On Jacques Rivette and His Cinema article
Arun Shankar writes on Jacques Rivette, one of the founders of French New Wave.
Ah, the joy of watching a Rivette film is pure exultation for the senses.
But contrary to what might be construed, most of Rivette's works have a very raw nature to it - kind of like a strange distant quality, as not in the plot, per se, but more in the mise-en-scene, which makes one initially uncomfortable about Rivette, but, not long, finding delectation for his methods. To qualify the distant aspect with being surrealist (an exception, one might say, being "Céline et Julie vont en bateau"), per se, or Dogma95-ish would be going off the track. Rivette's films are like reading a novel chaptered into distinct plots intangibly shaping out like an undulating curve - you are "in" the plot but the discreteness is felt. But, at the same time, it’s very latent. Rivette's films do not immerse one into the plot, but pulls one out, subtly. There is a definite sense of a tinge of the theatrical that springs out of the film. A lesser experienced filmgoer might question the veracity of the realism (which is an important aspect for Rivette) projected, but Rivette seems to be consciously making that choice - without breaking the “fourth wall.” The other catnip of Rivette for me is the spontaneity inherent in these steadfastly constructed plots, which, though not easily deducible, stand out in contrast. This apparent arbitrariness within the rigor makes it a rather savory treat.
Rivette’s films, with an unwavering measure, develop the relationship between the characters increasing the plot's depth, finally becoming a maze of possible permutations on the effect of mutual relationships among the characters, each affecting the other. For example, in "Va Savoir", 6 characters are entangled in such a way that each falls for or flirts with two others among them. They all are affected by the actions of each of them (should I say, six degrees of separation?) in their personal / professional lives.
The theater forms the common link among all of them, in that it is the cause (the ball starts rolling with Camille acting out her feelings on stage on a play almost identical to one that’s "playing" in her life) of the emotional turmoil and also ultimately the mediatory of this said turmoil. And we, as spectators, witness a cinema in the theatrical aspect of the characters concluding with the song "senza fine" - Italian for "unending." Brilliant! And in "La Belle Noiseuse," its painting - of the established, unashamed, self-indulgent painter in the last wanes of his life searching for, now long lost, inspiration to create his masterpiece. Here the sensuous, headstrong, with streaks of vulnerability, wannabe writer girlfriend of the young, proud, unabashed, talented painter takes over the role of Camille in "Va Savoir" (pardon the anachronistic lapse), in that she too is portrayed as dangling over the status of her relationship. The painting forms the common link between all the characters (including the one-track mind petty art dealer, the older maestro's submissive taxidermist wife, and the small girl) involved, and as in "Va Savoir" it is the cause and the antidote for all concerned (the young painter's fate was veered by the painting too - if that’s an antidote remains debatable). "Histoire de Marie et Julien" is a kind of exception from the above - the plot thickens not as much by the emotional intertangle between an assemblage of characters as by projecting haziness between reality and fiction — a realization which is out of Julien's depth (and most probably ours too, if thrust into a similar position).
Why are fictional projections of events of lesser worth than similar tangible events for the faculties of the senses? Questioning the apparent disjoint between reality and fiction, the film holds out a jolt of realization for the perceptive viewer. Moreover, by choosing Julien's profession as a clocksmith, Rivette questions our very intuitive grasp on time, the essence of the interconnection between the past, present, and future. Rivette, I think, utilizes modulation of sound to signify the same - a vacuum pointing to oneness of the three tenses. Also, in a way, Rivette brings about the relative ephemerality of our retaining capabilities (notice how Julien quickly forgets those left behind, or those that leave him). The film fittingly ends with Marie asking Julien, the clocksmith, for a "little time," with the clock ticking away in the background. In "Celine et Julie ...," the Julie character is one endearing personality. This is one hilarious film (at least for me) that gets better on multiple viewings, and with its surreal motif of haziness between reality and fiction makes it a mysterious one too.
The eeriness of the boating scene is one that sends a mild chill down the spine. This combined with Julie and Celine's childish perverse quirkiness makes it one hell of a film. But, the mystery involved in this film is one of the mysterious natures of the relationship of the viewer and the film itself. Paraphrasing that perceptive someone who quipped that, in the grander scheme of things, it’s a real puzzlement that films have survived for such a long time. Human attraction towards watching moving images is a mystery that is taken in this film wherein we watch a film with characters themselves privy to the fictional life of a family complete with role play and exchange, melodrama, comedy, and overcoming high stakes to save "innocent" lives.
The final boating act might be an askance on the hard distinction set between reality and imagination — while asking, isn't it that both creep in unknowingly on the other to create the whole?
But, here’s the thing above Rivette - his films do not come forth as didactic in the sense of putting forth an agenda(s) - they are just part of the platform sharing the stage with a multitude of other immanent characteristics resulting from Rivette's love in the film making process - which one can pretty easily decipher from his films, in fact, I would say, that’s the first thing that a cineaste would notice (As Jung says, its the non-psychological novel that offers the richest opportunities for psychological elucidation.)
Rivette does not drive his film. Anything but. Like many seers of this art, he allows the film to take control and follows instinctively - the apparent lyricality of this statement contrasts his films, because they are not poetic in the literal sense; if anything, his films put a premium on patience.
I'm not meticulous about describing a plot, but even if one desires, it would be a futile in the case of Rivette, because, irrespective of the underlying message, ultimately Rivette's films are not about plot itself (start, drama, end), but more in the mere existence of the same - a subtle difference, but having varying impacts on the audience. In other words, one can put most of Rivette's films as being a form of metafilm invoking aspects of arts within its self-referential frame. Or if one wants to loop it to the other extreme, one can loosely put Rivette's films being filled with that high-brow French culture aloofness, but without the apparent pretentiousness or manipulativeness. And that's praise, indeed.
