Lindsay Lindenbaum

A Brechtian Cinema? Towards a Politics of Self-Reflexive Film

In Polan�s essay, he discusses the issue of films as being self-reflexive and self-critical, and how this self-reflexivity is most often deemed, political. Polan argues that considering that self-reflexivity as a political construct is merely “a formal device whose political value depends on the context” self-reflexivity, in and of itself is not political. Polan also disagrees with the notion that the viewer is essentially forced into having a certain connection with a text and this connection can only be broken by the presence of reflexivity. Polan proceeds by clarifying the main attitudes a piece of art (film, book, painting, etc…) can take on and provides an example of a 1940s cartoon to further illustrate these ideas. He claims that an artwork assumes a “distance inherent in art and which makes it art” that is ultimately a distance from the real world. Furthermore, an artwork may also take on roles of self-reflexivity and social awareness, whereby the artwork is essentially commenting on itself as an art form as well as showing a consciousness of the real world which is usually ignored by the artwork.

In order for one to make the claim that a self-reflexive film is in fact political, Polan advocates the importance of questioning the history of both film and art theory. He suggests that by raising questions about the relationship between a film, reality, and the audience as well is coming up with definitions regarding form and content, one can have a better grasp on whether or not a self-reflexive film can be considered, political.

As Polan upholds throughout his essay, Brecht shares a similar view of art, and ultimately believes that there is an inherent distinction between art and political art. While one may attach “a sense of political engagement” to art’s separation from reality, it is not intrinsically linked to this distancing nature of art.

Polan brings up the idea “that coercion or bribery forces us into relationship with a text and that only reflexivity can rupture such a relationship.” Would you consider your relationship with a text to be one that results from coercion? How so?

Are there any examples from Breathless or Contempt where we can see a distinction between self-reflexivity and political self-reflexivity?

Aside from understanding the relationship between film, reality, and the audience, are there are other factors we should look at when determining whether or not a self-reflexive film is in fact political?

Do you agree with Brecht’s position that “realism is not a natural quality; but a social quality”? Why or why not?