otext( e) andJ ean Baudri l l ard,
1983) , pp. 83 ff .
9.

" Cas anova: AnI ntervi ewwi thAl do Tas s one, " i n Peter Bondanel l a, ed. Federi co Fel -
l i ni : Es s ays i n Cri ti ci s m( NewYork: OxfordUni vers i ty Pres s , 1978) , p. 28.
76
AESTHETI CSANDPOSTMODERNI SM
10.

I hab Hassanst i l l t ends t o represent post moderni smi n i t s
ut opi anmode(The Post -
modern71i rn: Essays i nPost modernTheory andCul t ure-
Col umbus: Ohi o
St at e
Uni versi t y Press, 1987) . Andreas Huyssenrepresent s ami ddl eground
of
bot hpol i t i
cal engagement andappreci at i onof post moderni sm(Aft er t heGreat Di vi de: Moder-
ni sm, MassCul t ure, Post moderni sm- Bl oomi ngt on: I ndi anaUni versi t y Press, 1986) .
Frederi c J amesoni s, of course, t he
most st ri dent cri t i c of post moderni smfroma po-
l i t i cal poi nt
of
vi ew
("Post moderni sm, or
t he
Cul t ural Logi c of Lat eCapi t al i sm, " New
Left Revi ew, no. 146(J ul y- August ,
1984), 57) .
Canadi anJ ournal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al Theory/ Revuecanadi ennede t bdori epol i t i que
et soci al e, Vol ume X11, Numbers 1- 2 ( 1988) .
POSTMODERN
NARRATI VECI NEMA:
AENEAS
ON
A
STROLL
Chri st opher Sharret t
Cent ral t o anunderst andi ngof post moderni smi s
t henot i onof t hespec-
t acl e ( as t hi s t ermcomes t o us
f rom
Guy
Debord' ) andi t s changi ng con-
f i gurat i on. Whi l eBaudri l l ard' s concept of
spect acl ei s probabl y correct i n
t hat t het heat ri cal experi ence andt headj acent senseof t hesoci al are
ob-
sol et e t opi cs i n t he wake of cabl e t el evi si on andt he VCRz t here i s l i t t l e
quest i on t hat anessent i al f eat ure of post moderni smi n t he hegemony of
t hei mage. Anevol vi ngst rat egy i napproachi ngpost moderncul t ure i s
t he
exami nat i onof t he t echnol ogi cal andi deol ogi cal di rect i onof medi a
and
t he const ruct i on of t he bourgeoi s subj ect by t hem. I wi l l argue t hat
t he
depi ct i onof t he prot agoni st i ncurrent f i l mnarrat i ve provi des asenseof
t he part i cul ar i deol ogy of post moderni sm, t he
pl ace
of
narrat i ve i n t he
recent mi l i eu, andt he
changi ngnot i on
of
t hesel f i nt hemedi al andscape.
As we have l earnedf romLauraMul vey3 andot hers, t he humani mage
depi ct edi n t he ci nemahas of t enf unct i oned as proj ect i on andego
i deal
f or t he bourgeoi s subj ect . Thi s not i onmust becont ext ed,
however, i n a
speci f i c phase of i mage product i onandpol i t i cal economy
. Post modern
ci nema, even
wi t ht he "nost al gi amode" whi chat t empt s t o evokel ongi ng
f or t he "i nnocence" of t he recent past , cont ai ns acont radi ct ory vi ewof
t hei ndi vi dual whi chul t i mat el y cannot of f er t hesol ace of domi nant i deol -
ogy. Whi l ecapi t al i st i deol ogy i s commonl yassert edi nt hereact i onary `80s,
i t i s i n cont ent i on wi t h t he cul t ure i ndust ry' s exhaust i on, i t s
sel f -
ref erent i al i t y bornout of t he deart h of i deas as t he demand
f or sat i sf ac-
t i ons i ncreases
whi l e
recei ved
myt hs
support i ng
bourgeoi s narrat i ve are
dessi mat ed.
POSTMODERNCINEMA
What f ol l owsi s necessar i l y tentati ve andheur i sti c: atypol ogi cal appr oach
towar d
mappi ng
a
par ti cul ar cul tur al mani f estati on of the bour geoi s sel f
wi thattenti on to the noti on that postmoder ni smi s
not one movement
as such
. Indeed, the cogni ti ve mappi ng whi chFr edr i c J ameson has
un-
der taken pr oves howextr aor di nar i l y compl ex postmoder ni smi s
as evi -
dence of a
maj or shi f t i n wor l dcul tur e, andhowpr evi ous str ategi es of
hi stor i cal per i odi zati on ar e obvi ousl y i nadequate(whi l e I am
i n agr eement
wi thJ ameson' s
noti on
of a
"spati al i zed" appr oachto postmoder ni sm, I
wi l l
suggest
her ei n the i mpor tance of Reagani sm, the 1980s, andthe hal f -
hear tedattempt to r ecoup cr edi bi l i ty f or master nar r ati ves to
the f or ma-
ti on of postmoder n exper i ence) . Never thel ess, thi s anal ysi s must pay at-
tenti on to the technol ogi cal , economi c, and
cul tur al changes of the l ast
ten year s i npar ti cul ar f or thei r evi denci ng of thecl i mate of posti ndustr i al -
i smoutl i nedby Dani el Bel l andother s, andmor e
par ti cul ar l y f or the ti dal
wave of r eacti on associ atedwi ththe pr esent massi ve cul tur al i nver si on
.
Whi l e ther e ar e compel l i gar guments f or postmoder ni smas subver si ve (that
i s, as an
extensi on
of
moder ni sm, as adeathknel l f or author shi p, tr uth,
al l f or ms of r epr esentati onal i sm), adi al ecti cal appr oachmakes postmoder -
ni smpr i mar i l y the br oad
f r amewor kf or acr i si s i n cr edi bi l i ty bothi n the
state andar ti sti c pr oducti on.
Thenatur e of the postmoder ni smdebate i s
f or the
most
par t wel l known,
but the centr al poi nts needto be r ecapi tul atedandsi tuatedvi s-a-vi s the
r ol e
of
nar r ati ve. Thus f ar postmoder ni smhas beenappr oachedpr i nci pal l y
by exami ni ngmaj or changes
i n
cr i ti cal
theor y andi nter pr etati ons of mass
cul tur e. Ther ear e, at thi s stage, twol i nes of thought on the devel opment
of postmoder ni sm. The Fr enchschool , r epr esentedby J ean Baudr i l l ar d
and
J ean-Fr ancoi s Lyotar d, mi ght be ter medneo-Ni etzschean i n i ts assaul t
ontotal i zi ng theor i es of hi stor yandl anguage systems.
Baudr i l l ar d' s r hetor i c,
even wi thi ts extensi ve tr aces of Mar xi sm, evi dencesthe ni hi l i smi n much
di scour se of post-' 68 Fr ance. At the hear t of Baudr i l l ar d' s
anal ysi s of cul -
tur e i s the noti on of the si mul acr a- si gni f yi ng pr acti ces empty of mean-
i ng, andend-pr oduct of Wester n r epr esentati onal i smwhi chhe associ ates
wi than apocal ypti c cr i si s of l anguage. 4 Al thoughBaudr i l l ar dsketches the
devel opment of
si gn
systems thr oughvar i ous stages of
capi tal i sm' s evol u-
ti on - equati ng, f or exampl e, ear l y i coni c r epr esentati on wi thf eudal i sm,
si mul acr a(computer gr aphi cs, medi ai mages) wi ththe cyber neti c r evol u-
ti on and
cor por ati sm-
he stops shor t of pr ogr ammati c r esponse.
Whi l e
hi s anal ysi s of the medi ai s cogent, debunki ngbothMcLuhan' sgl obal vi l -
l age utopi aandOr wel l ' s omni sci ent pol i ce state, hi s key contr i buti on i s
the noti on of medi a"i mpl odi ng, " wi thmeani ngs at odds
wi th
eachother ,
cut of f f r omany sense of r ef er enti al i ty. Baudr i l l ar d' s i deas become i mpor -
tant to an appr eci ati on of ci nema' s gr adual destr ucti on of nar r ati ve l i ne
(r educi ngi t to phantasmagor i a), i ts i l l usi venss (even as the hi stor y of ci ne-
mai s l ost), andi ts pr eoccupati on wi thi ts owntechnol ogy.
CHRI STOPHERSHARRETT
Lyot ard' s posi t i on, whi l e l ess ni hi l i st , i s al so l acki ng i n revol ut i onary
response( asi de fromhi s
recommendat i on of t hepet i t reci t as asubst i t ut e
for
di scredi t ed mast er narrat i ve) andi ncl i ned t o t ake for grant edt hefai l ure
of Enl i ght enment i deas, i ncl udi ngbot hradi cal soci al programs andt ot al i z-
i ng not i ons
of
t rut h. For hi m
post moderni smi s oddl y cycl i cal , a fal l ow
or regressi ve peri od precedi ngt herenewal of moderni st commi t ment s.
At t hecent er of hi s t heory i s t he" cri si s of l egi t i mat i on, " or t hei mpossi bi l -
i t y of " grand narrat i ves" whi chprevi ousl y
gavecredi bi l i t y t o
t he Enl i ght -
enment
proj ect andent i re t radi t i ons of t heWest . s Thel egi t i mat i on cri si s
encompasses broadconcept s such as t hei dea of progress andmoredi s-
cret e narrat i ves wi t hi n t hem, for exampl e, t he myt hof t hequest i nghero.
Whi l eal so refusi ng t radi t i onal Marxi st pol emi cs ( and t hat met hod' s sense
of t he soci al ) , Lyot ardsuggest s t hat
del egi t i mat i on i s not some
organi ci st
concept
associ at ed
wi t h
cybernet i c t echnol ogy overt aki ng t he cent ered,
bourgeoi s subj ect , but a cri si s caused by bourgeoi s soci et y' s confront a-
t i on wi t hi t s myt hs ( at onepoi nt Lyot arddraws at t ent i ont o t he fai l ureof
t hepat ri archal narrat i veaft er Wat ergat e, suggest i ng t hat soci et y cannot
fi nd
sol acei n myt hs perpet rat edby t hest at eapparat us, cert ai nl y not suchcur-
rent and bal d mani fest at i ons as t heTri l at eral Commi ssi on6) .
I t i s
i n
t hesecond school of t hought represent ed by Fredri cJ ameson
7
and, more recent l y, Terry Eagl et on, 8 t hat we fi nd a t rul y syncret i c ap-
proacht o post moderni sm, abl et o synt hesi ze t hework of t heFrenchNi et z-
scheans, but ai medmorepreci sel y at t heMarxi ananal ysi s
of
cul t ure and
i t s rel at i onshi p
t o
economy. TheJ ameson
proj ect i s
forceful i n vi ewi ng
post moderni smas asi t e of st ruggl e. Heavi l y i nfl uenced by Al t husser ( and
Lacan) , J amesonfocuses ont heconst ruct i on of t hebourgeoi s subj ect and
t hei mport anceof t hesuperst ruct uret o t he format i onof i deol ogy. Hi s ap-
proach t o post moderni smi s t hat of ahi st ori cal mat eri al i st , peri odi zi ngi t
wi t hi n t he devel opment of l at e capi t al i sm( as defi nedby Ernest Mandel )
and t hehegemony of supranat i onal corporat i sm, whi l eat t hesamet i me
modi fyi nga t radi t i onal hi st ori ci st perspect i veconsi deri ngpost moderni sm' s
mani fest at i ons i n consci ousness and i n desperat ecul t ural forms. Mul t i na-
t i onal capi t al i sm' s chal l enge
t o
nat i on- st at e economi cs i s fi nal l y a t hreat
t o t hei nt egri t y of t hebourgeoi s monadi csubj ect ; t hi s post ul at e i s t heba-
si s of J ameson' s vi ewof post moderni sm' s rel at i on t o sel f. For J ameson, t he
most
i mport ant
t endency of
post moderni smi s t he ul t i mat erei fi cat i on of
al i enat i on, t heat t empt t o co- opt
al l
adversari al cul t ure, t o assert al i enat i on
as accept ed st at e of
bei ngsi nce t hesubj ect
i s cut
off fromany hi st ori cal
sense- l acki ng an underst andi ng of causal i t y, andasked t o
accept t hat
ut opi anor radi cal opt i ons are
nai ve
or out dat ed.
Thesubj ect i s rendered
" schi zophreni c"
i n
t hat
hi s/ her
si gni fyi ng chai n and t herefore
hi st ori cal
consci ousness are rupt ured. Thest ruggl e of t hi s newbourgeoi s subj ect
provi des t heessent i al di ssonance and " i ncoherence" of post moderni sm
whi chwefi nd mani fest i n cul t ural phenomenasuchas ci nemat i c narra-
t i ve. J ameson' s approach i s useful i n a number of ways, not t he l east of
80
POSTMODERNCINEMA
whi chi s
i t s at t ent i on t o t he f ormat i onof a hermeneut i cs t hat acknowl edges
and
i ncorporat es pos t s t ruct ural i s m' s cri t i ci s mof meani ng, whi l e at
t hes ame
t i me
s i des t eppi ng pos t s t ruct ural i s m' s move t owarda news ubj ect i vi s m.
J ames on' s
Marxi s m
i s
es peci al l y i mport ant t o i nt erpret i ngchanges i n caus al -
i t y andnarrat i ve cl os ure
i nt he current ci nema, t he f unct i onof whi chwoul d
be l es s avai l abl e t o us
wi t hmany pos t s t ruct ural i s t s t rat egi es .
The
Fai l ure of
t he Act ant i al Model
In appl yi ngt he t erm"i ncoherence" t o
pos t moderni s t ci nema I ambor-
rowi ngmore f romRobi nWoodt han J ames on
i n t ryi ng t o s ugges t con-
t emporary cul t ure' s conf l i ct i ng, unres ol ved s t ruggl es of
i deol ogy' By
"i ncoherence" I do not mean t hat cert ai n t ext s are
hopel es s l y conf us ed
andunreadabl e, but rat her t hat t hey cont ai na number of
pos i t i ons i nt ens e
oppos i t i on, prevent i ng
narrat i ve cl os ureandt he bourgeoi s real i s mt o whi ch
Hol l ywoodci nemaas pi res . Thi s i s not neces s ari l y al audabl es i t uat i on, s i nce
t he
i ncoherence of a workrepres ent s mos t of t ent he unwi l l i ngnes s t opart
company
wi t hart i s t i c convent i ons andt he cul t ural as s umpt i ons s upport -
i ng
t hem
rat her t han t he depi ct i on of acompl exworl d- vi ew. Thedes t ruc-
t i onof
narrat i ve cl os ure i s a rat her t ypi cal f eat ure of moderni s m, co- opt ed
by
muchcommerci al art . Yet t he ges t ures of Art aud, Becket t ,
andWi l s on,
of Res nai s ,
Bunuel , andAnt oni oni were very purpos ef ul , ques t i oni ng
f or
t he mos t part bourgeoi s cons ci ous nes s whi l eworki ngcons i s t ent l y i n t he
real m
of
repres ent at i onal i s m. Thei ncoherenceof t he Hol l ywood
ci nema
of
t he 1980s i s i nvol vedi n t he cri s i s of repres ent at i onal i s mreducedt o
el e-
ment s of i t s ef f ect s , acknowl edgi ngt he
s el f - ref erent i al i t y
of
t heavant garde
whi l eat t empt i ng t o s t eer cl ear of a
pres ent at i onal i s mwhi chwoul ds ug-
ges t a newpol i t i cal
awarenes s
of
t he s pect at or. Al s o evi dent i n t hi s i nco-
herence i s t hat Hol l ywoodci nema of
t he `80s cont i nues t o advance
domi nant i deol ogy
even as i t demons t rat es t hat previ ous not i ons of i deo-
l ogi cal cons ens us no
l onger exi s t ; t he i mpul s es wi t hi n Taxi Dri ver ( 1975)
are f ar more pronounced, di s t urbi ng, and"s chi zophreni c" i nRambo( 1985) .
Far f rombei ngan envi ronment of s urf ace gl os s f ree of
al l advers ari al s i g-
ni f i cat i on, a domai n of "hyperreal i t y"" cut
of f
f rom
pol i t i cal and eco-
nomi c ci rcums t ance, pos t moderni s mi s , as J ames on
as s ert s , a l ogi cal
product of l at e capi t al i s m
. More s peci f i cal l y, i t can be approached as
domi nant cul t ure' s
at t empt t o res t ore capi t al i s m' s l egi t i macy by ef f ect i vel y
f orget t i ngt he l as t t went y years of hi s t ory ( hencet hepenchant f or t he 1950s ,
ret ro f as hi on, s hort hai r, machi s mo, et c. ) . Theproj ect of "s eal i ng over""
Vi et namandWat ergat e i s undermi ned, however, by t he di vi dednat ure of
t ext s , t he s chi zophreni a of t he s ubj ect .
The i s s ue of t he f unct i on of
s chi zophreni a i n pos t modern cul t ure i s
t roubl es ome, wi t ht he predomi nant s chool , repres ent edby Gi l l es Del euze
andFel i x Guat t ari , ' 3 argui ngt hat "t he s t rol l of t he s chi zo, hi s gl ori ous
wanderi ng, engenders aworl dcreat edi n t he proces s of i t s t endency,
i t s
comi ng apar t , i t s decodi ng. " 1 4
The Del ueuze/ Guat t ar i at t ack onps y-
choanal ys i s has becomea cent r al f eat ur e
of
pos t moder ni s t cr i t i ci s mand
i s i mpor t ant f or i t s f ur t her conj unct ur eof t heper s onal andt hepol i t i cal .
Unf or t unat el y, t heat t ack
onbot hFr eudandMar xbecomes anot her chaot i c,
s ubj ect i ve r evi val of Ni et zs cheas i t at t empt s t o val or i ze t he f r agment ed
s ubj ect of l at e capi t al i s m, t he
at omi zeds el f di vor ced
f r om
acode,
wi t hout
moor i ngs , t r ans f or medi nt oa " des i r i ngmachi ne. " Ter r y Eagl et onhas t er med
t hi s t hi nki ngt he" mos t banal anar chi s t r het or i c, " hol di ngt hat Del euze' s
andGuat t ar i ' s " i ns i s t ence upondes i r e' s di f f us e andper ver s e mani f es t a-
t i ons " ' 5 andt hei r r ef us al of her meneut i cs ef f ect i vel y val i dat es t hei deol -
ogyof cons umer capi t al i s m
.
Thes ubj ect as des cr i bedby Del euze/ Guat t ar i
s eems qui t e cl os e t oJ ames on' s i mageof t hepos t moder ns el f as cons e-
quenceof
t he
f ai l ed s i gni f yi ngchai n. Themaj or di s t i nct i onher e i s t hat
Del euze/ Guat t ar i advances s chi zophr eni ai na r eeval uat i on
of
bour geoi s i n-
t er pr et at i ons of cons ci ous nes s , al s oaccept i ngt hei mper vi ous nes s of capi -
t al t or evol ut i onar ychange. What i s cor r ect i nbot hanal ys es i s t het r ans i t i on
i n
t he model of t hes ubj ect . Ther epr es ent at i onof t hepr obl emi s cl ear
i nt heci nema, wher et het r adi t i onal f unct i onof t hes ubj ect i s di s r upt ed,
andnot i nways as s oci at edwi t h, s ay, t heexi s t ent i al ant i - her oof l at e moder -
ni s m(onet hi nks
of
J ames Bond,
or
t heManWi t h
No
Nameof t heSer gi o
Leonewes t er ns ) . The
di s r upt i onof t hepr ot agoni s t ' s r ol et ends t os uppor t
J ames on' s i dea of pos t moder ni s mas cul t ur al domi nant ' 6; t hecommer ci al
ci nema appl auds t hevar i ous mani f es t at i ons of t hes chi zophr eni cher oand
r ef us es t o s eet heneces s i t y of cl os ur et o t henar r at i ve, evenwhent her e
appear s
r i s k
t o t hei deol ogi cal ent er pr i s e. Ti r es ome l i near expos i t i onde-
pendent onnot i ons of nar r at i vecaus al i t y i s obvi at edi n t heageof vi deo.
Tr adi t i onal bour geoi s s t r at egy i s r eal i zedi nt hedi vor ceof t hes ubj ect f r om
nar r at i ve(hi s t or y), i ndi s t or t i ngor r epr es s i ngt hecaus al f act or s
whi ch
cr e-
at e t hes ubj ect . Pos t moder ni s mas domi nant modes ugges t s t hat t head-
ver s ar i al t endenci es
of
moder ni s mand
t he
avant gar de ar e er oded; t hi s
r at her s i mpl i s t i c i dea pays i ns uf f i ci ent
at t ent i on,
however ,
t o
l awf ul hi s t or -
i cal pr oces s es andt hes i t e of s t r uggl e whi chpos t moder ni s mact ual l y i s .
Thes chi zophr eni c
s ubj ect of
pos t moder ni s m
canbedi agnos ed
wi t ht he
ai dof A. J . Gr ei mas ' s act ant i al model , " t hef ai l ur e of whi chi nt hecur r ent
envi r onment t ends t or ef er us t o Lyot ar d' s l egi t i mat i oncr i s i s . I nGr ei mas ' s
cl as s i cal l y s ci ent i f i s t i c s t r uct ur al nar r at ol ogy, t r adi t i onal nar r at i ve der i ves
i t s
f or ce
f r omt he not i on
of a s end/ act ant , a
r epr es ent at i ve
of
s ymbol i c
val ues , whogi ves a mes s aget o t hes ubj ect ,
whoi n
t ur ni s abl e t o
make
choi ces (goodvs . evi l , et c. ) andt o di s per s e t hi s knowl edget or ecei ver s ,
as
wel l as conf r ont oppos i t i onal f act i ons andf i nal l y t oachi evet hedes i r ed
obj ect . Put s i mpl y, t hef i gur e i s vi ewedas r epos i t or y of s peci f i c s oci al f or ces
r at her t hani ndi vi dual s ubj ect as s uch. Gr ei mas pr ovi des a s ampl eof t hi s
s chemat i c' $
whi chmi ght appl y t oa bas i c " gr andnar r at i ve" f r omLyot ar d' s
f or mul a:
POSTMODERNCINEMA
Subj ect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . phi l osopher
Obj ect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
worl d
Sender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . God
Recei ver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
manki nd
Opponent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . matter
Hel per . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
mi nd
Obvi ousl y there i s i mpl i ed
i n
thi s
schemati c a consensus regardi ng
recei vednoti ons of order. Whi l e theactanti al model maybeseenas
redu-
ci bl e to l anguageal one, thei deathat i t i s i nvol ved, as
Fredri cJ amesonnotes,
i n the producti on of meani ngdraws our attenti on to
i ts val ue at ati me
whenmeani ngi s evacuatedf romnarrati ve evenas
certai n f ormal struc-
tures occasi onal l yremai n. El ements of essenti al Westernnarrati ves ( the ri se
of thechari smati c f i gure, thequest, the destructi onof the other) depend
ontradi ti onal concepti ons of truth andi ts reposi tori es. Structural model s
areamongthegrandnarrati ves whi chhave been
under sei gei ntherecent
peri od, but Grei mas' s argument i s proven
i ntheobverse. Theprotagoni st
of postmodern
ci nemacannot recei veamessage si ncetherei s nosender
( God, l aw) to transmi t
i t,
no soci al order to
answer to, andnoobj ecti ve
to attai n, al though the
f ramework
and
moti ons
of
al l the above remai n
reasonabl y i ntact ( thi s i s
i n contrast
to
avantgarde drama, whi ch f orces
us to recogni zethef uti l i ty of the heroi c f uncti onbydestroyi ng
narrati ve
structure) .
The
PSYCHO
Sequel s: Fanf are f or the Schi zophreni c
As Al f redHi tchcockf i nds asecure pl ace
i nthepantheonof f i l mdi rectors
( duri ng ati me whenthe l egendary Hol l ywoodauteurs are seen as part
of
a dead cul tural past) , wi th the chi ef work of hi s l ate peri od
canoni zed, ' 9i t i s si gni f i cant that Psycho ( 1960) shoul dbecome the obj ect
of i ndustry f eti shi zati on. Thetworecent "sequel s" to Hi tchcock' s f i l m,
Ri chardFrankl i n' s PsychoII ( 1984) andAnthonyPerki ns PsychoIII ( 1986)
both expenduponanddi l ute the ori gi nal f i l m' s sense of pervasi ve psy-
chosi s i nbourgeoi scul ture. The
f i l ms
move
Norman
Bates to
center stage,
val ori zi ng
hi m
as aki ndof patronsai nt
f or the
psychoti c
ki l l ers whohave
domi natedthehorror f i l m
of
thel ast twodecades( as thepsychoti c changed
f rommonster torecogni zabl e
other) ,
and, byso
doi ng, present hi mas a
representati ve bourgeoi s f i gure. That thi s poi nt shoul ddi gress so much
f romthe i deas of the ori gi nal Psychocauses us tovi ewthe newf i l ms i n
aspeci f i c cul tural context .
NormanBates i s i ndeedtheheroof thesef i l ms, anoverarchi ngpresence,
the "Haml et of thehorror f i l m. " 20 Bates' s appearance roughl y i nthemi d-
dl eof the
f i rst f i l m, creati ng what at f i rst seemsto beanewnarrati vel i ne,
works
to
demonstratethevi cti mi zati onof NormanandMari onCrane( and
i ndeedmost of themaj or characters of thef i l m) bypatri archyandcapi tal -
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
i sm, bythe f orces of repressi on. The soci al apocal ypse" of the
f i l m
i s
onl ytangenti al l yto dowi thNorman; hei s pri mari l ya f i gure actedupon,
as i s Mari on, byvi ci ous soci al f orces consti tuti ng the
