Transcendential films and characters

[Gigi M.]

A few days ago I was watching Pickpocket again with a friend, and after we saw the film we listened to the Schrader introduction on the disc. I was amazed to find out that he doesn't consider on of or his biggest creation, Travis Bickle, to be a transcendental character.

By definition something “transcendentâ€

[Mr Sausage]

There are some problems here. First, most people don't really know what they mean when they call something "transcendent," often because they have no idea what particular barrier or boundary is being transcended. Secondly, people often use the word in a figurative sense to indicate they have perceived an aspect of the work that is comparable to something divine. The problem with that is the label is so inherently personal that it must be necessarily vague.

I think the first step is to agree, at least tentatively, on a more concrete application of the word "transcendent," since those definitions you provide, although more or less accurate, are too broad and general to be truly usable in a public discussion. Then, based on that criteria, you can debate how much particular films or characters qualify.

[bufordsharkley]

Personally, I can't name a single more transcendent moment in filmdom than Pee-Wee Herman's dance to "Tequila" in Pee-Wee's Big Adventure.

The scene not only meets the five qualifications of the definition of "transcendence"; it also manages to justify human existence, in how transcendent it is.

[Gigi M.]

I think the first step is to agree, at least tentatively, on a more concrete application of the word "transcendent," since those definitions you provide, although more or less accurate, are too broad and general to be truly usable in a public discussion. Then, based on that criteria, you can debate how much particular films or characters qualify.

Many thanks for your excellent idea. I guess I'm a bit confused after hearing Schrader saying that Travis is not a transcendent character. I always saw Travis as a transcendent character, someone so lost - trapped - in his world wanting to escape. Like bufordsharkley's example of Pee Wee's dance, I can't think of better moment in cinema when Travis says "Are you talkin' to me?", or at the very end when he sees the cops and trigger his fingers toward his brains. If Travis is not a transcendent character then who is?

[Scharphedin2]

Gigi, I have not heard Schrader's intro on Pickpocket, but I know that before he started his career as a screenwriter/director, he was a film critic, and wrote a book entitled "Transcendental Style In Film" (it might be worth tracking down, if you want to get to the bottom of what Schrader thinks on this subject). For what it is worth, the films he used as examples were those of Carl Dreyer, Yasujiro Ozu and Bresson, so the characters in these films should be a good indication of what he sees as transcendental.

Schrader also came from a very strict religious background (Calvinist if I remember correctly). Without wishing to put words in his mouth, I am sure that what he means by a transcendental character has to do more with the religious/spiritual aspects of your definition above. One of the archetypes of transcendental heroes would then be Joan in Dreyer's The Passion of Joan of Arc. Someone more knowledgable about Schrader and what he calls "transcendental style" can probably comment further.

With Travis, I think what Schrader may be talking about is that Travis does not manage to "transcend" the environment he lives in, or reach a higher understaning of his personal condition, and certainly not come closer to any conception of the divine in the course of Taxi Driver. Travis is essentially the same at the end of the film, as he at its beginning. He has gone through a cycle in his life, you could say, but in one of the closing scenes, when he is talking to the Cyrill Shephard character (I believe), there is the brief moment, when he makes the double-take, adjusts the rearview mirror, and you know that he is basically back at the beginning of the story, taking in all these impressions from the underbelly of New York that pile up and fester in his mind, until he eventually explodes.

[Gigi M.]

With Travis, I think what Schrader may be talking about is that Travis does not manage to "transcend" the environment he lives in, or reach a higher understaning of his personal condition, and certainly not come closer to any conception of the divine in the course of Taxi Driver. Travis is essentially the same at the end of the film, as he at its beginning. He has gone through a cycle in his life, you could say, but in one of the closing scenes, when he is talking to the Cyrill Shephard character (I believe), there is the brief moment, when he makes the double-take, adjusts the rearview mirror, and you know that he is basically back at the beginning of the story, taking in all these impressions from the underbelly of New York that pile up and fester in his mind, until he eventually explodes.

Many thanks, and will track down the book. Don't you think the same thing could be said about Michel at the end of Pickpocket - now that he's behind bars? And all those wonderful things he told Jeane are because he's trapped? I believe Quant also raises the same question in his commentary.

You see, I always thought I knew what a transcendent moment or character was. Falconetti's Joan is the perfect example; Johannes in Ordet, etc... The questions I'm raising is that now that Schrader has me confused, is what others here believe. Do think Travis is a transcendent character or not?

