GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction

8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 1/8

e,cided

on

this

term,

fol-

and

Chase.

The

State

of

lst

annual

FIAF

confer_

5.

Speaking

about

shots

he

said:

,,Such

cases

are

t:

pT"

spectacle.,,

[Do_

rn

5lapstick Comedy,,,

rgbl)

52_53.1

lstance

penley

and

An_

na

L?

ry87)

42.

rften

combined

multi_

tied

by

songs

that

the

lsp,ectacle.

rirrer

and

Donald

G.

The

Cinema of Attract ion[s] :

Early Fi lm,

I ts

Spectator

and

the

Avant-Garde

Tom

Gunning

Writing in r9zz, flushed

with the

excitement

of seeing Abel Gance's Le RouE,

Femand L6ger

tried to define something

of the

radical

possibilities

of the cin-

ema. The

potential of the

new

art did not lie

in

"imitating

the

movements

of

nature"

or in

"the

mistaken path"

of its resemblance

to theater.

Its

unique

power was a

"matter

of making

images

seen."' It is

precisely this hamessing of

visibility, this act

of showing

and exhibition,

which

I feel

cinema before 19o6

displays most intensely.

[Its]

inspiration

for

the avant-garde of the

early

decades

of this

century

needs

to be

re-explored.

Writings

by the

early

modemists

(Futurists,

Dadaists

and Surrealists) on the

cinema follow

a pattem similar

to Ldger:

enthusiasm for this new medium

and

its possibilities; and disappointment at the way it has already developed, its

enslavement to traditional art forms,

particularly

theater and literature. This

fascination

with

the potential

of

a medium (and

the accompanying fantasy

of

rescuing

the cinema from

its enslavement

to alien and pass6 forms)

can be un-

derstood from

a number of viewpoints. I

want to use it to illuminate

a topic

I

have

[also]

approached before

[...],

the

strangely heterogeneous relation

that

film before

t9o6

(or

so) bears to the films

that follow, and

the way a taking

account

of this heterogeneity signals

a

new

conception

of

film

history and film

form.

My work in this area has been pursued

in

collaboration with Andr6 Gau-

dreault.'

The

history of early cinema, like the history

of cinema generally, has been

written

and theorized under the

hegemony

of narrative films. Early filmmakers

like

Smith, M6lids

and

Porter have been

studied

primarily from the viewpoint

of

their contribution to film as a storytelling

medium, particularly

the evolution of

narrative editing. Although

such

approaches

are not totally misguided, they are

one-sided and potentially distort both

the work

of these

filmmakers

and the

actual forces shaping

cinema

before

ryo6.

A few

observations will indicate the

way that early cinema

was

not dominated

by

the

narrative

impulse that later

asserted its

sway over the medium.

First

there is

the extremely important role

that actuality film

plays

in early film

production.

Investigation of the films

copyrighted in

the US shows

that actuality

films

oukrumbered fictional films

until

19o6.3

The Lumidre tradition of

"placing the world within

one's

reach"



382

The

Cinema

of

Attractions

Reloaded

through

travel

films

and

topicals

did

not

disappear

with

the

exit

of the

Cirre:;.

tographe

from

film

production.

But

even

within

non-acfuality

filming

-

what

has

sometimes

been

referrec

:i*

as

the "M6lids

tradition"

-

the role

narrative

plays

is

quite

different

than

in

:p

ditional

narrative

film.

Mdlias

himserf

declared

in

discussing

his

working

m€T_

oo:

As for

the

scenario,

he "fable,"

or "tale,"

I

only

consider

t

at

the

end.

I

can

staie

-:;::

the

scenario

constructed

n

this

manner

has

no importance,

ince

use t

merel.-

:-. ,pretext or

the "stage

effects,"

he "tricks,"

or

for

a nicely

arranged

abreau.a

\rvhatever

differences

one

might

find

between

Lumiirre

and

Mdlies,

they

sh:-

;

not represent

the

opposition

between

narrative

and

non-narrative

filmmak::,

at least

as it

is

understood

today.