mocki ngl yabsurd
vi si on f oundi n thef i rst gl i mpses of theavant garde(Buchner' s Woyzeck) .
Theunrecuperabi l i ty
of
soci etysuggestedi n the f i nal i mages of Psycho
(the death' s headgri n, the car
emergi ng f romthe swamp) are usedi n a
parodi cal f ashi oni n Psycho II andIII, but a parodydrai nedof
i rony(f or
al l thevi sual ref erences to Hi tchcock) andcri ti cal obj ecti ve, gi vi ngus
J ame-
son' s noti onof pasti che. Psycho
If
reaf f i rms theusel essness of psychoanal -
ysi s, of
"knowi ng" anythi ng about behavi or, thus bol steri ng a central
premi seof the contemporaryhorror f i l m. Thi s i dea i s even
more extreme
thani nPsycho, wi than emphasi s on ci rcul ari ty: Norman ends up
where
hebegan
twentyyears earl i er. Al so reaf f i rmed, through Li l a Loomi s' s at-
tempt to destroy
Norman,
i s
Psycho' s sense of the pervasi veness of
schi zophreni a. Thef ocus of cri ti ci smi s not, as
i n
the
ori gi nal f i l m, bour-
geoi s cul ture(Hi tchcockref erredto Mari onCraneas a "perf ectl y
ordi nary
bourgeoi s
1122)
;
rather, the concern i s wi th the ori gi nal Psycho as obj ect .
Hol l ywood
recycl i ng i ts past materi al duri ng a ti meof cul tural regressi on
andbankruptcydoes not at thi s stageseemunusual ,
nor
does
the cons-
tant al l usi on andhommage(al l
these nowseemf ami l i ar i ndi ces of post-
moderni sm) ; val ori zi ng Norman and creati ng a si tuati on of
the
schi zophreni c tri umphant (whi l eat the same ti me removi ng
Psycho' s vi -
si on
of
soci etyat a standsti l l ) gi ve thetwo sequel s a ki ndof
central i ty i n
the
postmodern ci nema. Whi l enei ther Psycho II nor Psycho
III acts as
prel udeto a
new
phaseof
f i l mmaki ng i n themanner of Hi tchcock' s work,
they represent veryadequatel y Hol l ywood' s
current si tuati on as wel l as
bourgeoi s soci ety' s conf rontati onwi th the noti on of
madness as conse-
quence; of repressi on. NormanBates' s predi cament no
l onger pl aces hi m
as an
adversaryto domi nant cul ture (i n Psycho he i s certai nl ypercei ved
as a threat) ; i n thesequel s, parti cul arl yPerki ns' f i l m, Bates i s a
sympathet-
i c
f i gure representati ve of madness as a cul tural gi ven, especi al l y
wi thPsy-
cho III' s pecul i arl y mi l l enni c noti on of a compl ete cycl e i n ti me, wi th
Normanentrappedandf orcedbackwardi n
ti me
by
transpsychi cal cri si s .
Psycho III goes so
f ar
as to
address rel i gi onas thef oundati on of patri ar-
chyandrepressi on(the f i rst words
uttered
as
thescreenremai ns bl ackare
"There, i s no God!").
Thepl i ght
of
Maureen to f ree hersel f f romthe ul ti -
mate patri archal
i nsti tuti on
i s a
muchmore del i berate, a manneredren-
deri ng of Mari on
Crane' s f l i ght f romPhoeni x. The psychopathol ogyof
Norman' s hel per Duane(hi s sadi sm, f eti shi sm, scopophi l i a)
carri es f urther
thetwof i l ms' depi cti onof pervasi ve
i nsani tyandapocal ypse. Yet thi s si t-
uati on, wi thNormanmovi ngthroughtheworl das
chroni c vi cti mandas
si mul taneousl yevi l andbenevol ent overseer,
never al l ows f or acri ti cal prac-
ti ce. Attenti on does not di verge
f romthese f i l ms as cul tural cel ebrati on
of themsel ves, cul mi nati ng i n
the "apotheosi s" shots at the endof both
f i l ms. Thef i nal shot of Psycho II - Al bert Whi tl ock' s
ani matedi l l ustra-
84
POSTMODERNCINEMA
t i on of t he Bat es housewi t h Normanal oneon t he t opst ep -becomes
asi gnat urest i l l devoi dof t hespect ral aspect of t heori gi nal bl ack-and-whi t e
publ i ci t y shot
f or Hi t chcock' s f i l m. Thi s l ast i magei s amodel of expl ana-
t i on i n underst andi ng t hef i l m' s rel at i onshi p t o
t he ori gi nal . Thespeci f i c
"anxi et y of i nf l uence" t he f i l mproj ect s ef f ect i vel y t ransf orms t he work
t o whi chi t ref ers. By so
doi ng,
Psycho
II gi ves us an exampl eof post moder-
ni sm' s t ransf ormat i on of t heprot agoni st .
The
col l ect i onof
shot s ( t heshow-
er sequence, t hepeephol e, t hest ai rcase andcel l ar of
t heBat es house) i n
Psycho II andIII, wi t ht hei r excessi ve"i nsi der j okes" andhommage( whi ch
assumet hat t heaudi enceconsi st s of ci neast es) gi ve Hi t chcock' s f i l manew
st at us as cul t ural art i f act but dest roys
i t s hi st ori cal posi t i on as awork of
art . Thepost warangui shwhi chPsychoproj ect s sowel l ( el uci dat edi n
Robi n
Woods' s Hi t chcock' s Fi l ms) i s erasedas Psycho nowbecomes merel y t he
f i rst f i l mi n aseri es, out si det he hi st ori cal
cont ext . J ameson' s t hi nki ng i s
especi al l y appl i cabl ehere: NormanBat es i s no l onger schi zophreni c,
nor
i s he represent at i ve of
exi st ent i al i st anomi e, al i enat i on, or burn-out . He
i s amegast ar phant asmaboveal l ; as suchhi s ai l ment makes hi mno more
adversari al t odomi nant cul t uret han t heIran-Cont rascandal , Wheel of
For-
t une, Franki e Goes t o Hol l ywood-al l have a moment i n t he hyperreal
medi aset t i ng. Thereal shockof Psycho, sowel l exami nedbyRobi nWood,
i s t hat f i l m' s senseof t heabsurdi n t hewakeof Hi roshi maand
Auschwi t z,
of a worl dnot governed by vaguemet aphysi cal f orces. Psycho i s absur-
di sm' s cent ral cont ri but i on t o popul ar cul t ure. Psycho II andIII remove
absurdi sm' moral i smandni hi l i sm, qui et i ng t hel ast great voi ceof moder-
ni st anxi et y
as
t he
popul ar
ci nemaasks us t o acqui esce
t o
amadness whi ch
i t ref uses t o
anal yze
.
TheDi srupt i on of t he Quest
The
i mpossi bi l i t y
of t he
chi val ri c quest , wi t h i t s not i on
of
t he dest ruc-
t i on of t he ot her or i t s i ncorporat i on i nt o t he domi nant order
, 23
has be-
come a f eat ure of genre art i n post moderni sm. Cert ai n genres
whi ch
dependedheavi l y on t he chi val ri c quest f or a depi ct i on of t he ci vi l i zi ng
experi encehavedi sappearedexcept f orsomet ransmogri f i edf orms-t he
west erni s t hemost obvi ous exampl e. Ot her genres whi chst i l l havesome
rel evance t o t hecont emporary senseof t he soci al showamarkeddi srup-
t i on or i nvol ut i on of t hequest , causi nga
di f f i cul t y i n
t he
const ruct i on
of
t heprot agoni st ,
hi s/ her i dent i f i cat i on wi t ht he ot her, audi ence i dent i f i ca-
t i on wi t h t he prot agoni st ' s purpose,
andt he
l ogi c of
t henarrat i ve ent er-
pri se
.
Wi l l i amFri edki n' s
To
Li veandDi ei nL. A. ( 1985), bal l yhooedas t he
"French Connect i on
of
t he 80s, " i ndeedcont ai ns some i deol ogi cal and
st ruct ural si mi l ari t i es t o t heVi et nam-eracri mef i l m, but wi t haconf i gura-
t i on pecul i er t o t he current cul t ural si t uat i on. Theat t empt by Secret Serv-
i ce agent Ri chard Chance t o crack a count erf ei t i ng ri ng operat ed by a
CHRI STOPHER
SHARRETT
par t i cul ar l y pat hol ogi cal vi l l ai nnamed
Mast er s pr ovi des
t hefr amewor k
on
whi ch t hefi l mpol i ci er i s t r adi t i onal l y
st r uct ur ed.
Theobsessi onal behavi or of Chanceandhi s si mi l ar i t y t o Mast er s i s not
so muchan ext ensi on of PopeyeDoyl e' s r el at i onshi p t o Char ni er ,
nor
i s
t he"descent i nt o i nfer no" el ement of To Li veandDi ei n L. A. a summa-
t i on of i deas i n Fr enchConnect i on ( 1972) andCr ui si ng( 1981) . Theher o' s
conduct , hi s senseof sel f andver y met abol i sm, seemaffect edby t hespeci f-
i c i deol ogi cal andcul t ur al ci r cumst ances i nscr i bedi n t hepost moder n t em-
per ament , speci fi cal l y :
1. Theageof Reagan as cont r ol l i ngbackdr op. Theopeni ngsceneshows
t hesecr et agent s escor t i ngt hePr esi dent t o an engagement at a Los An-
gel es hot el . Thesoundt r ack
cont ai ns excer pt s of Reagan' s
"Second
Amer i can Revol ut i on" speech ( on t ax r efor m) , t r ansmi t t edover t he
hot el ' s publ i c addr ess syst em. Reagan i s a sat ur at i ng pr esence,
onenot
chal l engedby t hecent r al char act er s of t hefi l m( i n cont r ast , say, t o
t he
di sr espect for aut hor i t y i n Di r t yHar r y) . Reagan i cons appear r egul ar l y,
al ong wi t h numer ous pat r i ot i c symbol s ( t hefl ags on t hePr esi dent i al
l i mousi near eamongt hefi l m' s fi r st i mages) . Thei deol ogi cal t ensi on
of t heReagan per i od' s affi r mat i on of "t r adi t i onal val ues" i s expl i ci t t o
ever y mot i f of t hefi l m, i ncl udi ng t hecent r al i mageof t hedol l ar bi l l
( gi ven an especi al l y pr i vi l egedmont agesequencei n Mast er s' count er -
fei t i ng l ab) andt hepr ot ect i on andacqui si t i on of capi t al at any cost ,
summar i zi ngt hesur vi val -of-t he-fi t t est et hi c of ent r epr eneur i al fr eeen-
t er pr i se. Thi s et hi c i s fi nal l y expl odedwi t ht hecount er fei t i ng mot i f i t -
sel f, t heconfusi onbet ween "r eal "
and"fake"
money, bet ween t her eal
andsi mul at i on. Theevacuat i on of r eason fr ompol i t i cal di scour se, t he
publ i c fi gur eas fl eet i ng medi acel ebr i t y, andt hei ncr easedi nt er connec-
t i on bet ween consumer i sm
andt hespect acl ear e
suffi ci ent
t o
i nvol ve
Reagani smi n t hemappi ng
of
t hepost moder n.
2. Thebr eak-up of r at i onal , cal cul at edt hought andt he
j umbl i ng
of
cause
andeffect . Muchhas al r eady been madeof t hi s
fi l m' s r el i ance
on
t he
aest het i cs
of
t her ockvi deo, wi t h t heover -emphasi s on qui cki nser t
shot s not as an Ei senst ei ni an di al ect i cal synt hesi s, but as a pi l i ng-up of
st i l l s,
of
ver y di scr et e"fi ct i veact s
"24
t o subst i t ut efor nar r at i ve. Thede-
emphasi s of nar r at i vedoes not fol l owmoder ni sm' s pr oj ect of cal l i ng
i nt o quest i on t r adi t i onal di egesi s; r at her , i t cat er s t o t hedi mi ni shedau-
di encei nt er est i n mat t er s of causeandeffect as t hei maget akes pr ece-
dencei n t hefi el dof t hespect acl e.
Thefr agment at i on of Chanceas r ecogni zabl egenr epr ot agoni st
i s effect u-
at edby el ement s of
t hefi l m' s t ext gr owi ng
out of
t heset wo cat egor i es.
Dur i ngt heagent s' pr ot ect i on of Reagan, Chancecor ner s asui ci dal t er r or i st
whoi s "r eady t o di e. " Wi t hout cont ext i ng t hi s moment , t hefi l m' s at t ack
86
POSTMODERNCINEMA
oncausal i t y i s associ at ed
wi t h t he domi nant i deol ogy' s f ost er i ng of an
apo-
l i t i cal , i r r at i onal
vi ew
of
pol i t i cal vi ol ence. 21 Thi s ahi st or i cal appr oach t o
di egesi s i s essent i al t ot he f i l m. Whi l e
t her e
i s no
sense t hat Chance or hi s
par t ner J ohnVukovi char e i n opposi t i ont ot he
domi nant i deol ogy, bot h
t hei r const r uct i on
as char act er s andt hei r oper at i oni nt he f i l m' s
nar r at i ve
set upenor mous
cont r adi ct i ons . Thest r at egy of cast i nga vi r t ual
unknown
(Wi l l i amPet er sen) i n t he r ol e of
Ri char dChance under mi nes bot h t r adi -
t i onal expect at i ons of pr ot agoni st cent r al i t y
and audi ence i dent i f i cat i on.
Thei nt er t ext ual
r esonance
of
Chance' s name(J ohnWaynei nRi oBr avo)
i s nodoubt l ost ont he
cont empor ar y audi ence; f or ci neast es t he r ef er -
ence i s subver t ed by Chance' s r at her pat het i c si t uat i on
. Mor e i mpor t ant ,
t he nar ci ssi sm
i nscr i bed i n t he char act er (t he post ur i ngi n
t i ght j eans) i s
a hyper bol i c pl ay ont he hi st or yof mal e
er os i nt he ci nema, her econj oi ned
t o t he sense of over whel mi ng avar i ce consumi ng
t he wor l d of f i l m. Thi s
sensi bi l i t y i s vi si bl e i n t he f i l m' s ever y gest ur e, i ncl udi ng
Chance' s br ut al
mi st r eat ment of a youngwomanact i ng as hi s i nf or mant
; hi s caval i er pl an
t o
r oba di amondsmuggl er (r esul t i ng i nt hemur der of a f el l owagent )
; and,
most si gni f i cant l y, hi s sudden, br ut al mur der at t he concl usi on,
mar ki ng
t he "er asur e" of
t he pr ot agoni st as t he nar r at i ve' s uni f yi ng pr i nci pl e. That
aqui ck shot of
Pet er senshoul d be i nser t ed f ol l owi ng t he endcr edi t s
i n-
vi t es us t ocont empl at et he
f i l m' s r el i nqui shi ng of t he i dea of pr ot agoni st ,
andof t hest ar as pur el y decor at i ve i con
. Thi s f i nal i mageof t he f i l mwor ks
as coda, j ust as t he vi deo- i nf l uenced mai nt i t l e sequence
i nt r oduced i m-
ages cent r al t ot he f i l m' s pl ot , muchi nt he manner of
t he "t easer " pr el ude
t o
t he t el evi si onpol i ce show. Thi s coda i s unusual i n i t s r ef er ence t o
t he
t r adi t i onal
subj ect of f asci nat i oni n t he var i ous act i on/ advent ur e genr es
.
The qui ck
shot of Chance' s f ace suggest s t he f i gur e whi chcanno
l onger
be r ecuper at ed.
J ameson' s not i onof past i che has r el evance t o
t he f i l m' s pl ay onexposi -
t i on. Theuse of t i t l es t o
si gni f y t he passage of t i me ("' Ihesday, 11 : 35 a. m")
becomes agr at ui t ous gr aphi c devi ce
si nce l i t t l e i s addedt o suspense, and
t he decor at i ve aspect of t he t i t l es (a di f f er ent t ypescr i pt i s used
eacht i me
t hey appear ) becomes l ess t hana concei t , l acki nganyusef ul ness
as a r ef er -
ence of genr e convent i on. The sequence i nt he st udi oof
t he dwar f ar t i st
(whose
wor kpl acei s al i t er al past i che of st yl es) andt he "musi c vi deo"
se-
quence of
Mast er s pr oduci ngcount er f ei t pl at es ar e among
t he moment s
whose vacuousness andgr ot esquer i e ampl i f y t he i deol ogi cal t ensi ons of
t he f i l m. Chance' s car eer i smand(i t woul dseem) accept ance of t he
pol i t i -
cal andeconomi c syst em
ar ecount er posed wi t hshot s of L. A. - as- j unkyar d,
r andomdest r uct i on
of consumer goods, t he accept ance andco- opt at i on
of
ki nky sexual i t y (t he behavi or of Chance, Mast er s, andt hei r gi r l f r i ends) ,
t he event ual accept ance by t he r el at i vel y mor al Vukovi chof hi s dead
par t -
ner ' s r ol e as "pr ot ect or " of Chance' s i nf or mant (who
at t empt edt o bet r ay
t he t woagent s t o escape
her
sexual
bondage) . The car chase sequence,
an"updat i ng" of t he f amous
Fr enchConnect i onscene, maybeembl emat i c
87
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
of thepol i ti cs of thefi l m, wi ththe
mani c Chancedri vi ngdi rectl y i ntoon-
comi ngtraffi c, i n
sui ci dal opposi ti onto the soci ety hi s offi ce supposedl y
protects
. (Repeti ti on-compul si on and the associ ated
death wi sh fi gure
promi nentl y
i n thecharacters' overal l behavi or andare
representedbest
by Chance' s bri dge-j umpi ng
hobby) .
As asummarystatement onthesel f-destructi onandutterl y amoral
aspect
of l ate capi tal i sm, ToLi ve andDi e
i nL. A
.
woul dbe abri l l i ant work, par-
ti cul arl y i n i ts debunki ng
of the protagoni st as afi gure acti ng as areposi -
tory of soci al consensus. Thetal i smantheherotradi ti onal l y
pursues,
whi ch
establ i shes hi s potency andcentered posi ti on
as effectuator of hi stori cal
change, has gradual l y di sappearedal ong
wi th thesource of mythi c power
whi chval i datedthehero
once
the
tal i smanhadbeenachi eved. Whi l efrus-
trati onassoci ated wi thacol l apsi ngsense
of thesoci al i mpedes (andmoves
tothefri nge) theheroes of TheFrench
Connecti onandDi rtyHarry, Chance
andVukovi ch
are
i n
amore precari ous posi ti onaccordi ngto noti ons of
order embodi edi ngenreconventi ons. Popeye Doyl ei s abl e to crackadrug
ri ng; Harry Cal l ahantracks down
andki l l s thepsychoti c ki dnapper/ assassi n.
Chance' s acti on, i n contrast,
i s ci rcul ar . At noti me i s he i npossessi onof
anobj ect whosesymbol i c
val ueauthori zes hi mas protector of thesoci al ,
eventhedi si ntegrati ng soci al refl ectedi n
theworl ds of Popeye Doyl eand
Di rty Harry. Thestol en
satchel of cash (stol en, as i t turns out, fromacol -
l eague), ' whi ch
Chance smashes openwi th frustrated abandon, contai ns
nothi ng. The
attempt to trap Masters' ri ng, confusedwi th Chance' s desi re
to
avenge
adeadpartner, resul ts i nChance' s owndeath, the "resurrecti on"
of
Vukovi ch
as Chance' s repl acement, andtherepeti ti on of the same cy-
cl es i nti me. Most i nteresti ng i s thedepi cti on
of
therevengemoti f
andthe
code of mal e camaraderi e andprofessi onal i sm
onwhi chi t depends. To
Li ve andDi ei nL. A. mi ght be cal l ed a"revenge
fi l m" si nce i ts acti onde-
pends on
Chance' s
dri ve
to avenge themurder of hi s partner/ mentor J i m
Hart . Chance' s
rapi d(and easy) transformati oni ntoathi ef andmurderer
(accompani ed
by hysteri a andnear-madness) suggests the pathol ogy un-
der numerous mal e acti on/ adventure genres . Sti l l , theennui that emerges
fromthe
fi l m' s sensethat al l bets areoff (anennui si mi l ar to "Mi ami Vi ce, "
i tsel f
dependent onthe deri vati ve angst el ements of Bl adeRunner and
neo-fi l mnoi r) i s overwhel med by a decorati ve si gni fi cati on.
Theportrayal of thequest i n narrati ve art becomes di ffi cul t (fromthe
standpoi nt of supporti ng recei ved nati ons
of patri archal myth, hi erarchy,
and bourgeoi s order) as texts
exhaust myths by repeti ti on and sel f-
referenti al i ty. Thesel f-destructi ve
enterpri se of "nami ng" myth, as Barthes
andLevi -Strauss have i nformed
us, has destroyedi ts useful ness as asup-
port mechani smfor real i sm,
yet thi s process i s at the heart of much con-
temporary fi l mmaki ng.
Wal ter Hi l l ' s Streets of Fi re (1984) and Cl i nt
Eastwood' s Pal eRi der
(1985), remakes of TheSearchers andShanerespec-
ti vel y, represent anextreme
phaseof narrati onwherei nmyth i s del i ber-
atel y foregrounded, but not for
the purpose of cal l i ng i nto questi on
88
POSTMODERNCINEMA
assumpti ons of domi nant cul ture whi chenf orce myth. Wal ter Hi l l i nvokes
Borges to descri be Streets of Fi re ( subti tl ed "a rock androl l f abl e") as a
"mi ck- epi c. . . about Sol di er Boyrescui ngthe Queeenof theHopf romthe
Leader of the Pack
:
' 26
The si te
of
struggl e wi thi n thi s worki s i ts attempt
tof orman apotheosi s out of postwar popcul ture. Theassumpti oni s
that
rock androl l represents the l ast heroi c art f orm; al thoughtheenterpri se
of
consti tuti ngrock cul ture as f oundi ngmythseemssensi bl e onthe f ace
of i t, the proj ect has al readybeendone bothby
cri ti cs ( the workof Grei l
Marcus27 ) andbyvari ous contemporarystars whoattempt to appropri ate
themythi c aspects of thei r f orebearers ( Bruce Spri ngsteen' samal gamati on
of Dyl an, El vi s, andMotown; Mi chael J ackson' s andPri ce' s al l usi ons to the
Beatl es; Davi dBowi e' s pop- star- as- messi ahconstructi on) . More si gni f i cant
than thef ai l ure of thi s mythi c i nvocati on i s the al l usi on not to the tradi -
ti onal narrati ve of j ourneyandrecovery, but toJ ohnFord' s westerns, wi th
Sol di er Boy( Mi chael Pare) correspondi ngto
Ethan
Edwards,
supporti ng
actors f i l l i ngtheJ ef f rey
Hunter,
Natal i e Wood, and
HenryBrandonrol es
( Wi l l i amDaf oei s Scar as cycl e outl aw- thi s aspect of thecountercul ture
i s portrayedas whol l yvi l l ai nous rather than as the survi vi ngf ree
spi ri t
of the f ronti er commonto 60s mythol ogy) . The most obvi ous compari -
soni s wi thTaxi Dri ver, whi chhas al so beenexami ned
i n
terms of
i ts ref er-
ence to TheSearchers. 2$ Whi l e Taxi Dri ver i nf l ects the mythsof j ourney
andrecovery, comi ngat l ast to ani deol ogi cal stal ement representati ve of
the tense si crcumstances of the mi d- 70s, Streets of Fi re suggests posti n-
dustri al Ameri caas apl ace capabl e of recoupi ngmythal thoughi t i s strate-
gy made emptybyi ts
sel f - consci ousness.
Cl i nt Eastwood' s Pal eRi der, a
scene- by- scene remake of
Shane, i s qui te
probl emati cal as a work
of
the newci nema
of
al l usi on. 29
On
the one
hand,
the attempt
to appropri ate
the
charmandmyths of Stevens'
f i l m
seems bothmercenaryandof a pi ece wi ththe recoupi ngof patri archal
mythi n the Reaganperi od; however, Eastwood' s f i l mat poi nts verges on
progressi ve tendenci es i ndeconstructi ngthegenreandtheactor/ di rector' s
star i mage( a si mi l ar proj ect i s evi dent i n Ri chard' Il i ggl e' s Ti ghtrope( 1984) ,
whi chshowstheEastwood- detecti ve character as pathol ogi cal andal i enat-
ed, anoti ononl ysuggestedi nDi rtyHarry) . InPal eRi der, the Eastwood
character ( the Preacher) i s muchmore overtl yi nvol vedi ni nvoki ngmyth
thanStevens' f i l m, goi ngsof ar as to ref er bothtothenarrati veof thekni ght
errant and, bi bl i cal apocal ypse. Yet the Eastwoodcharacter' s i nf l ati on of
mythi cal attri butes of the hero( compare, f or exampl e, theboul der- smashi ng
sequence [ rather Arthuri an] wi ththe stump- rai si ng scene i n Shane) i s
pecul i arl yof f set byhi s sexual encounter wi thMegan, gi vnghi mthe con-
notati onof f erti l i ty god. If
the
Preacher i s anevocati onof bothChri sti an
andpaganmyths, hi s
symbol i c f uncti onas aradi cal potenti al i tyi nthe com-
muni tyreturns these mythstoaprogressi ve stature. Whi l e the Preacher' s
f i nal showdownwi th Stockburnandhi s deputi es i s depi cted as anepi c
goodvs. evi l conf rontati on, i t i s si gni f i cant that evi l i s si tuated squarel y
89
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
i n thef i gur eof thel awman, andthel awman as def ender
of
i ndustr i al cap-
i tal . Theonl ypr ecedent f or
suchan i deai s the r evi si oni st wester n of the
l ate 60s and
ear l y
70s, suchas TheWi l dBunchandMcCabeandMr s. Mi l l er ;
Eastwoodhas r ar el y been thought to shar ethecompl exsensi bi l i ty of Peck-
