Alexandre Astruc’s canonical essay, ‘The Birth of a New Avant-Garde: La Caméra -Stylo’ (), is considered a key precursor in the study of cinematic. Digital video and Alexandre Astruc’s. caméra-stylo: the new avant-garde in. documentary realized? Bjørn Sørenssen Norwegian University of Science and T . La caméra-stylo. Alexandre Astruc. “What interests ine in the cinema is abstraction.’ (Orson Welles). One casinot help noticing that something is happening in the.
|Published (Last):||25 March 2014|
|PDF File Size:||3.94 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.58 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The evolution of mankind over ayear period does not occur despite technology but because of it. On another level, it was part of his particular, post-war culture and sensibility: Maurice Nadeau wrote in an article in the newspaper Combat: We highly recommend it!! styloo
Alexandre Astruc obituary | Film | The Guardian
These concepts or signs allow us to reflect upon our experiences, to come to a new understanding a,exandre their meaning and relevance. But Astruc does not stop there.
Awtruc we already have a significant example: He called for an end to institutional cinema and for a new style that would be both personal and malleable. The cinema of today is capable of expressing any kind of reality. Astruc begins with a quote from Orson Welles: In their hands, Balzac becomes a collection of engravings in which fashion has the most important place, and Dostoievsky suddenly begins to resemble the novels of Joseph Kessel, with Russian-style drinking-bouts in night-clubs and troika races in the snow.
Order by newest oldest recommendations.
Alexandre Astruc – Wikipedia
That is why I asttruc like to call this new age of cinema the age of camera-stylo camera-pen. Although his specific examples are all feature-length narrative films, shot on 35mm, he also mentions the proliferation, in the post-WWII period, of 16mm cameras, and how this increased availability of film cameras can facilitate the continued growth of the new mode of cinematic writing.
It becomes clear that Astruc relates abstraction to language — and language to thinking. This has nothing to do with a school, or even a movement. To the contrary, cinema must continue to develop its own non-linguistic form of language, which does not necessarily discount speech or the written word as stypo this were possiblebut neither does styo rely on speech or words as the primary source of cognitive engagement and understanding.
But the cinema cannot but develop.
Introduction to “The Future of Cinema” by Alexandre Astruc
With all due respect to Nadeau, a Descartes of today would already have shut himself up in his bedroom with a 16mm stlyo and some film, and would write his philosophy on film: With this in mind, and as a final homage to Astruc, let me end the same way he ended his piece 67 years ago: The majority of users aleexandre do nothing special with these technologies, their lives will carry on more or less the same; but what is important is the transformative value these technics may have for one person, for one individual, who transforms the device, allows it to evolve, while also transforming themselves — as well camra those who come into contact with their work in the near or distant future.
Born inBernard Stiegler studied philosophy with Jacques Derrida, whose influence is evident in his writing style, his attraction to neologisms, as well as in his skills at deconstructing the texts of other philosophers. It can tackle any subject, any genre.
Astruc begins his essay by suggesting that something qualitatively new is happening zstruc the cinema. But, in at least one important matter, I have respected the historical specificity of the text in order to address a common misunderstanding.
But there was the possibility that this might occur, through this individual encounter with technics. A for Aperture Hole.
I would go further: The existence of the Nouvelle Vague to cite just one exampleand its continued ability to inspire future generations of filmmakers, belies the claim that cinema develops along a single course, with everything assimilated into a single, hegemonic form. In the end, she sacrifices both men for her independence. Already it is looking to the future, for the future, in the cinema as elsewhere, is the only thing that matters.
From the beginning, philosophy has ignored or repressed technics, a consideration of which is deemed to be outside the purview of philosophy.
I will even go so far as to say that contemporary ideas and philosophies of stlo are such that only the cinema can do justice to them. Whereas Kant proposes that the a priori coordinates of understanding are somehow innate, Stiegler argues otherwise: We have no desire to rehash those poetic documentaries and surrealist films of twenty-five years ago every time we manage to escape the demands of a commercial industry.
Descartes, we could say, had an instrumentalist view in regards to technology: Daniel Ross, Screening the Pastissue 36 June .