8A - Monday, April 14, 2014

The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com

8A -MonayApri 14 204 Th Mihign Daly mihigadaiyco


"What year is it?"
Postmodernism and
Gondry's 'Is the Man...

So how does Gondry try
to not to let us forget the
cuts? The first three minutes
and thirty seconds provide
an overture to the work as
whole, at least in this regard.
The film's exposition works
to reveal and subvert the
inherent coerciveness of film
by inventorying the film's
cinematic tools. The very first
frame, squarely bird's-eye-
view over Gondry's backlit
animation desk, displays
Gondry's colorful palate of
Sharpies. Then Gondry's hand
physically enters the frame,
declaring, "Here I am! I am the
filmmaker manipulating the
film." His hand draws a hand,
desk, lamp and sheet of paper.
Once again, he is inventorying,
saying, "This is the stuff of my
film." Gondry's hand exits the
frame and the now animated
hand begins to draw. It draws
a cartoon Gondry sitting at a
desk, creating the animation.
Lastly, on the subtitle frame,
Gondry displays his own Bolex
film camera, which he used
to record his conversation
with Chomsky. Thus here, in
short, is supposed to be the
(at least partial) achievement
of Gondry's goal of artistic
honesty: deliberate showing
of the constitutive elements
of his film in order to expose
the subjectivity of Gondry's
artistic interpretation.
But I'm not convinced that
Gondry is really as honest
as he's trying to be, and
I'm skeptical that he's even
capable of being so honest
considering the constraints of
human "psychic continuity,"
which he recognized himself.
Gondry sees animation as
distinctly different from other
forms of film. Thereby he
grants (his) animation relative
propagandistic immunity.
But this is strange to
me. Why should animation
be exempt from Gondry's
critiques of film? Gondry
gave us some reasons, but I'm
not so sure they hold up. For
example, when I was a kid,
Bugs Bunny didn't feel like it
was "clearly the interpretation

of its author." One might
argue, "Oh, you were just a
child then." But I would say
that I'm still a child now,
especially when I'm watching
a movie. Even when Looney
Tunes were at their epitome of
meta postmodern expression
(e.g., "Duck Amuck"), I never
felt like I was really aware of
the manipulative influence
of its author - especially not
while I was watching. I didn't
feel like I was "constantly
reminded that (I wasn't)
watching reality" - not when
I was watching Road Runner
and not when I was watching
"Is the Man Who Is Tall
Happy?"
The only time viewers can
be conscious of the author's
influence is when the flow
of psychic continuity is dis-
rupted (e.g., with analytic
thought like the kind Gondry
demonstrates in his inciting
explication). This is to say,
psychic continuity can only
be disrupted when the view-
er sees "the cuts." But, like
gestalt figure-ground draw-
ings of faces and goblets, the
viewer cannot see the cuts and
maintain the flow of psychic
continuity simultaneously.
So, despite Gondry's senti-
ments, his animation cannot
subvert the coerciveness of
film because animation is no
exception to the principle that
film must maintain psychic
continuity for the viewer.
Gondry's unfulfilled goal of
artistic honesty represents a
greater problem of the present
postmodern project. Despite
many of the postmodernists'
attempts at self-exposition
and self-deprecation through
repeated self-reference, they
often cannot escape the under-
lying hypocrisy of their own
creative critiques. For those
who worry about such prob-
lems - artists, writers, think-
ers, etc. - it presents us with
an opportunity for new solu-
tions. How will this problem
be solved? How will the next
art and philosophy movement
look? Thankfully, the answers
seem to still be undecided.

Dii
ani
No
Iw
here:
the M
An p
with I
really
autho
"Man
Inste
the
Gond:
of th
in th
postm
refere
humo
postm
their
or wi
into
that
postm
into a

rector presents Gondry's new film is a
case study for these larger
mated talk with questions. To those already
interested in the postmodern
oam Chomsky project, these questions will
probably seem obviously
By ZAK WITUS imperative. To those who
Daily Arts Writer have no idea what I mean
by "postmodernism," maybe
ant to do the impossible this article will illuminate
I want to talk about "Is the subject. For starters,
[an Who Is Tall Happy?: take a popular film like "The
Animated Conversation Muppets" that recognizes
Noam Chomsky" without itself as a film with in-dialogue
talking about Chomsky, statements like, "Here comes
r of works such as a major plot point." That sort
ufacturing Consent." of ironic self-reference is a
ad, I'm interested in typical postmodern motif.
filmmaking of Michel Getting back to the subject
ry ("Eternal Sunshine at hand, I actually only want
e Spotless Mind") and to directly talk about the first
.e fate of the present three minutes and 30 seconds
odern project. Will self- of "Is the Man Who Is Tall
nce and self-deprecating Happy?" - before Chomsky
r continue to excuse formally enters it. Analyzing
odern artists from this section of the film allows
own creative critiques, me to (I think) fairly ignore
11 their irony transform Chomsky in order to pay closer
a stain of hypocrisy attention to the filmmaking
justifies the present itself. Further, the first three
odern temple's collapse minutes and 30 seconds
bysmal absurdity? feature an inciting explication

ofthe film by Gondry that
reveals the film's intended
philosophical and artistic
paradigm in a very useful way,
analytically speaking.
Accompanied by his own
handwritten scrawl, Gondry
(off-screen) speaks directly to
the audience:
"Film and video are both
by their nature manipulative:
the editor/director proposes
an assemblage of carefully
selected segments that he/
she has in mind ... And, as a
result, the voice that appears
to come from the subject
actually comes from the
filmmaker. And that's why I
find the process manipulative:
the human brain forgets the
cuts - a faculty specifically
human, that, as I will
learn, Noam calls psychic
continuity. The brain absorbs
a constructed continuity as a
reality and consequently gets
convinced to witness a fair
representation of the subject."
Gondry does an excellent
job reciting the typical
postmodernist claims about

film: Film often pretends not to
be film and that, more or less,
makes it coercive. Therefore
postmodern filmmakers want
to find ways to make films that
express this critique without
being hypocritical.
In this film, Gondry does so
with animation. "(Animation)
is clearly the interpretation of
its author. If messages, or even
propaganda, can be delivered,
the audience is constantly
reminded that they are not
watching reality."
The film, therefore, can be
seen through the lens of Gon-
dry's desire not to deceive the
audience. And thus his goal for
the rest of the film has been
firmly established: Don't let
the audience "forget the cuts."



INTERESTED IN GETTING
WRITING PUBLISHED
THIS SUMMER?
JOIN THE DAILY ARTS SECTION AND GAIN
VALUABLE JOURNALISTIC EXPERIENCE IN
A LOW PRESSURE ENVIRONMENT.

DTUBE AT V URVENRIERT LUUATIUM
NAOAL JACKSON ROAD NATIONAL PLYMOUTH ROAD
3870 Jackson Rd 1645 Plymouth Rd
734-747-9060 734-663-6990
STATE STREET 1W STORAGE CHEST WEST LIBERTY
I' 2333 S State St 3033 W. Liberty
734-747-9060 734-663-6443
OPEN LATEI- CALL FOR HOURSU
RATMRDAY- APRIL26T S ATURDAY MAY 3RD

E-mail gbuonomo@umich.edu to request an application.

SI