JonathanRosenbaum评《出局》

原标题：Out1anditsdouble首次发行于Carlotta的美版《出局》蓝光碟套装[OrnetteColemanx27;sFreeJazz]causesearachethefirsttimethrough,especiallyforthosenewtoColeman’smusic.Thesecondtime,itscacophonylessensanditscomplexbalancesandcounter-balancesbegintotakeeffect.Thethirdtime,layeruponlayerofpleasingconfigurations—rhythmic,melodic,contrapuntal,tonal—becomesvisible.Thefourthorfifthlistening,oneswimsreadilyalong,abouttenfeetdown,breathingthemusiclikeair.–WhitneyBalliett,“Abstract,”inDinosaursintheMorningIfthereissomethingcomforting—religious,ifyouwant—aboutparanoia,thereisstillalsoanti-paranoia,wherenothingisconnectedtoanything,aconditionnotmanyofuscanbearforlong.–ThomasPynchon,Gravity’sRainbowInthespringof1970,JacquesRivetteshotaboutthirtyhoursofimprovisationwithoverthreedozenactorsin16mm.Outofthismassiveandextremelyopen-endedmaterialemergedtwofilms,bothofwhichcontrivetosubvertthetraditionalmoviegoingexperienceatitsroots.Out1,lastingtwelvehoursandfortyminutes,structuredasaneight-partserial,originallysubtitledNolimetangere,thatwasdesignedforbutrefusedbyFrenchtelevision,wasscreenedpubliclyonlyonce(atLeHavre,9-10September1971),stillinworkprintform.Seventeenandahalfyearslater,attheRotterdamFilmFestivalinFebruary1989,asomewhatre-editedbutnearlyfinishedprintwasscreenedoverseveraldaysforamuchsmalleraudience,includingmyself,andthenintheearly90s,aversionthathadapparentlybeenre-editedsomewhatfurtherbyRivette(includingthedeletionofalengthysequencefeaturingJean-PierreLéaudinthefinalepisode),wasshownatafewfilmfestivalsandonFrenchandGermantelevision,andthisversion,tothebestofmyknowledge,istheonebeingpresentedhere.AsIrecall,nomorethanaboutfiveviewersinRotterdamcaredtowatchtheserialinitsentiretyin1989,andveryfewothersturnedupeventosampleit.ButsucharetheconundrumsofshiftingfashionthatwhentheMuseumoftheMovingImageinNewYork’sQueensscreenedtheserialoveraweekendinlate2006,ticketsweresoldoutwellinadvance,andtheentireeventwasrescheduledthefollowingMarchtoaccommodatetheotherswhowantedtoseeit.(Inthiscase,anappreciativearticleintheSundayNewYorkTimesbyDennisLimclearlyhelped.)Out1:Spectre,whichRivettespentthebetterpartofayeareditingoutofthefirstfilm—running255minutes,orroughlyathirdaslong,andstructuredtoincludeanintermissionhalfwaythrough(aswasRivette’spreviousfeature,the252-minuteL’amourfouin1968)—wasreleasedinParisinearly1974,andtothebestofmyknowledge,isthesameversionthatisincludedinthisrelease.ITheorganizingprincipleadoptedbyRivetteinshootingtherawmaterialofbothfilmswasthenotionofacomplot(plot,conspiracy)derivedfromBalzac’sHistoiredestreize,wherethirteenindividualsoccupyingdifferentsectorsofFrenchsocietyformasecretalliancetoconsolidatetheirpower.Consciouslysettingouttomakeacritiqueoftheconspiratorialzeitgeistofhisfirstfeature,ParisNousAppartient,Rivettealsousedthisprincipletoarrangemeetingsandconfrontationsbetweenhisactors,eachofwhomwasinvitedtoinventandimprovisehisorherowncharacterinrelationtotheoverallintrigue.TheonlywritingdoneaspreparationcamefromRivette’scodirectorSuzanneSchiffmann,whohelpedtoprepareandplottheseparateencounters,andfromRivettehimselfwhenhewrotethreeseparatecodedmessagesinterceptedbyoneofthecharactersthatalludetothecomplotandthe“13”.Paradoxically,ifonecangetpasttherelativetediumofthetheatricalexercises,Out1mightbethemostaccessibleandentertainingofallofRivette’sworks,withthepossibleexceptionofCélineatJulievontenbateau—quiteunlikeSpectre,whichprobablyqualifiesashismostdifficultfilm.