Art Cinema and Theology: The Word

Was Made Film 1st Edition Justin

Ponder (Auth.)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/art-cinema-and-theology-the-word-was-made-film-1st
-edition-justin-ponder-auth/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Genre Trouble and Extreme Cinema: Film Theory at the

Fringes of Contemporary Art Cinema 1st Edition Troy
Bordun (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/genre-trouble-and-extreme-
cinema-film-theory-at-the-fringes-of-contemporary-art-cinema-1st-
edition-troy-bordun-auth/

In The Beginning Was The Word An Introduction To Cross

Cultural Theology Lectures Courses Articles Muhammad
Wolfgang G. A. Schmidt

https://textbookfull.com/product/in-the-beginning-was-the-word-
an-introduction-to-cross-cultural-theology-lectures-courses-
articles-muhammad-wolfgang-g-a-schmidt/

Absence in Cinema The Art of Showing Nothing Film and

Culture Series 1st Edition Remes

https://textbookfull.com/product/absence-in-cinema-the-art-of-
showing-nothing-film-and-culture-series-1st-edition-remes/

Film, art, and the third culture : a naturalized

aesthetics of film 1st Edition Smith

https://textbookfull.com/product/film-art-and-the-third-culture-
a-naturalized-aesthetics-of-film-1st-edition-smith/
In the Beginning Was the Word The Bible in American
Public Life 1492 1783 1st Edition Mark A. Noll

https://textbookfull.com/product/in-the-beginning-was-the-word-
the-bible-in-american-public-life-1492-1783-1st-edition-mark-a-
noll/

Interpretation and Film Studies: Movie Made Meanings

Phillip Novak

https://textbookfull.com/product/interpretation-and-film-studies-
movie-made-meanings-phillip-novak/

Contemporary Film Music: Investigating Cinema

Narratives and Composition 1st Edition Lindsay Coleman

https://textbookfull.com/product/contemporary-film-music-
investigating-cinema-narratives-and-composition-1st-edition-
lindsay-coleman/

Art and Engagement in Early Postwar Japan Justin Jesty

https://textbookfull.com/product/art-and-engagement-in-early-
postwar-japan-justin-jesty/

Impure cinema intermedial and intercultural approaches

to film First Edition Jerslev

https://textbookfull.com/product/impure-cinema-intermedial-and-
intercultural-approaches-to-film-first-edition-jerslev/
Art Cinema and Theology
 Justin Ponder

Art Cinema and

Theology
The Word Was Made Film
Justin Ponder
Marian University in Fond du Lac
Fond du Lac, WI, USA

ISBN 978-3-319-58555-0 ISBN 978-3-319-58556-7 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-58556-7

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017948722

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2017

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction
on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and
information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication.
Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied,
with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have
been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: Igor Stevanovic/Alamy Stock Photo

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
For Deanna
 Acknowledgements

Many thanks to the community of anonymous reviewers and editors who

improved my thinking throughout this process. The chapter on Ordet is
a modified and expanded version of an article published as “‘I Bid Thee
Arise!’ Reverse-Editing and Reversal Miracles in Carl Theodor Dreyer’s
Ordet” in Religion and the Arts (March 2012): 100–121. And the
beginnings of the chapter on Diary of a Country Priest appear in “‘All is
Grace’: Sound and Grace in Robert Bresson’s Diary of a Country Priest”
in Imaginatio et Ratio 4 (2015): 16–26.
I am grateful to John C. Lyden for professional encouragement,
support, and advice throughout the years, as well as to Lina Aboujieb
and Karina Jakupsdottir for taking a chance and providing helpful and
inspiring guidance along the way. I also want to thank Denise Guibord
Meister for her careful reading and thoughtful suggestions. Special grati-
tude remains for all the friends and family who gave hours of their lives
listening to me talk through this project, especially my father Darryl
Ponder and my mother Judi Schlesner.
Finally, I’d like to thank my wife Deanna Singh for her patience dur-
ing the many years of early mornings, late nights, and distracted days it
took to write this book. For her understanding, unwavering support, and
boundless love, I dedicate The Word Was Made Film to her.

vii
 Contents

1 Introduction: The Word was Made Film 1

2 “All Is Grace”: Sound and Grace in Robert

Bresson’s Diary of a Country Priest 25

3 “Life. Yes. Life.”: Editing and Miracles in

Carl Theodor Dreyer’s Ordet 67

4 “The Whole Earth Is Full of His Glory”: Lighting

and Suffering in Ingmar Bergman’s Winter Light 115

5 “No One Must Know of This”: Close-up and

Heresy in Luis Buñuel’s The Milky Way 161

6 Conclusion: … And Dwelt Among Us 203

Index 211

ix
 List of Figures

Fig. 3.1 (47:34, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). The camera

(panning left) follows the Borgens’ carriage ride 77
Fig. 3.2 (47:37, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). The camera match cuts
to the mannequin at Petersen’s sermon before
panning left 78
Fig. 3.3 (27:11, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). Inger exits to backstage
screen left 84
Fig. 3.4 (27:31, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). Inger enters from backstage
screen right 85
Fig. 3.5 (1:27:00, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). Morten exits screen left 89
Fig. 3.6 (1:27:25, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). Morten enters screen right 90
Fig. 3.7 (2:01:47, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). Johannes exits screen left 108
Fig. 3.8 (2:01:49, Ordet, Dreyer, 1955). Match on action has
Mikkel enter from screen right 109
Fig. 4.1 (43:22, Winter Light, Bergman, 1962). Lights rise
on Tomas 130
Fig. 4.2 (1:13:04, Winter Light, Bergman, 1962). Algot comforts
Tomas by the light of the desk lamp 148
Fig. 4.3 (9:19, Winter Light, Bergman, 1962). Tomas during the
opening Eucharist 155
Fig. 4.4 (1:21:00, Winter Light, Bergman, 1962). Tomas during
the concluding Sanctus 156

xi
xii List of Figures

Fig. 5.1 (11:11, The Milky Way, Buñuel, 1969). Close-up on

the mad priest 169
Fig. 5.2 (46:13, The Milky Way, Buñuel, 1969). Close-up on
the Inquisitor 178
Fig. 5.3 (1:28:07, The Milky Way, Buñuel, 1969). Close-up on
the priest who declares, “We must believe dogma.” 192
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction: The Word was Made Film

