Cinematic Careers in and of Shadows Career-Making Among Cinematographers and Film Editors in the Danish Film Industry Mathieu, Chris; Stjerne, Iben Sandal
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Cinematic Careers in and of Shadows Career-Making among Cinematographers and Film Editors in the Danish Film Industry Mathieu, Chris; Stjerne, Iben Sandal Document Version Final published version Publication date: 2011 License CC BY-NC-ND Citation for published version (APA): Mathieu, C., & Stjerne, I. S. (2011). Cinematic Careers in and of Shadows: Career-Making among Cinematographers and Film Editors in the Danish Film Industry. Department of Organization, Copenhagen Business School. Link to publication in CBS Research Portal General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us ([email protected]) providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 Creativity at Work: Cinematic careers in and of shadows: career-making among cinematographers and film editors in the Danish film industry By Chris Mathieu ([email protected]) & Iben Sandal Stjerne ([email protected]) Department of Organisation, Copenhagen Business School December 2011 Page 1 of 47 Creative Encounters Working Paper # 67 Abstract This chapter analyzes subjective and objective dimensions of developing a career to a large extent based on one or several strong dyadic relationships to directors who invariably overshadow editors and cinematographers, and the personal and professional advantages (maybe even necessity) and dilemmas encountered in this process. We focus on processes of reputation, but above all, association. With regard to association we examine its two-fold dimensions. On the one hand we look at dynamics inherent in the dyadic relationship (relationship-internal dynamics) as these are central to both subjective experience of one’s career (i.e. meaningfulness, quality of working life, ambitions, and accomplishments), as well as its more objective trajectories. Keywords Career coupling, professional collaboration, subjective career, job satisfaction Page 2 of 27 Creative Encounters Working Papers # 67 Cinematic careers in and of shadows: career-making among cinematographers and film editors in the Danish film industry Chris Mathieu & Iben Sandal Stjerne Introduction Only true film enthusiasts would say ’Tonight I’m going to see the new Roger Deakins or Pietro Scalia film’ or ’I wish my local arthouse theatre would do a Sven Nykvist, Vittorio Storaro, Dede Allen or Thelma Schoonmaker retrospective so I could see his or her best camera or editing work on the big screen all in one evening.’1 Though cinematographers and editors can win Oscars and other prestigious prizes, these occupational categories rank definitely behind directors and actors and actresses, and probably behind producers, screenwriters and composers as well, in public name recognition. Despite the lack of public recognition, these occupations are absolutely central to the ’visual cluster’2 in film production, and their incumbents work intimately with the director on (cinematographers) and off (editors) set. This chapter analyzes subjective and objective dimensions of developing a career to a large extent based on one or several strong dyadic relationships to directors who invariably overshadow editors and cinematographers, and the personal and professional advantages (maybe even necessity) and dilemmas encountered in this process. We focus on processes of reputation, but above all, association. With regard to association we examine its two-fold dimensions. On the one hand we look at dynamics inherent in the dyadic relationship (relationship-internal dynamics) as these are central to both 1 To make the point about the relative anonymity of these major cinematographers and editors in film history, and the point made later that the careers of cinematographers and editors are largely associated with well-known directors, Deakins (cinematographer) is primarily known for his work with Joel and Ethan Coen, Scalia’s editing with Oliver Stone and RIdley Scott; Storaro with Bertolucci, Beatty and Coppola; Nykvist with Bergman; Schoonmaker with Scorsese; and Allen with Arthur Penn. 2 Editors also edit and sync the audio dialogue. Page 3 of 27 Creative Encounters Working Papers # 67 subjective experience of one’s career (i.e. meaningfulness, quality of working life, ambitions, and accomplishments), as well as its more objective trajectories. On the other hand we look at how the perceptions and actions of actors external to the dyadic relationship are informed by the existence of the given dyadic association (relationship-external dynamics). Reputation in this study is dealt with as assessments focused primarily on characteristics of the individual editor or cinematographer. The characteristics usually weighed by externals as we will see below have to do with three parameters: artistic capacity; ease of collaboration (is the person easy or difficult to work with); and whether the individual helps keep time and financial budgets. While these evaluations are of individuals, they are based on assessments of the work done in collaboration with the directors who are party to the dyadic relationships. Thus individual reputation and dyadic association are intertwined. Despite this we retain a restricted, individual-based definition of reputation in order to allow us to isolate and focus on the dynamics of association. Both structural and individual-based factors play into the processes we examine. On the structural side, the cinematographer, director and editor are distinct roles in the production process (though one person can assume more than one role), distinct artistic aesthetic and knowledge spheres, areas of distinct technical competence, distinct leadership roles in the production process, but also mutually interdependent and close enough that full autonomy is rarely granted or experienced, and bi-directional exchange of ideas and judgments is the rule. Though producers do the ultimate hiring, directors are often given a large role in choosing these key collaboration partners. Thus directors often make these hiring decisions (though producers and the Danish Film Institute [DFI]3 might also have suggestions or demands). This hiring dimension further exacerbates asymmetric power and dependence relations, in addition to the structural and cultural privileging of the director in relation to cinematographers and editors. A final structural factor is the one we opened this paper with. The director role is more central to the filmmaking process, as the formal title – director, and informal nickname ‘helmsman’ for the role connote. This role, especially in most European productions means that directors are often either originators or founders of the project, or brought in early in the development of the project, and thus are invited, expected and able to form the project in accordance with their wishes and visions. In general, the director role entails the prerogative to make the ultimate creative and artistic decisions in film projects. Based on this structurally central role in the production process as well as the cultural privilege associated with the role, directors are almost 3 The Danish Film Institute co-finances selected film productions in Denmark and its consultants take a co-producer role, which can include personnel decisions. Page 4 of 27 Creative Encounters Working Papers # 67 invariably more well-known within and outside the branch. Auteur theory encapsulates the most extreme form of cultural and structural privileging of the director (Caughie 1996; Hicks & Petrova 2006; Staiger 2003). Though auteur theory still exists as a privileging discourse and operative ideology in several contexts, there is also wide recognition that filmmaking is a complex team process requiring specialist contributions from a myriad of technical, managerial and artistic persons and occupations. Though the group or team nature of filmmaking is both recognized and has received a great degree of attention in film production research, the orientation of this chapter is different and more elementary. Focus here is on the dyadic dimension of collaboration, which is more intimate, immediately interpersonal, and face-to-face of a more intensive nature (Turner 2002). This focus recognizes the general and particular hierarchies and dependence between occupational roles and artistic professions, as well as the role that personal resources, whether personality or socially based (such as esteem, reputation, authority) play in informing the on-going interaction and specific events in dyadic interaction. Naturally, dyadic relations do not play out in social and cultural vacuums; the focus on the dyadic relation is thus a focus on primary interaction and/or consideration that always has a wider social base. The specifics of the variation between occupational dyadic relationship between directors and cinematographers and editors respectively will be elaborated below. This study is based in-depth career history interviews with 8 Danish cinematographers and 10 film editors. All 18 could be considered among the elite in their profession, in terms of longevity (remaining in work over a long period of time), frequency (working regularly – at least two films a year) and the prestige of the projects that they work on (major production of an artistic