(Arguably,thesethreefilmsfeatureRivette’smostinventiveandpleasurableusesofcolor.)ButbecauseofitsinitialrejectionbyFrenchstatetelevisionanditssubsequentlackofavailability,itsreputationhasassumedlegendaryproportions,inflatingnotionsofitsallegeddifficultyduetothelengthofitscombinedepisodes(whichfewviewerswouldeverthinkofapplyingtootherTVserialsandminiseries,especiallythoseinEnglish).SoonafterapiratedversionoftheserialasitwasshownonItalianTVturnedupontheInternet,furnishedwithEnglishsubtitlesprovidedbyamateurfans,EnglishcriticBradStevenswasmovedtowritethefollowinginVideoWatchdog:“Itissurelyevidenceofhowwidelycinemaisstillconsideredasecond-rateartthatoneofitssuprememasterpieceshasbeendeniedtoBritishandAmericanaudiences;ifasimilarsituationexistedwhereliteraturewasconcerned,wewouldonlybeabletoreadEnglishtranslationsofProust’sÀlarecherchedutempsperduintheformofclandestinelycirculatedphotocopies.YetonecanhardlyresistawrysmileupondiscoveringthatOut1,aworkobsessivelyfocusedonconspiracies,hasfinallyachievedwidespreaddistributionthankstowhatmightdescribedasanInternet‘conspiracy’.”ItshouldbenotedthatrepeatedviewingsofOut1andSpectrehelptoclarifynottheir”plots”buttheirseparateformalorganizations.TheanalogysuggestedabovebetweenRivetteandColemanisfarmorerelevant,however,tothenotionofperformance.MuchlikeColeman’sthirty-eight-minuteventureintogroupimprovisationwithsevenothermusicians,Out1‘ssurfaceisdictatedbyaccommodations,combinations,andclashesbroughtaboutbycontrastingstylesof“playing.”ThetexturesrunthegamutfromthepurelycinematicskillsofJean-PierreLéaud(Colin)andJulietBerto(Frédérique)tothestage-boundtechniquesofFrançoiseFabian(Lucie);fromtherelativenervousnessofMichelLonsdale(Thomas)andMicheleMoretti(Lili)totherelativeplacidityofJacquesDoniol-Valcroze(Etienne)andJeanBoise(Warok);fromthereticenceofBulleOgier(Pauline/Emilie)tothegarrulityofBernadetteLafont(Sarah).Mostradicalofallisthesuppositionthat“everything”anactordoesisinteresting,effectivelyabolishingthepremiseonecandiscriminateinaconventionalmannerbetween“good”and“bad”performances,whichisalwayspredicatedonsomefixednotionofthereal.ForColemanasforRivette,thethematicmaterialiskepttoaminimumandmainlyusedasanexpedient—alaunchingpadtopropeleachsoloplayerintoa“statement”ofhisownthatelicitsresponsesfromtheothers.ApartfromthebriefensemblepassageswrittenbyColeman,thereisnocomposerbehindFreeJazz,hencenocomposition;theprimaryroleofColemanasleaderistoassembleplayersandestablishapointofdeparturefortheirimprovising.Rivette’sroleinbothversionsofOut1issimilar,withthecrucialdifferencethatheeditedandrearrangedthematerialafterward,assemblingshotsaswellasplayers.Andtheassemblyisonethatworksagainstthenotionofcontinuity:sustainedmeaning,theprovinceofanauteur,isdeliberatelywithheld—fromtheaudienceaswellastheactors.Consequently,itishardlysurprisingthatthe“13″inbothversionsofOut1neverrevealsitselfasanythingmorethanachimera.Iteventuallybecomesevidentthatthecomplotisapipedreamthatnevergotofftheground,anideaoncediscussedamongthirteenindividualsthatapparentlywentnofurther.Asidefromtheeffortsofcertaincharacters(mainlyThomasandLucie)tokeepitsrealorhypotheticalexistencehidden,andtheattemptsorthreatsofothers(Colin,Frédérique,Pauline/Emilie)to“expose”it,the“13″neveronceassumesarecognizableshape—inthedialogueoronthescreen.Bothfilmsbeginbypretendingtotellusfourseparatestoriesatonce—althoughthebeginningofthefirstandlongerversioncouldperhapsalsobedescribed,withgreateraccuracy,aspresentinguswithfourseparateandalternatingblocksofdocumentarymaterialwithnonarrativeconnectionbetweenthem.WewatchtwotheatregroupsrehearsingplaysattributedtoAeschylus—SevenAgainstThebes(directedbyLili)andPrometheusBound(directedbyThomas),andalsoobserveColinandFrédérique—tworathercrazedandcuriousloners,eachofwhomcontrivestoextractmoneyfromstrangersincafés.(Colinhandsoutcardsdeclaringthathe’sadeaf-mute,andplaysaggressivelyandatonallyonhisharmonicawheneversomeonehesitatestogivehimmoney;Frédérique,whensheisn’thangingoutwithhergayfriendMichel[playedbyherreal-lifegayhusbandatthetime,MichelBerto],usuallystartsbyflirtingand/orinventingstoriesaboutheridentityandbackground.)ForthefirstthreedozenorsoshotsofSpectre—tenofthemblack-and-whitestillsaccompaniedbyanelectronichum–Rivettecutsbetweenthesefourautonomousunits,establishingnoplotconnections.Theonlylinkssetupareoccasionalformalrepetitions:asceneechoedbyasubsequentstill,twopansinseparateshotsofColinandFrédériqueintheirrooms.Evenwithineachunit,manyshotsareeither“toolong”or“tooshort”tobeconventionallytakenasnarrative.Rivetteoftencutsinthemiddleofasentenceoramovement,andthemissingpiecesarenotalwaysrecuperated.Conversely,ashotinwhichColin’sconciergeremindshimtoleavehiskeyendsirrelevantlywithherwalkingawayfromthecameraandsittingdownatatabletowrite.Likesomeofthecrypticstillspunctuatinglaterportionsofthefilm,suchadiversionproposes—withouteversubstantiating—yetanothersupplementaryfiction.Thenalmostmiraculously,13minutesand35secondsintoSpectre—and35minutesand28secondsintothesecondepisodeoftheserial(ormorethantwohoursintotheoverallproceedings)—twoofthefour“plots”arebroughttogether:ColinissuddenlyhandedaslipofpaperbyMarie(HermineKaragheuz),amemberofLili’stheatregroup.Onitistypedaseeminglycodedmessagewhichhesetsouttodecipher,alongwithtwosubsequentmessageshereceives,followingcluesprovidedbyreferencestoLewisCarroll’s“TheHuntingoftheSnark”andBalzac(thelattergracefullyexplicatedbyEricRohmerinacameorole).AndwhenColin’sdeductionseventuallyleadhimtoahippyboutiquecalled“l’Angleduhasard,”the“plot”appreciablythickens:theboutiqueisrunbyPauline,whomwelaterdiscoverisafriendofbothThomasandLili,anothermemberofthecollective;andallthreearemembersofthealleged“13.”Meanwhile,Frédérique,thefourthnarrativestrand,hasbeenmakingsomeunwittingconnectionsofherown.AfterstealinglettersfromtheflatofEtienne(anotheroneofthe“13,”alongwithhiswife,Lucie)forthepurposeofpossibleblackmail,shedonsawigandarrangesameetingwithLucie:anincongruousmatchsuggestingMickeyRooneyinanencounterwithRohmer’sMaud.Then,whenshefailstocollectmoney,sheturnsupattheboutiquetotrythesameploywithPauline.Thissecondencountermarksthefusionofallfour“plots,”andoccursjustbeforetheintermissionofSpectre,althoughitdoesn’toccurintheserialuntilmuchlater,duringthefifthepisode.ItistheonlytimeFrédériqueandColinevercrosspaths(theyaretheonlyimportantcharacterswhonevermeet),andthespectatormaywellfeelatthispointthatsheorheisfinallybeingledoutofchaos.Buttheremainderofthestoryinbothversions,afterdrawingthefourstrandstogethermoretightly,proceedstounravelthemagain;andthefinalhourofSpectreandtheremainingepisodesoftheserialleaveusasmuchinthedarkaswewereatthebeginning.Bythistime,manyofthecharactershavewounduprevealingvarioussecrets–Colin,forinstance,startstalkingabluestreakinoneoftheintermediateepisodes,losinghisdeaf-muteposeforseveralhours—andtheconspiraciesparadoxicallyseemtogrowthickeratthesametimethatbothgroupsstarttodissolve.Eventhoughcertainscenestowardtheenddefyexplanationordecoding—inadialoguebetweenColinandSarahattheendoftheseventhepisode,someofherlinesandoneofhisareliterallyplayedbackwardonthesoundtrack,andFrédériqueintheeighthepisodeiskilledinanobscureintriguewithherrecentlyacquiredloveronarooftopinvolvingduelingpistolsandablackmask(ineffect,anotherromantic19thcenturyfantasythatseemstorhymewithColin’sobsessionwithBalzac)—theoveralldesignandmeaningofOut1becomeincreasinglylucidastheserialunfolds.Bytheend,theparanoidfictionthattheactorshavegeneratedhasalmostcompletelysubsumedthedocumentary,eventhoughtheimpliedconspiracycontinuestoeludetheirgraspaswellasours.Thesuccessivebuildingandshatteringofutopiandreams—theidealisticlegacyofMay1968—arethusreproducedintherisinganddecliningfortunesofallthecharacters,outliningboththepreoccupationsandtheshapeoftheworkasawhole.MuchasfolieàdeuxfigurescentrallyinL’AmourFouandCélineetJulievontenBateau,failedfolieàdeuxgraduallybecomestheveryessenceofbothOutandSpectre.Theinabilityto“connect”revealsitselfaspartandparceloftheincapacitytosustainfictions,afailureregisteringmostpoignantlyintherelationshipofOgierandLéaud,whichbeginswithmutualattractionandendsinestrangement.Ofallthe”two-partinventions”,theirsistherichestinshiftingtensions,andthegrowingriftisbrilliantlyunderlinedbythestagingoftheirscenesintheboutique—particularlywhenthey’restationedinadjoiningroomsonoppositesidesofthescreen,eachvyinginadifferentwayforourattention.Thisspatialtensionreachesitsclimaxintheirlastscenetogether,onthestreet,whenOgierforciblybreaksawayandLéaudmimestheinvisiblebarrierbetweenthembypushingatitinagonizeddesperation,finallywanderinginadiagonaltrajectoryoutoftheframewhileblowingadissonantwailonhisharmonica.IITheidealformofviewingthefilmwouldbeforittobedistributedlikeabookonrecords,as,forexample,withafatnovelofathousandpages.Evenifone’saveryrapidreader—which,asithappens,isn’tmycase—oneneverreadsthebookinonesitting,oneputsitdown,stopsforlunch,etc.Theidealthingwastoseeitintwodays,whichallowedonetogetintoitenoughtofollowit,withthepossibilityofstoppingfourorfivetimes.–RivettedescribingtheserialtoGilbertAdair,“PhantomInterviewersOverRivette,”FilmComment,September-October1974AtleastpartoftheimpressionismyouseeinDurasandStraub(who,bytheway,wastotallyhypnotizedbyascreeningofthethirteen-hourOut)comesfromtheirlow-budgettechniques.Iaimatsomethingalittledifferentinmyrecentfilms;youmightalmostsaythatIamtryingtobringbacktheoldMGMTechnicolor!IeventhinkthatthecolorsofOutwouldpleaseaNatalieKalmus[Hollywoodcolorconsultant1934-49]….–RivettetoJohnHughes,“TheDirectorasPsychoanalyst”(Spring1975),http://www.rouge.com.au/4/hughes.htmlComplotbecomesthemotivationbehindaseriesoftransparentgestures:spectersofactionplayingoveravoid.Wewatchactorsplayingatidentityandmeaningthewaythatchildrendo,withmanyofthegamesleadingtodeadendsorstalemates,someexhaustingthemselvesbeforetheyarriveanywhere,andstillotherscreatingsolidrolesandactionsthatdancebrieflyinthetheaterofthemindbeforedissolvingintosomethingelse.Nothingremainsfixed,andeverythingbecomesominous.RelentlesslyinvestigatedbyColinandblindlyexploitedbyFrédérique,thespecterofthe“13″reactivatestheparanoiaofitswould-bemembers,mainlyincreasingthedistancesbetweenthem.Othercrisesintervene(astrangerrunsoffwiththemoneyofanactorinLili’stheatergroup;Paulinethreatenstopublishtheinterceptedletters);fearbegetsfear;boththeatergroupsdisperse;EmilieandLiliarelastseendrivingofftomeettheperpetuallymissingIgor;andFrédériqueandColinareeachreturnedtotheirisolation.Repeated“empty”shotsofPorted’ItalieinthefinalreelofSpectre—chillingmixturesofOzu-likeemptinesswithLangianterror—embodythisgrowingsenseofvoid,whichultimatelywidenstoswallowupeverythingelseinthefilm.ThedeliveryofthefirstmessagetoColinistotallygratuitous,anactthatisneverexplainedorevenhintedat,andmostoftheother“connections”arebroughtaboutbyequallyexpedientcontrivances.InacountryhouseoccupiedatvarioustimesbySarah,Thomas,Emilie(akaPauline),andLili,Rivetteparodiestheverynotionof“hiddenmeaning”inasubtlerway,bymakingsurethatasinglenondescriptbustwithnoacknowledgedrelationtothe“plot”isvisibleineveryroom.ItevencropsupinthelockedroompossiblyinhabitedbyIgor,Emilie’smissinghusband,aroomsheentersonlyneartheendofthefilm.Obviouslythebustisajoke;butwhyisitthere?Tosuggestacomplot.AndaccordingtothetacticsofOut1,