"Style alone is an overall manner of looking at": Modernist Fiction and the Camera-Eye.
In 1897, Joseph Conrad started out "The Nigger of Narcissus" with the declaration that, "my activity that i am trying to accomplish is, by the energy of the written phrase to cause you to hear, to make you feel- it is, before all, to cause you to see". His focus on the artist's loyalties to more perfectly convey the planet in fiction prompted literature's move beyond mimetic Realism and toward a new kind of representational writing where authors could use vocabulary to investigate the ways we understand the world. However, forty years earlier, Gustav Flaubert experienced similarly emphasised this dependence on a mastery of words to help make the reader look out of style by themselves. He believed the future of Art lay in the immediate engagement of terminology with manifestation and applying for grants fact (Flaubert 301) characterised in his "novel about nothing", Madame Bovary (1857). Flaubert's theory predicts the ideas of the literary impressionist movements, pioneered by Walter Pater and defined by its preoccupations with "the functions of perception and visual sensation, its evocation of superimposition and multiple perspectives. . . and its own understanding of long lasting and essential forms underlying the noticeable world" (Marcus 186).
The tries of literary impressionism to depart from mere cosmetic representation and change inwards embodied Modernism's desires to investigate deeper into their characters, continuing the task of Flaubert by experimenting with language to stand for these procedures of understanding, perfecting techniques such as blast of consciousness, narrative temporality and alternating tips of view. It is by the presence of the features in Flaubert's work that led to his characterisation as proto-modernist, foreshadowing the later stylistic tests of Modernist creators like James Joyce in Ulysses (1922) which embraced the inside experience of reality, providing a perfect comparison within an investigation into settings of finding. However, while such experimentation with narrative representation was developing in literature at the change of the century, a fresh art was rising that promised to master just how we looked at the world- the cinema. In 1913, D. W Griffiths reiterated Conrad's manifesto, saying "The duty I am attempting to achieve is above all to make you see" (Spiegel xii); only this time he was referring to his motives for film.
When theatre first arrived to public attention in 1895, it mainly centered on documentary films that mimetically displayed the entire world as some images. Yet, as technical advancements mobilised the camera, many filmmakers recognized that by organising the images on display screen as part of the conceptual design, film placed the same diegetic potential as literature (Spiegel xii). This notion of the narrative film was heavily theorised by Dziga Vertov, a Soviet filmmaker from the 1920s and pioneer of 'the kino-eye', translated here as the camera-eye. One of is own most pertinent beliefs was that film would perfect the 'imperfect human attention' and improve its capability to portray truth since, "we cannot enhance the making of your eye but we can endlessly perfect the camera". However, disdainful of the mimetic, Vertov's camera-eye long beyond the zoom lens to the editing and enhancing of the film-pieces to create the narrative of the film thus making 'camera-eye' a method in itself. The only real purpose is, through the camera, "to organise the film pieces wrested from life into. . . a significant visual term, an fact of "I SEE" subliminally invoking Conrad and his Modernist contemporaries' intentions and also providing the link between your film editor and the author. In taking into consideration the techniques film uses to accomplish a diegetic quality, we recognise many similarities to its literary predecessors, notably Flaubert and Joyce, detailing their categorisation as 'cinematic novels'. For Flaubert, this classification lay in his foreshadowing of cinematic varieties as well as for Joyce, his close romance with the cinema inspiring his ground-breaking style of representing actuality, with both writers displaying ultimate mastery and directorial control around the world they create.
In Theory of Film, Balazs emphasised the features of witnessing the beginning of a fresh art which learning the evolutionary procedure for film would help understand its predecessors, specifically literature itself. The synonymous relationship Balazs establishes between books and film presupposes a reciprocity between your two mediums; as cinema grows itself by adopting literary techniques, modernist books attracts on cinematic techniques to assist its experimentation in exhibiting reality. However, seeing had not been exclusive to eye-sight, "the modernist narrative relates to modes of since settings of knowing" (Danius 21) therefore we must explore the ways Modernist literature sought to bring interiority to the foreground, prompted by cinematic form. By sketching on knowledge of Modernist techniques and film theory while analysing the novel and its adaptation, we can hope to ascertain how both genres departed from mimetic representations of the world and converted towards more diegetic engagements by trying to create a more perfect eyes with which to perceive the world, adopting the 'camera-eye'.
