"Writing on the Screen": An Interview with Emmanuel Burdeau

Author(s): Dudley Andrew, Emmanuel Burdeau and Mary Anne Lewis

Source: Framework: The Journal of Cinema and Media, Vol. 50, No. 1/2 (SPRING & FALL 2009),
pp. 229-234
Published by: Wayne State University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41552559
Accessed: 30-04-2015 05:09 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Wayne State University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Framework: The Journal
of Cinema and Media.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 05:09:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 on the Screen":
"Writing

An Interview with

Emmanuel Burdeau

Dudley Andrew

This interview took place at the offices of

Cahiers du cinéma, Paris, February 29, 2008

DudleyAndrew :I am writinga book thattracessomethingI call "The Cahiers

Line" fromRoger LeenhardtthroughBazin past the New Wave to Serge
Daney and now on to you. I understandthatCahiersdu cinémain all itsperi-
ods had severaldirections,butI'm concernedto findoutifCahiersdu cinéma
todayfeelsa pressurefromthe past as itchooses whatfilmsto discuss,who
will writeabout themand what subjectsit will adopt. Here's a hint:what
have been yourthoughtsabout certainkindsofnew media, cinema of ani-
mation,cinema of entertainment media, new kinds of spectacle,and new
entertainment regimes?These are veryimportantculturalphenomenaand
Cahiersdu cinémashould address them,I presume,but it seems thatthese
appear to standto theside ofthe"Line" thatI taketo be thebackbone ofthe
journal all theseyears.How do you take up theseissues?Fromwhatstance
do you approachthem?

EmmauelBurdeau : The questionofworkingon the Cahiershas almostalways

been a questionof inheritance.How does one workon a reviewthat has
knowna Golden Age whichno one will eversurpass-the'50s and the New
Wave?That is notto be repeated.How to continuein a notso unfaithfulway,
thatis the firststep.The onlystepin a way.Both the firstandthe nextstep:
bothtryingand failingto continuetheGolden Age and theeras after,theeras
justbeforeyou.It'sofcoursea questionofdecidingon whatan interpretation
of Cahierswas- at the beginningor just yesterday-and thereforeof what it
mustbe today.

Framework
50,Nos.1& 2,Spring& Fall2009,pp.229-34.
© 2009WayneStateUniversity
Copyright Michigan48201-1309.
Press,Detroit,

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 05:09:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Dudley Andrew

