MATERIAL THINGS: A Typology of Performative Materialities in the Presentation of Celluloid-Specific Experimental Films

(1)

MATERIAL THINGS:

A Typology of Performative Materialities

in the Presentation of Celluloid-Specific

Experimental Films

_________________________________________________________________

Master’s Thesis Heritage Studies: Preservation and Presentation of the Moving Image

Faculty of Humanities Department of Media Studies University of Amsterdam

Supervisor: Christian Gosvig Olesen Second Reader: Dr. Giovanna Fossati

(2)

0.0: Introduction……….….………3

0.1: Problem and Urgency……….…..………3

0.2: Theoretical Frameworks………..….……6

0.3: Objects of Research………12

1.0: Preservationist Materiality……….…….15

1.1: Case Study – By Brakhage Volumes One & Two……….…..20

1.2: Conclusion………..28

2.0: Transitional Materiality………...………...30

2.1: Case Study - A Tom, Tom Chaser & Anaglyph Tom (Tom with

Puffy Cheeks) by Ken Jacobs……….36

2.2: Conclusion………..44

3.0: Artists’ Lab Materiality………..46

3.1: Case Study – Filmwerkplaats……..………...50

3.2: Conclusion………..57

4.0 Final Conclusions………59

Works Cited………...62

Appendix………67

(3)

0.1: Problem and Urgency

Film as a material object has been an essential consideration throughout the history of avant-garde film, and remains so today. Recently, the increasing ubiquity of digital equipment in both the production and the presentation of moving images has undoubtedly forced involved parties of all shapes and sizes to reflect on their cinematic priorities and values. More

specifically, the Digital Agenda For the European Film Heritage report1 indicated the year 2012 as that in which the various steps of the cinematic workflow primarily transitioned to digital. As with many industries, waves made at the center eventually ripple out and cause disturbances on the fringes, forcing those with much lesser means to try and adapt. This is the difficult reality that has faced practitioners and enthusiasts of avant-garde and experimental film. Due to these circumstances, the financial resources of fringe institutions dealing with experimental film are much more limited, but there are a whole range of difficulties beyond economics that must be dealt with. One major consideration is the role that celluloid, a material object that can be touched and viewed even without passing through a projector, has on the viewing experience. Experimental cinema encompasses a wide range of non-narrative and alternate-narrative works, and thus the focus in many of these films falls outside the thrust of a straightforward story. Instead, experimental filmmakers often place the viewer’s attention on the celluloid itself, exploring the possibilities the material is capable of. Film scholar and head curator at the EYE Film Museum, Giovanni Fossati, categorizes works that emphasize the materiality of celluloid within what she calls a “Film as Art” framework. As Fossati notes, “Especially in avant-garde cinema, the filmmaker may use the film as a canvas (e.g. Oskar Fischinger painting and scratching the film emulsion), or where the film itself is central to the work (e.g. Kubelka’s

Arnulf Rainer)”2. Thus, the importance of the celluloid material to the viewing experience presents custodians of experimental cinema with a considerable dilemma in light of the widespread digital transition.

1_{Mazzanti, Nicola (ed). “Challenges of the Digital Era For Film Heritage Institutions”. Final Report prepared for}

the European Commission, DG Information Society and Media, December 2011. Accessed June 18, 2015. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/final_report_en.pdf.

2

Fossati, Giovanna. From Grain to Pixel the Archival Life of Film in Transition. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009: 122.

(4)

There are a number of custodial institutions throughout the world that primarily involve themselves with experimental works3. However, with the exception of Anthology Archives, which as its name suggests performs a range of preservation functions, these institutions

primarily act as outlets for distribution activities. In the US there is Anthology Archives, a New York City based institution that was founded in 1970 by a group of experimental filmmakers including Jonas Mekas, P.Adams Sitney and Stan Brakhage. Embracing its marginal status, Anthology, on its website, proclaims that it, “strives to advance the cause and protect the heritage of a kind of cinema that is in particular danger of being lost, overlooked, or ignored”4. The Canadian Filmmakers Distribution Center is located in Toronto and was founded in 1967. Its catalogue primarily focuses on Canadian filmmakers, and includes such luminaries as Michael Snow, Jack Chambers and Joyce Wieland5. In France, there is the previously mentioned Light Cone, founded in 1982. The Light Cone collection now contains over 3700 films, including a variety of films from various strains of experimental filmmaking like found footage films and structural cinema6. Over time, their distribution efforts have made each of these institutions synonymous with experimental film, yet without an archival focus the future of the material they possess is left in a nebulous position. In most cases, this is not a preference on the part of the institutions, but again is chiefly a matter of means.

Consequently, the impetus for the preservation and presentation of these experimental films largely resides on the shoulders of the filmmakers. In the digital age, this especially involves choices of format, which has a significant impact on both how the films look and how audiences receive the films. As various digital formats continue to proliferate, there is a vast range of shifting materialities presenting themselves within the experimental film community. These include digital materialities that simulate the materiality of celluloid, as well as those that more strongly utilize the specific visual properties of digital images. Additionally, there are completely analog materialities appearing in part as a reaction to such digital materialities. How then might a typology of these varying materialities be developed so that experimental

filmmakers can make decisions on how best to move forward with the presentation of experimental films that focus on the materiality of celluloid?

3_{Others not listed include LUX in London, Six Pack in Vienna and Canyon Cinema in San Francisco,} 4

"About". Anthology Film Archives. Accessed June 20, 2015. http://anthologyfilmarchives.org/about/about.

5

The CFMDC catalogue can be viewed at: http://www.cfmdc.org/.

(5)

I will confront this problem by proposing three specific types of materiality:

Preservationist Materiality, Transitional Materiality and Artists’ Lab Materiality, and attempting to bring them together within the widened umbrella of the Film as Art framework. Over the course of the 20th century the consideration of moving images as an art form has been a mutating and often nebulous subject. Certain genres of film such as the horror or comedy film have often been excluded from such consideration, while other films exhibiting a range of commonly identifiable traits were eventually referred to as “art films”7. Though the qualifications have been contentious, Fossati nevertheless asserts that the Film as Art argument “lies at the

foundation of most film archives”8. Fossati specifically links the concept of the art film with that of the avant-garde. As she again notes, “archives that, free from a national mandate, have

focused on a specific mission, for instance, the preservation of avant-garde films, have often based their raison d'être on the ‘Film as Art’ argument”9. Though I do believe avant-garde films deserve to be viewed and considered within the realm of art, I also believe the Film as Art framework could be productively expanded to more suitably account for the range of

materialities that are possible with the use of new digital technologies, each of which in their own way can sustain such a notion. This thesis will pursue such an expansion largely by considering the “do-it-yourself” practices of experimental filmmakers, as I believe they offer a privileged vantage point for this issue.