Before the cleaving of earth from heaven, soil from bliss, and dirt from
air, the earth was without form and void. Before the carving of day from
night, morning from evening, and firmament from the waters, all was
darkness upon the face of the deep. Before the gathering of seas and the
drying of lands, the grasses from earth and the herbs from seeds, the
Spirit moved upon the face of the waters. Before the skies split seasons
into days and years, before the air divided fish, fowl, cattle, creeping
things, beasts of the earth, and man and woman—before Genesis and
before the divisions required for meaning and speech, there was oneness.
After the creation that required sundering, after the becoming that
required uncoupling, and after the definition that required distancing,
the darkness separated from the light. After the tree desired to make
one wise, after their eyes had been opened, after the brother’s blood had
cried from the ground, after the end of all flesh had come before him,
after the rain was upon the earth for forty days and forty nights, after
architects were confounded and their builders scattered abroad upon the
face of all the earth, there came witness. After those born of blood with
the will and flesh of man, there was one born of God, full of glory that
humans could behold, the glory begotten of the Father who is the full-
ness of grace and truth. After creation, he entered the world that he cre-
ated, and the world knew him not; even after he came unto his own,
his people received him not. And so the logos that inspired creation grew
incomprehensible to those it had created. Nevertheless, it is written,
“The word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”

© The Author(s) 2017 1

J. Ponder, Art Cinema and Theology,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-58556-7_1
2 J. Ponder

This passage from the Gospel According to St. John articulates the
mystery of Christ. Genesis details the moment where God spoke the
separations between light and dark, sea and land, and human and beast
that brought existence into being. But John suggests creation culmi-
nates in the instant when the universe reunites with its speaker, and
the distinction between the words that uttered flesh into life give way
to the moment where the flesh reconciles with the word. Here, God
became man, the divine became human, and the infinite became finite.
Dualistic faiths split the universe into light and dark, good and evil,
secular and sacred, but this verse links the word and flesh. According
to John, creatures fail to comprehend the Father’s reason for crea-
tion, so the Son dwells among them so he might reveal its meaning.
In this cosmology, spiritual knowledge relies on analogy. Christ repre-
sents God, the visible reflects the invisible, and sarx signifies logos. The
mysteries of the universe lie bare for all to see, and if believers wish
to know spiritual truths, they must analyze the physical representations
that dwell among them.
As Christianity holds that the word was made flesh so believers might
understand God’s will through Christ’s body, The Word Was Made Film
maintains that viewers might illuminate a movie’s conceptual themes
through its stylistic techniques. As sinews, hairs, and pores reveal some-
thing about the body, a few decibels of diegetic noise, seconds of cross
editing, watts of lighting, or frames of a close-up contribute to a film’s
central theme. At the same time, this project maintains that theoretical
controversies surrounding the word are essential to the flesh. For exam-
ple, broad surveys of ancient doctrine, Enlightenment theology, mod-
ern philosophy, and postmodernism situate a text’s central theme within
intertextual discourse. Therefore, this book relates the cinematographic
sarx and conceptual logos of particular films, considers close readings of
filmic technique alongside broad surveys of thematic issues, and explores
how minuscule elements of a single frame might suggest the rhetorical
structure of an entire text. Ultimately, The Word Was Made Film reads
the flesh of films to interpret the “word” that underpins them.
Scholars have analyzed particular elements to draw general conclu-
sions in different ways. Theorists have inspected narrow filmic conven-
tions, and theologians have connected broad religious themes. Film
studies provide the vocabulary for examining microscopic components,
such as sound, editing, lighting, and shot, while the field of religious
studies charts the path for recognizing macroscopic issues, such as grace,
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 3

miracles, suffering, and heresy. Both of these approaches have their vir-
tues, and this book merges film theory and theology to inherit the
benefits of both disciplines. Before embarking on this task, however, it
would be valuable to detail the history of film theory, survey the field of
theology and film, and situate The Word Was Made Film between these
disciplines.

The Flesh
One of the virtues of film studies is its attention to the “flesh.” From its
formalist beginnings to its identity politics, this discipline has bridged the
gap between filmic technique and ideological consequence, shown the
broad implications of specific devices, and detailed the political repercus-
sions of the slightest features. Throughout its history, this approach has
undergone many instantiations and splintered into different schools, each
providing particular ways to interpret cinema.
Some forms of film analysis concentrate on the technologies that
facilitate communication. Russian formalists sought an almost-scientific
account of how film conveys meaning, and their modern heirs analyze
how elements, such as mise-en-scène, focus, and camera movement,
affect audiences.1 Similar to formalism, semiotics develops a general
theory of filmic signs as some critics apply linguistic analyses of verbal
language to the audiovisual lexicon of movies. Other critics show how
narrative structures of particular films conform to “spheres of action”
that reappear over millennia of storytelling.2
Formalist theory examines how a film creates meaning, but psycho-
analytic approaches consider how a movie impacts viewers. For example,
some theorists show how formal techniques encourage viewers to objec-
tify women, others use Freudian thought to explore what happens in the
minds of filmgoers, and numerous anthologies solidify the importance of
psychoanalytic film theory.3 Despite their differences, all these psycho-
analytic analyses scrutinize the slightest detail, showing how the subtlest
elements of film influence human perception.
This concentration on film techniques also appears in Marxist the-
ory. Scholars from this broad approach investigate how movies trans-
mit ideology through shot duration, camera proxemics, and depth
of field. Some show how changes in cinematic conventions reflect
changes in social values, and others explore the ways in which film
questions hegemony by undermining filmic standards. Many detail
4 J. Ponder