i npahandcer tai nl ynot thecounter - cul tur e
atti tude of
Al tman. Thedi ege-
si s suggests that theawar eness
of
themythi c f i gur e
as metaphor
( the r al l yi ng
of the mi ner s) andthe Pr eacher ' s f ar ewel l , whi l er epeati ng the l ast scene
of Shane, f or ces the mythi c content to the l i mi t andcal l s i nto questi on
the val i di ty of the messi ani c f i gur e as pr i memover. Yet wear e l ef t wi th
thef i gur e of Eastwoodandthepr i macyof thestar f i gur e. Thei deol ogi cal
tensi ons i n theconstr ucti on of the pr otagoni st ar e muchmor e sever ei n
Pal eRi der than i n Str eets of Fi r ei n r egar dto associ ati ons wi thgenr econ-
venti ons. Pal eRi der ' s r ef er enti al i ty takes i t
beyond
thesur f ace gl oss and
the emptyi ngout- of - hi stor y wi thi n
Str eets of
Fi r e
.
The
Mad
Max
f i l ms of Austr al i an di r ector Geor geMi l l er ar esomewher e
i n themi ddl eof thi s gr oupi n thei r pasti cheof el ements f r ompostwar mass
cul tur e andthei r attenti on to the f or mati on
of
mythi c consci ousness i n
the age of mass medi a. 3 TheRoadWar r i or ( 1982) andMadMaxBeyond
Thunder dome( 1985) both tr eadaf i ne l i ne between par odi cal comment
on thear chetypal nar r ati veof j our neyandr ecover yandapasti che
whi ch
attempts anewmythout of thewr eckageof popul ar cul tur e. BeyondThun-
der domei s byf ar themost al l usi ve of theMadMaxcycl e( wi thr ef er ences
to Lawr ence of Ar abi a, The Texas Chai nsawMassacr e, Ser gi o Leone' s
wester ns, Lor dof theFl i es, andTVgameshows) suggesti ngthegenr ef i l m' s
i ncr easedconsci ousness
of
i tsel f
as
text
.
Whi l eMadMax
i s por tr ayed
as
the "ti mel ess" her o
i n
themanner of the "wander i ng kni ght, samur ai , or
gunsl i nger , "
3 1
the sel f - consci ousness of thi s enunci ati on di sr upts the sub-
j ect' s cr edi bi l i ty as myth. In BeyondThunder domethe author i ty of the
char i smati c her oi s chal l engedsi nceMaxi s expl i ci tl y apr oduct of pr oj ec-
ti on; the Cr ack i n the Ear th sequence, wher eMaxi s seen as asavi or to
the l ost tr i be of f er al chi l dr en i s ar emar k on the messi ani c i mpul se as a
f undamental l y r egr essi ve andahi stor i cal tendency. By sendi ng up thi s
pr edomi nant mythof the nar r ati ve tr adi ti on the MadMaxf i l ms have an
al l ur i ng andr adi cal cast, but thedanger ous noti on of thepost- nucl ear l and-
scapeas both wastel andandthe newwi l der ness f i l l edwi thpotenti al has
r ever ber ati ons not onl yof El i ot but of the conser vati venar r ati vethef i l ms
seemtopar ody. But hi s f i l mr epr esents thei nexor abl e
tendency
i n popu-
l ar
and
hi ghar t ( thi s di sti ncti on
has di ssol ved) topr esent nar r ati veas sheer
text .
Li ke
f i l ms
suchas TheAdventur es of Buckar oo
Banzai ( 1984), theMad
Maxf i l ms i nvi te us to take pl easur e i n contempl ati ngconventi ons f or thei r
own sake- as af r ee pl ay of si gni f i er s, i f youwi l l - r ecogni zi ng the
ex-
haustednatur eof genr es . Yet, l i ke Bl adeRunner ( 1982), acompar ati vel y
pr ogr essi vewor k, nostal gi af or l ost i nnocencesatur ates theMadMaxf i l ms,
andtheher o, al thoughdepi ctedas af abr i cati on, i s ul ti matel y r estor ed( both
POSTMODERN
CINEMA
The
RoadWarri er andBeyondThunderdomeconcl ude
on
the
i mageof
a sol i tary Max) .
Thi s tensi on i s embl emati c of the struggl e
between
representati on
andpresentati onthat has takenonnewcharacteri sti cs
on
postmoderni sm,
as theboundarybetweenart andl i fe bl urs i nawaycounter
totheutopi an
ambi ti ons of moderni sm. 3 z MadMaxi s expl i ci tl y
apasti che
not for thel egacy
hei nheri ts fromtheheroi c epi c, but for hi s fi gurati on
as end-product of medi acul ture. Thereferences tothetel evi si onwestern,
bi ker
moves, andpunkcul ture removetheseforms fromthe
provi nce of
di screte, i ndi vi dual works or cul tural tendenci es
. Thesynthesi s of these
forms i s
probl emati cal . Whi l ethi s fusi oni ntheMadMaxfi l ms
represents
the
achi evement of asi gni fi cant moderni st
goal (contempl ati onof recei ved
myths as pure narrati ve), the characteri sti c
postmodern attri butes of
cel ebrati ng adi sruptedal phabet, the
hodge-podgeof styl es, genres, and
l anguagesystems, i s equal l y
apparent andi mpl i ci tl yreacti onary. TheMad
Maxfi l ms, morethan
most of thecurrent sci ence-fi cti ongenre, address
themessi ani ci mpul seandthe
arti sti c conventi ons thei mpul sehas gener-
atedi n narrati ve. Oncewepercei ve the
fai l ureof themaster narrati veof
themessi ahandthebankruptcyof i ts conventi ons,
thequesti onremai ns
as to whether anon-mythi c understandi ng
of narrati ve(andhi story) i s
preferabl e; BeyondThunderdome, whi l e
thoroughl ysendi ngup themyth
of the heronowmedi atedbythe
ci nema, suggests that cul tural entrap-
ment bypatri archal myth i s i nevi tabl e
.
TheCul t of the
BodyandtheNewPatri oti sm
The
most representati ve fi l ms of the 1980s
(asi de fromFl ashdance,
Porky' s andcomi ng-of agefi l ms ai medat theadol escent
audi ence or the
spectator-as-adol escent) arethosewhi chattempt
torestore, l i kethepol i ti -
cal cl i matewhi ch
produces them, theful l , unchal l engedauthori ty
of the
chari smati c, patri archal mal e. 3 3 The
oi l ed-muscl eman-wi th-machi ne-gun
genre, wi thi ts wi sh-ful fi l l ment
vi ol ence andrewri ti ngof fai l ed
U. S. ad-
venturi sm, mayappear si mpl yan
outgrowthof 80s reacti onrather than
amani festati onof anythi ngas extraordi nari l y
compl exas postmoderni sm.
Yet
thesefi l ms areas muchof api ecewi ththe
postmoderntemperament
as the
recycl i ngof "Leavei t toBeaver, "
or therestorati onof thefather wi th
afew
concessi ons totheshards of thel i beral
consensus i n "TheCosby
Show. " Thepl ace
of thesefi l ms i nthecurrent di scourse
i s securedbecause
theheronarrati ve
i s strai nednot byacl ever process of deconstructi on
(as i n Beyond
Thunderdome), but bythe
most del i berate, vul gar hyper-
bol ewhi chpushes the
acti onfi l mprotagoni st beyondtheapparent
i deo-
l ogi cal agenda, i ntothereal m
of parodyandpasti che. Themal ei s depi cted
as accompl i shedprofessi onal , soful l y
devel opedmental l yandphysi cal l y
as tosuggest theNew
Manor si mi l ar noti ons associ atedwi th
cl assi cal fas-
ci sm; thei deaof thehero
as di vi nel y-ordai nedemi ssaryfurther
enhances
aki ndof master-racemental i ty
dri vi ngtheful l recuperati on of the
pro-
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
t agoni st i n t he mai nst reamci nema of t hedecade. The
represent at i ve ex-
ampl es here are, of course,
t heSt al l one/ Schwarzenegger cycl es. As
i n t he
earl i er exampl es ci t ed, t hecont radi ct i ons oft enappear
puzzl i ngsi nce, un-
l i ke t heMad
Maxfi l ms, t he i deol ogi cal agenda of t hese
fi l ms does not i n-
vi t e us t o vi ewt hemas
pure di scourse.
Thei deol ogi cal basi s of t he
St al l one/ Schwarzenegger cycl es proceeds
nat ural l y from( a) t henarci ssi smandi nversi onof
t henewcul t of t hebody
( aerobi cs cul t ure, di et i ng, et c. ) as "t he body, beaut y
andsexual i t y are i m-
posedas
newuni versal s i n t hename of t he ri ght s of t he newman,
eman-
ci pat ed by abundance and
t he cybernet i c revol ut i on, "
34
and ( b) t he
at t empt at acl ear demarcat i onof sel f and
ot her whi chret urns t hespect a-
t or t o
t hepri mal myt hs of t heAmeri can ci vi l i zi ng
experi ence ( e. g. , t hei n-
herent
evi l
of
speci fi ed raci al andpol i t i cal mi nori t i es) .
Thi s proj ect i s
undermi ned, part i cul arl y
i n Rambo( 1985) andCommando ( 1985) ,
by con-
t radi ct i ons whi chmust beseen si mpl y as
t heresul t of t heat t empt s act i ve-
l y t o suppress t he past t went y years of
hi st ory, t he l essons of whi chare
becomi ng apparent
i n a peri odof recuperat i on. More i mport ant ,
repet i -
t i ve emphasi s onmachi smo and
pat ri ot i smhas t he effect ( not ed
earl i er)
of
dest royi ngmyt hby successi ve
enunci at i onandt ransformat i on i nt o
nar-
rat i ve. 35 Theprocess i s
evi dent i n t he pi vot al sequence of vi rt ual l y
al l t he
St al l one/ Schwarzenegger fi l ms,
whi ch consi st s of a mont age of t he hero
"sui t i ng up" i n ri t ual i st i c fashi on, t he
camera focusedt i ght l y on sect i ons
of
wel l - oi l ed t orso rapi dl y adornedwi t h kni ves,
bandol i ers of ammuni -
t i on, grenades,
andt hel i ke, cul mi nat i ngi n t hecamera' s
confront at i on wi t h
a ful l fi gure of t he prot agoni st , aki ndof
apot heosi s effect . Thi s t ype of
sequence
has moreaffi ni t i es wi t h a scene i n Dawnof t he
Dead( t he sur-
vi val i st s rai dagun
st ore) t han wi t h Kurosawa' s samurai
fi l ms
or
t hefi nal -
march- t o- t he- showdown
of The Magni fi cent Seven ( 1962) or
The Wi l d
Bunch( 1969) . Si ncet he
St al l one/ Schwarzenegger fi l ms l ack t he consci ous
parody of
George Romero' s zombi e epi c, t he"sui t - up" sequence
ends wi t h
t he Schwarzenegger
charact er' s gl ance at hi msel f i n a ful l - l engt h
mi rror;
t hi s narci ssi smandreduct i on of
t he mal e t o obj ect of t he gaze support
t he sal vi fi c funct i on of t heprot agoni st
andt hepol i t i cs of t heneoconser-
vat i ve ci nema of t he 1980s. It
shoul dbenot edt hat t hemal e- as- obj ect - of-
t he- gaze has appearedearl i er
i n works wheret he mal e fi gure funct i ons
as a t hreat t o t he st at us quo
( cf . Pi cni c, TheFugi t i ve Ki nd) .
The
fi xat i on
on mal ebeaut y was associ at ed
wi t h t he mal e' s i nci pi ent androgyny and
a presence di srupt i ve t o bourgeoi se
moves. Thebeefcake of Rambo, Com-
mando, Cobra ( 1986) , andRawDeal co- opt s
t hat t endency, i nt erpol at i ng
i t i nt o
t he newcul t of t he body andavery
t i reddefi ni t i on of "cool . " Yet
t hi s fet i shi sm
effect i vel y dest roys t hechari smat i caut hori t yof
t hehero ( one
coul d
hardl y i magi ne a "sui t - up" beefcake sequence
i n The Sands of Iwo
J i ma or
Hi gh Si erra) whosest at us dependedon
myt hi cal val ues.
Anext ensi on of t he fet i shi st i c approach t o t he
st ar/ hero i s t hebl urri ng
of t hemal e prot agoni st
i n t he commodi t yl andscape, t he
ci rcumscri pt i on
POSTMODERNCINEMA
of act i onbyt heworl d
of commodi t i es, andt hei ncreasedsenseof t hework
i t sel f
as product .
The
St al l one/ Schwarzenegger fi l ms concent rat e heavi l y
on
new,
st at e- of- t heart weaponryandt ransport at i on( t he press ki t for Cobra
spot l i ght s t he guns andaut os usedbyt he St al l one charact er) . Gi ven t he
cont rol of st udi os byt ransnat i onal
corporat e concerns, fi l ms are vi rt ual
advert i sement s for
consumer capi t al i sm. Rambo, producedbyTri - St ar ( i n-
t erfacedwi t hCoca- Col a) , feat ures Coca- Col aproduct s i n several pri vi l eged
scenes. Cobraadvert i ses Pepsi product s duri ngt hesupermarket shoot - out ,
anda rooft opchasepri vi l eges
l arge, Bl adeRunner- st yl e neonbi l l boards.
Commando
advert i ses a vari et yof sport i nggoods andspeci al i zedweapon-
ry. The st ar qual i t yof St al l one/ Schwarzenegger ( andt he pol i t i cs t heyos-
t ensi bl yrepresent ) runs i nt o confl i ct wi t h t hei r const ruct i on as sal esmen
andul t i mat el yas commodi t i es
. Whi l e t hi s commodi fi cat i onprocess may
beseen as anat ural
devel opment of t hedomi nant i deol ogy, t hei ssue here
i s t he cont radi ct i on wi t hi n t hi s i deol ogy i n t erms of ful fi l l i ng i t s purpose
of
guarant eei ng
t he hegemonyof corporat i sm. Thechari smat i c, aut ono-
mous hero and
t he
myt h
of t he ci vi l i zi ng experi ence andt he bourgeoi s
normal i t y
he represent s are di st urbedas at t ent i ondri ft s t o t hesurface gl oss
of t he i mage, andpart i cul arl y t o t he hero as mass- producedsi mul at i on.
Theprol ogue t o Cobra i s heavi l ydependent
on
MagnumForce
( 1973) ,
yet t heurgencyanddespai r
of t heDi rt yHarryfi l ms i s l ost , si nceas Cobra
suggest s
a
worl d
overcomebybarbari sm, wi t hcri medepi ct edfroma non-
sensi cal perspect i vedi vorci ngi t fromhi st ori cal process or pot ent i al cure.
Mari on Corbet t i ( St al l one) i s not Di rt yHarrysi ncehe i s not a fri nge fi gure
of t he power st ruct ure ( pol i ce work i s fun rat her
t han
al i enat i ng
or
demoral i zi ng, andhe i s t herefore i nt ot het radi t i onal ri ght i st vi gi l ant e)
; t he
past i che el ement
comes l argel yfroman essent i al i gnoranceof genre con-
vent i ons and
t he foregroundi ng andsel f- absorpt i on of t he st ar. Past i che
here i s born not fromparodybut fromHol l ywood' s t endency
t o
repack-
age andhyperbol i ze previ ous i mages.
Thepol i t i cal agendaof t heSt al l one/ Schwarzenegger cycl ei s consi st ent -
l yskewedi n several di rect i ons. TedKot cheff' s Fi rst Bl ood( 1982) , whi ch
i nt roduced St al l one' s enormousl ysuccessful
Rambocharact er, mi ght be
t ermedt he capst one t o t he cycl e
of i ncoherent t ext s of t he 1970s and80s
not edbyRobi n Wood. The
t radi t i onal cul t of i ndi vi dual i smi n t hi s fi l m
i s i nt erwoven wi t ha port rayal of t heexpl osi on
of t he bourgeoi s commu-
ni t yandt he hero' s unwi l l i ngness
t o hal f t he cat ast rophe. Theprogeni t or
of t hi s t endencyi s probabl y
The Chase( 1965) ,
3
but a more i mmedi at e i n-
fl uence
on
Fi rst Bl ood
i s Rol l i ng Thunder, wi t h i t s sense of t he warri or
ret urni ngt oacorrupt Ameri caagai nst whi chhemust usehi s mi l i t aryski l l s.
Fi rst Bl ood' s st ep beyondRol l i ng Thunder
i s i t s depi ct i on of t he t own
sheri ff as symbol of i deol ogi cal cont radi ct i on. Sheri ff
Teasl e' s poi nt l ess war
agai nst ret urni ngvet eran
J ohnRambosuggest s soci et y' s wi sht o di vest i t -
sel f of al l responsi bi l i t y i n t he
Vi et namWar. Whi l e t he fi l mexpl oi t s t he
i mageof t hevet eran
as psychot i c ki l l i ngmachi ne, Fi rst Bl oodi s not ewor-
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
thyi n depi cti ngthe f ul l f orce of theveteran' s
rage di rected at thecommu-
ni ty.
Theti de of rage i s stemmedat the concl usi on by the recuperati on
of the mi l i tary' s i magei n
the
person of
Col onel Trautman, who, al though
an al most ri si bl e Dr. Frankenstei n ( " I created
hi m" ) i s a f ocus of sympathy
as he emerges as
Rambo' s f ather-f i gure andtherapi st . The
credi bi l i ty of
the mi l i tary37 andsoci al
normal i tyare restoredbyTrautman' s
medi ati on;
Rambo' s l ast outburst of
anger
i s
di rectedat " those maggots at theai rport"
and
the protest movement of the si xti es. Al though
the bul k of the f i l m
portrays theveteran as vi cti mandas countercul ture
f i gure, the characteri -
zati on i s
del i beratel y cut i n hal f andmoti vati ons abruptl y
reversed. The
i mpetus i s theexpl oi tati on of rage and
cyni ci smi n thepost-Watergateperi od
si mul taneous wi th recogni ti on of
the newti de of reacti on.
Rambo:
Fi rst Bl ood Part II i s a more f orcef ul
recuperati on of the
domi nant i deol ogy
andAmeri can myth, but wi thcontradi cti ons
remai n-
i ng concerni ng the constructi on of
theprotagoni st . 38 Thef i l m' s
ahi stori -
cal
depi cti on of the Vi etnamWar andthe
attempt to drawthe audi ence
i nto the
f antasy
of
Rambo' s revengeas apaybackf or l ost
honor ( " thi s ti me
he' s f i ghti ng
f or al l
of
us" ) aresecondaryto the recreati on of
mythi c l and-
scape. Rambo, wearetol d, i s part Ameri can
Indi an ( nobl e savage whose
magi c andsurvi val i st
i nsti ncts have been appropri ated), part
German ( i deal
di sci pl i nedwarri or romanti ci zed,
not i roni cal l y, bypostwar Ameri canci ne-
ma). Themyth of j ourney and
recovery i s enhanced by the other ( Vi et-
namese, Russi ans) recogni zabl e by
raci al characteri sti cs rather thanpol i ti cal
convi cti ons. Theovertl ypropagandi sti c
tone of the f i l mi s di sruptednot
onl ybythe
trotti ng-out of somevery raggedmyths, but bythe
i l l -def i ned
senseof Rambo' s symbol i c ori gi ns, the " sender"
( i n Grei mas' s term) sup-
pl yi ng the hero' s narrati ve val ue. It can be
arguedthat Ramboi n the end
restores
truthi n thesel f , wi ththe hero cast
adri f t i n thetradi ti onof f ronti -
er i ndi vi dual i sm. But Rambo' s
threat to the CIAbureaucrat Murdock
and
thef renzi edassaul t on the
computer bankrepresents not so
muchri ghti st
i ndi vi dual i smbut the
anxi ety
of
the depol i ti ci zedprol etari at
andmi ddl e
cl ass. Thef rustrati on andschi zoi d
pol i ti cal vi si on of these cl asses i n
the
wake
of
Vi etnamandWatergateareef f ecti vel ymarshal l edby
thef i l m. There
i s
l i ttl e questi on that thechauvi ni smpl anted
i n thenarrati veandthef i l m' s
adverti si ng
( " thef i l mthat has al l Ameri ca
cheeri ng" ) havebeen success-
f ul , both
i n terms of the f i l m' s box-of f i ce prof i ts
andi ts advancement of
f al se
consci ousness. Yet Rambo' s reacti onary
proj ect i s i nf ormed by the
same
contradi cti ns as themaj ori ty of f i l ms of the
peri od, wi ththei nterne-
ci ne
conf l i cts of the domi nant order l eavi ng the sel f
di recti onl ess.
Si mi l arl y,
the f i l ms f eaturi ngf ormer body-bui l di ng
star Arnol dSchwar-
zenegger are i nvol ved,
throughthei r texts' conf l i cts, i n the
erasureof the
hero at the same
ti me that they assert a parti cul ar vi si on of
themonadi c
sel f to bol ster
patri archy and" tradi ti onal val ues. " The
pol i ti cs of a f i l msuch
as Commando, a
shamel ess expl oi tati on of theRambo
phenomenon, are
pol ygl ot and
syntheti c i n a waywhi chdepends on the utter
nai vete and
94
POSTMODERNCINEMA
depol i t i ci zat i on of t he audi ence. In t hi s
f i l mCol . J ohn Mat ri x (Schwarzeneg-
ger) i s f orced by Lat i no t hugs
t o rescue a ri ght - wi ngLat i n- Ameri can di ct a-
t or t he CIAapparent l y
deposed; t he i mpul se here i s t he revi si on of t he
CIAs
i mage f romt hat i n Three Days of t he Condor (a post - Wat ergat e f i l m)
andt he val ori zat i on of mi l i t ary vi rt ues
as Mat ri x undert akes an i mpossi bl e
one- mancourse of act i on si mi l ar
t o Rambo' s. More cent ral t o t he Schwar-
zenegger f i l ms,
however, i s t he sense of prot agoni st as obj ect . Al t hough
Schwarzenegger' s at t empt s at humor t end t o send up hi s
charact er, t he goal
of Commando andRawDeal (and,
evenmore si gni f i cant l y, TheTermi na-
t or) i s t he ut t er reduct i on
of
t he
subj ect t o t he commodi t yst at us al l uded
t o earl i er. Thecarel ess
amal gamat i on of genres ; t he f et i shi zi ng of speci al -
i zed weaponry, t echnol ogy, andconsumer product s ; t he
i ncursi on of rock
vi deo st yl i st i cs ; t he erosi on
of aut horshi p Hol l ywoodcheri shedi n t he wake
of aut euri sm(RawDeal ' s
soundt rack i s by Fi l mscore, a corporat e ent i t y
usi ngcomput eri zed
synt hesi zers t o creat e musi cal scores
on cont ract ) de-
bunk t he hero' s rol e as purveyor
of myt h, part i cul arl y i f we accept t he
Bart hesi an not i on
of i deol ogy' s dependence on t he unconsci ous
f usi on
of nat ure and
cul t ure i n t he creat i on of myt h. The repet i t i on
of a vari et y
of preval ent i mages f romt he medi a l andscape commodi f i es
even t he f i c-
t i ve act , removi ngi t f roma ref erent i al i n t he
myt hi c di mensi on
.
Thet en-
denci es coal esce i n J ames
Cameron' s The Termi nat or (1984) , whi ch
f oregrounds t he i nevi t abi l i t y
of apocal ypse seen i n t he Mad Max f i l ms,
wi t hout
t hose works' sense of ref l exi vi t y. The aggressi ve ni hi l i sm
of t hi s
f i l mrej ect s t he
assert i on of Bl ade Runner (1982) andRobocop
(1987) t hat
t he human
soul wi l l survi ve i t s i ncorporat i on i nt o
t he cybernet i c t echnol -
ogyof post i ndust ri al i sm. The ki l l er- robot prot agoni st
(Schwarzenegger)
si gni f i es more part i cul arl y t he co- opt at i on
of punk/newwave cul t ure i nt o
t he
domi nant t endencyof rei f i ed al i enat i on; punk
i s depi ct edas essent i al -
l y ni hi l i st i c andsel f - dest ruct i ve
rat her t han genui nel y adversari al , and
i s
st rongl y
associ at ed here wi t h t he body f et i shi sm
of t he rest of t he St al -
l one/Schwarzenegger cycl e.
Thecul t of vi ol ence, narci ssi sm, and
chauvi ni smci rcul at i ng aroundRam-
bo, Commando, Cobra,
Predat or, et al ; on t he f ace of i t represent s a regres-
si ve cul t ural t endency,
part i cul arl y i n t he rest orat i on of phal l ocent ri sm
and
t he chari smat i c mal e
aut hori t yf i gure. As i n t he ot her
works, t he si gni f i ca-
t i on here i s i ncreasi ngl y
empt i ed of meani ng. Theexpl oi t s
of t el evi si on' s
Worl dWrest l i ng
Federat i onexempl i f i es onasi ml ar
scal e t he same t enden-
ci es and cont radi ct i ons
: sport and ent ert ai nment , pol i t i cs
and spect acl e
bl ur
t o
apoi nt
t hat credi bi l i t y i n t he f orm' s
i deol ogy det eri orat es . Thel um-
peni zed
el ement s ori gi nal l y const i t ut i ng t he
wrest l i ngaudi ence have reced-
ed
somewhat t o i ncl ude t he mi ddl e
cl ass as t he ri ght i st and vi gi l ant e
i deol ogy (t he st at e
[ ref eree] i s never t rust wort hy)
t el evi si on wrest l i ngcapi t al -
i zes on i n t he Reagan peri od
becomes t he underpi nni ng
of
t he f orm.
The
i nt erchangeabi l i t y of good
guyand bad guy, t he scrappi ng
of
rul es, t he
commodi f i cat i on of superst ars
serve, l i ke Rambo, t o demonst rat e t he
des-
CHRISTOPHER
SHARRETT
tructi onof areferenti al base i n the mi dst
of a
negati ve
