Andrei Tarkovsky: The Art of The Legend

Andrei Tarkovsky
The Art of the Legend

Andrei Tarkovsky (1932-1986)
Andrei Tarkovsky: formation
 Son of a poet, ArseniiTarkovsky.
 Andrei’s mother was educated as a writer at the
Literary Institute, but destroyed all her works
“for the lack of talent.”
 Studied music and art while at school; for a
year, studied Arabic (the Oriental Institute,
Moscow).
 Graduated from the State Institute of
Cinematography in Moscow (VGIK), film-
directing-program, in 1960.
Creative activity
Influences:
 Almost no Russian directors; French New Wave and
Italian neorealism;
 Michaelangelo Antonioni; Ingmar Bergman; Akiro
Kurosawa and other Japanese directors; Louis Bunuel;
Robert Bresson, etc. – the “author’s cinema”: director
should be also the scriptwriter.
Work beside cinema:
 screenplays;
 directing Hamlet in theatre (Moscow, 1976)
 directing the opera Boris Godunov (London,1983);
 a book on film theory, Sculpting in Time (1986)
Andrei Tarkovsky
 Left the USSR in 1984.
Died in Paris.
 Long list of international
awards, but just one (as
a student) in the USSR
(the Lenin Prize,
posthumously, 1990).
 One of the greatest
cineastes of the 20th
cent. His work is among
achievements of the
“Stagnation” (the epoch
that followed the Thaw).
Tarkovsky Quotes
 “The artist exists because the world is not
perfect”;
 “Art would be useless if the world were
perfect”;
 “Art is born out of ill-designed world”;
 “Cinema is an unhappy art since it
depends on money.”
Films by Tarkovsky
 The Steamroller and the
Violin 1960
 Ivan's Childhood 1962
 Andrei Rublev 1966. Shown
at Cannes 1967. Released for
(limited) screening in USSR in
1971 (censored version).
Released in full in 1987.
 Solaris rel. 1972
 Mirror rel. 1974
 Stalker rel. 1979
 Nostalgia 1983 (Italy)
 Sacrifice 1986 (Sweden).
Tarkovsky’s Art
 Bergman claimed that Tarkovsky invented a new
cinematic language: dreamlike, true to the nature of
film.
 Poetic realism: the long shot, less montage, no rapid-cut
editing.
 Fantasy, dreams and the telescoping of time (sculpting
in time) - the flashback unmarked.
 Anti-narrative in the Hollywood/Socrealist sense.
 Measured use of colour (chromatic Epilogue in AR).
 Metapoetic (self-reflective).
 Recurrent motifs (i.e., horses, levitation/flying, milk,
water).
 Metaphysical themes.
Andrei Rublev 1966
 Naturalism, not realism. Episodic narrative structure.
Metaphorical connections between the episodes and
shots. The title character is not the centre of each
episode. Viewer=witness.
 Rubs our nose in the cruelty of life. Necessary for the
life-affirming message at the end.
 The creative personality as the centre of attention: the
medieval icon-painter Andrei Rublev (ca.1370-1430).
Artist and repressive authorities; search for the meaning
of life; what is art and what’s its purpose.
 The title: Passion According to Andrei. Part I and II,
Prologue, 7 episodes and Epilogue.
Two Andreis
In the film, Andrei Rublev says that
people live through hardships, endure
them all, just praying God to give them
enough strength; the last words recorded
by Andrei Tarkovsky in his diary shortly
before his death were: “But now I have no
strength left – that is the problem.”
Andrei Rublev
 Frame within a frame (i.e., windows).
 Individual point of view: flying camera in the
first episode; emotional connection to the
character.
 Andrei needs to identify with the people; the
cruelty of life and casual cruelty of the lords,
esp. towards the artists: the skomorokh (jester)
who is smashed against a tree, the stonemason
who has his eyes put out.
 The joy of creation: the balloon episode at the
beginning - flight leading to death.
The figure of an artist
 The importance of looking and seeing (the
function of an artist): Andrei looks at the
jester – connection between artists (while
Daniil is reading/sleeping);
 Artist as a messenger: apostle Andrew
(Andrei).
 The jester as a Christ-like figure (telling
truth leads to crucifixion); Kirill as Judas.
 Biblical reference: the rooster’s cry.
Mark 14 (King James Version)
65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say
unto him, Prophesy: and the servants did strike him with the palms of their
hands.
66 And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of
the high priest:
67 And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said,
And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth.
68 But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest.
And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.
69 And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is
one of them.
70 And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to
Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech
agreeth thereto.
71 But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom
ye speak.
72 And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that
Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.
And when he thought thereon, he wept.
Andrei vs Theophanes
 Theophanes: “Today they praise you,

tomorrow they abuse you, and they forget
you the day after tomorrow”; “I work for
God, not for people”; “If Jesus returned to
earth, they would crucify him again.”
 Andrei defends people; crucifixion is re-
enacted during the conversation; Andrei
“crucified” by pagans, but forgives them.
Faith in people lost
 The Tartars, supported by a treacherous
prince, sack Vladimir. The split nation.
“Brothers, what are you doing?” – the
theme of (violated) brotherhood. What
does this remind us of?
 Animal cruelty, violence. How is this
violence different from that in action and
horror movies?
After the massacre
 A figure of a man who kills a Russian and saves

the holy fool (durochka). Later we find out it
was Andrei. Crime and punishment: “Live
between divine forgiveness and your own
torment.”
 Three persons left: an artist, a holy fool and a
ghost.
 Another dialogue between Andrei and
Theophanes: A. claims he was mistaken back
then and doesn’t believe in people any more.
Th. replies it’s he who used to be wrong.
Andrei’s disillusionment
 “How long will it go
on like that?” - “Don’t
know. Most likely
forever.”
 “Nothing is more
terrible than snow
falling in a temple.”
 Andrei’s (artist’s) role
as a witness.
Nothing left to tell people
 Andrei decides not to paint any more:
people are vicious and don’t need art.
 Theophanes calls this decision a sin.
 A. gives a vow of silence.
 The holy fool seduced by a Tartar “devil,”
A. fails to save her soul: his
disillusionment seems final.
The Bell and Spring
 Another artist, a young bell-maker’s son, creates
a perfect masterpiece against all odds.
 The symbolism of spring (Christian aspect:
Resurrection, Easter).
 Redemption by art (both for people and an
artist).
 Andrei breaks his vow of silence : “You’ll cast
bells, I’ll paint icons.”
 The Epilogue: icons by Andrei Rublev. The
image of horses (see the Prologue).
The Bell
Another “crucifixion”
The Church of the Intercession of the Holy
Virgin on the Nerl River, XII-th cent.
The Trinity by Andrei Rublev

Andrei Tarkovsky: The Art of The Legend

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Andrei Tarkovsky: The Art of The Legend

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Andrei Tarkovsky: The Art of The Legend

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Who was Andrei Tarkovsky and what was his background?

What were some of Tarkovsky's major influences and styles in filmmaking?

Andrei Tarkovsky

The Art of the Legend

 Theophanes: “Today they praise you,

 A figure of a man who kills a Russian and saves

You might also like