Rather,

one

can

unite

them

in

a conception

-rdl

sees

cinema

less

as a

way

of telling

stories

than

as a

way

of presenting

a

series

:r

views

to

an

audience,

fascinating

because

of their

illusoryrpower

(whether

::*e

realistic

illusion

of

motion

offered

to the

first

audiences

by Lumiere,

or the

r..r*

gical

illusion

concocted

by

M6lids),

and

exoficism.

In

other

words,

I

belier.e

-:.er

the

relation

to

the

spectator

set up

by

the

films

of both

Lumidre

and

M6lies

"r:

many

other

filmmakers

before

19o6)

had

a

common

basis,

and

one

that

dl-::ri

from the primary spectator relations set up by narrative film after 19o6. I -,,,11

call this

earlier

conception

of cinema,

"the

cinema

of

attractions.,,

I

belier.e

r.m"

this

conception

dominates

cinema

until

about

'9o6-19o7.

Although

diiterer.

from

the

fascination

in

storytelling

exploited

by

the

cinema

from

the

tiaq. :".

Griffith,

it

is

not

necessarily

opposed

to

it. In

fact

the

cinema

of

attractio:::

does

not

disappear

with

the dominance

of narrative,

but

rather

goes

ur.i.r-

ground,

both

into

certain

avant-garde

practices

and

as

a

component

of narre:*,

*

films,

more

evident

in

some

genres

(e.g.,

the

musical)

than

irrothers.

\Atrhat

precisely

is the

cinema

of attraction[s]?

First

it

is

a

cinema

that

t,:-,ey.

itself

on

the

quality

that

L6ger

celebrated:

its

ability

to

show

something.

C:,:*

trasted

to

the

voyeuristic

aspect

of

narrative

cinema

analyzed

by

chris:a.r

Metz,s this is an exhibitionist cinema. An aspect of early cinema which I h:, r

written

about

in

other

articles

is

emblematic

of this

different

relationshi:

.:'r

cinema

of attractions

constructs

with its

spectator:

the recurring

look

at the

c.:r"

era

by

actors.

This

actiory

which

is

later

perceived

as

spoiling

the realistic :

_,,:.."

sion

of

the

cinema,

is

here

undertaken

with

brio,

estatrilshing

contact

with

:*

audience.

From

comedians

smirking

at

the

camera,

to the

constant

bowins

i:r:

gesturing

of

the

conjurors

in magic

films,

this

is

a cinema

that

displays

its

ir:

lity,

willing

to

rupture

a

self-enclosed

fictional

world

for

a

chance

to

solicit

:,*.

attention

of

the

spectator.

Exhibitionism

becomes

literal

in

the

series

of

erotic

films

which

play

ar

:::,."

portant

role

in

early

film

production

(the

same

path6

catalogue

would

adr.er::a



Film,

ts Spectator

and

the Avant-Garde

of the

Cindma-

eerr referred

to

Ent

than

in

tra-

n-orking

meth-

L

tr can

state

that

re t merely

as

a

hleau,+

x" ffire1'should

re frJrnmaking,

mreption

that

ting

a series

of

r

nr.hether

the

hr"

or

the

ma-

; I heiieve that

td \{elids

(and

rre

that

differs

er 19o6.

I will

'I

helieve

that

rrefi

di-tferent

rr tfu

time

of

f attraction[s]

r

goes

under-

t

of narrative

IS

ma that bases

nddng.

Con-

t'v

Christian

lr-hich

I have

h'anship

the

ok at the

carn-

r realistic

itrlu-

ffict nith

the

Gb'olrirrg

and

[ar-=

its r-Lsihi-

: to

scrliit

the

h

p.]-

an

irn-

ruld adrerfi--e

the Passion

Play

along

with "scdnes

grivioses

d'un

caractdre

piquanf,,

erotic

films

often including

full nudity),

also

driven

underground

in

laier

years.

As

NoEl Burch

has

shown

in

his film

ConnrcrroN,

prEasr

on

How

wn

Gor rNro

Prcrunrs

Ggzil,

a

film like

THn Bnrns

Rrrrnss

(France,

goz)

reveals

a

funda-

mental

conflict

between

his

exhibitionistic

tendency

of

early

film

and

the

crea-

tion of a fictional diegesis.A woman undressesor bed while her new husband

peers

at her

from

behind

a screen.

F{owever,

t

is

to

the

camera

and

the

audience

that

the

bride

addresses

er

erotic

striptease,

winking

at us as

she

aces

us,

smil-

ing

in

erotic

display.

As

the quote

from

Mdlids

points

out,

the

trick

film,

perhaps

the

dominant

non-actuality

film

genre

before

t9o6,

is

itself

a series

of displays,

of magical

attractions,

rather

than

a

primitive

sketch

of narrative

continuity.

Many

trick

films

are,

n

effect,

plotless,

a series

of

transformations

strung

together

with

little

connection

and

certainly

no

characterization.

But

to

approach

even

the

plotted

trick

films,

such

as

Ls

vovacr DANS

LA

ruNr

(r9oz),

simply

as

precursors

of

later

narrative

structures

s

to miss

the

point.

The

story

simply

provides

a frame

upon which to string a demonstrationof the magicalpossibilitiesof the cinema.

Modes

of exhibition

in

early

cinema

also

reflect

this lack

of

concem

with

creating

a self-sufficient

narrative

world

upon

the

screen.

As

Charles

Musser

has

shown,6

he early

showmen

exhibitors

exerted

a greatdeal

of control

over

the

shows

they

presented,

actually re-editing

the

films

they

had

purchased

and

supplying

a

series

of

offscreen

supplements,

such

as sound

effects

and

spoken

commentary.

Perhaps

most

extreme

is

the

Hale's

Tours,

the

largest

chain

of

theaters

exclusively

showing

films

before

19o6.

Not

only did

the

films

consist

of

non-narrative

sequences

aken

from

moving

vehicles

(usually

trains),

but the

theater

tself

was

arranged

as a train

car

with

a

conductor

who

took

ticketg

and

sound

effects

simulating

the

click-clack

of

wheels

and

hiss

of

air brakes.z

Such

viewing experienceselatemore to the attractionsof the fairground than to the

traditions

of the

legitimate

theater.

The

relation

between

films

and

the

emer_

gence

of the

great

amusement

parks,

such

as

Coney

Island,

at

the

fum

of the

century

provides

rich

ground

for rethinking

the

roots

of early

cinema.

Nor

should

we ever

forget

that

in

the

earliest

years

of exhibition

the

cinema

itself

was

an

attraction.

Early

audiences

went

to

exhibitions

to

see machines

demonstrated

the

newest

technological

wonder,

following

in

the

wake

of

such

widely

exhibited

machines

and marvels

as

X-rays

or, earlier,

he

phonograph),

rather

than

to view films.

It

was

the

Cin6matographe,

he Biograph

or the

vita-

scope

hat

were

advertised

on the variety

bilts

in

which

they

premiered,

not

[LE

DfpuNrn

nu

n6nf,]

or Trrs

Bracx

Dravroxn

Expnrss.

After

the

initial

novelty

period, this display of the possibilitiesof cinemacontinues,

and

not

only in

ma-

gic films.

Many

of the

close-ups

n

early

film

differ

from

later

uses

of the

techni-

que

precisely

because

hey

do not

use

enlargement

or

narrative

punctuatior;



The Cinema of Attfactions Reloaded

but

as

an

attraction

in

its

own

right.

The

close-up

cut

into

porter,s

T,,r

Gay

rror

Crnnx

ogoi

may

anticipatiater

*.",t:il?

,"chniques,

but

its

principal

motive

is

again

pure

exhibitio.,ir-,

as

the

rady

rifr

her

rti'ritr"-,

exposing

her

nkle

for

alr

to

see.

Biograph

films

such

as

pnorocnapHrNc

a

Fnuarr

Cnoox

tgo+)

and

HoorrcaN

rN

Jarr

ogo.,

consist

of

a

singre

shot

in

which

the

camera

s

brought

crose

o

the

main

"t,u.u"tur,

until

they

aL

in

mid_shot.

