this session of poses shows Frenhofer twisting MarianneÕs body in long and tortuous positions which convey to the spectator a sense of fatigue and discomfort, to paraphrase Jean Roy.121 The transition from LizÕs voodoo story to MarianneÕs silent suffering is not without significance. The last pose Frenhofer imposes on his model involves her sitting against a bench seat, her arms stretched along the headrests, as if offering herself to a sacrificial rite. As developed by Morrey and Smith, the theme of MarianneÕs skin is representative of the frontier between visible surface and invisible depth. FrenhoferÕs painting activity is not so different from LizÕs voodoo practices. The painter models MarianneÕs body to seek for the secret of incarnation (fig. 3.4.). In fact, to penetrate the metaphysical essence of the universe, Frenhofer can only return to the surface, Ôby endlessly staring at, and sketching MarianneÕs body.Õ122
In La Belle Noiseuse, the incarnation phenomenon differs, to a certain extent, from the one sought in the theatre groups in Out 1. In the former, Rivette tackles the theme of the metamorphosis phenomenon by involving Marianne in an intimate and active collaboration with Frenhofer. In the latter case, Rivette stimulates the metamorphosis through a collective emotional experience (closely linked to the notion of trance) that seeks to establish contact with the unconscious. Either way, Rivette remains loyal to the representation of art as a mode of rebellion, confrontation and, ultimately, dialogue between nature and culture. This final section explores how La Belle Noiseuse proposes to defy the traditional power relation between painter and muse, by ending Frenhofer and MarianneÕs face-to-face in a draw.
3.5. Cinema and painting: the politics of the gaze
As demonstrated through Out 1, theatre captures the crossbreed nature of cinema through the creation of fiction and non-fiction dialectics. The confrontation of cinema with painting poses, in turn, a different challenge. Bazin suggested that the difficulty directors face when dealing with painters comes from the profoundly antagonistic nature of both media. The sequence film progresses according to a geographical and therefore horizontal pace, whereas the pictorial frame detaches itself from temporal
121 Jean Roy, ÔRivette au tableau dÕhonneurÕ, LÕHumanitŽ (May 1991), Accessed May 7, 2015, http://www.humanite.fr/node/22102
122 Morrey and Smith, Jacques Rivette, 219.
reality and only creates effects of time through the dynamics of its plastic composition.123 To prevent the cinematic frame from distorting the experience of painting by, for instance, fragmenting the creative gesture in favour of narrative logic, Rivette undertook a documentary work in collaboration with modern figurative painter Bernard Dufour. Indeed, FrenhoferÕs atelier is constituted of DufourÕs old paintings, made during the 1960s, as well as more recent works which helped Rivette contextualise the artistÕs career and private life. In parallel with the shooting in which Dufour ÔlendsÕ his hand to Michel Piccoli and draws the first sketches of Marianne in one single shot, the painter is also confined to the Ôatelier offÕ. This particular office is none other than the fictional bedroom of Frenhofer in Ch‰teau dÕAssas, which saw the creation of several portraits and nude paintings of both Jane Birkin/Liz and Emmanuelle BŽart/Marianne:
Le 21 mai Rivette et Piccoli viennent au PradiŽ, dans lÕAveyron, mÕobserver, voir lÕatelier. (Cet atelier sera le 27 juin intŽgralement dŽmŽnagŽ et constituera lÕatelier de Frenhofer ˆ Assas, dans une immense grange, reflet de la mienne: jÕy serai chez et je nÕy serai pas chez moi). Ils me posent des questions sur mon travail, sur ma vie de peintre, mon emploi du temps, les mod•les nues. Le jeu du Piccoli-peintre vient de mes rŽponses et de certaines mises en garde.124
More than a shooting, the project of La Belle Noiseuse soon became a site for research, in which the character of Frenhofer is enriched by Bernard DufourÕs personal story. In the absence of a second camera, Rivette asked a photographer to capture DufourÕs slightest activity Ð when the latter was not requested on the film set. DufourÕs creative methods interestingly echo FrenhoferÕs philosophy of painting; his works belong to the new figurative tradition whose aesthetics overthrew the breach between abstraction and figuration. As regards Frenhofer, his aesthetic ideals aim at an Ôabsolute paintingÕ, which is defined by Eigeldinger as Ôun mode de connaissance qui recherche la fusion
123 AndrŽ Bazin, ÔPainting and CinemaÕ, in What is Cinema, Volume 1, trans. Hugh Gray (London:
University of California Press, 2005), 165.