how rewriting the rules of scene transition, causal plots, and sound
mixing reshape society, while peers challenge viewers to consider how
cinematic vocabulary interpolates audiences to view the world in hier-
archical ways.4
These Marxist approaches analyze how movies relate to classism, but
feminist theory considers how films relate to sexism. Some examine how
film stereotypes women, while others explore the social implications of
such stereotyping. From claiming horror movies subvert gender roles
to detailing how reading films closely can resist ideology, texts like these
show the long history in which feminist theory has critiqued patriarchal
culture by scrutinizing cinematic conventions.5
Another important school of film studies is queer theory, which
explores how cinema perpetuates and challenges heteronormativity.
Some survey the degree to which filmic conventions have represented
homosexuality throughout history, and others explore how the Motion
Picture Production Code’s moral guidelines forced filmmakers to use
subtle techniques to code the sexual identities of their protagonists.6
While many look at representations of gay characters, others examine
works by gay filmmakers. Investigating the history of lesbian and gay
filmmaking, charting how this industry produced unique aesthetic val-
ues, or chronicling how LGBT independent media culture challenges
heteronormative movies, queer theory scholars connect film to sexual
politics.7
As these approaches have become some of the most important in film
theory, scholars have applied them to some of the most significant direc-
tors in cinema history. For example, scholars analyze Robert Bresson’s
formal techniques or employ semiotic theory to examine his system of
signs.8 Some conduct psychoanalytic readings of his oeuvre or chronicle
how he engages with Marxism. Others consider feminist explorations of
Bresson’s style or read homoeroticism in his close-ups.9
Film studies also examine the work of Carl Theodor Dreyer. Some
chart the formal qualities of the auteur’s technique, while others con-
trast the filmmaker’s methods with the semiotic context in which he
operated.10 Particular works consider psychoanalytic concerns in the
director’s camera movements or claim Dreyer’s long takes are disem-
powering.11 Some scholars consider the way this auteur’s mise-en-scène
might challenge patriarchy, and other critics examine how these works
threaten heteronormativity.12
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 5

Many also apply these approaches to Ingmar Bergman. Studying

the moviemaker’s formal conventions, examining how his films fit into
archetypes, or connecting stylistic features to psychoanalytic issues, crit-
ics have interpreted the auteur’s métier through multiple angles.13 At the
same time, others have considered how Bergman’s films relate to poli-
tics, feminism, and queer theory in ways that demonstrate theory’s long
engagement with this director.14
Finally, the major schools of film studies also cover the work of Luis
Buñuel. Formalists have concentrated on his editing, and semioti-
cians have linked his films to the esperpento tradition.15 Psychoanalytic
scholars analyze his surrealistic imagery, while Marxists examine his
political content.16 With feminist writers exploring the auteur’s gen-
der politics and queer theorists discussing sexual dissidence in his films,
Buñuel proves to be another director who has received meticulous atten-
tion from film studies.17
While theory covers these auteurs, some of their films require more.
Formalist, semiotic, psychoanalytic, Marxist, feminist, and queer
approaches reveal interesting aspects in work by these auteurs, but some
of their works invite interpretations from other discourses. Bresson’s
films critique capitalism, ridicule patriarchy, and glorify homosocial-
ity, but they also portray rebels, wretches, donkeys, and priests as they
struggle with grace. Dreyer’s oeuvre lambasts oppression, sides with
women, and exposes hypocrisy, while also concentrating on saints,
witches, and miracle workers. Most acknowledge Bergman’s spiritual
upbringing before moving on to political readings, but religious issues
remain vital to many of his films. Finally, Buñuel arranges a flurry of
surreal images that seem incoherent, though his montages include so
many Christian references that they would benefit from theological
interpretations.
While the value of film studies is its attention to the “flesh” of a
movie, scholarship on Bresson, Dreyer, Bergman, and Buñuel leaves
plenty of room for more. Because many of their films contemplate
Christianity, examinations of these works involve explorations of this reli-
gion. Because the filmographies of these auteurs converge on theological
issues, investigating their identity politics means researching the religious
identities central to them. Because close readings of these audiovisual
texts require broad surveys of their theological contexts, film studies ana-
lyzes the flesh but could also examine the word.
6 J. Ponder

The Word
While scholars in film studies inspect the flesh, those in religious studies
analyze the word. For decades, writers in the field of religion and film
have considered the relationship between movies and theology, making
great strides to show the connections between scriptures and movies.
During its short existence, this school of criticism has developed differ-
ent approaches to recognize the holy behind the profane, the religious
within the entertaining, and the theology of film.
One perspective that argues movies warrant theological interpretation
belongs to apologists. Instead of branding a film blasphemous or virtu-
ous, scholars in this camp argue that cinema merits respect. These crit-
ics formulate a “theology of culture” and claim that religion and society
inhabit each other.18 History abounds with examples of Christians who
have insisted the movie house defiles their faith, while others argue that
popular forms of expression can teach believers. For millennia, theolo-
gians have accepted the religious value of the high arts, such as music,
painting, and literature, with apologists asserting that movies deserve
similar attention because filmic texts can reveal spiritual truths.
While the apologist approach interprets cinema in general, another
interprets the religious work of auteurs in particular. To legitimate theo-
logical ventures into movies, some turn to the work of respected direc-
tors like Federico Fellini, Eric Rohmer, and Roberto Rossellini. These
acclaimed filmmakers depict spiritual issues, and theologians weave
auteur movies into Christian discourse. Some examine a selection of films
from La Strada to My Night at Maud’s alongside a sampling of theologi-
ans from Barth to Bultmann.19 Others argue that the rise of cinema sig-
nals a shift in the zeitgeist, noting that postwar society proclaims God’s
death while auteur cinema resurrects Christian values.20 Rather than con-
duct close readings of individual films by Pier Paolo Pasolini, Jean-Luc
Godard, or François Truffaut, auteurist criticism often explores the con-
nection between cinema and spirituality, using film in particular to con-
sider postwar spirituality in general.21
Auteurists survey a broad swath of art cinema, but scholars from
the populist approach open the field even wider. The former concen-
trates on foreign religious art films, but a second wave of scholars dis-
cuss blockbusters.22 They apply “highbrow” concepts like Christology,
eschatology, and ethics to “lowbrow” movies. Some find Pauline doc-
trine in films such as Star Wars, Forrest Gump, and Babe while others
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 7

