Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem Bölcsészettudományi Kar DOKTORI DISSZERTÁCIÓ SERKÉDI ORSOLYA PIER PAOLO PASOLINI FILMMŰVÉSZETÉNEK IKONOGRÁFIÁJA Irodalomtudományi Doktori Iskola Iskolavezető: Prof. Dr. Kállay Géza DSc, egyetemi tanár Italianisztikai Irodalom- és Művelődéstörténet Program Programvezető: Prof. Dr. Szkárosi Endre PhD, egyetemi tanár A bizottság tagjai Prof. Dr. Kelemen János CMHAS, egyetemi tanár (elnök) Dr. Stőhr Lóránt DLA, egyetemi docens (bíráló) Dr. Török Tamara PhD, egyetemi tanársegéd (bíráló) Dr. Szegedi Eszter PhD, egyetemi tanársegéd (titkár) Dr. Földényi F. László CsC, egyetemi tanár (tag) Dr. Fried Ilona CsC, habilitált egyetemi docens (póttag) Dr. Gelencsér Gábor PhD, habilitált egyetemi docens (póttag) Témavezetők: Prof. Dr. Szkárosi Endre PhD, egyetemi tanár †Dr. Takács József PhD, egyetemi docens Budapest, 2014 1 Eötvös Loránd University Faculty of Arts DOCTORAL DISSERTATION ORSOLYA SERKÉDI THE ICONOGRAPHY OF PIER PAOLO PASOLINI’S CINEMA Doctoral School of Literary Studies Head of Doctoral School: Prof. Dr. Géza Kállay DSc, full professor Doctoral Program in Italian Literary and Cultural Studies Head of Doctoral Program: Prof. Dr. Endre Szkárosi PhD, full professor The Doctoral Committee Prof. Dr. János Kelemen CMHAS, full professor (chair) Dr. Lóránt Stőhr DLA, associate professor (referee) Dr. Tamara Török PhD, assistant lecturer (referee) Dr. Eszter Szegedi PhD, assistant lecturer (secretary) Dr. László Földényi F. CsC, full professor (member) Dr. Ilona Fried CsC, associate professor with habilitation (alternate member) Dr. Gábor Gelencsér PhD, associate professor (alternate member) Supervisors: Prof. Dr. Endre Szkárosi PhD, full professor †Dr. József Takács PhD, associate professor Budapest, 2014 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………….3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………….7 I. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………..8 I.1. Scope of dissertation……………………………………………………8 I.2. Structure and methodology……………………………………………10 II. THE FUSION OF FINE ARTS AND CINEMA IN FILM HISTORY…………...12 II.1. The theoretical questions…………………………………………......12 II.2. The history of the fusion of cinema and painting…………………….15 II.3. The painted effect and its semiotic problems……………………........18 III. PASOLINI’S AFFILIATION WITH PAINTING………………………………..22 III.1. The origins of Pasolini’s interest in fine arts………………………...22 III.1.1. The theoretician and the art historian………………………22 III.1.2. The graphic designer and painter…………………………..23 III.2. A discovery of the roots……………………………………………...23 III.2.1. Pasolini and Masaccio…………………………………….....25 III.2.2. The Mannerist painting in Pasolini’s cinema………………..26 III.2.3. Pasolini and Leonardo da Vinci……………………………..28 III.2.4. Pasolini and Caravaggio…………………………………......28 III.2.5. Pasolini and the contemporary painting……………………..29 III.2.5.1. Pasolini and the Futurism……………………….....29 III.3. The imprint of the affiliation with painting in the filmography……..31 IV. A FILMIC AND POETIC JOURNEY IN THE INFERNO OF THE SUBPROLETARIAT: AN INTRODUCTION TO ACCATTONE, MAMMA ROMA AND LA RICOTTA……………………………………………………………………………...33 V. ACCATTONE, 1961……………………………………………………………….37 V.1. Accattone’s hell…………………………………………………………...38 V.2. Accattone and Masaccio…………………………………………………..40 V.3. Accattone and Morandi……………………………………………………42 V.4. Accattone and Dante………………………………………………………44 V.5. The music in Accattone…………………………………………………...47 VI. MAMMA ROMA, 1962…………………………………………………………….50 3 VI.1. Social problems in Mamma Roma….........................................................51 VI.2. The citations of figurative arts……………………………………………54 VI.2.1. The motif of the Last Supper…………………………………….54 VI.2.2. Caravaggio’s effects……………………………………………...57 VI.2.3. The motif of the Dead Christ…………………………………….58 VI.3. Literary citations in Mamma Roma…........................................................61 VI.4. The music in Mamma Roma……………………………………………...63 VII. LA RICOTTA, 1963……………………………………………………………….66 VII.1. Picturesque citations: the role of Mannerism in La ricotta……………...67 VII.2. Literary contaminations…………………………………………………75 VII.3. Musical references………………………………………………………77 VIII. EXPERIMENTS WITH STYLES AND FORMS: LA RABBIA (THE ANGER), 1963…………………………………………………………………………….78 VIII.1. Social and political content in La rabbia………………………………79 VIII.2. The role of figurative arts in La rabbia………………………………...82 VIII.2.1. References to Ben Shahn’s art…………………………………...82 VIII.2.2. References to George Grosz’s art………………………………..85 VIII.2.3. Jean Fautrier’s paintings on screen………………………………86 VIII.2.4. Citations from Renato Guttuso…………………………………..87 VIII.2.5. Pontormo’s, Georges Braque’s and Jackson Pollock’s effects…..90 IX. TWO POLITICAL FILMS: IL VANGELO SECONDO MATTEO (THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW 1964) AND UCCELLACCI