Page 44 - Studio International - November December 1975

not form the world. Consciousness does not form the world. Material of disbelief. It is this aspect, which is a central base for the whole
relations form the 'I'. The self is merely a clinical word for a cipher. narrativity-investigation, which is most consistently repressed. This
Thomas Neumann, Sozialgeschichte der Photographie, Luchterhand repression overdetermines the whole 'study' of the codes of narrativity,
1966. and exposes its essentially reactionary state.
15The reactionary basis of most American film-making has only been 6'1 (I thank Peter Wollen for having brought the issue up in the first place
clarified recently, and this through only the beginnings of analyses which in the interview). Without wanting to confuse matters I must add that the
work upon the mystificatory and individualist aesthetics (ethics) of that above diatribe isn't meant to imply that I subscribe to Mulvey's/Wollen's
movement. The English problematic as I've stated is a pseudo- film or their views.
documentary production which does not question itself. (See 'On Mike 16b In addition, the issue is more complicated than it seems, because the
Dunford's Still de With Pear' in '5th Knokke Experimental Film Festival' in inherent Kabbalistic influence on Derrida and Tel Quel (I read no French)
Studio International, March 1975, p.138). 'The European film-makers to some degree certainly mitigates against a materialist praxis. Jabès'
certainly made a much stronger impression though without the presence repetitiousness of 'the book', 'the word', etc, in a poem, does not erase
of clearly established masters. But that's a way of thinking which many of the essential metaphysical stance which is elaborated precisely through
the Europeans reject... It's difficult to pin down, but one senses an his redundant symbolic schemata of circularity. But one can see the
attitude towards film-making not as the production of certain great works Jabès-Derrida connection, for example, in segments of the book ELYA
but as an on-going motive of artistic work ... European film-makers are (1969, Gallimard ; 1973 Tree Books, Berkeley) : 'Nothingness is our All.
wary of the structure and ideology which might create the conditions for The sky is a repeat of its own absence on which the void bestows a relief
cultural imperialism in the area of film-making. They are, therefore, of disintegrated constellations. So that there is nothing at the beginning,
involved in a redefinition of the nature and function of film-making that nothing at the end but a procedure caught in its hesitations and turns.
differs from those of the Americans who are making their way gradually The time the book first begins is a first time for being and things. All
toward the centre of our own culture.' P. A. Sitney, talking with Annette writing invites to an anterior reading of the word which the word urges
Michelson, 'A Conversation on Knokke and the Independent Filmmaker,' and which we pursue to the frontiers of faded memory.' (p.35).
Artforum, May 1975. Blanchot's exegesis supports the anti-materialism (and the metaphysical
The spectre of romantic illusionism and mystique of the individual materialism) of Jabès' texts : 'Elya is a meta-story (whose) breaks let the
artist is the reactionary concept of artist as god, artist as magician, artist margins breathe... the void becomes achievement ... thought shows
as purveyor of beauty, artist as fascist. through.'
(A) The Film-maker. The film-maker makes the film. It is a source of 17 I have been advised by friends and acquaintances that it may be
constant frustration that the illusion is so rigidly upheld that the film- inapposite to attack Screen. I would be untruthful if I didn't admit to a
maker produces not (only) the film but him/her self in it. Reception of the wish to have the Journal of the Society for Education in Film and
film ought to be productive, relational, not consumptive of the invisibly Television deal seriously with current film practice, avant-garde film. They
visible artist's character/persona. Even if Peter Gidal films dark rooms do, after all, attempt at Marxist film theory. And yes, important
what does it say about me except what it says about itself, ie handheld translations have been made. Good intentions are not the issue. As I am a
consistency and repetitiveness presents procedures onto 'subject-matter', film-maker, writings such as this one put me in a dubious position
dehierarchicalizing it, presenting its arbitrariness as against an vis-a-vis those who may at some stage be dealing with my work, even.
essentialness; ... meaning is (ideologically) produced, not innate. Not a Also, I've been told that any critique of Screen would more advisedly be
centreframe steadyfocus annexation ; ... constitution/deconstruction, calmer, more constipated and English, rather than the form of my
deconstruction/constitution of image through lightness, blackness, and three-paragraph attack, definitely un-English, angry. The stiff-upper-lip
annihilation as well through extremes of such.... The film-maker is doesn't work for me, and anger seems justified when Screen's policies
specifically not produced in the film, if the film operates on a materialist and writings are not just ignoring and ignorant, so far, of current film
anti-illusionist level, functioning as a practice, — film not literature, practice in England, but extremely aggressive in fact towards the latter : by
dealing with illusionism, not inside it. Films that end up being adequate innuendo, omission, condescension, and sole concentration on the
documentaries about the artist (subject's) concerns, transparently posit narrative cinema thus sustaining its dominance to some degree, at least
themselves against anti-illusionist cinema. theoretically. Actual power over the cinemagoer none of us has, at this
(B) Illusion. A constant illusionist/anti-illusionist procedural stage. Screen's attitude towards the avant-garde, so far, is mimicking the
operation is not the same as a positing of illusion and questioning its traditional attitude of criticism over the past 100 years towards
'reality' in the 'next' shot. True deconstruction (for which the term is not contemporary art practices. It would have been rather useful in the past if
usable) is simultaneous with construction and vice versa. there had been some critical work done, as the film-makers also would
(C) Narrative. Narrative is indeed a possible subcategory in the have found themselves, perhaps, reflecting upon their practice to a
strategic investigation of illusion-systems; systems of representation, in greater degree. Which can't be bad.
the process of representation, but filmically this study involves suspension

Peter Gidal Movie No. 1, 1972
1 96