Jean-Luc Godard’s films are distinguishable by their unconventional techniques, or at least unconventional when compared to a standard like Hollywood film or the Institutional Mode of Representation. One scene in Masculin, Feminin that partially exemplifies Godard’s style is the sequence containing the extended conversation between Robert and Catherine. During their discussion, Robert keeps asking Catherine questions about her personal life, and she continually responds with vague non-answers.
This sequence departs from shot/reverse shot as much as the rest of the film. Instead of following the speaker back and forth, it focuses on one for a time and then switches to the other. This develops each character separately leading the film to focus more on individual characters rather than the relationships between them, something that is especially interesting when one considers the complexity of the relationships depicted within the film.
Catherine and Robert’s conversation contains an extremely long conversation that seems out of place. It drags on for a long time, hardly advances the plot, and has little direction. This coincides with the overall narrative structure of the film, which did not have a definitive climax. Masculin, Feminin could almost be considered plot-less when compared to Hollywood film, because none of the characters seem to have definitive goals that they are working towards, events just seem to happen with little reason or resolution, and much of the actual action occurs off-screen.
One of the most interesting things about this film is the way Godard characterizes men and women through the main characters. In this scene, while Robert is telling Catherine that he loves her, she is telling him that her personal life is none of his business. The men in this film seem to constantly be stating their feelings directly, while the women are vague or ambivalent about it.
Much more can be said about this film, especially on the topics of gender roles, narrative structure, and formal elements. An extremely fascinating film from one of the most thought-provoking directors in recent history, Masculin, Feminin had many striking moments, but the prolonged conversations were the element that stuck out the most to me.
Trying to use Masculin, Feminin to deduce what Godard thinks cinema should be seems like it would simply be a ridiculous extrapolation. However, I think it is clear that Godard expects something from his viewers. He supplies us with the pieces and intends for us to put them together ourselves. Godard's films construct complex characters, relationships, and situations that lead the audience to be more active because of the many opportunities they provide for discussion.
Undeniably, Godard is also a social critic. He depicts people and puts their actions on display for study. However, I think that if we are to follow Tom Gunning's line of thinking (that the spectator is the definitive aspect of film), then Godard believes cinema is a means to make people think, discuss, act, and perhaps change. The expectation of active spectator-ship is the quality that makes his films so memorable.
This sequence departs from shot/reverse shot as much as the rest of the film. Instead of following the speaker back and forth, it focuses on one for a time and then switches to the other. This develops each character separately leading the film to focus more on individual characters rather than the relationships between them, something that is especially interesting when one considers the complexity of the relationships depicted within the film.
Catherine and Robert’s conversation contains an extremely long conversation that seems out of place. It drags on for a long time, hardly advances the plot, and has little direction. This coincides with the overall narrative structure of the film, which did not have a definitive climax. Masculin, Feminin could almost be considered plot-less when compared to Hollywood film, because none of the characters seem to have definitive goals that they are working towards, events just seem to happen with little reason or resolution, and much of the actual action occurs off-screen.
One of the most interesting things about this film is the way Godard characterizes men and women through the main characters. In this scene, while Robert is telling Catherine that he loves her, she is telling him that her personal life is none of his business. The men in this film seem to constantly be stating their feelings directly, while the women are vague or ambivalent about it.
Much more can be said about this film, especially on the topics of gender roles, narrative structure, and formal elements. An extremely fascinating film from one of the most thought-provoking directors in recent history, Masculin, Feminin had many striking moments, but the prolonged conversations were the element that stuck out the most to me.
Trying to use Masculin, Feminin to deduce what Godard thinks cinema should be seems like it would simply be a ridiculous extrapolation. However, I think it is clear that Godard expects something from his viewers. He supplies us with the pieces and intends for us to put them together ourselves. Godard's films construct complex characters, relationships, and situations that lead the audience to be more active because of the many opportunities they provide for discussion.
Undeniably, Godard is also a social critic. He depicts people and puts their actions on display for study. However, I think that if we are to follow Tom Gunning's line of thinking (that the spectator is the definitive aspect of film), then Godard believes cinema is a means to make people think, discuss, act, and perhaps change. The expectation of active spectator-ship is the quality that makes his films so memorable.
I agree completely with many of the points you‘re making Lacey but would like to go against your chosen “Moment.” After re-watching the conversation between Robert and Catherine I would like to argue this scene does in fact advance the plot. Along with adding to the direction of the film, in which I’m stating that I do believe this film has, direction. I will support this though my interpretation of an outside source, “Dutchman” a play written by “Amiri Baraka.” The play, which in fact appears in the film, takes place in a subway where we see an African American killed by a Caucasian woman. Interestingly “Lula” the woman who kills “Clay,” the gentleman aboard the subway, is constantly eating apples throughout the entire play. It obviously isn’t a coincidence that “Dutchman” appears in “Masculine, Feminine” which was released two years after the play. So I deduce that it also is not a coincidence that like "Lula" Catherine is eating an apple during her and Robert’s conversation. Here is how I draw the lines between the two, I feel this conversation along with many others between men and women in this film are all very similar. The early scenes between Paul and Madeleine, Paul and “Miss 21,” and also Robert and Catherine, all have the same discourse between them. The males are pursuing uninterested females. The statement I believe Godard was making when he put that apple in Catherine’s hand was one of foreshadowing. This scene does advance the plot for the reason that it reinforces our interpretation of gender roles throughout the film, the reoccurring dialect between male/female. And now it is adding to the direction of the film as we learn of how it all ends (well ends for Paul.) The conversations set us up to believe all the women have a lack of interest or emotions for the men and we can tie both stories together with the killing of the men, I believe Paul was pushed, in both.
ReplyDeleteJon Michael White
Lacey, I like your observation that the film focuses on individuals as opposed to the development of relationships between them. If, (and I agree) "Godard believes cinema is a means to make people think, discuss, act, and perhaps change," do you think that he is more interested in individual reflection/change or social change? The film has a lot of social commentary, so this question is an intriguing one. I think you could use the scene you mention (via close analysis) to explore this idea further.
ReplyDeleteJonathan, fantastic observation! I like your connection between the "Dutchman" and Catherine eating an apple...both narratives seem to make biblical references about the manipulation of men by women. I think you can go even further with this analysis (for a paper, perhaps). Comparing the two endings might be interesting!