Using a structuralist approach, the researcher conducted an in-depth study of films by Man Ray and Andy Warhol in an attempt to discover a commonality between the two artists. The examination of different art, film, and cultural movements provided the insight to support the reasoning of the signification present within the structuralist decisions of the artists. Many studies conducted in the past have explored the relationship of one filmmaker to another and utilizing these studies as a backing reference and guideline, the author explored a new comparison using two visual artists fluent in many of the same media. The results received from this extensive research and analysis provided strikingly similar elemental and semiotic usage between the two artists.
Many cultural movements throughout the twentieth century have had a significant impact upon the art world. Many of the artists involved in these movements have incorporated their personal ideas, concerns, and imaginations into their creations through the use of signs and sign systems. Some of these artists, later on, directed their skills towards the art of filmmaking and through this experimentation with a new medium, they produced images quite different from the classic Hollywood cine. By taking the structuralist approach to the semiotic theory, these works may be broken down, studied, and compared to find the representation and possible commonalty between a particular artist and others.
Andrews (1976), discussing Metz states "Semiotics serves a major function in this plan because it allows us to see beyond the petty cinema of the past and toward the vast domain of untried and repressed signification. With this freedom comes a vast responsibility. Signification doesn't simply exist; it must be created" (239). Man, with his symbol making propensity, unconsciously transforms objects or forms into symbols (thereby endowing them with great psychological importance) and uses them in both his religion and visual art (Jung, 1968).
Because of the reasoning and conceptualization involved in the creation of experimental and avant-garde/surrealist film, a definite code system is present within the works. The artists tend to create these films for the reason of expanding, manipulating, experimenting, and establishing new horizons for this particular medium. Contained in this process are many structural aspects, which some artists explore as they express their feelings; feelings which are hidden within signs and sign systems. Different aesthetic techniques, distortions, film speeds, and narrative/non-narrative structures create an aura which these systems manifest. For example, when considering the merits and liabilities of anamorphosis as a potential film style, we must realize that it is not merely an objective mechanism, but also, as a reality-distorting phenomenon, may originate in the behavior of human vision and in the mediation of atmospheric conditions between objects and human eyesight (Tyler 1969). Even in some cases, such as in dadaist film work, where an interpretation is not suspect because it is intentionally not meant to be interpreted, there is still a code system present supporting the reasoning of why it is not to be within the creation of such "nonsense". This code system signifies the idea of a revolt against the conventional ways and mainstream thinking of a standardized society. This provides one of the common traits of dadaist work.
Upon encountering code systems, the viewer is often engaged in primary and secondary processes. The processes, studied by Freud during his work on the interpretation of dreams, deal with the receiver and his/her own release of tension. The primary process seeks immediate gratification through hallucination, but the end result is always disillusionment and unpleasure, while the secondary process traces a more circuitous route to gratification, which necessitates the temporary toleration of unpleasure, but promises a more satisfying conclusion (Silverman, 1983). When applied to a semiotic structure, the drive from the processes leads to rational thoughts and understanding of the addressed ideas in the systems. These thoughts and ideas are transmitted from the encoder (artist) to the decoder (spectator) by use of structuralist approaches in the interpretation of the narrative. It can also be the narrative structure itself or the semiotics revolving around both struturalist and narrative elements allowing for the viewer to locate and decode the sign sytems.
For instance, a multiple exposed subject within a film, is not a transformation of the subject, but rather the artist's perception or at least a representation of the subject. In this example, the work is an expression of the artist and of the subject itself. Something has stimulated the artist in the way s/he perceives the subject for the artist to add his/her own perceptions through art. As an output, the artist releases these expressions through the multiple exposure of the film medium displaying the perception of the subject through his/her own view of the world and the subject itself. Here reality is first filtered by the selectivity of individual interests and modified by prejudicial perception to become experience; as such it is combined with similar, contrasting or modifying experiences, both forgotten and remembered, to become assimilated into a conceptual image; this in turn is subject to the manipulations of the art instrument; and what finally emerges is a plastic image which is a reality in its own right (Deren, 1972).
In surrealist, experimental, and avant-garde cine, the viewer's attention is often directed toward specific images through the use of structuralist techniques and away from other aspects within the screen space. The structuralistic techniques are a sign system within itself, as the artist has "almost" absolute control over the viewer's perceptions. The viewer does have the opportunity to look away from the screen and not follow the artists intentions as the film proceeds. When the spectator views the intended, it is the receiver's responsibility to make the decisions of what the signs signify, along with how they were presented and interpreted.
The avant-garde's revolt against convention finds its rationale in the discovery (by communication theory) that 'information' is a function of surprise (Ray, 1995). At times these signs may need to be studied more comprehensively to discover the signified; the artist's intentions. While incorporating structural techniques, the artist may mask or distort the sign which brings up a whole new sign system within itself. What is being signified from the technique chosen? What is being signified from the signs and why? By breaking down these continuous layers of sign systems that make up the semiotic code, the core will present what is signified.
Structuralistic approaches to the semiotic theory serve as an analytic technique to interpret the signified in the aesthetics presented to the decoder. Codes along with subcodes contribute to the processes as they present logical specifics and cultural ideas to film syntagmatically and paradigmatically. Film syntagmatics pertain to a transformation which takes place as one unit evolves into a second unit as seen in the editing of two camera shots. Why such a transition takes place offers an interpretation of the signified. A paradigmatic approach emphasizes the fact that the signifier may act as a "synonym or antonym" to the other signifiers that were not applied in representing the signified. The godfather of semiotics, Ferdinand de Saussure, first applied this technique in his study of semiotic linguistics. Paradigmatics are present in the film through the use of montage sequences.