With Madame Bovary, Flaubert wanted to create " a e book about nothing. . . presented together by the effectiveness of its style" (Flaubert 300). Since nothing at all of the calibre had been attempted, Flaubert had a need to create new methods of representation to achieve these ambitious narrative objectives, a feat which induced him great difficulty;
"I have to portray, simultaneously and in the same conversation, five or six character types who speak, several other people who are spoke about and the whole town, providing physical descriptions of people and things: and amid all that, I have to show a guy and a female who are starting to fall deeply in love with each other. Only if I had fashioned space!" (Flaubert 304).
Flaubert's dissatisfaction with the existing author's pen led him to refine his use of vocabulary creating his distinctively visible style as a identity of his novels in itself. Considering Flaubert's narrative in this way poses a challenge for the filmmaker wishing to adjust these now recognisably cinematic representational techniques to the display since as Stam records, "not only do Flaubert's personas refuse to stay still for his or her portrait, the portraitist- Flaubert or better still the narratorial camera- also refuses to stay still". It really is this narratorial camera that will provide our focus. Instead of browsing the adaptations of Renoir (1933), Minnelli (1949) and Chabrol (1991), in terms of these fidelity to the written text, by analysing Flaubert's most cinematic chapter, the Agricultural Good, we may hope to better understand the features where Flaubert aimed to make us see life as it is, most aptly through narrative montage. Chabrol, professed to "make the film Flaubert could have made had he a camera instead of a pen" (Stam 176) offering an interesting analogy through which to investigate Flaubert's writings as a precursor to the manipulated and controlling camera-eye inspired by Vertov.
The crux of the section resides in the juxtaposition of the menial village good and Emma and Rodolphe's retreat upstairs to the town-hall, foreshadowing Eisenstein's idea of constructive montage. Viewed as a collision of ideas, Eisenstein assumed "from the superimposition of two components of the same dimensions always arises a new, higher dimensions" finding montage as a narrative generating force somewhat than simply a rhetorical device. The narration of the two scenes is initially divided by alternating paragraphs between your lover's dialog and the councillor's speeches yet by disintegrating these distinctions, Flaubert escalates the scene's momentum, mirroring the escalating love between the buffs. In likening Flaubert's syntactical play to the editing and enhancing of the film slashes, we can better understand his perspective as he creates an experiential narrative, facilitated by the mobility of his narratorial camera.
Flaubert commences with a wide-angle equal shot intricately list each aspect of the fair, gradually creating a complete pictorial representation before filling up his tableau with people "pouring in from the lanes, the alleys, the homes; and every once in awhile one read banging side closing behind the girls of the town in egyptian cotton gloves who were heading to the fete". Having established this beginning shot, Flaubert replaces the existence of the omniscient novelist with the discovering eyes of man (Spiegel 30), not only giving a broader view of the picture but also in alternating between these two modes of understanding offers a deeper representation by presenting the world through the perspectives of the heroes involved. This is exemplified although switch in viewpoint to Mme Lefrancois and Homais enjoying the couple walk through the reasonable and then to Flaubert's entertainment of Emma and Rodolphe's frenetic gait as they make an effort to break free the watchful eye of Homais, "They were obliged to split up because of a great pile of chair a man was holding behind them". Recognising the distinctly cinematic nature of the section, both Minnelli and Chabrol focalise the narration of the world through the gossips, transposing the camera-eye with their view of the few.
