"Carefully I Touched the Faces of My Parents": Bergman's Autobiographical Image
Linda Haverty Rugg
Biography, Volume 24, Number 1, Winter 2001, pp. 72-84 (Article)
Published by University of Hawai'i Press DOI: 10.1353/bio.2001.0023
For additional information about this article
Access provided by University of Puerto Rico (15 Nov 2013 09:57 GMT)
though not visible on the screen. the pronoun “I” performs the magic of collapsing two bodies.
Biography 24. that of a remembered child and that of the remembering adult.1 (Winter 2001) © Biographical Research Center
. how can we understand that the person in front of the camera is identical with the person behind it? In textual autobiography. seems to me pragmatically sound. dwells on one of them: assuming that we are to identify the person directing the film with the subject of the autobiography. undermines the foundation of autobiographical discourse. in her groundbreaking essay on film as autobiography. his basic contention. The process of writing an autobiography calls for a single author who produces a narrative account of his or her own life. that the reader of an autobiography expects to find the type of identification he describes. First of all. The use of the photographic. Cinematic autobiography necessarily creates a physical distinction between the narrating and experiencing selves.I TOUCHED THE FACES OF MY PARENTS”: BERGMAN’S AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL IMAGE
LINDA HAVERTY RUGG
Despite the promise implicit in my title. Elizabeth Bruss. and the divorce between the directing and acting selves. In the photographic medium. film is graphic but not graphia. a “true” autobiography must have an author who bears the same name as the protagonist who is identical with the narrator of the account. cinematic medium brings a host of new considerations to bear on life representations. the body becomes the center of our attention. While there has been much criticism of the apparently absolutist nature of Lejeune’s paradigm. As famously defined by Philippe Lejeune (1982). And there are a number of important ways in which cinematic life-narratives disrupt traditional expectations of autobiography. into one person. which alludes to the films and texts of Ingmar Bergman. not writing. it is not entirely clear in what sense we may speak of cinematic autobiography.
Autobiographical. Thus we saw the emergence of a cadre of directors— Godard. It will be my contention in this essay that Ingmar Bergman. intersubjective model for self-representation in his autobiographical narratives. Bergman’s auto/biographies are perhaps not life writing at all in the traditional sense. and obscuring the corporate or national underpinnings of cinematic production. with its cast of actors. plays. develops just such a collaborative. One constructive response. Not surprisingly. the idea of a cinematic autobiographer became possible. In fact. and Bergman. the vision of a director) could elevate the popular movie to the status of art film. the collaborative nature of cinema. a collaborative subjectivity (intersubjectivity) that would expand the genre of autobiography to include cinematic self-representation. and fictional biographies of his immediate family. This theoretical move claimed the cinematic medium for the realm of high art. and a subjective and singular vision of his or her own life. articulated already by Elizabeth Bruss and developed further by Susanna Egan. This suspicion was fueled in part by questions about the propriety of subsuming the work of dozens (or hundreds) of individuals under the artistic imprimatur of one man (almost always a man). perhaps—but can this be autobiography? Opponents of the auteur concept have regarded its inherent elitism with suspicion. In doing so. Auteurism was first proposed as a requisite feature of cinematic art by the French journal Cahiers du Cinéma in the 1950s. There it was maintained that only the clearly recognizable fingerprint of a cinematic author (in most cases. technicians. must inevitably disrupt the concept of the solitary autobiographer. one of the most formidable representatives of auteur cinema. in some cases clearly marked (albeit through extratextual indicators) as autobiographical visions. Concomitantly. Truffaut. memories. all of these objections to film as a vehicle for self-representation have been raised in a different context.Rugg. corporate or national sponsors. written autobiographies. caterers. It seems clear that if we are to regard cinematic autobiography as a possibility. might be to imagine a new type of selfhood. cameramen. make-up artists. Bergman’s Autobiographical Image
Further. which include films. Bergman makes use of his texts and the cinematic medium—its collaborative aspect and the nature of its technology—to project a new kind of selfhood. since their primary
. Fellini. and so on. one that expands the boundaries of the self beyond the body and beyond the parenthetic enclosure of date of birth and date of death. making it possible for the concept of artist as Romantic genius to migrate into new technological media. confronted with the blank page. he seems to brush aside the difference between autobiography and biography altogether. for instance—who took their places as auteurs and proceeded in a number of their films to offer visions of childhood and adolescence. in the debate over auteur cinema. we must come to terms with these objections as well. set designers.
