SCREENING BOREDOM THE HISTORY AND AESTHETICS OF SLOW CINEMA Orhan Emre Çağlayan A Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Film Studies University of Kent February 2014 ABSTRACT This thesis examines Slow Cinema, a stylistic trend within contemporary art cinema, although one with a longer pre-history. Its distinguishing characteristics pertain ultimately to narration: the films, minimalistic by design, retard narrative pace and elide causality. Specifically, its aesthetic features include a mannered use of the long take and a resolute emphasis on dead time; devices fostering a mode of narration that initially appears baffling, cryptic and genuinely incomprehensible and offers, above all, an extended experience of duration on screen. This contemporary current emerges from a historical genealogy of modernist art films that for decades distended cinematic temporality and, furthermore, from the critical and institutional debates that attended to it. This thesis, therefore, investigates Slow Cinema in its two remarkable aspects: firstly, as an aesthetic practice, focusing on the formal aspects of the films and their function in attaining a contemplative and ruminative mode of spectatorship; and, secondly, as a historical critical tradition and the concomitant institutional context of the films’ mode of exhibition, production and reception. As the first sustained work to treat Slow Cinema both as an aesthetic mode and as a critical discourse with historical roots and a Janus-faced disposition in the age of digital technologies, this thesis argues that the Slow Cinema phenomenon can best be understood via an investigation of an aesthetic experience based on nostalgia, absurd humour and boredom, key concepts that will be explored in respective case studies. My original contribution to knowledge is, therefore, a comprehensive account of a global current of cultural practice that offers a radical and at times paradoxical reconsideration of our emotional attachment and intellectual engagement with moving images. The introduction chapter begins with a discussion of the Slow Cinema debate and then establishes the aims of the thesis, its theoretical framework and elaborates on the adopted methodologies, namely formal analysis and aesthetic historiography. Chapter 2 examines Béla Tarr in light of the evolution of the long take and attributes Tarr’s use of this aesthetic device as a nostalgic revision of modernist art cinema. Chapter 3 explores the films of Tsai Ming-liang, which embrace incongruous aesthetic features, envision an absurdist view of life, create humour through duration and are situated within the minimalist trends of the international film festival circuit. Chapter 4 focuses on Nuri Bilge Ceylan, whose films emerge from the aftermath of the collapse of a domestic film industry and intervene into its historical heritage by adopting fundamental features of boredom as well as transforming its idleness into an aesthetically rewarding experience. The conclusion chapter incorporates the case studies by stressing the role of Slow Cinema within the complex negotiations taking place between indigenous filmmaking practices and the demands of global art cinema audiences as well as the circulation of art films through networks of film festivals and their respective funding bodies. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS As in any other scholarly study, the work carried out within this thesis has largely benefited from the guidance and support of many friends. A number of institutions and departments have provided financial support for my doctoral study. The Film Studies Department at the University of Kent has granted a first year scholarship, while The International Office at Kent has generously offered me a three-year scholarship, for which I am particularly grateful to Joanna Ganderton-Smith. Mithat Alam Education Foundation has generously granted me with maintenance funds for four years, for which I am sincerely grateful to Yamaç Okur, Pelin Uzay and the man himself, Mithat Alam, a genuine cinephile with an inspiring passion and with whom I had many treasured conversations regarding the subject matter of this thesis. Members of the Film Studies Department at the University of Kent have provided me with valuable feedback. I am particularly grateful to Peter Stanfield, Murray Smith, Jinhee Choi, Tamar Jeffers-McDonald, Aylish Wood, Frances Guerin, Elizabeth Cowie, Virginia Pitts and Nigel Mather. In terms of administrative support, I want to thank Angela Whiffen for her endeavours in responding to my incessant queries. My supervisor Mattias Frey deserves more credit than I can express in words. I am sincerely indebted to his intellectual guidance, expertise, inspiration and moral support, all of which has been instrumental in having my work come this far. The postgraduate community at Kent has developed and refined my understanding of the discipline over the past few years and, most importantly, offered an opportunity to discuss my work in a friendly atmosphere. In no particular order, I am sincerely thankful to Dominic Topp, Paul Taberham, Ted Nannicelli, Stelios Christodoulou, Matt Thorpe, Charalambos Charalambous, Peter Sillett, Frances Kamm, Caleb Turner, Keeley Saunders, Sarah Polley, Geoff Mann, Luis Rocha-Antunes, Lies Lanckman, Katerina Flint-Nicol and James Newton. I will cherish the heated discussions and conversations on cinema we had over the past few years. I am also deeply grateful to my parents, Hande and Ufuk Çağlayan, as well as my sister Kıvılcım, whose undemanding devotion and unrestricted support has made my work unimaginably easier. My final thanks go to Inga Markelyte, whose love, patience and effort in correcting my manuscript has been crucial and without her I would not have been able to complete this dissertation. iii CONTENTS Abstract ii Acknowledgments iii Chapter 1 – Introduction 1 1.1 – Defining Slow Cinema 6 1.2 – Understanding Art Cinema 16 1.3 – Theorizing Slow Cinema 26 1.4 – Methodology 1: Formal Analysis 32 1.5 – Methodology 2: Aesthetic History 40 1.6 – Outline of Chapters 44 Chapter 2 – Nostalgia for Modernism: Béla Tarr and the Long Take 47 2.1 – Introduction 47 2.2 – The Long Take: the Dominant and Bazinian Realism 51 2.3 – Dedramatization, Dead Time and the Descriptive Pause 64 2.4 – Lingering Movement and Flânerie in Werckmeister Harmonies 79 2.5 – Framing, Duration and “the Cinephiliac Moment” 88 2.6 – Nostalgia, Modernism and the Retro Art Cinema Style 99 2.7 – Conclusion 109 Chapter 3 – Less is Absurd: Humour in the Films of Tsai Ming-Liang 111 3.1 – Introduction 111 3.2 – New Taiwan Cinema and the Rise of the “Festival Film” 114 3.3 – Tsai Ming-liang: Between Camp and Minimalist Aesthetics 121 3.4 – Narrative Form: Episodic Structure and Symbolism 131 3.5 – Theatre of the Absurd, Silent Comedy and a Theory of Humour 146 3.6 – Nostalgia and Cinephilia in Goodbye, Dragon Inn 159 3.7 – Conclusion 167 Chapter 4 – Contemplative Boredom: The Films of Nuri Bilge Ceylan 169 4.1 – Introduction 170 4.2 – Historical Background: Yeşilçam and the New Turkish Cinema 172 4.3 – Evolution from an Artisanal Mode of Production 186 4.4 – Intervention into Yeşilçam and Turkish Film History 196 4.5 – Boredom: A State of Mind and an Aesthetic Virtue 204 4.6 – Aesthetics of Boredom in Distant and Once Upon a Time in Anatolia 217 4.7 – Conclusion 231 iv Chapter 5 – Conclusion 233 Appendix. Slow Cinema Filmography (1975-2013) 243 Notes 254 Bibliography 281 v CHAPTER 1 Introduction This thesis examines Slow Cinema, a stylistic trend within contemporary art cinema, although one with a longer pre-history. Its distinguishing characteristics pertain ultimately to narration: the films, minimalistic by design, retard narrative pace and elide causality. Specifically, its aesthetic features include a mannered use of the long take and a resolute emphasis on dead time; devices fostering a mode of narration that initially appears baffling, cryptic and genuinely incomprehensible and offers, above all, an extended experience of duration on screen. This contemporary current emerges from a historical genealogy of modernist art films that for decades distended cinematic temporality and, furthermore, from the critical and institutional debates that attended to it. This thesis, therefore, investigates Slow Cinema in its two remarkable aspects: firstly, as an aesthetic practice, focusing on the formal aspects of the films and their function in attaining a contemplative and ruminative mode of spectatorship; and, secondly, as a historical critical tradition and the concomitant institutional context of the films’ mode of exhibition, production and reception. Before moving to a detailed exposition of my argument, however, I want to briefly set out the critical debate from which this research project has emerged and, even if temporarily, situated Slow Cinema at the centre of scholarly attention through its resonance with the journalistic discourses on art cinema. In the April 2010 issue of Sight and Sound, the journal’s editor Nick James inaugurated what was later called the Slow Cinema debate. In his editorial piece, Nick James outlined two acts of passive aggression against the Hollywood domination of the film industry, namely the Slow Criticism and Slow Cinema movements. Slow Criticism, a term borrowed from the Dutch critic Dana Linssen of Filmkrant, stands for “one response to the growing redundancy of so much tipster consumer reviewing of films,” while Slow Cinema, within this context, simply refers to a strand of international art