Renoir's relatively fixed camera meant this type of swift activity was unattainable and so, omitting this early on section of the section, he favours basic reductions to transition the eye between Emma and Rodolphe and the councillors outside to show their simultaneity. In this way, Flaubert's panning narratorial camera had been more complex in its potential to travel using its characters and mimic their eye-line. However, in utilizing skillet photographs to impersonate Emma's gaze viewing Rodolphe, Renoir bestows the camera with a voyeuristic quality, directly implicating it within the narrative just as Flaubert was able to do by transferring the narration to the eyesight of the gossips. Minnelli and Chabrol's more technologically advanced cams allow the filmmaker to employ more sophisticated editing and enhancing techniques to provide a silent narrative. This is exemplified through Minnelli's use of quick succession chopping; the gossips seeing the off-screen few, Charles on the level alone; the two in the bare room upstairs reminding us where Emma should be - viewing her spouse on stage. Flaubert's use of multiple vantage details lends itself well to the movie theater, as exemplified by Chabrol's imitation of the lines of eye-sight of his character types, notably the view down from the windowpane of the town-hall to the councillor on stage and the view up to the screen as if from the audience, making a multi-layered representation of the field. As aforementioned, Flaubert's use of syntactical leaps, predating film-cuts, provide great range for the film editor looking to create a film narrative, as illustrated by Chabrol. As the strain building between the lovers emanates into the disintegrating paragraphs of the text, Chabrol intensifies the landscape with rapid slashes between the few and the landscape below their window.
One of the most apparent features of film is the utilization of sound, which allows adaptations of Madame Bovary to accept the subtleties of Flaubert's terminology to encapsulate the same remarkable semantic overlap championed in the written text. By cross-cutting the scenes and their dialogue, Flaubert used vocabulary itself to escort our notion of the picture, exemplified by the convergence of the word 'duty' in both situations as either Rodolphe overhears the talk outside or if this overlap is a means for Flaubert to ensure 'responsibility' resonates with the reader, subtly influencing our conception of the personas since we know neither have much esteem for marital obligation: ". . . delivered of admiration for legislation and the practice of work. . . ""Ah! again!" said Rodolphe. "Always duty. I am sick of the term" .
Minnelli's screenplay dramatises these occasions through the overlaid soundtrack of the speeches outside the home window while Emma and Rodolphe sit in silence. As Emma finally produces to Rodolphe's developments, the councillor outside announces "Dr Charles Bovary", disrupting her dream. As she attempts to run off, Charles' speech can be been told outside talking about "a brash imposter"; demonstrating the clever use of dialogic in addition to scenic overlap to narrate the problem without implicitly including it in what themselves. In providing this line to Charles, the audience is manufactured aware, as is Emma, of the atrocity of her behaviour. Chabrol similarly comes with the narrative capacities of sound into his diegesis utilizing the window as a way for the speeches outside to filtering into the room adding a supplementary degree of sensorial belief. In extracting these subtleties from the written text, the adaptations literalise the fluidity of sound exemplified through these syntactical distinctions whilst complementing the drama of the landscape.
In Flaubert's writing it is not only words that speak but physical presence, exemplified through his reference to the physicality of his heroes in an effort to further our knowledge of their interior consciousnesses. Flaubert's use of the body as a narrative tool foreshadows Balazs' theory that "the expressive instant is the aboriginal mother tongue of the people", able to articulate emotion external of dialogue itself. Flaubert's innovative design of writing therefore disproves Balazs' perception that "in the epoch of phrase culture, we made little use of the expressive powers of the body and also have therefore partly lost that electricity". In this manner, cinema is seen as a reclamation of this lost kind of narrative therefore in adapting novels we are given a new setting of perception once we can analyse the language of gesture lacking in the novel; "it is the visual method of communication. . . Man has again become obvious". Once again, we return to this idea of seeing therefore considering this, cinema's materialism techniques to enhance the visuality of Flaubert's original book rather than reduce it to mere play.
