Solaris

Solaris as Anti-Soviet Propaganda?

On 18 February 1971 Tarkovsky notes in his diaries: ‘ The supreme idea of socialism is machinery. It turns a person into a mechanical person. There are rules for everything. And so man is taken form himself. His living soul is removed. It is understandable that one may be calm in such Easter quietism, and these gentlemen say they are progressive! My God! If that is progress, then what is Eastern quietism! ‘
and then,
Socialism is despair at the impossibility of ever being able to organize man. It organizes tyranny for him and says that is freedom itself! > about Svidrigailov, Dostoevsky’s notebooks, about Crime and Punishment, p. 556.
I’m very strongly affected by diaries and archives and , ”laboratories” of every kind. They’re wonderful catalyst.’
Tarkovsky, A. (1994), Time within Time: The Diaries 1907 -1986, translated by Kitty Hunter-Blair, Faber and Faber Limited, p. 36
Tarkovsky was without doubt influenced by Dostoevsky and not only. He had plenty of his own experiences from Soviet Russia, his motherland and socialist oppressive system. It is not difficult to see critical notes in Tarkovsky’s films as his own life and carrier were deeply affected by its dogma’s.
We could read ‘ Solaris as a metaphoric device capable of illuminating the relationship between individuals and societies. [...] It portrays which affect the human senses but stress that it is the power of our own senses that we must be most afraid. It is not therefore the surface of the planet which is most to be mistrusted [...] but our own consciousness which is formed in relation to it.’
Johnson, P. (2006), Through the Mirror: Reflections on the Films of Andrei Tarkovsky, edited by Johnsson, G. and Ottarsson, T., Cambridge Scholar Press, chapter Subjectivity and Sociality in the Films of Andrei Trakovsky, p. 71
This metaphor could be related to any system, society that is suppressing individual trough manipulation of their social environment, creating network of expectations and prohibition reaching deep inside his mind and soul.
Tarkovsky as we already know was a child of Stalinist era and Second World War and as his life happened to finish early, he did not get the chance to benefit form changes that brought year 1986 and following period of Gorbachev election to Congress of People’s Deputies. Tarkovsky as we already know was a child of Stalinist era and Second World War and as his life happened to finish early, he did not get the chance to benefit form changes that brought year 1986 and following period of Gorbachev election to Congress of People’s Deputies.
‘ The year of Tarkovsky’s death marked a turning point in Soviet cinema. In May 1986 the executive committee of the Soviet film federation was voted out of office and replaced by new representatives under the leadership of Emil Klimov. Feodor Yermash, tha chairman of Goskino who had repeatedly obstructed Tarkovsky’s career, was removed from his post shortly before the director’s death. The new political climate in the Soviet Union resulted in the release of large number of films that had been kept on the shelves for years. [...] In 1988 the first festival of independent film was held in Riga.’ Green, P. (1993) Andrei Tarkovsky: The Winding Quest, The McMillan Press Ltd, p. 137

Q: What kind or reference to Russian literature we can find in Tarkovsky’s art? Why did he identify with it so much?

What lead to Tarkovsky’s trouble with Committee and why?

http://magdalenaalcantaracmp.wordpress.com/

Film Studies Essay - Andrei Trakovsky

Writing Plan

Introduction

We are looking at excerpt from Solaris (1972) by Andrei Trakovsky. The film has been based on the novel with the same title written by Stanislaw Lem and published in Warsaw in1961.

The scene consist mainly of Kris Kelvin ”irrational” monologue and his painful meditation. The whole sequence is assembled of three shots and is dominated by still shot of Solaris Ocean, after which our main character is led towards the light.