At times an artist's intentions may not reach the viewer due to the fact that the translation was repressed by the receiver or the signs have references too personal or obscure for the spectator to decode them. According to Silverman (1983) on Freud "The intensity which properly belongs to the repressed materials is then displaced onto unacknowledged thoughts from the recent past and elements from each source are combined through condemnation to supply the dream with its characters, its narrative, and its mise-en-scene" (62). The reasoning behind repressed material is that the message may be interrupted outside the screen or within the screen, contain an unacceptable thought, be related to a taboo, etc. . . . The artist may also purposely use sign material similar to this in order to present the signified in a "shock technique". Material such as this will strike the viewer with a strong impact as it presents a forbidden or unknown aspect of the mind. At times when these messages have not been able to reach the viewer, it shows that either the artist has failed to communicate the material through the sign systems presented, it has been done purposely by the artist. When considering these aspects of sign systems and films, the artists/filmmakers may demonstrate highly similar techniques and management of the sign system. This provides a commonalty between the artists and also a contrast if they happen to utilize these sign systems differently. It is possible, for artists involved in different movements, to have similar traits and sign systems represented in their work.
By broadening one's analytic scope to include contextual concerns, one is simply casting a wider net to locate and incorporate some of the factors which are involved in any act of communication - the 'happenings' of making meaning (Harris, 1995). The point of semiotic entry that a receiver encounters a sign contains different levels of textual operations that can occur simultaneously. This structure is broken down into three levels - the macrostructural level, the mesostructural level, and the microstructural level. With the macrostructural level, it is stated that through historical/ ideological implications of semiotic encounters, a structure large in time or space may be hard to perceive directly. The mesostructural level is observed through the pragmatics revolving around the reception and production dynamics, which are different in the sense that the viewer has access to direct inspection of the signals. Microstructure refers to the textural analysis of structures not being large enough to be perceived by the observer.
Harris, (1995), discusses Hodge's and Kress's study of the relationship of the spectator to film as it is described into four separate areas: the production regime, reception regime, genre regime, and, lastly, the regime of knowledge. Within the production regime, the producers function within the rules of a specified context of production and sign construction. For whom it is aimed and who will receive the message through the presented sign system is a major concern. The reception regime puts all of its main focus directly upon the text and materializes from a spectator's interaction with the sign(s). The meaning is not directly in the text , but signs aid in the exchange and generation of the meaning taken out of it. The third part, genre regimes, uses assorted texts to place boundaries on the possible meanings, production, and receptional relationships derived from an idea or sign. All texts must have boundaries and structure and this is the classification system for these boundaries. Lastly, the regime of knowledge is taking these categorized topics and social constraints and properly understanding them or realizing them. Meaning is taken out of the outcome of text creating context and context creating text.
The very word 'film' itself calls to mind various definitions, ranging from the physical strips of celluloid, to a complex economic structure, to problems of legal censorship, and to many technological and socialcultural factors (Roth, 1983). Elements present in film, especially in non- narrative film, provide a skeleton composed of signs that permit for the growth of the signifier. Audio, camera angles and shots, color, depth of field, exposure, film speed, film stock, image size, lighting, etc..., as well as Eisenstein's theory of montage may be applied, utilized, manipulated, and abused to provide a code system within the aesthetics themselves. Space, time, reality, and imagination evoke the viewer's senses to the imagery displayed in the screen to form a "relationship" between the viewer and the two dimensional screen through the continuation of eye contact. With this "contact", the decoder may encounter individual feelings and emotions upon the presentation of cinematic principles sent out by the encoder. The semiotic theory applied to film allows the two dimensional screen surface to represent a three dimensional space. This representation allows the signification of an impression of reality through its illusionary traits. Even though the two dimensional field presents an image that is not "real", through the artist's utilization of the medium it appears to be as it allows the viewer to experience and observe the images/actions taking place within this field.
We have come to the understanding that a work of visual art differs from other products of human activity essentially in the fact that, whereas intentionality makes the latter serve a particular purpose, the same intentionally renders the work of art a sign, not subordinated to any external purpose but self-sufficient and evoking in man a certain attitude toward all of reality (Mukarovsky, 1944). Semiotics with its informational function provides a universal language through the sign systems represented in the visuals to provide a relationship or separation between the viewer and creator. The intention of the artist is a definition within itself of who the artist is and what the artist represents. Visual artists fluent in these media present an interesting study of how they utilize signs and sign systems, especially within the medium of film - the art of motion. Due to their experience in the different fields of art, the expansion and experimentation of different techniques concerning the media acted as essential parts of their sign systems. Two such visual artists fluent in a variety of media including paint. photography, print, and film were Man Ray and Andy Warhol. Both represent two different artistic and social cultural movements within the twentieth century.
Man Ray, involved heavily within the dadaist movement in both the United States and France in the late 1920's/early 1930's, (also considered to be a surrealist artist) brought many new ideas and techniques to the medium of film, due to his experience and experimentation with other visual arts such as photography. Known for painting with light through his "Rayograms" and "Solarizations", he later on applied his techniques to film. Ray's works contain neither the rigid sequential structure of the narrative film, nor the schematic/rhythmic form of the pure abstract artists (Leger, Eggeling, Richter) but their informality indicates the start of a new attitude to film-making in which the artist is free to reveal as much of the creative process as he chooses (Curtis, 1971). From this the viewer has the responsibility to interpret the signs and sign systems to understand the signified. This brings the decoder closer into the images and into the film itself. The interpretation of the visuals are a major concern of Man Ray's works, as they surround the viewer with various imagery and sign systems.
Andy Warhol, the visual artist from New York City is considered the pop artist of the 1960's. His feelings on American consumerism seen in many of his artworks is signified through the sign systems he presents within the imagery of the subject matter. Having previously expressed his views through many media, Warhol turned toward the art of filmmaking in the early 1960's after viewing films of Kenneth Anger, Stan Brakhage, Gregory Markopoulos, Willard Mass, Marie Menken, and especially Jack Smith in an attempt to create a revolutionary change of his own. The Factory, both his workplace and home, provided a rich environment full of artists and "beautiful people" who came to fulfill their dreams. This, in turn, would be a great asset to his creation of his own alternative Hollywood scene. As Warhol states (1975) "I've never met a person I couldn't call a beauty" (61), this provided everybody with a chance to achieve their superstar dreams; and also provided Warhol the opportunities to produce a film a day.
