Page 22 - Studio International - June 1973

Eisenstein/ of dialectical materialism and a romantic project the idea of the 'creator of art' as
idealism'. Although dialectical materialism, as godlike and unknowable, as a 'divine
Brakhage the theory of scientific practice (see Althusser's individual' tuned in to the celestial

work), can hardly be put on the same level as broadcasting station where the muses act as
romantic idealism, if links absolutely have to be disc jockeys. In this context, the many
made it is precisely Eisenstein's romantic admiring references to well-known
idealism which provides the point of contact musicians/composers in Brakhage criticism
between him and Brakhage. Ample evidence for emerge as far from innocent. Brakhage and his
this can be found in Peter Wollen's essay on critics also constantly refer to his films as
Eisenstein's aesthetics in Signs and Meaning in `the closest metaphor' for 'thought process',
the Cinema (1969). Annette Michelson's obviously unaware that thought is impossible
introduction to the issue of Artforum contains without language. Here again he situates his
many such missed opportunities to situate or conceptual framework as pre-dating Saussure
stimulate a coherent debate on the problems and Freud. His constant description of himself
raised by Eisenstein's aesthetics (e.g. his as an 'artist', setting himself above the common
distinction between representation and image, herd, the masses (a piece of Brakhage-
the contradiction between his political philosophy: 'a mass of people, which for most of
engagement and his aesthetics, etc.) and she also the history of the world is a pretty ugly
employs some technical terms in a highly apparition in any form in which it occurs',
idiosyncratic manner. To describe the cinema as p. 73) further underlines the anachronistic
`the paradigmatic aesthetic mode of the culture nature of his work and its profoundly
of our time' is as inaccurate as designating 'the reactionary implications. By embracing these
paradigm of contemporary style' as 'the ideas, Brakhage is in fact doing no more than
alternative to Intellectual Cinema: the Cinema enthusiastically acting out the role bourgeois
of Vision'. In fact, a paradigm is a system of society imposes on anyone who wishes to
possible substitutions and the selection of one regard himself as an artist. Far from challenging
item involves the presence in absentia of all the the society he lives in, Brakhage submissively
other terms of that system. This use of a and neatly fits himself into the niche reserved
particular vocabulary for no other reason than for 'Artists'. However, taking into account that
to indicate that the author is aware of the the ideas of bourgeois society have developed
terminology of modern criticism, is likely to considerably over the last century and a half,
The coverage of the cinema in art magazines betray precisely what the author wishes to Brakhage is again a bit out of touch. Although
presents a considerable number of problems conceal: a profound ignorance of the meaning of this may create the impression that Brakhage
which haven't yet begun to be resolved. The that terminology. should be treated as a joke, this is not the case.
prevailing prejudice against Hollywood has Annette Michelson is obviously quite right in His position, his ideas and his films do raise a
facilitated profoundly reactionary notions about characterizing Brakhage's aesthetics as considerable number of interesting questions,
the 'art' of the cinema to reign supreme in most romantic-idealist. As a matter of fact, Brakhage's although none is mentioned in Artforum:
film criticism in art magazines. A good example own statements, especially in his interview with What is the significance of championing early
of this can be found in the January 1973 issue of Hollis Frampton on pp 72-79 of this issue of 19th-century aesthetics in the second half of the
Artforum, devoted entirely to the work of two Artforum, leave no doubt whatsoever that his 20th century ? Why revive European
directors who have become most easily ideas belong firmly to early 19th-century romanticism (pre-World War I) in America
assimilated in the enclaves of 'art connoisseurs' : thought, the most eloquent exponents of these (post-World War II) ? What is the connection
Eisenstein and Brakhage. ideas being Herder and the Schlegel brothers at between aesthetic reaction and the highly
In a desperate effort to try to establish links the end of the 18th century. It is generally profitable nostalgia business thriving in various
between these two directors, Annette known that this tradition found its culmination parts of Western society (ironically, this might
Michelson seizes upon one of T. S. Eliot's more in the impressionist criticism of authors such as well provide an explicit link between Brakhage
unfortunate critical lapses : in order to L. Lemaitre and Anatole France. The latter and Hollywood) ? What are the political
appreciate the significance of an artist, one must summarized this attitude as follows : 'The critic conditions governing these reactionary
place him among the dead. From this premise, should say if he is candid: Gentlemen, I am movements ? Should Brakhage perhaps be
Annette Michelson logically deduces that, going to speak about myself in connection with related to the romantic myth-making comic
Eisenstein being dead and Brakhage alive, one Shakespeare, Racine, Pascal or Goethe' (quoted strips (e.g. Aquaman, Thor, Wonder Woman,
can only fully appreciate Brakhage by comparing in R. Wellek's History of Modern Criticism, etc.) and certain genres of pop music ? The
him to Eisenstein ! Michelson follows this with a Vol. 4, p. 24). Brakhage echoes this with: 'I attempt to relate Brakhage and Eisenstein is
no less astounding assertion that Eliot proposes made up my Eisenstein, or at least the more significant than Annette Michelson is
a dialectical view when he writes that 'the Eisenstein that was real to me at the time of willing to admit. It appears that a whole series of
existing order must be if ever so slightly altered writing that essay on Eisenstein'. It may potentially embarrassing questions can be
by the supervention of novelty'. This is either a perhaps seem appropriate that most Brakhage sidestepped simply by associating Brakhage's
truism or nonsense (depending on the criteria criticism struggles with the same problems that name with Eisenstein's, provided one omits to
one uses to determine what constitutes the occupied the minds of the romantic-idealist situate Eisenstein correctly within the context
existing order and what constitutes novelty), artists/critics circa 1800 : witness the abundant of the early Soviet cinema. In this way it
neither of them being particularly dialectical. attempts to draw parallels between Brakhage's becomes possible to claim that Brakhage's
Michelson also misses her greatest opportunity films and music, a belated echo of a 19th-century aesthetics developed from Eisenstein's
to establish a genuine link between the work of strategy which consisted in equating all 'high (thus indicating progress), while in fact
the two directors mentioned above, when she art', including architecture, with music, in order Brakhage totally embraces a position that
claims that their notions of their art 'are shaped to: Eisenstein was never able completely to shake
— found art as spiritual essence (on the
by the ideological structure in which they are assumption that music is the 'purest' of the arts, off (i.e. Brakhage= regression). If one really
formed — structures so greatly divergent as that i.e. not contaminated by reason), and 2 - to wants to know what progress from Eisenstein
252