[Kinsayder]

As Florence Darel's character in "Conte de printemps" discovers, the word transcendent(al) can have multiple and incompatible meanings. The back cover of "Transcendental Style In Film" gives an indication of what Schrader means in this context:

The acclaimed director of MISHIMA, AMERICAN GIGOLO, HARD CORE, BLUE COLLAR, CAT PEOPLE and also the screenwriter for TAXI DRIVER, Paul Schrader here analyzes the film style of three great directors – Yasajiro Ozu, Robert Bresson, Carl Dreyer – and posits a common dramatic language by these artists from divergent cultures. Unlike the style of psychological realism, which dominates film, the transcendental style expresses a spiritual state with austere camerawork, acting devoid of self-consciousness, and editing that avoids editorial comment. This important book is an original contribution to film analysis and a key work by one of our most searching directors and writers.

"Schrader believes that directors from varied cultural backgrounds have, by their approach to specific films, created a common style to express the sacred, and that this commonality shows through each director's individual choice of subject and philosophical assumptions and can be recognized through detailed criticism." Library Journal

[Gigi M.]

Created a common style to express the sacred, and that this commonality shows through each director's individual choice of subject and philosophical assumptions and can be recognized through detailed criticism." Library Journal

Thanks Kinsayder. Hmm, so by seeking redemption at the end of Pickpocket, Michel becomes someone sacred - therefore a transcendental character?

[Kinsayder]

Yes, but I think Schrader means something more than that. Louis Malle calls the film a parable - a story in which spiritual themes and symbols are more important than psychology, narrative and drama. Michel is a "transcendental" character because he is integral and subservient to the spiritual themes that Bresson develops in Pickpocket. By contrast, Travis Bickle's alienated psychology is the principal theme of Taxi Driver, making it a exercise in psychological realism rather than transcendentalism.

[mikeohhh]

TRANSPLENDENT!

[HerrSchreck]

Transcendental-- as a trackable, finite, repeatable adjective i e treating it as a definable science-- is a whimsical word which can result in polite snickers when uttered in any kind of company to begin with (as in TMeditation). What is transcendant to one man is spoiled trout to another.

But remember that Schrader was primarily trying to do was describe a style, not the characters therein. Ozu, Bresson and Dreyer evoke a sort of involountary participation in the hazy associative centers of the brain via their spacious simpicities which result in, when constructed around openended and very existentially contemplative narratives, enormously different readings from audiences. Anyone who's studied and/or practiced hypnosis knows that one of the simplest methods of bringing a person Under is to get them to focus their attention on a single object (some use swinging balls/crystals/etc, I would-- used to practice it as a gag & hobby at one time-- use the method of getting the individual to focus on a single static point in the room just above the comfortable sightline) for a long, uninterrupted time without blinking. The dreaming & symbolmaking centers of the mind become increasingly active when the deliberate consciousness is minimized, causing suggestive & somnambulistic individuals to get on the road of Going Under. The implications for the Long Take in a so called "Transcendental Style" are obvious.

But one should also remember that beyond metaphysical embellishments to resulting cineaste conversations and all their pompous conceits: what lies at the heart of his assignation of this adjective to these directors is quite simple: their styles are, to him, really really really great and deep.

[Scharphedin2]

Also more than a little bothered by Scharf's reliance on Schrader. The Transcendental Style book (Ozu, Dreyer and Bresson) was of some interest in its day, at least as an English text but it's usefulness now is far outweighed by superio scholarship and Schrader's own narrow focussing of the filmmakers through his own extremely problematic Christian template. As you're aware there are a range of readings for, say, Pickpocket AND un Condamne a Mort s'est Echappe including the very credible gay reading of the latter in which Fontaine's salvation is finally achieved with the assistance of Jost, as if God's gift of a liberator and a lover.

David, as much as I appreciate Schrader and his work, I would not rely on his definition of transcendence. My post was intended as a help to Gigi in deciphering Schrader's statement that Travis is not a transcendent character.

Going about my work today, however, my thoughts kept creeping back to this discussion, which I find really interesting, but also more than a little difficult. It feels a little presumptious to write about a topic this grand with as little formal insight as I possess. But here in any event are my thoughts. I am very curious, where we will end up with this in the end.

The struggle with finding an apt definition for “transcendenceâ€

[colinr0380]

Would a film like THX-1138 fit into this, where the lead character literally 'transcends' the boundaries of his society?

[Darth Lavender]

First example which came to mind is the first Ghost In The Shell movie.

Perhaps the definitive example would be the title character in Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ

[Mr Sausage]

The Freud and Kurosawa quotes remind me of the now sadly unloved auteurist expression "Privileged moment."

I always thought that was Walter Pater's literary term for what Joyce would later call an epiphany. Had no idea about its adoption by auterist critics; I figured it was "sadly unloved" for quite a bit longer than it evidently was.