Argument

‘All my protagonist are united by single passion – for overcoming. No knowledge of life can be won without a colossal expenditure of spiritual power. There may be grave losses on this path, but all the more profound and rich will be the achievements. In order to become conscious of what is best for oneself and one’s environment, what comprise the beauty and inner truth of our existence, our being (and not our mere subsistence [bytowanie]), in order to remain true to oneself and one’s duty to others, all my protagonists must pass through a tens sphere of meditation, searching and achievement.’ Bird, R. (2008), Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema, Reaktion Books Ltd, chapter Imaginary, p. 132

Counter-argument

‘Communication with Solaris-Thing [...] fails not because Solaris is too alien, the harbinger of an intellect infinitely surpassing our limited abilities, playing some perverse games with us whose rationale remains forever outside our grasp, but because it brings us too close to what in ourselves must remain at distance if we are to sustain the consistency of our symbolic universe.’ Bird, R. (2008), Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema, Reaktion Books Ltd, chapter Story, p 116

Conclusion

Has the communication really failed? Should we turn around and go back if we do not find what we expected on our ”trip” towards unknown? As the price sometimes may seems to high, is it okay for us just to give up and sleep within the dream?

I think how the process might be painfully we desert to know the truth.

Summary.

‘On creating his masterpiece Solaris (1972), the legendary Russian film-maker Andrei Tarkovsky coded the narration with the inter-circulation of texts, belonging to diverse non-cinematic art-realities: music and painting. These citations mark the most significant moments of the film. Tarkovsky’s cinematic technique represents his ability to reflect the meaning with the help of metaphorisation and to set up a multidimensional vision of a subject.’
http://www.sibetrans.com/trans/trans10/tarkovsky.htm [accessed on 20 October]

Solaris (1972) is a great example of creative possibilities that can be realized even in the most unfriendly conditions. Tarkovsky was a truly humanistic mind that manage to write part in history of the cinema with as little as seven future films.

I will go on exploring Tarkovsky’s world and all the references that it brings.

Bibliography

Internet sources:

http://www.filmref.com/directors/dirpages/tarkovsky.html#solaris

http://www.filmsite.org/sci-fifilms.html

http://www.mondo-digital.com/solaris.htm

http://www.longpauses.com/blog/2000_02_01_longpauses_archive.html

http://www.sibetrans.com/trans/trans10/tarkovsky.htm

http://www.ucalgary.edu/~tstronds/nostalghia.com/TheTopics/On_Solaris_2.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Tarkovsky

Literary sources:

Bird, R. (2008), Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema, Reaktion Books Ltd

Green, P. (1993) Andrei Tarkovsky: The Winding Quest, The McMillan Press Ltd

Johnson, P. (2006), Through the Mirror: Reflections on the Films of Andrei Tarkovsky, edited by Johnsson, G. and Ottarsson, T., Cambridge Scholar Press, chapter Subjectivity and Sociality in the Films of Andrei Trakovsky

Martin, S., (2006) Trough the Mirror: Reflections on the films of Andrei , edited by Johnson, G. and Ottarsson, T, Cambridge Scholars Press, chapter Film Theories: Live in the House and the House will Stand: The Role of Autobiography and Lived Experience in Tarkovsky’s Films and Asthetics

McSweeney, T. (2006), Through the Mirror: Reflections on the Films of Andrei Tarkovsky, edited by Jonhsson, G. and Otarsson, T., Cambridge Scholars Press, chapter Sculpting the Time Image: An exploration of Tarkovsky’s Film Theory from Deluzian Perspective

Tarkovsky, A. (1994), Time within Time: The Diaries 1907 -1986, translated by Kitty Hunter-Blair, Faber and Faber Limited

Vulgata, Ecclesiastes 1, 2-9

Films

Tarkovsky, A. (1972), Solaris

Study Blog

To be frank I got quite frustrated on the beginning, because I did not completely understand the idea of this assignment and I could not access subject resources. Blackboard blog example was a great help. It definitely helped me to start of.
After I decided to work on excerpt from Solaris (1972) by Andrei Tarkovsky I was still ”in the darkness” as I had no information about this director what so ever neither I have seen any of his films.
First I started to research all the basics: director’s biography, Solaris itself and film techniques just to have an idea what I should look out for. This research was mainly web based as due to technical problems mention above and my late decision on the subject, all point-start resources were drawn out from University library.

Week two…………….

