A University of Sussex DPhil thesis Available online via Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/ This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Please visit Sussex Research Online for more information and further details ‘A Film Should Be Like a Stone in Your Shoe’: A Brechtian Reading of Lars von Trier Angelos Koutsourakis DPhil University of Sussex July 2011 i I hereby declare that this thesis has not been and will not be submitted in whole or in part to another University for the award of any other degree. Signature............................ ii University of Sussex Angelos Koutsourakis DPhil English Literature. ‘A Film Should Be Like a Stone in Your Shoe’: A Brechtian Reading of Lars von Trier. Abstract This central premise of this thesis is that Lars von Trier is a political director. Through a detailed formal analysis of five films I proceed to discuss the political implications of form, something that has not been acknowledged by scholarship so far. In this thesis, I employ Brecht as a methodological tool so as to discuss the shift from a dialectical cinema devoted to the production of knowledge effects, to a post-Brechtian one that brings together points of tension that remain unresolved. Chapter 1 proceeds to a historical evaluation of Brecht’s reception in film theory and considers the ways that Brecht’s theory and practice can address the cinematic and political concerns of the present. The chapter also locates von Trier under the rubric of the post-Brechtian by comparing him to past film practices. Chapter 2 moves to a discussion of von Trier’s Europa trilogy and focuses on issues of historical representation. Emphasis is placed on formal elements that challenge the narrative laws of classical cinema. The chapter argues that von Trier follows Brecht’s mistrust of a historical representation based on pictorial verisimilitude, without however sharing his forward-looking politics and his view of history as Marxist science. Chapter 3 discusses Dogme 95 and The Idiots (1998). Firstly, the chapter discusses Dogme’s combination of a political modernist rhetoric with a realist one and places Dogme’s return to the past in a historical context. Secondly, the chapter considers the role of performance as a formal and thematic element in The Idiots . I draw attention to the ways that the camera becomes performative and brings together material of dramaturgical importance with moments that are the product of cinematic contingency. My discussion is very much informed by contemporary post-Brechtian performance and film studies invested in the discussion of ‘corporeal cinema’. Chapter 4 discusses Dogville , a film with obvious references to Brecht. Unlike previous readings, I shift the emphasis from the film’s assumed ‘Anti-Americanism’ and proceed to a formal analysis that can rethink the film’s politics and innovations. While Brecht has been thought to be as a fleeting presence in von Trier’s films by most critics, this thesis suggests that our knowledge of von Trier’s formal innovations can be deepened and enlivened by discussing them in conjunction with Brecht’s theory. By returning to Brecht, we can also rethink the importance of form as the key to a film’s politics. iii Contents Acknowledgements vi Notes to the Text vii Introduction 1 Chapter 1 ― Brecht’s Position in Film Theory and Practice Brecht on the Film Medium 21 Brecht’s Critique of the Institution of Cinema 31 Brecht’s Theory as the Road to Film Radicalism 34 Rethinking the Cinematic Institution 43 Defining Post-Brechtian Cinema 48 Straub/Huillet and Fassbinder: Two Different Tendencies 53 Locating von Trier in Post-Brechtian Cinema 66 Chapter 2 ― Historical Fragments in the Europa Trilogy Introduction 70 Accumulation of Visual and Narrative Materials 79 Epistemological Uncertainty 91 Epidemic : Literalization of the Medium. The Essay as Film Form 98 History as Transition 115 On Film Voyeurism 124 Chapter 3 ― Rethinking Realism: Dogme 95 and The Idiots Dogme 95: Ascetic Realism and Anti-Illusionism 132 Technology and Productivity 138 Dogme 2: The Idiots : The Film’s ‘Performant 151 iv Function Performative Camera 156 Interrupting the Narrative 161 Performance as the Subject and the Object of the Film 168 Characters as Bodily Effects 175 Performing out of Character 179 Chapter 4 ― Dogville : Theatricality as Experimentation Representation as an Experiment 185 Theatricality 202 Performativity and Performative Contradictions 213 Narrative Openness 227 Conclusion: Dialogue with the ‘Dissensual’ Past 234 Appendix Illustrations by Chapter Chapter 2 240 Chapter 3 252 Chapter 4 258 Interviews Interview with Lars von Trier 267 Interview with Alexander Kluge: Brecht Today 276 Manifestoes MANIFESTO 1 280 MANIFESTO 2 282 v MANIFESTO 3 – I Confess! 