Flaubert's text message embraces the performative aspect Balazs defends in film, allowing his narration to enter in Emma's body as it reacts to her situation; "on a regular basis she was aware of Rodolphe's head by her part. . . she kept experiencing, through the throbbing of her temples, the murmur of the masses and the tone of the councillor intoning his phrases". In representing Emma's consciousness as she battles to handle Rodolphe's improvements and the closeness of her spouse outside, Flaubert increases the experiential nature of the text by endowing the characters' areas of the body with narrative capacity as manifestations of the people' thought techniques; "He transferred his give his face. . . Then he let it fall on Emma's. She drew it again. However the councillor was still reading". Chabrol especially focuses on these understated cases, reiterating his career of utilizing Flaubert's pen for his camera. Rather than undermining the terminology itself, his substitution of Flaubert's words with visible representations reaffirms the necessity of as soon as within the narration of the action itself.
In viewing adaptations as ways by which to enlighten the audience to Flaubert's visionary intentions, the eye enjoying the display is forced to activate with the mind, activated by the web page, through use of editing and enhancing techniques. Bluestone assumed "one may see visually through the attention or imaginatively through your brain" yet these adaptations claim that in order to more properly perceive the planet, one needs to engage both eye and brain, an idea pioneered by Virginia Woolf in her polemic, "The Movie theater" (1926). She chastises the moviegoer as "the savage of the 20th Hundred years", a passive device of information on the display screen requiring no involvement of the mind; "the eye licks it all up instantaneously and the mind, agreeably titillated, settles down to watch things going on without bestirring itself to think". The alliance of attention and brain is unnatural, because they are "torn asunder ruthlessly as they try vainly to work in couples", so, regarding version, while the eyesight recognises the girl on the display as Emma Bovary, the mind does not; Flaubert made certain we recognized Emma through the within of her brain therefore to see her now, materialised, causes a conflict in our perception.
However, Woolf recognises cinema's potential as an expressive fine art if only it can formulate a function through which both vision and brain can coexist, complimenting each other, only "when some new symbol for expressing thought is found, the filmmaker has enormous riches at his command word". Taking into consideration the establishment of diegetic film by Vertov and Eisenstein, it appears filmmakers were hearing Woolf's recommendation for the movie theater. Their new kind of representation satisfies Woolf's assumption that "a lot of our thinking and feeling is linked with seeing", as recently suggested by Danius, believing there has to be some "residue of aesthetic feeling" not useful to freelance writers that the movie theater can adopt in order to enrich its images. When the filmmaker could "animate the perfect form with thought", then movie theater as a representational form might even surpass literature. In this manner, Flaubert's intensely visual design of writing predates Modernist hope for the cinema through his tries to mention the obvious characteristics of thought itself. However in cinema, "the attention wants help", unable to perceive reality by themselves, it needs the assistance of the brain to understand the reality on screen just as the brain attracts on its mind's-eye to visualise the images in the novel, coming back us to the notion of reciprocity between books and film.
While Flaubert's emphasis was on the thing seen, emphasising the eye, Joyce's Ulysses turned concentrate to the real action of the seer discovering, centering in on the mind, as Spiegel wrote "where Flaubert found wider, Joyce observed harder and deeper". Instead of aiming for an accurate representation of life like Flaubert, Joyce seemed to interior life and so situates both writers in an excellent parallel to explore the progression of settings of perceiving fact. Area of the appeal of movie theater to Joyce was that it could free him from the tediousness of storytelling and specific observation of every day and "allow him to build up the novel in more esoteric ways; linguistic experimentation and mental complexity" (Sinyard vii) something Ulysses certainly demonstrates. Like Madame Bovary, Ulysses is a novel about nothing; a sensorial exploration of Dublin in a single day, narrated through an omnipotent roaming eyesight and the inside experiences of his two protagonists, Leopold Bloom and Stephen Dedalus. The result is possible composed from the impressions and perceptions of these two men as they connect using their environment, allowing the audience to experience the principal moment of perception as they do. Platt said "things are conceived because they are perceived: to believe is to act. . . . This is actually the new cinema" (Marcus 8). Considering this in books, is it possible to modify Platt's affirmation; while it might be the 'new cinema', it offers most likely been affected by the 'new' books that was perfecting its omnipotent camera-eye as exhibited in Ulysses.