So whatis Cahiers ? Is thereindeed a kindofcontinuity? Perhapsthereis,

even ifonlya fictionalone. SergeDaney-editorfrom1974to 1981,themaster ;
obviously,some even call him a genius-has an idea thatcan summarizea
partofwhatconstitutes thecontinuity of Cahiersfrom'51 to today,above and
beyond all the changes. It is in an interviewthathe did withthe greatBill
Krohnat theend ofthe'70s when CahiersWeek was beingorganizedin New
York.This interviewwas firstpublishedin . . . ThousandEyes,I believe,and
then,a couple ofyearsago, as an introduction forthe firstvolumeforPOL,
La Maisoncinémaetle monde.Daney says thatin his opinion,throughoutall
itseras Cahierswas alwaysinterestedin a typeof cinema: the cinema thatis
hauntedby the written.Haunted as thoughby a ghost.In French:HANTE
PAR L'ÉCRIT, in capitalletters.
Among otherthings,it is a good way to suggestthatthe singularityof
Cahiersdu cinéma , what radicallydistinguishesit fromPositif, forinstance,
is notthe "mise-en-scène."It is ratherthe role ofwriting(écriture).There is
somethingin cinema thatcalls upon a veryparticularkind of criticalwrit-
ing thathas littleto do withliteratureor literarycriticismor musical criti-
cism. Film criticismis the way to answer and to understandthatcall. It is
an echo ofthatcall. In otherwords,thepage "translates"the screen.Daney
added that Cahiershad always defendedfilmmaker-writers such as Duras,
Cocteau, Guitry,Pagnol. Besides, the New Wave was also a movementof
somewhatfailedwriters,or so theypretendedto call themselves.Butall the
filmmakersofthe New Wave were in theirown way greatwriters:Rohmer,
Godard, and thenDemy,Eustache . . . (by the way,thatcan explain whyit
is thatoftenone mightfindthe textsfromCahiersdifficult to read). Insofar
as concerns Cahiers , writingmightbe just as importantas cinema. That is
not to say thatwe considerourselveswriters,in the sense of genuine liter-
aryauthors.
Nextthereis anotheraspectthatyouevoked,thequestionofnew media:
Internet,video games, and so on. There again one can give a schematic
answer.In February'sissue,we placed on the cover Brian De Palma's film
REDACTED , whichis a filmthatseemsto have been made throughtheInter-
net.When Bazin emphasizedtheidea ofan impurecinema-hisfamouspiece,
"Foran ImpureCinema"-thisimpuritywas definedin termsofthe position
thatthecinemaheld in relationto theartsthatwerebornbeforeand which,
in thishierarchy, wereabove it.There was literature,theater,music,painting,
and, ifone continueswithRohmer,architecture. The paradox ofBazin is that
he calls a book WhatIs Cinema?even thoughaside from"The Ontologyof
thePhotographicImage,"he does notcome to a definition. One mightthink
thatBazin has an essentialistdefinition ofcinema.He absolutelydoes not.He
has a definitionin termsof mechanicalrecording,a technical/metaphysical
definition, a pointofdeparturebutcertainlynotan arrivalpoint.Today,the
questionofan impurecinemaremainsin itsentirety. Butthingshave turned
upsidedown.The impurity ofcinemamightnowbe seen as occupyinga new

230

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 05:09:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 An Interviewwith Emmanuel Burdeau

positionrelativeto the media and the arts,as thoughthe lattercame after;

therehas been a reversal.Fiftyyearsago, cinemawas thechildofall theother
arts;todayitwould morelikelybe theparentofall theartsor certainlyofall
new media. This reversalshouldbe thoughtabout more deeply: it can help
definethecriticalworkoftoday.
There is a thirdresponse,butitis trulya different one. In thesecondvol-
ume ofLa Maisoncinémaetlemonde , there is anotherinterviewwithDaney that
he gave to thereviewEsprit.It'scalled "The PassionoftheImage." Daney,in
'83, rightatthetimewhenhisbook,La Rampe,came out,saysthatthecinema
has alwayshad a leg of an authorand a leg of a showman.A noble leg and
a non-nobleleg. An elitistleg and a popular leg. That is also a way to think
about Cahiers: it'salwaystryingto walk on boththoselegsand crossthem.
That is perhapsless important thanthequestionofwriting.Butmypoint
here and now could be to stressthatthe problemof the media-thatis the
redefinition ofpurity-relates to theproblemofwriting.I have writtenquitea
bittheselastyearsabouttheplace ofcomputersin film,textmessaging,writ-
ing on thescreen.. . . New media are renewingthe questionofwriting, they
are inventinganother"cinéma muet,"anotherformof silentfilmwithnew
typesofintertitles. So you see, thetwomeet.Movies are stillhauntedby the
written. Differently thanin thepast,butperhapsmoreand more.
So, comingback to the questionof the relationshipbetweenfilmsand
writing,the writtenin filmsand writingabout films,and the friendlyor
unfriendly ghoststhathauntus in-between. . . -whatis astonishingis thatthe
twomostimportant figures,Bazin and Daney,neverreallywrotebooks from
beginning to end. All theirbooks are collectionsofarticles.That is bothfas-
cinating and frightening, theidea thatwhatworksin a texta fewpages long
might not work in the context ofa book Bazin wrotearticlesoftwenty-five
pages, but Daney never gotpast ten or so. Both died beforetheycould writea
book. Daney was workingon an autobiography thatwouldhave toldbothhis
personalstory as well as that of the cinema. The firstchapterwas to be "The
Traveling Shot in Kapo"; he died before completingthe wholebook. As for
Bazin, I don't know ifhe really would have writtenan entirebook. . . . Any-
the
way, question Why is: is itthat, in the Cahierscontext,an articlehas to be
boththeforeword and theruinofa book thatyouwillneverwrite?A promise
and a failure?Is therea curse?