pol i ti cal educati on.
Whi l e such phenomenaexpl oi t reacti on,
they al so ul ti matel y cal l i nto ques-
ti on theassumpti ons
underneath l arger, "l egi ti mate" entertai nments ( i n thi s
case sports overal l ) and thei r rol e i n perpetuati ng fal se consci ousness.
The Decentered Subj ect andthe NewPop Underground
Anunusual feature of the ci nema
of
the l ate 1960s- earl y
70s
was the un-
dergroundcul t fi l m, or mi dni ght
movi e, probabl y i nauguratedwi th the
l ong run of Al ej andro
J odorowsky' s El Topo ( 1971) at NewYork' s now
defunct El gi n
Ci nema. Avari ety of fi l ms, fromavant- garde cl assi cs ( Un
Cbi enAndal ou) to provocati ve, obscure works of the Thi rdWorl dci ne-
ma( Antoni o dasMortes, Vi va l aMuerte) became part of aconcel ebrati on
at the wi tchi nghour. Thegesture i nvol vedthe creati on of anavant- garde
ci nemaappeal i ngto upper mi ddl e- cl ass urbanandsuburban youthwhose
tastes ran i ncreasi ngl y towardshockeffects rather than the experi ments
of, say, the NewAmeri can Ci nema. The
market
for
the
mi dni ght movi e
has remai nedconstant, al though fare avai l abl e
for thi s audi ence has
changed
i n i ts confi gurati on. Whi l e certai n fi l ms seemexpl i ci tl y desi gnedfor cul t
status for arel ati vel y l arge urbanaudi ence ( Subway, RepoMan, Li qui dSky,
Eraserbead) , theaters
are
fi ndi ng
that a number of mai nstreamfi l ms fi l l
the mi dni ght sl ot very wel l ( Apocal ypse Now, ACl ockworkOrange, The
Texas Cbai nsawMassacre) . What i s most compel l i ngi s the eventual reach
of the cul t fi l m, wi thRepoMan, Li qui dSky, andothers attracti ng al arge
suburbanaudi ence parti cul arl y as they appear on vi deotape. The emer-
gence of the cul t fi l m,
39
eventual l y i ncorporati ng tacky Russ Meyer and
EdwardWoodschl ock, suggests not thebi rthof ani mprovi shedor ready-
made
avantgarde ci nema
whi ch
woul dbe
the
provi nce of
radi cal youth,
but
an
attenti on
to
ci nema for
parti cul ar aspects of i ts spectacl e and
ul ti -
matel y, i n the terms of postmodern theory, i ts l oss
of
affect .
Whi l e such fi l ms as George Romero' s zombi e tri l ogy ( Ni ght of the Li v-
i ngDead, et al . ) contai nthe apocal ypti c vi si on attracti ve to the mi d- ni ght
commune of the 80s audi ence, the punk/newwave trends of the l ate 70s
i ntroduced
astyl e
that
woul druncounter to the ni hi l i sm
andrage
of
the
post- Watergate horror, sci - fi ,
and
war fi l ms, andcertai nl y agai nst the quasi -
mysti cal esoteri ca
of
some of the Thi rdWorl dci nema. Fi l ms suchas Li -
qui dSky ( 1983) andRepoMan( 1984) seemal most
to
have usedJ ameson
as abl uepri nt i n defi ni ng acel ebrati onof al i enati on, or, rather, i n defi ni ng
boredomandi nsenti ence as states of consci ousness repl aci ngal i enati on' s
i mpl i edprotest of i ndustri al soci ety. J ameson' s comment on the passi ng
of the Edi e Sedgewi ckburn- out case as paradi gmof l ate moderni st angst
i s real i zed i n Li qui d Sky' s vi si on of the Warhol scene_ ( especi al l y
Anne
Carl yl e' s "Mayfl ower stock"
monol ogue
as
she masks hersel f i n fl uores-
cent make- up) . Thetwi ns portrayedby Anne Carl yl e depi ct not the l i ber-
ati on of androgyny but bl ank i nversi on, narci ssi m, masochi sm.
POSTMODERNCINEMA
Schi zophreni awi thout anysense
of cri si s i s representedi nthemonotone
of the di al ogue( "got anydrugs?") ; the
transcendenceprevi ousl yascri bed
to the drugexperi ence
i s di ssol vedi ntheemptysci ence- f i cti ondevi ceof
theal i ensaucer, ani deaused al so i nAl ex Cox' s RepoManto suggest the
wastedef f ort of narrati vecl osureandthesi l l i ness
of
thegenref i l m' s
utopi -
ani sm. Luc Besson' s Subway( 1985)
makes use of aStar Wars i magetoef -
f ect a si mi l ar comment
on
the
empti ness of genres and the soci al
assumpti ons supporti ng
arti sti c conventi on.
Among
the more popul ar of the newcul t f i l ms, Repo Mancontai ns a
renderi ng
of thesubj ect i nf l uencedstrongl ybypunk/newwave, acul tural
tendency whose"cool ness" has caused i t to be seen as synonymous i n
manyrespects wi ththe
spi ri t of thepostmodern
. The
"beyondal i enati on"
atti tude
andni hi l i smof muchpunk/newwave have madei t avai l abl e f or
absorpti onbymedi a( as i s apparent i nthe case
of
The
Termi nator) ; as co-
optati onproceeds, the
tendencyconti nues to exampl i f ythecontradi cti ons
of postmoderni sm. RepoMan' s portrayal of punkcul ture
i s heavi l yi nter-
wovenwi thaparody
of
Ameri can
hi storyas medi atedthroughf i l mgenres.
Otto, the young
grocerycl erk- turned- repossessi on- man, f i nds hi msel f on
acontemporary
adventureof j ourneyandrecovery i nthe Southwestern
wastel and, except that the Grai l turns out to bemarti an- control l ed
sedan
l oadedwi thradi oacti vemateri al , andEl
Doradoi s thegri mi er, chi ntzysec-
ti ons of LosAngel es. Bud,
Otto' s repomentor, f i l l s theol dman/youngaco-
l yte construct
of countl ess westerns, parti cul arl y as pl ayedbyHarryDean
Stanton. Stanton' s presence
as ki ndof deraci nated, Beckett- l i ke f ronti ers-
man
of l atter- day genre f i l ms i s noti ceabl e, especi al l y
wi thhi s perf ormance
i nWenders' Pari s, Texas) . Ottoi s portrayed
byEmi l i oEstevez, whoseob-
vi ous physi cal resembl ance
to
hi s
f ather Marti n Sheen has resonances;
Sheen' s ownpl acei nAmeri canf i l m
was establ i shedwi thApocal ypseNow,
that epi c of thef ai l ure
of
the
Grai l narrati veandtheenti retyof Ameri can
myth.
RepoMani s not, however,
concernedwi thaf urther attack onthe con-
sumer wastel andandthe
demi seof theAmeri candream. Instead, thef i l m
uses the sarcasm
of punk/newwavetodemonstratethe di sappearance
of
the
demarcati onl i ne betweenadversari al and
mai nstreamcul ture. Otto' s
punkhai rcut i s appropri ate to hi s j obas grocerycl erk
andto hi s ni ght l i f e
as
sl am- danci ng punker. Otto' s partner at the grocery
store si ngs a 7- UP
j i ngl e, i nterchangeabl ewi throck
androl l , whi chi s depi ctedas absol utel y
co- optedandcommodi f i ed. Thef i l m' s
onemoment of angui shi s Ottoal one
i n the ni ght si ngi ng a modi f i ed versi on
of a TVtheme song about ki ds'
"dedi cati on to [ our] f avori te
shows" ( "The J ef f ersons! Saturday Ni ght
Li ve! . . . ") Otto' s gestures
of def i ance at the f ami l y andmedi a
cul ture
( he
makes sarcasti c cracks as hi s
stoned- out parentswatchaTVevangel i st) and
at
organi zedrel i gi on ( hecasual l y tosses apl asti c Vi rgi n
Maryout of arepos-
sessedcar)
are subsumedunder thel arger i deathat
Ottoj oi ns "theteam"
( the repo men) .
Thej ab at careeri smandcorporate cul ture
( wi ves auto
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
mat i cal l y become"repowi ves") i s
undermi nedby Ot t o' s ownacqui escence,
by
hi s randomassaul t s ont hepropert y of t hepoor
si mul t aneous wi t h hi s
pranks at
t herepoheadquart ers or repossessi on of a t hug' s
Chrysl er. Ot -
t o' s shi ft fromsub-cul t uret o t hearrogant ,
depol i t i ci zedpet i t -bourgeoi se
does not pl ace
hi mi n t heposi t i onof t heact ed-uponcomedi c
subj ect of
absurdi smevenas di egesi s
const ant l y t ends t owardt heabsurd
wi t h causal -
i t y
at t acked. Ot t o' s movement s areessent i al l y
hi s own; hei s soul l ess and
ut t erl y adapt abl e, abl et oi ncorporat e
hi s anger ( l argel y ai medat
t hesel f)
i nt o
survi val i sm. Thefaci l esci -fi comedy t hat gi ves
t hefi l mi t s del i berat e-
l y fakedenouement
has not hi ng t o dowi t h Ot t o, si nceOt t o
as cent ered
subj ect has l i t t l e t o do
wi t h t hefi l m.
Subway, l i keJ eanJ acques Bei nei z' s
Di va andTheMooni nt he
Gut t er,
mi ght bet ermeda
Europeanequi val ent of ToLi veandDi e
i n L. A. and
si mi l ar "rockvi deofi l ms" ; t he
mani cpaceof t heAmeri canfi l ms
i s mi t i gat ed
somewhat , but
t heassaul t onrecei ved wi sdom
( t heuseof Shakespeare,
Sart re,
Ari st ot l e, andFrankSi nat ra i nt heepi graph),
t heemphasi s ongl oss,
andt hepri macy gi vent o
t hesenseof t hefi l mas aggregat eof
shot s make
t he
correspondencenot i ceabl e. InSubway, a
youngconart i st ( Chri st opher
Lambert )
fl ees i n a t uxedofrompol i ceand
former prey t o t akerefugei n
t hemet ro. Hequi ckl y i nt egrat es i nt o
t hebi zarreundergroundci t y
l i fe( i n-
cl udi ng a
rol l erskat i ng bandi t , a superhuman
st rongman), resumes arel a-
t i onshi p
wi t hhi s haut emondegi rl fri end, and,
for unspeci fi edreason, forms
a rockband. The
band' s reggae-l i kesong "It ' s
Onl y Myst ery" forms aset -
pi eceof t he fi l m( t he
song' s openi ng l yri c queri es,
"Why dowegoon
wat chi ng t hi s fucki ng TV? We' reso
bored, wedon' t evencare
what we
see") . The
t radi t i onof t heal i enat edcri mi nal / dandy
of t hepost war French
ci nema
( t heNewWavebut part i cul arl y J ean-Pi erre
Mel vi l l e) i s t heback-
dropfor t hi s
exerci se, much as t hecri mefi l ms of
DonSi egel arefor To
Li veandDi ei nL. A. and
Cobra. TheLambert charact er' s
part i cul arl y
French anomi ebecomes
soexaggerat edt hat hedi ssol ves
i nt ot henarra-
t i ve, t oberecuperat ed
mocki ngl y i nt hefi nal frame;
t hegest urei s si mi l ar
t oRi chardChance' s ( To
Li veandDi ei n L. A. ) recuperat i on
aft er t hehys-
t eri cal amoral i t y ext endi ng
Di rt y Harry' s senseof a copas
di saffect edout -
si der. InToLi veandDi ei n
L. A. , however, t heprot agoni st
has somedi rect ,
l ogi cal l i nks t o a generi c t radi t i on
whi ch al l ows, at l east
for a t i me, for a
senseof
monadi c sel f . InSubway
t heProt agoni st i s conman,
roue, bum,
ent repreneur, hi pst er, fi nal l y nooneat
al l , aci pher seenas sumof
generi c
convent i ons.
Bei nei x' s TheMooni nt heGut t er
( 1983) shares wi t h Subway
t hepreoc-
cupat i on
of French post modernci nema
wi t h al l usi ont oci nemat i c
st yl es,
even
speci fi c i mages fromearl i er fi l ms, t o
a poi nt wherei nt erest
i n t he
prot agoni st ' s
fat ei s subj ugat ed. Where
Subway' s poi nt of reference
i s t he
cri me
fi l mandsomeel ement s of t he
fant ast i que, TheMooni nt he
Gut t er
refers t o, amongot hers, Van
St ernberg andt hefi l madapt at i ons
of Tennes-
see
Wi l l i ams' s pl ays. Li ke Lambert ,
t he Gerard Depardi eucharact er of
POSTMODERNCINEMA
Bei nei x' s f i l mi s avaguel y resonant i con of ci nema' s past ; even thef i l m' s
tempestuous emoti ons andsexual dynami cs are renderedas devi ces by
thei r bol del aborati on ( In one shot of
the f i l m, the camera pans up very
sl owl y f romDepardi eu' s f eet to hi s head, l ovi ngl y
reveal i ng the i sol ated,
f orl ornmal e f i gure muchi n thewayBrandoandhi s progeny were used
by a generati on of
f i l mmakers)
.
Thel oss of af f ect andpreoccupati on wi th al l usi oni smare
i ncreasi ngl y
components of "mai nstream" cul t f i l ms such as Ni chol as Roeg' s Insi g-
ni f i cance( 1985)
.
Therel evant f eature of Roeg' s f i l mi s that, l i ke the novel s
of
E. L . Doctorow, i t addresses the noti on
of
the di sappearance of "real
hi story"
4
as hi story becomes pop narrati ve, conf i ned anddi stortedby
medi ati on. Insi gni f i cance ( i n the l ogo, "si gn" i s wri tteni n bol df ace) may
be the
f i rst sel f - consci ous gesture
of
the ci nemai n demonstrati ngf or the
mass audi ence the di srupti on of
si gni f i cati on
by
turni ngi nto f ree pl ay a
wel l - organi zedf orm( the hi story pl ay) that deal s wi thaspeci f i c peri odof
the Ameri can past andthe "meeti ng"
of
hi stori cal personages. In thef i l m
Mari l ynMonroe, Ei nstei n, J oe
McCarthy/ Roy
Cohn,
andJ oe
Di Maggi omeet
i n an i magi nary 50s whi chi s si mul taneousl y al andscape of
the
i magi na-
ti on wherepast, present, andf uture mergeas creati on stands at the bri nk
of apocal ypse. Thei dea of hi stori cal f i gures meeti ngi n the ante- chamber
of hel l has roots i n tradi ti on, but i ts postmodern mani f estati oni n the pl ays
of TomStoppardandSamShepard, andthe f i l ms of HansJ urgen Syber-
berg suggests hi stori cal f i gures as proj ecti ons, andthe i mpossi bi l i ty of
l earni ngf romhi story. For somearti sts ( Syberberg) hi story has si mpl y been
anni hi l ated; f or others ( Doctorow) aconcernf or soci al progress has evapo-
rated. Theki ndof anxi etyi n bothof these modes i s sharedsomewhat by
Insi gni f i cance, whi chreverses the patri archal noti on advancedbyHol l y-
woodthat the i ndi vi dual shapes hi story. TheGreat Manconcept i s repl aced
here not bythei dea of the i ndi vi dual as product of hi stori cal f orces, but
bythei dea of the exi stence of thepast onl yas medi aappari ti on. Thedi s-
course here i s nei ther grandnor abstract ( the f i l mi s mi nus, f or exampl e,
the epi c sexual encounter of Bi l l y the Ki dandJ ean Harl owof Mi chael
McCl ure' s Star) ; the pol i ti cal resonances
of
McCarthy/ Cohn' s
brutal assaul t
on the Monroe f i gure are di l utedas the characters are returned
to
a
pop
i magi nary. Ei nstei n' s recri mi nati ons ( "I di dn' t choose Ameri ca. I don' t care")
don' t consti tute a radi cal depi cti on of what aprogressi ve consci ousness
mi ght have thought ( thi s woul dmovethe f i l mtoocl ose to tragedy) ; rather,
they rei nf orce the character as a subj ect of col l ecti ve f asci nati on, a "f a-
mous" personwhosepecul i ari ti es as wel l as convi cti ons have beenampl i -
f i edbymedi acul ture unti l thef i gure becomes a si mul ati on. The l egends
surroundi ng Ei nstei n become equal
to
Monroe' s Seven Year Itch pose,
McCarthy/ Cohn' s unctuous, bel l i gerent manner, Di Maggi o' s swagger. Per-
sonal styl e supercedes the hi stori cal moment : McCarthyi smonl yvaguel y
encompasses the Monroe cal endar photograph andEi nstei n' s absent-
mi ndedness as the hi stori cal ref erenti al i s tri vi al i zed. The i ronyof the ap-
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
proachof Insi gni f i cance t o t he hi st ori cal personagei s t hat whi l et hef i l m
overt urns Hol l ywood' s depi ct i on
of
t he i ndi vi dual
as
pri me mover
( t he
mai n
t hrust of t heepi c andsi mi l ar genres) , i t s poi nt i s t he i mpossi bi l i t y
of apprehensi on. The t rashi ng of t radi t i onal represent at i onal narrat i ve
st rat egi es, ul t i mat el yadvanci ng
t hedi sappearanceof t heprot agoni st , i s
i ron-
i cal l y key
t o
t he
emergence
i n
art of adepol i t i ci zed, ahi st ori cal consci ous-
ness t hat can be seen as a cul mi nat i on t o t he bourgeoi s worl d- vi ew.
That t he cul t or "l i mi t ed audi ence" f i l mshoul dbecome cent ral t o an
underst andi ng of bourgeoi s
i deol ogi cal dri f t i n t he 1980s i s ref l ect ed
i n
Davi d
Byrne' s TrueSt ori es andDavi dLynch' sBl ueVel vet ( bot h1986) . Whi l e
bot hf i l ms are ai medat t heurban"up- scal e" audi ence, t heyhaverecei ved
t he ki ndof not ori et y associ at ed wi t h i mage prol i f erat i on i n t he current
cul t ure
i ndust ry,
andmorepart i cul arl ywi t ht hei ncreasedt ast e f or t heout re
whi chhas madet hel ower budget cul t f i l m, previ ousl yat t he f i ri ng of i n-
dust ryeconomi cal l yandi deol ogi cal l y, t het ouchst one f or t hepol i t i cal t em-
per of post moderni sm. Theprot agoni st ' s posi t i on i s i mport ant t o bot hf i l ms
as an
i ndi cat or
of t hereact i onaryandprogressi vepol es of t he
newst yl e
.
In rockst ar Byrne' s TrueSt ori es t heprot agoni st / narrat or i s act ual l y a
t radi -
t i onal aut hori al rai sonneur andameans bywhi chByrne ( "rock' s renai s-
sanceman" accordi ngt o Ti memagazi ne) canbeshowcasedas geni us and
as chroni cl er of t henewsi t uat i on. Assembl i ng( st eal i ng?) numerous narra-
t i ve devi ces f romsources rangi ngf romFel l i ni t oSyberberg, Byrneassumes
a di si ngenuous, af f ect ed rol e of di si nt erest ed racont eur of l at e capi t al i st
Ki t sch andal i enat i on as he t akes t he audi ence t o a bi cent enni al cel ebra-
t i on i n
asuburbanTexas t own
.
Byrne' s deadpanst rol l t hroughst aged
vi g-
net t es ( a womanwhol i ves i n bed, acoupl ewhocommuni cat eonl yt hrough
t hei r chi l dren, a grot esqueRoma- st yl ef ashi on showi n ashoppi ngmal l )
has t he ef f ect of i nt roduci ng t o t he mass audi ence t he cool di st ance as-
soci at ed wi t h Warhol , al ong wi t h al i enat i onas- st at e- of - bei ng cent ral t o
Warhol ' s at t i t ude. Thef orceof Warhol ' s f i l ms andpai nt i ngs came, however,
f rom
anawareness of t he
horrors
of al i enat i onbasi c t o
moderni sm. Warhol ' s
cel ebri t yport rai t s andhi sDeat handDi sast er seri es,
whi l eawareof t hei r
posi t i on as si mul acra, hadenoughbeari ngont hereal t o est abl i shagenui ne
moral f orce. Warhol t he st rol l er was al ways cl ose t o t he di ssi pat ed
ni net eent h- cent ury habi t ueof sal onandst reet , nowhi di nghi si l l ness and
t orpor behi ndsungl asses. Byrne, on t he ot her hand, of f ers what canbe
seendramat i cal l yas st rai ght f orward( andnot t ooi nsi ght f ul ) parody, whi l e
si mul t aneousl ysuggest i ng goodheal t h i n hi msel f andsoci et y. Past i che i s
compl et ei n
True
St ori es si ncet hef i l m, i n t ryi ng
t o
remove i t sel f f romany
i deol ogi cal proj ect , l acks amoral cent er. We must modi f y t hi s, however,
si ncet he
f i l m
hasno
cont rol l i ng
aest het i c.
Whi l e
parodyi s
present , i t does
not havean educat i ve, cri t i cal f unct i on; rat her, i t evokes a sni del aught er
f romt he upwardl y- mobi l e urban bourgeoi si e at l umpen bourgeoi s el e-
ment s. At t he same t i me t he f i l mi s sewn t oget her wi t hrock vi deos and
el egant , campyst i l l - l i f e ( deri vedf romt hest yl e of Wi l l i amEggl est on)
whi ch
100
POSTMODERNCINEMA
t hi s same
audi ence consumes as post moderni sm' s
aggrandi zement and
commodi fi cat i onof t hebanal accel erat es .
Davi d
Lynch' s Bl ue Vel vet makes useof
post moderni sm' s ret romode
t o suggest
rat her fort hri ght l y t heundersi deof
bourgeoi s cul t ure. Unl i ke
RueSt ori es, whi ch al so associ at es t he 1980s
wi t h t he 50s, Bl ueVel vet ' s
i mages formaconj unct i onof t hepsychol ogi cal and
t hepol i t i cal t oeffec-
t uat e
cri t i ci smami dst avery di sj unct narrat i ve. Theprot agoni st
J effrey ( Kyl e
MacLachl an), anot her
st rol l i ngschi zo, wanders from"Leave
i t t oBeaver' s"
suburbi ai nt o a
hel l i sh across- t he- t racks met onymfor t he Id.
Whi l et he
MacGuffi nfor t hi s j ourneyi s
J effrey' s "needt oknowmore" about apos-
si bl emurder pl ot , t heneedi s
l i nkedt oawi sh t oobl i t erat et he
fat her, be-
gi nni ngwi t h t he
openi ngi mage
of
t hefat her' s st rokeont heoversat urat ed
greenof J effrey' s
front l awn( fol l owedbyt hemacrozoomi nt o t het urbu-
l ent unconsci ous of t he
eart h), endi ngwi t h t hefal l of Frank( Denni s Hop-
per), t het erri bl efat her who
cari cat ures t heheadof t hepri mal horde.
The
i mpot enceand
i mpendi ngfal l of t hi s fat her i s suggest edby hi s "l oss of
breat h"
( hi s i nhal i ngfromapl ast i c oxygen mask) and
hi s perversi on of
t he
pri mal scenewhi ch t he"chi l d, " J effrey, wi t nesses.
Thearri val of ut o-
pi a, st i l l suburban 50s but pri mari l y mat ri archal , i s
subvert edby t heap-
pearanceof art i fi ci al robi ns whi ch ful fi l l , i navery
present at i onal manner,
t hewi sh- dreamof J effrey' s gi rl fri end. Bl ueVel vet , wi t h i t s useof
t heret ro-
modet osuggest t hefool i shness of pat ri archy,
si gni fi es t heprogressi vet en-
denci es surfaci ngi n t hefri ngeci nema;
RueSt ori es, ont heot her hand,
evi dences t hechi c react i onof
t he80s as i t sat i ri zes al i enat i onwhi l erefus-
i ngt oadmi t t o an i deol ogi cal
agenda,
or
acri t i cal proj ect of any sort .
Concl usi on
Aconcernof t hi s paper has beent hecharact eri st i cs of post modern
cul -
t ureas much as t herepresent at i onof acert ai n
facet i nt heci nema. Obvi -
ousl yt hedebat eover post moderni sm, al t hough
al readyt reat edwi t h aki nd
of col l ect i ve yawnas t heaucourant t opi c of academe,
i s vi t al t oan un-
derst andi ngof t hecurrent pol i t i cal / economi c si t uat i on
i nt ernat i onal l y. J ame-
sonandot hers ( part i cul arl y t hegroupassoci at ed
wi t h t heNewLeft Revi ew)
areconvi ncedat t hi s poi nt of post moderni sm
as an i ndexof t hedynam-
i cs of l at e capi t al i sm
; t henot i on of t hesi t e of st ruggl e previ ousl y men-
t i onedmayi ndi cat e
somet hi ngfar moreseverei n t erms of t hei mpossi bi l i t y
of bourgeoi s myt hs as t hey are
medi at ed
by
art , evenas i mageproducers
at t empt t o resurrect
and
prop
up t hesemyt hs wi t h avengeanceduri ng
aperi odof
react i onandrecuperat i on. Thedeat h of t heheroandt hecom-
i ngapart
of
t heact ant i al model i n bourgeoi s narrat i veart must suggest
t ous t hebankrupt cyof pat ri archy andi t s abi l i t y t ot ransmi t symbol i c
val ues .
Whet her i t i s t heabsurdcont radi ct i ons and
worn- out si gni fyi ngmet hods
of Rambo, or t het endency of
St reet s of Fi re andMadMaxt o t reat con-
vent i ons
andt hemyt hs generat i ngt hemas puret ext , i t i s cl ear t hat acri -
CHRISTOPHERSHARRETT
si s poi nt i s approachi ng. It woul dbef ool i sh
andpreci pi tous to take heart
i nthi s as wef aceaperi odof great
i ntel l ectual i mpoveri shment i ntheci ne-
ma, but theevi dencei s
suchthat the postmodern styl e, i n f ormandel se-
where, i s aprel ude
to anon- mythi c consci ousness of art andhi story.
Notes
Medi aStudi es
SacredHeart Uni versi ty
1 .