create conversation between Hollywood and Christianity via Gladiator,

E.T., and The Godfather.23 As this approach illustrates ancient concepts
through contemporary films and difficult arguments through accessible
movies, the populist technique has provided scholars a way to use film
to explain theology. One fundamental work in this line of thinking is
Gerard Loughlin’s Alien Sex, a text which has had a profound effect on
the field of theology and film—as well as on The Word Was Made Film
because it demonstrates a way to connect broad theological concepts and
particular cinematic devices to articulate a concept of “cinematic the-
ology.” Most interesting is the way Loughlin explores the relationship
between film and religious concerns to analyze the theology of popular
culture itself. 24
While populists employ movies to understand Christianity, cultural
studies scholars examine popular films to interpret pop culture. Such
thinkers consider how secular films still imply religious values, and these
critics challenge readers to recognize how nonreligious films espouse
sacrificial love, social justice, and human dignity to an almost religious
extent.25 As they connect movies such as One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s
Nest, Blade Runner, and Saving Private Ryan to Christianity, these stud-
ies make the deeper argument that even movies that seem to reject reli-
gious traditions retain spiritual values, and blockbusters that might not
profess Christianity can still articulate the beliefs of the culture that pro-
duces them.
As scholars interpret film to analyze culture, others survey filmgoers to
examine the film experience. Many interview audiences about their expe-
riences, considering how viewers turn a movie viewing into a spiritual
encounter, while others show how audiences even go so far as to make
a film hierophantic, despite what filmmakers intend.26 In these ways,
scholars who contribute to reception studies do not analyze the religious
content of film as much as the individual perception that makes a film
religious.
As these approaches have become some of the most important in
theology and film, scholars apply them to some of the most influential
auteurs in film history. For example, before turning to blockbusters such
as Apocalypse Now, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, or Jurassic Park,
John R. May concedes that Bresson marked “a turning point in the
interpretation of religious film.”27 He confesses that films by this master
challenged simplistic divisions in the conversation between theology and
film that split the world between pro-Christian epics and anti-Christian
8 J. Ponder

propaganda. With films that depict faith without extolling it, Bresson’s
work changed the way theologians analyze film, and this change proves
significant even to scholars who concentrate on the flicks packing the
multiplex.
Theology and film also gestures toward Dreyer’s importance. While
criticizing scholars for making implausible links between religion and cin-
ema, Antonio Sison invites them to excavate scholarship from the ’70s
that analyze this master.28 He notes that the style of most religious mov-
ies remains conventional, but points out that Danish director Dreyer
crafted a technique of his own, one with seven-minute takes, mini-
mal set design, and actors who didn’t face each other during dialogue.
Applying this kind of stark modernism to religious themes, the auteur
married cinematic style and theology. For creating this kind of cinematic
theology, Dreyer even receives acknowledgment in examinations of more
popular films, such as Amistad, Apocalypse Now, Hotel Rwanda, and The
Motorcycle Diaries.
Bergman also stands on the periphery of theology and film. In “The
‘Religious’ in Film: From King of Kings to The Fisher King,” Peter
Hasenberg contrasts the secularism of American cinema with the reli-
gious engagement of its European counterpart. He notes how Bergman
discussed the role of religion in his childhood and points out how
Christianity appears in his films, before moving on to suggest that the
director’s work encapsulates a time period where moviegoers struggled
to reconcile the Almighty with Auschwitz.29 In this example as well
as many others, the famous auteur—who has devoted more films to
Christianity than perhaps any other director—receives mention even in
discussions of American movies.
Finally, Buñuel gets recognition from critics in theology and film. Like
his colleagues, he collects bylines for his contributions to a contempo-
rary discipline that otherwise ignores him. Ambros Eichenberger per-
forms one such tip of the hat when he claims, “Great filmmakers like
Luis Buñuel have suffered from the ‘clerical’ mentality that is ready to
control and to condemn rather than to analyze, to engage, and to under-
stand.”30 Such passages ignore Buñuel’s work and concentrate on his
biography as a victim of ecumenical censorship and a warring tale that
exemplifies why theology and film must distance itself from “questiona-
ble past experiences with certain organs of the churches.”31 Scholars have
pressed their peers to analyze more overtly religious movies and examine
cinematographic devices, and Buñuel’s filmography contains movies that
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 9

most directly confront Christianity through a unique style. Nevertheless,

theology and film has regulated Buñuel to its mausoleum, sealed in place
to receive eulogies without any actual examination.
Despite the tendency to acknowledge European auteurs from the
1950s and 1960s, only to concentrate on popular American movies
from the twenty-first century, theology and film can benefit from exam-
ining these old masters. Many insist cinematic theology must analyze
cinematographic style, and others note that Bresson is one of the most
unique cinematographers in film history. Some criticize scholars in the
discipline for appropriating non-Christian movies with Christian pur-
poses, but Dreyer focuses on religious content so much that his work
almost requires theological exploration. Likewise, Bergman’s movies use
the stunning mise-en-scène, camerawork, and lighting that come from
an auteur who confronts spiritual issues through a unique style, and
Buñuel’s films about religion use disorienting montage, unsettling close-
ups, and anachronistic costuming to confuse viewers and challenge their
beliefs.
The value of theology and film is its attention to the “word” of a film,
but examining Bresson, Dreyer, Bergman, and Buñuel could benefit
scholarship in this discipline. Because this field seeks to explore religion
in film, it remains incomplete without explorations of these auteurs who
return to Christianity again and again. These directors rely on uncon-
ventional flourishes, giving scholars the chance to appreciate how cine-
matographic devices imply alternative theologies. Those in the discipline
reference these filmmakers in sprawling overviews of spiritual discourses,
but the work of these auteurs commands detailed examinations of their
cinematic style. While broad surveys of theological contexts require close
readings of these audiovisual texts, religious studies analyze the word,
but they could also examine the flesh.