124 ÔOn May 21st, Rivette and Piccoli come to observe me at PradiŽ, in my atelier, located in the Aveyron.
(On June 27th, this atelier will be integrally moved to Assas and become FrenhoferÕs studio, in an immense barn, similar to mine: I will feel at home and as a foreigner all at once). They ask me questions about my work, my life as a painter, my timetable, and the nude models. PiccoliÕs performance comes from the answers and warnings I gave themÕ [My translation, ZTZ]. See Bernard Dufour, ÔQuestions au peintreÕ, Cahiers du cinŽma 447 (September 1991): 26.
de la cause et de lÕeffetÕ.125 Inspired by the sorcerers of the ancient Orient who practiced the science of magism, Frenhofer envisions painting as the only way to reach complete knowledge of the principles ruling the universe. If wizardry aims to discover the enigma of cosmos, FrenhoferÕs paintings intend to express the beauty of GodÕs creation. In order to express pure beauty, Balzac offers no other alternative than intellectual mediation. For this reason, the process of painting surrounding La Belle Noiseuse begins with the idea and ends up in a result very close to abstraction. FrenhoferÕs excessive emphasis on the theoretical aspect of what painting should do gives way, nonetheless, to infinite doubts and uncertainties at the time of creative action. The abundance of science is precisely what jeopardises FrenhoferÕs capacity to paint. Balzac describes his masterpiece as a chaos of colours and lines, which blurs the borders between the conceptual and the representational, and foreshadowes, as such, the aesthetic tendencies of the works of Dufour, but also Jean Fautrier, Willem de Kooning and Francis Bacon.
FrenhoferÕs desire for synthesis is indeed present in DufourÕs sketches, which he creates with different painting utensils: the sharp, dry and precise lines of the traditional dip pen contrast with the thick wet traces left by the large brush. This last technique places great importance to contingency since the surface of the sketch is partially soaked in the moistened paint. RivetteÕs obstinate emphasis on framing the diverse phases that precede the completion of La Belle Noiseuse could be read as a hint at BalzacÕs hard work when writing La comŽdie humaine. As a matter of fact, Rivette gave importance to the framing of the painterÕs hand, which becomes the very incarnation of the artistÕs thought. The hand, to quote Balzac, Ôtrahit tout ˆ la fois les secrets du corps et ceux de la pensŽeÕ.126 In Physiologie du mariage (1829), Balzac dedicates an entire page to the hand, which he considers as the artistÕs main working instrument. Its description alternates between moments of physiological observations and allegorical images. The hand is conceived as the passage between theorisation and realisation: it is an act of synthesis. To master the art of painting, the artist needs, therefore, to maintain and persevere with his working efforts, as demonstrated through the unedited framing of real-time drawings and paintings in RivetteÕs four-hour long film. Additionally, the
125 Ôa mode of knowledge which seeks the fusion between cause and effectÕ [My translation, ZTZ]. See Eigeldinder, La philosophie de lÕart chez Balzac, 59Ð60.
126 Ôbetrays the secrets of both body and mindÕ[My translation, ZTZ]. HonorŽ de Balzac, Physiologie du mariage ou MŽditations de philosophie Žclectique sur le bonheur et le malheur conjugal (Paris:
Charpentier, 1847), 214.
