Alienation as conveyed through cinema (Vivre Sa Vie (DVD))

Member Name: shaneo632

Product:	Vivre Sa Vie (DVD)
Date:	14/07/09 (14 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: A visually stunning and important cinematic work about alienation

Disadvantages: None

Note: this is a University essay I wrote in 2008 entitled "The function of mise-en-scène in characterisation, with specific reference to the alienation of Nana in Godard's Vivre sa vie".

~~~

This research project will seek to investigate the use of mise-en-scene (that is, how filmic components are constructed within the film frame) in Jean-Luc Godard's film Vivre sa vie (1962). The project will consider the following questions, drawing upon four critical sources:

a) How is lighting an important component of the film's mise-en-scène in portraying the character of Nana as alienated?

b) How does performance operate in cohesion with mise-en-scène to portray Nana as such, with consideration to audience perception?

c) How is this portrayal enhanced by Godard's use of montage editing in conjunction with mise-en-scène?

Thus, the project will make considerations both endogenous and exogenous to the film's narrative, in considering audience perceptions of Nana, as well as character perceptions, both of which are created by lighting, performance and editing within the scope of the film's mise-en-scène.

a) "No component of mise-en-scène is more important than 'the drama and adventure of light'" - David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson

Chapter four of Bordwell and Thompson's Film Art: An Introduction (entitled "The Shot: Mise-en-scène") seeks to assert the primacy of lighting in creating an integral part of the cinematic experience. Not only do Bordwell and Thompson posture that it is the key feature of mise-en-scène, but as a subset of this, that minor adjustments in lighting control can convey entirely diverse moods, atmospheres and tones. Bordwell and Thompson attest that the lighting of a scene (which they believe to comprise the essence of its visual palette) determines its impact and veracity; lighting may quite physically enable us to watch what is occurring within a film's mise-en-scène, yet it also articulates the minute details within that frame, such as texture. Conversely, they insist that it can conceal as much as it reveals, citing Cecil D. BeMille's lighting work on The Cheat (1915) as a key example, whereby shadow was utilised to imply an entire prison in one shot. Bordwell and Thompson close with a quote from "one of the cinema's great masters of lighting" , Josef Von Sternberg, who stated that "the proper use of light can embellish and dramatize every object".

Bordwell and Thompson claim that "the manipulation of an image's lighting controls much of its impact", and the opening shot of Vivre sa vie would seem to support this. The protagonist, Nana, is shrouded in shadow, and whilst there is no doubt that she is resultantly imbued with an air of intrigue and mystery, other than being able to discern that the face is that of a woman, little else of personable quality is available to the viewer; Nana is essentially already alienated from the audience. Bordwell and Thompson further commented that "Lighting can articulate the textures of the face" , and the film's second shot does exactly that. The lighting level remains dim, and a greater level of illumination would greater articulate Nana's facial features, yet comparatively, the film's second shot is considerably more textured than the first shot (which, due to Godard's use of low-key lighting, is almost entirely devoid of any sense of texture).

The remark in this chapter that lighting "can reveal and can conceal" manifests resolutely as Nana watches The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928) in a cinema. The ostensibly dimmed lighting of a cinema screen, contrasted with the high-key lighting administered to Nana's face obscures her spatial location in relation to the other patrons, including the man sitting next to her. Evidently moved by the film, she is entirely alienated and withdrawn from even the man next to her who purchased her cinema ticket, and for all intents and purposes, she is "alone" in her viewing of the film, as arguably characterised by her abrupt dismissal of the potential suitor following the film. The "drama and adventure of light", as Bordwell and Thompson preferred to call it, is one of profound stoicism in this scene, assuming a somber tone, whereby Nana is, through the medium of lighting, shut out from those around her (perhaps feeling much in common with Maria Falconetti's titular character). Attuned to Sternberg's aforementioned quote, Nana's estrangement from human contact is very much embellished and dramatised, employing the often-histrionic theatricality of lighting within the film's mise-en-scène.