Bresson, Dreyer, Bergman, and Buñuel

If film studies analyze the flesh but overlook the word, and religious
studies concentrate on the logos but deemphasize the sarx, merging the
two approaches could yield interesting results. Formalist interpreta-
tions explore cinematography but miss theological issues, and apologist
investigations scrutinize religion but neglect style. Marxist, feminist, and
queer theory use close reading but attach less attention to Christianity,
while populist, cultural, and reception studies inspect spirituality but give
10 J. Ponder

less weight to filmic particulars. If this is the case, one could combine a
film scholar’s ability to analyze a movie’s flesh and a theologian’s apti-
tude to evaluate its word.
Methods that blend these strengths are important when it comes to
interpreting filmmakers that make the word into flesh. Directors such as
Bresson, Dreyer, Bergman, and Buñuel fall between the cracks of film
studies and religious studies because they confront theological content
that is overlooked by the former with cinematic form that is neglected
by the latter. Because they depict religious subjects in a “spiritual style,”
theological interpretations of cinematographic elements seem appro-
priate when interpreting their work. They demand religious studies to
understand their content, but they also compel film studies to appreciate
their form.
A few texts have sought to read both word and flesh by relating spe-
cific audiovisuals to grand theologies. For example, in Transcendental
Style in Film, Paul Schrader dissects work by Bresson and Dreyer, and he
connects the particular and the general by linking things such as mise-
en-scène and icons, editing and predestination, or camera angle and
meditation in one of the first and most in-depth analyses of the relation-
ship between style and spirituality to which The Word Was Made Film
is greatly indebted.32 Beyond this work, Holloway’s Beyond the Image
joins the visual elements used by auteurs with the religious features
foregrounded by Christianity in a work that bridges the divide between
Christian film viewers and humanist filmmakers.33 Thirdly, in Cinema,
Religion, and the Romantic Legacy, Paul Coates connects art cinema and
theology, showing the way in which the visual form of this genre reveals
much about the spiritual values of its culture.34
While these texts often ground centuries of theology in the filmic fea-
tures of a single frame, they are broad. Schrader, Holloway, and Coates
concentrate on the style of film, but they address a vast array of mov-
ies. Schrader leaps from the Catholicism of Bresson to the Protestantism
of Dreyer to the Buddhism of Yasujirō Ozu to analyze the “transcen-
dental,” but he weaves too many religions, movies, and artistic periods
together to define what that term means. Similarly, Holloway provides
a dizzying survey of so many films across so many years that he has time
to do little more than list every movie that has dealt with Christianity.
Because Coates references everything from The Curse of the Cat People
to Dostoevsky to The Matrix to Rilke, he intermingles romanticism and
religion more than he interconnects film style and theological concepts.
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 11

While some cover multiple directors, others concentrate on single

auteurs. For example, Joseph Cunneen’s Robert Bresson: A Spiritual Style
in Film merges grand issues, such as Jansenism, postmodern religion,
and youth culture, with specific elements, such as close-ups, sound, and
editing.35 Similarly, Tom Milne’s The Cinema of Carl Dreyer connects
the director with his religious views and acknowledges the far-reaching
theological issues that appear in Dreyer’s feature films while concen-
trating on particular frames with meticulous scrutiny.36 Arthur Gibson
begins to analyze how style informs content in The Silence of God:
Creative Responses to the Films of Ingmar Bergman as he remains broad
enough to discuss existentialist, Lutheran, and mystic contexts but keeps
close enough to examine the cinematographic features that comprise the
auteur’s actual texts.37
While these texts narrow their focus to a single filmmaker, they still
cover a wide range of films. Cunneen’s study of Bressonian cinema jams
thirteen features into 200 pages, which wades through each film without
diving into any one. The same applies to Milne’s examination; because
Dreyer produced fewer films than Bresson, a book on the Danish direc-
tor allows for longer chapters on each, but the more movies this text
covers, the thinner the treatment. Books on Bergman and Buñuel skim
the surface because these prolific filmmakers made dozens of movies, and
given the sheer number of movies these auteurs released, works that try
to address them all must become sweeping overviews.
To connect theology and film in convincing ways, The Word Was
Made Film strives to be narrow. Film studies can improve examina-
tions of Bresson, Dreyer, Bergman, and Buñuel by acknowledging the
religious aspects of their films, and theology might advance analyses of
religious films by paying more attention to these auteurs. Even those
rare texts that have explored the transcendental style of a single director
could benefit from covering fewer films in greater detail. Persuasive argu-
ments about cinematic style require more concentrated analyses than a
text that focuses on an individual filmmaker would allow, and compelling
bridges between a particular shot and a specific theology demand that
more monographs address fewer films.
Beyond narrowness, linking theology and film requires specificity.
Scholars have placed Bresson’s broad theological concerns in general
conversation with Christianity, but scholarship on the director has yet
to pair his exploration of grace in general with charisological discourse
in particular. Platitudes abound regarding the auteur’s ascetic style,
12 J. Ponder

