{"id":225,"date":"2003-12-14T00:28:44","date_gmt":"2003-12-14T04:28:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/?p=225"},"modified":"2003-12-14T00:28:44","modified_gmt":"2003-12-14T04:28:44","slug":"comedy-of-innocence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/?p=225","title":{"rendered":"Comedy of Innocence"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Raoul Ruiz&#8217;s <a href=\"http:\/\/www.amazon.com\/exec\/obidos\/ASIN\/B0000C23D4\/dhalgrenstevensh\"><em>Comedy of Innocence<\/em><\/a> is an oddly disturbing film, creepy despite (as well as because of) its great degree of abstraction. In an icily <em>haut-bourgeois<\/em> Parisian home, a 9-year-old boy demands to be taken to the home of a complete stranger, telling his mother (Isabelle Huppert) that this other woman (Jeanne Balibar) is his <em>real<\/em> mother. An odd triangle develops, with the boy as the pivot and seeming instigator of a not-quite-conflict between the two women, equal parts underhanded seduction, implicit menace, and (if this is not an oxymoron, or &#8211; on second thought &#8211; even if it is) understated hysteria. Although Freudian overtones are suggested (the father is absent, on a business trip, while all this happens), and despite a (somewhat surprisingly for Ruiz) more or less coherent explanation of the mystery by the end, this is a film whose enigmas, and unsettling moods, are not so much psychological as ontological. Ruiz&#8217;s long tracking shots, explorations of empty deep space, insistent focusing upon odd details, and occasional defocusings, set against a deliberately over-formal acting style, make everything feel insecure because it is revealed as hollow. But the viewer&#8217;s emotional responses are not so much undermined by what I can only call an anti-revelation, as set curiously adrift.<br \/>\nI can perhaps explain this better by a few comparisons. When Godard calls attention to the fictionality of his films, he is actually affirming social reality as something that exists outside fictive representations; the result of undermining the film&#8217;s &#8220;reality-effect&#8221; is to reinforce the reality of the film <em>as<\/em> a social practice, and as a construction of images and sounds. But when Ruiz undermines <em>his<\/em> film&#8217;s reality-effect, the result is the corrosion, or de-solidification, of any sort of reality, that of the film, and that of the world as well. Again, when Bunuel, for instance, exhibits the hollowness of his bourgeois protagonists, the result is a kind of gleeful liberation into absurdity; Ruiz makes moves which on paper are equally &#8220;surreal,&#8221; but the effect is one of being sucked into metaphysical quicksand, rather than one of subversion and unconscious release through laughter. Ruiz is neither a Godardian constructivist, nor a Bunuelian surrealist, but (I&#8217;m reaching here) a queasily cerebral paradoxicalist, which is something far more unusual.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Raoul Ruiz&#8217;s <a href=\"http:\/\/www.amazon.com\/exec\/obidos\/ASIN\/B0000C23D4\/dhalgrenstevensh\"><em>Comedy of Innocence<\/em><\/a> is an oddly disturbing film, creepy despite (as well as because of) its great degree of abstraction. In an icily <em>haut-bourgeois<\/em> Parisian home, a 9-year-old boy demands to be taken to the home of a complete stranger, telling his mother (Isabelle Huppert) that this other woman (Jeanne Balibar) is his <em>real<\/em> mother. An odd triangle develops, with the boy as the pivot and seeming instigator of a not-quite-conflict between the two women, equal parts underhanded seduction, implicit menace, and (if this is not an oxymoron, or &#8211; on second thought &#8211; even if it is) understated hysteria. Although Freudian overtones are suggested (the father is absent, on a business trip, while all this happens), and despite a (somewhat surprisingly for Ruiz) more or less coherent explanation of the mystery by the end, this is a film whose enigmas, and unsettling moods, are not so much psychological as ontological. Ruiz&#8217;s long tracking shots, explorations of empty deep space, insistent focusing upon odd details, and occasional defocusings, set against a deliberately over-formal acting style, make everything feel insecure because it is revealed as hollow. But the viewer&#8217;s emotional responses are not so much undermined by what I can only call an anti-revelation, as set curiously adrift.<br \/>\nI can perhaps explain this better by a few comparisons. When Godard calls attention to the fictionality of his films, he is actually affirming social reality as something that exists outside fictive representations; the result of undermining the film&#8217;s &#8220;reality-effect&#8221; is to reinforce the reality of the film <em>as<\/em> a social practice, and as a construction of images and sounds. But when Ruiz undermines <em>his<\/em> film&#8217;s reality-effect, the result is the corrosion, or de-solidification, of any sort of reality, that of the film, and that of the world as well. Again, when Bunuel, for instance, exhibits the hollowness of his bourgeois protagonists, the result is a kind of gleeful liberation into absurdity; Ruiz makes moves which on paper are equally &#8220;surreal,&#8221; but the effect is one of being sucked into metaphysical quicksand, rather than one of subversion and unconscious release through laughter. Ruiz is neither a Godardian constructivist, nor a Bunuelian surrealist, but (I&#8217;m reaching here) a queasily cerebral paradoxicalist, which is something far more unusual.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-225","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-film"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=225"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=225"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=225"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=225"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}