The auteur theory

peter wollen
GROUP 3 FILM THEORIES

Autuer
\-tr\ noun
1 : French for author 2 : an artist (as a musician or writer) whose style and practice are distinctive

The auteur theory was developed by a loosely knit group of critics

who wrote for [the French periodical] Cahiers du Cinma and made it the leading film magazine in the world There were special conditions in Paris which made [the rise of auteur theory] possible. First, there was the fact that American films were banned from France under the Vichy government and the German Occupation. Consequently, when they reappeared after the Liberation they came with a forceand an emotional impactwhich was necessarily missing in the Anglo-Saxon countries themselves [This] gave French cinphiles an unmatched perception of the historical dimensions of Hollywood and the careers of individual directors. (Wollen)

Many would define the autuer theory as the theory where the director is the author of the film, but Wollen states that the auteur theory does not limit itself to acclaiming the directore as the main author of the film.

The auteur theory was never elaborated in programmatic terms and could be interpreted and applied on rather broad lines. In time,

owing to the diffuseness of the original

theory, two main schools of auteur critics grew up...

The auteur

&

The metteur stressed styleen andscne mise

en scne works does not go beyond the realm of performance, of transposing into the special complex of cinematic codes and channels a pre-existing text (scenario, book, or play) The meaning of the film exists a priori

Those who insisted on revealing a core of meanings, of thematic motifs

works has a semantic dimension, not purely formal The meaning of the film is constructed a posteriori

Geoffrey Nowell-Smith:
One essential corollary of the theory as it has been developed is the discovery that the defining characteristics of an authors work are not necessarily those which are most readily apparent. The purpose of criticism thus becomes to uncover behind the superficial contrasts of subject and treatment a hard core of basic and often recondite motifs. The pattern formed by these motifs... is what gives an authors work its particular structure, bith defining it internally and distinguishing one body of work from another.

Test case:

Howard Hawks

 Has worked for many years within the Hollywood system Made his first film Road to Glory in 1926 Has only received general critical acclaim for his war time film Sergeant York

Has worked with every genre

His films exhibit the same thematic preoccupations, the same recurring motifs and incidents, the same visual style and tempo. Reducing the genres to two basic types:

Adventure Drama

Crazy Comedy

Homo Hawksanius and the Hawksian World

The highest human emotion is the camaraderie of the exclusive, self-sufficient, all-male group Habituated to danger and living apart from society The groups only internal tensions come when one member lets the other down and must redeem himself by some act of exceptional bravery, or occasionally when too much individualism threatens to disrupt the closeknit circle. The groups security is the first commandment The group members are bound together by rituals Hawks heroes pride themselves on their professionalism. They expect no praise for doing their job. danger fun craziness Hawks kind of men have no place in the world. Excluded from society and exclude the society. Outsiders = Undifferentiated crowd Presence of external society is a constant threat to the Hawksian elite, who retaliate by having fun.

Homo Hawksanius and the Hawksian World

Beside the covert pressure of the crowd outside, there is also an overt force which threatens: woman. Man is womans prey men are equals, whereas there is clear identification between women and the animal world no married life Hawk sees the all-male community as an ultimate regression sex-reversal and role-reversal

Homo Hawksanius and the Hawksian World

dramas - show mastery of man over nature, over woman, over the animal
comedies - show his humiliation, his regression (heroes become victims) - underlying different tales (Hawks different movies) was an archi-tale (repeated motifs)

Homo Hawksanius and the Hawksian World

structuralist criticism - NOT only about perceiving resemblances or repetitions - must also comprehend a system of differences and oppositions - this is so that works can be studied in their universality (what they all have in common) and also in their singularity (what differentiates them from each other)

with Andrew Sarris and Molly Haskell at Moving Image Source. Here are a couple of brief quotes from Schwartzs introduction to the interview: If Howard Hawks didnt exist, auteurist film critics would have had to invent him. He was the epitome of the idiosyncratic, existential artist who worked undercover, disguised as a competent craftsman

with a clean, direct style. Hawks was equal parts entertainer and
intellectual; box office receipts rewarded the former, critical insight revealed the latter. The paradox of Hawks was that he toiled anonymously within the genres and conventions of the Hollywood system yet imbued every film with his distinctive personality and a worldview that valued professionalism and the collaborative spirit above all. "Not coincidentally, these two traits are essential to the filmmaking process, and the connection between Hawkss view of his own professionalism and that of his characters was clear to Andrew Sarris, who anointed the director as a member of the pantheon in his seminal book The American Cinema: Like his heroes, Hawks

has lived a tightrope existence, keeping his footing in a treacherous

industry for more than forty years without surrendering his personal artistry. Just as Sarris explained and confirmed Hawkss stature as a great director, so did the textural richness of Hawkss entertainments confirm Sarriss stature as a great critic, and validate the very premise of auteurism.