[PDF] les arts sous louis xiv cycle 3
[PDF] Les arts témoins de l'Histoire
[PDF] les aspects comique d'une pièce de théâtre ( textes et représentations ) ne servent - elles qu'a faire rire
[PDF] Les aspects de la citoyenneté
[PDF] LES ASPECTS DE LA PUISSANCE JAPONAISE
[PDF] Les aspects de la réussite de l'économie chinoise
[PDF] les aspects et les limites de la mondialisation
[PDF] Les aspects positifs et négatif de la révolution industrielle
[PDF] LES ASSOCIATIONS : l'exemple d'Action contre la Faim
[PDF] les asymptotes d'une fonction
[PDF] les asymptotes d'une fonction pdf
[PDF] les atomes
[PDF] Les Atomes !
[PDF] Les atomes , urgent !
[PDF] Les atomes / le ions
CinemaPlastique
Cinéma,Art(s)Plastique(s ),Ce ntreCulturelInterna tionaldeCerisy,France ,14-21June2001
Are portbyJuliaHammett-Jamar t,Univer sityof
Wollongong,Australia,and l'UniversitedeParis-III(La
SorbonneNouvelle),Franc e
The2001 Coll oquedeCerisybroug httoge theranumberofprominenttheori stsfromFrance andNort hAmericatodisc uss"cinema"and"lesartspl astiques". Underthedire ctionof ClaudeMurcia(l'U niversitédePoit iers,France)andPierreTaminiaux(Georgetown University,USA),thetoneofdiscussi onswasuncensoredandhighl yproduc tive.Parti cipa nts soughttoex plorether elationshipbetweenc inemaand thefineartsandalsotounderstandthe wayinwhich cinema itselfcanbeconside redtoembodytheprinci pleof"plasticity" .A surprisinglevelofconsensus surroundedthepresuppositiont hatf ilmconstitut esanartwhich canbeattr ibute dtoan"auteur"(individualorcollec tive). Theti tleofthisconferenc ewa snodoubtdevisedw iththeintentionofprovokingdebates abouttheontol ogicalst atusof"cinema",withpart icularreferenc eto "lesartsplastiques".The term"artsplast iques"isgenerally translatedinEnglishas" fineart s".However,this translationoverlooksthematerialit yevokedbytheFre nchter m.Twokeyquestions underpinnedinitialdiscussi ons:inlightofitscommerc ialandindustrialunderpi nnings,ca n cinemabeconsideredan" art ";and,inthesecondinstance ,towhat extentcancinemabe consideredan"artplastiq ue"? Thepai ringoftwodistinctdomainsf ort hepurposesofthis conferencecanbeparti ally explainedbythepersistentreluc tanceof academi cinstitutionstorecognize filmstudiesasan independentfieldofinquir y.Mostoften,filmstudi esi nFrancearetaughtasa subjectw ithin thediscipl ineof"artsplastiques".There ar eafewrareexcepti ons,suchastheUFR"Cinema etAudiovisue l"atLaSorbonneNouvelle.Mic helMarie ,direct orofthatpart icular department,waspredictablythemost vocalopponentto thethemeoftheconference. Thefi rstpaperwasprese ntedbyDomini queChateau( l'UniversitéParis-I)whoserec ent monographonaesthetics infor medhisthesison"TheConceptofPlastic ity".Chateauspoke abouttheval ueofisola tingandident ify ingaspectsofamedium(ci nema)wi thaviewto betterunderstandingit snature.Hethusdrewadistinc tionbetween the"côtépoétique"and the"côté polyetic"offilm ,opposingthe"spirit"ofaworktoit sphy sicalform.Chateau drew uponPl ato'sreflectionsonplast icityasthetransformationofnature, its"bec oming",which mightsustainthede finitionofcinemaas an"art plastique". MichelMarie(l' UniversitéPari s-III)indicatedhisemphaticoppositiontothisnoti on.During theensuingdi scussion,RedaB ensmaïa(GeorgetownU niversity,U SA)insistedontheneed tomovebey ondthem aterialit yofcinema.H eobservedthat,aftertheinitialinscription, whichgivesrise tothought,thesubjectbecom espoetic/i ntellec tualandisnot anchored inits plasticity.Thediscussionconcludedwithge ner alconcurrencethatthe