Guy Debord, TheSoci ety of theSpectacl e(Detroi t : Bl ack andRedPress, 1983)
.
2.

SeeJ onathanCrary, "TheEcl i pseof theSpectacl e, " i nBri anWal l i s,
ed
. , Art Af ter
Moder-
ni sm: Rethi nki ng Representati on (Boston: Godi ne, 1984) .
3.

LauraMul vey, "Vi sual Pl easureandNarrati veCi nema, " i nScreen 16(Autumn
1975) : 6- 18
.
4.

J ean Baudri l l ard, Si mul ati ons, Trans
. Paul Foss, Paul Patton, andPhi l i p Bei tchman(New
York: Semi otext(e), 1983)
.
5.

J ean- Francoi s Lyotard, The
Postmodern Condi ti on: AReport onKnowl edge, trans.
Geof f Benni ngtonandBri an
Massumi (Mi nneapol i s : Uni v. of Mi nnesotaPress, 1984).
Thenoti on of thel egi ti mati on cri si s
i s central , of course, to Habermas' s theory of
l ate capi tal .
6.

Ibi d. , 14.
7.

J ameson' s most si gni f i cant work onthi s topi c thus f ar i s hi s "Postmoderni sm, or the
Cul tural
Logi cof LateCapi tal i sm, " i nNewLef t Revi ew146(J ul y/ August 1984):
53- 94
.
8.

Terry
Eagl eton, "Capi tal i sm, Moderni sm, andPostmoderni sm, " Newl ef t Revi ew152
(J ul y/ August
1985) : 60- 74.
9.

J ameson,
71
.
10.

Robi nWood, "TheIncoherent
Text: Narrati ve i n the `70s" i n Movi e27/ 28(Wi nter
1980/ Spri ng 1981) : 24- 43
.
11 .

Thetermi s associ atedpri nci pal l y wi ththework of Baudri l l ard. It has beenappropri -
atedrecentl y by UmbertoEcoi nhi s 73"avel s i n Hyperreal i ty, trans . Wi l l i amWeaver
(NewYork: Harcourt, Brace, J ovanovi ch, 1986) .
12.

SeeRobi nWood, "`SOs Hol l ywood: Domi nant Tendenci es, " i n Ci neACTION1 (Spri ng
1985)
:
2.
13.

Gi l l es Del euzeandFel i zGuattari , Anti - Oedi pus : Capi tal i smandSchi zopbreni a, trans .
Robert Hurl ey, Mark Seem, andHel enR. Lane(Mi nneapol i s : Uni v. of Mi nnesotaPress,
1983)
.
14.

Vi ncent
B. Lei tch, Deconstructi veCri sti ci sm: AnAdvancedIntroducti on (NewYork:
Col umbi aUni v. Press,
1983), p
. 216.
15.

Eagl eton,
69.
16
.

J ameson, 55.
17.

A. J . Grei mas, Structural
Semanti cs : AnAttempt at aMethod, trans. Dani el eMcDowel l ,
Ronal dSchi ef er, et al . (Li ncol n: Uni v.
of
Nebraska
Press, 1983), pp
. 197- 221 .
18.

I bi d. , 208.
POSTMODERNCI NEMA
19.

Thi s canoni zati on(andthereturnof aspeci es of auteri sm) i s di scussed i n Robert
E.
Kapsi s, ' Al fredHi tchcock: Auteur or Hack?" i n Ci neasteXI V(February
1986) :
30-36
.
20.

AnthonyPerki ns has frequentl y madethi s remark
i n referenceto thecharacter. See
Art Mi chael s, "Psycho I I I ",
Ci nefantasti que 16 (October 1986) :
83.
21.

R
.
Barton Pal mer uses the
termi nhi s "TheMetafi cti onal Hi tchcock: TheExperi ence
of
Vi ewi ngandtheVi ewi ngof Experi ence i n Rear Wi ndowandPsycho, "
i n Ci nema
j ournal 25(Wi nter
1986)
: 18. See
al somyÀpocal ypti ci smi n theContemporaryHorror
Fi l m" (Ph. D. di ssertati on
: NewYork Uni versi ty, 1983) 30-54.
22.

Frano; oi s Truffaut, Hi tchcock (NewYork: Si monandSchuster, 1967), 211
.
23.

Thefuncti onof thequest i s di scussed i n Mi chel deCerteau, Heterol ogi es
: Di scourse
ontheother, trans. Bri anMassumi (Mi nneapol i s: Uni v. of Mi nnesota
Press, 1986), xi i i .
24.

SeeDana B. Pol an, "AboveAl l El se to MakeYouSee' :
Ci nemaandtheI deol ogy of
Spectacl e, " i nJ onathanArac, ed. , Postmoderni smandPol i ti cs
(Mi nnesotaPress, 1986),
59.
25.

Thi s vi ewi s encouraged, not i roni cal l y, by government offi ci al s andsectors
of the
medi a. I n the current peri od, thedepi cti on of terrori sts as Other i s accompl i shed
usual l ybyassoci ati onwi thsoci al i st i deol ogy; a
fai rl y
common
strategy, however, i s
to portray the terrori st as product of anamorphous al though obj ecti ve evi l
for the
purposeof debunki ngi deol ogy i tsel f andi ts rel ati onshi p to vi ol ence
. Arepresenta-
ti veexampl ei s Cl ai re Sterl i ng, TheTerror Network(NewYork: Berkl ey,
1982) . Ster-
l i ngattri butes to Mehmet Al i Agca(convi cted of shooti ngthePope)
theremark"I
amnei ther l eft-wi ngnor ri ght-wi ng. I deol ogydoesn' t i nterest me. Thei mportant
thi ng
i s to beani nternati onal terrori st (297) . " For Sterl i ng, Agca' s remark "went far to i l -
l umi nate the decade aheadto us. "
26.

Li ner notes to thesoudtrackal bumof Streets of Fi re (MCA-5492)
27.

Grei l Marcus, Mystery Rai n: I mages of Ameri cai n RockandRol l Musi c
(NewYork:
Dutton, 1976) .
28.

Robi nWood, "TheI ncoherent Text, " 26.
29.

SeeNoel Carrol l , "TheFuture of Al l usi on: Hol l ywoodi nthe
Seventi es(and Beyond), "
October 20
(Spri ng1982), 51-83
.
30
.

Seemy "Myth, Mal e Fantasy, andSi mul acra: TheHeroas Pasti che i n Mad
Maxand
TheRoad Warri er, "J ournal ofPopul ar Fi l mand Tel evi si on 13, no. 2
(Summer
1985),
80-91.
31
.

Thi s i deai s suggestedi nmuchof thepubl i ci tymateri al for thefi l m. SeeMi chael Stei n,
"GeorgeMi l l er onMadMaxBeyond Tbunderdome, Fantasti c Fi l ms 45(August 1985),
20.
32.

Thenoti onseems basi c to recent di scussi on of postmoderni sm. See
Mi chael New-
man, "Revi si ngModerni sm, Representi ngPostmoderni sm: Cri ti cal Di scourses of the
Vi sual
Arts, " i n Li saAppi gnanesi ,
ed. ,
Postmoderni sm(London: I CADocuments, 1986),
pp.
32-51.
33.

SeeRobi nWood, "' 80s Hol l ywood. "
34.

J eanBaudri l l ard,
For
a Cri ti que of thePol i ti cal Economy of theSi gn,
trans
. ,
Charl es
Levi n
(St . Loui s: Tel os Press,
1981),
p. 97.
40.

SeeJ ameson, p. 68.
35
.

Thei deai s i nvest i gat ed at l engt hi nRol and Bar t hes,
Myt hol ogi es, t r ans. , Annet t e Laver s
(NewYor k: Hi l l and Want , 1972) .
Per haps mor e cent r al t o t hi s di scussi on i s Cl aude
Levi - St r auss, "HowMyt hs
Di e, " NewLi t er ar y Hi st or y 5, no. 2 (Wi nt er 1974) , 269- 81.
See ALsoJ ean Baudr i l l ar d,
Si mul at i ons, p. 12 .
36.

SeeRobi nWood' s di scussi on onThe Chasei nhi s Hol l ywoodfr omVi et namt oRea-
gan (NewYor k:
Col umbi a Uni v. Pr ess, 1985) pp. l l - 25
.
37
.

SeeCl audeJ . Smi t h, "Cl eanBoys i nBr i ght Uni for ms: THe Rehabi l i t i at i onof t heU. S.
Mi l i t ar y i nFi l ms Si nce 1978, "J our nal ofPopul ar Fi l mand Tel evi si on 12, no. 4 (Wi nt er
1984) , 144- 152.
38
.

An i nsi ght ful i nvest i gat i on of Rambo' s confl i ct i ng i deol ogi es
i s
El i zabet h Tr aube,
"Redeemi ng I mages: The Wi l d ManComes
Home, " Per si st ence of Vi si ons
1,
nos. 3/ 4
(Summer 1986) , 71- 95
.
39.

