The ‘imponderable fluidity’ of modernity: Georges Méliès and the architectural origins of cinema
2010; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 8; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/17460651003688089
ISSN1746-0662
Autores Tópico(s)Visual Culture and Art Theory
ResumoAbstract This essay situates the development of early 'glass house' film studios in the history of nineteenth‐century glass‐and‐iron architecture. It focuses on Georges Méliès's first studio (built in 1897) and describes its roots in structures including the Galeries des Machines at Paris's international expositions and the photography studio on the roof of Méliès's magic theatre in Paris. Filmmakers such as Méliès used the same materials and designs that changed turn‐of‐the‐century Western cities to create the first buildings for film production. In doing so, they made the primary characteristics of nineteenth‐century architecture – spatial plasticity and fluidity, artificiality, and the manipulation of light – defining elements of both the first film studios and the films created there. This essay argues that early cinema, especially in its relationship to architecture, played a significant role in the changes of industrial modernity that historians of technology describe as the greatest technological revolution in history: the construction of an increasingly artificial, human‐built world. As urban populations adjusted to the artificiality of modern space, cinema arrived to both re‐imagine the built environment and re‐create artificial worlds on the screen. Filmmakers such as Méliès, who built and worked in the first studios, occupied a unique position: both the films they made and the spaces in which they worked were at the vanguard of fraught changes in the experience of Western urban reality. While early film historians have detailed the ways that urban modernity affected cinematic spectatorship, this essay shows that film production spaces were part and parcel of that process. Keywords: film studiocinemaarchitecturetechnologyMélièsDisdériglassironphotographyartificialityfluidityplasticity, space Acknowledgements This essay was the winner of the 2009 Domitor student essay competition. Portions of this essay were presented at the University of California at Irvine's Visual Studies 'Birth/Day' Graduate Student Conference. I would like to thank the conference organizers and respondents, especially Bliss Cua Lim and Richard Meyer. I also thank Vanessa R. Schwartz, my colleagues in History 620 at USC, Régis Robert and Karine Mauduit at the Bibliothèque du Film in Paris, and especially Catherine E. Clark. This essay is dedicated to my late advisor and mentor, Anne Friedberg. Notes 1. '[Le XIXe siècle] représente dans l'histoire de la civilisation humaine une immense mutation. Les sciences naturelles deviennent plus fécondes et plus puissantes que jamais, et leur union avec la technique les conduit, dans une course à la victoire sans précédent, vers un but dont les époques antérieurs n'osaient pas rêver: la domination de la nature.' All translations are my own unless otherwise noted. 2. Méliès was preceded by not only W.K.L. Dickson's 'Black Maria' in West Orange, NJ, but also by rooftop studios built by Dickson for the American Mutoscope and Biography Company in New York and by Oskar Messter in Berlin. 3. See, for example, Charles Sheeler and Paul Strand's Manhatta (1921), Walter Ruttmann's Berlin: Symphony of a Great City (1927), Dziga Vertov's The Man With a Movie Camera (1929), and László Moholy‐Nagy's Berliner Stilleben (1926) and Marseille vieux port (1929). 4. Especially The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (Robert Weine, 1920) and Metropolis (Fritz Lang, 1927). 5. Commonly cited films include Marcel L'Herbier's L'Inhumaine (1924), Man Ray's Les Mystères du château de Dé (1929), Pierre Chenal's L'Architecture d'aujourd'hui (1929) and Hans Richter's Die neue Wohnung (1930). 6. Architectural theorist and historian Anthony Vidler has outlined the appearance of a series of concepts – Elie Faur's 'cineplastics', Hermann Scheffauer's 'fourth dimension', Erwin Panofsky's 'dynamization of space and spatialization of time', El Lissitzky's 'pan‐geometries', Sergei Eisenstein's 'architectural montage' and Walter Benjamin's 'filmic unconscious' – that sought to explain the ways that cinema and architecture produced comparable spaces and similar spatial experiences. For each of these theorists cinema offered new ways to enliven architectural space by imbuing it with artificial motion – that is, to technologically produce fluid, plastic, artificial spaces (Vidler 1996 Vidler, Anthony. 1996. "The explosion of space: Architecture and the filmic imaginary". In Film architecture: Set designs from Metropolis to Blade Runner, Edited by: Neumann, Dietrich. 13–25. Munich: Prestel. [Google Scholar]). 7. Ironically, Carné consistently remade city streets and urban locales in the studio, and Clair filmed portions of Paris qui dort in a small studio in the suburb of Joinville‐le‐Pont and shot Sous les toits de Paris (1930) entirely on sets built at the former Éclair studio in Epinay‐sur‐Seine (Carné 1933 Carné, Marcel. 1933. "When will the cinema go down into the street?". In French film theory and criticism: A history/anthology, Edited by: Abel, Richard. Vol. 2, 127–8. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 1988. Originally published as Quand le cinéma descenra‐t‐il dans la rue? Cinémagazine 13 [Google Scholar]; Dale 1986 Dale, R.C. 1986. The films of René Clair, Vol. 1, Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. [Google Scholar]). Meanwhile, architects such as Mallet‐Stevens were expressing concern about the tendency in architecture to attempt to mimic cinema, rather than 'offer[ing] itself up naturally to filmic action, always preserving the distance between the real and the imaginary' (Vidler 1996 Vidler, Anthony. 1996. "The explosion of space: Architecture and the filmic imaginary". In Film architecture: Set designs from Metropolis to Blade Runner, Edited by: Neumann, Dietrich. 13–25. Munich: Prestel. [Google Scholar], 23). 8. As historian Annette Fiero explains, 'For architecture, the birth of iron construction in this period was revolutionary in spatial, representational, and as well technological terms, particularly given the implications of radically changing methods and scales of production' (Fierro 2003 Fierro, Annette. 2003. The glass state: The technology of the spectacle, Paris, 1981–1998, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Google Scholar], 49). 9. Hughes and Williams argue that the industrial revolution that began in Great Britain in the eighteenth century and the second industrial revolution that transformed everyday life in Western cities in the latter half of the nineteenth century are only two aspects of a larger technological revolution: 'the creation of a new habitat for human existence' (Williams 2002 Williams, Rosalind. 2002. Retooling: A historian confronts technological change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 22). 10. As Fierro notes, the Galeries 'continuously challenged previously known structural concepts and scales of enclosed spaces' (Fierro 2003 Fierro, Annette. 2003. The glass state: The technology of the spectacle, Paris, 1981–1998, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Google Scholar], 9). 11. The 1889 Galerie was overshadowed, literally, by its more famous neighbour, the Eiffel Tower. 12. 'Il suffit de se promener dans les rues de Paris o[ugrave] s'élèvent des constructions nouvelles pour reconnaître que l'usage du fer et de la fonte dans le bâtiment est aujourd'hui un fait acquis, une amélioration acclimatée dans l'industrie du bâtiment.' 13. As Wolfgang Schivelbusch describes, the use of 'ferro‐vitreous architecture created a novel condition [in which] light and atmosphere were … no longer subject to the rules of the natural world' (Schivelbusch 1986 Schivelbusch, Wolfgang. 1986. The railway journey: The industrialization of time and space in the 19th century, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. [Google Scholar], 48). 14. 'Film,' Bruno argues, 'dwells on the borders between interior and exterior', and cinematic spectatorship becomes a 'tactile appropriation' on par with the experience of the transparent architectures of urban modernity (Bruno 1993 Bruno, Giuliana. 1993. Streetwalking on a ruined map: Cultural theory and the films of Elvira Notari, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 45–9). 15. On early theatre architecture and the relationship between architecture and viewing practices, also see Bruno 2002 Bruno, Giuliana. 2002. Atlas of emotion: Journey in art, architecture, and film, New York: Verso. [Google Scholar]. 16. Notwithstanding recent corrections by Malthête (1996 Malthête, Jacques. 1996. Méliès: Images et illusions, Paris: Exporégie. [Google Scholar], 2002), Noverre's remains the most accurate and comprehensive account of the studios. Unless otherwise noted, the following description is drawn from Noverre's description. The best description in English is Hammond (1974 Hammond, Paul. 1974. Marvelous Méliès, London: Fraser. [Google Scholar], 31–3). 17. Barry Salt notes that Méliès quickly identified the importance of entrance/exit directions for creating continuity (Salt 1990 Salt, Barry. 1990. "Film from 1890–1906". In Early cinema: Space–frame–narrative, Edited by: Elsaesser, Thomas. 31–44. London: British Film Institute. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 31–44). Tom Gunning similarly cites La voyage dans la lune (1902) as an early prototype for the continuity that would be more fully developed in the 'chase' film (Gunning 1990 Gunning, Tom. 1990. "Non‐continuity, continuity, discontinuity: A theory of genres in early films". In Early cinema: Space–frame–narrative, Edited by: Elsaesser, Thomas. 86–94. London: British Film Institute. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 86–94). On the development of story films, see Musser 1990 Musser, Charles. 1990. The emergence of cinema: The American screen to 1907. Vol. 1, History of the American cinema, New York: Scribner. [Google Scholar], Chapter 11. 18. On the relationship between photography and early cinema see Gunning 1999 Gunning, Tom. 1999. "Embarrassing evidence: The detective camera and the documentary impulse". In Collecting visible evidence, Edited by: Gains, Jane and Renov, Michael. 46–64. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar], 46–64 and Gunning 1995 Gunning, Tom. 1995. "Tracing the individual body: Photography, detectives, and early cinema". In Cinema and the invention of modern life, Edited by: Charney, Leo and Schwartz, Vanessa R. 15–45. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 15–45. On the use of lighting techniques from photographic portraiture in early Hollywood, see Keating 2006 Keating, Patrick. 2006. From the portrait to the close‐up: Gender and technology in still photography and Hollywood cinematography. Cinema Journal, 45(3): 90–108. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]. 19. Christian Fechner notes that 'La présence d'un laboratoire photographique au‐dessus du théâtre fera toujours poser une menace d'inondation ou d'incendie sur la petite allée qui, par deux fois, en 1881, à l'époque d'Émile Robert‐Houdin, puis, en 1901, à celle de Georges Méliès, faillit ne pas en réchapper' (Fechner 2002 Fechner, Christian. 2002. "Le Théâtre Robert‐Houdin, de Jean Eugène Robert‐Houdin à Georges Méliès". In Méliès: magie et cinéma, Edited by: Malthête, Jacques and Mannoni, Laurent. 72–115. Paris: Paris musées. [Google Scholar], 87). 20. On the phantasmagoria, see Gunning 2004 Gunning, Tom. 2004. "Phantasmagoria and the manufacturing of illusions and wonder: Towards a cultural optics of the cinematic apparatus". In The cinema, a new technology for the 20th century, Edited by: Gaudreault, Andre, Russell, Catherine and Veronneau, Pierre. 31–44. Lausanne: Editions Payot. [Google Scholar]. 21. As McCauley notes, 'photography itself retained an aura of magic' that made Disdéri's association with the magical theatre and its owner below 'more than fortuitous' (McCauley 1985 McCauley, Elizabeth Anne. 1985. A.A.E. Disdéri and the carte de visite portrait photograph, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar], 23). 22. The numerous rooftop studios built in cities such as New York and Philadelphia during cinema's first decade are no doubt a continuation of this tradition. 23. According to Fechner, Méliès began visiting the Robert‐Houdin as a schoolboy at the age of ten, in 1871 (Fechner 2002 Fechner, Christian. 2002. "Le Théâtre Robert‐Houdin, de Jean Eugène Robert‐Houdin à Georges Méliès". In Méliès: magie et cinéma, Edited by: Malthête, Jacques and Mannoni, Laurent. 72–115. Paris: Paris musées. [Google Scholar], 89). One could speculate that Méliès's father, the successful owner of a shoe factor in Montreuil‐sous‐Bois, might have had the young Méliès's portrait made in one of the studios. 24. The film is also known as Une Chute du cinqième étage. 25. Madeleine Malthête‐Méliès claims that Méliès suggested the photography studio to Maurice and Lumière and that Méliès even saw the Lumières' first film devices there before the Grand Café screening (Malthête‐Méliès 1973 Malthête‐Méliès, Madeleine. 1973. Méliès l'enchanteur, Paris: Hachette. [Google Scholar], 147–8). See also Deslandes 1963 Deslandes, Jacques. 1963. Le boulevard du cinéma à l'époque de Georges Méliès, Paris: Cerf. [Google Scholar], 15; Chardère, Borgé, and Borgé 1985 Chardère, Bernard, Guy, Borgé and Borgé, Marjorie. 1985. Les Lumière, Lausanne: Payot. [Google Scholar], 96; and the letters from the Lumières to Maurice in Rittaud‐Hutinet 1994 Rittaud‐Hutinet, Jacques, ed. 1994. Auguste et Louis Lumière: Correspondances, 1890–1953, Paris: Cahiers du cinéma. [Google Scholar]. 26. According to Méliès: 'M. Lumière père y venait fréquemment, ayant des intérêts dans cette maison qu'il fournissait de plaques photographiques. Je le connaissais pour l'avoir rencontre souvent en sortant de mon bureau. Un soir, vers cinq heures, je le vis arriver, l'air radieux, et il me dit: "Êtes‐vous libre, ce soir?"' (Chardère, Borgé, and Borgé 1985 Chardère, Bernard, Guy, Borgé and Borgé, Marjorie. 1985. Les Lumière, Lausanne: Payot. [Google Scholar], 96). See also Malthête‐Méliès 1973 Malthête‐Méliès, Madeleine. 1973. Méliès l'enchanteur, Paris: Hachette. [Google Scholar], 157. 27. McCauley's description of early portrait photography is apt here: 'For many visitors to the new studios perched on rooftops to take advantage of the light the experience recalled the anxiety of visiting a dentist, a man of dubious professional skills who forced his clients to undergo incomprehensible, painful procedures' (McCauley 1994 McCauley, Elizabeth Anne. 1994. Industrial madness: commercial photography in Paris, 1848–1871, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar], 17). 28. This is difficult to see in a still reproduction – the film uses a painted backdrop that extends across the entirety of the back of the frame. The left wall of the depicted photography studio also looks fake (as if it is part of this painted set), but it is actually a flimsy wooden frame that extends out from the back wall. The painted backdrop behind this wooden frame creates the illusion of depth. 29. In Une Chute de cinq étages the photography studio is a mise‐en‐abyme for the film studio. 30. Alice Guy noted that one of the primary reasons that Gaumont built its first studio was to avoid the chaos of shooting on public streets caused by curious onlookers and the police. Alice Guy, 'A Propos des Débuts de l'Industrie Cinématographique', Gaumont publication, 1930.
Referência(s)