From this vantage point my thesis will attempt to address my research question by suggesting that there is a range of potentially productive practices that stretch beyond the boundaries of celluloid. Part of this is naturally borne out of necessity, as the continued use of celluloid to maintain these very materially oriented films is simply not feasible, and so one must either adapt or risk losing these films altogether. However, acknowledging this untenable situation does not necessitate approaching it with a correspondingly dour attitude. Instead, such a situation can be seen not as a straitjacket, but rather an opportunity to birth new modes of approaches that may one day become standard. With this in mind, I will argue that the use of digital filters and effects in the presentation of these sorts of experimental films creates new ways of defining materiality that are valuable in their own right. As Cosetta Saba notes, “The

7_{Grau, Chris. “When Is Film Art?”. Lecture, Pacific APA, Pasadena, CA, 2007.} 8

(6)

media artwork's translation and transfer into a digital form for documentary purposes, especially when it concerns audiovisual components, does not produce something immaterial, but assumes another type of materiality with different properties…” (114). This “type of materiality” bears the traces of both analogue and digital processes, and will require filmmakers to rethink current definitions of materiality. In studying the strategies developed by many experimental

filmmakers that involve these sorts of materiality, fruitful insight into the contemporary presentation of celluloid-specific experimental film can be learned. Doing so will ensure that despite the changes brought about by increasingly commonplace digital technologies, the historical importance of materiality to experimental cinema remains at the fore. This effort prompts a theoretical framework that draws perspectives from theories that concern themselves with issues of materiality in both the analogue and digital realms, as I will further explicate in the next section.

0.2: Theoretical Frameworks

Though the authors of these aforementioned theories do not all draw the same

conclusions, each of them offers useful points of consideration towards developing a typology of materiality flexible and expansive enough to answer my aforementioned research question. My first chapter will primarily concern the medium of celluloid. To theorize celluloid’s specificities, I will make use of approaches to film materialism by scholars like Peter Wollen ("‘Ontology’ and ‘Materialism’ in Film"10). Wollen’s article explores the nature of the medium of celluloid and aspects of its material nature. I have selected resources such as this as it will allow me to better establish the link between the materiality of celluloid and experimental films, primarily because of these theories’ specific attention to the way in which an approach centering on celluloid’s materiality has developed over time within the realm of experimental filmmaking. In doing so I can more convincingly elucidate key points of consideration, as well as some

inconsistencies, when it comes to the necessity of celluloid in presentation decisions. My second chapter will concern the digital image. To theorize the specificities of the digital image I will use approaches involving digital technologies such as Barbara Flueckiger’s article “Material

(7)

Properties of Historical Film in the Digital Age”11 and Laura U. Marks’ “How Electrons Remember”12. Both of these articles grapple with concerns that arise when considering digital materiality, and will assist me in describing some of the unique material features of the digital image. This will allow me to better argue for a broader range of potential practices when it comes to dealing with experimental films by highlighting the productive characteristics of digital materialities. Perhaps most importantly, throughout this thesis I will frequently refer to the theoretical framework proposed by EYE Chief Curator Giovanna Fossati in From Grain to Pixel (Amsterdam University Press, 2011). Fossati’s framework will serve as the foundation from which I will seek to build the typology of materialities, as it is the one that offers information most pertinent to the concerns I have previously highlighted, as well being the one that I believe can be most productively expanded upon.

In From Grain to Pixel, Giovanna Fossati identifies four frameworks of archival practice that she uses to analyze methods in various institutional settings. These four frameworks consist of: “Film as Original”, “Film as Dispotif”, “Film as State of the Art” and “Film as Art”. It is the third and fourth frameworks, Film as Art and Film as Original, that are of particular interest to this thesis. Fossati begins the Film as Art section by tracing the lineage of the argument,

eventually seizing upon two aspects that she believes are key to the debate: “medium specificity and those of the auteur”13. The auteur theory, brought to light primarily through the efforts of the Cahiers du Cinéma critics and directors of the French New Wave in the late 1950s and early 60s, as well as the American critic Andrew Sarris shortly thereafter, posited the film director as the most important creative voice and primary overseer of the filmmaking process, as argued in key texts like “Notes on the Auteur Theory in 1962”14 and “The American Cinema”15. As the Encylopedia Brittanica summarizes, “The auteur theory, which was derived largely from Astruc’s elucidation of the concept of caméra-stylo (‘camera-pen;), holds that the director, who oversees all audio and visual elements of the motion picture, is more to be considered the

11_{Flueckiger, Barbara. "Material Properties of Historical Film in the Digital Age." NECSUS. Accessed May 5,}

2015. http://www.necsus-ejms.org/material-properties-of-historical-film-in-the-digital-age/

12_{Marks, Laura. "How Electrons Remember”, Millennium Film Journal, 1999. Accessed May 11, 2015.}

http://www.mfj-online.org/journalPages/MFJ34/LMarks.html.

13_{Fossati, Giovanna. From Grain to Pixel the Archival Life of Film in Transition. Amsterdam: Amsterdam}

University Press, 2009: 123.

14

Sarris, Andrew. "Notes on the Auteur Theory in 1962." Film Culture 27:1-8.

(8)

‘author’ of the movie than is the writer of the screenplay”16. Yet since its inception, the auteur theory has been a point of continued dispute.

One of the main arguments against the auteur theory is the highly collaborative nature of much of mainstream filmmaking. As end credits to feature films often attest, there can be hundreds if not thousands of individuals involved in the process. Critics of the auteur theory argue that the involvement of such a large number of people makes a singular vision impossible to realize. However, when it comes to experimental filmmaking, the application of the auteur theory seems considerably more feasible. As discussed above, experimental filmmakers have frequently overseen nearly every aspect of the creation of their films, from capturing of images to the processing and eventual editing of those images. In such cases, the films truly are the result of a singular artistic vision. The auteur theory also encouraged critics and viewers to adopt a wider view and consider filmmaker’s larger oeuvres in order to get a sense of common stylistic trends and themes. These commonalities can be much more immediately apparent when

studying experimental filmmakers, since they are usually the sole authors.

Fossati postulates that “In most cases… ‘Film as Art’ based on the auteur argument is more concerned with the filmmakers visual style (e.g. the mise-en-scene) rather than medium specific arguments”17. Yet, she specifically mentions avant-garde films as the possible exception to this trend, particularly when, “the filmmakers reflect on the very film technology”18. It is amongst these films, specifically mentioning filmmakers such as Jürgen Reble, Harry Smith, Oskar Fischinger and Peter Kubelka19, that Fossati identifies a close link between the Film as Art and the Film as Original frameworks. She states that, “the two concepts are often closely related, especially in those cases (very common with avant-garde and experimental film) where the filmmaker/auteur is also partial to the medium used”20. Fossati’s Film as Original framework centers on notions of the “original” and the many complicating factors that play into making such identification. Fossati demonstrates that notions of originality frequently transform depending on the priorities and imperatives of the parties involved with the material21. Fossati places a particular emphasis on the concept of authenticity as a vital consideration in an archive’s

16

The New Encyclopedia Britannica. Chicago, IL: Encyclopedia Britannica, 2005.