DA: Bazin began a novel,buthe was notable to getbeyondtwentypages. As

forDaney-and to add to the "difference" that Cahiersrepresents-let's
recall
whathe said so pithily:
"Cinema has a relationshipto the real,butthe real is notwhatis repre-
sented."This is important
forme because in newfilmsofspectacle,especially
Chinese filmslikeHeroor ThePromise , we can see everything,even theinsect
thatbotherstheprinceon thehilltop,etc.Butin the cinema ofSerge Daney
thereare thingsthatescape thevisual and thatescape thescreen.The screen

231

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 05:09:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Dudley Andrew

is a sitewhereone mustlook forthereal;thisis perhapsnotthecase in writing

because writinggivesa bitofdistance.
Speaking of spectacle: Is the sociological questionof change in movie
theatersand exhibitionsveryimportantforthe Cahiers?Does cinema exist
eveniftheatersdisappear?

EB: Cahiersis quite interestedin economic questions-distribution, produc-

tion-ofFrenchcinema. We regularlydevotemanypages to such questions.
At the same time,we're stillreallytalkingabout movies in theaters.I am of
a ratherBazinian mindset;I would liketo have a Bazinian repositioning, but
that'sa bitdifficult.
When Trafic came outwithnumber50, WhatIs Cinema?,
RaymondBellour-heknewI was workingon thecompleteeditionofBazin-
asked me to choose a textthathe could publishin thatissue. I did in fact
choose twopieces on issuesoftechnology,one on cinemascopeand another
called "Is Cinema Mortal?"That seemed logical in termsofwhatis goingon
today.In thesetextsBazin said thatperhapscinema is onlya momentin the
historyof technologicalevolution.Perhapsthe cinema will disappear,and
somethingelse willcome.
At Cahierswe are havingmore and more discussionswithJean-Michel
Frodon,who does notwantus to writeabouttelevisionseries,whichare quite
importantin today's culture.His argumentis thatthis is not cinema. But
Cahiersis more an arrowthathas been shotand is stillin flight;it takes off
fromcinema and undergoesan evolution.This is a momentwhencinema is
movingintootherthingsor transforming itselfand eventuallyadoptingnew
names foritself.Is thisor thatcinema,or is itnot?Of course we shoulddis-
cuss thisquestion,butwithoutstickingso hard to the name. Cinema is both
moreand less thanjust a name; it'smorelikelyto be a moment,a phase or a
force.. . . Somethingthatdoes nothave,in anyway,thepurityofa name.
Thereare twosolutions-either Cahiersducinémaceases,thatis to saydoes
not crossthe river,or it continues,but withoutclingingso sacredlyto what
muststillbe called cinema.Six, sevenyearsago therewas a periodof Cahiers
where it immerseditselfin television,animation,and video games. They
wererightto break the barrier,buttheydid itpoorly.They did itas though
thiswerea rejuvenation, In fact,justthismorning,therewas
a sortoffacelift.
a discussionaboutwhatone mightcall thenecessarywideningofthecritical
perimeterof Cahiersto televisionseries,to othercontemporary artisticprac-
ticesthatuse cinemafrequently, to thesortsofRomanesque Frenchliterature
thatis verymuchinfluencedtodaybycinema.There are newwaysoflooking
at theconsumptionoffilmand the consumptionofthingsthatare notreally
filmsanymore-ona telephone,on a computer,in an exhibition,in a movie
theater,on DVD, on DivX, etc.
Is cinemamortal?Butofcourse.Bazin was veryinterestedin cinema,but
he was alsojustas interestedinthehistoryoftechnology. Evenifhe wrote"The
MythofTotal Cinema,"even ifhe describedcinema as the accomplishment