Due to his observant eye for beauty, Warhol incorporated his feelings and outlook on society through the structuralist techniques he applied (or didn't apply) to his films. The revolutionary fixed camera gaze placed much emphasis upon the sign systems presented, or itself being a sign system, signifying that the time experienced by the viewer was not real time, but rather Warhol's concept of time and could be taken farther to interpret the signified in the images presented within the imagery of the subject matter. Warhol challenges the very notion of art and its subject matter in these films by taking a commonplace event (of the sort to which we would not give a second thought) and elongating its duration, thus making us painfully aware of every aspect of it (Rowe, 1982). His career as a filmmaker contains so many abrupt lurches into new directions and shifts to different scales of production that description of it in terms of a single expressive urgency is as difficult as organizing it in standard generic categories (James, 1989).
Population
The population examined in this study consisted of the films, artwork, and commentaries pertaining to both artists. Films of Man Ray's viewed consisted of Emak Bakia and L'Etoile de Mer, while the experimental films of Andy Warhol viewed consisted of Sleep, Eat, Kiss, and Empire. The Morrissey/Warhol cult films Flesh, Trash, Frankenstein, and Dracula were also incorporated into the study to demonstrate Warhol's growth as a filmmaker/producer. Many stills of both artist's films were also viewed, along with various commentaries on those works, as well as others.
Procedure
Many views and interpretations were considered as many of the structuralistic techniques
and sign systems were carefully explored, compared and interpreted. A process such as
the following occurred:
Man Ray's 1927 Parisian film, Emak Bakia which took six months to complete, contains a nonnarrative plot within a nonlinear structure, demonstrating a true Dadaist quality. Irrational, nonpsychological, and nondramatized rhythms present the illusions as signs signifying the absolute void of nothing. The viewer's ability/desire to identify with any of these irrational happenings in the film is disrupted, cheating him or her of the expectations of a strong narrative structure and a sense of "reality" in the work. Many times the viewer's expectations are raised by a few feet of "narrative film" and then the sequence is disrupted with an abrupt change to objects and subject matter that have no relationship to the previous or to the future footage. Abstract motion art in Emak Bakia places a strong directional feel to these visual rhythmic implications brought on by Man Ray in his juxtapositional usage of film elements. The experimentation of these elements presents the everyday world of reality and transforms it into a false or new reality. This particular film could be considered surrealistic, but due to Man Ray's use of continual rhythmic juxtapositions, experimentations with Rayographs, and other structuralistic elements, as well as an absence of a strong narrative, Emak Bakia very much demonstrates Dadaist qualities. The time period from which the film was produced, the geographical location, and economic conditions surrounding the film support the Dadaist concept and resemble similar circumstances of such other Dada artists as Duchamp, Eggeling, and Richter.
This cinepoeme, of landscapes and spiral studies, signifies the cinema as an actual machine which is producing "nothing". Techniques applied act as a sign for the signified concept of a growing modernized progressive cinema where art may be expanded or remain constant within the celluloid medium and its chemical processes. Man Ray's manipulation of this film stock, by producing Rayographs, signified the actual celluloid as a sculpture itself. Rayographs, created by exposing the strip to white light for a brief moment only after sprinkling such objects as pins, thumbtacks, salt, pepper, and smoke to this light sensitive surface provide rhythms which link to other segment rhythms of speed, light or black and white ratio creating a filmic format. Such images consisted of the rhythmic relations of lampshades, egg crates, merry go rounds, female torso, male shirt collars, mirrors, crystals etc. . . creating an overall juxtaposition of a nonlinear happenings.
Man Ray utilized these illusionary images (signs) in a way to signify a three dimensional field, which was achieved by maintaining a fixed camera shot that remained static while the images "performed" their acts. The actual filmic frame acted as a sign representing a phototgraph, which Man Ray was certainly familiar with, and allowed the images to "come alive" within this two dimensional surface. The rotation and positioning of these juxtapositions create the illusion for the decoder of a signified third dimension. These images, at times, contain an extremely high contrast produced through his Rayograph lighting techniques preserving Man Ray's concept of rhythm and continuity allowing such transitions to take place.
Multiple exposed images in Emak Bakia support Man Ray's signified three dimensional field, but also show true irrational happenings preserving the Dadaist traits. Of course, one would never find an eye appearing on top of a camera's lens, but through superimposing, Man Ray could relay this sign to the viewer to signify the irrationality the spectator is witnessing or about to witness. The multiple exposed eye is seen later on superimposed on the front grill of a car and also painted on Kiki's eyelids. This leaves it up to the viewer to attempt to reflect and interpret what is being shown or about to be shown. In this particular case, it is more of an experimentation of light, rhythm, and sequence that provides no possible depth for a relationship to bond, similar to a sleep pattern.
Besides maintaining these fixed camera techniques, Man Ray's study of the moving camera is demonstrated through the speed of a stable camera. Footage shot from the inside of a car, reaching incredible speeds, photographs the passing exterior in a fast paced rhythm signifying the passing of the spectator into the second dimension. The next image of the sheep shows these delicate animals as a motion vector into rhythm through Man Ray's structuralistic technique of camera framing. This sets up the situational illusion of the car colliding with the sheep. Achieved by tossing the actual 16mm camera into the air and catching it demonstrates Man Ray's minimalistic qualities with a desire to expand. He used what he had readily available to him with creativity, but with simple structuralist procedures. The main focus Man Ray maintains is the effects of light patterns and shadows created through these rhythms and speeds providing a visual distortion of the image to the viewer. This provides a sign to signify an exploitation of the medium and a disregard for the conventional mainstream cine.
