Authorship, Collaboration and National Identity: Lindsay Anderson’s Directorial Practice in the Cinema Isabelle Gourdin-Sangouard A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy AHRC – funded School of Arts and Humanities, Communications, Media and Culture University of Stirling January 2014 DECLARATION: I hereby confirm that the following work has been composed by myself, The work it embodies has been done by myself and has not been included or submitted as part of another thesis or degree, All references to the use of work published in press and/or submitted for publication by myself have been duly acknowledged, All references and verbatim quotes from archive sources and other material have been duly acknowledged and listed accordingly, Stirling, January 18th , 2014 Isabelle Gourdin-Sangouard ABSTRACT: The thesis investigates the directorial practice of Lindsay Anderson in the cinema. This includes a study of his work as a feature film director, documentary filmmaker and film critic. From his formative years as a film critic and documentary filmmaker, Anderson developed a distinctive vision for the role of the director. As the study of his critical writings and personal correspondence will show, his vision translated into a celebration of the concept of artistic integrity, which he located at the level of both the production and reception of the film. In turn, this implied a belief in the integrated nature of the filmmaking process with the director in a central but reactive function. The use of archive material – mostly from the Lindsay Anderson Archive located at Stirling University – will uncover the existence of a tension: the study of the tension will be attached to the conceptualisation of a dialogue that I see as underpinning Anderson’s directorial practice in the cinema. It will become apparent for instance, that the practice of diary writing that Anderson maintained for over 50 years, echoed his working relationships with his close collaborators during and after the making of his films. I aim to uncover the sites of convergence as well as of tension between Anderson’s films and the context of their production. In order to do so, I have identified three themes which the director’s life and career in the cinema suggest: authorship, collaboration and national identity will provide the basis for a study of Anderson’s work in relation to their national and cultural context as well as the wider academic context in which his legacy will be assessed. Acknowledgements: I would like to acknowledge the support of the AHRC – Arts and Humanities Research Council – who funded my PhD studentship and gave me the opportunity to contribute to the project – “The Cinema Authorship of Lindsay Anderson”. I would also like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Professor John Izod, for his supervision and support throughout the duration of the project. Thank you very, very much for your sustained interest and input. I am also very grateful for the timely and thorough input that my secondary supervisor, Professor Elizabeth Ezra, provided me with. Her thoughts and encouragements have proved extremely helpful over the course of the project. I am also taking this opportunity to thank my colleagues Kathryn Hannan and Karl Magee – active members of The AHRC-funded project: “The Cinema Authorship of Lindsay Anderson”, for their professionalism and enthusiasm – their help and input with the archive material, as well as interest in my work, have proved invaluable. Kathryn, thank you also very much for your friendship and moral support throughout the thesis! I would like to thank my friends Annabella Padilla-Lamb and Carola MacCallum for their interest in my work and the kindness and support they have been showing me over the years. Thanks also to Kathleen Morison-Izod for so kindly taking care of me whenever the going got tough! Lots of thanks also and “Bises” to Dr. Margot Buchanan and Dr. Soha El-Batrawi for their friendship, support and faith in my work. Merci, les amies! Thanks also to Juergen for his support and interest in my work over the years. Un grand merci à Louise Womersley et Marie O’Brien for their kindness and support over the years. It has meant a lot! I would also like to express my gratitude to my internal examiner Dr. David Rolinson, and my external examiner, Professor Charles Barr, for their interest in my work. Un grand merci et tout mon amour à ma famille: ma maman, mon papa, mes soeurs, Catherine et Marie-Laetitia pour leur soutien, moral et financier, et pour leurs encouragements soutenus, leur enthousiasme jamais démenti. Mum, Cathy, Lulu, les DVDs et petits cadeaux ont bien servi! De gros bisous également à mamie pour ne jamais oublier sa petite fille ! Table of Contents: Declaration ii Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv Table of contents v Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Literature Review 10 The Lindsay Anderson Archive 10 Anderson’s Writings and Publications 13 Books on Anderson’s Life and Career 31 