The

enrarge_

ent

is

not

a

device

expressive

of

narrative

tension;

t

is

in

ibelf

an

attraction

nd

the

point

of

the

film.s

[To summarize, thecinemaof attractir

incitinsvisuatcuriosity,andsupplyi"rJ,Hrl'fi

itl.::X':'::tff

:;::::n1

unique

evenf

whether

fictionif

or

do'cumentary

hatls

of

interest

n

itself.

The

ttraction

to

be

displayed

may

also

be

of

a

cinematic

natury-such

as

the

earry

lose-ups

ust

described,

or

trick

films

in

which

a

cinematic

manipuration

(slow

otion'

reverse

motion,

substirution,

murtipre

".p.r;;;t;;;;;",

the

firm,s

no_

elty.

Fictionar

situations

tend

to

be

restricted

to

gags,

vaudevilre

numbers

or

ecreations

of

shocking

or

curious

incidents

1"*u.t.rtiorrr,current

events).

t

is

he

direct

address

of

the

audience,

n

which

an

attraction

i"

oliur"a

to

the

spec_

ator

by

a

cinema

showman,

that

defines

his

approach

o

filrnmaking.

Theatri_

cal

display

dominatesover narrative absorption,emphasizing t" diru"t stimu_

ation

of

shock

or

surprise

at

the

"*p".,."

of

unfording

u

,iory

or

creating

a

iegetic

universe.

The

cinema

of

attractior

acterswirhpsvchorogicarmorivations".Hi;fi

;:i;:;[ffi

fl;:?,rur"::";

oth

fictionar

and

non-fictional

attractions,

ts

energy

moves

outward

an

ac_

nowledged

spectator

rather

than

inward

towards

the

character_based

ifua_

ions

essential

o

classical

narrative.]

The

term

"attractions"

comes,

of

co..r"e,

rom

the

young

sergei

Mikhailovich

Eisenstein

and

his

attempt

to

find

a

new

moder

and

-oiu

or-u.alysis

for

the

heater'

In

his

search

f:..rn"

"unit

of

impression"

of

theatricar

art,

the

founda-

ion

of

an

anarysis

which

wourd

.r.rder*ir,"

rearisticrepresentationaltheater,isensteinhit upon

the

term

"

attraction.,,e

n

attraction

aggressivery

ubjected

the

spectator

to

"sensual

or

psychological-

mpact."

accoraing

to

Eisensteiry

theater

shourd

consist

of

u

*tr,tug"

or"r.r"r,

"*""tro.,r,-"."",iig

a

reration

to

he

spectator

entirely

different

rrori

hi"

absorption

n

,,inusory

[depictionsJ.,,,o

ick

up

this

term

partly

to

[underscore] he

relati""

to

til-:;tator

that

this

ater

avant-gar'de

practice

shares

with

early

cinema:

that

of

exhibitionist

con_

rontation

rather

than

diegetic

absorption.

of

course

he

,,experimentalry

regu_

ated

and

mathematically

carculated;

montage

of

attractions

demanaed

by

Ei_

enstein

differs

enormousry

from

these

eJy

fihs

(;,

";;-;""scious

and

ppositional

mode

of

practice

will

from

a

popular

one;.;,

Ho#u*r,

it is impor_ant to rearize he context from which

Eisenstein

serected

he

term.

Then,

as

ow'

the

"attrachon"

was

a

term

of

the

fairground,

and

for

Eisenstein

and

his



The

Cinema of Attraction[s]:

Early Film, ts

Spectator and

the Avant-Garde

friend

Yutkevich it primarily

represented their

favorite fairground attraction,

the roller coaster, or

as it was

known

then in Russia,

the

American Mountains."

The source is significant.

The enthusiasm of the early

avant-garde

for film

was

at least partly an enthusiasm

for

a mass culture that

was emerging

at the

beginning of

the century,

offering

a

new

sort of stimulus

for an audience

not

acculturated

to the traditional

arts.