Danny
Pear y Cul t Movi es (NewYor k: Del l , 1981) . Pear y' s wor k (nowt wo vol umes)
i s par t of a gr owi ng body of fan mat er i al at t empt i ng t o defi ne a fi l msubcul t ur e.
Canadi anJ our nal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al Theor y/ Revue canadi enne de t heor i epol i t i que
et s oci al e, Vol ume XI I , Number s 1- 2 ( 1988) .
SPATI AL ENVY
YVONNERAI NER' S
THEMANWHOENVI EDWOMEN
Peggy Phel an
Near t heendof Yvonne Rai ner ' s r ecent f i l m, TheManWhoEnvi ed Wom-
en, t he f r ame i s f i l l ed f or t he s econd t i me wi t h Donal dJ udd' s l ar ge gr ey
concr et e s cul pt ur es l uxur i at i ng i n an openTexas f i el d. ' The camer a wal ks
acr os s t hes e s cul pt ur es l i ke f i nger s over a pi ano: t hey s eemt o hol da
ki nd
of t une hal f hi dden, hal f audi bl e. The s cul pt ur es ar e concr et e out l i nes of
s quar es t he col or of t ombs t ones . The heavi nes s of t hei r f r ame accent uat es
t he hol l ownes s of t he ai r t hey embr ace. Li ke a Wi t t gens t ei ni anwor dgame,
or bet t er s t i l l , l i ke Mar k St r and' s wi t t y poem
"Keepi ngThi ngs Whol e",
J udd' s s cul pt ur es
s ugges t t hat
"s pace" i s
t hat whi ch negot i at es bet ween
ai r y
f i el ds
( i nf i ni t e pos s i bi l i t i es ) andconcr et e ar chi t ect ur e ( f i ni t e f act s ) , whi l e
not r es i di ng ent i r el y i n ei t her t he one or t he ot her. As St r and put s i t an-
t hr opomor phi cal l y: "WhenI wal k/ I par t t he ai r / andal ways t he ai r moves
i n/ t o f i l l t he s paces / wher e my body' s been/ ". Fi l l i ngi n t he s paces cr eat ed
by depar t i ngper s ons , pl aces , andt hi ngs i s t he cent r al concer nof TheMan
WhoEnvi edWomen. J udd' s s cul pt ur es , wi t h t hei r r ef us al t o l ocat e or de-
f i ne as pat i al poi nt of or i gi n or t er mi nat i on, ar e t he obj ect i ve
cor r el at i ve
f or t he di f f i cul t i dea of s pace t hat Rai ner ' s f i l mal t er nat i vel y
vi gi l ant l y ar -
gues f or , and
whi ms i cal l y
hopes
f or. I n t hi s combi nat i on
of
ar gument and
hope
Rai ner ' s f i l mr es embl es s ome of t he bes t wor kof J ean- Luc Godar d.
Mor e i nt er es t i ng t han t he vi s ual abs ence of t he i mage of Tr i s ha t he f e-
mal e pr ot agoni s t , i s Rai ner ' s i nnovat i ve expans i onof t he pos s i bi l i t i es of
t he s ur f ace of t he f i l m. Us i ngvi deo
t r ans f er s
as
ki nd
of
wi ndows ( f r ames -
wi t hi n- f r ames ) ,
gr ai ny
s uper - 8 as
an i nt er r upt i on
of
t he s moot her s ur f ace
PEGGYPHELAN
of the f i l m, the f ragments f romcl assi c Hol l ywoodandavant- garde
f i l ms
as J ack' s i nteri or mental l andscapes, Rai ner di sal l ows thepl easureabl e i l l u-
si onof avi sual l ypol i shedart pi ece
andf orces i n i ts steadareconf i gura-
ti on of thetradi ti onal archi tecture of thef rame.
Rai ner descri bes her attempt
to
break downthe f rame as a: "di srupti on of the gl ossy, uni f i edsurf ace
of
prof essi onal ci nematographybymeans of opti cal l ydegeneratedshots
wi thi n an
otherwi se seaml essl y edi tednarrati ve sequence. . . . I ' mtal ki ng
about f i l ms where i n everyscene you have to deci de anew
the pri ori ti es
of l ooki ng
andl i steni ng. "' Thi s ref usal to mai ntai na"uni f i ed[ vi sual ] sur-
f ace" mi rrors the
f i l m' s
di sdai n
f or tradi ti onal narrati ve coherence and
progressi on. I npl aceof thespati al andtemporal
homogenei tyweexpect
i n narrati ve f i l ms, Rai ner creates a much more
di f f i cul t uni ty.
The
ManWhoEnvi edWomen' s subj ect i s not so much "a week i n the
l i f e of Tri sha; '
al though i t i s parti al l ythat ; the f i l mi s mai nl yi nterestedi n
chroni cl i ngthemani f estati ons and
consequences of thepervasi vemal ai se
of spati al envy. Thi s subj ect makes i ssues as apparentl ydi verseas
thepo-
l i ti cs of Central Ameri ca,
theManhattanreal estate crunch, thevi ci ssi tudes
of sexual andsoci al rel ati ons,
thevi ri l i ty andi mpotenceof poststructural -
i sm, andthe medi cal i zati onof women' s bodi es, seem
deepl yi ntertwi ned.
I mperi al i smi n Central
Ameri caandNewYork l ove af f ai rs are si mi l ar, f or
exampl e, i n that theyare each moti vated, i npart, by
thedesi re to gai nspace.
I nRai ner' s f i l mthel atter i s wryl yrepresentedby
theonl yhal f - f unnyone
l i ner : "Whenarewe getti ng marri edso I canhave your apartment
when
weget di vorced?"
TheCentral Ameri cansi tuati on, as weshal l see, i s treat-
edmuch more somberl y
. Usi ng
a col l age of
"movi ngpi ctures" as aki nd
of col l ecti ve i nterpreti ve Rorschach, Rai ner i s abl e to
swi nga wi de and
f l ui dnet over theseseemi ngl yunrel atedtopi cs. Thesemovi ng
pi ctures f unc-
ti onas aki ndof cl assi cal Chorus whi chpunctuatethedrama
Rai ner' s f i l m
unf ol ds. I ni ti al l yassembl edbythevi sual l yabsent but- very- present Tri sha,
theyare
recreatedandrearrangednol ess thansi xti mes i n thef i l m; thei r
spati al rearrangements paral l el
theshi f ti ng
spaces
andstori es of spati al envy
whi ch ani mate The
Man
Wbo
Envi edWomen.
Rather thanbegi nni ngwi tha
"f eel i ng f or f orm, " Rai ner' s f i l mbegi ns by
underl i ni ngthe
i ncoherenceof f orm. Postul ati ngthat f ormal ways i nvol ves
thepossessi on
( i magi nati ve
or
actual ) of space, Rai ner begi ns her narrati ve
proper
wi th Tri sha' s doubl e l oss of space. Af ter movi ngout of the apart-
ment sheshares wi th
J ack,
shei s
evi ctedf romher studi o. Tri sha, themys-
teri ousl yel usi ve arti st, begi ns
between"spaces" ; shei s di s- possessed. She
cancreate onl yi n f ragmented
i mages, i n cut- outs that she must - per-
f orce - l eave behi nd. Thi s i s the
parabl e
of
l oss, of al ways f ragmented
andi nterruptedf ormal concentrati on that the
f i l msl owl yunf ol ds. Rai n-
er' s consi stent di srupti on of thef rame' s space
techni cal l ymi rrors Tri sha' s
cut up "home" andher cut- out art .
Tri sha' s openi ngmonol ogue i s j ust thef i rst l ayer of
Rai ner' s associ ati ve
medi tati on onthe i mpl i cati ons of l osi ngand
gai ni ng space:
106
SPATI ALENVY
I t wasahard week. I spl i t up wi t h myhusbandof
f our years and
movedi nt omyst udi o. Thewat er heat er brokeandf l oodedt he
t ex-
t i l e merchant downst ai rs. I bl oodi ed up apai r of whi t el i nenpant s.
TheSenat evot ed f or nerve gas and mygynecol ogi st went down
i n Korean Ai rl i nes f l i ght #007. Theworst of i t was t he gynecol o-
gi st . Heused t o put
boot i es
on
t hest i rrups andhi s specul umwas
al ways warm.
Al t hough t heseevent s are l i nked i n t i me, t heyare l i nked i n ot her more
subt l eways waswel l . To put i t si mpl y, al bei t crudel y
: spl i t t i ng up wi t hJ ack
set s
of f aseri es of di smi ssal s anddepart ures. Tri sha' s f l oodi ng menst rual
bl oodand
her
st udi o' s
f l oodi ng wat er heat er areal i kei n t hei r f i t s of unru-
l i ness agai nst t hei r spat i al conf i nes. Thi s
pri vat eandi ndi vi dual unrul i ness
moreover, f i nds i t s publ i c andpol i t i cal i magei nt hedarkdramaof
Korean
Ai rl i nes f l i ght #007. Overst eppi ng, overf l owi ng, or f l yi ng over t hebound-
ari es of space, no
mat t er howvi si bl e
or
i nvi si bl esuch boundari es mi ght
appear, can
have t ragi c consequences.
Tri sha' s overf l owi ng menst rual bl oodi s cruci al ;
Rai ner' s t i t l e pl ays on
t heFreudi annot i on t hat womenarebeset wi t hpeni s envy. Part of
Rai n-
er' s ai mi s t o t urn t he t abl es: shewant st o suggest t hat menenvywomen
i n
part becauseof
t hei r i nt ernal bi ol ogi cal space. (Women, as i t were, car-
ryt hei r " ai r space" i nsi det hem. Toempl oyt hi s met aphor
psychoanal yt i -
cal l y, and f romt he woman' s poi nt of vi ew, vi ol at i ons of " ai r space" are
act s of power
: t hephysi ol ogi cal andsoci al arrangment sof het erosexual i t y
combi net omai nt ai n
womeni n
asubordi nat eposi t i ont o
men. To suggest
t hat mal esexual desi rei s mot i vat edat l east part i al l ybyspat i al envy, acoun-
t ry
and
west ernsong mi ght phrasei t " hunger f or ahome" , rapebecomes
not onl ya
l ogi cal , but an i nevi t abl e consequence of t he psychol ogi cal -
physi ol ogi cal archi t ect ure of het erosexual i t y. ) Rai ner usest he
woman' s
body
andt he f unct i ons of i t s st i l l myst eri ous spaces as aki nd of l ens t hrough
whi chcont emporary " probl ems" canbeeval uat ed. Shet ri es t o l i nk t he
mi nd t hat t hi nks andt he bodyt hat f eel s i n aspeci f i cal l y womanl yway.
One
mi ght saysheat t empt s
t o
rei nvest i gat et het radi t i onal opposi t i onsof
West ernmet aphysi cs, i nt hewakeof Derri da, f romaf emi ni st poi nt of
vi ew
.
Part of her correct i on t o t he st ory post st ruct ural i smt el l s i s st yl i st i c.
Met aphysi csi nRai ner' s vi ewcannot go t ool ong wi t hout aj oke; t hef i l m' s
most
seri ousmoment s (wi t h t he except i onof t he l ast t enmi nut es or so)
are cont i nual l yundercut
wi t h
aj oke
. I n what J . Hobermant hi nks i s t he
best
l i ne i nt hef i l m, Rai ner, i nadi st ort edof f - cent er cl ose- up remi ni scent
of Hi t chcock,
i nvi t es " al l menst ruat i ng women [ t o] pl ease l eave t he
t heat re. " 3 Thi s i nvi t at i oni s sympt omat i c of Rai ner' s most
congeni al habi t
of mi nd. Her most consi st ent i mpul se, and
her
most
comf ort abl eperspec-
t i ve,
i s
f romadi st ance- al most over her shoul der. Thi s i s not af i l mt hat
asks t he
spect at or t o l i ke t hecharact ers, t o enj oyt hescenery, t ol aughheart -
i l y, or t o nodone' shead knowi ngl yat al l t he f ami l i ar conversat i on. The
107
PEGGYPHELAN
ef f or t at t he hear t of t hi s f i l mi s
as engagedi n t hr owi ngyouout as i t i s
i nset t l i ng youi n.
Ret ur ni ngagai nt o t he enabl i ngf i ct i onof t he anal yst / anal ysandwhi ch
she expl or edi nJ our neys f r omBer l i n/ 1971
( 1980) ,
Rai ner ' s t r oubl ed and
t r oubl i ng mal e
pr ot agoni st J ack Del l er begi ns t he f i l m"ont he couch
. "
Del l er ' s doct or
i s of f - scr eenandvoi cel ess ( per haps t he ul t i mat e r epr esen-
t at i onof Roger i an
cl i ent - cent er edt her apy) , andhi s conf essi ons ar eact ual -
l y t he
ponder ousl ysoundi ngwor ds of RaymondChandl er ' s l et t er s and
di ar i es .
Rai ner ' s
f r equent t endencyt o have char act er s quot e f r omot her t ext s
i s par t of
her
l ar ger ar gument wi t hnar r at i ve, andspeci f i cal l ywi t hher sense
t hat nar r at i ve const r uct s ( i nevi t abl y) si ngul ar char act er s andsi ngul ar poi nt s
of
vi ew:
bydi sal l owi ngher char act er s si ngul ar l i ngui st i c habi t s she pr o-
hi bi t s
as
wel l
a si ngul ar habi t of mi ndanda si ngul ar poi nt of vi ew. I na
1985 ar t i cl e i nWi de
Angl e, Rai ner comment s t hat her i ndef at i gabl yquot -
i ngchar act er s hel p
"f or egr oundnot onl yt he pr oduct i onof nar r at i ve but
i t s f r ust r at i onand
cancel l at i onas wel l . . . or ds ar e ut t er edbut not possessed
bymyper f or mer s as t hey
oper at e
wi t hi n
t he f i l mi c f r ame but donot pr opel
a f i l mi c pl ot . " Del l er sees hi msel f as a manmor e gi f t ed
andbl essed
t han
t r oubl edandcur sed. He i s a uni ver si t ypr of essor - he t eaches f i l mt he-
or y, sor t of - wi t h Lef t i st l eani ngs who uses wor ds
t o
seduce ever yone
( especi al l yhi msel f ) i nt o acocoonof babel mor e hypnot i c t hanr evel at or y.
Dur i nghi s "sessi ons" J ack si t s i na chai r f aci ngt he camer a. He si t s ont he
l ef t si de of t he f r ame, andcont i nual l y
gazes beyondt he l ef t ver t i cal end
i mposedbyt he f r ame. Thi s i nvi si bl e
space i s acut el ypr esent i nhi s mono-
l ogues, j ust as t he vi sual l yabsent Tr i sha i s acut el ypr esent i nt he nar r at i ve
t ext ur e of t hef i l m. J ack, mor e t hananyot her char act er i nt he f i l m, i s desper -
at el ydependent uponanaudi ence. That t heaudi ence f or hi s i nt i mat e mean-
der i ngs t ur ns out t o be "t he spect at or " who i s f or cedi nt o t he posi t i on
of "t he doct or , " i s j ust one over t exampl eof Rai ner ' s obsessi ve t endency
t o suggest t hat f i l m' s ef f or t t o addr ess i s, absol ut el y, dependent uponan
er asur e. The f i r st wor dof t he f i l m, "doct or , " addr esses someone who i s
not t her e. The
st andar dcr i t i cal cl ai mt hat t he spect at or al ways i dent i f i es
wi t h t he
camer a r equi r es t hat t he camer a become a sur r ogat e spect at or.
Thecamer a, i n
so
becomi ng, l i t er al l y
ef f aces
t he
spect at or. Thepower of
t he camer a' s eye ( t he pot ent i al l yi deal I / eye) i n
addi t i ont o
showi ngus ob-
j ect s andl endi ngus i t s
gaze, al so shows us up. Thespace of t he f r ame can
be r ent edor l eased but i t cannever be owned. The camer a' s vi si on i s
pr esent edbut not possessedi n mucht he wayRai ner ' s char act er s "ut t er
but do not possess" t hei r ownl anguage. The i l l usi on of ci nema' s vi sual
r eal i smi s r adi cal l ydeni edbyRai ner ' s meander i nganddel i ber at el y di su-
ni f i ed vi sual f r ames . Her most sust ai nedi nvest i gat i onof t he ont ol ogyof
t he f i l mi c i mage
occur s, sui t abl y, i nJ ack' s st r uggl e t o separ at e andmake
108
SPATI AL ENVY
coherent hi s parcel l ed past :
that i s, i nJ ack' s sessi ons wi th
the i nvi si bl e
doctor.
At onepoi nt, J ack si ts i nhi s
chai r f aci ngthedoctor/ spectator to the
l ef t,
andthe
camera moves back to reveal an audi ence
compl etel y absorbed
i nwatchi ngthe
f i l mcl i ps pl ayi ngnext to hi s head. The
scenei s unsettl i ng.
Thef i l mcl i p i s f romThe
Ni ght of theLi vi ng Dead, andthe
spectators be-
gi nto attack
eachother as thef i l mi mages grow
morechaoti c andthe
sound
track more
di scursi ve ( i na threeway
phoneconversati onTri sha
summa-
ri zes Chodorow' s
andDi nnerstei n' s arguments
andrumi nates onthe as-
soci ati ons between
thename"J ackDel l er" andf ai ry
tal es) . Despi teal l the
aural andvi sual ornamentati on,
thi s sequencef orces thespectator to
reex-
peri ence
the acute psychi c di scomf ort
that comes f romthe recogni ti on
of theprof ound connecti on
betweenvoyeuri smandci nema.
Therei s noth-
i ng
ori gi nal about thi s connecti onof
course, but what i s
ori gi nal ( and aw-
f ul ) i s the di sturbi ng
connecti on thi s parti cul ar
sequence demands.
The
mayhem
producedbythei mages of TheNi ght
of theLi vi ngDeadl i teral l y
i nci tes the
audi ence to perf ormi ts ownaggressi ve
mayhem. Gi venthat
thesecl i ps are
i nthesamespati al f rameas J ack' s
"conf essi ons, " theunder-
l yi ng connecti on
i mpl i ci tl y suggests that psychoanal ysi s,
l i ke ci nema, i n
rel yi ng on"proj ecti on" as
i ts paradi gmati cpri nci pl e, i s
i nherentl y voyeuri s-
ti c
. To
di scover that the onl y posi ti on
onecantake i n thi s
"l ongshot" i s
therol e of thedoctor i s todi scover
as wel l that one' s i nterest
i nJ ack( ci ne-
mati cal l yand
psychoanal yti cal l y) stems f rom
adesi reto "treat" hi m.
More
uncomf ortabl y,
i t i s to real i zethat one' s i nterest
i nthesi mi l ari ti es between
the
"ci nemati c apparatus" andthe
psychoanal yti c paradi gmstems f rom
the spectator' s
owndesi re to be "treated".
J ack' s central
concerni n these sessi ons i s hi s
rel ati onshi p to women,
a rel ati onshi p that
undergoes a radi cal change af ter
the deathof hi s f i rst
wi f e. Tri sha, hi s secondwi f e,
has l ef t hi maf ter f our years, i n
part because
of hi s i nabi l i ty to be
f ai thf ul . Hi s wel l - desi gnedexpl anati ons
f or hi s l ack
of
f i del i ty essenti al l y consi st of
hi s bel i ef that af ter hi s
i deal i zedf i rst wi f e
di ed, hebecamei ncapabl eof
seei ngwomenas anythi ngother
thansacred
gi f ts. Toturn downsuchagi f t verges on
thesacri l egi ous - andour
J ack
i s
nohereti c. Onegi f t hehas
i nheri ted f romTri sha, agi f t he di d
not ask
f or, i s
her "art work. " J ack asks Tri sha to
take i t wi thher whenshe
moves
out .
Shesays she' l l returnf or i t .
I nsof ar as TheManWhoEnvi ed
Women
has anarrati ve
"pl ot, " i t i s thi s earl ypromi se of
return that thef i l muses
as i ts departi ng
poi nt . Li ke everythi ngel se, themeeti ng
i s i nterrupted, even
superseded, by
the promi seof another meeti ngbetween
J ack andJ ack- i e
( Raynal ) , whoareal so
ex- l overs. Thi s meeti ngactual l y does
occur, andi t
i s f romthe unsettl i ng perspecti ve of
thei r rel ati onshi p that al most
al l of
thevari edthreads the
f i l munwi nds cometogether. But as we
wai t f or the
party, the "meani ng" of
the art that i s l ef t behi nd,
the hi erogl yphi cs of
anunreachabl e
- bothvi sual l y and
romanti cal l y - arti st, consume
more
and
more
of
J ack' s attenti on.
109
PEGGY
PHELAN
Thi s ar t
wor ki s a col l age of magazi ne
cl i ppi ngs; t hr ee comef r omThe
SundayNewYor kTi mes
andt wocome f r omMot her
j ones. Theyi ncl ude:
anÀbout Men" col umn
wr i t t enbya pr i est , an
ad
f or
a Cent r al Amer i can
ci gar whi ch
f eat ur es a r i ch manandhi s
dog as t he Bar t hesi an "si gn" of
success, andagr uesome
phot ogr aphof decapi t at edbodi es wi t h
a capt i on
whi chseems t oi dent i f y
oneof t he vi ct i ms as a si xmont h
ol dGuat amal ean
chi l d. The
spat i al ar r angement of t hese i mages
i s cont i nual l yr evi sed. Of f -
scr een
voi ces cr eat e nar r at i ves of coher ence
about t hem. Theconnect i on
bet ween
t he ci gar adandt he
mut i l at edbodi es i s descr i bedal l egor i cal l y:
t he successf ul ci gar - sel l i ng
manpr of i t s, bot h, di r ect l yand
i ndi r ect l y, f r om
t he mut i l at i on anddeat h
of Sal vador eanpeasant s. The
Uni t edSt at es' i n-
t er est i nCent r al
Amer i ca i s r eadas ani mper i al
l ust
f or
t he cont r ol of geo-
gr aphi c space.
The
pl ea f or t he "emot i onal "
spaceof menr epr esent edbyt he Àbout
Men" col umn
i s seenbot heconomi cal l y(guess who
pr of i t s?) andsoci al l y.
That
t he spacef or t hi s col umnoccupi es t he
Sundaypaper , whi l e t he "Her s"
col umni s put i n t he "Home"
sect i onof Thur sday' s Ti mes ("amongt he
l at est sof as") i s seenas an
i deol ogi cal mani f est at i onof t he pr i vi l ege
of space.
Mor e subt l y,
as
t he
woman' s voi cenar r at es her
obj ect i ont o t he par t i t i on-
i ngof col umnspace i nasl i ght l y
whi ni ngway, t hecol umnbecomes anot her
sour ce of spat i al envyas
wel l .
The adf or t he
menopausal dr ug i s seenas par t of t hel ar ger
t r eat ment
of "women' s
pr obl ems" hi st or i cal l y. I t i s l i nked
t o t he t hemes of sexual
di f f er ence
i npost st r uct ur al di scour se.
Thepr eci se r el at i onshi p of t he(by
now)
axi omat i c connect i onbet ween
t he t ext ual bodyandt he sexual
body
i s expl or edwi t h a t wi st
t hat woul dmake Rol andBar t hes cr i nge
. Rat her
t han seei ng t hi s
connect i onas t he sour ce of Bar t hes'
j oui ssance, a ki nd
of per pet ual f or epl aywhi ch
t eases onet ocont empl at eament al and
spi r i t ual
communi on
soi nt ense i t hol dst hepot ent i al f or
i nf i ni t e ecst asy, Rai ner sug-
gest s
t hat t he l i nkbet weent hemi ndt hat
t hi nks andt he bodyt hat f eel s
i s one
of l oss - aki ndof per manent gr i ef . Ear l y
on, Tr i sha makesapr ovoca-
t i ve
connect i onbet weent he ovar i esand
t hebr ai n: "The ovar i es of a seven
mont hol df et us cont ai n
al most 1, 000, 000eggcel l s. Fr omt henon, t he
ova
const ant l ydecr ease i nnumber wi t hout
r epl eni shment . Theonl yot her cel l s
t odot hi s ar e t hoseof t he br ai n. "
The mut ual pr ocess of dr oppi ng eggs
andl osi ng br ai ncel l s, nei t her
of whi char e r egener at i ve, r evi ses t het r adi -
t i onal (mascul i ne)
"mi nd/bodyspl i t " i nt oa mor e r adi cal af f i ni t y
.
The
body
t hat f eel s andt hemi nd
t hat t hi nks ar e uni f i edi nt hei r si mi l ar
physi ol ogi -
cal movement f r om
abundance t o l oss. Thebr ai nandt he ovar y
t henar e
t hephysi ol ogi cal ker nel s
whi chsow, or soi t woul dseem, a
met aphysi cs
not t o
acqui si t i on, but of i nevi t abl e depl et i on.
Thehor r i f i c
i mageof t he decapi t at edbodi es (t he spl i t
bet weent hebody
andt hemi nd
socompl et e as t o make West er n
met aphysi cs a pat het i c un-
der st at ement ) ,
i s t he i mage t hat el i ci t s t he
deepest medi t at i on. I n one of
t he onl y
moment sof uni f i cat i onbet ween
t he soundt r ackandt hei mage
SPATI ALENVY
t r ack, t hevoi ce
of
one
of t he off- scr eencomment at or s (Mar t ha Rosl er ' s)
br eaks off as Del l er ' s handt r ai l s
away fr omt hewal l aft er shi ft i ng t he i m-
ages ar oundi naneffor t t o bur yt hegr uesomei mage(andt henakedbod-
i es) under
al l
t heot her cl i ppi ngs. I t i s a movi ng sequence, not onl ybecause
Del l er
at l ast seems "i nsync" wi t ht hewor l dof t hefi l m, but al so because
one
of
t he
quest i ons of "owni ng space" hi nges - appar ent l y absol ut el y
- onsomeoneel se l osi ng i t .
Thi s r el at i onshi p
i s expl or edwi t h a poi gnant befuddl ement as Rai ner
fol l ows t hesequenceof publ i c hear i ngs cal l edt o consi der Manhat t an' s r e-
cent pr oposal t o al l ocat e housi ng funds t o ar t i st s movi ng i nt o t he Lower
East Si de. Thei dea behi ndt hi s pl anwas t o keep NewYor k Ci t yas a con-
geni al "space" for ar t andar t i st s - a cyni cal obser ver mi ght sayt hat t he
i dea exposes NewYor k' s owni mper i al l ust for cul t ur al supr emacy- but
nomat t er : cont empl at i ng "movi ngt oJ er sey" i s vi ewedwi t hequal hor r or
by al l member s of t hehear i ngs. Oneof t heunfor t unat e consequences of
t hi s pr oposal was t hat i t pi t t edt hear t i st s agai nst t heet hni c wor ki ng- cl ass
whosever y pr esencei n
Rai ner ' s over t l y t heor et i cal fi l m, cal l s i nt o ques-
t i ont heeffi cacyof ar t andt heaest het i c i mpul se
t o mani pul at eandr e- or der
spacefor somear t i st i c good. Thei mmensespace
of Donal dJ udd' s scul p-
t ur al fi el dandt he huge canvases of LeonGol ubsuddenl yseemabsur d:
do "i mages" and"r epr esent at i ons"
deser ve/ need t o consume so much
space? Do wepar t i ci pat ei nt he
const r uct i onandmai nt enanceof a wor l d
i nwhi ch"r epr esent at i on" l i t er al l y
domi nat es our l i ves, andr obs somepeo-
pl e
of four wal l s? "Al most over ni ght wemet t he enemy, " Tr i sha decl ar es,
"andi t was us. "
I f t he spat i al ar r angement s andr ear r angement s of Tr i sha' s abandoned
ar t wor k (wor kt hat has fal l enunder t hegazeof hyper - ar t i cul at eeyes) con-
st i t ut e t he mel ody
of
t he fi l m, par t
of i t s
r hyt hmi c
st r uct ur e comes fr om
J ack' s magi c headphones. Li ke somefant ast i c st at e- of- a- fut ur e- ar t Wal kman,
J ack' s over si zedmechani cal ear s makehi mpr i vy
t o t he conver sat i ons of
Manhat t anst r eet - st r ol l er s. I t i s per haps t he t r i pl i cat e r epet i t i onof t hese
scenes t hat pr ompt s Hober mant o dubRai ner "t hePur pl e
Roseof Soho, "
andt o compar eher fi l ms t o WoodyAl l en' s. Rai ner ' s one- l i ner s ar edr yand
i nfect i ous. Theyar e al so obsessi vel yconcer nedwi t hsex. Thespacebe-
t weenJ ack' s
ear s, byi mpl i cat i on, seems over l oadedwi t hsexual puns: hi s
headsel ect i vel y r ecei ves t he wor l dfr om
a sexual
poi nt
of vi ew .
I nt he fi r st i ssue of Mot i onPi ct ur e, Rai ner wr i t es t hat t he
pur poseof
t hese scenes i s t o convey t he
i dea t hat t he ci t y, for J ack, i s a "pl ace ful l
of sexual anxi et y, obsessi on, andver bal assaul t , l i t ani es of sexual di st r ess . . . [ I t
i s] a bar r age-
a
ver i t abl e
er upt i on
-
of or di nar i l y r epr essedmat er i al . "
But t hepr obl emi s t hat t heconver sat i ons ar eal l i none- key: i f i t i s a j ungl e
i t speci al i zes i noneani mal .
Mor e
i mpor t ant l y,
t hesej okes ar e
al l
about sex-
PEGGYPHELAN
ual stereotypes: gaymenas housewi ves, f emi ni smas abadge of
admi ttance
f or pol i ti cal l y correct mento awi der set of women' s bedrooms, andso
on. I f thesecl i ches aresupposedto
f ri ghten
a
manwhospouts of f thesubtl e
seducti ons of Foucaul t andwhospeaks of the ci nemati c
apparatus as an
i nti mate echo of Lacani ansubj ectvi ty, thenhei s i nreal l y sorryshape. But
I
thi nk Rai ner' s ai m
and
i ts ef f ect arequi tedi f f erent . Wetendnot, I thi nk,
to take these
l i nes
as symptomati c of
J ack' s f ear : wetendto take themas
wel comecomi c rel i ef .
J acki e i s not speaki ng to J ack: she addresses a di f f erent spectator al -
together. She seems to be addressi ng on/ of f - screenTri sha. Or at l east, i t
woul dseemthat Tri sha hearsJ acki e more cl earl y
than
J ack does
. J acki e' s
voi ce, thi ck wi th a French accent, i s passi onate andsounds
hal f sl eepy.
Shewears aki ndof shi mmeri ng gownthat hal f reveal s her breasts.
The
camera scruti ni zes her wi thapl easure i t si mpl y cannot f i ndi nJ ack. She
rol l s
her
tongue arond
theseamazi ngl yl arge words wi ththestrange wonder
of a French womanspekai ng Engl i sh as
i f f or the f i rst ti me; the sounds
of the words resonant wi th the conf i dence of thei r ownori gi nal i ty,
they
aresure they have never beenspokeni nqui tethi s waybef ore. As I
watch
thi s scene
I
f eel as
i f
the theatre
wi l l col l apse under al l these words; as
i f there shoul dbe arati ng f or f i l ms basedsol el y onthenumber of
words
spoken
i nto l i ttl e rooms; as i f seducti oni s madeupof nothi ngbut words.
Thi s sl owseducti on
underscores J ack' s i roni c i nsi stence onrepeati ng
Foucaul t' s axi om: "There i s noopposi ti on
betweenwhat i s sai dandwhat
i s done. " As J ack andJ acki e move
i ntel l ectual l y f urther andf urther apart,
thei r bodi es movecl oser andcl oser together. As J ack conti nual l y repeats
Foucaul t' s arguments about the
ubi qui tous di spersi onof power, J acki e
categori zes anddel i mi ts di f f erences i nthepower to
di scri mi nate power.
J ack i s content to i gnore "what i s sai d" f or what mi ght "bedone: '
Heseems
not to hear a thi ng she says. J acki e i s, i nal most a l i teral sense, speaki ng
a di f f erent l angauge:
Onl y the nai ve humani st f emi ni st thi nks shecanchange somethi ng
by
changi ngher consci ousness; the ri gorous f emi ni st pl umbs the
hi ddendepths of subj ecti vi ty, studi es i ts
constructi oni nl an-
guage. . wi nds
throughthel abyri nthto f i ndnot amonster but anew
posi ti onof thesubj ect
. . . Oneawkwardconsequenceof thef reudo-
marxi st marri age presi dedover by
l anguage,
i s to open
upani nvi t-
i ngspace
f or marxi st andf emi ni st l aborers whi chcanonl y be de-
f i ned
by
thehystemati c evacuati onof certai nquesti ons - pol i ti cal ,
economi c, andaboveal l hi stori cal questi ons. . . Theory as awatch-
dogi s apoor creature: not because
i t i s nasty or destructi ve but
becausef or attacki ngthe
anal ysi s
of
conf rontati oni t si mpl y hasno
teeth
.
As i f thi s i s the
permi ssi onRai ner has beenwai ti ngf or, theremai nder of
TheManWhoEnvi edWomenmoves steadi l y away f romthe theoreti cal
SPATI AL ENVY
pronouncement ( the worl dof J ack) to a morepersonal , andmoretenta-
ti vemedi tati on. Wemovemorecomfortabl yandmorecompl etel yi ntothe
worl dof thei magi nati on. Thi s worl d, enteredonl ythrough theportal of
thefemi ni ne, i s formal l y i nvoked( evoked?) byJ acki e, whoagai nborrows
Morri s' words:
Passi ng fromthereal mof thetheory of thesubj ect to theshi fty
spaces of femi ni newri ti ng i s l i ke emergi ng froma horror movi e
to a costumebal l . . . Femi ni newri ti ngl ures wi th ani nvi tati on tol i -
cence, gai ety, l aughter, desi reanddi ssol uti on, a
fl ui dexchange
of
partners of i ndefi ni te i denti ty.
Underscori ngthi s changei nmental spaceRai ner cuts toTri sha' s narra-
ti onof a dream. Shedreams her mother andJ ack arel overs. Both mother
anddaughter arepl ayedbyRai ner. J ust as Tri sha seems to accept that her
mother i s J ack' s l over, themother watches J ack andTri sha ( di sgui sedbe-
hi nda paper mask) i nbedtogether. NowTri sha i s furi ous. But thedream
i s so obvi ousl y funny, so cl earl y a wi l l ful Oedi pal reconfi gurati onthat
Tri sha' s refusal to l augh seems hi l ari ous. Tri sha' s eyes areso compl etel y
di sgui sedshei s apparentl y unabl etoseehersel f. Fi tti ngl y, sl i nki ng through
thi s "Oedi pal extravaganza" - thephrasei s Rai ner' s - i s a one- eyedcat.
Cut back to thehal l way. J ack andJ acki eareembraci ngal l therhetori cal
possi bi l i ti es of physi cal l y embraci ng.
Andthenagai nTri sha' s voi ce: "I f a gi rl takes her eyes off LacanandDer-
ri dal ongenough
to
l ook shemaydi scover shei s thei nvi si bl eman. " That
thefi l m' s i nvi si bl ewoman, Tri sha, says thi s onl yhei ghtens thei rony; the
fi l mabandons thepoeti cs of theoryandi ndi vi dual mascul i ni tyfor a more
persuasi vel ook at Tri sha' s movi ng pi ctures.
As i t happens whentheory i s not thel oudest voi cei n theroom, what
theeyesees
when
i t l ooks agai ni s a di fferent i mageal together
.
Tri sha' s
concl udi ngrumi nati ons,
unl i ke
J ack' s i ni ti al confessi ons, are
tentati veand
gropi ng:
Latel y I ' ve beenthi nki ng yet agai nI can' t l i vewi thout menbut I
canl i vewi thout a man. I ' ve hadthi s thought before, but thi s ti me
thei dea i s not col oredbysti gmaor despai r for fi nal i ty. I knowthat
therewi l l someti mes beexcruci ati ngsadness but I al soknowsome-
thi ngi s di fferent now, somethi ng i n thedi recti onof unwomanl i -
ness. Not a newwoman, not non- woman, or mi santhropi st, or
anti - woman, andnot non- practi ci ng l esbi an. Maybeun- womani s
al sothewrongterm. A- womani s cl oser. A- womanl yA- womanl i ness.
I must admi t that I ' mnot sure what Tri sha means by thi s. Sheseems
wi l l i ng andready to buryJ ack' s hol donher. Andready to bury some-
thi ng l arger as wel l . Amongthemoreeni gmati cal l y
haunti ng
sequences
i nthefi l mi s anearl y onei nwhi ch Tri sha compl ai ns
that her father chose
thi s week to"popout. " I nTri sha' s vari ous
retel l i ngs
of
her stori es of "l i fe
PEGGYPHELAN
wi thJ ack" there i s a f eel i ng that s he i s tel l i ng the s tory of l i f e wi thPop
as wel l . Tri s ha' s exas perati on wi ththe
way
the memory
of
her f ather i n-
trudes uponher recol l ecti on of "l i f e wi thJ ack" s peaks to the doubl enes s
of thepai n of mourni ng. Thef ather, l i ke J ack, i ntrudes on Tri s ha- both
as a
maddeni ngl y
i nadequatepres enceandas apers i s tent and
unwel come
abs ence. Thi s i s al l i nthereal mof s pecul ati on- therei s l i ttl e di rect
ref er-
ence to thi s i n the f i l m. But what i s germaneto Tri s ha' s announcement
of "s omethi ng di f f erent now" i s thepers i s tent hopethat i f a- womanl i nes s
means anythi ng at al l , i t mi ght have s ome i mpact
on
Tri s ha' s Oedi pal
dreams . Wi thPopandJ ack tuckedbacki n thes ui tcas e, maybe
Tri s ha, her
mother, andthe one- eyedcat can create anewdream. Onethat maywel l
be f i l l ed wi th"excruci ati ng s adnes s , " but onethat mi ght yet be al l owed
the repres entati on of a dream- text, one that mi ght rai s e the
hi terto
repres s ed.
Wereturnagai nto theart work- f or onel as t rearrangement. Thi s ti me
Rai ner as ks , "I f thi s were an art work howwoul dyoucri ti que i t?" The
ans wer bri l l i antl y recas ts the connecti ons between the i mages ands ug-
ges ts that s pati al arrangements , arti s ti c andrati onal i s ti c, arei nherentl ypo-
l i ti cal . I quote j us t bri ef l y f romRos l er' s l ong argument :
I woul df eel I was bei ngtri cked i nto tryi ngto deal wi ththi ngs that
have becomei ncommens urabl eas thoughthey weren' t i ncommen-
s urabl e. That I was bei ng tol d that themyths of ci vi l i ty at home
andtheprobl ems of
dai l y l i f e are onl yaveneer over thetruththat
thes tate des troys peopl e. I t i s as thoughI were bei ngtol d that
when
deal i ng wi ththe ul ti mate, my worri es about howI l i ve myl i f e i n
Ameri ca are not i mportant.
She then goes on to el uci date the ways i n whi chthe arrangements of
the i mages tel l pol i ti cal andvi s ual s tori es . The
uncari ng emoti onal f acade
of
menthat the
"About
Men"
col umn
argues agai ns t, "determi ne[s ] how
weconduct our
f orei gn
pol i cy. I t
i s n' t onl y amatter of economi c i nteres t,
but of
howwe
choos eto purs ue
that i nteres t . I f we' rewi l l i ng to gri ndup
other peopl ebecaus ewecan' t bebotheredto f eel about
themthen i t does
matter. " What s he argues
f or
then i s a
new
noti on of
s pati al pri vi l ege -
an anti - pri vi l ege; or maybe
that' s the wrong term- pri vi l egel es s nes s i s
cl os er. A
worl di n whi chthe
s pace oneoccupi es
( publ i cl y andpri vatel y)
i s not s ubj ect to or
the obj ect
of
envy; aworl dthat J udd' s s cul ptural em-
braces create
whenthei r s pati al begi nni ngs andendi ngs cannot bedef i ned
or l ocated.
Thef act that thes cul ptures
thems el ves domi nate awi de openf i el d i n
Texas underl i nes the
di s tance weneedto travers e bef ore s uchani deal s pa-
ti al arrangement mi ght occur
.
J udd' s
s cul ptures , i n other words , demand
a s econd l ook
. Rai ner' s f i l mpropos es a democracy of s pati al equal i ty s o
radi cal that
i ts
very propos al
requi res aconti nual rearrangement not onl y
of the i mages i n the f rame but of
the
f rame
i ts el f .
SPATI AL
ENVY
I sai d ear l i er t hat
t he i dent i f i cat i on bet weent he
camer aandt he spect a-
t or
i nevi t abl y ef f aces t he power of
t he spect at or and t hat
i mpl i edwi t hi n
t hi s
ef f acement t her e was a f ai l ur e of
addr ess. J ack' s sessi ons
whi ch ad-
dr ess an absent
doct or and ar e augment ed
by f i l ms addr essedt o
an au-
di ence al er t t o
ot her t ext s, under scor e t he
di f f i cul t y of f i l mi c addr ess
. The
spect at or i s t he f i l m' s
i nvi si bl e hear er , i t s unseen doct or
and del i ver er of
cat har si s. At t he
"Nar r at i ve Poet i cs Conf er ence" i n
Apr i l at Ohi o St at e
Uni ver si t y, Ter esa DeLaur et i s ar gued
t hat Rai ner ' s f i l mencour aged
her t o
f eel
addr essedas awomanspect at or
andt hat t he success of
t hi s f ul l some
addr ess was one of
t he gr eat est achi evement s of
The Man Who Envi ed
Women. DeLaur et i s
cont endedt hat t he f i l msawas
a womansees andt hat
i t di dnot bowt o t he
convent i ons of t he mal e gaze
(convent i ons t hat Del au-
r et i s has l ongbeeen
skept i cal about but ar e nonet hel ess
r ecogni zed by most
f emi ni st f i l mcr i t i cs)
andt hus advancedbot hf emi ni st f i l m
t heor yandf i l m
pr act i ce. 4 I nsof ar as
t he di st i nct i on bet ween gender
speci f i c poi nt s- of -
vi ewhas any val i di t y, i t i s
cer t ai nl y t r ue t hat TheManWho
Envi ed Women
i s ani mat ed f r omand
f or a women' s eye. Myear l i er
poi nt was mor e con-
cer end wi t h under l i ni ng
t he chal l enge of Rai ner ' s f i l m
i n t er ms of addr ess
i t sel f . By upset t i ngt he
convent i ons of f i l mi c poi nt of
vi ew(e. g. : not show-
i ngTr i sha at al l andt hus
maki ngi t i mpossi bl e t o f ol l owher gaze;
t he con-
f l i ct i ng nar r at i ve angl es of t he
pl ot (s) et al . ) , Rai ner al so
chal l enges t he
convent i ons
of f i l mi c addr ess. By "addr ess"
I mean not onl y t he compl i -
cat ed
and compl i cat i ngpr ocesses of
i dent i f i cat i on bet ween
"char act er "
and
spect at or , but al so t he mor e
si mpl e f eel i ngof bel ongi ngness -
as i f
one
i s i nvi t edandencour agedt o
be engaged. Mor e t han
si mpl ysayi ngpost -
Br echt
t hat f i l m, and avant - gar de
f i l mi n par t i cul ar , makes t he spect at or
f eel al i enat ed - makes t he spect at or
r ecogni ze t he gap bet weent he t ech-
ni cal
camer a eye andher owneye,
I ' mt r yi ngt o say t hat what
Rai ner ' s f i l m
suggest s i s t hat f i l m' s deep
dependency on poi nt - of - vi ew
(gender speci f i c
or
ot her wi se) as t he pr i mar y means
by whi ch t he spect at or i s
gi veni nt i -
mat e access t o a
ki nd
of
knowl edge, no mat t er how
r el at i ve - as i n t he
el egant
equi vocat i ons of Roshomon - i s what needs t o
be di smant l ed and
under st ood as aseduct i ve
f i ct i on. I nsof ar as Tr i sha' s
concl udi ngr emar ks
about
"a- womanl i ness" can be seen as an
abandonment of gender as a
shor t handnot i on of i dent i t y, i t woul dseem
t hat Rai ner i s t r yi ngt o aban-
don
t he owner shi p of (and per haps
f i l m' s conspi r acy i n t he mai nt enance
of ) si ngl e i dent i t y i t sel f .
The r el at i onshi ps bet ween
l anguage, i mage, andchar act er ar e
i ndi vi du-
al l y andcol l ect i vel y
r ear r anged i n TheManWhoEnvi ed
Women. Rai ner ' s
ambi t i ous
f i l munder l i nes t he ways i n whi ch
nar r at i ve coher ence demands
andcr eat es a spect at or al er t t o
a
t oo
si mpl e coher ence. The
pr oj ect of t he
f i l mi s not t o del i neat e
t he r easons andmot i vat i ons f or J ack' s envy of Tr i sha
or J ack- i e; nor i s
i t t he st or y of J ack' s t r ansf or mat i on
f r ombul l y t o l over ;
PEGGYPHELAN
I don' t even thi nk i t' s
about thewayi n whi chf i l mtheoryi nf orms f i l m
practi ce al though
that i s s ort of di s tracti ngl yi nteres ti ng.
I thi nk
the
f i l m
i s actual l y
about theappeti teto rearrangeand
reconf i guretheconnecti ons
between
i mage, l anguageandcharacter i n f i l m,
thedes i reto rearrangeand
reconf i gures exual rel ati ons hi ps i n
"Li f e" andeconomi c- pol i ti cal - s pati al
rel ati ons hi ps i n Àrt" andi n "The
Worl d, " andI thi nk i t i s about Rai ner' s
ownappeti tef or anewaes theti c
of
f i l mi c
archi tecture. ( I ought to s tres s
that I bel i evetherei s adi f f erence
betweendel i neati ngan appeti tef or s ome-
thi nganddel i neati ng
thethi ngi ts el f . TheManWhoEnvi ed Women
i s much
more of a
propos al and s pecul ati ve dreamthan i t
i s a programmati c
mani f es to
;
thi s
tooi s i n keepi ngwi thRai ner' s wi ttymetaphys i cs
andTri s ha' s
wi de
rumi nati ons ) .
"Fi l mi c
archi tecture" borders onthe
oxymoroni c: archi tecturetends to
connotes tabi l i tyandthef i xi ngof andwi thi n
s pace. I t tends to connote
s cul ptural f i el ds l i keJ udd' s and
towers l i keTrump' s . Rai ner' s Fi l mi carchi tec-
ture takes f l exi bi l i tyandf l ow
as def i ni ngpri nci pl es , andf i l m' s i nevi tabl e
f ai l ure to meet thedes i re
to f i x or pos s es s s pace i ts el f as i ts phi l os ophi c
s pi ne. TheManWhoEnvi ed
Womenrej uvenates thepol i ti cal / aes theti cagen-
daof theavant- gardef i l mi n i ts
method, andi t chal l enges contemporary
cri ti cal theory' s thral l domwi thmas cul i ni s t modes i n i ts argument . TheMan
WhoEnvi ed Womenchal l enges theory' s own
des i re f or pos s es s i on and
coherence. Theory' s panti ngaf ter di s curs i ve
s pacei s perhaps not onl ya
l ogi cal but an i nevi tabl e cons equenceof thedes perati on
and
parcel l i ng
out of "s pace" i n
cri ti cal di s cours ei ts el f . Fi l ms tudi es , f emi ni s t or other-
wi s e, exi s ts i n
adi s curs i ves pacethat encourages ( even
demands ) "pos s es -
s i on. " Thebi tter i rony, of cours e, i s that f i l m' s mos t radi cal potenti al
l i es
i n i ts res i s tance to bei ngpos s es s ed or owned
.
Fi l m' s abi l i tyto movepi ctures conti nuous l y,
to
endl es s l yrearrangethe
cut- outs bywhi ch
andthroughwhi chwecometo s eeandproj ect i denti -
tyand owners hi p,
andthrough whi ch wecome to des i re themboth,
demons trates as wel l the
i mportanceof chal l engi ngour owncomf ort wi th
theconventi ons
of coherence. I n f i l m, theparti cul arl ycomf ortabl econ-
venti ons ares harpl y
del i neated poi nts of vi ew( owni ngs tori es ) andthe
modes of addres s typi cal of narrati ve
anddocumentaryf i l m. Fromthef i rs t
tenmi nutes of s uper- 8f i l m, throughthevi deo "documentary"
of
the
hous -
i ngheari ngs , Rai ner cons tantl ymani pul ates thes urf aceof her f i l m. We,
l i keJ ack, arel ef t wi th cut- outs whos e"meani ng" l i es i n i ts potenti al to
beendl es s l yrearranged
. What makes thi s f i l mmorethanas mart l ef ti s t
mani f es to, i s thei nnovati ve
way
i n
whi chRai ner matches her pol i ti cal vi -
s i on of pri vi l egel es s nes s wi ththeaes theti cpos s i bi l i ti es
of
i nterrupted
and
s haredf i l mi c s pace. Rai ner degrades theval ues
of
theowners hi p
of
i deas ,
di s cours e, andManhattanl of ts , byconti nual l yrearrangi ngwhat weexpect
f i l mto own: thes paceof i ts f rame.
Ti s ch School of Perf ormi ng Arts
NewYork Uni vers i ty
1 .