Man Ray's concerns with the ability of the viewer to sit through his films and not leave in the middle of them, presents a toleration test of the viewer's patience towards the witnessing of films characterized by irrational time, content and interpretation. The viewer's responsibility is to reflect on what is shown; the dramatization of the unreal and bring this reflection upon themselves into their real lives. To bring this unreal into the real for the purpose of reflection is another way that the two dimensional sign signifies a three dimensional field; in this instance real time, real life, and real sequential continuity. This concept is not only true of Emak Bakia, but also of L'Etoile de Mer.
Man Ray created L'Etoile de Mer in 1928, inspired by the poetry of friend Robert Desnos. Desnos, about to leave on a journalism assignment to the West Indies, read this poem at the farewell dinner party held by Man Ray and Kiki (Alic Prin). Man Ray had promised that upon Desnos's return a film will be finished based on his poem. Man Ray's film in all its imagery and elements signifies Desnos's poem, which in turn signifies other literary concepts and semantics. This particular work is considered to be more of a surrealistic piece as it presents a dream like sequential structured, lyrical, rhythm for the philosophical metamorphosis of illusionary imagery allowing the spectator to reflect, interpret, and relate to. Once again, Man Ray allows the viewer only to experience these "dramatic" sequences for only a short period of time, cheating their expectations and testing their patience.
The structuralistic technique of applying a gelatin filter to the lens is the most predominante characteristic of this film, which proves to be both clever and disturbing to the viewer. The distorted images created produce rhythmic patterns of juxtapositions signifying that this is not real time, but rather a dream like time which the spectator goes through as they witness the actions on film. Relating this element to the "narrative", the film acts as a sign signifying the instability and insecurity presented in a romance. This could also possibly act as a personal sign signifying Man Ray's fear of losing Kiki to another man and not being able to bear the sight. Kiki, incorporated into the film as the female image, appears nude through this filter, which blocks voyeuristic principles (cheating viewer expectations), and also acted positively for the cinematic censors at this time period in film history. By utilizing the filter, Man Ray presents a rhythm of movement within the distorted images shown through the fragmentation of manipulated lighting in the gelatin's texture.
Areas of multiple exposure in this film reinforce the surrealistic state signifying the dream like state separating the "narrative" into phrases. Each phrase is a sign referring to particular lines of the poem L'Etoile de Mer. The multiple exposed frame, in which it is divided up into twelve sections, signifies the third dimension by movement held within a static two dimensional frame. Within Man Ray's visual poetry, the starfish signifies love, a love that will be kept always (represented in a jar) throughout time, which is signified through the sign of movement in the wheels in the bottom sections of the frame. Further literary translations of the semantics presented in the "narrative" imagery lead to a deeper understanding of Desnos.
Andy Warhol's way of approaching the art of filmmaking much resembles the philosophical teachings of a Zen Buddhist as Warhol experiments within a real time format. Buddhism beliefs incorporate the concept of living now, not the future, not the past, but rather right now accepting the greatness of the moment in time with all its qualities. Warhol's beliefs of everybody having a star like quality very much represents the Buddhist belief of everyone/everything being wonderful and unique. Both concepts are especially present in the early films Sleep, Eat, Kiss, and Empire. Within the production regime of these films Warhol sets up these ideas signified through the sign systems (subject matter) within structuralistic confines. The viewer experiences a past time in a present time, re- experiencing the uninterrupted past time with much emphasis on the "beauty" of the image in a set real time context.
Sleep, shot in 1963 with a 16mm Bolex, presents an avant garde biographical film of poet, John Giorno, sleeping. Being Warhol's first film, the experimentation, manipulation, and minimalistic approach remain the focus of the film rather than the study of the subject's anatomy at rest. The film, signifying the camera as a mechanical device and ways to project subject matter, was shot at 24 fps and projects at 16 fps retarding the film emphasizing the grain and movement (or lack of). Much like Man Ray, the cinematography very much signifies a three dimensional plane framed in a photographic format, allowing the rhythm of the subject's breathing to remind the viewer of the third dimension. This rhythmic pulsation is also found later on in the static Empire.
The framing of John Giorno sleeping contains various close-ups of his anatomy, often mystify ing the viewer of what is to be interpreted or received through the presentation of such a tight framed composition. The high contrast of black and white, light and shadowed areas, mask the image to the viewer emphasizing the coarse grain appearance which act as a sign to signify the chemical properties embedded in the celluloid as it is manipulated through the eye of the machine. Passive to the mechanics of the camera, Warhol runs the camera at different angles to stress the black/white relationship in a fast falloff chiaroscuro lighting situation, similar to that of Baroque artist Caravaggio, posing a dramatic effect within a tight dimension. The selective illumination emphasizes the rhythm present in the chest and neck shots, while the bone structure of Giorno is emphasized by the hot spots contained in the feet, hand, and head shots. These changing of angles form a very equal repetitive pattern of constant time and rhythm preserving the notion of unaltered and uninterrupted real time; the focus of the work.
Sleep, as well as the other Warhol silents, strike an interesting idea of what is needed in order to create an actual film. The absence of the structuralistic element, sound, presents another look into this idea. Are these films, in real time, signifying real time present in the theater as well as it acts as a sign to stimulate a response of whispers, sarcasm, subtle movements, and sounds of impatience which make the viewers' increasingly aware of their auditory surroundings making them the stars of the film, thus forming the narrative of the film? So entranced, the viewer may not want to wake the false reality (sleeper) of real time projected in the actual present real time. If this is true, then the two dimensional sign (the film) signifies a third dimension (false reality), which in turn acts as a sign to stimulate the true third dimension and provides the audio for the silence of the sleep.