University Press, 2009, 125. 18_{Ibid. 126.} 19 Ibid, 165. 20 Ibid. 21_{Ibid. 117-123.}

(9)

determination of what is considered original. Referring to Walter Benjamin, authenticity would appear to lose its value when the medium is mechanically reproducible, as film undoubtedly is. Yet the matter is not so univocal, as Fossati continues on to detail a selection of potential complicating factors.

When it comes to experimental film then, the Film as Art and Film as Original

frameworks would appear to present a problem with only one solution: that such films will only continue to work if they remain on celluloid. However, Fossati does not view this as being the case, as she points out that:

Probably because of the auteur approach, where avant-garde filmmakers are more and more often adopting digital film as their medium of preference, accordingly, film archives that privilege the ‘Film as Art’ framework are also accepting the emerging digital technology, also as a means for restoring and giving access to film-born films22.

Whether it is out of necessity, an adventurous spirit or some other motivating factor, experimental filmmakers have been increasingly open to the use of the digital in their filmmaking. Filmmakers like Phil Solomon and Ernie Gehr, who, in line with their status as auteurs, developed reputations as masters of the manipulation of the material properties of celluloid, have since produced work in the digital realm with equal enthusiasm. Perhaps

experimental filmmakers, having become comfortable with the new materialities of digital-born works, are now becoming more amenable to the materialities of digital versions of works born on celluloid.

Though Fossati’s frameworks are inclusive enough to cover large swaths of potential options for archives to consider, there is one avenue briefly discussed in the book, that

concerning performance, which I would argue is open for much further expansion. In writing about the restoration of Harry Smith’s Mahagonny carried out by the Anthology Film Archives in New York City and the Harry Smith Archives, Fossati explicates the many challenges of working with a film of such visual complexity. Anthology Film Archivist Andrew Lampert, speaking about the Mahagonny, refers to it as “inherently unpreservable”23. In describing the project, the restorers of the film refer to their efforts as a “performance”24. The film is made up of four separate 16mm tracks intended to be projected in “quadrants” in unison with a soundtrack 22 Ibid. 165. 23 Ibid. 229. 24_Ibid.

(10)

composed on the opera Rise and Fall of the City of Mahagonny (Weill & Brecht, Germany, 1930). Ultimately, those involved in the project elected to use a 35mm print capable of containing the quadrants on a single image. Fossati writes that the decision was in large part based on the fact that a single 35mm print of the four 16mm tracks “could be shown everywhere and to a broader audience”25. This demonstrates the impulse towards accessibility that has driven previous film-to-film restorations of experimental films, an essential consideration that also factors into the materialities of the film to digital transfers that will be examined further on in this thesis. Fossati subsequently describes the film as “more a performance than a cinema projection”26, again underlining the performative nature of the restoration endeavor. However, as previously mentioned, I believe the consideration of performance can be developed and expanded so as to comprise a wider array of performative practices which may yield a more detailed understanding of the conceptual redefinition of film materiality in the digital age. In doing so, I suggest a development of Fossati's framework that recasts the notion of Film as Art as a performance of contemporary technologies, which may also further our understanding of the presentation of experimental film works today. I suggest to label this development as the “Performative Materiality” framework.

The Performative Materiality framework is one that may be particularly pragmatic for considering the realm of experimental film and potentially justifying the digital transfer of celluloid-specific works. Like Mahagonny, many experimental films that interrogate the material nature of celluloid have a performative aspect to them that is characteristic of the unpredictable nature of their creation, and which specifically lend themselves to the possibilities offered by digital technologies. Restoration efforts like that of the Center for Visual Music on Oskar Fischinger’s three-screen Raumlichtkunst (1926, Germany), in which the CVM sought to represent the “concept and experience of Fischinger’s series of shows”, shows that originally featured “up to five 35mm film projectors, color filters and slides”, have attested to this fact27. This is evident much earlier in the filmmaking process as well. Experimental filmmakers who exploit unique chemistries or rely on uncontrollable natural elements in order to create their images embrace some loss of control or predictability on the final outcome. This

25_{Ibid. 228.} 26

Ibid. 230.

27

"Raumlichtkunst." CVM. 2012. Accessed June 20, 2015. http://www.centerforvisualmusic.org/Raumlichtkunst.html.

(11)

unpredictability, rather than being a liability, can offer greater flexibility when considering presentation options by allowing for interpretation. Rather than viewing an experimental film as a fixed entity, the unpredictability inherent to work can be viewed as a performative element, one that can take many potential forms. This view opens a broader array of potential presentation choices to a filmmaker depending on the type of materiality they opt to ascribe to.

An important resource in the formation of the Performative Materiality framework comes from film scholar Vinzenz Hediger. In his article “Original Work Performance. Film Theory as Archive Theory” Hediger suggests that archivists should take cues from musical theory when considering film as a performance, writing that “in music, like in film, there is either no original, or each and every performance is an original. The philosophy of music, then, may furnish a productive template for thinking through problems of preservation and presentation […] because it broadens the notion of so-called ‘original’ and of the work to include the aspect of

performance”28. By “philosophy of music” Hediger means the work of philosopher Lydia Goehr, specifically her theory of the “regulative concepts”, which “determine, stabilize and order the structure of practices”29. These points are related to his conclusion that, “if we agree that the film as work includes the aspect of performance, we have to admit…that every performance is as good as every other performance, so long as it can be identified as a performance of the work in question”30. Thus, Hediger expands the possibilities for presentation by viewing films as performances that can take many potential forms. In line with Hediger, I posit that the

Performative Materiality framework provides for a range of acceptable practices including the use of digital technologies as long as the current work can be tied back to the “original work”. There are several possible ways in which a performance can be tied back to the work in such a manner, as I intend to demonstrate in the case studies in both Chapters One and Two.

The Performative Materiality framework must rely on two key components: the input of the filmmaker and the availability of contextual information. In keeping with the auteur status of most experimental filmmakers, their intentions are key for guiding the interpretive undertaking of any archival effort. Acknowledging the strain of unpredictability running through such films does not mean overlooking the creative vision overseeing the shaping of work. The creative

28_{Hediger, Vinzenz. “Original, Work, Performance: Film Theory as Archive Theory.” Giulio Bursi and Simone}

Venturini (eds.). Quel che brucia (non) ritorna - What Burns (Never) Returns: Lost and Found Films. Udine: Campanotto Editore, 2011.

29

Ibid.

(12)

vision and intentions of the filmmakers can serve as a template from which to drive the

methodology of the presentation effort. Likewise, contextual information describing the various possible incarnations of a film and the motivations for pursuing a specific form by those

involved on the project can help ensure that the project in question is not erroneously seen as being “definitive”. As Lampert stresses when considering a digital simulation of Mahagonny, “We would need to have a well written caveat to explain our intentions and discussing original formats and more educational aspects so that people would not assume that Harry Smith was creating digital video in the 1970s”31. Contextual information can allow artists to take certain liberties, especially with regards to digital effects, under the rubric of performative materiality while ensuring that the celluloid material remains at the fore. As artist and scholar Jon Ippolito writes, contextual information gathered through strategies such as the questionnaire “can serve as the ‘ethical will’” when making decisions like those involving the presentation of an artwork32. These are but some of the theoretical considerations that will further guide my explorations in Chapters One through Three, each of which will also feature a carefully chosen case study.

0.3: Objects of Research

My thesis will include multiple case studies that will allow for further exploration of my theoretical assertions and demonstrate how these theories can be discerned in real-world

scenarios. The case study in Chapter One will include the Criterion Collection Blu-ray releases of Stan Brakhage’s films in cooperation with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Film Archive, entitled By Brakhage Vol. 1 & 2. I have chosen the By Brakhage volumes primarily because of the nature of Brakhage’s work, which often exhibit a range of effects used on the material surface of celluloid, including painting, baking, scratching, among others. Brakhage wholly fulfills the concept of the auteur, overseeing nearly every aspect of his film’s creation. These two aspects, the focus on the materiality of celluloid and his auteur status, are ideal for conducting an examination of the transference of such work to the digital realm. I believe the By Brakhage releases embody one of the key types of materiality, Preservationist Materiality, that make up my previously mentioned Performative Materiality framework. It is a

32

Ippolito, Jon. “Accommodating the Unpredictable: The Variable Media Questionnaire”. Permanence Through

(13)

materiality that seeks to be faithful to many of the characteristics of the work in its celluloid form. As such, it will be useful for filmmakers who wish to maintain the visual experience of celluloid when undertaking presentation practices using high quality digital technologies.

The aforementioned releases are interesting in that they have received varying levels of support from more established institutions like the Academy Film Archive, but there are many experimental filmmakers that have no hope of receiving assistance in even that form.

Acknowledging this, Chapter Two will also consider experimental filmmakers that are dealing with these issues largely on their own or in collaboration with much smaller institutions. This includes American experimental filmmaker Ken Jacobs, whose “do-it-yourself” ethos has driven a number of DVD releases of his work and is thus particularly relevant for study in this thesis. Tied to the aforementioned DIY ethos, the works differ from the case studies that will be covered in Chapter One in that each exhibits a particular approach in which the materiality of the

resulting digitized image is utilized in specific ways, which I have labeled Transitional

Materiality. This is a materiality that bears some traces of analog materiality, but also makes full use of digital characteristics like hyper-saturated colors, pixelation, variable framerates, and a continual morphing of the depth and space of the frame. Therefore, this materiality more strongly identifies the material of moving images as constantly changing, or as Ippolito writes, “as a succession of linked events that, like a stream of water, endures by remaining variable”33. These “performances” can be so distinct that they represent entirely new works. Yet these works remain inextricably linked to, and can often provide further understanding of, the celluloid itineration in a number of ways. In regards to the two videos that will serve as Chapter Two’s case study, A Tom, Tom Chaser and Anaglyph Tom (Tom with Puffy Cheeks), each shares a close relationship to the 16mm analog film Tom, Tom the Piper’s Son, as I will go on to elucidate. This type of materiality will be particularly useful for filmmakers who wish to use the

digitization process as an opportunity to create a new performance that visually diverges from the work in its celluloid form, to better make explicit how the transitional nature of their works rests upon new materialities.

Standing in contrast to the works I will highlight in Chapters One and Two, Chapter Three will focus on the endeavors of the artist-run lab Filmwerkplaats in Rotterdam. Unlike the perfomative materialities I will define in Chapters One and Two, which make use of digital

(14)

technologies, the artists at artist-run film labs like Filmwerkplaats engage with a completely analog materiality. Yet this analog materiality is nevertheless being reconfigured by the increasing presence of the digital, and as such potentially requires a new descriptor. I believe studying this phenomenon will be valuable for providing a more complete picture of the subject of materiality. Additionally, many of the DIY methods and knowledge practiced at venues like Filmwerkplaats can be of use for presentation projects that might be carried out entirely on celluloid. For example, the optical printer is still an important piece of equipment at labs like Filmwerkplaats, and knowledge of its use can provide key insight into earlier experimental films originally created through its use. By examining each of the aforementioned case studies, I wish to both elaborate the nuances of my Performative Materiality framework and convincingly argue for the expansion of the Film as Art framework for the purpose of guiding experimental

(15)

1.0: Preservationist Materiality

In this chapter, I will define some of the key characteristics and historical concerns of the aesthetics of celluloid. I will begin by addressing theories involving the ontology of celluloid, both considering their merits and questioning some of their assertions. I will also establish the important role that celluloid and its materiality has played specifically within the realm of experimental film. I will then focus on a case study - the Criterion releases By Brakhage

Volumes One and Two, which feature a digital presentation of Brakhage’s material specific

celluloid films. As such, I believe the releases exhibit elements of one of the performative materialities previously mentioned in my introduction, namely Preservationist Materiality. The case study will allow me to more clearly identify some of the key characteristics of this

materiality.

Since its publishing in 2009, Giovanna Fossati’s From Grain to Pixel has become an integral work for identifying a range of concerns in the use of digital for the preservation and

presentation of moving image material. A significant concern of Fossati throughout the book involves the nature of celluloid and the effects of the digital on its ontology, as when she claims, “From this perspective, this work addresses the question of whether the ongoing transition in film technology and practice is introducing fundamental change in the nature of film, and specifically focuses on how it could affect the present and future role of film archives”34. The “fundamental nature” of film is of particular importance here, as it suggests that there are certain material characteristics inherent to celluloid as a medium, characteristics which many

experimental artists have sought to employ towards artistic ends.

In order to further illuminate this claim, I believe it is necessary here to further identify and describe some of these key material characteristics inherent to celluloid. Though there are many types of celluloid that vary in their chemical specificities, a safety sheet from the Kodak company succinctly summarizes celluloid’s basic composition as follows: “Film is made up of layers, and it’s the combination of the layers that give each film its character. Motion picture film consists of a transparent support film base, a light-sensitive emulsion, and a number of

34

(16)

layers coated on both sides”35. The safety sheet continues on to identify the most emulsion layer of celluloid as being the most important element, noting that “emulsion is made by dissolving silver bullion in nitric acid to form silver-nitrate crystals. These crystals are dissolved and mixed with other chemicals to form silver-hallide grains, and then suspended in the gelatin emulsion coating”36. As the description makes clear, celluloid is an object with a dense chemical structure. The very chemical nature of celluloid has allowed many artists to experiment with various elements of its make-up in order to produce a wide range of effects. For example, some experimental filmmakers have used elements like coffee, lemon juice or other acidic liquids during the processing phase to produce images with unpredictable color schemes. Other artists have used bleach to degrade or distort images that have already been processed. Yet while its chemical composition is fairly straightforward, since cinema’s birth and pubescent development the ontology of film has been a subject for debate and theorizing. Peter Wollen identifies André Bazin as the most influential early theorist to interrogate the nature of celluloid, highlighting that for Bazin, “the ontology of the photographic image was inseparable from the ontology of its model, even that it was identical to it. By natural optical and photo-chemical processes, the being of the pro-filmic event (the objects within the camera's field of vision) was transferred to the being of the film itself”37.

For many avant-garde film artists, this was and remains an important conceptual point. Wollen also asserts that, “Bazin's approach to the cinema ran up against two difficult problems, that of fiction and that of interiority - problems which the novel seemed much more advanced in solving than the cinema”38. Interiority here refers to the “mental landscape”39, i.e. how to depict what goes on inside the human mind. The challenge of depicting and revealing interiority with the material of celluloid would prove to be a fertile creative ground for experimental filmmakers to delve into. For founding American experimental filmmakers like Maya Deren, the chemical processes that altered the material of the filmstrip carried certain poetic and even mystical connotations that were absolutely necessary to the experience her films provoked. Reading

35_{"How Film Makes Images." Kodak. Accessed June 20, 2015.}

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat_en_motion_newsletters_filmEss_04_How-film-makes-image.pdf.

36_Ibid.

37_{Wollen, Peter. "‘Ontology’ and ‘Materialism’ in Film". Screen 17.1 (1976): 7.} 38

Ibid. 9.

39

Horton, Justin. “Mental Landscapes: Bazin, Deleuze, and Neorealism (Then and Now)”. Cinema Journal, No. 2, 2013: 23-45.

(17)

through her writings like those in Maya Deren: Notes, Letters, Essays (Film Culture, 1965), one can find Deren repeatedly emphasizing the material nature of celluloid as a unique medium for certain forms of artistic expression untranslatable to other contexts. As the experimental film movement progressed, concerns about the material nature of film became more dominantly associated within that realm.

As Wollen recounts, “The immediate point we must note is that the concern for ontology has clearly shifted from the mainstream, which Bazin represented, to the avant-garde”40. A diverse range of artists like Peter Kubelka, Stan Brakhage, Michael Snow, Carolee Schneemann and many more began making films attempting to further push the boundaries and qualities related to celluloid41. Regina Cornwell situates this phenomenon within a larger art-historical context, pointing out that, “Of the fairly recent avant-garde, most of the filmmakers are or have been involved in the other arts as well. And the concerns and problems of the larger avant-garde art context are shared by them and brought to bear in film, which is examined on its own

terms”42. What these notions again underline is that the material medium of celluloid has a set of inherent characteristics, characteristics that a discerning artist can utilize in order to create a wholly individual work of art. Like the types of oil or pastels a painter would elect to use in the creation of their painting, experimental filmmakers chose celluloid with certain densities of grain or celluloid with chemical properties that would create specific effects when exposed to varying types of light or other elements, such as rain or dirt. For example, for his 1997 film Zillateral, Jürgen Reble buried a 16mm print in a densely forested garden for several months43. In both the instances, the medium-specific characteristics that the artist/filmmaker exploits in the creation of the work are integral to the viewing experience of the final product.

It must be acknowledged though that one can identify romantic and territorial undercurrents running through this position. As Noël Carroll believes, “Medium specificity arguments are attractive for the purpose of transforming a new medium into a new artform, because they appear to provide a way of individuating arts and, thereby, isolating new ones”44. From the beginning, experimental filmmakers have been marginalized both within the film

40

Ibid. 10.

41_{However, these artists were not the first to attempt such an endeavor. For example, artists like Man Ray pursued}

similar avenues with celluloid in the 1920s.

42_{Cornwell, Regina.“Some Formalist Tendencies in the Current American Avant-Garde Film”. Studio International}

no. 948,1972: 62.

43

Reble, Jürgen. "Rumpelstilzchen." Reble/Films. Accessed June 20, 2015. http://www.filmalchemist.de/films.html.

(18)

industry and in the larger art world. Critics and audiences, who mainly saw film as disposable entertainment, frequently met the efforts of experimental filmmakers with a dismissive attitude. Therefore, many experimental filmmakers spent a considerable amount of time and energy to establish their pursuits as a legitimate art, one that deserved attention and respect. This effort is evident even as early as the 1920s, especially in the writings of filmmakers like Germaine Dulac, Abel Gance and Jean Epstein45. Carroll is critical of this view, believing that it is illusory and limiting.

I believe these principals also partly play a role in the affective experience of celluloid. For many cinephiles, the romantic concept of celluloid as something “magic”, something ineffable and whose essence is ultimately indescribable, bears weight46. Likewise, celluloid as physical object that, like our bodies and our minds, is subject to the effects of time, effects that we can see with our own eyes, is a potent sentiment. Experimental filmmaker and founder of Re:Voir Pip Chodorov endorses these thoughts when he writes:

When I film an event on 8mm or 16mm…the emulsion is physically altered on a molecular level on the film strip, the developing chemicals transform these into opacity and transparency, the projector's light is again physically altered by this opacity and transparency, and the light that hits the screen and bounces into my retina is physically affecting…47.

Chodorov’s statement enthusiastically seizes upon the tangible aspects of the process, and though there is a clear poetic link being made, Chodorov is careful in attempting to ground it in biological processes like the phi phenomenon (the illusion of seeing separate images as

continuous when they quickly follow one another), as when he writes that, “There is a direct, physical connection between the original event - the flower, the sunrise, the smile - and the here and now of watching it, my brain stimulus, invigorated by the flicker which produces the phi phenomenon, transforming the rapid slide show into motion”48.

45_{For instance, see Epstein’s writings in Jean Epstein Critical Essays and New Translations (Amsterdam:}

Amsterdam University Press, 2012) or Richard Abel’s French Cinema: The First Wave, 1915-1929 (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1987).

46_{For example, see Quentin Tarantino’s statement:}

https://www.facebook.com/savethefilmlegacy/posts/956681784357089

47

Chodorov, Pip. “canyon in the news (bad news dept)”. Message posted to frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com. Archived at https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/2012-February/006910.html .

(19)

While I do believe some of the more intangible aspects of celluloid carry weight and play a significant role in arguments about concerning the “original” like Giovanna Fossati’s Film as Original framework, it is possible to point to many inconsistencies in these sorts of arguments. For instance, when dealing with experimental films that highlight specific aspects of celluloid, such arguments are somewhat undercut by the fact that often times the original shooting stock and the stock that eventually passes through the projector are not one and the same. Film that has been painted on, scratched or chemically altered frequently cannot pass through a projector without risking the destruction of both the filmstrip and the projector. In order to avoid this, equipment like the contact printer is often used to make a copy of the original filmstrip onto a print that can safely be projected. For example, the original celluloid that artist Carolee Schneemann worked on for her seminal work Fuses (US, 1965) was so heavily altered that it necessitated copying in order to be projected at all49. In these instances, the material properties of the celluloid being projected already differ from that of the original celluloid. This point is important to recognize when arguing for the appropriateness of digital formats for the display of these sorts of works, as it acknowledges that the conceptual break with the original by necessity has taken place for many years even purely within the realm of celluloid. On the other hand there are a few notable exceptions to this principle, like Luther Price, who frequently projects the originally altered filmstrip with the knowledge that at any moment either the film or the projector could be ruined.

Yet by and large experimental filmmakers adopt the copying as a necessary step in the process. Some experimental filmmakers have even examined the necessary step of copying as a focus for an entire film. In J.J. Murphy’s Print Generation (1974), a short piece of film is reprinted through the use of an optical printer over fifty-times, eventually creating an image that registers as entirely abstract. Scott MacDonald, an academic who has written extensively about avant-garde film, writes that Murphy, “experienced, and watched other filmmakers experience, the trauma of having a laboratory make a print of a film and discovering that the result was significantly different than the original”50. The use of the word trauma in relation to the resulting image indicates the considerable impact this process of copying has. It also serves to

49_{"Carolee Schneemann - Remains to Be Seen: New and Restored Films and Videos." Time Out New York. October}

25, 2007. Accessed June 21, 2015. http://www.timeout.com/newyork/things-to-do/carolee-schneemann-remains-to-be-seen-new-and-restored-films-and-videos-with-video.

50

MacDonald, Scott. Avant-garde Film: Motion Studies. Cambridge [England: Cambridge University Press, 1993: 47.

(20)

underline the point that the material, physical link between the original act of filming and the eventual print that is seen by audiences is already compromised in some fashion. It is an unavoidable, and, for some, unfortunate reality. However, it also provides room for more

flexibility when considering transference of such films to digital formats, as the shift can be seen as just another itineration of the original unavoidable compromise.

Notions of medium specificity also tie into larger considerations concerning restoration theory. In his book Change Mummified, Philip Rosen offers a particularly precise summary of the development of an axis involving contrasting preservationist and restorationist strategies. Taking a look at modern-day recreations of historical villages like the Old Sturbridge Village in Sturbridge, Massachusetts, Rosen writes about the necessity of visitors conceptually “buying into” the experience. That is, the preserved or restored buildings and objects cannot alone transmit some sort of affective experience. He continues, “It is also an opposition between the abstractly ideal and the concrete, between a priori organicized conceptions of a building and a posteriori respect for what the building is and has been in time – and therefore, we might say, between the building’s hypothetical essence and its actual, historical existence”51. Rosen highlights this concept as part of his larger focus tracing the historical delineation between preservationist and restorationist arguments. These arguments advocate for, on the one side, preserving the various materials that make up a historical site in their original form, as they bear the signs of aging and decay that accurately convey the ongoing passage of time and its

accumulated effects. The other side supports restoring said materials in order to present a more unified “ideal” whole (one that may have never existed in the first place). In the following section, I will attempt to further elaborate on some of the concerns involving this axis, as well as others discussed throughout this chapter, by turning to the Criterion Company releases By

Brakhage Volumes One and Two.

1.1 Case Study -

By Brakhage Volumes One & Two

Stan Brakhage is in many ways an exemplary figure when it comes to emphasizing the unique properties of film as a material object. Over the course of his film career Brakhage made

(21)

over four hundred films varying wildly in length, from a mere ten seconds to over four hours. The Film as Art framework is especially apt in that many of his works feature film frames that he directly applied paint and other similar materials to. So too, it can be argued that he has done more than any other filmmaker in history to depict the interiority that Bazin, discussed in my introduction, found so problematic. Brakhage did so by asserting that his various aesthetic manipulations were direct manifestations of his interior physiological processes. For example, Brakhage, who never shied away from bold statements, occasionally proclaimed that he was, “the most thorough documentary film maker in the world because I document the act of seeing as well as everything that the light brings me”52. Furthermore, he was one of the medium’s most outspoken advocates, often engaging in heated arguments with audience members about the physical characteristics of celluloid and its importance to his films53. Annette Michelson likewise saw Brakhage as the central hub for experimental filmmaking’s focus on celluloid’s materiality, affirming that, “Brakhage's insistence upon the materiality of the filmic support, the filmic filtering of light, his revision of sound-image relation, his subversion of the space in which narrative takes place, initiate the development of that detailed critique of illusionism which marks the passage from cinema to film”54. In this quote Michelson reinforces several of the arguments I have made thus far, noting that the narrative that takes precedence in mainstream filmmaking is supplanted by the exploration of celluloid’s unique attributes.

Despite Brakhage’s essentialist artistic pursuits involving celluloid, a sizeable portion of his massive filmography has undergone digital transfer for commercial home releases. Most notable among these are the DVD, and subsequent Blu-ray packages, offered by the Criterion Company. The first release, entitled By Brakhage Volume One (2003), included over twenty-five films dating 1954 to 2001 and was available in DVD format only55. Nearly eight years later, a second release entitled By Brakhage Volume Two (2010) was made which included nearly thirty films dating from 1955 to 2003 on Blu-ray. Additionally, the original Volume One was upgraded to Blu-ray format. The works included in these two volumes feature a wide variety of material

52_{Grauer, Victor. "Brakhage and the Theory of Montage". Millennium Film Journal 32/33, 1998: 105-129.}

53_{For examples of this, see his many audience interviews at the Millennium Film Workshop collected in Millennium}

Film Journal Nos. 47/48/49: Brakhage at Millennium.

54

Michelson, Annette. “Paul Sharits and the Critique of lllusionism: an Introduction," Projected Images. Minneapolis: Walker Art Center, 1974: 23.

(22)

effects carried out on the celluloid including scratching (Window Water Baby Moving, 1959), baking (Dog Star Man, 1961-1964), pasting (Mothlight, 1963) and painting (Stellar, 1993).

Moving beyond this general information, I will now look at some of the specific features of these releases that I believe characterize one of the forms of performative materiality

mentioned in my introduction that I have labeled Preservationist Materiality. In an essay included in a booklet accompanying the Blu-ray releases of Volumes One and Two, Academy archivist and scholar Mark Toscano, who has carried out multiple restorations of Brakhage’s works on celluloid and oversaw the digital transfer, writes that:

Brakhage’s films are not about surface perfection or cleanliness…no cleanup or image processing of any kind was performed…this process emulated the practices I’ve employed in film, duplicating the films to prolong their life, but only with as deep an understanding as possible of how they function aesthetically, technically, and even conceptually56.

Toscano’s statement reveals several insights about the methods and objectives of the undertaking, starting with the lack of digital intervention in the “cleaning up” of the image. The use of digital software to remove marks or scratches is a common practice in the realm of narrative filmmaking. As Fossati notes, “In the last few years, film archives have resorted to digital restoration more and more frequently”57. This includes “elimination of scratches, elimination of so-called dust (i.e. any type of small stain extraneous to the image content), stabilization of images, and de-flickering”58. Despite this trend, Toscano’s statement implies a desire on behalf of those involved to respect a Film as Art approach by attempting to remain consistent with the visual aesthetic of Brakhage’s oeuvre, an aesthetic which favored the sort of surface imperfection detailed above.

Furthermore, the statement can be read as an admission on the part of someone who has spent a great deal of time working on restoring films of this nature of the ability of digital technologies to transmit aesthetic, technical and conceptual attributes that productively simulate the works in their celluloid form. Toscano also admits that, “although some of these films exist in their final form as actual painted pieces of celluloid, the majority were finalized via some form

56_{Toscano, Mark. “The Hair in the Gate: Preserving Brakhage”. By Brakhage An Anthology, Volume Two. New}

York: Criterion, 2010. Print: 38.

57

Fossati, Giovanna. From Grain to Pixel the Archival Life of Film in Transition. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009, 81.

(23)

of rephotography[…]For the films, the ‘original’ of the finished film is no longer the painted source material but the result rephotographed film”59. As has been previously discussed, the conceptual compromise made from the beginning eases the tension of the format shift and makes the transfer yet another link in the chain, one that still bears the traces of the material specificities of celluloid. Thus, one of the benefits of the performative materiality of the digital image is that it can be employed to closely simulate the visual characteristics of the celluloid version, as was done in the two Brakhage volumes. This can partly be explained through a “mind/film”

approach, which Fossati states, “shifts the focus from the relation between reality and material film artifact, the photographic reproduction on film, to the relation between film and the

viewer”60. For example, visual characteristics of Brakhage’s films on celluloid such as scratches or other surface marks remain in these digital versions. Because of the ultimate relationship between the image and the mind of the viewer, in addition to the similarity of the appearance of the marks, notions involving time, decay and physicality that such surface marks are often employed on celluloid to provoke can still be gleaned from the works in their digital form.

In addition to the similar visual characteristics, the By Brakhage releases also recall the materiality of celluloid through the grouping of the films on the menus for each disc. According to Marilyn Brakhage, writing on how she went about the grouping process, she “wished simply to offer further openings into the enormity of Brakhage’s accomplishment, and to allow viewers to follow some of the evolutions in form and interrelated thematic concerns” 61. The “evolutions in form” is of notable interest, as it reveals an attempt to highlight the way in which Brakhage’s alterations to the material surface of the celluloid developed over time. By grouping the films on both By Brakhage volumes chronologically, the viewer is encouraged to pay close attention to the way certain material techniques shift throughout Brakhage’s oeuvre. For example, by watching the latter half of the second disc of By Brakhage Volume One, which features an array of hand-painted films, a viewer can see the way certain painting techniques were introduced and eventually expanded on in later films. These groupings also directly echo those Marilyn

Brakhage has made for the films in their celluloid versions through distribution outlets such as

59_{Toscano, Mark. “The Hair in the Gate: Preserving Brakhage”. By Brakhage An Anthology, Volume Two. New}

York: Criterion, 2010. Print: 40-41.

61

Brakhage, Marilyn. “Some Notes on the Selection of Titles For By Brakhage: An Anthology, Volume Two”. By

(24)

Canyon Cinema62. The focus on this range of material methods is further amplified by both the brief audio snippets that can be played before viewing the films and the longer interviews with Brakhage included as extras. Each of these often feature Brakhage offering insights into his practices and recalling his various experiences with celluloid. In taking such an approach to the

By Brakhage releases, those involved respect the constantly evolving relationship Brakhage had

with celluloid materiality while also reinforcing the idea of Brakhage as a singular auteur. With all of the aforementioned in mind, one might take as an individually representative example Brakhage’s 1967 film 23rd Psalm Branch, included on By Brakhage Volume Two. On

celluloid, 23rd Psalm Branch is split up into two parts, each running approximately thirty

minutes, and this division is maintained on the disc. On celluloid, 23rd Psalm Branch features

“very frequent and heavy splicing, short bursts of colored leader and decades-old newsreel footage, painting, and even adhesive graphic patterns”63, and all of these effects remain visually present in the Preservationist Materiality of the digitized versions (see figures 1-2). These

effects are often employed to impart a sense of chaos and inner turmoil, and, as per the mind/film approach, this continues to be apparent in the digital versions. Furthermore, the argument might be made that because digital technology allows for the pausing of individual frames at any moment the viewer chooses, the By Brakhage releases allow for a more thorough examination, and subsequent appreciation, of such visual effects. Likewise, the performative aspect of the materiality manifests in the initial presentation of the work and how it is grouped with other films. 23rd Psalm Branch is included on the first disc within a group entitled “Program 1:

1955-1967”. The other works in the group are The Wonder Ring (1955), The Dead (1960) and Two:

Creeley/McClure (1965). When played together, it is possible to note the development of

stylistic tendencies amongst the works, and the juxtaposition of certain themes and

preoccupations. For example, the lighter tone of the Wonder Ring contrasts with the darker tone of The Dead and 23rd Psalm Branch. Similarly, the intimacy of Two: Creeley/McClure is

divergent from the wider scope of 23rd Psalm Branch. When 23rd Psalm Branch is individually

selected from the menu, a new screen appears with contextual information about the film (see figure 3). This includes a note from Brakhage that reads, “A study of war, created in the

62

See http://canyoncinema.com/clients/curated-programs/stan-brakhage-curated-programs/

(25)

imagination in the wake of newsreel death and destruction”64, as well as a short biographical description. The biographical description explicitly mentions the original 8mm format, and as such reminds the viewer of the original celluloid version. The screen is further supplemented with individual frames from the film, again recalling the celluloid frame. Each of these aspects point towards an approach that seeks to preserve elements of the celluloid experience in a digital form, which is why I believe these releases embody the type of materiality I have labeled

Preservationist Materiality.

Figures 1-2. Frames from By Brakhage Volume Two version of 23rd Psalm Branch

exhibiting material effects such as a visible splice, scratches and “adhesive graphic pattern”65.

64

By Brakhage Volume Two. Blu-ray. Criterion Company. NY: 2010.

(26)

Figure 3. 23rd Psalm Branch menu screen from By Brakhage Volume Two66.

