Theories of Authorship - Term Paper Example

hip theories and industrial production Introduction: Film theories offer the notion of the director as the of the film. But this is a controversial issue because film production itself is a collaborative activity, one that involves the creative input and ideas of many artists and technicians. Can theories of authorship therefore be compatible within this industrial context, where the very notion that authorship of a film is assignable to one individual is questionable? This essay argues that despite the industrial context, the distinctive stamp of some directors on certain films may well lend credence to such theories. Analysis: The auteur theory is one of the most important theories of authorship. The term, politque des auteurs was coined by Francois Truffaut, who realized that American Directors often worked within strictly circumscribed parameters in reference to the kinds of films and the scripts they could direct, since these were often predetermined and allowed the directors little room to experiment with their own ideas (Keller 1930). The notion of the Director being the true author of a film first emerged through the views of Andrew Sarris on the distinctive nature of a particular director’s work. According to Sarris, Hitchcock was “great” and Welles was classed as “brilliant”, based on the view that over the course of preparation of several films, a director may reveal certain recurring characteristics of styles or themes, which are like his or her personal signature or stamp upon the film, identifying it unmistakably as their product (Sarris, 1979:650-665), irrespective of the collective nature of film production. It may be argued that American cinema in earlier decades was circumscribed by the industrial context of production and the concentration of power in the hands of studio top executives. The power wielded by the writers and directors of the film was considerably less than that wielded by studio heads and their creative control over the film much lower. Yet, despite these restrictions, some directors such as Hitchcock were able to achieve a personal style that was uniquely their own. In particular, where some directors such as Orson Welles and Jean Luc Godard are concerned, some recurring themes may occur in all their works, or their work may demonstrate a particular worldview or personal vision that becomes evident through their work. They bear the unmistakable personal imprint of the author, despite the plethora of external market and commodity pressures that may fashion the final products. For example, in the works of Godard, the director’s interest in depiction of reality as it actually is experienced, rather than a fictional image conjured up for a viewer, is evident. “For Godard, there is not reality and then the camera – there is reality seized at this moment and in this way by the camera” (MacCabe, 2003:79). The director’s work reflects an adherence to his personal world view, rather than bowing to market pressures which may dictate a greater emphasis on presenting a fantasy experience for a viewer. Andrew Sarris indicates a manner of reading and appraisal of films by examining the imprint of the author of the work, generally the director. Sarris uses this theory to rank the work of directors on the basis of three separate criteria: (a) technical competence (b) stylistic identity and (c) the communicability of their worldview, and on this basis, Sarris examines the work of directors and estimates their worth.(Wells and Hakanen, 1997:313). Keller points out that the auteur theory or la politique des auteurs may be summarized as the “acknowledgement of the director as the primary and shaping force behind any film.” (Keller 1930). It may be argued that creative input into a film comes from many individuals, especially the scriptwriters who are technically the authors of the film. But the actual form that the film will assume, the manner in which the storyline is executed on screen and the impact it will produce in the viewers is largely the function of the director. One example that can be cited is the technique of standing back from the film itself and offering a narration, observation or comment on the film that is outside the main frame of reference of the film. Brecht characterizes this as follows: “Alienation is nothing but a representation, that is ‘making noticeable’’ of estrangement. (Michaela, 2003). The feat of withdrawal from the reality of the film and the objective use of language in order to stand back and assess experiences in a more subjective manner through a greater reliance on the senses, is a directorial technique. The film medium permits the kind of juxtaposition of reality and reflexivity (Bonnard, 2005) that elevates the film viewing experience to a unique dimension which reflects the distinctive stamp of the director rather than the author of the film story. Film critic Robin Wood also highlights the importance of authorship as a distinguishing feature of a creative work such as a film. But in his analyses, he offers a more critical perspective, focusing on the ideological limitations of directors.(Wood, 1998). He contends that politics plays a role in filmmaking, in particular sexual politics which may determine how a particular work is to be interpreted. Caughie (1981) has pointed out that despite the making of a film in collaborative and industrial conditions, authorship appears to be able to transcend these conditions because it draws attention to the author’s particular style and the consistency of themes or worldview as demonstrated through the films of a particular author. Authorship has defined filmmaking because “Film criticism became a process of discovery, ….