Balzacian artist requires a space outside social, political, sentimental and leisure activities.127 Unlike Henri-Georges ClouzotÕs Le myst•re Picasso (1956), which shields Picasso from any dramatic setting that is not the moment of artistic creation, La Belle Noiseuse emphasises the division between FrenhoferÕs atelier and the rest of the property. Contrary to the studio, which in MarianneÕs words Ôlooks like a ChurchÕ, Le Ch‰teau dÕAssas is dominated by nature. The castle is made up of French windows which open on to the garden and give great luminosity. The contrast between the brightness of the French Southern environment, reminiscent of Paul CŽzanneÕs landscapes, and the more obscure and private space of creation, reinforces the romantic association of the artist with a marginalised and solitary character.128 In fact, in Le chef-dÕoeuvre inconnu, Balzac compares Frenhofer with the legendary figure of Rembrandt:
ÔVous eussiez dit une toile de Rembrandt marchant silencieusement et sans cadre dans la noire atmosph•re que sÕest appropriŽ ce grand peintreÕ.129 Allusions to Rembrandt were, in the first half of the nineteenth century, far from being an uncommon literary instance. As developed by Anne Chalard-Fillaudeau, the nineteenth century not only rehabilitated the figure of Rembrandt through extensive research, critical debates and European exhibitions, but also erected the Dutch painter as subject of reference, inspiration, allegory and illustration in the fields of German philosophy (Hegel, Karl Rosenkranz), popular theatre (the vaudeville Rembrandt ou la vente apr•s dŽc•s [1801], Josh and DumurÕs drama Rembrandt: Drame en cinq actes et neuf tableaux [1896]), French literature (Aloysius Bertrand, Hugo, Alexandre Dumas, George Sand, ThŽophile ThorŽ-Burger, ƒmile Zola) and history of art (les fr•res Goncourt).130 Although Rembrandt embodied the myth of the genius painter through the constant association of his working methods with a Ôkind of MagicÕ,131 the aura of mystery surrounding the Master of chiaroscuro was nonetheless stained, since the eighteenth century, with rumours on his venal, heartless and vain nature.132 In La Belle Noiseuse, the role of Michel Piccoli restores the dialectic between the narcissistic, uncompassionate husband
127 Eigeldinger, La philosophie de lÕart chez Balzac, 52.
128To learn about the relation between the Balzacian character Frenhofer and the life and work of Paul CŽzanne see Kear, ÔÒFrenhofer cÕest moiÓ: CŽzanneÕs Nudes and BalzacÕs Le Chef-dÕoeuvre InconnuÕ:
345Ð360.
129 Ôa Rembrandt walking slowly, outside its frame, in the dark atmosphere eternally associated with that great painterÕ. Balzac, Le chef-dÕoeuvre inconnu, 39Ð40.
130 Anne Chalard-Fillaudeau, Rembrandt, lÕartiste au fil des textes. Rembrandt dans la littŽrature et philosophie europŽenne depuis 1669 (Paris: LÕHarmattan, 2004), 108Ð119.
131 Chalard-Fillaudeau, Rembrandt, lÕartiste au fil des textes, 40Ð41.
132 Ibid., 288Ð289.
and the passionate yet humble painter, who bows before the supremacy of nature. To accentuate this personality trait, Rivette not only develops and extends FrenhoferÕs family and sentimental background through the introduction of Liz, but also focuses on representing the emotional tension between the figures of painter and model. Again, contrarily to Clouzot, who represents PicassoÕs working methods through the binary relation between painter and canvas, La Belle Noiseuse involves the representation of the triangle relationship that unites the traditionally dominant figure of the painter, the blank canvas, and the source of inspiration, the muse.