232

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 05:09:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 An Interviewwith Emmanuel Burdeau

ofhistory, he understoodthathistorycontinues.Bazin said and othercritics

afterhimsaid itin a moreextremeway (Louis Skorecki,forinstance):"Who
do we thinkwe are to believethatwe can stophistory?"What interestsus is
pursuingthe future.This barriermustabsolutelybe broken-crossover the
river,to theotherside.It'sextremelydifficultto do itwell.
Currently,writing about films in theaters is sacred. The articlesare
always writtenwith an idea thatwe are addressinga certaincommunityof
spectators thatwill existfora certain lengthoftime.If I writeabout a film
thatis released,I knowthatthisfilmis somewhatin the spiritofthepeople
ofthetime,and I knowthatitwill be in a theaterwithpeople goingto see it.
There is a commonspace ofunderstandingthatallows textsto exist.This is
also a wayofansweringthe questionabout thedifficulty-the absurdity?-of
writingbooks. If I writeon filmsthat are no longerin theaters,on films
forwhich I no longerknow theirdestinyin the community-their"com-
mon space"-do I reallyknowhowto do it?This problemremainsunsolved.
Writingon a filmthatis being released-I know how to do that.But doing
somethingelse,I'm notsure.It is verydestabilizing.I too tryto writebooks,
and so farI haven'tsucceeded.

DA: You shouldbe proudofthat.It meansyou are a borncritic.

EB : Of notsucceeding?Well,we'll see.

DA: Whatinterests me aboutwhatyou said is thattheimpurity ofthecinema

is
is valuable because thecinema alwayscaught between two statesofbeing;
in
whetherminoror formidable relation to the otherarts, in itsown domain
itdominatesthoseartsthatare oftenincluded within it.You may findpaint-
ings,stories,photographs, video,TV, cellphonesin a filmframedon thebig
screen.These artsand technologiescan coexistin a film,butare adjudicated
by cinema.And it'sin thisway thatthe artsand technologiesare compared,
organizedby films.Cinema becomes thesiteofcomparison.It's impure,but
it has the largerscreenthatframeseverythingincludedthere.So if Cahiers
beginsto deal withnewarts,entertainments, and technologies,I wouldthink
you stillought to requirethatthey be "framed" bythetext.Today,thingsare
changingfast.When Greenaway,who so oftenpacks multipleartsintohis
widescreenfilms,abandons the theaterand the screen,explodingit so that
he can projecthis imagesin partsofthecity,thenI wonderifthespectatoris
encountering cinema,in a new form,or ifwe are talkingabout a completely
different phenomenon.He has done thisin Geneva, and again in Barcelona.
These citiesframehis "cinemaimages"ifthat'swhattheystillare; architec-
tureand cityplanning(or mapping)becomes largerthanthe filmedimages
thatare scatteredwithinit. At thatpoint,the cinema as I know it,and as I
haveknownitthroughCahiers , is over.Maybe in a fewyears,we can havethis
discussionagain, perhapsafterCahiershas, as you putit,crossedthe border

233

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 05:09:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Dudley Andrew

to new technologies.We have alwaysreferredto thejournal in shorthandas

simply Cahiers
; soon we may have to ask de ? ? Even then,however,
Cahiers
therewillbe writingaboutimagesin itspages, somethingyou do so welland
have done forso long.May thatcontinue.

[Translatedby Mary Anne Lewis, PhD student,Yale University]

EmmanuelBurdeauwas borninRennes , onApril25, 1974.He has written

, France
forCahiers du cinéma since1995 and was thejournal'schiefeditorfrom2004 to
March2009. He is alsoa publisher
at Capricci
.

DudleyAndrew , theR. SeidenRoseProfessorofFilmStudiesand Comparative Litera-

tureat YaleUniversity as a commentator
, beganhiscareer onfilmtheory the
, including
biographyofAndréBazin, whilepublishing oncomplexfilms(Tilm in theAura of
Art,1984).ThencameworkonFrench filmandculture, anchored byMistsofRegret
(1995) and Popular FrontParis (2005). Currently he is writing
Approachesto
Problemsin World Cinema, as wellas contributing to a volumeon cinemafor
BlackwelVs "Manifestoseries."

234

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 05:09:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions