-
8. Reflections on the Auteur Theory
- Wayne State University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
213 The status of the“auteur theory” as theory has always been somewhatdubious.ToTruffaut,whoseemstohaveinventedit forthecinema(itishardlynewtothehistoryofcriticism,critics havingonthewholeagreedforseveralcenturiesthatShakespeare istherealauthorofHamlet),itwasrather“auteurpolicy ,”andmeantsimplythatitisworthdistinguishingbetween differentartists(forwhatmoredoestheoncenotoriousremark that Renoir’s worst film is more interesting than Delannoy’s bestamountto?).Itisalsoobviousthatitsusefulnessandinterest existwithinclearlydefinedlimits,namely,thestudio-dominated “commercial”cinemawherethedirectorisanemployee. Thepropositionthat(grantedthesocialandhistoricaldeterminants operativeonanyworkofart)BergmanandFelliniarethe realauthorsofmostoftheirfilmsisuninterestingbecauseselfevident .The“auteurtheory”isofvalueonlywhereitsvalidity ishighlyarguable. Its value may, I think, prove to have been largely historical :whatisvalidinitisalsoobvious,andsimplyneededtobe pointedout.EvenTruffaut’soriginalprincipleisscarcelybeyond question:yes,IthinkTourneurisamoredistinguished artistthanMarkRobson,butthereareanumberofTourneur assignmentsthatIwouldhesitatetoprefertotheleastunappealing ofRobson’s:themostonecouldsayisthatTourneur’s camera-styleshowstasteandreticence,qualitiesthatbecome pallidandtenuousindeedinDaysofGlory,andvanishaltogether inhisEasyLiving.Agreatartist’sfailuresareofteninteresting ,certainly,buttheinterestliesinthelighttheythrow 8 ReflectionsontheAuteurTheory 214 chapter8 onandthecontexttheyprovideforthesuccesses:thatistosay, itisapassinginterest.MyinterestinSergeantYork,forexample ,ceasedwhenIfeltIhadunderstooditsrelationtoHawks’s successfulworks—whichisanotherwayofsaying,whenIhad accountedforitsfailure.IhaveseenRioBravosomethinglike twentytimes,andwouldseeitagaintomorrow;IhaveseenSergeant Yorkthrice,andhavenoparticulardesiretorepeatthe experience.OnecanblameHawksornotforthefailureofSergeant York:either,“thematerialwasuncongenial,Hawkswas ill-at-ease,”or“thefailureofthefilmindicatesclearlyHawks’s limitations.”Bothseemtometrue;itisthelatterthatgivesthe filmitspassinginterest. Itstillseemstometruethatthedirectoristhedecisivedeterminant ofthequalityofthevastmajorityoffilms;butthe statement must be qualified by important corollaries, which mayatfirstappearcontradictions.Thefirstoftheseisthat,the Hollywoodcinemabeinginquestion,thepresenceofagiven “auteur”isnoguaranteeofquality.Itisnot,ofcourse,inanyof thearts;yetThePlumedSerpent(whichItaketobetheworst,at leastthemostactivelybad,ofLawrence’snovels)retainsmany ofthequalitiesofhisbestwork,andthisismorethanonecan countoninthecinema.Thesecondisthatfilmsofexcellence can(veryoccasionally)comeintobeingindependentlyofgreat directors.Thethirdisthat,giventhecomplexdeterminantsat workonaHollywoodfilm,adirector’smost“personal”films, theoneshe“reallywantedtomake,”neednotnecessarilybehis best:TheBeguiledisnotnecessarilysuperiortoMadigan,The Fugitiveisplainlyinferiorto...(younameit!). Rather than pontificate theoretically (a practice to which myreaderswillknowIamlittleaddicted,orindeedsuited),I wantheretoconsiderbrieflyfourfilmswhichstrikemeas,in theirdifferentways,testcasesforthe“auteurtheory,”eachof them,Ithink,excellent,eachdemandingorillustratingthesort ofqualificationsIhavesuggested.Ineachcasetheproblemsof [3.19.56.45] Project MUSE (2024-04-19 18:41 GMT) 215 reflectionsontheauteurtheory authorshipraisedareonlypartlyresolvable. 1:RemembertheNight(1940)wasscriptedbyPrestonSturges anddirectedbyMitchellLeisen.Mostwillagree(giventherespective oeuvres)thatSturgeswasbyfarthemoredistinguished “auteur”;fromtheLeisenfilmsIhaveseenIhavedifficultyin understanding, or feeling any sympathy with, the intermittent attemptstoelevatehimto“auteur”status...