After trying my local library witch out any satisfying result I have learned that I am allowed to benefit for other University library’s. It may sound silly but I did not realise that. This fact brought major change to my research as luckily I live in Goldsmith University neighbourhood. As soon as went there, I was stuck by the fact how much has been written about Tarkovsky, his theories, cinematic, philosophy. I was completely overwhelm by the amount of informations on the subject as well as complexity of it and Tarkovsky’s art. I had to create the mind map which turn out to be great idea.

Week three…………..

At this time I had gone trough quite a lot of material (my living room is flooded with papers) and I still did not got around it. It is dissatisfying as I feel I have less and less time and I want to prepare this blog as best as I can. I feel that I am slow which frustrate me even more… There was (and is!) so many interesting facts and subjects that I wanted to explore but unfortunately not enough time. I had to narrow my search and focus on few major themes.
I feel I can work best at home, where I can relax and let my thoughts float. The best time is morning or day time, when I can work with natural light, it seems like it energizes me.
Photocopying turn out to be very useful as I can highlight parts and quotes of my interest and make little notes on the margin. I have been brought up in the books surrounding and I like to treat them with respect.

Week four…………

Finally all the informations I have absorbed are slowly falling in to places. I am going back to my sources to get clearer view on the informations and to be able to transform them freely. There is still a lot I have to learn, so many possibilities to explore! But the clock is ticking and I am reviewing my posts trying to improve them.
I realize that I work the best on the subject after gathering and assimilation of information that consider the subject. Without this knowledge I do not feel I have power to speak about it, I have no confidence. I found as well that my vocabulary is to limiting and I have to enrich it so I can avoid unwanted repetitions.
I am very happy I have gone through this process as I have learn a lot and most of all I have been introduced to Tarkovsky’s world. I will definitely have to fined a time to come back to certain positions and I am sure they will find a place in my own library.

Tarkovsky cinematic theories and techniques.

Tarkovsky created theory that could be called ”Sculpting in time” (just like his book) – specific attribute of cinema is the fact that it can change the way we feel about time. With a use of long and slow takes and with least editing us possible he tried to give the spectator feeling of passing, perhaps as well lost time and create a relation between its different planes. Time, rhythm and editing where the most important elements, with editing left on far end, which for Tarkovsky was a little bit more than assembly process. With this point he was definitely in opposition Soviet directors like Eisenstein and Pudovkin concentrated mainly on the montage.
‘Tarkovsky describes an essential aesthetic principle of film as its ability to capture and reproduce time, to retain time , [...]
; they are two sides of the same coin. Memory is part of man’s mortal equipment, Tarkovsky argued, since life in no more than a finite period given to man in which to shape his spirit in accordance with his own conception of human existence. Although time is irretrievable, Tarkovsky saw the past as far more real or permanent than the present. The present passes away, slips through out fingers like sand . It acquires its material weight only in the memory. But time cannot disappear without trace.
Tarkovsky developed this aesthetic idea of film with increasing subtlety, cutting between past, present and future, and between memory, dream and vision, creating time within time in complex system of subjective cross-references. [...]
Solaris and The Mirror went furthest in Tarkovsky’s investigation of time in film. The former explored the idea of the materialisation of dreams and memories. The letter, a complex autobiographical timescape, was an essay in the rediscovery of lost time, in which beginning and end seems part of an endless spiral.’ Green, P. (1993), Andrei Tarkovsky: The Winding Quest, The McMillan Press Ltd., Introduction, p. 7

In Sculpting the Time (1986), he gives an example of ten minute film by Pascal Aubier that consist only one shot: it begins with a landscape and then the camera closes in/zooms in slowly to revile man on the hill that appears to be asleep, another bigger close up and we learn that the man is dead.
‘ You will remember that the film has no editing, no acting and no décor. But the rhythm of the movement of time is there within the frame, as the sole organising force of the – quite complex – dramatic development.’ Tarkovsky, A. (1986), Sculpting in Time: Reflections on the Cinema, translated from the Russian by Kitty Hunter-Blair, The Bodley Head Ltd., p. 114
The Time and the Rhythm we can see both of them polished to the perfection in Trakovsky film art.