predestinationism, or mystical art, but more convincing connections

between his cinematographic vocabulary and the study of grace would
be helpful. Rather than linking the French filmmaker’s broad narrative
themes with the grand philosophies of Jansen, Pascal, and other thinkers
who influenced French culture, theological analyses of Bresson require
detailed links between particular cinematographic elements and specific
theories regarding grace.
The same goes for Dreyer. Scholarship contains many references to
how he depicts miracles in unique ways, as scholars associate his lum-
bering camera movements and drawn-out takes with predestination.
These interesting but uninvestigated claims place his slow style beside
Calvinism, but studies could go beyond simply inferring these relation-
ships. To flesh out these connections, one must survey different theolog-
ical stances on marvels and show how various elements of Dreyer’s work
espouse or contradict them.
Scholarship on Bergman could also improve with greater particular-
ity. Passages teem with sweeping generalizations about how he expresses
atheism, agnosticism, or nihilism, but these terms could be defined more
fully. Parenthetical asides claim that his movies consider the death of
God, but more could investigate how aspects of his filmography relate to
particular theologies. His corpus mostly struggles to reconcile the sub-
lime with suffering in ways that contend with theodicy, so scholarship
on Bergman might survey theodicians or theodicial concepts or at least
show how his films voice different theodicies.
Finally, scholars issue grand statements about Buñuel’s theological
import and note the ways he tackles heresy, but they could provide more
detailed examinations of Buñuel’s heresiology. They might chronicle the
thinking of Docetists, Nestorians, and Monarchians, but narrow treat-
ments of specific sects spiral into broad generalizations about theology.
Most claim he praises nonconformity or scolds the orthodox, but such
explorations must go beyond analyzing the director’s position regarding
heretical issues to analyze what his style suggests about the nature of her-
esy itself, scouring theological history and scrutinizing the auteur’s work
to determine how plot, symbolism, close-ups, and editing represent dif-
ferent arguments regarding heresy.
This book seeks to realize these possibilities by combining the formal
analyses of film studies with the theological approach of religious studies.
To make this link, it provides close readings, because surveying enough
theological arguments about grace to interpret how Bresson represents
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 13

grace calls for more than a thirty-page chapter. Chronicling how characters
articulate different opinions about miracles in Dreyer’s work requires more
than a ten-page section. Connecting enough theological, philosophical,
and fictional views on suffering to interpret what Bergman’s films suggest
about God’s benevolence demands more than a few paragraphs; and link-
ing the interpretations of heresy with the cinematography of Buñuel war-
rants more than a footnote. To connect theological concepts from 2000
years with individual frames from two-hour movies, this project links close
readings of filmic flesh with broad surveys of religious word, and to facil-
itate an approach with these conflicting demands, it poses the following
premises about film:

Premises
1. 
Film concentrates on a theme. The plots of Bresson, Dreyer,
Bergman, and Buñuel meander more than those of their
Hollywood counterparts, but their narrative texts still focus on
central issues. These character-driven stories might concentrate
on psychology, disrupt causal plots, and cover a myriad of issues
more than most blockbusters, but these films focus on certain top-
ics more than others. Bresson’s characters discuss will and grace
enough that charisology becomes a central theme of his movies,
and Dreyer’s figures debate miracles enough for thaumatology to
emerge as a controlling purpose of his films. Bergman’s protago-
nists contemplate suffering enough for theodicy to surface as a the-
sis for his work, and Buñuel’s archetypes raise heresy enough for
heresiology to be one of his ultimate concerns. Because even these
ambling plots gravitate toward a subject, they show that even films
with the loosest narratives remain thematic.
2. 
Film dialogue surveys different opinions regarding a theme. As
movies concentrate on an issue, they chronicle various assertions
regarding that concept: In Bresson’s work, characters debate grace;
in Dreyer’s, they disagree over miracles; in Bergman’s, they argue
about suffering; and in Buñuel’s, they fight over orthodoxy. These
films concentrate on certain themes, and they sample many opin-
ions regarding those topics through moments of conversation.
Auteurs might excise propaganda, but their characters do not. In
these films, the voice of God doesn’t roar from a burning bush
to tell viewers what to think, but discussions articulate the many
14 J. Ponder

things they could think. As different lines within an exchange

debate the theme, a film catalogs the multiple approaches one
could take on that subject.
3. Film dialogue cites discourse. Different characters might assert
opinions, but those positions are not unique. Particular lines might
represent the beliefs of a character, but the assertions of fictional
figures resonate with the arguments of historical thinkers. These
passages can relate to quotes from philosophers, theologians, or
artists, or they might resemble a certain treatise, sermon, or scrip-
ture. Either way, these lines of dialogue suggest different writings.
For example, Diary of a Country Priest’s Torcy emphasizes will in
ways that resemble Pelagius, and Ordet’s doctor discusses miracles
with assertions that match those of Newton. Winter Light’s Tomas
wonders if the absence of God permits all action with a tenor that
parallels Sartre, and the various historical figures that appear in The
Milky Way recite the words attributed to their nonfictional sources.
When dialogue surveys different positions regarding a theme, it
also cites historical arguments concerning that topic.38 As it places
fictional characters in conversation and their contributions refer-
ence historical arguments, film places the theological positions of
thinkers from different time periods in the same scene. When mov-
ies assemble old arguments in these ahistorical ways, they make it
possible to explore new issues, debates, and opinions.
4. Film suggests arguments about its content. Characters articulate
their arguments with words, but films imply theirs through tone,
and one can determine a film’s values by examining the tone that
it uses to depict various assertions. Because fictional works do not
document factual encounters between various theological asser-
tions, they cannot be objective. Acting out fictional events that
have not happened, these movies go beyond representing reality
to present new realities. To analyze the rhetorical structure behind
these cinematic universes, the viewers can scrutinize moments of
editorializing where the text goes beyond chronicling the actions of
real people and starts evaluating those characters. Because film con-
veys meaning through so many audiovisual elements, it becomes
difficult to portray characters neutrally. Whether through sight
or sound, story or style, film depicts some positively and others
negatively. Some receive favor; others disdain. Whatever the case,
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 15