Writers and art critics like Rebecca West and Michel Leiris conceptualised the muse as, on the one hand, the personification of life, beauty and nature, and, on the other hand, as this ÔotherÕ defiant entity that the painter must face and tame. The latter has in turn been compared with the mythical image of the centaur, the minotaure and with the symbol of the conquering torero.133 In his representations of Le chef-dÕoeuvre inconnu, Picasso centred on imagining and illustrating the face-to-face encounter between Frenhofer and Gilette by reflecting on the distance and contact point which separates (and eventually unites) the painter with the model. The theme of nudity (as expressed by CŽzanne and, later on, Picasso in homage to BalzacÕs novella), poses nonetheless another sort of problem when meeting the voyeuristic character of narrative cinema. By its very photographic mechanism, cinema reinforces the impression of reality and stimulates emotional identification through the analogical connection between camera angle and spectatorial gaze.134 As Rivette observed in his renowned critique of Gillo PontecorvoÕs Kap˜ (1960), filmmakers are ethically responsible for every viewing angle they select and subsequently screen. The cinematic frame not only conveys the authorÕs political position, but also becomes object of judgment on the part of the spectator.135 In this sense, the cinematic representation of FrenhoferÕs painting process presents two major risks: the filmmaker could either falsify the painterÕs mechanism of creativity in order to conform to narrative unity and time restrictions, or he could choose to represent Marianne as a passive sexual object. Both concerns, as we shall see, are matters of morality.
133 Murielle Gagnebin, LÕirreprŽsentable ou les silences de lÕoeuvre (Paris: Puf ƒcriture, 1984), 113Ð114.
134 Jan Campbell, Film and Cinema Spectatorship: Melodrama and Mimesis (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005), 180.
135 Jacques Rivette, ÔDe lÕabjectionÕ, Cahiers du cinŽma 120 (June 1961): 54.
RivetteÕs camera submits to a ÔmoralÕ distance which prevents any trickery from intruding the creative act and thereby remains faithful to Bazin. Like Le myst•re Picasso, the shooting schedule of La Belle Noiseuse follows a chronological order:
On a tournŽ dÕabord quinze jours, en gros, ce qui correspond ˆ la premi•re heure du film, le prologue, pour faire connaissance les uns avec les autres. Ensuite, on est entrŽs dans lÕatelier o• on a tournŽ chronologiquement tout ce qui sÕy passe, pour avoir cette progression des dessins, des rapports Frenhofer/Marianne, des rapports de Michel tant avec Bernard quÕavec Emmanuelle.136
The alternation of scenes in which Piccoli ÔperformsÕ as a painter and the documentary nature of DufourÕs hand coming into action adds a supplementary spatial dimension to the film, which is none other than that of the painting itself. RivetteÕs camera immerses the spectator in the very own life of the painting by penetrating the virginal unmarked frame (fig. 3.5.). To paraphrase BazinÕs critique of Le myst•re Picasso: DufourÕs drawings Ôexist in time, have their own duration, their own life and sometimes Ð as shown in the end of the film Ð their own deathÕ.137 However, Clouzot decided to accompany PicassoÕs creative act with what Bazin considered as a poorly chosen musical soundtrack, whereas Rivette offers the spectator a rich sensory experience through the amplification of direct sound, such as the nib scratching across the sketchbook, the determined and stringent noise of the fusain on the thick paper, and the clinking of the paintbrush on contact with water. As Morrey and Smith suggested, RivetteÕs use of sound adds a depth of field to the visual image and, consequently, allows the spectator Ôto identify at once both with MarianneÕs being-a-body and with FrenhoferÕs sensual appropriation of this body for his art.Õ138 In fact, the noise of the nib and the charcoal over the paper acts as the binding element between the shot of DufourÕs hand and the reverse shot of Emmanuelle BŽartÕs body. By composing La Belle Noiseuse of nude scenes that occupy nearly half of the screening time, Rivette
136 ÔIt began with fifteen days of shooting, which correspond, roughly, to the first hour of the film, the prologue, which also allowed the cast to know each other. Then, we entered the atelier and we shot everything that was happening chronologically so as to have a real progression of the drawings, of the relationship between Frenhofer and Marianne and MichelÕs relation with both Bernard and
EmmanuelleÕ[My translation, ZTZ]. Jacques Rivette, ÔConfŽrence de presse (extraits): Cannes 1991Õ, Cahiers du cinŽma 445 (June 1991): 34.
137 AndrŽ Bazin, ÔUn film bergsonien: Le myst•re PicassoÕ, in QuÕest-ce que le cinŽma? (Paris: Les ƒditions du Cerf, 2002), 195Ð196.
138 Morrey and Smith, Jacques Rivette, 220.
succeeds in liberating BŽartÕs body from erotic fascination and turns FrenhoferÕs painting scenes into an opportunity to educate the spectatorÕs gaze. To this end, Rivette refuses to fragment MarianneÕs body and builds, instead, a circular path for the camera, which slowly rotates around the modelÕs body and captures her through different angles.
Moreover, RivetteÕs camera movements preserve the same focal length, which place Marianne into perspective and prevent flatness and Ôcut outÕ impressions (the semi close-ups of BŽartÕs face are an exception to the rule). Contrary to the iconic status of women in Hollywood mainstream cinema, whose visual presence, according to Laura Mulvey, Ôfreezes the flow of action in moments of erotic contemplationÕ, Rivette structures the film around a main controlling figure who is none other than Marianne/Gillette. 139
Marianne is in charge of framing the narrative through opening and ending voice-overs. It is Marianne, indeed, who disrupts Frenhofer and LizÕs daily life by gaining entry to their kitchen earlier than scheduled. As a result, Marianne progressively takes control of FrenhoferÕs agenda and draggs him out of his comfort zone. When Frenhofer is about to give up, on the second day, Marianne tells him ÔNo. ThereÕs me. I count tooÕ.140 In BalzacÕs novella, Gillette is not entitled to comment on FrenhoferÕs painting. At this turning point, RivetteÕs film consolidates the idea (already suggested in the first scene) that La Belle Noiseuse is not all about Frenhofer and, by extension, Bernard Dufour. This moment of rebellion in which Marianne regains control over her own body is all the more significant since Rivette, according to BŽart, did not expect this turn of events.141
In the mid-1970s, journalist Jean Delmas wrote that the interest of CŽline et Julie vont en bateau (1974) resided in the directorÕs desire to erect his female protagonists to the rank of subjects.142 Contrary to more popular films like Emmanuelle (1974) or Les valseuses (1974), whose female characters conform to the normative representation of women as sexual objects, an important part of Rivettian heroines do not embody male fantasy. Rather, Guy Austin suggested that it is precisely CŽline and
139 Laura Mulvey, ÔVisual Pleasure and Narrative CinemaÕ, in Film Theory and Criticism, eds. Leo Baudry and Marshall Cohen (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 713Ð714.
140 La Belle Noiseuse, DVD, part two, directed by Jacques Rivette (1991; Artificial Eye, 2009)
141 Antoine de Baecque, ÔEntretien avec Emmanuelle BeartÕ, Cahiers du cinŽma 447 (September 1991):
22.
142 He also stated that CŽline et Julie was, certainly, Ôthe most authentically surrealist film ever madeÕ [My translation, ZTZ]. See Jean Delmas, ÔCŽline et Julie vont en bateau un film de Jacques RivetteÕ, Jeune cinŽma 80 (JulyÐAugust 1974), Accessed October 9, 2015,
http://www.iletaitunefoislecinema.com/critique/2033/celine-et-julie-vont-en-bateau
JulieÕs Ôown fantasies which dynamise and direct the film they inhabitÕ.143 The narrative was indeed co-created between Rivette, the leading female protagonists (Berto, Dominique Labourier, Marie-France Pisier) and the scriptwriter, Eduardo Gregorio.
Ogier, another important character of both CŽline et Julie and Duelle, collaborated many times with Rivette, notably in Le pont du nord and La bande des quatre (1989).
These later films also focused on the trajectories of different groups of women trying to uncover a secret, which, in each case, is held by an indefinable and threatening man.
Hence, Rivette approached the theme of the female quest from various angles: from the perspective of theatre communities, of secret conspiracies, playful fantasies and
Hence, Rivette approached the theme of the female quest from various angles: from the perspective of theatre communities, of secret conspiracies, playful fantasies and