b) "The character the actor creates is in part a figure of the mise-en-scène" - David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson

Chapter four of Bordwell and Thompson's Film Art: An Introduction further comments upon mise-en-scène as comprised of the performance of the actors within the film frame. They attest that whilst a director controls lighting and camera movement, he also directs minor nuances of the "various figures in the mise-en-scène". Bordwell and Thompson continue that the mise-en-scène can endow these figures (that is, the actors) with expressive and emotive powers, as well as diversify the meaning encoded within their performance. Bordwell and Thompson conclude that mise-en-scène and an actor's performance are very much intertwined, in the sense that both elements consist of and rely on appearance and expression.

Bordwell and Thompson's claim that mise-en-scène can "give such figures the power to express feeling and thoughts" is apparent throughout Vivre sa vie; the harmony with which Anna Karina moves about the screen, and Godard moves his camera is incredibly striking with regard to portraying the character of Nana as alienated. It is remarkable that throughout the film, seldom is Nana's entire face in the same shot as that of any of the film's male characters. When conversing with men, the scenes are frequently shot from behind, and even when they are not, Nana is frequently shot at a side profile, whereby her face and the face of a male are rarely in clear visibility together. The only shot of considerable length in which she shares a clear facial shot with a man is when she enters a client's residence, and his face is reflected on a mirror alongside Nana's own. Nevertheless, this ubiquity of side profiles reflects Nana's own uncomfortable existence, and thus, her alienation; her face and that of another man's never appear together without artificial reproduction (the mirror). Furthermore, it is only when Nana meets up with a friend, a female no less, that her face ever fully shares the screen with another individual without "censorship". The deliberation of this approach is cemented by the fact that Nana herself states "I turn my head, I'm responsible", inferring that Nana, in turning her head from these men at precise moments to ensure that she never shares the screen with them, is very consciously asserting her own alienation.

Chapter five of John Gibbs' Mise-en-scène: Film Style and Interpretation (entitled "Mise-en-scène and Melodrama") references Laura Mulvey as it pertains to mise-en-scène as creating a "distanciation effect" akin to those advocated by Bertolt Brecht in his writing on theatre. Interestingly, this "verfremdungseffekt" was formerly translated as the "alienation effect" before becoming known as distanciation. Furthermore, Gibbs illustrates that this effect is said to relate to the elements of Brecht's theatrical practice which advocate the spectator to "become aware of the social forces that shape their behaviour". Gibbs continues that often, "such moments of distanciation will be reflexive", and that films may seek to draw attention to their own making, to disable the audience from being drawn into the film's action.

This distanciation effect that Gibbs speaks of is apparent when considering Godard's use of camera movement and mise-en-scène to construct an insular world for Nana. Similarly as Anna Karina is sure to remain disconnected from the men performing with her in the film's scenes, Godard meticulously encroaches upon any sense of communion between Nana and the world around her through constantly re-positioning the camera. Thus, there appears to be a sort of contest between Nana and Godard; as Nana appears to attempt to connect to a world in which she is lost, Godard will unpredictably disrupt the film's mise-en-scène, usurping the quaint tranquility and ensuring that Nana remains isolated. Godard's jarring mise-en-scène thus prohibits audience involvement in Nana's emotional experience, and instead, promotes audience awareness in relation to the social forces that shape her behaviour, namely the limited options open to women at the time, and their subsequent proclivity to dabble in prostitution.

Godard further utilises techniques suggested by Gibbs, such as employing distanciation reflexively; in Nana's conversation with "the philosopher", Godard utilises a jump cut, followed by Nana staring into the camera. Both the break in continuity and Nana seemingly breaking the fourth wall (although not literally talking to the audience), particularly as abrupt and sudden as their appearances are, remove the "danger of the spectator being drawn unthinkably into the action".

Gibbs thus seems to form an antithesis to several of the points made by Bordwell and Thompson. The latter resolve that mise-en-scène can be implemented as a tool of expression, to convey thoughts and feeling, whilst Gibbs ascertains that, in fact, it can also be utilised to convey the opposite; to distance the audience from thoughts and feeling (at least as it pertains to Nana). However, where the two sources agree is that mise-en-scène and an actor's performance are very much intertwined; even in proposing the distanciation effect, Gibbs accepts that an actor, as an object in a scene, is an important aspect of this percept.