It

is important to take

this enthusiasm

for

popular art as

something

more than

a simple

gesture

of epater es bourgeois.

The

enofinous

development

of the

entertainment

industry since the

rgros and its

growing

acceptance

by middle-class

culture

(and

the

accommodation

that

made this acceptance possible)

have

made

it difficult to understand

the

libera-

tion popular entertainment offered at the beginning of the century. I believe that

it was precisely the exhibitionist

quality of tum-of-the-century

popular

art that

made it attractive to

the avant-garde

-

its

freedom from the

creation of a

dieg-

esis,

ts

accent

on direct

stimulation.

Writing of

the variety

theater,

Marinetti not

only

praised

its aesthetics of

as-

tonishment and

stimulatioo

but particularly

its

creation of

a new spectator

who

contrasts

with the

"

static,"

"stupid

voyeur"

of traditional

theater. The

spectator

at

the variety theater

feels directly

addressed by the spectacle

and

joins

in, sing-

ing

along,

heckling the

comedians.'3

Dealing

with early cinema

within the

con-

text of archive

and academy,

we

risk missing its vital relation

to vaudeville,

its

primary place of

exhibition

until

around r9o5. Film appeared as one

attraction

on the vaudeville program, surrounded by a mass of unrelated acts in a non-

narrative and even

nearly

illogical

succession

of

performances.

Even when pre-

sented

in the nickelodeons

that

were emerging at the end of this

period, these

short

films always appeared

in a variety

format,

trick

films sandwiched

in with

farces, actualities,

"illustrated songs,"

and, quite frequently,

cheap vaudeville

acts.

It was precisely

this non-narrative

variety that placed

this form of

enter-

tainment under

attack by

reform

groups in the early 191os.

The Russell Sage

Survey of popular

entertainments

found

vaudeville

"depends

upon

an artificial

rather than a

natural human

and

developing interest, these acts

having no

nec-

essary, and

as a rule,

no actual connection."'a

In

other

words,

no

narrative. A

night at the variety

theater

was

like a ride

on a streetcar

or an active

day

in

a

crowded city,

according

to this

middle-class reform group, stimulating

an un-

healthy nervousness.

It was precisely

such artificial

stimulus

that

Marinetti and

Eisenstein wished

to borrow

from

the popular

arts

and inject

into the theater,

organizing

popular energy

for radical

Purpose.

What happened to

the cinema

of

attraction[s]? The

period

from r9o7

to about

1913 represents

the tnte narratiaization

of the cinema, culminating

in the appear-

ance of

feature films

which

radically

revised

the variety

format. Film clearly

took the legitimate

theater as

its

model,

producing

famous players

in famous

plays.

The transformation

of

filmic

discourse that D.W. Griffith

typifies bound

38s

E' Tru

Cry

d

:::.

:rnci,ual

"

gr:tr-1s=.E

er

s&{*qi

Cnoox

[*

-:,r.

iEIf[efA

iar

::;ac:ol-,

dirr

:- lm-

rr

l t i lF<ru-:-:-

i l ' i :=-:; The

h

l*

:c

ee-ri.-

rourlaLnr:n

.i

-rt

r t fk: , :1-r

: : t , i -

g

nur:::le:s

:r

i e*,er-:s

]:

s

d

fi.: ::*:

::e;-

&ur,g ;":r*::-

r

di:ui'y::

s--i::,

-

ffi :Li:i-.,a

i

[m&,fi][:]rjE :iil-

f,djr;ulrre

:.:*ci*

--ri

fui'@l; tr

fl,:-

Fftmse"c

sli:;;*

fiMliiitt[lrtilt l.'nttr'

*

nlmw*

r:rr

fc

fi"

dfirru*

:rl:urr.1in*'

funi,au.

tnr,r:nn*r

dllf,r

,r.uulmyne'r

b

[r.r'lmnrr'grr,

;,iD

illlgllrilllilil;YI

1

i

pEfUtnn"rsl

l

ffir

1tr"m:

fnurs

ffiinunrusr:rm'-

6r{rnLlllilrrelguL-

mrdeim

urn,

il;-

mffinsrnxullh'Ell]|d

fi,

:rlt

p, mrilmnml-

[M'

Tifinus'n,

tilrr.

t&mm

,rltliud

frllt|ii



The

Cinema

of Attractioni

Reloaded

cinematic

signifiers

to

the

narration

of

stories

and

the

creation

of

a

self-enclosed

diegetic

universe.