The fact that Warhol had an extreme fascination with people's personalities, as well as being fascinated by the most most boring simplistic ideas, coincides with the Buddhist philosophical beliefs of every moment being the greatest of moments. This is signified in these films through the structuralistic usage of Warhol's techniques. The 1963 film, Eat, composed of Robert Indiana consuming a single mushroom for a full 45 minute session was shot in real time presenting to the viewer the continuous length of time it took him to finish the mushroom. Within this continuous real time frame, the viewer is presented with a static close up of Indiana for the full 45 minutes demonstrating to the viewer Warhol's passive minimalist techniques of filmmaking. Going against the norm, this film never changes its view and the only thing that he does change is a new magazine reel approximately every ten minutes. With this incorporated into the film, this overexposed leader strip of film fades in and fades out as a sign to signify the mechanics of the camera and how film, as a light sensitive medium, can reinterpret past events into a present time event through real time replaying the past. The visual strip of overexposed leader structuralistically acts as sign to signify a feeling of timelessness in which the viewer feels time retard as reality briefly turns "surrealistic" and is then brought back into real time in a continuous sweep (fading in).
In Eat, the subject provides the angles for the camera instead of the camera providing angles for the spectator signifying, once again, Warhol's minimalist approach to structuralist elements. Indiana's movement in the chair, facial movements, and direction of focus demonstrate these various angles, thus signifying the presence of out of frame subject matter that has some significance to him provoking curiosity in the viewer. The camera as a machine can not see this subject matter without the aid of an active operator, but through Warhol's passiveness the camera is never touched. The expectations of the viewer to witness this out of frame space are delayed and never confirmed, as the static camera shot controls this scene to the very last frame. In the middle of the film, the viewers' expectations are cheated as a cat jumps up into the frame surprising the "storyline" with this unexpected incident. This provides a climax to this film.
The eye contact Indiana makes to the viewer, by use of a static mechanical camera as a transport, signifies the subject's possible awareness of spectators in this illusion of real time. Through this first person silent narrative structure in a real time format, Warhol not only violates cinema norms, but sets up the spectators to violate cultural norms by "forcing" them to stare at somebody eating. When engaged in this eye contact with Robert Indiana, the viewer may feel uncomfortable and need to look the other way signifying the shared real time/real life of the spectator and cinema. Both, spectator and Indiana, are engaged in the same time format as the camera remains static presenting the illusion of this shared space. The movement takes place in the subject of the film, as well as in the spectators' reactions/surroundings, not in the structuralist elements during the manipulation of the spectator in these moments of tension.
The selective focus camera, in Eat, allows Indiana, himself, to be thrown out of focus through his body movement providing soft images in the screen space. Resulting from these movements are a range of shots, not by the camera, but by the subject (ex. medium close up, to extreme close up, to medium close up etc. . .) signifying the concept of man versus machine; the influence of human movement in rebelling against the control of a machine. Warhol's intellectual ignorance to utilize the camera during these instances also signifies his intent to present the image as a photographic medium containing a two dimensional space. Within this movement, finely tuned selective focus, and use of natural available key light acting as a sign to signify the beauty taken for granted in an everyday event, the shadows cast present rhythms and highlight important detailed areas of the screen where the attention should be directed. Other areas of the frame are produced through highly contrasted silhouette effects which direct the attention to the brighter and lighter areas which tend to bounce out of the darkness. The retardation of the film speed, along with this lighting, point out the beauty of Indiana's facial muscles as they expand and contract in this everyday routine. The fact that eating is an everyday event allows this film to take a look at this process and examine its qualities to provide a new perspective on its "beauty" and ourselves.
The retardation of film speed in real time format used in the 1963 film, Kiss, places much emphasis on the beauty and movements of a kiss through the similar lighting techniques and camera shots in his future Screen Tests. This series of segments documenting couples engaged in a kiss with all its passivity and aggressiveness possibly act as a sign system to the decoder signifying the analogy of Warhol's passive approach to the cinema as compared to the classic aggressive Hollywood approach characterized by frequent camera movement, edits, strong lighting, sound, etc. . . . The movement of these individuals, within this static frame, express the emphasis on the structuralist elements such as strong shadows and spot lighting, thus creating high contrasts. These contrasts, similar to a reversed negative, place an erotic aura around the individuals involved creating a sign system in an attempt to signify their personalities within the elements.
Voyeuristic principles apply to Kiss as the viewer's gaze into the private world of another's kiss is presented through the tightly framed screen space demonstrating the intensity and seduction of this act. Warhol's camera acts as a window for the intrusion on the mystery of others engaged, relying on the comments and replies of the spectator as the audio for the visual interpretation. The slowed down drug induced state of real time reinforces the beauty of others and intensifies the rhythm of facial muscle movements and feelings presented between both subjects in their experience. Each segment ends with the overexposed leader signifying to the viewer the film medium bringing the viewer out of the trance and into the next viewing window. These overexposed roll-ins interrupt the image not allowing the unity of the individuals to end carrying the idea through the overexposed period, thus maintaining a strong emphasis on a continuous theme with the only visual interruption of the leader which acts as an aid in this continuum of an everlasting kiss. The main focus of a constant kiss has no beginning or end as it is a continual process which is suspended through the breaks and moves onto another couple. Warhol preserves this idea of conceptual continuity through his minimalistic approach to structuralist usage.
By use of camera, Warhol presents feelings of curiosity in this very natural act of beauty. In one segment within the fixed camera gaze, it becomes apparent that there is to be a unique twist to the documentation as one of the individuals is definitely a male, but the other individual is questionable as the face is hidden from absolute view. The aggression incorporated into the kiss is extremely intense magnified by the structuralistic technique of Warhol's static close up and slowed down real time which further reinforcing the doubt. Acting as a sign, Warhol incorporates movement of the camera breaking his silence of passivity and quickly zooms out to cheat the viewer's expectations presenting two males, as the subjects, engaged in an intensive kiss. The zoom, signifies the unacceptableness of homosexuality in society and is used as a shock technique signifying the intensity of an anti-homosexual favoring to the image. This demonstration of homosexual love resembles similar themes in the works of Anger's Fireworks and Smith's Flaming Creatures dismissing the idea of a Hollywood mainstream as it backlashes. This sign provides an antonym to the subjective view in subjective time, which can be considered objective view in subjective time if the actual theatre is to play the supporting role to the screen space - shared space/shared time. The underground world's (Warhol's world's) perception of this technique was a mere metaphor for a rebellion of expression against a heterosexual dominated society into an underground society of acceptableness and respect.