suggestingacomplotisatonceanabsurdityandanecessity:itleadsusnowhereexceptforward–acompulsivemovementthatoftenleadstocomedyintheserialbutmainlyproducesafeelingofanguishinSpectre.Formuchofthepreceding,I’vebeentreatingtheplotsofOut1anditsshortenedandfractured“double”asiftheywereidentical,butinfacttheexperiencesandmeaningsoftheserialandofSpectreareinmanywaysradicallydifferent,astheyweremeanttobe.TheopeningshotofSpectre,forinstance,occursalmostthreehoursintotheserial,andthefinalepisodeoftheseriallargelyconsistsofmaterialmissingfromSpectre.OneofthemorestrikingdifferencesinthelongversionisthatThomas(Lonsdale)emergesasvirtuallythecentralcharacter(whichheclearlyisn’tinSpectre)—notonlybecauseofhisroleinguidinghisgroup’simprovisationsandpsychicself-explorations,butalsobecausehisambiguousroleasaratherinfantilepatriarch,climaxinginhisfallingapartinhislastextendedsequenceonthebeach,becomespivotaltotheoverallmovementoftheplot.Beginningasadocumentarythatisprogressivelyovertakenbyfiction,theserialhasnoprologue,merelyarudimentaryitinerarysetdowninfivesuccessiveintertitles—“StéphaneTchalgadjieffprésente/OUT1/PremierEpisode/deLiliàThomas/Le13avril1970″—followedbyanopeningshotoffiveactorsinabarerehearsalspaceperformingelaboratecalisthenicstogethertothesoundofpercussion.Minusthedate,thesamepatternofintertitleslauncheseveryotherepisode,eachofwhichislabeledasafurtherrelaybetweentwocharacters,beginningineachcasewiththesecondcharacternamedintheprevioussegment.(Inthesixthchapter,therelayisbetweentwoguisesofthesamecharacter,Pauline/Emilie.)Allsevenoftheremainingepisodeshaveprologues,eachofwhichisstructuredsimilarly:15to28blackandwhiteproductionstillsshotbyPierreZuccathatrecapportionsoftheprecedingepisode,accompaniedbythesamepercussionheardinthefirstshotofthefirstepisode,followedbytheoneortwoconcludingshotsoftheprecedingepisodeinblackandwhitethatcarrytheiroriginaldirectsound.Thusthenotionofpreciselinksinachain—betweenoneepisodeandthenext,betweenonecharacterandthenext–ismaintainedthroughoutasastrictlypracticalprincipleaswellasaformalone.Eachblackandwhiteprologueprovidesbothaghostlyabstractionoftheprecedingsegmentasanaidedemémoireandaversionof“thethirteen”(roughly,2x13=26)asacompulsiverearrangementofexistingdatathatmightprovidecertaincluesaboutwhatistocome.Similarly,eachrelay-titlepositsabeginningandanendtothetrajectoryofcharacterswithineachepisodewhileestablishingthateachnewbeginningwasformerlyanendandeachnewendwillformanewbeginning—anotherformofabstraction-as-synopsisthatretracestheactionasifitwereakindofpuzzlethatmightyieldhiddenmeanings.(InSpectre,thesetitlesvanish,buttheblackandwhitestillsarereformulatedatvariousjuncturestoprovidecrypticextensionstoaswellasrecollectivesummariesoftheaction,accompaniedbyadroninghumratherthanpercussion.AsRivettedescribedthissoundandfunctionina1974interview,“Whatwehaveisjustameaninglessfrequency,asifproducedbyamachine,whichinterruptsthefiction—sometimessendingmessagestoit,sometimesinrelationtowhatwe’vealreadyseenoraregoingtosee,andsometimeswithnorelationatall.Becausetherearestillsfromscenes,especiallytowardtheend[ofSpectre],whichdon’tappearinthebodyofthefilmandarefranklyquiteincomprehensible.”)Incontrasttotheserial,Spectremightbesaidtobeginasafictionalnarrativethatisprogressivelyovertakenbydocumentary—thepreciseoppositeofitspredecessor.DespitethefactthatboththeatergroupsareputativelypreparingtoperformplaysascribedtoAeschylus,therearenodeathsatallintheserialapartfromthatofFrédérique,andapparentlynonewhatsoeverinSpectre.