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"
8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 2/8
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
8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 3/8
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;
8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 4/8
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
8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 5/8
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
8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 6/8
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
8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 7/8
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
8/18/2019 GUNNING the Cinema of Attraction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gunning-the-cinema-of-attraction 8/8
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.