acesso em 23 de maio de 2011

http://www.soma.org.uk/Essay2022020OII20Screen20Space/essay2oIIscreens.html
Essay by A-Soma
MISE-EN-SCENE AND THE OFF-SCREEN SPACE

Cinema, like liIe itselI, oIIers an experience, which is open to unlimited interpretation. It has since
its invention, been a locus Ior thought and debate which, ultimately, is concerned with the nature oI
our own consciousness and impulse to Iind meaning. Everything that can be thought about, can also
exist within the speciIic orbit oI cinema. Perhaps this value as an existential mirror stems Irom its
particular Iour-sided circumscription the Iilm Irame. 'LiIe' cannot be encompassed, but a two-
dimensional Iilm image can be. It dictates that we all share the same physical point oI view. Like
the philosopher's pencil, it is where we agree our point oI departure what is inside the Irame is, The
Film what is outside oI it is not.
The moving image suggests a spacial and temporal simulacrum, which we observe Irom a state oI
physical suspension. Seated beIore the screen in secure abandoment oI rational pretexts, we leave
our corporeality behind. There, in a sublimated notional world, although our limbs may
occasionally jerk with involuntary response to screen action, their relevance is paralysed. We don't
even require hands to turn a page. Whether we become interpellated into the Iilm or remain
critically conscious, our involvement is purely a mental one. From the dark void outside the Irame,
our role is to watch. Observing a parallel universe unIold simulations oI deceptively Iamiliar
realities: Shapes move around, there is sound. And, perhaps most signiIicant, there is duration. A
major component oI cinema's corollary oI liIe.
The process oI making and viewing movies might be a remanant oI lost ritual: 'Disused mechanisms
oI thought with nowhere else to exercise themselves no longer employable in the mapping oI
magical correspondences'.(1) For extended moments we are out oI our body and ex-mortal. Like
psychotropically transported Yanomani Indians, looking down upon the dream oI liIe. Recognising
it Ior the shadowplay it is. Who knows, perhaps this is like what being dead will be? We are in a
state oI grace preparing to return to earth with renewed gravitas. Hungry to penetrate the world's
persona with a sharpened insight. Or, perhaps not. Isn't there usually something missing at the
movies? Some dark Iin, to, momentarily slice through the gossamer oI Iantasy. A spanner in the
works which breaks the spell. An overlong stare, back into the camera lens, reminding us oI our
selves. AIter all, it's our own liIe that is awesome, not the movies.
Taking a reductionist's gimlet to mise-en-scene opens up a revealing ontological seam. In cinema
the word 'Iilm' has dual meanings. Not only as a projection oI moving images. But also their
material photographic location. And, it is interesting to note re. mise-en-scene, that the word, scene,
means location. The actual location oI a Iilm's visual source, is in its emulsion. This is cinema's
opaque persona. From here, a Ilickering code oI light is generated. MeaningIul, only to the presence
oI a mind willing to oblige its optical trick, and pursue its illusion oI allusive phantoms.
What is a Iilm's mise-en-scene? Quote: 'Strictly speaking mise-en-scene reIers to the practice oI
stage direction in the theatre in which things are 'put into the scene', i.e. arranged on the stage'.
When applied to Iilm, it reIers to whatever appears in the Iilm IrameE'(2) A more concise deIinition
might be: Everything you see and hear. Obviously this inclusive deIinition can be separated into
component attributes, in the manner oI taking a scalpel to a Ilower. Setting, costume and makeup,
lighting and the expression and movement oI actors. I would also include editing and oI course
sound. So what purpose does the term mise-en-scene serve? AIter all, iI by simple deIinition a Iilm's
mise-en-scene is what is shown within its Irame. Is this not like saying: a Iilm's Iilm, is the Iilm?
Isn't there a tautology occurring here? Might we simply speak oI: The Film. Am I being
bamboozled by an over-determination oI theory? Could the term be oIIering something a little more
ediIying than identiIying signs oI authorial style and to what end?
II we return to the Iundamental meaning oI the phrase mise-en-scene, which is, 'put into the scene'
(or location), we notice a transitive verb and preposition have been added 'put into'. The phrase is
alerting us to an intentionality. We are being invited to consider what we are seeing in terms oI
motive. The creator/s oI a Iilm have made choices according to a system oI values. What are these
values? What is being required Irom us other than our scopic desire? Through mise-en-scene we can
examine a Iilm's ideological subtext. It prompts questioning oI suture and hegemony. OIIering a
sceptical perspective, which exercises our autonomy we don't have to swallow the sugared pill, we
can ask, why? Thus another channel Ior appreciation is opened. One where we can negotiate both
pleasure and, unpleasure, within the satisIaction oI conscious thought. From this we beneIit by a
broadening oI our vocabulary. We can enjoy aberrant Iusion oI Iorm and content in cinema art. Its
potential to conIound, while evoking something oI the aleatoric asymmetry oI our real lives in the
oII-screen-space.
A-Soma 2001

(1) GeoIIrey O'Brien, The Phantom Empire p. 188
(2) Pam Cook, The Cinema Book p. 151

Other Sources:
David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson, Film Art
Jill Nelmes, An Introduction To Film Studies
Susan Hayward, Cinema Studies, The Key Concepts
Karel Reisz and Gavin Millar, The Technique oI Film Editing