UCCELLINI (THE HAWKS AND THE SPARROWS 1966)………………………………………………...93 X. IL VANGELO SECONDO MATTEO (THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW), 1964……………………………………………………………………...95 X.1. The figurative, cinematographic and musical contaminations in Il Vangelo…………………………………………………………………….98 X.1.1. References to figurative arts………………………………..98 X.1.2. Piero della Francesca’s role in Il Vangelo………………...100 X.1.3. Botticelli’s and Filippo Lippi’s figures in Il Vangelo secondo Matteo.............................................................................................103 X.2. The music in Il Vangelo secondo Matteo…………………………...105 XI. UCCELLACCI E UCCELLINI (THE HAWKS AND THE SPARROWS), 1966………………………...........................................................................................107 4 XI.1. The references to figurative arts……………………………………110 XI.2. Filmic, literary and musical contaminations……………………….112 XII. CHE COSE SONO LE NUVOLE?, 1968………………………………………..115 XII 1. References of fine arts……………………………………………..116 XII.2. Literary citations…………………………………………………..120 XIII. TEOREMA (THEOREM), 1968……………………………………………….124 XIII.1. Pictorial contaminations in Teorema……………………………..127 XIII.2. Literary quotations………………………………………………..131 XIV. PORCILE (PIGSTY), 1969……………………………………………………134 XIV.1. Fabula and “syuzhet”……………………………………………..134 XIV.2. The elements of fine arts in Porcile………………………………136 XV. THE PAINTED EFFECT IN THE TRILOGIA DELLA VITA: DECAMERON (1971), I RACCONTI DI CANTERBURY (THE CANTERBURY TALES, 1972), I FIORI DI MILLE E UNA NOTTE (THE ARABIAN NIGHTS, 1974)…………………….......141 XV.1. Visualisation in the Trilogia della vita……………………………142 XV.2. DECAMERON, 1971……………………………………………..143 XV.2.1. Visualizing Decameron, pictorial motifs in Pasolini’s Decameron………………………………………………………..144 XV.2.2. “Perché realizzare un’opera, quando è così bello sognarla soltanto?” – the dream sequence after Giotto………………...…..145 XV.2.3. A homage to Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s The Combat of Lent and Carnival; The Triumph of Death……………………………..148 XV.3. I RACCONTI DI CANTERBURY (THE CANTERBURY TALES), 1972….............................................................................................151 XV.3.1. Decameron, “the connector”…………………………….151 XV.3.2. The Renaissance scenic design………………………….152 XV.3.3. Pasolini’s and Bruegel’s imagery in I racconti di Canterbury………………………………………………………..152 XV.3.4. Infernal imagery under Hieronymus Bosch’s effect…….153 XV.4. I FIORI DI MILLE E UNA NOTTE (ARABIAN NIGHTS, 1974)……………………...............................................................154 XV.4.1. Orientalist iconography………………………………….155 XV.4.2. The connection of visual and linguistic coding…………156 5 XVI. SALÒ, O LE 120 GIORNATE DI SODOMA (SALÒ, OR THE 120 DAYS OF SODOM, 1975)……..........................................................................................159 XVI.1. Literary sources for Salò………………………………………….161 XVI.2. Iconography in Salò………………………………………………163 XVI.2.1. Traces of Futurism, Cubism and Dada…………………164 XVI.2.2. Mannerist instances in Salò…………………………….165 XVI.2.2.1. Hieronymus Bosch and The Garden of Earthly Delights…………………………………………………...165 XVI.2.2.2. Bruegelian effects in Salò…………………….166 XVII. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………….169 XVIII. ILLUSTRATIONS……………………………………………………………173 XIX. WORKS CITED………………………………………………………………218 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to give thanks and grateful acknowledgement to all those who have helped me in this work. I owe much to my professors at Eötvös Loránd University of Budapest: the late Dr. József Takács, whose personal and academic generosity inspired me to undertake this study; Prof. Dr. Endre Szkárosi for his enthusiastic support and inspiring conversations, feedback and classes; Dr. Judit Bárdos for her encouragement and articles and Judit Pintér for lending me her complete Pasolini film collection. I am also very grateful to my PhD-colleague, Áron Zombori, for his remarks and materials related to my research. I owe special thanks to Roberto Chiesi, the head of the Pasolini Archive of Bologna and the entire staff of the Film Library “Renzo Renzi” of Bologna (Biblioteca Renzo Renzi, Cineteca di Bologna) for their helpfulness, kindness and for letting their resources any time available for me. I would also like to acknowledge the “Campus Hungary Program” whose scholarship gave me the extraordinary financial support to compile this work and lead me to this point. Much of the writing and research for this dissertation was done in the Film Library of Bologna with the generous support of Eötvös Loránd University of Budapest. The dissertation, in general, relies extensively on the Pasolini Archive of the Film Library of Bologna and occasionally on the Marco Gromo Library of Turin. I gratefully acknowledge