1 (Winter 2001)
concern is not the narrative of his life. This is particularly obvious in the work that follows his retirement from directing films. ***** When Ingmar Bergman’s mother. himself and the artists who have influenced him (Strindberg in particular). intertwining life and films in such a way as to make it clear that Bergman himself draws little if any distinction between the two. and in 1990. Images deals mainly with Bergman’s life in relation to his films. inscribed with the words “To [my daughter] Margareta after my death or to be burned” (Linton-Malmfors 9). himself and his parents. If this sounds expansive. was a Lutheran minister whose appointment to the Royal Court of Sweden forced the family to maintain a high moral standard in the public eye. Soon. Bergman begins to want to break through the historical and physical limitation of his body and his birth date to move into the dark space of his own origins. one must also keep in mind that the danger of violation exists in Bergman’s construction of selfhood. his parents’ story begins to eclipse his own. The packet contained Karin’s diary. It is at this point that he begins to write autobiographies: in 1987. which revealed her passionate love affair with a young theology student. Erik Bergman. The primary problem cited by critics of auteurism applies here as well—the appropriation and subjugation of others to a single person’s artistic vision. particularly his desire to use photographs as portals into the Other and the past. and here the story of his parents begins to take shape. I will attend to his use of the photographic medium as a means of constructing (inter)subjectivity. positive. The Magic Lantern. she left behind an image-shattering legacy. He embarks on a series of films and literary works about
. his mother’s posthumous revelation still seems to have had a stunning impact on him. Images: A Life in Film. Her husband. Even as Bergman creates the illusion of boundlessness between himself and his actors. indicates that he had always known about the schism between his family’s outer face and their private reality. A sealed packet was found among her things. In doing so. In the analysis of Bergman’s autobiographical work that follows. to the extent that the book ends with an entry from his mother’s diary.74
Biography 24. I would like to strike a balance between liberation and violation in order to get at the essential nature of Bergman’s project. died in 1966. but the presentation of this experimental concept of what a “life” might be—something broader than singular selfhood. The Magic Lantern focuses primarily on his childhood and the birth of his obsession with the cinema. however. or to put it differently. Karin. The Magic Lantern. and liberating. Though Ingmar Bergman’s 1987 autobiography. he reinscribes his authority by insisting on his angle of vision and his voice.
and how their materiality can serve as an allegory for conceptions of selfhood. and relates how his relationship to the family photographs led to the idea of writing the novel: “Carefully I touched the faces and fates of my parents. Best Intentions and Private Confessions. In his foreword to Best Intentions. At a critical moment. and because they include a narrative voice that ponders its relationship to the protagonists. Persona presents the unforgettable image of the faces of two women merged into one eerie still photograph. but another aspect of photography’s power will emerge as well: the physical. respectively. Bergman’s mother left her secret diary to her daughter. the year of his mother’s death. They become objects of ritual and fetishistic importance because they contain actual pieces of the past. both textual and cinematic. an exploration of his parents’ courtship and the difficult early years of their marriage. who inherited all of the family papers. my book on photography and autobiography. and I thought that I learned a few things about myself” (6). Bergman’s Autobiographical Image
his parents. the parents are in the photographs.
. it is interesting to consider these biographical novels as extensions of or prefaces to Bergman’s autobiography. and their totemic quality. and two novels about his parents. should take the family photographs that interested him. but the siblings agreed that Ingmar. This argument will recur in connection with Bergman.Rugg. and something can be communicated by a physical contact with the surface of the image. This emblematic image offers an object for meditation on Bergman’s model of intersubjectivity as it applies to erotic pairings and parents and children. directed by Bille August and Liv Ullmann. In Picturing Ourselves. both of which were made into films. beginning in 1986 with a documentary film made for television and entitled Karins ansikte [Karin’s Face]. and how his understanding and use of photographs illuminate his construction of selfhood. He attempts to deny or overcome the barrier-like quality of images through an act of imagination. material nature of photographs. Bergman refers directly to his photographic inheritance. He goes on to write the film script for Sunday’s Child (a film about his childhood relationship with his family. the physical nature of photographs stresses their enigmatic aspect—the viewer cannot enter the two-dimensional surface. Bergman begins in his film Persona to grapple with the issues of cloven realities and subjectivity that are unbounded by body or time. It is also a point of departure for considering how photographs function in Bergman’s work. again. directed by one of his sons). Somehow. I considered how photographs negotiate the tension between the verifiably real and convincing illusion. the filmmaker. At the same time. But already in 1966. there is no way to penetrate the face or the mind depicted there. and this polarity makes itself felt throughout Bergman’s work. Because these works follow closely on the heels of Bergman’s foray into autobiographical writing. Photographs are both windows and barriers. The act of touching the photographed faces emphasizes the materiality of photographs.
but the original image. actors in a real space.1 (Winter 2001)
in the foreword to Best Intentions he writes: “I go into the images. “There is no way. film director) and autobiographical text (in this case. things that have happened to him enter into his cinematic and dramatic work practically unedited: “Those who are interested [in learning more about my break-up from Ellen] can find out what happened in the third part of Scenes from a Marriage ” (189). no way of discriminating a shot of the director from a shot of any other. . the documentary photograph offers one kind of reality. clovenness. the “authored” film) breaks down inevitably between the persons in front of and behind the camera. I knew quite well how feelings should be reproduced but my spontaneous expression [of them] was never spontaneous. the identity between author (in this case. “of marking a personal attachment to one image rather than another. As soon as he “enters” the image.” she writes.” is also an illusion. And the narrative aspect of film. One notable exception to the control and his cloven condition occurs while he is sitting at his mother’s deathbed. Thus Bergman describes his neurological condition as a professional illness. But he realizes that the entrance is illusory. Since he claims he cannot experience life in the world as it unfolds. the director’s mental image. there was always a microsecond between my intuitive experience and its emotional expression. he transforms it through a fictionalized narration. in order to enter the world of the real through illusion. but it is a reality that must be penetrated through illusion. like the “reality” that fictional film represents. Repeatedly he alludes to his careful orchestration of episodes in his own life for the best dramatic effect (112). indifferent
. .1 The film photographs something real. The mental image is another kind of reality. the way it brings images to life through so-called “motion. Similarly. he creates a controlled environment in which he can know what will happen in advance. I wonder if there is or will ever be an instrument that could measure and define a neurosis that so effectively mimicked an illusory normality” (Laterna 140–41). He describes his own persona as diseased—a self that looks at itself: “I existed on memories of feelings. which leads to a propensity for staging events in his own life. For Bergman. One way into a discussion of photography and Bergman’s model of selfhood is to begin with a dichotomy he often evokes in his work: kluvenhet (literally.2 Bergman’s description of his condition maps neatly onto theoretical discussions of autobiography and film.” This is achieved through narration. Elizabeth Bruss notes that in film. brought to life through magic. and it must be galvanized.76
Biography 24. did not exist until these photographs were taken. looking at her face just moments after she has passed away: “I don’t even think that I observed or staged myself— that professional illness [was absent] that had dogged me all my life and so often had stolen or cloven my deepest experiences” (12). . or division) and gr¨ ansl¨ oshet (boundlessness).
Here she hinges her argument on the body as a final frontier. even to the extent that he tells the boy what he was thinking at that moment in the past (significantly. And Susanna Egan expands on that argument. We watch as Bergman sets up a scene which. proposing that the apparent problem of schism is precisely what gives films the potential to act as “interactive” autobiography
Staging his boyhood self—Ingmar Bergman directs Bertil Guve in Fanny and Alexander (photo courtesy of The Museum of Modern Art Film Stills Archive). it is a memory of himself as the child director of a puppet theater. Film poses both a physical and a narratological problem for autobiography. Here we see Bergman’s intense engagement with the young actor who plays him. in other words. as Bruss argues. that the narrative voice (which appears only in the documentary) cannot be adequately attached to both the directing and acting selves. A scene from Bergman’s documentary film The Making of Fanny and Alexander illustrates her point. is identified as a memory from his childhood.