The

look

at the

camera

becomes

aboo

and

the

devices

of

cin_

ema

are

transformed

from

playful

,,fricks,,

-

cinematic

attractions

(M6lids

ges_

turing

at

us

to

watch

the

lady

vanish)

-

to

erements

of

dramatic

expressiory

en_

tries

nto

the

psychology

of

character

and

the

world

of

fiction.

However,

it

would

be

too

easy

o

see

his

as

a

cain

and

Abel

story

with

nar-

rative

strangling

the

nascent

possibilities

of a

young

iconoclastic

orm

of

enter_

tainment.

Just

as

the

variety

format

in

some

sense

urvived

in

the

movie

paraces

of

the

rgzos

(with

newsreel,

cartoory

sing-along,

orchestra

performance

and

sometimes

vaudeville

actssubordinatedto, uut sul coexistinj with, the narra_

tive

feature

of the

evening),

he

system

of

attraction

remains

an

essential

part

of

popular

filmmaking.

The

chase

ilm

shows

how,

towards

the

end

of

this

period

(basicaily

from

r9o3

to

t9o6),

a

synthesis

of

attractions

and

narrative

was

already

,r.rd"r-uy.

The

chase

had

been

the

originar

truly

narrative

genre

of

the

cinema,

providing

a

model

for

causality

and

linearity

as

well

as

a

basic

editing

continui$2.

A

film

like

Biograph's

psnsoNat

(rgo4,

the

model

for

the

chase

i-lm

rn

many

ways)

shows

the

creation

of

a narrative

linearity,

as

the

French

nobleman

runs

for

his

life

from

the

fiancdes

his

personal

corumn

ad

has

unleashed.

However,

at

the

same

ime,

as

the

group

of

young

women

pursue

their

prey

towards

the

camera

in each shot, they encounter some slighi obstacre a rencg

a

steep

srope,

a

stream)

that

slows

them_

down

for

the

spectator,

providing

a

mini-spectacle

pause

n

the

unfolding

of

narrative.

The

Edison

Company

sJe*ea

particularly

aware

of

this,

since

they

offered

their

pragiarized

versiorr

of

this

Biograph

film

(Howa

FnrNcn

Nonrs*{ar{

Gor

a

wrir

TnnoucH

rHE

Nnw

yonx

Hrnaro

psn_

soNAL

CoruivrNs)

"

,yg

formE

as

a complete

ilm

or

as

separate

shots,

so

that

any

one

mage

of the

ladies

chasing

he

man

could

be

uougit

without

the

incit_

ing

incident

or narrative

closure.'5

As

Laura

Mulvey

has

shown

in

a

very

different

context,

he

dialectic

between

spectacle

nd

narrative

has

fuelled

much

of the

classicar

inema.,6

por.rura

i.J

ton

in

his

study

of

slapstick

comedy,

"The

pie

and the Chase,,,has shown theway

slapstick

did

a balancing

act

between

the

pure

spectacle

of gag

and

the

development

of

narrative.'7

Likewise,

the

ltraaitionar]

spectacle

ilm

[...]

proved

true

to

its

name

by

highlighting

moments

of

pure

visuar

stimulation

along

with

narrative.

The

r9z4

version

of Br*

Hun

was

in

fact

shown

at

a

Bos-

ton

theater

with

a

timetable

announcing

he

moment

of its

prime

attractions:

8135

The

Star

of

Bethlehem

8:4o

jerusalemRestored

8:59

Fall

of

the

House

of

Hur

70:29

ThelastSupper

ro:5o

Reunionts



cr' . =etrt-enclosed

&r

;er.ices

of cin-

M'r--o

\felies

ges-

0c

t,:t:lession,

en-

eL

::-u" rrith

nar-

ffir;

:,r:m

of enter-

ffie

::ru-"nie

alaces

Fjer,lnrnarce and

g

;,*1fi.

j:te

narra_

m

"s--c:;1al

Dart

Of

d

la-r;callv

lrom

hre=;-, imdenfa\-.

im:r:

:ror-iding

ctrr::'r--:it','.