conceptofplasticityi s oftenconstruedin anoverlyabstractma nner.It wassuggest edthat,verysimply,t he malleabilityofcinemabeconsideredascentra lt oitsclassificationas "ar tplastique". Thefi lmexcerptssel ectedbyparticipantstosupportt heirpapersaccordinglyreve aleda preoccupationwiththephysicalaspects ofcinema.Godardw asrepe atedlycitedasthe directorwhoseworkmightbec onsideredtomost effectivel yexploitthe mat erialityofthe cinematicmedium.ThuspapersbyJean- PierreEsquenazi,La eti tiaFieschi-Vi vet,andMa rie- FrançoiseGrangeallanalyz edthe"dimensionplastique"of filmsbyGoda rd.Thelatter developedanextreme lyinter estingthesisonthequestionofself-portrai tureinthecinema. Grange(l'UniversitédeSt -Etienne)proposedareflectionuponthedegre eto whichcinematic self-portraitsresemble/differfromself-po rtraitsinthevisualarts.Sheconsideredthemanner inwhich anauthormightbesai dtoinscr ibetraces of"self"withina cine maticwork. Numerousfascinatingob servationsweremadeinresponsetoGrang e'spaper.Therewasa discussionaroundthedistinc tionbetween cinemat icself-portraitureandcine maticauto- biography,withthesuggestionthat thelatterism orefirm lyattachedto thenarrati veand chronologythantoplastici ty.Commenti ngthatth efilmJLGparJLGconstitutedafairly unproblematicexampleofthegenre,Re daBensmaïanotedthatself- port raiture doesnot requirepersonificat ion.DominiqueChateausuggestedthatthemodelbereverse d,i.e.that perhapstheveryqua litywhi chdefinesanaute uristomakeofhis/herf ilmaself-portra it. Thisfinal reflectionbroug htthediscussiontoaninterestingimpassef ortheauthorofthis report.Atmyhomeinsti tution,fi lmstudies areoffe redaspartoftheCommunicati onand CulturalStudiesprogram. Textualanalysisist hereforeinformedbyapost-s tructuralist perspectivewhichrecognize stheproductionofmea ninginfilmsasasocialprocess, involvingtheinterpr etative activityofthespectatorasmuchasitdoesthecr eativecapacity ofthe director /writer/produceretc.Thisperspectivewouldrejecttheverynotionof authorshipwhichwasat thecenterofthepre cedingdiscussion, i.e.as anobjec tofstudy, "cinematicself-portraiture"pre supposestheidentificationofasubject/author. PhilippeDubois(l'Unive rsitéParis- III)alludedtothisparadoxinhispaperoncine matic figuration.Hebeganbyemphasizingthe factt hatcinemais neithera n"artplastique"nora "literaryart"nora"dramaticar t"norevennecess ari lya n"art"atall,butratheranamalgam ofanum bero fdifferentf ormswhic hbringsforthanewcapacity forcreatingm eaning.He suggestedthatitisthi saspectofthecin emawhi chprovides suchfertile groundfor multidisciplinarystudy.Itisperhapsalsoforthisrea sonthattheColloquede Cerisy ,which broughttoget heradisparategroupofinternati onalsc holars,provedtobesoengagin g. TheCol loquewasheldina magnificent chateaui ntheBass eNor mandie.Thelocalewas difficulttoaccessbutoncether e,parti cipantsstayedtogethe r,a tetogetherand relaxed together.Asinglepaperwas pres entedatanyonetime ,whichmeanttha tparticipant sdrew uponac ommon resourceofaccumul atedknowledge.Thissha red vocabularyresultedinan enrichedlevelofdiscussion, whichmovedoutoftheconfer enc eroomsandintothedining rooms.TheColloques deCe risyareprogramm edi naccordancewithatradi tionwhichha sin thepastw elcomed suchluminariesasChristian MetzandAndréMa lraux.Theprinciple objectiveoftheColloquesist ofor geintel lectualcommunities, throughli velyandc andid discussionasmuchasthroug htheform alpresenta tionofre search.Thiscontex twasnot negligibleincreatinganatmosphe reofsti mulatingandcandidintellectualdeba te.