Empire, the last of the Warhol silents, utilizes the film medium itself as a sign to signify the idealistic concept of what is actually needed in order to consider a film an actual film. This Baudelairean avant garde work explores a new concept of time and space throughout its dense eight hour fixed camera gaze into a stationary index vector of fame and fortune. Warhol's fascination with stardom signified through the image of the famous New York building, further acts as a sign signifying corporate America brought on by a consumeristic culture. The realism signified here is greatly attributed to Warhol's minimalist approach to the structuralistic technique of a fixed camera gaze producing the sign signifying the concept devoting that much time to the subject.
The duration of time, incorporated within this film, allows the viewer to respond to this sign and realize its artistic architecture through the stabilized framing. Never moving, this structure stabilizes the frame as it divides the frame in half and later on into equal sized segments of light as the floodlights appear at dusk providing the climax of the film. Once again, Warhol's concept of stardom is found in the sign of the building, (itself a work of art), signifying art as art, business as art, and money as art. This is similar to the concept behind Warhol's Money Art. The length of time Warhol presents the viewer to work with each of these concepts is ample enough time to form a bond with the subject and interpret the ideas and thoughts presented in this "photograph". Presented in a first person form, the viewer and the building confront each other as the encoder sends out a stimuli to the decoder stimulating a response or concept to the image.
To remind the viewer that they are engaged in viewing a film, Warhol's minimalism present in his structuralistic techniques signify this particular medium as opposed to a two dimensional photographic medium. This is achieved through the various periods of overexposure in the film, various manipulations, and breaks in linearity due to rolling in the a new magazine exposing the leader film. The actual use of light is achieved through the fading of natural light and increase of artificial light, as well as the pulsation of artificial light. Warhol takes full advantage of the technical production code of utilizing as much available light as possible to incorporate an image or idea. Changes in lighting demonstrate a gray scale in this black and white medium, often emphasizing grain and producing extremely high contrasts which is stressed towards the end of the work. Towards the end of the film, the building has virtually disappeared, with the exception of the floodlights, which leave an abstract configuration producing the invisible shape of the phallic structure. Surrounded by minute lights, which tend to form "constellations" signify this is an area of "stars", the biggest star being the building itself. The lit up rod splits the top portion of the structure in half, presenting twin counterpoints stabilizing an empty screen represented in a high contrast of black and white color. A pulsating light adds movements to the "hyperfocal distance photo" creating what is the film, signifying the concept of what is needed in order to consider a film a film.
Later on with the assistance of Paul Morrissey, Warhol's films lean more towards a "slap in the face" Hollywood style narrative structure featuring the Factory cast. The main objective of these films are to test the spectator's patience as well as their toleration towards a cinema that backlashes a traditional cinematic structure. Warhol and Morrissey achieve this change through their usage and misuse of structuralistic and literary concepts that compose a film. For instance, it is hard to tell at times whether the camera movements, in- camera edits, and in-camera dissolves were planned or created spontaneously to capture the spontaneity of the "narration", which at times may have also been an improvisation or actual conversation. The camera signifies the subject as the main focus, not the technique or dialogue.
Many of these structuralistic techniques, especially the fixed camera gaze, act as a sign to signify the viewer as a member of the cast, in the sense that they are present in the scene observing the actions as a third party. To reinforce this concept, the camera usually remains focused, or unfocused, on a subject, usually extremely close up, while the dialogue remains vague to the image. At some points, the dialogue is heard from off screen, while the camera tends to have a fixed "drug induced" shot of an object or individual in another area. A quick zoom or pan usually follows to relocate the eye. Warhol and Morrissey control the viewers' eyes to the point that they direct the spectator where to look, when to look, and what to reflect on - the image and the dialogue. At times the dialogue becomes secondary and the visual is primary showing the unimportance of the "script" and the artistry of the camera movement; visual vs. auditory.
The 1968 Warhol/Morrissey production, Flesh, entirely directed, produced, and written by Paul Morrissey utilized the Factory cast and demonstrated a carbon copy of Warhol's mise-en scene; Warhol was still in the hospital recovering from Valerie Solanas's assassination attempt. In this documentary style narrative film, the selective focus of the camera constantly reassures the viewer of the main character, Joe Dallesandro portraying him as sign to signify "the male image" or "sex symbol". Morrissey achieved this through the minimalist structuralist techniques of a fixed camera gaze, which is interrupted by periods of in-camera edits, quick zooms, or in-camera dissolves. The in-camera edits, with its clicks and flashes, act as a sign to signify to the viewer that what they are watching is a film and not reality. Although Warhol's and Morrissey's main intentions are to display and preserve real time, these elements cheat time leaving a moment in time forgotten thrusting the viewer ahead in time. This type of "time travel" is also slowed down during the in- camera dissolves. These minimalist elements present rhythms, pacing and separate duration of the narrative to draw the attention to the visual and leave behind the nonsense dialogue in order to preserve a possible continuity within the nonlinear speech.
Trash, (1970), with its documentary approach to a junkie hustler, presents many of the same concepts of Flesh, without the clicks and flashes of in-camera edits. Many of the structuralist elements applied in this film, especially the floating fixed camera gaze, bring out the harshness of heroin addiction and its transformational high. Achieved through the structuralist sign of a fixed/floating camera "eye" within a real time format, Joe Dallesandro's image is often tightly framed signifying a third party view experiencing the sedation with his character in shared time/shared space. This floating camera technique directs the eyes of the viewer to drift and eventually remain focused on objects that have nothing to do with the situation. The shared space and shared time place much emphasis on the rituals magnifying the grotesque details of the self inflicted rush. The arm is tightly framed as it is slowly punctured in real time allowing the blood to rush into the needle as the liquid volume rushes out; leaving the arm in discolorment.
Warhol/Morrissey float the camera to Dallesandro at times with unstable framing as a sign to signify the rush of the injection associated with the dizziness and disconnection with reality and the body. This reaction shot is magnified through the mass confusion of the narrative dialogue that does not coincide with the events that are at state; demonstrating the realism to the viewer. The viewer experiences the drugged state, as what they see does not pertain to what they hear, thus disassociating the viewer with the out of screen narrative. This subjective view signifies the viewer in a drugged state to emphasize the numbness to reality. The camera remains selectively focused, or selectively out of focus, in real time to present the change of Dallesandro's muscle and facial structure as they quickly turn to an altered state. The blood, the high, and the structuralist approach taken, with the absence of edits, signify this is real action, in real time as opposed to Hollywood time with its make-up, props, special effects, and fancy reenactments. These techniques utilized by Warhol/Morrissey present an uneasiness to the eye giving the spectator what they desire; the gore and disgust of a sadistic act.
This concept is incorporated into the Warhol/Morrissey collection of Dracula and Frankenstein represented in the excessive gore and violating acts of immorality that dominate these productions. Much emphasis is placed upon these acts through the structuralist element of a fixed camera gaze allowing for the acts to take place in real time as the viewer experiences the details of every moment. Possibly acting as a sign system within the production regime, the signification here greatly brings up Warhol's inner fear of death and physical violation. The reception regime of the viewer within these sign systems may not transmit the signification if the viewer is unaware of Solanas's assassination attempt on Warhol and the trauma that it caused him.
Warhol experiments further with this signification of the third dimension as he presents an alteration in the projection of the medium itself. Frankenstein, originally projected in 3-D, explores the psychological effects and interaction between viewer and cinema as they experience the actions within a shared space. The world being a stage with everybody an actor is a metaphor of this signification. With the mesostructural levels of this film presented in 3-D, stimuli in shared space allows for new types of viewer involvement dependent on the personality of spectators. This further incorporates Warhol's obsession with personality fascination. In this shared space, everybody's reactions and movements allow them to act out their parts.
Although these two screen works are closer to a Hollywood production, than any of the earlier works, Warhol's voyeuristic approach to a mise-en-scene with lack of montage structure, still separates his films from the classic Hollywood format. Utilizing the Factory cast, in a different environmental setting, Warhol has moved them from the usual urban setting to the countryside of Europe. The cinematography in these features has evolved into a structured format where spontaneity is no longer the primary focus, but rather a focus driven by a formatted script. Improved audio and use of editing techniques bring Warhol out of the minimalism incorporated in his earlier films and into the materialism present in these films. Warhol as businessman becomes apparent.
The works of both Warhol and Man Ray contain many similarities within structuralist and semiotic confines. Warhol's regression to a dadaist state in the avant- garde films Sleep, Eat, Kiss, and Empire contain strikingly similar concepts to Man Ray's attempts to further the medium meeting this regression halfway. The overall concept that both artists share is the idea of what is needed in order to call art/art or a film/film. While managing minimalist techniques to this production regime, within confines of the genre regime, the sign systems of both artists test the viewers' patience and intelligence against substantial periods of abnormality and irrationality. A true revolt against the mainstream cinema.
Lighting elements selectively light areas of screen space presenting rhythms, contrasts, and juxtapositions between shadows and highlights characterizing the works of the artists. By emphasizing the grain in the actual medium, this manipulation demonstrates an artistic background of one exploring a new medium. Billy Name, Factory lighting director and photographer, assisted with an avant-garde approach to lighting the subjects in many of Warhol's films. Man Ray, in the avant-garde movement, utilized lighting very much similar to these techniques to place emphasis on the subjects' rhythmic movements on a two dimensional plane.
Such techniques as Rayographs, resemble the high contrasted silhouette sections within Warhol's frames. For example, in Trash, where Andrea Feldman attempts to score LSD from Joe Dallesandro, the scene is so high contrasted that their images appear silhouetted against a background of out of focus primary color lights; signifying a drugged LSD state. Similar to Warhol's Rorsharch Paintings, this scene much resembles the Rayograph footage in Man Ray's Emak Bakia. Many of Warhol's early experimental films that resemble this dadaist quality contain these lighting elements of extreme high contrast with the purpose of rhythmic reflection as in Man Ray's films/photography. Sleep, Eat, Kiss, and Empire contain this type of 1920/1930 aura.
Camera involvement and framing in both artist's works signify the idea of a photograph signifying a third dimension emphasized by the sign of movement within the screen space. The minimalist approaches toward filmmaking to create art is shown through the passive approach of Warhol and the minimalist camera movement executed by Man Ray. By avoiding the camera totally through creating Rayographs, Man Ray proved that this particular medium did not require a machine to produce the images, which demonstrates Man Ray's passivity to the camera. Warhol's simplistic approach of setting up the camera and walking away produced his lengthy "photograph", but still produced an artistic focus on detail orientation. The concept of camera as machine drove these artists to expand and experiment in new directions than with a traditional approach.
The approach taken to frame subject matter by both artists are similar as these frames vary from one extreme to another. In this spectrum, the artists either present total stabilization of the frame or complete unstableness for the purpose of rhythm, juxtaposition, or sequential continuity of subject matter. With complete unstable framing, the artists set up the sequence for complete irrational future footage to take place within the minutes to come creating a surrealist state. Stabilized framing in these works often emphasized shapes and space (positive and negative) to create a unique outlook on subject matter. Tightly framed shots as opposed to long shots tend to dominate these productions emphasizing detail and structure providing images that normally never receive a second look are emphasized into a new idea.