. Bergman’s Autobiographical Image
individual” (305). “I want to go to mother”).Rugg. in the inter-titles. But Bruss closes her essay with the thought that perhaps film can represent a transformed vision of selfhood for the technological age: “film simply shares—or better. It seems to be the case here. articulates—the dilemmas of an entire culture now irrevocably committed to complex technologies and social interdependencies” (320). In fact.
1 (Winter 2001)
(“Encounters” 599). He regards his younger self through a frame. his childhood self. The illusion of pushing through that liminal space (for it is an illusion. illuminated by the candle footlights upstage. In The Magic Lantern. intersubjective life. many of whom have worked closely with Bergman for decades. and so the line must be erased through narration and illusory motion.78
Biography 24. takes his cues from the older man on the other side of the “mirror. however. in his turn. who. The young actor. In this scene. More germane to my line of argument about the role of photographs in Bergman’s work. there is no I”] (Laterna 63). a remarkable thing happens. and the entirety of The Making of Fanny and Alexander in fact. as if the theater were a mirror. This occurs in part because the boy is a director. The collaborative nature of film reflects what we have come to understand as the collaborative nature of selfhood. Because Fanny and Alexander was the last film directed by Bergman. but bringing the film instead into real.” Once this scene has moved into the feature film. as an illustration of the collaborative principle. but also because of the way his face fills the entire backstage. and the created world and the spectator. which he works to overcome with the illusion of motion (as in motion pictures) and textual narrative.4 In his autobiographies. emblematized in the still photographic image and the black lines between each image in a filmstrip. It is the black line that interferes with bringing life to the dead (and the dead images). the real world and the created world. and links his subjectivity to the viewers’. Of these people. consistently interrupting the perspective the viewer would see in the “real” film. there is a valedictory feeling attached to the gathering of actors and technicians in the documentary. though a convincing and clearly readable one) makes up the thrust of Bergman’s attempt to achieve boundlessness.3 With this in mind. Bergman’s cast and technicians are visible and active. The shot identifies Alexander as the film’s subjective consciousness. we can revisit the scene from Bergman’s childhood. intet jag” [“If there is no you. he meditates on that blackness:
. both textual and (dare I say the word) real. In the documentary. framed by the stage as if a mirror image of the viewer. Bergman deals explicitly with the problem of the analogous spaces between images and between individuals. is the way the shot of the young Bergman as theater director is organized. through the open stage of the puppet theater. like Bergman. Although the viewer cannot see Bergman in the shot. Bergman says “Utan ett du. Bergman’s use of the framed theater stage in this scene resembles his use of other framed and permeable spaces that depict liminality—borderlands between the created world and its creator. dreams the play. Stasis is nothing less than the force and power of death. like the boy. there is a strong sense of the director’s artistic presence. we see Bergman peering at the young actor. Fanny and Alexander.