The Archive in Context 41 Chapter 2: Anderson’s Authorship 62 The Sequence Years (1946-1952) 63 Artistic Integrity 65 Artistic Integrity and Commitment as Active Exchange 70 Authorship as Dialogue 75 Chapter 3: The Diaries and The Sutcliffes’ Documentaries 82 Authorial Intent in a Collaborative Process 86 The Sutcliffes’ Documentaries 91 Chapter 4: Anderson’s Directorial Practice 100 The Production Team: 100 The Scriptwriter: 104 The Lead Actor: 106 Anderson’s Working Pattern: 107 Collaboration and Opposition: 110 Chapter 5: Anderson’s Directorial Practice – Part 2 117 The White Bus (1966) 117 Creative Latitude: 119 Collaboration and Authorial Control: 120 Collaboration and Creation: 124 Collaboration and Tension: 127 The Place of the Director: 129 The Active-Passive Exchange Dynamic 136 A Fusion of Creative Elements: 142 Chapter 6: Britishness and National Cinemas 148 The Artist and the Nation 149 Free Cinema and Transnationalism 151 Transnational Experiences: 152 National Cinema and the Transnational Artist 158 Britannia Hospital and the National Identity of Anderson’s Cinema 161 Chapter 7: The National and the Cultural 169 Every Day Except Christmas and Free Cinema: 171 Reviewing Free Cinema: 174 The National and the Cultural: Anderson’s Critical Impasse 184 Chapter 8: Engagement and Authorial Intent 189 The Directorial Manipulation of Reality in the Narrative 190 Authorial Intent and Discursive Engagement: 205 Beyond the Death of the Author: Anderson’s negotiation of opposites 209 Conclusion 215 List of References 222 Notes: When referring to The Lindsay Anderson Archive, I follow the cataloguing system in use in the Special Collections. Anderson’s Archive correspondence will read for instance, LA/ 5/01/. For the personal diaries, the reference starts with LA/6/. For material relating to the production of films, LA/1/01 for the early documentaries, LA/1/03 for This Sporting Life (1963), and so on. In addition, the archivists at Stirling University identified extra archive material about Anderson held at the BFI and ensured a copy was made available in the Anderson Archive. I also have a digital copy of a letter sent by Anderson to François Truffaut that a researcher at the BFI forwarded me. I will also mention material that originates from the Cinémathèque Française, more specifically, la Bibliothèque du Film – BiFi – located in Paris, France. Either I reference material that corresponds to folders held in the archive section of the library: this type of documents consists of personal correspondence from, to or about Anderson as well as promotional material originating from film festivals. I also use press reviews – French or international – that can be consulted freely in the on- site digital library; I list this material by author and/or title. All quotes are verbatim – this includes the correspondence between Anderson and his friends and colleagues in Poland and the former Czechoslovakia, which was often conducted in French and at time – fran-glish (!) I have, overall, followed the Harvard Referencing system – however, for ease of reference, I have opted for footnotes as opposed to endnotes in individual chapters. 7 Introduction: The thesis investigates the directorial practice of Lindsay Anderson in the cinema. This includes a study of his work as a feature film director, documentary filmmaker and film critic. The main focus for the thesis is the conceptualisation of an on-going dialogue that underpins Anderson’s vision for and practice of his role as a film director on and off the set. The concept of an ongoing dialogue arises from three considerations: first, Anderson’s life-long commitment to recording his personal feelings about friends and colleagues, as well as his vision of filmmaking that gives both a central and collaborative role to the director. The second consideration follows on from the first: the use of archive material, mostly from the director’s personal Archive, uncovers the existence of a tension that I see as central to the study of Anderson’s work in the cinema. The concept of a tension often overlaps with that of the dialogue that underpins Anderson’s relation with his own writings. It also encompasses the director’s view of his directorial practice as well as the critical and public reception of his work. Lastly, the question of the context in which Anderson wrote and directed films can be extended to include the academic framework in which his work will here be assessed. That last aspect brings out the existence of a dialogue between the researcher – myself – and the archive material used. 8 As I will develop in the literature review, the Lindsay Anderson Archive that is held at the University of Stirling, mostly comprises of the director’s diaries, personal correspondence and files pertaining to the production of his films and plays. Anderson also kept newspaper, journal and magazine clippings documenting the critical and public reception of his work, which the archivists have catalogued, along with his personal book and video library.