The Board and the Commission (1909-Present): Study of a Language Criterion Through Film Classification
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
N°d’ordre NNT : 2016LYSE2084 THESE de DOCTORAT DE L’UNIVERSITÉ DE LYON Opérée au sein de L’UNIVERSITÉ LUMIÈRE LYON 2 École Doctorale : ED 484 Lettres, Langues, Linguistique et Arts Discipline : Études anglophones Soutenue publiquement (ou à huis clos) le 26 septembre 2016, par : Julie VILLESSECHE The Board and the Commission (1909-present): Study of a language criterion through film classification. Devant le jury composé de : Jean-Rémi LAPAIRE, Professeur des universités, Université Bordeaux 3, Président Kristy Beers FÄGERSTEN, Professeure des universités, Söderstön University, Rapporteure Sue HARRIS, Professeure d’université, University of London, Rapporteure Jim WALKER, Maître de conférences, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Examinateur Jean SOUBRIER, Professeur des université, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Directeur de thèse Thèse The Board and the Commission (1909-present): study of a language criterion through film classification. Julie Villessèche. 2016 Université Lumière Lyon 2 U.F.R des Langues Département d’Etudes du Monde Anglophone Ecole Doctorale 3la CRTT (Centre de Recherche en Terminologie et Traduction) Doctorat en Etudes Anglophones 2 Université Lumière Lyon 2 U.F.R des Langues Département d’Etudes du Monde Anglophone Ecole Doctorale 3la CRTT (Centre de Recherche en Terminologie et Traduction) Doctorat en Etudes Anglophones The Board and the Commission (1909-present): study of a language criterion through film classification. Julie Villessèche. Supervisors: Jean Soubrier, Université Lumière Lyon 2. Jim Walker, Université Lumière Lyon 2. Members of the jury: Kristy Beers Fägersten, Södertörn University, Sweden. Sue Harris, Queen Mary University, United Kingdom. Jean-Rémi Lapaire, Université Bordeaux-Montaigne 3, France. 3 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Now I have written this thesis, I am convinced that it would not have been possible without the support and kindness of people around me. They have allowed me to grow into the researcher-apprentice I have been for the past three years. Thus, firstly, I thank my supervisors for believing such a subject had a chance to flourish into a research, and for trusting me at all times. I also thank my University, and especially my Doctoral School, l’Ed 3la, for giving me the chance to accomplish this thesis, thanks to a doctoral contract; the English department, for letting me teach during two years, and thus, discover the other side of a researcher’s work; and my research laboratory, the CRTT (Centre de Recherche en Terminologie et Traduction), for supporting the projects in which I was involved. I am thankful to Sue Harris, for welcoming me in the Film Studies Department of Queen Mary University (London) for three months and for also accepting to be a rapporteur and member of my jury. My thanks also go to Kristy Beers Fägersten, who agreed as well to be one of my rapporteurs and member of my jury, and to Jean-Rémi Lapaire, for allowing this jury to be complete by his presence. I would like to thank all the people who welcomed me in The National Archives (Kew) and (Pierrefitte-sur-Seine), and at the Municipal archives of Lyon. I would like to personally thank the two members of the BBFC – Jacob (Sorry, for not giving your name) and Edward Lamberti, who gave me access to the film files. It also goes without saying that all this would not have been possible without the help and advice of Jonny Davies (BFI Archives). This work would not have been possible without the kindness of Pierre Chaintreuil and Jean-François Théry, who took time to answer my questions about the work of the Commission. And, of course, I thank Pierre Frank, Claude Brenez, Jean-François Tardy, Barbara Dent and Gauthier Jurgensen, for agreeing to meet me. If this thesis is today of ink and paper, it is also thanks to: - My dear proofreaders, who helped me on short notice, without a dash of complaint: Michaël Gauthier and Adam Renwick. - My lovely sister, for creating the image of the Popcorn Times, and for proofreading my interviews: Oriane Villessèche. 5 - My colleagues and co-organisers of the Sociolinguistics Summer School 7, who have been understanding for my half-presence at the conference. But, if all this is possible today, it is thanks to my parents, sisters and brothers, who have been there for me for three years, who have never doubted me and who have carried me through the most difficult times. 6 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Welcome, dear reader. ............................................................................................... 11 A few words: the main information you will need on this journey… .................. 11 A word of introduction .............................................................................................. 12 Why am I here? ..................................................................................................... 12 Time for questions. ............................................................................................... 16 Establishing a plan ................................................................................................ 19 Part I: Spiderman or spinning a theoretical web. 23 Chapter 1: Falling into the rabbit hole… Delimiting the contours of my analysis. ..................................................................................................................... 24 1.1. The perks and drawbacks of comparison. .................................................. 25 1.2. What does film classification have to do with sociolinguistics? ................ 35 1.3. Translation: when linguistics and film studies match… ............................ 48 Chapter 2: Pardon my French… What is Language for film classification? ............ 54 2.1. What the heck are we talking about? ......................................................... 55 2.2. Bad language = swearing? ......................................................................... 61 2.3. What is the ‘language criterion’? ............................................................... 70 Part II: Doctor Who or recounting the history of film classification. 75 Chapter 3: Following a White Paper Trail. Methodology and the field. ................... 76 3.1 Archives are measured in kilometers. ........................................................ 76 3.2. Archives in methodology: Historical sociolinguistics. .............................. 91 3.3. Completing archives? Interviews. ............................................................ 100 Chapter 4: Becoming national (1909-1970s). ......................................................... 107 4.1. National Control required. ....................................................................... 107 4.2. 1909-1945: Becoming national. ............................................................... 112 4.3. 1945-1980: Re-ajusting to new needs? .................................................... 119 Chapter 5: Keeping credibility alive and breathing (1980s-…) .............................. 128 5.1. Under the 1980s wind: the long road from censorship to classification. ...................................................................................................... 129 5.2. Under the 1990s tempest? ........................................................................ 136 5.3. Facing new threats? (2000-…) ................................................................. 142 8 Part III: Milo James Thatch or exploring a new sociolinguistic area. 147 Chapter 6: Building a language criterion? .............................................................. 148 6.1. Taking exceptions: objection, your honour! ............................................ 149 6.2. The incredible case of the observations on scenarios. ................................ 162 6.3. Methods of work: parting ways................................................................... 176 Chapter 7: Degrees or not degrees… Negotiating the unspeakable? ...................... 180 7.1. Negotiating the linguistic content… 1960s BBFC cases. ........................... 181 7.2. VOSTFR and VF: what disappears through the translation process........... 190 7.3. Negotiating the classifications: linguistic adjustments. .............................. 203 Chapter 8: Deconstructing the language criterion? ................................................. 211 8.1. Counting exercices: the Villain figure. ....................................................... 212 8.2. French classification: when does the language count? ............................... 222 8.3. Status, attitude, risks. .................................................................................. 229 A word of conclusion .............................................................................................. 239 General overview ............................................................................................... 239 And now? ........................................................................................................... 243 Annexes 245 Annex 1: BBFC Reports (1913-31) ........................................................................ 246 Annex 2: Transcriptions .......................................................................................... 269 Annex 3 : Summary in French ................................................................................ 513 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 514 Partie I: Les contours théoriques ...........................................................................