the stuff of film.” Bergman writes. Bergman touches upon the solidity of static photography. I can still feel the rising sense of magic from my childhood: there in the darkness of the closet [with my magic lantern] I cranked forward one frame after another. With his reference to the stubbornness of these mental images. the reality is life that extends beyond the frontiers of two apparently individual bodies. This is one of cinema’s magic tricks. a deception of the senses. as he puts it. so “devilishly alike.” In this light. [When the image of the four women appeared] I was busy with something else. there is a reality conveyed by that trick that exists in the same space as the viewer’s ability to recognize the boy with the puppet theater as the director of the film. At the same time. Thus. he says. (89)
He knows that the apparent “motion” of cinema is a magic trick. “It sometimes happens that images stubbornly return without my understanding what they want. but the optic nerve does not register the darkness.” which proves important to his project of depicting merged subjectivities breaking the body’s frontiers (Bergman 196). . frame by frame. this time of “four women in white dresses in a red room. the invisible imagined world. going straight to our feelings. Bergman decided to make a film with the two of them because they were. . Bergman’s Autobiographical Image
No other art bypasses our conscious minds as film does. was inspired by an actual photograph of Liv Ullmann and Bibi Andersson. enigmatic mental image. with darkness between. In his autobiographies The Magic Lantern and Images. its rock-like immobility. Bergman stresses how certain of his films begin with a single. saw the almost imperceptible changes. I understood that they wanted something of me” (Bilder 83). in its turn. And in Bergman’s mind. show “the thing that has been there” (76).Rugg. while still images can serve as the genesis for his cinematic narratives. This mental image. sitting on a beach and comparing hands. In this case. A tiny glitch in our optic nerve. wearing hats. for the cinematic apparatus galvanizes the dead photographic image. the photographic rigidity can also be made to stand for something that can neither be denied (a photograph always acts historically) or penetrated (a photograph does not permit true entry). are hard pieces of reality in the sense that they. cranked faster: a movement. Persona. but since they kept coming back so persistently. Cries and Whispers had its genesis in an image as well. These images are not historically real. a shock effect: twenty-four illuminated squares a second. Described as a stand-in for death above. . the images of the imagination have independent subjectivity. and beyond the frames of birth and death. he
. but they will shortly enter the realm of reality through cinematic photography. the real objects filmed in fictional narratives represent the unreal. across the editing table. deep into the twilight chambers of our souls. At the same time. When I run the strip of film.5 Photographs. as Roland Barthes said. he also writes “I can never get past those images. grew out of an image of two women.
transform.1 (Winter 2001)
“Devilishly alike”—Bibi Andersson and Liv Ullmann in Persona (photo courtesy of the Museum of Modern Art Film Still Archives). “My art cannot melt. and indestructible. but also enacting a kind of masculine penetration of female subjectivity. which I find problematic. obviously in this case. Two things interest me here: first that the images take on the form of the impenetrable. Nor the man who burns for his beliefs” (Bilder 59). and second. With this in mind. undeniable. who is a fictional stand-in for himself. Also problematic is his use of women to project his anxieties about his own subjectivity. He says. The director’s concept of “reality” in image has no connection to historical verifiability.
considers two images from Persona—that of a young boy. I want to connect the notion of photographs as a kind of impermeable substance. while the second is an historical document. In Bergman’s work the materiality of film is analogous to the
Biography 24. implying an essentialized view of women as more “naturally” intersubjective.or window-like. mirror. to the photograph as membrane. and that of a Vietnamese monk who sets himself on fire. or forget that boy on the photograph. The first is a mental image. that a mental image has for Bergman the same status as an historical one.
and the mirror structures that are set up between the boy and the screen. Now a fascinating reverse shot takes place. As for the more obvious body analog. produces the image of film as membrane. wakes up. film running through the machine. occurs soon afterwards when a young boy. Further. too. Bergman’s original title for the film was Kineotography. Like the realization of Bergman’s mental images. we see the cinematic apparatus from the inside. This is the moment of magic birth out of stasis that Bergman depicts in The Magic Lantern as the reason for his obsession with cinema. for in a wrenching scene. and call attention. who now occupies the space of the screen. the spectator and the boy. the two women whose faces are later merged in the film. If we understand the red membrane-screens as having something to do with a space separating the living from the dead or the living from the not-yet-alive. the red interscreens reflect an imaginary reality in graphically physical terms. In Cries and Whispers. looking past him at the screen. He reaches out to touch the viewer. Marilyn Blackwell. or perhaps rebirth.Rugg. particularly the female body. a projector with its tungsten lamp glowing. We see the separate frames flip through the machine and watch as a cartoon image. “The moist membrane of the soul” combines the physical and metaphysical spheres in a dizzying way. Viewers who have seen the film before will recognize Liv Ullmann and Bibi Andersson. which indicates the link he imagines between the story of the film (merged personae or masks) and the cinematic apparatus. He explains that “The bluntest but also the most valid reason is probably that the whole thing is something internal and that ever since my childhood I have pictured the inside of the soul as a moist membrane in shades of red” (Bergman 60). apparently lying on a stretcher in a morgue. where we now see a shifting image of the faces of two women. Running his hand back and forth. he seems to want to discover something about the image he sees. Bergman’s 1972 film about the women in white dresses in red rooms. becomes animated. In the opening sequence of the film. Both birth and death receive attention in the film. The situation of the child within the womb mirrors Bergman’s construction of subjectivity: both boundless and cloven. the images the boy touches are of women who
. and the spectator and the screen (Kawin. to the illusion of cinema. in her feminist critique of Bergman’s work. through the break they make in the narrative. still screens. a corpse reaches out and grabs one of her mourning sisters. Another image of birth. at first in separate. blank red screens are inserted repeatedly into the film. Persona. points out the womb-like quality of the red membranes (189). and the viewer is behind the boy. Bergman’s Autobiographical Image
materiality of the body. Of central importance to my argument is the screen as touchable object. Blackwell). we can see the screen as a surface that resists Bergman’s repeated attempts at penetration.
