What Are the Potential Benefits and Pitfalls in Promoting a New Cinema - Essay Example

?Topic: What are the potential benefits and pitfalls in promoting a new cinema that places its emphasis on issues of identity and difference? Introduction When motion pictures were first devised in the late 19th century, it was viewed as a medium for documentation of historical artefacts, in much the same way as still photographs were regarded. By the early 20th century the value of motion pictures as a form of entertainment and education was firmly established; however, it is only in the recent past, during the period of globalization, that the capability of film as a powerful tool for cultural dissemination has been recognized. Academic studies have turned to a determination of the effect of film in creating cross-cultural bridges between societies. A recent genre of film has been developed that explored the clashes among cultural influences and the ensuing resistance, assimilation, or adaptation of these elements. What emerges is the depiction of the evolution of identity, its definition in contemporary terms, and its differentiation from the status quo. There are both benefits and pitfalls to this new mode of filmmaking, which this paper will explore. It is however important to first describe the nuances of identity and differentiation, that becomes a defining force in the creation of motion pictures. Issues of identity and difference The driver for the depiction of cultural identity and its differentiation from “the other” is born by a universal need for public recognition of the distinctiveness of societies. The desire to preserve identity in one form or another is in response to the challenges of multiculturalism and the politics of recognition in democratic societies. The cultural context is valued by individuals as among their basic interests, and their right to this is universal. The problem resides, however, is in the reconciliation of the conflicting content of the various valued cultures. This implies limits that must be placed on political recognition of particular cultures (Amy Gutmann, 1994: 3). In Liberal democracies, citizenship cannot be regarded as a comprehensive universal identity, for the reasons that: (1) people are unique, self-creating, and creative individuals; and (2) people are also “culture-bearing” whose cultures differ depending on their past and present identifications (Amy Gutmann, 1994: 7). Citizenship, therefore, is a unifying and equalizing factor in terms of rights; it does not, however, erase cultural distinctiveness. The liberal value of diversity should not be associated with the nullification, but rather the expansion and preservation of the “cultural, intellectual, and spiritual horizons of all individuals,” enriching and exposing us to differing intellectual and cultural perspectives, allowing for growth, exploration and enlightenment (Amy Gutmann, 1994: 9) The problem of cultural homogenization and cultural heterogenization is that there exists the indigenization of new cultural influences as they are constantly introduced into mainstream society (Arjun Appadurai). The new global cultural economy may no longer be understood in terms of simple models involving centers and peripheries, but instead as “a complex, overlapping, disjunctive order”. An elementary framework for exploring these disjunctures is suggested by Arjun Appadurai involves “five dimensions of global cultural flow”: (1) ethnoscapes; (2) mediascapes; (3) technoscapes; (4) finanscapes; and (5) ideoscapes. Each of these dimensions is a deeply imbued with historical, linguistic, and political context of nation-states, multinationals, diasporic communities (i.e., sharing common national or ethnic identity), and other such aggrupations. The five dimensions form the multiple worlds that are constituted by historically situated collective imaginations of persons and groups flung to various parts of the world (Appadurai, 2003). Deterritorialization generally is one of the major phenomena in contemporary times. It results from the mass movement of people of similar culture to other countries, eventually forming communities within other countries and cultures. Deterritorialization likewise creates new markets for cinema in the host country, expanding the geographical reach of films with ethno-cultural-racial content (Appadurai, 2003). These clashing issues – of homogenization and heterogenization, nationalisation and deterritorialization, assimilation and diversity – find their way into the context of modern cultural exchanges, not only in film but through the new media and other forms of communication made possible by technology. The technology enables both individualization as well as generalization; these same conflicts have pervaded the attributes of new cinema. The characteristics and complexities of identity in new cinema Of interest to this study is the dimension of “mediascape” which Appadurai (2003) defines as “the distribution of the electronic capabilities to produce and disseminate information (among which are films), and to the images of the world as they are presented by these media. The effect of these images may be influenced by their mode (documentary or entertainment), their hardware (electronic or pre-electronic), their audience (local, national or transnational) and the interest of those who own and control them. In the case of television and film, in particular, the repertoire of images produced is large and complex and include narratives and ethnic constructs that are viewed by an international audience. Distinction between reality and fiction become vague, and the farther the audiences are from the realities of the portrayal, the more real to them the “imagined world” becomes (Appadurai, 2003). Mediascapes may be the product of private or state interests; either way, they are image-centric and narrative-based segments of reality, offering their viewers elements of character, plot and texts. These elements tend to be made the basis of imagined lives, of the audience themselves as well as how they perceive the lives of others, living in other places. The viewing experience, whether for information or for entertainment, becomes a vicarious experience lived by the viewer by which they are transformed. The scripts become disaggregated into complex sets of metaphors by which people tend to structure and conduct their lives. The images cause the viewer to create “narratives of the ‘other’ and proto-narratives of possible lives, fantasies which could become prologemena to the desire for acquisition and movement” (Appadurai, 2003). Another consideration is that not only do different cultures have different readings of certain features of the genre, but they also respond to different degrees for different aspects of the genre. Appadurai, 2003 points out, for instance, that an Indian audience may be attentive to a political speech particularly when triggered by certain key words and phrases common in several Hindi films, while a Korean audience may react more strongly to subtle references to Buddhist or neo-Confucian rhetorics that may be encoded in the media. Hamid Naficy developed the concept of ‘accented cinema’, referring to the recently emerging genre of diasporic/exilic films. Naficy provided a comprehensive description of this new mode of filmmaking, that “cuts across previously defined geographic, national, cultural, cinematic and metacinematic boundaries” in both time span and range (Naficy, 1996: 119). They are largely independent transnational films directed by deterritorialized visionaries exhibit common attributes in terms of its thematic preoccupation, narrative structure, and visual form. The genre is termed “accented cinema” because the films are a reflection of the filmmaker’s sense of displacement, straddling both the elements of the host and home societies. “What characterizes accented authors, then, is the way they undergo and express the experience of exile” (Suner, 2006: 365). Naficy classified accented authors into three types, depending on the form of cultural or geographic displacement experienced (Suner, 2006): 1. Exilic – These authors write of exile from their country of origin and residing in a Western country, expressing ambivalence towards both their home and host societies; 2. Diasporic – This type of filmmakers are those that retain a long-term ethnic consciousness anchored in their cultural origins, cherishing a collective notion of an idealized homeland. 3. Postcolonial ethnic and identity – These authors express their identities much as a hybrid between two cultures, with less emphasis on the original homeland. Suner (2006) draws parallels between the Navicy typology and the nationalist film which, while situated in the country of origin and is therefore not of the exilic, diasporic nor postcolonial ethnic and identity genre. They do, however, display cultural identities just as complex, with a relationship to their ‘homeland’ just as problematic. There is likewise a struggle that is ethnic or cultural, situated in the midst of a metamorphosis of their home country, or the ambiguity foisted upon the protagonists by the encroaching ambiguity of modernity – or other such similar themes, not necessarily related to emigration to a Western culture, but displaying just as much a sense of dislocation and complexity. Another way of viewing this emergent genre is in terms not of “accent” but as “slang.” Khoo (2006) likens to the contemporary films as a form of vagabond expression representing a filmic vernacular. Khoo draws insights from the modern Singaporean cinema that portrays the dark side of the country’s economic development as a form of failed Asian modernity. While the film seeks to present modernist views and Westernized transformation, they however contain content that is too local in context to be exported to a global audience. An example is Royston Tan’s “15” (2003) which is a confusing fusion of documentary and fictional portrayal, an “extreme documentary realism” (Lim, 2008:10), employing Western elements (the MTV-style screenplay), and yet contained within a context distinctly Singaporean. Lim (2008) observes that the movie does not rely on straightforward narrative, but fragments it with musical interludes, resulting in a film full of contradiction and ambivalence. The film apparently was intended to shock and dismay Singaporean society, which is steeped in traditionalism and compliance (Lim 2008). It does not convey this effect, however, on the international audience, where the things considered rebellious and antisocial in Singapore – body piercings, body tattoos, smoking marijuana, and disrespecting elders in public – are rather commonplace and, while not entirely accepted everywhere, are tolerated in large part by Western cultures. The shock factor is thus not conveyed, and foreign critics regard the movie as directionless and in the nature of a protracted music video. Finally, it is worth mentioning that Ho (2007) saw modern authors as threatened in their autonomy by the influences of the authors they have read, studied, admired or disliked, citing this as akin to what Harold Bloom termed as the “Anxiety of Influence” (Ho, 2007: 310). For the home country filmmaker, the “anxiety of influence” that affects all authors is further compounded by the “postcolonial anxiety” which admits of the added influence of a postcolonial mental and sociological frame. Ho likewise draws the overlapping natures of cinema as “auteur-driven” versus “sociological” – that is, as much individual and personal, as it is a general commentary by a collective frame of mind. Potential benefits and pitfalls of new cinema conveying identity and difference In the light of the foregoing discussion on new cinema as portrayal of identity and difference, there are benefits that are seen to be derived from it: 1. Firstly, new cinema explores brave new visions; it tries to challenge stereotypes and preconceived notions of cultures and societies. For whatever else it may be lacking in terms of accuracy with the original portrayed, a good film will usually present a richer insight than that which is conveyed by mere externalities. 2. It presents the alternative viewpoint of the protagonist, as differentiated from that of society, and thereby fosters an understanding of the complications from his point of view. This is similar to what Ho (2007) explained as the “auteur-driven” (personal, individual) perception in contradistinction to the “sociological” (collective, general) perception. Identity described here is more than the commonalities among a group of people against other societies, but also the identity of the individual as distinguished from others within his society. He is representative of the whole, as well as distinct within the whole. New cinema gives the viewer this perspective. 3. While there are no reassurances of faithful representations, an exact duplicate should not be the aim of identity portrayal, however. There is no such thing as exact representations, as Hall (1997) points out; there is always the influence of the author’s perspective, and the viewer’s interpretation. What is important, therefore, is the creation of a resonance with reality within the author and the audience, thereby creating both an intellectual and an emotional connection. 4. New cinema provides a record of developing cultural and social identity, not only in terms of factual content, but also in terms of the treatment of the facts presented. The tone and innuendos of the film as designed by the director is as much commentary about prevailing norms and attitudes of the home culture at the time, as is the plot. Identity evolves and is displaced as much through time as it is in geographical context; the nuances of new cinema are part of that evolution. A clear demonstration is the music-video-type style of Royston Tan’s “15” which would have been meaningless as a statement in earlier generations. Aside from the potential benefits, there are also pitfalls in the use of new cinema to convey identity and difference in culture and society. 1. New cinema, when poorly executed, has a tendency to simplify or polarize complex issues. This is the viewpoint of foreign film critics of the Tan’s “15”. In its attempt to portray realistic content in a stylized manner (“extreme documentary realism” according to Lim, 2008:10) it fails to exploit the power of the medium to concentrate attention and highlight minutiae, squandering it on repetitive images and thereby impressing the viewers as “directionless”. The chance to highlight the struggle is lost on the film. The issue becomes simplified and polarized, “bad” modernity versus “good” conservatism. 2. There is also the probability of trivializing profound issues of identity. Motion pictures are capable of looking deep into layers of complexity, providing a multidimensional image through the interplay of plot, character, setting, and dialogue. Failure to expound on these elements renders the portrayed identity shallow and monochromatic, doing a greater disservice to the culture portrayed than a straightforward documentary. 3. Misrepresentation of a class of people, creates generalizations and new stereotypes. Stuart Hall (1997) describes representation as a manner of presenting an object not as it is, but reconstructing it in a new form or environment embodying the viewpoint of the presenter – in this case, the filmmaker. Any form of representation, therefore, cannot be an exact facsimile of the original “because there will always be a gap between intention and realization, original and copy” (Salazar, 2008). 4. At times the representation of a cultural identity is skewed in cinema, because of the need to comply with conventions and rating systems. The representation thus loses a measure of loyalty or affinity with that which is represented (Hall, 2007), however in a way that is not intended by the author for the sake of artistic portrayal, but rather for legalistic compliance. Conclusion New cinema is an exciting new genre full of potential and yet prone to pitfalls. Such repercussions are particularly pronounced when this mode of filmmaking is used to convey such a profound subject as the identity of a culture or society in contra-distinction with other dominant cultures or societies. New cinema conveys unconventional content with experimental style, and the results are either blase and mediocre, or avant-garde and impressive. Either way will be taken as reflection of the identity the work had intended to convey, which may inadvertently redound to negative commentary on an entire culture. Wordcount = 2,500 excluding topic statement Bibliography Appadurai, Arjun (2003) “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy”, in Jana Evans Braziel and Anita Mannur (eds.), Theorizing Diaspora: A Reader (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing), pp. 25-48. Gutmann, A. (1994) “Introduction”. In Amy Gutmann (ed.) Multiculturalism (Charles Taylore et al). Princeton: Princeton UP, pp. 3-24 Hall, Stuart (1997) “The Work of Representation”, in Stuart Hall (ed.), Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices (London: Sage Publications), pp. 13-74. Ho, Tzu Nyen (2007) “The Afterimage – Traces of Otherness in Recent Singaporean Cinema”, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 8 (2): 310-26. Khoo, Olivia (2006) “Slang Images: On the ‘Foreignness’ of Contemporary Singaporean Films”. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 7 (1): 81-98. Lim, Song Hwee (2008) “15: The Singapore Failure Story, ‘Slanged Up’”, in Chris Berry (ed.), Chinese Films in Focus II, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, and London: BFI, pp. 9-16. Naficy, Hamid (1999) “Framing exile: From homeland to homepage”. In H. Naficy (ed.) Home, Exile, Homeland: Film, Media, and the Politics of Place, New York: Routledge. Salazar, Noel B (2008) "Representation in Postcolonial Analysis." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Retrieved February 15, 2011 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045302240.html Suner, Asuman (2006) “Outside In: ‘Accented Cinema’ At Large”, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 7 (3): 363-82. Woodward, Kathryn (1997) “Concepts of Identity and Difference”, in Kathryn Woodward (ed.), Identity and Difference (London: Sage Publications), pp. 7-62. Read More