Experimental filmmaker and good friend of Joyce, Sergei Eisenstein wrote that "What Joyce does indeed with books is quite near what we're doing with the new cinematography and even closer to what we will do" (Trotter 87). What Eisenstein was specifically referring to was Joyce's concentrate on interior monologue, just becoming available to theatre through the advancement of audio. Eisentein presumed Ulysses was "the most significant event in the history of movie theater" (Marcus 425). Interestingly categorising it amongst cinema, Eisenstein helps the belief that Joyce's personal interest in film directly facilitated the different remarkable and cinematic features in the book, enabling Joyce to work with "cinema as a trope for what he saw in his mind's-eye as cataracts and eyesight operations diminished his vision" (Norris 8). While Woolf needed the mind to participate in the attention in cinema, Joyce enhanced his imaginary, camera-eye to pay for his lack of actual sight, giving an answer to Platt's proven fact that one perceives through thought itself. In this manner, Danius believes we should view Ulysses as an progress of Conrad's crucial as Joyce answers the decision to perceive, turning it into an "axiomatic and autonomous visual principle" therefore in reading it as a result we can attempt to investigate the ways that Joyce endeavors to make us see, principally through imploring the senses, making belief a corporeal experience.
Joyce said Eisenstein was one of the one directors he'd allow to adapt Ulysses; the ultimate meeting of eyeball and brain, Eisenstein among the greatest designers in the visual medium of film and Joyce, one of the greatest authors of prose who experienced virtually no vision (Norris 10) but unfortunately the pairing never had become. In 1967, Joseph Strick contacted Ulysses, licensed by his know-how in movie theater verite that "gave the camera a position as a 'figure' in the film and foregrounded its role in producing perspective and point of view" (Norris 17) exhibited in his debut, The Savage Eye (1959). Since the primary adaptive task resides in how to mention Joyce's interiority, this form of camera-work was suitable for depicting Joyce's internalisation of the narratorial eye as he makes us see through notion itself.
One of the most cinematic sections in the text is 'Wandering Stones', a chapter consisting of nineteen short scenes established around Dublin having most of the people in the book. A more sophisticated experiment than that of the Agricultural Good whose aim was to stand for simultaneity of happenings for remarkable purposes, Joyce's use of montage orchestrates an almost anthropological analysis of the everyday in the city. The camera-eye in 'Wandering Stones' roams the town and closes in on the protagonists of every world while still conscious of the occurrence of character types already met on the trip or ones we will meet later. These character types aren't always seen by the protagonist therefore emphasises the readers' privileged view. Bloom's "shadowy existence" is first observed in world 5 where Boylan is buying a present-day for Molly in Thornton's while flirting with the shopkeeper. A single sentence inserted into their conversation;"A darkbacked shape under Merchant's arch scanned catalogs on the hawker's car", alerts us to the simultaneous occurrence of Bloom, buying Molly a fresh book as promised earlier in the book. The narratorial eyesight does not face Bloom again until sc9, this time around the "darkbacked figure scanning catalogs on the hawkers cart" is discovered by Lenehan as Bloom. The understated change to the progressive tense signals a change in point of view as the audience witnesses the same landscape as Lenehan.
Much as Flaubert put into his narration by representing the physicality of his character types, Joyce's use of montage endows certain images and figures with diegetic quality by placing them as temporal markers within the narrative itself. For instance the HELY's sandwich panel men we met prior in Bloom's shopping trip in 'Lestrygonians' are came across again, further in their quest in sc5, "HELY's submitted before him. . . earlier Tangier Lane, plodding towards their goal". In reintroducing them into the narrative, Joyce forcibly engages his viewers' mind's-eye and brain as they remember when they last longer observed the image. This discussion supports Eisenstein's declare that "montage is the mightiest means for a. . . creative remoulding of characteristics". Regardless of the intensely cinematic feel of the section, Strick chose to omit the 'Wandering Stones' from his adaption instead focusing more on the ways that Joyce represented the psychological interiority of the characters through their hallucinations and internal monologues, being it is through knowing the mind of the people that the audience could hope to see the world as they do.
In 'Proteus', Joyce uses the internal monologue in Stephen's brain, "the great spectator hero" (Spiegel 1), to deal explicitly with the nature of perception providing a perfect insight into the use of cinematographic stylistics in his sensorial exploration of the day in Dublin. As he strolls down Sandymount Strand, Stephen considers the "ineluctable modality of the obvious", questioning the flawed manner in which we count on our view to see the world which is only capable of acquiring "signatures of all things" from actuality rather than true understanding, "thought through my eyes". Stephen discerns to counter the "limitations of the diaphane" and problematic sight by discovering with another sense - reading, "shut your eye to see". Danius advises this type of synaesthetic imagery advises "the pre-eminence of the terms of the eye" reiterating the focus on the visual in fiction. If our knowledge of seeing the earth relies entirely on view, then to summarize off that sense, Stephen fears the planet will vanish, bolstering himself to open up his eyes, "I will see if I can see". The world continues to can be found without him, "and ever before will be, world without end", this is reminiscent of Woolf's belief that the movie theater can depict the earth as if "we have no part in it" furthering the idea that Joyce attracts on cinematic ideas to perfect methods of discovering in literature.
This focus on seeing invokes Vertov's theory of the imperfect eye, something Joyce counters in changing Stephen's eye into a camera. Observing the waves on the beach, he exclaims "Ah see now! Comes back suddenly, iced in stereoscope. Click does the secret", emphasising the poignancy of perspective in understanding and the privileged position of the modernist article writer to be able to freeze amount of time in order to comment after reality. Strick can literalise this effect through the transposition of the camera lens for Stephen's sight, implementing a black display as he closes his eyes, providing what Eisenstein called a "hurrying visuality". In doing this, Strick similarly isolates the senses of the audience enabling us to perceive the does sound of the beach with Stephen, his footsteps on the pebbles, the tapping of his ashplant cane, uniting the audience's experience with that of the character. Using centred long axial pictures (Trotter 100), Strick interposes tableaus of the sea, birds and the beach, not only representing Stephen's line of eye-sight but also by exhibiting them as quick flashes he illustrates Joyce's notion of perceiving mere signatures of things that the brain places together it seem sensible of actuality. In forcing the audience to connect vision and brain so, Strick catches Joyce's intention to utilize the narratorial eyeball to translate the representation of senses into "mental feelings to be observed or been told in the silent interiority of the reader" (Danius 185) relating them in the principal moment of belief alongside Stephen.
Moving from the sensorial, 'Circe' descends into the hallucinatory Nighttown where even flawlessly refined senses will not help perception of this world. Written in the style of a screenplay with level directions, speaker's labels and delivery records, this surreal section removes itself from certainty related to itself with the internal consciousnesses of Stephen and Bloom. In adopting a script format, 'Circe' details the character's thoughts with mimetic accuracy, as if the audience is observing a performance in the character's head, whilst evolving the diegesis by enriching our knowledge of the type through this interiority. That is most pertinent in Stephen's ending up in the ghost of his dead mom. Drunk in the brothel, Stephen imagines he perceives his mother, requesting her "Choking with remorse and horror: 'They say I wiped out you mother'" (681), echoing Buck's preceding comment that his aunt is convinced Stephen killed her therefore implying its impact on his consciousness. Strick replaces the novel's horrific information of The Mother with a blurred outline of a woman advancing towards Stephen, fitting the scene in the context of the drunken dream as opposed to the terrifying manifestation of guilt in the text. To break from the unconscious, Strick ensures we are aware of Stephen's mindful position in the brothel with Bloom and the whores by infiltrating his hallucination with Zoe's words, "I'm melting!" and concern at Stephen's whiteness. The novel's level directions indicating Bloom's movement to start the windows are translated into dialogue, increasing the complete aesthetic experience since the audience are not in the lounge but in the darkness depicting Stephen's head. The scene provides a privileged perception into how Stephen perceives himself as instigated by the responses of another, namely Buck's aunt, representing the levels of perception Joyce deems essential to infiltrate to be able to perfect our view of this world.
While 'Circe' withdraws narrative ability from the people by presupposing a playwright of the situations, it is further removed in 'Ithaca' where Joyce utilises the question and answer format of catechistic techniques to give a low profile narrator complete control over what the reader is permitted to know, its only try to make us see. Rather than tailoring the questions to only answer material information on the field, the catechizer ensures they require more insightful replies in order to keep the strength of interior narration that has dominated the novel, for example, "Did Bloom discover common factors of similarity between their particular like and unlike reactions to see?" The reactions provide exact details to the amount of pedanticism, perhaps satirising the ways in which art endeavors to mimic fact; such details do not add anything to the immediate understanding of the moment but do show the lengths a modernist copy writer goes in order to make the reader understand a picture on every level.
[Stephen] "Which seemed to the variety to be the predominant qualities of his guest?
[Bloom] Confidence in himself, an equal and oppositional electricity of abandonment and recuperation".
"What did his limbs, when little by little extended, come across?
. . . The existence of human form, female. Hers. The imprint of the human form. Guy. Not his" .
The short syntax encapsulates Bloom's feeling in his realisation that another man has indeed just been in his foundation. The adaptation benefits from the spoken tone in its capability to wait to tonal changes in the actor's speech to more sufficiently convey the impression this event has already established on the character. Similarly, the final line fades in to the sound of any ticking clock as Bloom drifts to sleep and the rhythm of speech moves over to Molly, checking the ultimate narrative work of the book in 'Penelope'.
In this section, Joyce focuses on the ultimate function of self-narration within an unpunctuated interior monologue by means of stream of consciousness. In choosing this form, Joyce emphasises the value placed on functions of understanding throughout Ulysses by turning his literary camera-eye inwards. Removing punctuation dramatises the "swift transitionless jumps" of the mind from one perspective to some other (Spiegel 168), similar to montage techniques. In this way, the narrative can be likened to the cinematograph itself, "a kaleidoscope of incident" (Spiegel 79) perhaps characterising 'Penelope' as the utmost visionary and so most correct conveyance of representing simple fact. To be a reconstruction of "the laws and regulations of the idea process", Marcus feels the montage form Joyce adopts is "allied to that particular penetration of interior vision" and it is through this penetration alone that Joyce not only shows but explains to his world.
Eisenstein thought that only the audio film was with the capacity of reconstructing the span of thought, which evidently urged Strick's decision to record the voice-over monologue first, expecting it could "inspire the visual texture of all of those other film" (Norris 21). In separating the words from the speaker through voice-over, Strick literalises the notion of internal monologue as "a feverish internal debate behind the story mask of the facial skin" with Barbara Jefford's emotive performance intensifying our experience of Molly's brain.
However, perhaps most vital to our understanding of the scene employs from Eisenstein's idea of "the quivering internal words relating to visible images" in the mind that may be literalised on display screen, something Strick exploits to great impact adding another perceptive level to the monologue itself. By giving constantly changing images, Strick further articulates the fragmentary mother nature of Molly's head represented in Joyce's narration and replaces the mind's-eye we see within the written text with the perfected eye of the camera. While the images do definitely not match Joyce's words semantically, they refunction the text by actualising the images circulating in Molly's mind, changing the camera into Molly's awareness itself therefore allowing the audience direct entrance to perceive her in her most exposed form.