Sissies,SailorsandotherMascul inities
ExploringMasculiniti esandFilmattheCe ntrefor ResearchintoFilma ndMedia,Unive rsity ofNe wcastleuponTyne,2-4July2001
Are portbyJamesLeggott,Newc astleUn iversity,UK
ExploringMasculinitie sandFilmtookplac einearlyJuly2001, andwasa rrangedby NewcastleUniversity'sCentrefor ResearchintoFilmandMedia.Thecon ference,which coveredthreedaysa ndwasorganisedbyPhi lPowrie,ChrisP erriam andAnnDavie s, attractedarangeofspeakersandpanel li stsfromtheUKandN ort hAmerica,androughlya fifthofthepaperswer egive nbypostgr aduates.Suchwas thespectrumoftheore tical approachesonoffer,theattendee was oftendauntedbythe choiceofpa rallelpanels;wasitto be,say," ProductionandR eceptionofNorthAmericanMa sculinite s","TheGaze"or"Early
CinemaMasculinities" ?
Decisionsmayhavebeenta ken,alas,int hehopeforal essclammyvenue ,fortheconferenc e seemedtocoincidewit haheat- wavethatdisorientat edvisitorandlocal ali ke.Withthe conferenceroomslackingair- conditioning,and thefrequencyofshuttersb eingdrawnfor filmclips,oneoft enfeltthatani ce- creamconeonthese afrontwouldbeamore sensible proposition.I'mnotsureifthe delegatesI hea rdplanning atript oWhitle yBayevermadeit, butag oodnum berofice -creamsdid getc onsumedonthesecondday,whentheconference tookreside ncyinthelocalNFT-affi liated Tynesi deCinemaforacouple ofkeynotesanda showingofMinnel li' sThePirate inantic ipationofStevenCohan'spaperonGeneKe lly .The soaringtemperatu resdidhavetheunfortunateeffectofdiminishingpeopl e'scapac ityfor rigorousconcentration, letaloneparticipation,andIfeltt hattheoddcontent iousstateme nt mighthavecausedgre aterf rictionhadtheove rallenergylevelsnotbe ensappedsomewhat. StevenCohan'spaper, "DancingwithB allsinthe1940s:Sissie s,Sailors,andtheCamp MasculinityofGeneKelly",exa mi nedthe"camp masculinity"ofthedancer'sp ersonainthe contextoftheunstablesta tusof masculini tyitselfinmi d-centuryUScultur e;a nintriguing proposalfor,asC ohannoted,studi esofmusic alcamphavet endedtofocusonf emalestars. Thecont emporaryextra-filmiccomment aryonKelly,alongsidethemusicalsthatcrafta "homosocial"pairingwithmale co-stars,andthesolonumbers thateroticiset hebody,added upto, inCohan' swords,the "culturaloxymor on"oftheer oticspect acleofmaledancer, whichproblematise dnotionsofmasculinityandheterosexualit y.Havingdef ined "camp"in termsoftensionsbetwe enf ormandcontent,ordisc ourseandreference,wit hanexcessi ve, theatricalisedstylethat"queersrepresentation" ,Cohanstressedthe featurestha trankKelly alongsideother(female )campicons,a ndallowhisbodytofunctionasasiteof indeterminate meaning,aproblematicpe rfor manceofmasculinitythattransgr essescategoriesofstraightor queer. Throughouttheconfe rence, therewerenumerousmentionsofthe"hardbod y",andthe organiserswerepleasedto welcomeSusanJef fords,whosepaper("TheFa ceofTerr or:Why AreWeAfr aidofAv erageWhiteMen?")address edt hedepictionofundistinctivewhiteme n asnationa lenemieswithinthe post-Oklahomabombingclimate .Sheusedthepopular HollywoodfilmsArlingtonRoadandBreakdowntoexplor etheshiftintheportra yalofthe nationalenemyfromthe" other"totheaver agemale. Thiswasa nengagingpaper,contai ning agood balance betweentextualanalysi sandculturalcommentary .Italsoledtooneofthe morelivelyd ebates,followingJohnH ill'ssuggestionthatherfocus wastooAmerican. Fromthepopulart othearc ane:KajaS ilverma n'spaper onGodardtookplaceattheT yneside Cinema,whichallowedf orsomeclipsfromhis Histoire(s)ducinéma,aw ork withwhichI amnotfam ili ar(outsidetheGodardfaithful,Isuspec tI'mnotalone).Entit led,"Th eDreamof theNinet eenthCentury",thisrigorouspaper exploredGodard'sacknowledge mentofhis "awakening"fromamasculineideal throughhisc olla borationswithAnne-MarieMiévill e. Maybeitwasthehe at,butI experienc edSilve rman'spaperrat herlikea dre am;utterlylogical andconvinci ngwhileitunfolded,butdiff iculttopindownaf terwa rds. Inantic ipationofherbookonJean-PierreMelvill e,G inetteV incende auspo keonthe excessivelymasculineworldofLeCercl eRouge.She usedthefi lmtodi scusstheim portance ofa spectsofmasculinityboth tot heaudienceofMelville'sthrillers, andhisow ncriti cal reputation.ForVincendeau,LeCercl eRougewashis"apog eeandswa nsong",andshe focusseduponthefilm's mult iplegene ricformulation:itsrel ationshiptoAmericanand
Frenchgangsterfilm sandJapanese"samurai"films.
JohnHill prefacedhispaper withanapologyforhisappar entfocus uponmattersof class ratherthangender--ne edlessly,as ithappens,asthe "Masculi nities"bannergenerateda varietyofhybridapproac hest hattackledreprese ntationsofgenderinthecontextof( among others)class,nat ionalidentity,genre, starstudies,sexualityandEa rlyCinema.Hill'spaper, "AWorkin gClassHeroIsSome thingToBe?:Chang ingRepresenta tionsofC lassand MasculinityinBritishCinema "usedac omparisonbetweentwok eyBritishfilms,Kesand BillyElliott,to exploret helatter'sappar enthostilityt owardsatraditionalmaleworking- class culture.Inasubsequentpanelon "Briti shIde ntities",Joyc eWoolridgeals oused acycleof films,thistime,the Britishfootba llfilmsofthepasttw odecades, tochartshiftingatti tudes towardworking-class identityandcommunity,andthemovefrom"hooliga n"to"NewLad" films,whichpromised footballasthesource ofanaffirmative ,instantidentitythati gnored classdistinction.I fthesepapers,andothers,assum eda"cr isis"ofsomekindinm odern masculinity,suchanapproach,accordingt oAnnaCla ydon,inase cond"BritishIdentit ies" panel,betrayed anunsatisfactorydeterminism. Inherpr ovocativepaper,entitled"New PerspectivesonBritishCinema:GoingB eyond the'Crisis'inMasculinit y",shearguedforan analysisofBritishmasc ulinityt hatescapedthepremiseofa "crisis".Theperspectiveshe offered,however,which,i fmemoryservesmeright,dr ewfrompsychoana lytict heory,struck measequa llydete rministic. Withninetyminute sforeachpanelse ssion,andthreespeakers togetthr ough,itwasperha ps inevitablethattherewasofte ninsufficient timefordiscussion, andthatnoma jortheme dominatedtheevent.Howeve r,thera ngeofnationalci nemasunderdiscussionwasmost impressive,withpapersonYiddish,N orthernIrish,Hi ndi,Italian,No rthAme rican,German, FrenchandBritishCine ma.Iwa sintriguedbyBrettAl lanEnemark's"GigoloBea t: Masculinityintheearlyfilms ofLarr yKent(1963 -7)",amajorfigure intheemergenceoft he modernEnglishCana dianfilm.Ifamaj orcharacteristicofthene wCanadianmasculinit esof the1950swas an" openavowalofvic timhood",K ent'searl yfilmsdisplacee stabl ished masculiniteswiththe"existential,a narchic"ideolog yofBeat culture. Alsonotablew asthevarietyofp apersonstars andthei rreception;Americansta rsdom inated (GeneKelly,C larkGable,ClintEastwood,W illiamPowell,Fr ankSinatra,BruceWi llis),but therewerealso piecesonAlainD elonandNanni Moretti.AlthoughImiss edP eterHomden's "GettingIntoShape:TheEconomicBod yofGentleme nJimCorbett", Iwasint riguedbyhis abstract,whichpromisedanex aminationofthec ontemporaryidentificati onsmadew iththe boxer(thefi rstheavywei ghtchampionofthew orldtobecapturedoncelluloid)anda demonstrationofhowevenatitsincept ion,c ine mawas"market edtowar dsacontrolling and desiringmalegaze". Havingonlyseenat hirdofthe fiftyorsopaper son offer,itisdiff icul ttocom mentonthe overallquality;furt hermore,theunfavourablecondit ionsmademelesssympathetictowards themorede mandingpaper sandthelessexperienced deliverers.Ithusawai twith interest the forthcomingbookproposedbytheorga niser s.quotesdbs_dbs46.pdfusesText_46
Cinema Plastique - University of Nottingham