The edits in Warhol's films are practically obsolete, where as, editing techniques utilized in Man Ray's films are minimalistic. The edits occur too quickly at times, preserving rhythmic continuity, but prevent the viewer to form a relationship or interpretation to the images present in the frame. Warhol's absence of editing allows for the concept of real time to occur, so that the viewers do have enough time to realize the beauty of the subject matter within the frame, but later on Warhol's in-camera edits resemble the minimalism of Man Ray's editing techniques. These spontaneous clicks and flashes produce a rhythmic irrationality, which do not allow the viewers to ponder on the images, but rather advance the "narrative" into a period of real time without edits.
Warhol's fourteen year filmmaking career started with a period of no edits evolved into a period of in-camera edits and finished with a period of actual editors working on his films. This not only demonstrates his study of editing and real time, but also demonstrates his metamorphous of an artist from a minimalist to a materialist state. Man Ray certainly never entered a materialist state, as he simply created with what he had available to him and remained a minimalist.
Warhol's concept of projecting his silents at 16 fps instead of at 24 fps presents real time in an altered time state; Warhol's time. This time which tends to border on surrealistic time, resembles the feeling of time experienced in Man Ray's L'Etoile de Mer and Emak Bakia. Rhythm is a key concept in the purpose of this altered state as the part on the viewer is to realize the movement of overexposed/underexposed contrasts that produce images in themselves. This aesthetic approach, places Warhol as the opposite of Brakhage, transforms reality into a new dimension. This concept quickly places Warhol as a frontier filmmaker with Brakhage, Godard, and Markopoulos leaving few aspects left to explore in the cinema and in the relationship to the viewer.
Man Ray and Andy Warhol, both born of immigrant parents into a world without riches, grew to become artistic successes from their outlook of life and expression of inner beliefs. Their artwork was a landmark within their time period. Rumor has it that Andy Warhol did indeed consider Man Ray as one of his main influences which might explain the similarities. The portrait of Man Ray that Warhol composed brought the likeness of Ray into the immediate medium of Warhol. Man Ray's Kiki, who at one point was interested in Dali, as was Warhol's star Ultra Violet brings displays similarities in associative ties they had with others.
To further pursue this study, the researcher may want to explore other Warhol films to chart the growth from his minimalist state to his materialist state. From this, another comparative study can be conducted, which could include artists who have presented theories of their own, as well as demonstrated particular areas of growth in the cinema. Such artists may be direct influences or artists who Warhol may have directly influenced. Man Ray's study could be conducted in much the same manner, but possibly relating him to any other photography filmmakers of his era and how the principles of photography have influenced the works.. An analysis of Ray's works compared to other dadaist/surrealist artists of that period would be beneficial to this research.
Berg quotes Warhol in 1967, "But it's so easy to make movies, you can just shoot and every picture comes out right".
Andrew, J.D. (1976). The major film theories. New York: Oxford University Press.
Berg, G. (1967). Free press. In M. O'pray (Ed.), Andy Warhol film factory. (28- 41). London: British Film Institute Publishing.
Braunsberg, A. (Producer), & Morrissey, P. (Director). (1973). Frankenstein [Film]. (Available from Triboro Entertainment Group 101, West 57th Street, New York, NY 10019).
Braunsberg, A. (Producer), & Morrissey, P. (Director). (1974). Dracula [Film]. (Available from Triboro Entertainment Group 101, West 57th Street, New York, NY 10019).
Curtis, D. (1971). Experimental cinema. New York: Universe Books.
Deren, M. (1946). An anagram of ideas on art, form and film. New York: The Alicat Book Shop Press.
Harris, D.M. (1995). The semi-semiotics of film. Film Criticism, 39-54.
James D.E. (1989). Allegories of cinema. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C.G. (1968). Man and his symbols. New York: Dell Publishing.
Mukarovsky, J. (1944). The essence of the visual arts. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Ray, M. (Producer), & Ray, M. (Director). (1926). Emak Bakia [Film]. (Avilable from The Museum of Modern Art, 11 West 53rd Street, New York, NY 10019).
Ray, M. (Producer), & Ray, M. (Director). (1928). L'Etoile de Mer [Film]. (Available from The Museum of Modern Art, 11 West 53rd Street, New York, NY 10019).
Ray, R.B. (1995). The avant-garde finds Andy Hardy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Roth, L. (1983). Film semiotics, Metz, and Leone's trilogy. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.
Rowe, C. (1982). The baudelairean cinema: A trend with the American avant- garde. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press.
Silverman, K. (1983). The subject of semiotics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tyler, P. (1993). Underground film: A critical history. New York: DaCapo Press.
Warhol, A. (Producer), & Warhol, A. (Director). (1963). Eat [Film]. (Available from The Museum of Modern Art, 11 West 53rd Street, New York, NY 10019).
Warhol, A. (Producer), & Warhol, A. (Director). (1963). Kiss [Film]. (Available from The Museum of Modern Art, 11 West 53rd Street, New York, NY 10019).
Warhol, A. (Producer), & Warhol, A. (Director). (1964). Empire [Film]. (Avaible from The Museum of Modern Art, 11 West 53rd Street, New York, NY 10019).
Warhol, A. (Producer), & Warhol, A. (Director). (1963). Sleep [Film]. (Available from the Museum of Modern Art, 11 West 53rd Street, New York, NY 10019).
Warhol, A. (Producer), & Morrissey, P. (Director). (1968). Flesh [Film]. (Available from Mystic Fire Video, Inc., P.O. Box 422, New York, NY 10012-9607).
Warhol, A. (Producer), & Morrissey, P. (Director). (1970). Trash [Film]. (Available from Mystic Fire Video, Inc., P.O. Box 422, New York, NY 10012-9607).
Warhol, A. (1975). The philosophy of Andy Warhol: From a to z and back again. New York: Harcourt Brace J ovanich.