283 The Dogme 95 Manifesto and the Vow of Chastity 285 “Defocus 288 The Dogumentary Manifesto 289 Bibliography 291 vi Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the help and support of a great deal of people. Firstly, I am most grateful to my supervisors, David Barnett and John David Rhodes. Their patient readings and their merciless criticism have been a context in which I have been very fortunate to work. David made me understand Brecht beyond the limits of Orthodox Brechtianism, while J.D. taught me to think of films as more complex objects and not as materials that justify predetermined philosophical ideas. I am most grateful to the Danish Agency for International Education for funding my writing year and giving me the chance to spend ten months in Denmark as a guest researcher at the University of Copenhagen. Many thanks also to the department of Media, Cognition and Communication at the University of Copenhagen. My deep gratitude goes to Lars von Trier who allowed me to interview him and to his secretaries Katrine Sahlstroem and Emilie Spliid. I would also like to thank von Trier and Zentropa Productions for allowing me to incorporate the former’s Manifestoes along with stills from the films I discuss. I am very grateful to Alexander Kluge, who also gave me an interview. I am indebted to Beata Wiggen for organising this interview. During my stay in Copenhagen, I was lucky enough to discuss von Trier’s films with Peter Schepelern. These discussions have greatly deepened my understanding of von Trier’s cinema. Peter was very generous with his time and always there to share his knowledge. I am also grateful to him for setting up my interview with Lars von Trier. There are also some people at the University of Copenhagen, whose help and support was invaluable. Tine Weidick and Nete Nørgaard Kristensen were always there to help me with any practicalities. Jespe Kappel from the University’s audiovisual archive provided me with materials that have enriched my knowledge of von Trier’s cinema. Camilla Dindler and Eva Novrup Redvall were always there to share my concerns about the project. Giannis Stamatellos’ companionship was the beginning of a good friendship and intellectual collaboration. I am indebted to Nikolaj Lubecker for sending me his article on Dogville , which is currently in press. I would also like to thank the staff at the University of Sussex and in particular Margaret Reynolds. I am also grateful to Darrow Schecter for our long discussions on Critical Theory. The help of friends has also been indispensable. Amongst them, Peter Blake, Martin Trigg-Knight, Karin Berg, David Tucker, Tatiana Kontou, Seda Ilter, Alex Pestell, Manolis Galelianos, Katie Reid, Karen Veitch, and John Caddle helped me keep my sanity throughout the project. Thanks also to Mary Davou for reading a first draft of the thesis. My deep gratitude goes to my family for their emotional and financial support. Many thanks to my brother, Vangelis Koutsourakis, for introducing me to the films of Lars von Trier. Lastly, my gratefulness to my partner, Eszter Katona, for her support and for sharing a passion for European Art Cinema. vii Notes to the Text UK English is used throughout the text. Quotations using American English remain unchanged. All illustrations (in the appendix) and Lars von Trier’s Manifestoes are courtesy of Lars von Trier and Zentropa Productions. In each chapter, I put in parenthesis the release year of the films only the first time I refer to them. Similarly, references to characters from the films are accompanied by the actors’ names in parentheses only the first time they are mentioned. 1 Introduction Aims: Politics as Form in Lars von Trier The central premise of this thesis is that Lars von Trier is a political director and a formal study of his films can reveal their dialectical aspect, something that has not been acknowledged by scholarship so far. The title of the thesis refers to a quotation from his second feature film Epidemic (1987), in which von Trier – who performs himself – reflects on the filmmaking process and firmly asserts that ‘a film should be like a stone in your shoe’. 1 This quotation has either been ridiculed by the popular press or has been used as a means of strengthening the understanding of von Trier as a ‘provocateur’, an egocentric director who wants to be in the spotlight. This emphasis on the director’s persona is largely responsible for the overlooking of the political implications of the films’ form. This thesis follows a different line of argument and aims at discussing formal aspects of von Trier’s films that can be understood politically.