http://magdalenaalcantaracmp.wordpress.com/

Pud n c ` i ed mainly on the montage.
‘Tarkovsky describes an essential aesthetic principle of film as its ability to capture and reproduce time, to retain time , [...]
; they are two sides of the same coin. Memory is part of man’s mortal equipment, Tarkovsky argued, since life in no more than a finite period given to man in which to shape his spirit in accordance with his own conception of human existence. Although time is irretrievable, Tarkovsky saw the past as far more real or permanent than the present. The present passes away, slips through out fingers like sand . It acquires its material weight only in the memory. But time cannot disappear without trace.
Tarkovsky developed this aesthetic idea of film with increasing subtlety, cutting between past, present and future, and between memory, dream and vision, creating time within time in complex system of subjective cross-references. [...]
Solaris and The Mirror went furthest in Tarkovsky’s investigation of time in film. The former explored the idea of the materialisation of dreams and memories. The letter, a complex autobiographical timescape, was an essay in the rediscovery of lost time, in which beginning and end seems part of an endless spiral.’ Green, P. (1993), Andrei Tarkovsky: The Winding Quest, The McMillan Press Ltd., Introduction, p. 7

In Sculpting the Time (1986), he gives an example of ten minute film by Pascal Aubier that consist only one shot: it begins with a landscape and then the camera closes in/zooms in slowly to revile man on the hill that appears to be asleep, another bigger close up and we learn that the man is dead.
‘ You will remember that the film has no editing, no acting and no décor. But the rhythm of the movement of time is there within the frame, as the sole organising force of the – quite complex – dramatic development.’ Tarkovsky, A. (1986), Sculpting in Time: Reflections on the Cinema, translated from the Russian by Kitty Hunter-Blair, The Bodley Head Ltd., p. 114
The Time and the Rhythm we can see both of them polished to the perfection in Trakovsky film art.

Andrei Tarkovsky

Tarkovsky cinematic theories and techniques

Tarkovsky created theory that could be called”Sculpting in time” specific attribute of cinema is the fact that it can change the way we feel about time. With a use of long and slow takes and with least editing us possible he tried to give the spectator feeling of passing, perhaps as well lost time and create a relation between its different planes. Time, rhythm and editing where the most important elements, with editing left on far end, which for Tarkovsky was a little bit more than assembly process. With this point he was definitely in opposition Soviet directors like Eisenstein and Pudovkin concentrated mainly on the montage.
‘Tarkovsky describes an essential aesthetic principle of film as its ability to capture and reproduce time, to retain time, [...]
; they are two sides of the same coin. Memory is part of man’s mortal equipment, Tarkovsky argued, since life in no more than a finite period given to man in which to shape his spirit in accordance with his own conception of human existence. Although time is irretrievable, Tarkovsky saw the past as far more real or permanent than the present. The present passes away, slips through out fingers like sand . It acquires its material weight only in the memory. But time cannot disappear without trace.
Tarkovsky developed this aesthetic idea of film with increasing subtlety, cutting between past, present and future, and between memory, dream and vision, creating time within time in complex system of subjective cross-references. [...]
Solaris and The Mirror went furthest in Tarkovsky’s investigation of time in film. The former explored the idea of the materialisation of dreams and memories. The letter, a complex autobiographical timescape, was an essay in the rediscovery of lost time, in which beginning and end seems part of an endless spiral.’ Green, P. (1993), Andrei Tarkovsky: The Winding Quest, The McMillan Press Ltd., Introduction, p. 7

In Sculpting the Time (1986), he gives an example of ten minute film by Pascal Aubier that consist only one shot: it begins with a landscape and then the camera closes in/zooms in slowly to revile man on the hill that appears to be asleep, another bigger close up and we learn that the man is dead.
‘ You will remember that the film has no editing, no acting and no décor. But the rhythm of the movement of time is there within the frame, as the sole organising force of the – quite complex – dramatic development.’ Tarkovsky, A. (1986), Sculpting in Time: Reflections on the Cinema, translated from the Russian by Kitty Hunter-Blair, The Bodley Head Ltd., p. 114
The Time and the Rhythm we can see both of them polished to the perfection in Trakovsky film art.