[which] … forced a more precise attention to what was actually happening within the film than had been customary for a traditional criticism which tended to be satisfied with the surfaces of popular film" (Caughie, 1981, pp. 11–12). The distinctive imprint of the director as the author of a film may not however, necessarily be affected by the industrial context. For example, in Spain, the male dominance that characterizes the industrial context of film production has produced an under representation of women in production and direction of films (Jordan and Tamosunas, 1998: 118). While it may be argued that this lack of representation restricted the input of women into the film making process, women directors in Spain today are making films that bear their personal stamp in the form of a distinctive style that proclaims their authorship. Therefore, it would appear that there is some relevance to the theories of authorship and they may be valid despite external environmental conditions. In discussing the films of Frenchwoman Germaine Dulac, Fliterman-Lewis offers the view that her film “The seashell and the clergyman” in effect “thematizes woman as a force of desire within the production of the filmic writing itself.” (Flitterman-Lewis, 1984:33). Thus, through her writings and films, Dulac was able to present a perspective of women from a subjective viewpoint that was generally denied to women in France in the nineteenth century. Despite the industrial context that inhibited such subjective expression, Dulac’s achievements suggest that theories of authorship, which highlight the importance of directorial contribution, may well be relevant and thus, they cannot be held to be incompatible with the industrial context. Conclusion: On the basis of the above, it may thus be concluded that authorship theories are not incompatible within the industrial context. Sarris has contended that all directors are constrained by the conditions under which they work and the cultural context within which their artistic expression must take form. But, as he points out, the “auteur theory values the personality of a director precisely because of the barriers to its expression.” (Sarris, 1968: 31). When a creative work stands out as a distinct piece of work bearing the imprint of its author, despite the constraints of the environment, it only shows that authorship theories have relevance. It cannot be denied that the industrial context of film production does play a significant role in influencing the quality and content of directorial work and authorship. But while it may pose some restrictions or limitations on individual author expression, this does not necessarily that authorship theories are incompatible. Authorship theories place a premium on the distinctive nature of an author’s work, certain features and characteristics of a creative work that distinguish it from other works. This unique individuality and creativity of an individual as expressed through authorship and directing of a film may hold good despite restrictions in the environment, as was the case with directors such as Alfred Hitchcock. Although film production is a collaborative effort, a collective view may not necessarily emerge in the final product, rather the nature and quality of the final work may be a reflection of the ideas and world view of the author. Thus, it may be concluded that while the industrial context may affect the quality of authorship, in general authorship theories may not be incompatible with the industrial nature of film production. References: * Bonnaud, Frederic, 2005. “Occupational Hazards”, Film Comment, 41(1): 37-40. * Caughie, John, 1981. “Theories of authorship”, London: Routledge * Cohen, M and Mast, G, 1979. “Film Theory and Criticism: introductory readings”, New York: Oxford University Press * Driver, Michaela, 2003. “Using Brechtian ideas and theatrical practices to reconceptualize role distance and facilitate learning in organizations”, Tamara: Journal of critical postmodern organization science, Retrieved June 25, 2008 from: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4007/is_200301/ai_n9338351/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1 * Dulac, Germaine, 1994. “Ecrits sur le cinema”, 1919-1937”, Paris: Paris Expérimental. * Flitterman-Lewis, Sandy, 1986. “The Image and the Spark: Dulac and Artaud Reviewed”, Dada/Surrealism, 15: 110-127 * Jordan, Barry and Tamosunas, Rikki-Morgan, 1998. “Contemporary Spanish Cinema”, Manchester University Press * Keller, Craig, 1930. “Jean-Luc Goddard”, Retrieved June 25, 2008 from: http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/directors/03/godard.html * MacCabe, Colin, 2003. “A portrait of the artist at Seventy”, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux * Sarris, Andrew, 1979. “Notes on the auteur theory in 1962”, IN Cohen, M and Mast, G, 1979. “Film Theory and Criticism: introductory readings”, New York: Oxford University Press * Sarris, Andrew, 1968. “The American cinema”, New York: Dutton * Wells, Alan and Hakanen, Ernest A, 1997. “Mass Media and society”, Ablex/Greenwood. * Wood, Robin, 1998. “Sexual Politics and Narrative Film: Hollywood and Beyond”, New York: Columbia University Press. Read More