Otto Brahm once said, “The device on the banner of the new art is one word: Truth. And truth, truth in every aspect of life is what we too aim at and demand… the truth of the independent spirit that does not need euphemisms, that does not want to conceal anything. And which therefore knows only one adversary, its enemy to the death: the lie in every form.” One of the confusions in understanding realism is the focus on form. One hears “realism” and thinks of an aesthetic representation that is perfect in its rendering of the image of our world. Yet realism has more to do with truth that real. What is the motivation behind the art is verily what Otto Brahm said, that realism is truth in every aspect of life without euphemisms or concealing anything. Art has in its nature a subjectivity which leads to contrivance. Historically that contrivance has been used to conceal the true horror of the oppressed. Brecht argues that to portray the truth, realism is to lay bare the causal network in society; the oppressive force. So in order to portray that truth, the medium for representation requires objectivity. Bazin argues that to best source of that objectivity is found in film. The nature of the camera allows it to capture reality, in his opinion, without the interpolation of the author. What we see is simply what is there.
Hirokazu Koreeda’s film “Still Walking” provides an accurate example of the intent of these theorists (Brahm, Bazin, Brecht) that objectivity leads to truth which is the lodestar of realism. Upon viewing the film one is taken by the stillness of the camera work. Perhaps most notable is the lunch scene. The shot is framed by the open door to the garden, with the camera placed in the garden looking into the house. The camera remains stationary for the majority of the meal. The characters enter and exit the scene without the camera following them. We hear their voices after stepping out of the shot and then they enter again. The dialogue and the action occur without any concern for where the camera is or where the focus is “supposed” to be.
The result of this is a semblance of objectivity. As an audience we don’t have any help from the camera to tell us about positions of power or relationships or focus. All things occurring within the frame are of equal importance. Whether the daughter is talking to the father or the mother to the son, none is favored. It appears that the scene happens and the camera has merely captured that moment in time. We are left, as Brecht says, to then use that concrete to muse upon more abstract concepts. The son and the father have a bad relationship. The husband and the wife have a bad relationship. The new wife of the son is uncomfortable in this situation. So then those concrete visions lead us to make unfettered conclusions about the causal network in play here.
Therein lies the truth. The greatest truth that we can find is that which we discover within ourselves. We watch this scene and view that concrete representation and then apply to ourselves, see in ourselves the similitude to that concrete. We find that which is true in ourselves, where the oppression is in our own lives. We see a causal network for our own misery and happiness. That is truth. That is real.
Brecht believed that the truth belonged to the masses, that is why realism is a popular art. What is common amongst the masses is family. The family structure often has within it oppressive causal networks. In watching Koreeda’s film we see an oppressive causal network playing out in front of the camera. The family’s tension is our tension, their resentment is our resentment, their hegemonic family structure is ours. Setting up that objective lens allows us to see into that truth that we all experience, that which is popular, that which is real.
It is worth noting however that this objectivity is a myth. The objective lens is still a contrivance because it is place, focused, angled, and the image is framed. A hand still chooses when to move, when to cut. But this myth of objectivity still leads to that lodestar of the truth of the human condition, laying bare the causal network. We see that, and in spite of the contrivance to make the subjective objective, we find truth, by making that objective subjective. That subjective hand of the director reveals rather that hides the oppressive structures. That illusionary objectivity opens the door to subjectivity in the audience and then the truth is found in ourselves. That is popular realism.
No comments:
Post a Comment