His novel Best Intentions concludes just weeks before his birth. but receives no answers. In the closing pages of The Magic Lantern. a visit reminiscent of the scene from Fanny and Alexander in which the ghost of a dead man visits his mother. “I pray to God but receive no comfort. returns to the enigmatic image of his mother for clues to his life and information about the blackness that separates them. believe that I close my eyes. The I who sits in the chair is no longer the one in charge of my reactions. though she has already died. he turns the crank of his narrative magic lantern faster and faster. And Bergman. the entry written just after his birth. and he also announces the fact that he changes dates to accommodate his fictionalized version of the past.
Rochelle Wright notes that Bergman’s descriptions of these “real” photographs (are they always real? it’s unclear) are characterized by Bergman himself as inaccurate. when he was in his mother’s womb. while Private Confessions recedes yet farther into an imagined past. who is sitting in the chair. the membrane/screen separates (and links) mother and child. Revisiting the photographs of his parents again and again. observing me. he goes on to describe some of those pictures.
1. Here. is stubborn. So instead he turns to her diary. . . sense that there is somebody in the room. he can create a narration or a movement that will break through the static and delimited images to a boundlessness on the other side. emphasizing once again the totemic value of photographs. with his birth and his mother’s voice. stand I myself. thus undermining the power of photographs as evidence. there is no turning back” (Laterna 108). The boy remains in the not-alive.
2. like Roland Barthes in Camera Lucida.
. while the other tears up a photograph of her son. And this also brings us back to Bergman. carefully touching the faces of his parents. Then the scene shifts. Bergman describes how he made the documentary Karin’s Face: “Day after day I studied hundreds of pictures through the magnifying and delimiting lens. Bergman demands explanations from his mother. open my eyes: in the sharp twilight. as in Cries and Whispers. I am standing over there on the yellow rug watching myself. “You just have to get along as best you can” (336). . like his images. yet not-dead space that begs to enter the photograph and bring it into motion.1 (Winter 2001)
are anti-mothers. perhaps if he turns it often enough and fast enough. This is the terminus. using his mother’s confirmation picture to reenter her girlhood and a moment at which he imagines she experiences a crisis of religious faith remarkably similar to his own. It seems that Bergman. one has had an abortion. and he tells of a visit he makes to his mother. In portraying the moment of mental breakdown after his arrest for tax evasion. a few meters away. Though he knows at one level that it is only an illusion.82
Biography 24.” she writes. Bergman writes: “I close my eyes.” With affection and extraordinary attention to detail. Here Bergman’s first autobiography ends.
———. Camera Lucida. 1981. there was an intrinsic challenge posed to Bergman by the medium of film—to make use of the camera’s ability to move freely through time and space. ———. 1986. Gender and Representation in the Films of Ingmar Bergman. New York: Simon & Schuster.” La Création biographique/Biographical Creation. Princeton: Princeton UP. screens. ———. Viskningar och rop [Cries and Whispers]. ———. 296–320. Blackwell. Columbia. SC: Camden House. Richard Howard. Ed. Westport: Hofstra University and Greenwood Press. 1982. 1982. in Egan’s own concept of autobiography as “mirror talk” (Mirror Talk). “At a very early point in his film career. Eakin. 1966. ———. Trans. Stockholm: Norstedts. My argument owes something to the insights of both these scholars. 1987. As Birgitta Steene has observed of Bergman’s cinematic work. to document reality and yet move past it. Enskilda samtal [Private Confessions]. Bergman’s Autobiographical Image
3. Persona. and in many feminist studies of autobiography. New York: Farrar. Ed. Bergman on Bergman. Marilyn Johns. 1997. while Jarrod Hayes looks at the door as liminal space in Fanny and Alexander. Rennes: Rennes UP. & Giroux. 1991. Stockholm: Norstedts. Den goda viljan [Best Intentions]. “Relational Selves. 1998. “Eye for I: Making and Unmaking Autobiography in Film. Thomas Couser and Joseph Fichtelberg. Timothy Dow. 1990. 93–99. in Paul John Eakin’s notion of the “relational life” (“Relational Selves”). etc. Dokument Fanny och Alexander [The Making of Fanny and Alexander]. Peter Ohlin’s essay focuses on Bergman’s use of liminal spaces—windows.” True Relations: Essays on Autobiography and the Postmodern. ———. Bruss. 1980.
. 1997. interactive selfhood is brought forward by James Olney in his argument for the autobiographical trace evident in biography. ———. 1996. ———. Marta Dvorak. G. Stockholm: Norstedts. Ed.” Autobiography: Essays Theoretical and Critical. Stockholm: Norstedts.Rugg. James Olney. ———. Bergman. Relational Lives: The Story of the Story. something that could be touched in reality. Paul John.
The argument for collaborative. Laterna Magica [The Magic Lantern].
4. 1973. 1992. Strauss. Princeton: Princeton UP. mirrors. “Running in the Family: Photography and Autobiography in the Memoirs of Michael and Christopher Ondaatje..
5. 1972. Ingmar. Bilder [Images].
Adams. Also important for the understanding of the role of family in such collaborative autobiography is work by Timothy Dow Adams and Marianne Hirsch. Karins ansikte [Karin’s Face]. and yet it was also an illusion. ———. though their theoretical interests differ from mine. Elizabeth. The image showed a photographed object. Roland. Touching the World: Reference in Autobiography. created and illuminated by the camera and the projector” (79). Fanny och Alexander [Fanny and Alexander]. 63–81. Barthes.
Den dubbla verkligheten: Karin och Erik Bergman i dagb¨ ocker och brev.84
Biography 24. Birgitta. Stockholm: Carlssons.” Finsk Tidskrift 5. Picturing Ourselves: Photography and Autobiography. Ohlin. 1997. 1978. 1982. Marianne. Mindscreens: Bergman. and First-Person Film. Rugg.” Scandinavian-Canadian-Studies/Études-Scandinaves-au-Canada 7 (1994): 79–91.1 (1997): 40–48. ———. “Ingmar Bergmans Laterna Magica. Cambridge: Harvard UP. Ed. Carter. Steene. Princeton: Princeton UP. Lejeune. 1999. Trans. 192–222. R. Jarrod. Chicago: U of Chicago P. Bruce F.” Ingmar Bergman: An Artist’s Journey.3 (1988): 174–80. New York: Arcade. and Postmemory. Hirsch.
.” MFS: Modern Fiction Studies 40. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Godard. Rochelle.” Literature/Film Quarterly 25. Susanna. Oliver. Linton-Malmfors. Tzvetan Todorov. Hayes. Philippe.” Literature/Film Quarterly 16. 1997. Roger W. “The Autobiographical Contract.1 (Winter 2001)
Egan. Mirror Talk: Genres of Crisis in Contemporary Autobiography. 1995. “Four Images in Bergman: Representation as Liminality and Transgression. Wright. “Encounters in Camera: Autobiography as Interaction.223–24 (1988): 78–90. 116–25. Kawin. “The Seduction of Alexander Behind the Postmodern Door: Ingmar Bergman and Baudrillard’s De la séduction. “Strindbergman: The Problem of Filming Autobiography in Bergman’s Fanny and Alexander. Linda Haverty. Olney. Birgit.” Southern Review 22. Family Frames: Photography. Peter.2 (Spring 1986): 428–41. 1907–1936. James. Narrative. 1992. “The Imagined Past in Ingmar Bergman’s The Best Intentions.3 (Fall 1994): 593–618.” French Literary Theory: A Reader. Ed. “(Auto)biography. ———.