(Onecan’tbeentirelysureaboutthemessengerplayedbythefilm’sproducer,StéphaneTchalgadjieff—brainedbyPaulinewithabluntinstrumentbottleinthebackofthehippieboutiquewheresheworks,fornoapparentreason,andneverseenagain.)Moreover,themeaningandimpactofmanyindividualshotsandsequencesaremarkedlydifferent.Colin’seffortstogetanEiffelTowertrinkettoswingbackandforth13times-—aminorgagintheserialthatparodieshismaniceffortstoimposemeaningwherethereisnone,toconvertchanceintodestiny—-becomesthefinalshotofSpectre.Thereitfiguresasanironicmetaphorfortheviewer’sfrustrationintryingtomakesenseoutofthelatterfilm.Afterrepeatedefforts,Colinfinallyconcludes,“Itdidn’twork,”speakingnowforRivetteaswellasthespectator:thephysicalactbecomesmetaphysical.IIIROSENBAUM:WhydidyouchoosethetitleOut?RIVETTE:Becausewedidn’tsucceedinfindingatitle.It’swithoutmeaning.It’sonlyalabel.–“PhantomInterviewersOverRivette,”FilmComment,September-October1974Seenasasinglework,oratleastastwoversionsofthesamework,Out1strikesmeasthegreatestfilmwehaveaboutthecountercultureofthe1960s.IhastentoaddthatunlikealltheAmericanorEnglishexamplesonecouldcite,thereisnothinginOut1abouthallucinogenicdrugs(despitesomeriotouslybright,psychedeliccolors),andasaperiodstatementthatisrelateddirectlytothedisillusionmentthatfollowedthefailedrevolutionofMay1968,itprojectsaspecificallyFrenchzeitgeist.(OnecouldperhapsspeculatethattheCartesianbasisofFrenchthoughtprovidedFrenchculturewithasortofshortcuttothemindsetprovidedbyhallucinogenicdrugsinNorthAmerica,therebydelayingandotherwiselimitingtheirculturalimpact.)ButseenmorebroadlyasanepicreflectionontheutopiandreamsofthecountercultureastheymanifestedthemselvesonbothsidesoftheAtlantic,Out1remainsaninvaluabletouchstone,aboveallinitsperceptionsoftheoptionsposedbetweencollectivityandisolation,themajorthemeofRivette’searlyfeatures.VirtuallyallofOut1canbereadasameditationonthedialecticbetweenvariouscollectiveendeavors(theaterrehearsals,conspiracies,diversecounter-culturalactivities,manifestos)andactivitiesandsituationsgrowingoutofsolitudeandalienation(puzzlesolving,scheming,plotspinning,ultimatelymadness)—theoptions,tosomeextent,oftheFrenchleftduringthelate1960s.Formally,theserialcouldbecalledBazinianandRenoiresqueinitspreferenceforthelongtakeandformiseenscèneindeepfocusovermontageasapurveyorofmeaning,andinthisrespect,theaggressivelyedited,splintered,andLangianSpectreformsastrikingdialecticwithit.Intheserial,thisultimatelyleadstoakindofparodicsummationofBazin’snotionsaboutrealism—aRouch-likepseudo-documentarymiredinfantasy—thatmightbesaidtoundermineBaziniantheoriesmorethansimplyillustratethem.AmajordifferencebetweentheRivette’sserialandthecrimeserialsofFeuillade—accountingfortheirvastdifferenceinpopularappeal,atleasttotheaudiencesoftheirrespectiveperiods—restsinthenotionofastablebasebeneathorbehindallthemachinations.InLesVampires(1915-1916)andTih-Minh(1919),asupremeconfidenceinthefixedgenericidentitiesofheroesandvillainsandinthefixedsocialidentitiesofmastersandservantsmakesallthe“revisions”ofthesecharactersandtheimprovisedspiritoftheirenactmentsaformofplaythatneverthreatenstheirrootfunctionsandidentitiesasnarrativefigures.InOut1,theabsenceofthissocialandartisticconfidence—averitableagnosticismaboutsocietyandfictionalikethatseemstospringfromboththeskepticismofthelate1960sandtheburdenplacedonalltheactorstoimprovise—givesthenarrativeaverydifferentstatus,entailingafrequentslippagefromcharactertoactorandfromfictiontononfiction.Becausenoneofthemasksseemsentirelysecure,thefiction-makingprocessitself—itspleasures,itsdangers,evenitstraps,deadends,andlapses—becomespartoftheoverallsubjectandinterest.