c) "Montage is above all an integral part of mise-en-scène" - Roger Rittenden

Chapter one of Roger Rittenden's Fine Cuts: The Art of European Film Editing (entitled "Montage, Mon Beau Souci") analogises the importance of editing in relation to mise-en-scène (this means: the composition of the frame); it suggests that mise-en-scène will answer how one would go about approaching an attractive young girl in the street, yet it is editing which expresses "the life of an idea". Rittenden continues that "talking of mise-en-scène automatically implies montage" , and that when montage effects "surpass those of mise-en-scène in efficacy", it enhances the beauty of the mise-en-scène. Rittenden closes with an esoteric comparison between montage and mathematics, that "the unforeseen unveiling secrets by its charm is an operation analogous to using unknown quantities in mathematics".

A pivotal scene exemplifying Godard's use of montage editing transpires in the sixth "tableau", whereby Nana is in a café as a shootout occurs outside. Standing up to investigate, more machinegun fire rings out, as a shot panning to the window of the café jump cuts synchronically with the sound of the gunshots. Rittenden's precept that it is montage which breathes life into an idea established by a film's mise-en-scène becomes apparent in this scene; the film's mise-en-scène makes it clear that Nana is already alienated; she sits at her table, studying prostitution figures, and conversing only with a man interested in profiting from her trade. However, it is the scene's jarring montage edit which elicits spatial distance between Nana and the patrons and employees of the café which best exemplifies Nana's isolation, literally "shooting" past everyone else in the café. It is as though, in fact, Godard is attempting to brush past these individuals as quickly as possible, as Godard is aware that she is disconnected from them, and wishes to reach the scene's pivotal facet (the shootout) as quickly as possible.

Angela Restivo's article "Using Feature Film Clips to Illustrate Film Aesthetics" highlights the difference between "classical" editing and that employed by Godard. Restivo claims that Godard's editing techniques "[allow] us to discuss the ways in which the classically edited scene is not 'natural'", and that instead, classical editing is simply a firmly-established convention which is by now de rigueur. Furthermore, Restivo attests that Godard's editing techniques allow us to consider the merits of filmmaking in creating distance as opposed to identification. In closing, she asks us to consider how camera movement can reconfigure a scene's spatial design, and how it may provoke re-readings or create "binary oppositions of what will govern the thematics of the film". Restivo cites the example of Neil Jordan's The Crying Game (1992), in which the open credits depict the land and the sea as near-indistinguishable, which serves as a metaphor for the film's encompassing theme of androgyny and gender reversal.

Vivre sa vie, whilst certainly not as pronounced in its editing style as Godard's earlier À bout de souffle, nevertheless illustrates the convention of linear, "classical" editing, and more importantly in regard to this project, allows us to further discuss the merits of creating distance rather than identification. Godard's aforementioned use of montage editing to promote Nana's distance from those around her is certainly meritorious in its exposition; Godard's use of editing in conjunction with mise-en-scène to create a cinematic metaphor is decidedly more striking than that of simply explaining it through the dialogue of the film's narrative. The camera movement, as dictated by the disorientating "machinegun montage", seeks to reconfigure the scene's spatial design; Nana already sits alone, yet this frantic edit seeks to verify and authenticate her alienation with its impact and definition. This reconfigured spatial design, as Restivo asserts, provokes re-readings of what govern the film's thematics (such as the suggestion that Godard's mise-en-scène alienates Nana more than the film's narrative does). Whilst not entirely metaphorical in its execution, the machinegun montage serves as a sort of allegory for Nana's plight; disconnected from those around her, she is helpless, and without coincidence, it is a gunshot that is the last noise that Nana hears before her life ends at the film's conclusion.

Rittenden and Restivo's remarks, whilst referring to different filmic techniques than those of Gibbs and Bordwell and Thompson, similarly highlight the reliance of a film's mise-en-scène upon seemingly exterior forces (such as lighting, actors and editing). Furthermore, all four sources seek to affirm that these forces are, in fact, integral components in crafting a film's mise-en-scène (and therefore in telegraphing Nana's alienation), and as such, collectively lend credence to the idea that mise-en-scène is a meticulously constructed, multi-faceted construct as opposed to simply relying on "point and shoot" filmmaking. Thus, mise-en-scene is an essential tool in eliciting characterisation; its effects are not as pronounced or conspicuous as those of a film's narrative, yet employing mise-en-scene to construct character allows a subtle, even poetic means of utilising the medium of film.

Summary: A classic of the French Nouvelle Vague