[colinr0380]

Strange that the discussion has moved to the sexual area, since I remembered last night Catherine Breillat in her interview on the Anatomy of Hell disc talking about how that film is about transcendence, and of how an orgasm can be a transcendental moment of clarity. She describes the sex act as something which has tried to be diluted into something dirty or only for procreation by controlling policital forces (political used in its wider sense, including organised religion and consumerism etc) afraid of the power of sex as something that allows people to transcend their physical realities and 'look at things in a different light', as I think she put it.

[Gordon]

I can't believe that no one has mentioned 2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman experiences a true transcendence - overcoming himself and not returning to his previous existence, the ladder being discarded.

I also think that Kapar Hauser achieves an ultimate state of grace in the haunting, tragic ending to Werner Herzog's, Every Man for Himself and God Against All. He dreams himself back into non-existence.

[sevenarts]

I also think that Kapar Hauser achieves an ultimate state of grace in the haunting, tragic ending to Werner Herzog's, Every Man for Himself and God Against All. He dreams himself back into non-existence.

Herzog's an excellent example, I think you could probably make similar arguments about almost all of his films -- especially as regards a kind of tragic transcendence of horrible material circumstances. Herzog isn't exactly a spiritual director, but he does have a sensibility that looks beyond the drudgery of the material world, and his characters are often striving to overcome the limits of their circumstances. I would read the ending of Stroszek similarly to Kaspar Hauser. You can also look to his documentaries for characters like the ski-jumper Steiner or Fini Straubinger from Land of Silence and Darkness. There are many more of course -- transcendence, both achieved and not, is a MAJOR recurring theme in Herzog's work, stretching across both his features and his docs.

[Mr Sausage]

I always thought that was Walter Pater's literary term for what Joyce would later call an epiphany. Had no idea about its adoption by auterist critics; I figured it was "sadly unloved" for quite a bit longer than it evidently was.

It was. But you're obviously younger than me by about 20 years. (My first compliment - treasure it!) Sarris dug it up, via Truffaut and it was big through the seventies. I still use it anyhow. Epiphany was also such a lovely term but now sounds like Paris Hilton having a thoughtful nanosecond. My not-husband refers to extreme gay moments (like hot cruising) as 'epoophanies".

If I'm only younger than you by about twenty years, you're not that old yourself.

[BusterK.]

i consider Alan Clarke's Elephant (1989) to be transcendental in the way it represents violence, almost mystical in its cosmic scope.

Gus Van Sant's death trilogy is also in the same vein. No motives, no explanations, only the facts.

I tend to see transcendence in FORMS, not THEMES. I couldn't care less about a movie with religious/spiritual themes but shot in a very standard way. ON the contrary, movies that make the most impression on me are often innovative in form and narration.

[Gordon]

Herzog isn't exactly a spiritual director, but he does have a sensibility that looks beyond the drudgery of the material world, and his characters are often striving to overcome the limits of their circumstances.

That, to me, is the essence of German Idealist Philosophy: to look beyond the drudgery of the material world, as exemplified by Immanuel Kant and Arthur Schopenhauer. It is only through perception of objects that we might obtain any semblance of an idea as to their essence - of what they are in and for themselves. Where religion goes wrong, is to posit the what-lies-beyond as something known - it puts the cart before the horse, so to speak. But there are two types of experience we have: outer and inner (our own bodies). And the riddle of the world can only be solved by us humans, to our own benefit, by initiating these two forms of experience at the crucial point.

To me, the word transcendence does not relate to the spiritual, but to a deeper metaphysical (which could be emotional) experience of the universe or oneself, which are the same 'thing', ultimately. "I am my world," said Wittgenstein. From our points of view, Man is the microcosm of the macrocosm (the Universe, which like us, is greater than the sum of its 'facts').

Videodrome is a transcendent film.

[Gigi M.]

Can we put Stroszek in the same category, as both film and character?
The dancing chicken is definitely a transcendent moment.

[John Cope]

Dead on, Gordon. That's why arch materialist directors like Cronenberg and Kubrick speak beyond their own base level intentions or aspirations. They may or may not believe in the "known unknown" but the profundity of their search reaches beyond purely primitivistic examinations of self and society. This also has something to do, I think, with their wholesale disinterest in the particularities of individual psychology and their disregard for the supposed legitimacy of Cartesianism or dualism. For me, Michael Mann's work functions this way and something like Vice is a superb contemporary example of how to do transcension through material properly. It is unfortunate that materialism is seen only as a reductive empiricism when it has its roots in the extraordinary, rich profundity of pre-Socratic thought, in which there is no division and all is merged in one.

[Kinsayder]

The pre-Socratics were poets as well as philosophers, and if Méliès had been born a few thousand years earlier they would probably have been filmmakers too. Philosophy has its limits, as Wittgenstein acknowledged ("Whereof we cannot speak thereof we must be silent"), but great art can lead us right to the threshold and draw aside the curtain.