(Theissueatstakeisn’tsomuchtheskillofRivette’sactors—whichvariesenormously—astheperfunctorynatureofmanyofthefictionsthattheyembody.)Herethereisnofixedtextbeneaththevariousproliferatingfictionsthatmightguaranteetheirsocialandgenericfunctions;whatonefindsinsteadisaseriesofreferencesandallusions—BalzacandRenoir,AeschylusandLang,DumasandRouch,HugoandFeuillade—thatcanprovideonlytheoreticalpretextsormomentary,unsustainablemodels,aswellasanoverallspiritofdriftandplay.IV:ThreeAfterthoughtsHewholeapsintothevoidowesnoexplanationtothosewhowatch.–JeanLucGodard,reviewingMontparnasse19(1958)1.PerhapsthemostdetailedcomparisonbetweenthetwoseparatetheatergroupsinOut1hasbeenofferedbyCristinaÁlvarezLópezandAdrianMartinintwoseparatevideosandanaccompanyingtextcommissionedbytheMelbourneInternationalFilmFestivalinlate2014aspartofanongoingseriesofaudiovisualessaysandwrittentextsaboutOut1.(KevinB.LeeandIprovidedthesecondvideointhisseries,ÁlvarezLópez/Martinmadethefirstandfourth,DavidHeslinandChrisLuscriprovidedthethird,andLuscrialone,workingwithanaudiointerviewwithTchalgadjieff,producedthefourth.)Thefollowingtwopassagesaredrawnfromanessaypostedinmubi.com/notebookon7August2014toaccompanythefirstofthesevideos,“Paratheatre:PlaysWithoutStages(fromItoIV)”:“ThefactisthatOut1isanextraordinary,synthesizingdocumentofmanyexperimentalmovementsintheater,datingfromtheimmediatepost-warperiodandsurvivingthroughtoourday,inperformanceworkshopsgrandandsmallacrosstheglobe.Althoughsomeofthecommentariesindicate,inpassing,thatRivettedrewupon(throughhisactors)amélangeofinfluencesincludingthePolishtheatreguruJerzyGrotowskiandTheLivingTheatrefromUSA,itisdizzyingtorealizejusthowmanytraditionsandtendenciesarereferencedinthephysicalworkoftheperformersthatRivetterecordswithsuchcare,andatsuchlength.Thefilmislikeanimmensecorridorthroughwhichthehistoryofcontemporary,experimentaltheatrepasses.”“Onegroupusesgesturalandvocalworktoexploreandexpress,inhighlystylizedways,Aeschylus’SevenAgainstThebes;theotherusesaradicalformofimprovisation,nominallybasedonthepretextofAeschylus’PrometheusBound,thatisnotquitepsychodrama(itsaimisnotintheleastbittherapeutic),butcertainlyreachesdowntotherootsofArtaud’sTheatreofCruelty—inthelattercase,thewrittentextslipsfurtherandfurtheraway.Bothgroupsbasetheirworkonthetypesofrigorousexercises(Grotowski’sexercises,psychophysicalexercises,andancientgamessuchasmirroring)thatarecrucial,forinstance,toRichardSchechner’sThePerformanceGroup(whichlaterbecameTheWoosterGroup),whoseproductionofDionysusin’69wasdocumented(insplit-screen)byBrianDePalmain1970.“Bothtroupestalk,analyzeandreviewtheirworkalot—butwhereastheThebesgrouptendtore-workthingspractically(accordingtovariouskindsof‘scores’forvoiceandmovement),thePrometheusgroupismoreintoresearchandself-critique,oncetheyemergefromeach‘trance.’Note,too,thedualorientationofbothgroups:while,inonewayoranother,theyarefullyavant-garde,theyarealsotryingtoplugbackintomythic,sacredsources—therevivaloftheatricalspectacleasritualwhichbothattractedanddisturbedPasolinibytheendofthe1960s.”Basedonmyownlimitedtheatergoingexperienceinthisperiod,Iwouldaddtothisaccountthatsomeofthe“trances”inthePrometheusgroupcloselyresemblecertaininterludesinTheLivingTheatre’sproductionofParadiseNow(whichIattendedatBrooklyn’sAcademyofMusicinthefallof1968,afterthesamegroupandproductiontouredEurope).2.Theeventualknittingtogetheroffourseeminglyautonomousandunrelatednarrativestrands—morecursoryinSpectre,butcentraltotheserial—mightbeseenasthebelatedfulfillmentofaninnovativeaspectofErichvonStroheim’soriginalGreed,runningatalengthofsome40-oddreels,thatiscompletelyabsentfromthereleaseversion.AsI’venotedinmymonographaboutGreed(BFIClassics,1993),anenormousamountofnarrativematerialwasaddedbyStroheimtotheplotofFrankNorris’snovelMcTeague:“Nearlyafifthoftheplot(aquarterofthe[latestversionthatwehave]ofthescript—69outof277manuscriptpages)transpiresbeforeonearrivesatMcTeagueeatinghisSundaydinneratthecarconductors’coffeejoint,thesubjectofthenovel’sopeningsentence.Mac’slifepriortohisarrivalinSanFrancisco,whichtakesupaboutaquarterofthisprologue—overtwenty-fourpagesinthepublishedscript—comprisesanelaborationofonlytwoshortishparagraphsinthenovel.“Abrilliantlydesignedandextendedsequencethatcomesfourpageslaterinthepublishedscript,andencompassesaboutthirtypagesmore,introducesalltheothermajorcharactersinthefilm[includingthreethatareentirelymissingfromthereleaseversion]ona‘typical’Saturday,thedaythatprecedesthenovel’sopening,withoutestablishinganyconnectionsbetweenthemapartfromthefacttheyliveinthesamebuilding.ItseemsentirelyplausiblethatHarryCarr—whodescribedwatchingaforty-five-reel-versionofGreedbetween10:30amand8:30pm—hadthissequenceatleastpartiallyinmindwhenhewroteinMotionPictureMagazine(April1924),“Episodescomealongthatyouthinkhavenobearingonthestory,thentwelveorfourteenreelslater,ithitsyouwithacrash.”3.UndoubtedlythemostsignificantchangebroughtaboutinRivette’sre-editingoftheserialbetween1989andtheearly90swashisdeletionofLéaud’spowerfulclimacticscene,whichisnolongerpartofthefilm.(TheonlyotherchangesI’mawareofinvolvetheorderofcertainsequences.)Thislengthyplan-séquenceoccurredoriginallyjustafteracomparablylengthyscenebetweenBulleOgierandBernadetteLafont.(Infact,thefinalepisodeinitsoriginal,ninety-minuteformshowedallfourofthemajorcharacters—Ogier,Léaud,Berto,andLonsdale—goingtopiecesinaseparateextendedsequence;notraceofanyofthesefoursequencesistobefoundinSpectre.Lonsdale’ssceneisplacedlast,andhisreductionfromdirector-patriarchtoamassofblubberingjellyonabeachseemstobringtheserialfullcirclefromthewordlesshysteriaofhisgroup’sfirstexercise.)Isuspectthatthishair-raisingsequence,whichshowedColinaloneinhisroominastateofhysteriaoscillatingbetweendespairand(morebriefly)exuberance,carriedtoomanysuggestionsofLéaud’ssubsequentreal-lifeemotionaldifficultiesforRivettetofeelcomfortableaboutretainingit.WhenLéaudappearedattheViennalein2013tospeakaboutthefilm,alongwithitsheroicproducerStéphaneTchalgadjieff(whoseotheradventurouscreditsincludeIndiaSong[1975],Rivette’sDuelle,Noroît[both1976],andMerry-Go-Round[1981],Straub-Huillet’sFortini/-Cani[1976],andBresson’sTheDevil,Probably[1977];Out1,moreover,wasthefirstfilmheproduced)andmyself,hedidn’talludetothisdeletion.Butitalsobecameclearthathe’sneverseentheserialinitsentirety;hespokemainlyabouthisearlierfriendshipwithRivetteandtheinfluenceplayedbyNorthAfricanmusiconhisharmonicawails.Basedonmynotestakenatthe1989Rotterdamscreening,themissingsequence,punctuatedbyafewpatchesofblackleader,showedColincrying,screaming,howlinglikeananimal,banginghisheadagainstthewall,bustingaclosetdoor,writhingonthefloor,thencalmingdownandpickinguphisharmonica.Afterthrowingawayallthreeofthesecretmessageshehasbeentryingformostoftheserialtodecode,hestartsplayinghisharmonicaecstatically,throwshisclothesandotherbelongingsoutintothehall,dancesaboutmanically,andthenplaystheharmonicasomemore.Dramaticallyandstructurally,thisrawpieceofpsychodramainevitablysuggestedcertainparallelswiththesequencerelentlesslyrecordingJean-PierreKalfon’sself-lacerationswitharazorinRivette’sL’Amourfou—adisturbingpieceofself-exposureinwhichthefictionalpostulatesofthecharacterseemtocrumbleintogenuinepainanddistress,representinginbothfilmsadangerouscrossingofcertainboundariesintowhatcanonlybeperceivedasmadness.Note:Thisarticledrawsonmaterialfromtwopreviousessays(“WorkandPlayintheHouseofFiction,”SightandSound,Autumn1974,and“Tih-Minh,Out1:OntheNonreceptionofTwoFrenchSerials,”TheVelvetLightTrap,spring1996)andafewotherprevioustexts,mostofthemavailableatjonathanrosenbaum.net