TheManWhoEnvi ed Women. 1 6 mm, col or ,
1 25 mi n. ,
1 985.
Di str i buted byFi r st
RunFeatur es, 1 53Waver l yPl ace, NewYor k, NewYor k, 1 001 4,
CFDC, 67APor tl and
St . , Tor onto, Ontar i o,
M5V
2M9.
Al l quotes unl ess other wi se notedar e fr omthefi l m.
Ar t Si mondi scussedthi s paper
wi th
mewi thadmi r abl e
pati enceandi nsi ght . I thank
hi mand her ebyabsol ve hi mof r esponsi bi l i ty for what fol l ows.
2.

Rai ner , "SomeRumi nati ons ar oundCi nemati c Anti dotes to
the Oedi pal Net ( l es) whi l e
Pl ayi ngwi th DeLaur aedi pus Mul vey, or , HeMay
Be Off Scr een, but . . . " TheI ndepen-
dent, Apr i l , 1 986: 25.
3.
SPATI AL ENVY
Notes
J . Hober man, "The Pur pl eRoseof Soho," The Vi l l ageVoi ce, Apr i l 8, 1 986: 64
.
Hober -
manl uci dl ysummar i zes the femi ni st theor eti cal i mpl i cati ons of Rai ner ' s deci si onnot
to showTr i sha' s i mage.
4.

SeeM. M. Bakhti n, TheDi al ogi cI magi nati on, ed. byMi chael Hol qui st, tr ans. byHol -
qui st andCar yl Emer son( Austi n: Uni ver si tyof Texas Pr ess,
1 982) . Seeespeci al l y, "Di s-
cour se
i n
the
Novel ," the fi nal essay
.
"Heter ogl ossi a" i s defi ned anddi scussed onp.
263and fol l owi ng
.
5.

Most of theFoucaul t comesfr omDi sci pl i ne andPuni sh tr ansl ated byAl anSher i dan
( RandomHouse: Vi ntage Books, 1 974) . ; theMor r i s quotes ar etakenfr om, "ThePi r ate' s
Fi ancee; ' i nMi chel Foucaul t: Power , 7i- uth, Str ategy( Sydney: Fer al Publ i cati ons, 1 979) ,
edi ted byMeaghanMor r i s andPaul Patton.
6.