As the world starts, the camera adopts an eye-level shot following her gaze around the room, watching the ceiling while chastising Bloom's request for breakfast in bed. Ruminating on whether Bloom is having an affair, the image changes to Bloom and their ex - maid, Mary Driscoll, in the kitchen. Her declaration that "I wouldn't lower myself to spy on them" is paired with an image of her searching in a drawer, a ram of her previous behaviour. Her entrance of jealously at Bloom's alleged infidelity is followed by remembrances of her liaisons with Boylan. As the text will not explicitly name Boylan at this time, Strick speculates on who she could be considering, "sometimes you like so wildly when you feel this way so nice around you can't do yourself a favour" with the addition of the series of Molly and Bloom passionately kissing on her foundation. Each image on the display relates directly to an interpretation of the written text, her visit to confession is ingrained with her interior guilt as the priest emerges as Boylan and the stills of the church's stained goblet house windows show a amount, mind in hands, being scolded. Strick's choice of images support the argument that the display has changed into an uncensored projection of Molly's inside thoughts, notably through the use of naked man statues to represent her irreverent sexual desire. When not directly conveying the surreal images of Molly's mind, the camera comes back to omniscient eye, for example displaying her kissing rosary beads, possibly representing her Catholic guilt for considering such lascivious thoughts whilst reminding us in our voyeuristic position amongst these thoughts.
To further Molly's representation on herself, Strick uses mirrors and shot/reverse shots, with the camera behind her make, as she talks about herself, declaring "only never to look unattractive or those lines from the strain"; we see what she perceives since we look in the mirror with her. Oscillating between this type of shot and eye-level photographs, Strick gives the effect at once to be inside Molly's brain but in the same way reaffirming the audience's position as a privileged observer of this scene. As the written text provides an uncomfortably close access to Molly's erotic fantasies and conquests, Strick translates this through the extreme close-ups of the looming faces of her lovers again creating an experiential style of viewing, similar to the design of writing Joyce found in 'Proteus'.
The text's powerful visuality helps it be impossible to avoid participating the brain with no mind's-eye and without this mutuality the monologue would associated risk misinterpretation. Strick's decision to track record images after the sound satisfies Woolf's motives by remaining devoted to the imperatives of the modernists to mostly appeal to the brain that may always sophisticated itself with images through its mind's-eye, yet here the brain is aided by the camera. By closing this exploration of perception with an entirely internal speech, Joyce appears to be saying that it's through this interiority that we have the ability to truly 'see'.
The sensorial tests exemplified in Flaubert and Joyce show the Modernists advancement from mimesis as a way of earning the audience 'see', to participating with how the characters perceive the earth, using vocabulary as an entrance into their thought techniques to unite the reader with the character at the initial moment of notion. To come back us to the moment, the writer needs complete editorial control total components that constitute the perceptive experience; particularly visual proposal with the thing and its influence on the consciousness. While books was tinkering with ways to engage more intellectually with reality, the Modernist writer found enthusiasm in the growing talent of movie theater that was similarly wanting to perfect the 'vision' by transposing it through the camera-lens. Tolstoy said: "The cinema's swift change of picture, this blending of feelings and experience is. . . nearer to life. In life, changes and transitions adobe flash by before our sight and thoughts of the heart are just like a hurricane. " (Sinyard vii) epitomising our argument as to why Modernist writers appeared towards theatre to encourage their pen as they wanted new styles by which to make us start to see the world. Tolstoy found the camera as a primary risk to the writer, boasting it "will make a revolution in our life- in the life span of writers. . . A fresh form of writing will be necessary. . . But I alternatively like it" (Cartmell 5).
Viewed as such, the cinematic stylistics in literature can be said to be the product of the threat therefore supports the thought of the cinematic book and cinema as analogous, a reasonable progression of representational art work forms that can go with and interpret one another as both settings seek to express new ways of seeing. In this manner, supporting our belief that filmic adaptation of these novels can provide new interpretations and so give a continuation of Conrad's vital to make us see. Flaubert's final result that "style can be an absolute manner of finding" prompted modernist writers to imbue the pen with cinema's camera-eye by merging both mediums' aesthetic techniques. In doing this, the writer is given a fresh dialectic through which to see and write about life, revivifying the representational capabilities of his pen.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay