 |
 |
In historical terms, the essay film is not to be considered ‘different’ from documentary but a type or style of documentary. It is no more possible to define it than to define documentary as such. (It would be better to think of documentary in the same sort of way that Wittgenstein would have us think of forms of life like games, which come in families and are related by family resemblance; and in that case, documentary is like an extended family of films which overlap with fiction in some respects but not others. Essay films might then be regarded as a branch of the documentary family, but this metaphor shouldn’t be pushed too far.) The term was introduced in post-war France (as ‘film d’essai’) to describe documentaries which approached their subject in the same way as a literary essay - not to present a factual report but a space of reflection on a theme - and calling it an essay also indicated the personal voice of the film-maker. The paradigms were such films as Le Sang des Bêtes and Hôtel des Invalides by Franju, which comprise strictly observed images, but as the idiom evolved it readily expanded to encompass any and every kind of visual material. Chris Marker, who is perhaps the film essayist par excellence, was doing this already in Letter from Siberia in 1958. If you can read French, there’s a good webpage at http://www.cotecourt.org/html/categorie.asp?id=39, which includes the full listings of a 20-programme retrospective. Michael Chanan blog at http://humaninbristol.blogspot.com * * Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to. To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask] For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon. **