DeLaur eti s' tal k was del i ver edwi th humor andpol emi cal zeal . TheConfer ence was
hel dbetweenApr i l 1 0- 1 2, 1 986. Rai ner was pr esent at the confer ence, and TheMan
WhoEnvi ed Womenwas shownthe ni ght befor e DeLaur eti s' tal k. Rai ner answer ed
questi ons after the scr eeni ng but di d not comment publ i cl yafter DeLaur eti s' tal k.
Canadi anJ ournal of Pol i t i cal
andSoci al Theory/ Revue
canadi enne de t heori epol i t i que
et soci al e, Vol ume Xl l , Numbers 1- 2
( 1988) .
DECONSTRUCTING
FELLINI
Frank Burke
Fel l i ni ' s workt ends
t o be i dent i f i edwi t h t heEuropeanart f i l m
move-
ment of t he l at e 50s andearl y
60s ( LaSt rada, LaDol ce Vi t a)
t hen wi t h
t heemanci pat ory romant i ci sm
of t hemi dandl at e 60s ( 8 1/ 2, J ul i et of t he
Spi ri t s, Fel l i ni Sat yri con) . Hi s f i l ms
of t he 70s and80s have not recei ved
t heat t ent i onenj oyedby hi s
earl i er f i l ms . As aresul t , he
i s vi ewedpri n-
ci pal l y as a hi gh moderni st
and, especi al l y, as t he ki nd
of
roman-
t i c/ i ndi vi dual i st art i st
pri zed by hi gh moderni sm. ' Concomi t ant l y, hi s
f i l ms t end t o be seen
as romant i cal l y af f i rmat i ve, cl osed works
whose
cl osurei s consi st ent wi t hbot hbourgeoi s
art andt he pri vi l eged, separat e
nat ure
of art i n hi gh moderni sm. z
Ironi cal l y,
Fel l i ni ' s f i l ms, evenf romt he
si xt i es, servet oundermi nebot h
romant i c i ndi vi dual i sm
andFel l i ni ' s ownpersonaas
romant i c art i st . At t he
samet i me, hi s f i l ms
ei t her di ssol ve or at t ack
bot hcl osure andt hesepara-
t i onof art f roml i f e. In
81/ 2 ( 1963) , Gui do( a Fel l i ni
surrogat e) , never com-
pl et es hi s f i l m( ast range
hybri dof sel f - cent eredaut obi ography
andescapi st
sci encef i ct i on) . Moreover,
af t er hi s i ndi vi dual i t y andegoi st i c separat eness
aredi ssol ved, andhemerges
wi t hal l t hehumani mages f romhi s
past , Gui -
dohi msel f di sappears . Thef i l m
ends wi t hout Gui door evenhi s symbol i c
rei ncarnat i on as t he boy i n whi t e,
wi t honl y adark ci rcus arena, anun-
set t l i ng si t e of bot h presence and
absence, out of whi chsomet hi ngnew
mayor may not be born. Gone
are bot h t he si ngl e, heroi c i dent i t y and
t he sense
of af f i rmat i ve cl osure upon whi ch
bourgeoi s romant i ci sm
depends
.
What happens
t o Gui do i n 8 1/ 2 happens t o Fel l i ni hi msel f
as mai n
charact er i n The Cl owns
( 1970) andFel l i ni ' s Roma( 1972) .
By t he endof
DECONSTRUCTING
FELLINI
the
f ormer, Fel l i ni as di rector i s repl aced byan ol dcl own
who
tel l s a
story
whi ch, i n taki ng on a l i f e of i ts own, narrates The Cl owns to
i ts concl u-
si on. Thestoryi s
about the i nseparabi l i ty of deathandl i f e, absence
and
presence, as i t
conf i rms
both
thedemi se andthe resurrecti bi l i ty of the
art
of thecl own. It tooends i n thedomai n of
openness, i ts concl udi ngci rcus
arena - l i ke that of 81/ 2- a spaceof
i ndetermi natef utures, cl earedof
l i mi ti ng speci f i ci ty.
At the
endof Roma, Fel l i ni has agai n di sappearedas
narrator/ di rector.
Present onl y as camera eye, he becomes
absorbed i n the bal l eti c dance
of motorcycl i sts whoweave
thei r away among the monuments of Rome
( the
past) and out onto the Vi a Cri stof oro Col ombo.
Themotorcycl i sts,
thoughcommunal
andsynchroni zed, are al so depersonal i zedby
thei r gear ;
the roar of thei r engi nes i s
threateni ngas wel l as energi zi ng; thei r enci r-
cl i ng"occupati on" of Romesuggests
thedestructi veness of theVi si goths
andVandal s as wel l as the posi ti ve potenti al of
contemporary l i f e- on- the-
move. ( Moreover, theVi a Cri stof oro Col umbonot
onl yi mpl i es di scovery
of a new
worl d, i t l eads to the E. U. R. di stri ct of Rome, product and sym-
bol of
Ital y' s repressi ve past under Fasci sm. ) 3
In short,
Fel l i ni ' s i denti tybecomes absorbedi n a act or process of
"f utur-
i ng" whi chi nvol ves
decenteri ng( l eavi ng thef i l mi c andhi stori c centre of
Rome) , dehumani zaton, the
death
of
i denti ty, anda hurtl i ng- f orth ami dst
i mages that of f er no romanti c assurances or
concl usi ons whatsoever. 4
In al l threef i l ms, Fel l i ni an process i s muchl i ke Derri dean
di f f erence or
di f f erenti ati on, constantl y ef f aci ng presences, encounteri ng traces
rather
than ori gi ns,
af f i rmi ngthe acti vi ty of l i f e rather than i ts meani ngs or mo-
ments of cl osure.
These f i l ms, f rom
Fel l i ni ' s mi ddl e peri od, 5 tend to ori gi nate i n a con-
text of romanti c
i ndi vi dual i smwhi chi ncl udes amoderni st predi sposi ti on
toward the compl eted, whol e
artwork ( Gui do andFel l i ni hi msel f seeki ng
to make movi es) . Then they proceed to
deconstruct romanti ci smand
moderni sm, worki ngthroughto a postmoderni st
si tuati onandsensi bi l i ty.
One f i l mf romhi s l ater peri od, Ci ty of
Women ( 1980) , does the same.
Here, we have a dream- memory whi chf uncti ons as the
f i l mwi thi n the
f i l m( the cl osed artwork) , wi th Snaporaz as dreamer- di rector
as wel l as
romanti c l ead. The dreamwork gradual l y pushes Snaporaz
beyond hi s
total i zi ng f antasi es of women( el i mi nati ngal so hi s romanti c
al ter
ego,
Caz-
zone) and breaks
i ts own boundari es as dream, l eavi ng Snaporaz i n an
awakened
state,
on
themove, i n a trai n surrounded byactual women
rather
than
meresymbol s of hi s ownwi sh- f ul f i l l ment . Agai n, thecul mi nati ngcon-
di ti on i s oneof
open- endedness . Thewomenare "real " yet they
ori gi nat-
edi n hi s dream- as di d
thetrai n j ourneyand- hi s nowbroken gl asses.
We
don' t have real i ty versus dream, consci ous vs . unconsci ous, wehave
both. Moreover, the movi e concl udes wi th an endi ng anda begi nni ng.
The trai n enters a tunnel , thescreen goes dark, andthe
credi ts rol l by, si g-
ni f yi ng that the movi e i s over. Yet af ter the credi ts a smal l l i ght appears
FRANK
BURKE
at t heendof t het unnel , breaki ngt het radi t i onal concl udi ngbarri er
of
t he
fi l mi t sel f .
As at
t heend
of Roma, wehave perpet ual mot i on
.
I naddi t i on,
t hought heent ry i nt ot het unnel (gi vent het hrust
of
t hefi l mandSnapo-
raz' s
age) suggest s deat h, t he l i ght at t he endsuggest s newl i fe. As at t he
endof TheCl owns we are l eft wi t h bot h
deat h and
l i fe
- coupl ed
here
wi t h
bot h darkness andl i ght - rat her t hanone or t he ot her.
I ncont rast t o Ci t yof Women, Fel l i ni ' s ot her recent fi l ms t endt ooperat e
pri nci pal l y
or sol el y i na negat i ve mode - focusi ngont he l i mi t at i ons of
cl osure, hi erarchy, romant i c i ndi vi dual i sm, st at i c harmonyor uni t y, wi t hout
escapi ng a worl d
caught
i n
t hose l i mi t at i ons .
Fel l i ni has sai dof Amarcord(1974) : "anot her t i t l e I want edt o gi ve i t was
I l
borgo,
i n
t hesenseof a medi eval encl osure, a l ack of i nformat i on, al ack
of cont act wi t ht heunheardof, t he new. . .
. "6
Thesmal l t owni nAmar-
cordi s t hemost obvi ous formof cl osure i nt hefi l m. However, t he narra-
t i ve modeof memory, suggest edby t hemeani ng
of
t het i t l e("I remember") ,
i s equal l y i mport ant - andone whi chi s never openedout t hewayi t i s
at t heendof Ci t y of Women. Moreover,
t he t own"narrat es" i t s
exi st ence
t hrough a seri es of ri t ual s suchas t he burni ngof t hewi t ch of wi nt er and
t hegat heri ngof Apri l 21, whoseyearl y repet i t i on(l i ke t hecomi ngof t he
puffs of spri ng) suggest s mere cycl i cness (i dent i cal i t y, sameness i n t erms
of deconst ruct i on) rat her t handi fference andnovel t y. '
Theat t empt edcompensat i onfor ent rapment i nt hefi l mi s romant i c fan-
t asy, i mport edfromt heSt at es vi a
movi es and1heocean
l i ner Rex, andmost
i nsi di ousl y ful fi l l edbyMussol i ni andhi s myt hof I t al i an superi ori t y. Fas-
ci smandAmeri ca converge i n t he fi l m' s fi nal scenewi t h t hemarri age of
Gradi sca t o a carabi ni ere, whosemarri age
moves
hi monl y
t o
procl ai mVi va
I t al i a! andwho
i s descri bedbyaweddi ngguest as Gradi sca' s GaryCoop-
er. Of course t he j oi ni ngof t he t ownsexgoddess t oa pet t y Mussol i ni i n
an
i nst i t ut i ont hat i s
supposedt o provi de happi ness ever
aft er makes t he
romant i c al t ernat i ve j ust anot her cl osedendi ng. Unl i ke Roma andCi t y of
Women, Amarcordends wi t hnosenseof forwardmot i on, j ust t he sense
of ent ropi c concl usi on.
I nt erest i ngl y, t hough t he fi l mmoves t o a deadend, Fel l i ni , i n t al ki ng
about hi s andfri ends' response t o t hefi l m, suggest s a favori t e post modern
st rat egy, "resi st ance"
or
"refusal , " as a count erbal ance
t o
cl osure: "psycho-
l ogi cal l y, i t woul d[ be] more accurat e t o speak of a ki ndof heart rendi ng
refusal of somet hi ngwhi chonce bel ongedt o you, of somet hi ngwhi ch
madeyou, of somet hi ngwhi chyou st i l l are. Andi n t hi s refusal , t here i s
al ways somet hi ng
sad, t ort ured, andt ort uous . Youspeakof t hat i nfamous
school , of t hat st upi danddul l l i fe t oget her, of ri di cul ous dreams, of t he
brui ses t hat youhave draggedal ongwi t h you forever,
of
a compl et e refusal
of t hat l i fe. " Yet for Fel l i ni , t he "refusal " proves ul t i mat el y t o bea fai l ed
st rat egy: ". . . at t hesamet i me, youknowverywel l t hat unfort unat el yyou
hadnoot her l i fe, you hadonl y t hat one. " 8 Oneul t i mat el y col l apses i nt o,
DECONSTRUCTING
FELLINI
becomes
i dent i cal wi t h, t henegat i vememoryof Amarcord, rat her t han
mai nt ai ni ng an
energi zi ng di st ance.
Fel l i ni ' s Casanova ( 1976) i s
Fel l i ni ' s pai nf ul di sembowel l i ng of Casano-
vaasromant i chero: as wri t er/ creat or, as
l over, asl oved one, andmost i m-
port ant , as f at uouspersona of al l t hree. Moreover, i t i s
Fel l i ni ' s unmaski ng
of t he
dark si deof romant i ci sm: f asci sm. Al l t hi s i s suggest ed by
Fel l i ni ' s
comment son t hef i l m: "Casanova
f or medoesnot exi st . . . . Therei s not h-
i ngi n TheHi st oryof MyLi f e, i t recal l s
not hi ng t oyou, not hi ng! . . . He
has gone
al l over t heworl d, andi t i s as i f henever got out of
bed
.
. . .
Whoknowswhat
Casanova wasl i ke? Weareeval uat i ng t hecharact er of
a book . . . a l oud, annoyi ng,
despi cabl echaract er . . . a man whopos-
sesses t hest upi di t y, t hearrogance, and
t hebumpt i ousnessof t hebarracks
andt he
church
. .
. . Hei s a manwhodoes not even al l owyout o
bei g-
norant ,
hesuperi mposes hi msel f on everyt hi ng . . . . Af asci st "9
Not j ust anat t ackon hi smai n charact er,
Fel l i ni ' s Casanova i s a cri t i que
of a ri gi d hi erarchi cal soci et y, charact eri zed
i n part byt heInqui si t i on,
whosesuppressi on t urnspot ent i al creat ors i nt o
post urersandsycophant s,
di rect i ngmost of t hei r at t ent i on t o i mpressi ng
aut hori t yand t he rest t o
seduci ng women.
Li vi ng i n t hi s soci et y, Casanova becomesl i t t l e moret han a
pseudoi n-
t el l ect ual Snaporaz
whocannot awaken f romhi s adol escent f ant asyof f emi -
ni ne conquest , sal vat i on, and perf ect i on.
Accordi ngl y, i n cont rast t o
Snaporaz, Casanovaendshi sf i l mundert hei nf l uenceof t heunconsci ous,
recal l i ng a dreamhehadt heni ght bef orei n whi chheret urned t o
Veni ce
and, wi t ht hebl essi ng of
hi smot her andt hePope, danced onef i nal dance
wi t h hi s mechani cal dol l
part ner,
Rosal ba.
Unl i keGui doi n 81/ 2 and
Fel l i ni i n TheCl ownsandRoma, Casanova
never escapeshi s i dent i t y,
hi s
persona, or
hi sownaut obi ographi cal f i ct i ons.
TheOrchest ra Rehearsal ( 1979) i s Fel l i ni ' s most bl at ant at t ackon cl osed
art , st at i c harmony, andhi erarchy. It s set t i ngi s an ol d orat ory, perf ect ac-
coust i cal l y- henceperf ect l yseal ed of f f romt heout si deworl d. Themu-
si ci ans,
under t heaut hori t yof t heconduct or, seek someki nd of el usi ve
perf ect i on - an i deal hel dsol el y
i n t he
conduct or' s
mi nd. Theorchest ra
i s hi erarchi zed
not onl ybyt heconduct or, but byuni onrepresent i ves, a
maf i oso"capo
orchest ra, " andaki nd of nat ural ranki ngamongt hemusi -
ci anst hemsel ves f rompercussi oni st s
( most l yNeopol i t answearet ol d) t o
vi ol i ni st s ( presumabl yNort hern It al i ans!) .
Theart process i t sel f i s oneof repressi on andproj ect i on
. Theext reme
t emperament al and bi ographi cal di f f erences amongt he
musi ci ans, t hei r
radi cal l ysel f -cent ered obsessi onwi t ht hei r owni nst rument s,
aregradual -
l yl evel l ed byconf ormi t y. Fi rst t hemaj ori t yof t heorchest ra band t oget her
i n arebel l i on agai nst aut hori t ywhi chdi mi ni shes rat her t han af f i rmssel f -
expressi on. Then, whent hei nsul at ed worl dof t heorat oryi s shat t eredby
awrecki ngbal l , t herebel l i on i s qui ckl yabandoned.
Theorchest rarest ores
t heconduct or t o
hi spodi um, anddevot es i t sel f t ot hepi eceof musi che
FRANKBURKE
hasbeenseeki ng
t o i mposeont hemfromearl y i nt hemovi e
.
Al l
i ndi vi du-
al i t y, al l di fference, has beenel i mi nat ed. Order
becomes compl et ewi t hi n
t heworl dof t heart work. (Even
t heseemi ngt hreat posed by t hewreck-
i ngbal l seems
neut ral i zed by t hefal se harmony of t heorchest ra. )
Cent ral t o t hi s st ory of i mposed and escapi st
uni t y i s t hecharact er of
t heconduct or, aGermanaut hori t ari anromant i c i nt he
t radi t i onof Wagn-
er. Hei s t heart i st as
di ct at or, l ocked i nt o andperpet uat i nga syst emof art
as power andsubmi ssi on. At t hefi l m' s end, whent hepi ecei s concl uded,
he cannot abandonhi s rol e as
conduct or. Hemust cri t i ci ze and i nsul t ,
demandi ngever morerehearsal .
Theremust beno wayout of t hi s end-
l essl y repet i t i ve,
henceful l y cl osed, worl d of art .
And
t heShi pSai l s On(1983) concl udes what mi ght becal l ed Fel l i ni ' s
"l at et ri l ogy" of dead anddeadeni ng
art . Heret heformof i sol at eart i st ry
becomes operarat her t han
aut obi ography (Casanova) or t hesymphony
(The
Orchest raRehearsal ) , andt hesi t ebecomes anoceanl i ner rat her t han
Casanova' s decadent i magi nat i onor an
orat ory.
There
arenumerous si mi l ar-
i t i es t o TheOrchest ra
Rehearsal . Theshi pandt heoperat roupearehi er-
archi es muchl i ke
t hesymphony. Aut hori t ybecomesi ncreasi ngl y domi nant
andfi nal l y comesal t oget her fromwi t hout . (TheAust ro- Hungari anbat t l e-
shi pcombi nes i neffect t he
rol es of wrecki ngbal l andGermanconduct or
as exogenous mot i vat i ngforceby t heend. ) Di fferences among
t heopera
st ars arerepressedi nfavor of fal seharmoni es: fi rst t hepi l gri mage
t o
scat -
t er EdmeaTet ua' s ashes near her bi rt hpl ace
(harmony as worshi p) , t hen
t hevari ous operat i c performances
t hat accompanyt heat t ackof t heAust ro-
Hungari anshi pandt heevacuat i onof t heoceanl i ner (harmony
as el i t i st art ) .
Underpi nni ngt hemovement
of
t hefi l m
i s, of course, t heromant i c myt h
of t hegreat art i st (Tet ua) , as wel l
as t heromant i c i l l usi ons of t hevari ous
passengers who somehowl i ve t hrough
or i nl i ngeri ngcompet i t i onwi t h
her. Thei mpl i ed
l ogi c of t hefi l mi s si mi l ar t o t hat of TheOrchest ra Re-
hearsal : romant i c
myst i fi cat i oncreat esacl osed i nner worl dof fant asywhi l e
t heout er worl dget s i ncreasi ngl y out of handandexert s i ncreasi ngaut hori -
t y over t hei sol at eromant i c worl d.
Andt heShi p Sai l s Oni s al so a fi l mabout fi l m-
and about
fi l m- as-
cl osure. I nt heopeni ngsequence, wemovefromdocument ary camera
work(Fi l mas presumed real i t y) t o i ncreasi ngl y
sophi st i cat edci nemat i c t ech-
ni ques (cl oseups, edi t i ng) whi chreveal fi l m' s mani pul at i on, st ruct uri ng,
and"de- real i zi ng" of t he
found worl d. Moreover, col or i s i nt roduced as
real i sm(a mere
t echnol ogi cal , aest het i c achi evement ) , not as hei ght ened
or i ncreasedreal i t y. I n
fact , t hecol ori zat i onof t hei mages coi nci des wi t h
t hemovement fromdocument ary
t o
fi l med
operaor musi cal comedy -
i . e. , pureescapi st
ci nema.
I n addi t i on, t hecredi t s
areaccompani ed by t hesound of a proj ect or,
emphasi zi ngt hat t hefi l m
wearewat chi ngi s acompl et edproduct , qui t e
separat efrom
t heworl d i t presumabl y reveal s, mechani cal l y reproduced
for at heat re
audi ence. I t i s not aformof i mmedi at e, l i vi ngaccess t o t he
122
DECONSTRUCTINGFELLINI
worl di t represent s. Byf i l m' s end, as al l becomes mechani zedmel odrama
andopera, compl et e wi t hhappyendi ng,
t he
emphasi s on di sassoci at ed
proj ect i on i s evenmorepronounced. Moreover, t he f i nal i mage-an
i ri s
i n t o darkness -emphasi zes mere l aborat ory t echni que, superi mposed
on
t he f i l mst ock, evenf urt her removi ng t he f i l mf romt hereal i t y i t sup-
posedl yrepresent s. (The i ri s i n i s, of course, a dramat i ci nst ance of cl osure
andcont rast s di rect l ywi t ht hesmal l i ri s of l i ght t hat opens out t het unnel
at t he endof Ci t y of Women. )
Thedi ssoci at i on bet weenf i l mandreal i t y i s accent uat edbyt herol e of
t hej ournal i st whoserves of t enas our maj or l i nk t o t heact i on. It becomes
cl ear earl yon, as he i s bani shedt o a corner of t hedi ni ng room, t hat hi s
awareness of what ' s happeni ng(hence our knowl edgederi vedf romhi m)
i s part i al i n t he ext reme. Paradoxi cal l y, t hough hi s l i mi t s (and even
sel f -
doubt ) as a j ournal i st pervade t hef i l m, he becomes our sol e source of
i n-
f ormat i on. Weare f orcedt o accept onl yhi s versi on of t he f act s -a ver-
si on whi chi t sel f i s f ul l of t ent at i ve hypot heses rat her t han persuasi ve
document at i on.
ThoughFel l i ni ' s use
of
anunrel i abl ej ournal i st -narrat or i s a st rat egyf ound
i n
hi s
earl y
work("The Mat ri moni al
Agency, " 1953) i t al so
serves as a l i nk
bet ween
t he
l at e
t ri l ogy
of
"deadart " andFel l i ni ' s most recent work, Gi nger
andFred(1986) . Here medi a repl aces art al t oget her, i nst eadof remai ni ng
i n i t s servi ce. Fel l i ni ' s j ournal i st -narrat or becomes t he vast consci ousness-
programmi ngnet work of t el evi si on.
In Gi nger andFred, t el evi si on serves as t henewf asci smf or Fel l i ni . It s
i ni t i al presence seems casual : a pl acardat t het rai n st at i on, di spl ayi ng t he
nameof t heChri st mas speci al ("EdEccoa hoi ") onwhi chAmel i a andPi ppo
(Gi nger andFred) are t o appear. Yet even here, t he worl dof t el evi si on ar-
rest s Amel i a' s at t ent i onanddi ct at es her movement . Soon, act ual t el evi si on
t ransmi ssi ons appear andbegi nt ori vet t hecharact ers' at t ent i on(e. g. , t he
soccer game at t he hot el ) . Amel i a hersel f uses t he t v i n her roomt o un-
wi nd. Then, she andPi ppoare movedi nexorabl y t owardt he t v st at i on
andt heshow. As t hi s happens, al l t ransmi ssi ons begi n t ocome f romone
st at i on -andconsi st onl yof announcement s rel at i ng t o t he Chri st mas
spect acul ar. EvenFel l i ni ' s camera eyebecomes sl ave t ot het vmoni t or, du-
t i f ul l y reveal i ngguest s i n t he net workcaf et eri a as t heyare descri bedby
t he f emal e t v announcer.
OnceAmel i a andPi ppoare i nsi de t hest udi oandpast t hesecuri t ycheck-
poi nt , t hei r ent rapment
becomes compl et e.
(Pi ppo,
f eari ngt hi s,
t hrows
a
bri ef revol ut i onaryt ant rumbef ore goi ngt hrough
securi t yset t i ng
of f t he
al armwi t hhi s horseshoe. ) Amel i a andPi ppo
become
Gi nger
and
Fred,
t heyareregi ment ed
i nt ot hemechani st i cschedul e of t he show, andt hey
becomesubservi ent i n t he presence of t hesmugl yaut hori t ari an net work
presi dent . Thei r remai ni ngf reedomconsi st s onl yof a f ewmoment s of
sel f -expressi on andrebel l i onduri ng a power f ai l ure -moment s whose
aut hent i ci t y
i s undercut byt heset t i ng: t he st age of a t vst udi o. As soon
FRANKBURKE
as thel i ghts return, Gi nger andFredresume thei r pl acewi thi n theshow' s
ri gi d scheme of
thi ngs
.
Because Amel i a' s and
Pi ppo' s
rel ati onshi p i s rul edby
the pervasi ve
authori tyof tel evi si on, thei r personal i denti ti es remai n
subordi nate
to
thei r
stage i denti ti es of Gi nger andFred. They have no opportuni tyto ( re) es-
tabl i shcontact or devel opameani ngf ul partnershi p. Eveni n thef i nal scene,
as they reach a moment of potenti al honesty anddi rectness at the trai n
stati on, theyare
i nterruptedbyautographseekers whorestorethemto thei r
rol es as
Gi nger
andFred.
For Fel l i ni , tel evi si on cl earl yserves not onl yas thenewf asci sm, but as
the newgodandsanta cl aus, di spensi ng l ove, spi ri t, goodwi l l , andgi f ts
onChri stmas day. I t i s the l atest commodi tyf ormi n a consumer
soci ety
( the preponderance of f oodcommerci al s makes the l i nk between tel evi -
si on
andconsumpti onqui tecl ear) . I t deri ves f romthewi l l i ngness of peo-
pl e
tobe
programmed, andi t f uel s thei r desi re f or passi veacceptance of
meani ng f romwi thout .
Thenature of tel evi si onprogrammi ngprovi des perhaps themost
graphi c
i nstance of f al se harmonyi n Fel l i ni ' s l ater work. I t al so harkens back to
hi s earl ywork, combi ni ng twof avori te Fel l i ni an arenas of
entertai nment :
the
vari ety theatre andthe ci rcus . Acts f ol l owoneanother wi thvi rtual l y
no
connecti on,
no
pri nci pl eof i ntegrati on. Acowwi th 18 teats cancoex-
i st wi th, a l evi tati ng monkand24danci ngdwarf s . I nterspersedaresausage
andol i ve oi l commerci al s. Theonl y thi ng that hol ds the showtogether
i s the f act that i t occupi es a conti nuous ti me sl ot .
Thetel evi si on showi s, of course, a cl osedf ormi n much thesameway
as i s a memoi r, symphony, opera, or proj ectedf i l m. However, i n i ts radi -
cal l ydi sj uncti ve embodi ment of bothf ragmentati onandcl osure, i t i s even
moresymptomati c of our current worl d- our quest f or order amongthe
rui ns - than the art f orms of Fel l i ni ' s precedi ng movi es .
Li ke Fel l i ni ' s anal ysi s of the di s- i ntegrati ng andauthori tari an nature of
tel evi si on, hi s conti nui ng exami nati on of the l i mi ts of art, cl osure,
and
romanti c i ndi vi dual i smattest to
therel evance of hi s recent work as both
cri ti que and
expressi on of contemporanei ty. They i ndi cate that, despi te
hi s di mi ni shi ng vi si bi l i ty on thei nternati onal f i l mscene, Fel l i ni i s work-
i ng di l i gentl y andsel f - cri ti cal l y on i ssues of urgency i n the real mof cul -
tural arti cul ati on.
Notes
1 .

Mysenseof howFel l i ni i s currentl ypercei vedi s deri vedl argel y
f romdi scussi ons wi th
other f i l mschol ars concerni ng the negl ect of Fel l i ni ' s
work
on
the part of f i l mthe-
ori sts andcri ti cs .
I ndi cati vel y, Fel l i ni ' s namedoes not appear i nthe i ndex of Movi es
andMethods.
Vol . I I . An Anthol ogy, ed. Bi l l Ni chol s ( Berkel ey: Uni v. of Cal i f orni a
Press, 1985) -
a 743- page compi l ati on of contemporary f i l mtheory andanal ysi s .
124
Department of Fi l mStudi es
Queen' s
Uni versi ty
Attacks onFel l i ni - as- romanti c aretypi f i ed byRobert Phi l l i pKol ker' s remarksi nThe
Al teri ng Eye: Contemporary I nternati onal Ci nema (London: Oxf ordUni versi ty Press,
1983)
:
"Fel l i ni [ has] sl i pped back toamel odramati c mode vi aexpressi oni sm, anau-
tobi ographi cal expressi oni smi nwhi chthestructures of memoryandf antasy arel i mned
out wi th hi story rel egated toabackdrop andnostal gi a el evated above anal ysi s. He
returns toa
romanti ci smthat i nsi sts that the producti ons of thearti st' s l i f e andi magi -
nati onmust beof
i nterest si mpl y
because
they aretheproducti ons of thearti st" (p. 87) .
2
.

Moderni sm' s pri vi l egi ng of
the
autonomy of
art i s descri bed as f ol l ows by Andreas
Huyssen: "Contrary tothe avantgarde' s
i ntenti on
to
merge art andl i f e, moderni sm
al ways remai ned boundup wi th the more tradi ti onal noti onof the autonomous
art
work, wi th theconstructi onof f ormandmeani ng. . . andwi th the
speci al i zedstatus
of theaestheti c" (Af ter theGreat Di vi de: Moderni sm, Mass Cul ture, Postmoderni sm
- Bl oomi ngton: I ndi anaUni versi ty Press, 1986- p. 192) . Moderni sm' stendency to
pri vi l egecl osed f ormandthe f i ni shed art obj ect i s addressed by I habHassani nThe
PostmodernMrn: Essays i n
PostmodernTheory andCul ture(Col umbus: Ohi oState
Uni versi ty Press, 1987), p. 91
.
3.

E. U. R. was begunas amonument toFasci st
archi tecture andi deol ogy, though i t was
not compl eted unti l l ong af ter the second worl dwar.
4.

For rel ated andmore extensi ve anal yses of The Cl owns, see A. J . Prats, TheAutono-
mous I mage: Ci nemati c Narrati onandHumani sm(Lexi ngton, Ky. : Uni v. of Ken-
tucky Press, 1981), pp. 122- 152andFrankBurke, "The Three- Phase Processandthe
Whi teCl own- AugusteRel ati onshi p i nFel l i ni ' s The Cl owns, " 1977Fi l mStudi esAnnu-
al : Part One: Expl orati ons i nNati onal Ci nemas(Pl easantvi l l e, NewYork: Redgrave
Publ i shi ng, 1977, pp. 124- 142. For arel atedanal ysi s of Roma, see Wal ter C. Foreman,
J r. "Fel l i ni ' s Ci nemati c Ci ty: RomaandMyths of Foundati on, " ForumI tal i cum, 14,
no. 2(Spri ng 1980), 78- 98. For a di scussi onof the di ssol uti onof i denti ty or "decharac-
teri zati on" i s other f i l ms f romFel l i ni ' s mi ddl eandl ate peri ods, see A. J . Prats andJ ohn
Pi eters, "The Narrati ves of Decharacteri zati oni nFel l i ni ' s Col or Movi es, " South At-
l anti c Bul l eti n,
45,
no. 2(May 1980), 31- 41.
5.

I ntermsof Fel l i ni ' s f eature f i l ms, I consi der hi s earl y peri od toembrace Vari ety Li ghts
(1950) throughLaDol ce Vi ta (1960), hi s mi ddl eperi odtoi ncl ude 81/ 2through
Roma,
andhi s l ate peri od tocommence wi th Amarcord
.
6.

Àmarcord: TheFasci smWi thi n
Us
: AnI ntervi ewwi th Val eri oRi va, " i nPeter Bon-
danel l a, ed
.
Federi coFel l i ni : Essays i nCri ti ci sm(NewYork
: Oxf ord Uni versi ty Press:
1978), pp.
24- 25
.
Herei naf ter ci ted as Àmarcord i n Bondanel l a. "
7.

Thesense
of
adeadendi s emphasi zedby Fel l i ni i ndescri bi ng theresponse of cl ose
f ri ends tothef i l m: " . . . what i s i t that agi tates i f everythi ng i nthef i l mi s ri di cul ous?
I t i s because yousense that i t i s your I tal y, i t i s you, because yousense that i f today
youare abl e tol ook wi th anal most i mpi ous eye at thi s thi ng, at the same ti me i t i s
your mi rror . Andthen, notwi thstandi ng that, yousense that therei s noti me l ef t f or
another ki nd of l i f e andthat thi s thi ng f romwhi chyouwi shtodetach yoursel f and
whi chyouj udge wi thout pi ty i s the onl y l i f e
youhavehad. "
Amarcordi nBondanel -
l a, p. 26.
8.

Amarcord i n Bondanel l a, p.
25.
DECONSTRUCTI NGFELLI NI
9.

"Casanova: AnI ntervi ewwi th Al doTassone, " i n Bondanel l a, pp. 29- 30.

Aesthetics and Postmodern Cinema PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aesthetics and Postmodern Cinema PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Canadi anJ ournal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al

Theory/ Revue canadi ennede t heori epol i t i que

You might also like