-{

tilm

D

:lan\-

I\-avsi

gttrE:r

:*JL: tor hri-s

.

H:"r,:ei-er at tple

mrris

-Jue

arne'ra

& irS:f

:10D€.

a

':

-_----ru- l f : - lp

emre: ::r:;u-lari',-

hs

i:':.-a:hr;im

im.s, :-:.r-q-n Fgn-

mfiif

;i],:::

Si

dlai

wili::q:r*:

t1w nc:-

dli",;

rr.::

; ter ',:exfl-l

& 'o l ' ' ]a-o

"a--

t'

ia-;

::r:,-il:: 3rE

k ; r

: : :

i j -J i rc

rorfa:r=

--r:-

-

-

l l rudL : - *: --r-

S $i:r:'nnr::: : E,:5-

m

t::r;A:rirs:

The

Hollywood

advertising

policy

of enumerating

the

features

of

a

film,

each

emblazoned

with

the command,

"See " shows this

primal

power

of the

attrac-

tion

running

beneath

the

armature

of

narrative

regulation.

We

seem

far from

the

avant-garde

Plemises

with

which

this

discussion

of

early

cinema

began.

But

it

is important

that

the

radical

heterogeneity

which

I

find in early

cinema

not be

conceived

as a truly oppositional

program,

one

irre-

concilable

with

the

growth

of

narrative

cinema.

This

view

is

too

sentimental

and

too a-historical.

A

film

like

TnE GnEan

TurN

Ronssnv

(rgol) does point

in

both

directions,

toward

a

direct

assault on

the spectatol

(the spectacularly

en-

larged

outlaw

unloading

his

pistol

in our

faces), and

towards

a linear

narrative

continuity.

This

is early

film's

ambiguous

heritage.

Clearly

in some

sense

recent

spectacle

cinema

has

reaffirmed

its

loots in stimulus

and

camival

rides,

in

what

might

be called

the

Spielberg-Lucas-Coppola

cinema of effects.

But

effects

are

tamed

attractions.

Marinetti

and

Eisenstein

understood

that

they were

tapping

into a

source

of

energy that

would

need

focusing

and

inten-

sification

to

fulfill

its

revolutionary

possibilities.

Both

Eisenstein

and

Marinetti

planned

to exaggerate

the

impact

on

the spectator[s],

Marinetti

proposing

to

iiterally

glue

them

to

their

seats

(ruined

garments

paid

for after

the

perfol-

mance)

and

Eisenstein

setting

firecrackers off

beneath

them.

Every

change

in

film history

implies

a

change

in

its address to

the sPectatol,

and

each

period

constructs

its spectator

in a

new

way. Now in a period of American avant-garde

cinema

in which

the

tradition

of

contemplative

subjectivity

has

perhaps

run

its

(often glorious)

course,

it

is possible

that this earlier

camival

of

the cinema,

and

the

methods

of

popular

entertainment,

still

provide

an

unexhausted

resource

-

a Coney

Island

of

the

avant-gatde,

whose

never

dominant

but

always

sensed

current

can

be

traced

from

M6liEs

through

Keaton,

through

UN

CnrsN

ANDA-

Lou

(7928), and

Jack

Smith'

Notes

First publishedinWide

Angte8.3-4

1986):

3-7o;and

subsequently,

ith

some

variations,

n faily Cinema:

Space

rame

Narratioe,

ed. Thomas

Elsaesser

London:

British

Film

Insti-

tute,

r99o)

56-62.

Ttrc

variations

and

additions

to the original

version

are

Put

between

squared

rackets.

L. Femand

L6ger,

"A Critical

Essay

on the

Plastic

Qualities

of

Abel

Gance's

Fllm

The

IMeeI,"

Functions

f

Painting,

ed.

and intro.