when films place characters in a debate, movies treat their opinions

in different ways.
5. Film favors certain arguments through characterization. Instead
of telling viewers what to believe, narratives let characters voice
different arguments. Characters state what they think through
textual assertions, but film exposes its presuppositions through
contextual factors. For example, in Bresson’s Diary of a Country
Priest, the priest of Torcy tells his protégé to fortify his will, but
the film depicts him as a disgruntled clergyman more concerned
with getting his way than with helping others. He insists on hard
work, but the fact that he mistreats others suggests his toiling
has been for nothing. Here, dialogue represents what a figure
thinks, characterization taints who a character is, and one’s ethos
can prove or disprove what she thinks more than anything she
says. If a film portrays a person as likable, it might make their
ideas seem likable; and if a movie depicts another as distasteful,
it casts their views in an unfavorable light. In this way, a movie
might appear to endorse opinions if they come from confident,
sincere, and peaceful figures, and it may appear to undermine
beliefs if they come from arrogant, deceptive, or erratic ones.
Ultimately, the structure of narrative cinema encourages viewers
to affirm the opinions of positive characters and negate the views
of negative ones.
6. 
Film validates claims through plot. Once characters express an
argument through dialogue, they become the physical represen-
tation of that philosophical position. What happens to those rep-
resentatives suggests the validity of their beliefs, and the fate to
which the film subjects these agents implies much about the worth
of their views. Characterization shades what figures say with who
they are, but plot mitigates what they say against what happens to
them. If a narrative rewards characters with desirable experiences,
their ideas seem worthwhile, but if it punishes characters with disa-
greeable ones, their views seem useless. For example, in Dreyer’s
Ordet, Inger claims many little miracles happen every day, but
when she dies and a big, rare marvel resurrects her, irony disproves
her assertion. With this kind of event, what happens to a figure can
contradict her ideas, and plot can favor the claims made by charac-
ters that enjoy positive experiences.
16 J. Ponder

In addition to narrative elements, such as dialogue, characterization,

and plot, movies can also promote certain arguments through filmic ele-
ments. This fact leads to another set of premises.

7. 
Films favor assertions through sound. Film is an audiovisual
medium that commands both the eye and the ear. Talkies allow
characters to speak their beliefs into existence, but movies place
other sounds alongside dialogue. A character may declare their
worldview verbally, but a film might editorialize on those beliefs
aurally. In Diary of a Country Priest, the curé and countess debate
grace as the priest presses her to repent, and during this exchange,
the grating of a rake clawing the yard leaps onto the soundscape.
To appraise this dialogue, one must analyze the noises that sur-
round it, and as the priest discusses grace with the countess amidst
the scratching of dead leaves, the gardener’s clatter becomes a met-
aphor for the priest’s argument. While the landscaper scrapes refuse
aside so new grass can grow, the minister prunes the countess’s
soul so she might see the sun. Presuming that raking away death so
life can emerge is a positive thing, it would seem the sound of that
grating is beneficial, and if this favorable noise coincides with the
priest’s dialogue about grace, it seems the film represents his views
favorably. Ultimately, characters state their arguments through dia-
logue, but one can analyze how sound comments on the words of
characters.
8. 
Film privileges arguments through editing. Characters voice
opinions through dialogue, but film represents their conversa-
tions through different splices, transitions, and shot durations.
Convention dictates that characters obey the 180-degree rule,
transitions move from wide shots to closer ones, and takes cut
every four to six seconds. Deviations from these standards are
unusual, and unconventional cutting often occurs for extraordi-
nary purposes. Having characters walk behind the camera empha-
sizes the camera’s physical placement in the room, cutting between
scenes with close-ups disorients viewers, and forcing audiences
to endure long takes creates a glacial pace. Dreyer’s characters
assert different opinions about miracles, but his style represents
those claims in various ways. For example, in Ordet, Morten uses
dialogue to dispute wonders, but that dialogue unfolds in an
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 17

extraordinarily long take. He rejects miracles in a minutes-long

shot that drags the film to an anemic pace, and the sluggish tempo
that conveys his views suggests his thoughts lack vigor. In this way,
films can comment on the arguments of their characters through
different editing techniques.
9. 
Film commends certain stances through lighting. Cinema has
a longstanding tradition of associating light with goodness and
dark with evil. Halos illuminate saints to signify their holiness, and
shadows befall villains to represent their depravity. When protag-
onists descend into despair, cinematography casts them in black-
ness, but when they receive a glimmer of hope, lighting envelops
them. These filmic conventions establish a value system, and the
way a movie lights characters suggests how it values them. In
Bergman’s Winter Light, Tomas struggles with doubt between one
service and the next. As he moves from Mittsunda to Frostnäs,
he declares many things about the goodness of God in different
lines of dialogue and also under various kinds of lighting. With
each statement about the benevolence of the Almighty, the parson
articulates a different argument about the point of pain, and with
each floodlight and shadow, the film evaluates those assertions.
The views that Tomas articulates in radiance seem enlightened,
while the opinions he confesses in darkness seem blinded, and this
lighting scheme that casts certain assertions in blackness and oth-
ers in brightness provides a kind of commentary on the beliefs of
characters.
10. Film extols particular theologies through shot length. On the one
hand, long shots can make figures appear standoffishly distant or
comfortably far, passively small or confidently removed. On the
other hand, close-ups can make characters seem intimately near or
intimidatingly close, aggressively powerful or welcomingly attrac-
tive. Buñuel’s The Milky Way varies shot length for satirical pur-
poses. Because a close-up of an orthodox cleric might make him
seem oppressively large, a tight shot could make his dogma seem
tyrannical. At the same time, filling the frame with the face of a
heretic as he wishes salvation for all might make his heresy appear
to be compassionate. These instances show how scholars can ana-
lyze dialogue to determine the arguments of characters, but one
might also examine shot length to interpret the film itself.
18 J. Ponder

The Word was Made Film

This book explores the relationship between cinematic flesh and
Christian word, and it examines how that connection dwells in specific
films. Each case study scrutinizes a different movie, but each shares a
similar methodology. The following chapters divide into sections that
pair film characters with theologians, showing how the former reso-
nates with the latter. Then each section considers how narrative elements
depict that dialogue in flattering or unfavorable ways, moving on to illus-
trate how one cinematic aspect represents that character’s assertion. If
certain figures articulate theological arguments and films privilege them,
movies might favor their claims.
This project pursues this task through four chapters and a conclu-
sion. Chap. 2, “‘All is Grace’: Sound and Grace in Robert Bresson’s
Diary of a Country Priest,” explores what the film’s soundtrack sug-
gests about divine will. Many claim the auteur’s set design, editing,
and dialogue exemplify Jansenism, but his sonic mixing might also do
something more. When characters declare arguments regarding the rela-
tionship between desire and fate, their statements resemble those articu-
lated by Pelagius, Camus, Jansen, Lacan, Irenaeus, and Milbank. Some
suggest one must foster will, reject hope, submit to predestination, make
peace with longing, return to nature, or find grace in faith communities.
Regardless of what these characters articulate, sound complements, con-
tradicts, and complicates what they say. Diegetic noise mocks self-deter-
mination, musical score undermines will, and voice-over interweaves
the human community required for mercy to exist. While most theolo-
gians focus on the relationship between God and the individual, sound
in Diary of a Country Priest suggests grace is a gift exchanged between
people.
Chapter 3, “‘Life. Yes. Life.’: Editing and Miracles in Carl Theodor
Dreyer’s Ordet,” asserts that the film foregrounds wondrous experience.
As various characters articulate different beliefs about wonders, different
editing styles represent these figures. When these characters extol various
theologies, their ideas reverberate with those articulated by Augustine,
Origen, Hume, Spinoza, Newton, C.S. Lewis, and Badiou. During these
moments of representation, the 180-degree rule shatters, crosscutting
detaches, and seven-minute shots bore audiences. Each of these devices
comments on the arguments that characters articulate, casting some as
supernatural, disconnected, or lifeless. Ultimately, Ordet concentrates on
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE WORD WAS MADE FILM 19

unconventional editing techniques to resurrect conventional ones. The

film revives reverse editing in ways that assert the miraculous connection
between the worker, the object, and the witness of miracles. The movie
relies on single takes that divide people, but its final moments use reac-
tion shots that relate them. In doing so, editing advocates Alain Badiou’s
concept of the intersubjective “evental” site. If Ordet privileges a stance
on marvels, it is one that links people who wait together for an event
without the guarantee that one will ever occur.
Chapter 4, “‘The Whole Earth is Full of His Glory’: Lighting and
Suffering in Ingmar Bergman’s Winter Light,” analyzes how the film uses
light to examine God’s silence. When characters discuss anguish, they
sound like Augustine, Kant, Leibniz, Kierkegaard, Sartre, Nietzsche,
Barth, and Hauerwas, and lighting portrays these figures in different
ways. Doing everything from staring at sunshine to lurking in a shadow
to standing in candlelight, these characters articulate theologies under a
special glow, and cinematography casts their thinking in a certain light.
Some inhabit the dark where they cannot see, and some are blinded by
luminescence. A few have the endurance to brave the shadows, while
fewer have the courage to light the way for others. In the end, the film
privileges those who leave the comfort of their sunshine and head into
the singeing radiance needed to enlighten peers. This lighting criticizes
explanations for torment that concentrate on subjective suffering and
condones those that focus on intersubjective communities seeking to
alleviate anguish. Overall, elements from chandeliers to candlelight extol
the fragile light made by humanity that can light the darkness even when
the Lord’s sun has set.
Chapter 5, “‘No One Must Know of This’: Close-up and Heresy in
Luis Buñuel’s The Milky Way,” examines how the film relates tight shots
and heresiology. While La Voie lactée recounts different takes on heresy
that resemble those held by Origen, Irenaeus, Walter Bauer, Helmut
Koester, Karl Rahner, Harold O.J. Brown, Tertullian, and Slavoj Žižek,
tight shots comment on the characters that articulate these views. When
religious figures proclaim doctrine, close-ups make them appear foolish,
and when heretics declare their creeds, tight shots make them seem mis-
guided. In both cases, camera proxemics mock any character who makes
truth claims. Undercutting the orthodox and heretical alike, cinematog-
raphy in La Voie lactée advocates certain theological stances regarding
Christianity less than it reveres a particular attitude concerning human
perception. These close-ups disparage characters who claim to know the
20 J. Ponder

truth and invite viewers to appreciate the unknowable. At the same time,
these tight shots also criticize neutrality. The film’s best characters act
by following a set of claims without insisting those claims are true. This
commitment without truth claims rejects dogmatic fanaticism as well as
solipsistic neutrality. Ultimately, close-ups in The Milky Way prevent audi-
ences from knowing the whole picture, press them to embrace ambigu-
ity, and push them to act without guarantee.
The Chap. 6, “… And Dwelt Among Us,” explores the logical implica-
tions of these chapters. After analyzing audiovisual elements to determine
what they suggest about theological arguments, this chapter interprets the
style of these films in particular to draw more general conclusions. With
unconventionally lush soundscapes, extended shots, exaggerated light-
ing, and disorienting close-ups, these movies explicitly challenge viewers
to question their individual powers of perception. Rather than overtly
striving for the verisimilitude that creates an accessible dream world, these
films fragment solitary perspective and construct universes that rely on
many viewpoints. Through these experimental techniques, these movies
press audiences to view the world in a way that articulates interdepend-
ent worldviews. Ultimately, the style of these films imply that reading the
flesh can reveal the word but only through the intersubjective conversa-
tion one conducts with those who dwell among us.

Notes
1. Viktor Shklovsky, “Art as Technique,” in Russian Formalist Criticism:
Four Essays, ed. and trans. Lee T. Lemon and Marion J. Reis (Lincoln:
U of Nebraska P, 1917/1965), 3–24; Sergei Eisenstein, “Dickens,
Griffith, and Film Today,” in Film Form: Essays in Film Theory, ed.
and trans. Jay Leyda (New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1949),
195–256; Victor Perkins, Film as Film: Understanding and Judging
Movies (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972); David Bordwell, Narration
in the Fiction Film (London: Methuen, 1985); Robert Stam, Subversive
Pleasures: Bakhtin, Cultural Criticism and Film (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins UP, 1989).
2. Christian Metz, Film Language: A Semiotics of Cinema, trans. Michael
Taylor (New York: Oxford UP, 1974); Peter Wollen, “North by North-
West: A Morphological Analysis,” Film Form 1.1 (1976): 19–34; Colin
MacCabe, “Realism and the Cinema: Notes on Some Brechtian Theses,”
in Contemporary Film Theory, ed. Antony Aesthope (London: Longman,
2014), 53–67.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.