An important correlative to the materiality described above, and one that reaffirms the Film as Art framework, is the close involvement of either the artist him/herself, or, if the filmmaker in question is deceased, the involvement of those with intimate knowledge of the filmmaker’s oeuvre. In the case of the Criterion releases, Brakhage died in 2003, shortly before the release of the first volume. Therefore the Criterion Company authored the releases with the participation of the Academy Film Archive and several of Brakhage’s friends and family

including: his widow Marilyn, film critic Fred Camper, Canadian filmmaker and film theorist R. Bruce Elder, and one of most prominent film theorists of American avant-garde film, P. Adams Sitney. As Andrew Lampert was quoted in my introduction, “original formats and more

educational aspects”67 should be made explicit so as not to encourage viewers to make incorrect assumptions. Each of the aforementioned individuals have studied and written extensively about Brakhage’s filmmaking68, and as such were in a position to both affirm the similarities between the digitized films and their celluloid counterparts and offer further information to contextualize the releases. This includes elements such as Fred Camper’s descriptions of each film included in the accompanying booklets. By providing a context for the digital reproductions, Criterion

66_{Source: Ibid.}

68

For examples, see Fred Camper’s Brakhage website: http://www.fredcamper.com/Film/BrakhageL.html, P. Adams Sitney’s Visionary Film (Oxford University Press, 2003) or Elder’s The Films of Stan Brakhage… (WLU Press, 1999)

(27)

fosters a greater awareness of the celluloid versions whilst suggesting possible points of entry into Brakhage’s extremely large oeuvre for neophytes. Indeed, it is the accessibility of the digitized versions that Marilyn Brakhage highlights in an interview, and while this type of performative materiality is visually faithful to that of celluloid, she ultimately sees a separation between the works on celluloid and their digital translations. She states that the releases were “intended for individual use and home use, and I want people to keep screening films for public events”69.

Additionally, Marilyn revealed that certain works like The Text of Light, a film that employs the interaction between celluloid grain and light in a singular manner, were at first considered for transfer but were eventually abandoned as too many of these visual subtleties were lost in translation70. On a similar note, it should be acknowledged that although the visual experience of this materiality is intended to be close to that of celluloid, unintended evidence of the digital is still apparent at times, especially on the DVD versions of the releases. This

evidence comes largely in the form of artifacts, which are particularly apparent during moments of rapid movement and dense color arrangements. I will describe artifacts in further detail in the following chapter, but for now it is adequate to mention that they are the result of electronic alterations introduced at some point during the digitization process. As technology continues to improve many of these artifacts can likely be avoided, but it remains to be seen whether or not they will ever be completely eliminated. Thinking back to Rosen’s preservation/restoration axis, when an approach which respects the cumulative material effects of time is utilized, as, based on statements like Mark Toscano’s above, appears to be the case with the By Brakhage releases, it is worth considering why the potential addition of such digital artifacts are usually not also

considered in this light. Rather than being embraced as yet another visible marker of the passage of time and history, digital artifacts like these are instead seen as a nuisance. Authors and

restoration specialists Bob Brodsky and Toni Treadway have noted that, “most experimental artists we know have not embraced digital artifacts. Although experimental filmmakers employ myriad [analog] artifacts and accidents in their works, they choose to do so”71. This statement

69_{Brakhage, Marilyn. “Marilyn Brakhage on Stan Brakhage, Interview with Rick Raxlen, October 2005”. Vantage}

Point. Vantage Point, 2008. Web. 2 May 2015.

https://vantagepointmagazine.wordpress.com/2008/01/03/marilyn-brakhage-on-stan-brakhage-interview-with-rick-raxlen-october-2005/.

70

Ibid.

71

Brodsky, Bob and Toni Treadway. “Experimental Film on the Digital Doorstep”. The Moving Image 12, no 1 (2012). 99. Emphasis in original.

(28)

again reinforces notions of auteurism, and in such cases, the visibility of unintentional digital artifacts without the consent of the artist will continue to be a bothersome presence. Therefore as long as digital artifacts are a possibility, filmmakers pursuing this type of Preservationist

Materiality may have to decide on certain priorities. In the case of the By Brakhage releases, I contend the occasional presence of unintentional digital artifacts was likely tolerated in light of the benefits of accessibility. Regardless, I argue the sometimes presence of unwanted digital artifiacts does not devalue the type of performative materiality I have outlined in this chapter. Rather, it argues for the continued development and refinement of technologies relating to this type of Preservationist Materiality while also underlining the value of pursuing more traditional analog archival methods.

1.2: Conclusion

In conclusion, in this chapter I have analyzed several material attributes of celluloid and some of the ways in which these attributes have been employed by experimental filmmakers. While acknowledging the validity of these methods, I have also sought to expand the boundaries of the conversation by mentioning a range of caveats to celluloid absolutism. With those in mind, I continued on to highlight a new type of performative materiality I have labeled Preservationist Materiality, one that I believe is evident in releases like By Brakhage Volumes

One and Two by the Criterion Company. This type of materiality simulates that of its celluloid

counterpart, including smudges, scratches, flares and visible splices, among many other effects, frequently utilized by experimental filmmakers like Brakhage. It also points back to the

materiality of celluloid through the grouping of films to both highlight the evolution of material techniques and to underline common thematic concerns, as well as allowing for greater

accessibility on the part of the viewer. This materiality, in keeping with the importance of the auteur in the Film as Art argument, relies heavily on contributions from either the artist or those close to the artist to both affirm the visual qualities of the reproduction and offer further

contextual information. This is done to ensure that a distinction between the performative materiality of the digital versions and the purely analog materiality of the celluloid versions remains clear. These attributes fulfill the Performative Materiality framework discussed in my introduction, which grants such liberties to be taken. This type of materiality is not intended to

(29)

replace that of celluloid, yet it expands the possibilities for filmmakers to consider when they wish to present some of the characteristics of their works on celluloid in a digital format.

(30)

2.0: Transitional Materiality

In Chapter One, I researched some of the characteristics of the celluloid image and offered several possible lines of consideration towards adopting a more flexible view when it comes to medium specificity. I detailed releases in my case study in which the digital image has been utilized to simulate that of its original celluloid counterpart, whilst remaining cognizant of some of the more performative aspects of the materiality that have manifested themselves in these projects. In Chapter Two, I will examine the realm of the digital and some features that distinguish it from the medium of celluloid. I will continue to elaborate on the Performative Materiality framework, and analyze the way in which it can be adapted to support a range of practices that highlight the properties of the digital beyond that of its ability to resemble celluloid. By doing so, I will provide filmmakers with an even greater set of possibilities to potentially choose from when undertaking the presentation of experimental films that focus on the materiality of celluloid. The case studies chosen for this chapter will involve several DVD releases of American filmmaker Ken Jacobs. Though these releases share some commonalities with the releases in Chapter One’s case study, they differ in that in each instance fealty to the celluloid image is no longer the primary point of focus. Instead, the filmmaker has used the digitization of the celluloid-specific experimental film as an opportunity to maintain some of the visual characteristics of celluloid, while also more overtly highlighting the distinct characteristics of digital that partly make up the resulting Transitional Materiality.

As I attempted to explicate in Chapter One, the visual characteristics of celluloid’s materiality remain to a degree in the digital image. However, while this resemblance is becoming increasingly precise, the digital medium is, on an ontological level, fundamentally different from that of film for many experimental filmmakers. Therefore, it follows that when transferring a work made with a hypersensitivity to celluloid’s inherent properties to a digital format, a format that possesses its own distinct set of characteristics, the nature of the work and the viewing experience it provides inevitably changes. Author/archivist Ray Edmonson takes a particularly intractable view, asserting “Migration to the digital domain ends the connection with the analogue carrier and the associated technology. The content is separated from its physical context and meaning. There is no longer a physical aspect to be experienced…To that extent, the