Kristen Stegemoeller
Dana Polan�s A Brechtian Cinema? Towards a Politics of Self-Reflexive Film
In this essay, Dana Polan argues that art utilizing Bertolt Brechts self-reflexive technique is not necessarily political, and that to be political, films must be self-reflexive in both their style and content. Polans thesis runs counter to the assumption (held by Wollen, for one) that Brechtian formal techniques undermine traditional modes of narrative and illusionistic representation to activate an inherently passive spectator. Polan thinks that the reasons for this failure are that contemporary theorists and filmmakers have ignored Brechts theories of content, and that there is nothing inherently political about self-reflexivity.
Defining political the as analysis of the contradictions in a historical situation, Polan disagrees with the notion underlying the critiques of so-called conventional representation, in their assumption that texts conform to the real world and conceal its contradictions; that submission to a text means submission to its ideology. He believes that art relates to material reality in two ways, by the degree to which it displays awareness of its own artifice (or lack thereof) and in its social/political attitude (or lack thereof). To support his stance, Polan cites a long line of literary examples (Tristram Shandy, Tom Jones), cartoons and television shows, which are self-reflexive but not political. Adding to his argument, he claims that very few Hollywood movies are actually transparent, and that they traffic in a kind of campy self-aware un-reality that mitigates their ability to be debunked by formal self-reflexivity.
He insists that most mainstream art is very self-aware in its contradictions, but remains non-political by divorcing contradiction from its social causes. This is where the theory of content in Brecht becomes important. Brecht believed that all art contains distancing, estranging properties, which can be harnessed to add a sense of political engagement. Polan argues that the overwhelming goals of Brechts political theatre is lead the viewer to consider the possibility that life doesnt only have to take on the forms it generally does. Brechts theater grants the spectator the pleasure of producing a new world of possibilities and, contrary to popular belief, encourages the identification of the spectator. The political theater encourages two different identifications, the first, an empathetic one linked to the reified vision of the world and the second, a critical identification with a new perspective of knowledge with which the old way is scrutinized. Polan calls for a return to Brechts please and instruct concept of self-conscious political criticism, while remaining aware that this critical mode may exist in traditional cinema.
Thought Questions:
Polan essentially ignores the issue of medium specificity in his assertion that self-reflexive film must follow the content guidelines of Brechtian Theater to be politically generative. Is there anything specific about the medium of film and its relation to the viewer that problematize this perspective?
What are the differences in effect between the political self-reflexivity utilized in the films of Antonioni and Godard?
In Brechts model is the political component on the level of narrative or representation?
Does Polan differentiate between self-reflexivity and alienation effects?