Edward

Fry trans.

Alexandra

Anderson

(New

York

Viking,

t973)

zr.

2. see

my

articles

'The Non-Continuous

Style

of

Early

Film," Cinema

goo-t9o6,

ed.

Roger

Holman

(Bruxelles:

FIAF,

rgSz) and

',An unseen

Energy

swallows

space:

The Space

n Earlv

Film and

its Relation

to American

Avant Garde

Fllm,"

FiIm

Before



Th" ryg:?q.,ractions

Reloaded

Grffith,

ed'

John

L.

Fell

(Berkeley:

u

of

Califomia

p,

ryg)

355-66,and

ur

collabora_

ive

paper

delivered

by

M.

Gaudreault

at

tl"

*rf;::;;i,C;;""

Film

History

August

t98)

"Le

cinema

des

premiers

temps:

un

ddfi

a

l,histoire

du

cin6ma?,,

ould

arso

ike

to

note

the

importance

of

my

discussions

with

Aaam

simon

and

ur

hope

to

further

in;uestigate-ihe

history

and

the

archaeology

of

the

f'm

spectator.

3'

Robert

C.

Aileru

vauderiili

and

FiIm:

fii5-t9t5,

A

study

rn*lleara

nteraction

New

ork:

Amo,

rygo)

59,2a2_.r.1.

4'

Georges

M6lids,

"Importance

du

sc6nario,',

n

Georges

adoul,

Georges

driis

(pais:

feghers,

ry6r)

n6

(my

translation).

5'

Christian

MetZ

The-,Imaginary

ignifier:

Psychoanalysis

and

the

Cinema,trans.

Celia

rittoru

Annwyr

william

nen

gr"ewste,

u'i

err"a

Guzzettt(Bloomington:

Indiana

.

yl,r98z), parricutarty 58-8o,gr_97.

t

:r11;lJVlusser'

'American

vliag"uph

t897-t9o.',"

Cinema

lournal

zz.3

(spring

7'

Raymond

Fierding

"Hale's

Tours:

tltrarearism

in

the

pre_r9ro

Motion

picfure,,,

Film

Before

Grffith

l:rl_jo.

8.

I

wish

to

thank

Ben

Brewster

for

his

con

paper

hich

ointed

ut

he

-p",";";;':?ilii"xtfi

i:,

"U"1*l"JJ"fl"**;

ttractions

here.

g'

s'M'

Eisenstern,

How

I Became

a Film

Direct

or,,,

Notes

f

a

Fitm

Director(Moscow:

l:yfl

Language

publishing

House,

n.d.)

16.

10.

s'M.

Eisensteiru

Montage

oiAttractionq

i,

oun".Daniel

Gerould,

The

Drama

Reztiezn

8.r

(March

ry79:78_79.

r-r.. Eisensteiry

,Montage

of Attractions,,

Zg_7g.

72.

Yon

Barna,

Eisenstein

Bloomington:

ndiana

Up,

ryp)

59.

3.

F.T.

Marinetri,

,,The.

Variety

Thlater

]:rgrZli,

futririionyntos,

ed,.Umbro

Apollo,

io

(Newyork:

Viking,

ryp)

o7.

14.

Michael

Davis,

The.

Exproitation

f

preasure

(New

york:

Russell

sage

Foundation"

?ept..o_f

hild

Hygiene,

pamphtei

rgrr).

1'5'

David

Levy,

"Edison

sales

poliry

ur'ti

*r"

Contirluous

Action

FIm

t9o4_r9o6,,,

ilm

efore

Grffith

207-22.

t6'

f];u

tut"t""t

"visuar

pleasure

and

Narrarive

cinema,,,

screen

,63

(Farl

ry75):

17'

Paper

delivered

at

the

FIAF

Conference

on

slapstick,

May

ryg5,New

york

City.

8'

Nicholas

vardas

From

stage

to

screen:

Theairical

Methlds-

iom

carrirt

to

Grffith

New York BenjaminBlom, ry6g) 42.

Documents

GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction