Bela Balazs and Jean Epstein: The Close-Up

Summary

In this video lecture, we explore the work of silent era film theorists Béla Balázs and Jean Epstein, focusing on their analysis of the close-up and the face on screen. The lecture discusses three key concepts: revelation, expression, and duration, illustrating how cinema reveals hidden aspects of reality, expresses inner emotions, and captures the flow of time. By examining these ideas, we gain insights into how silent films communicate profound human experiences through visual means, beyond the limitations of language and traditional art forms.

Takeaways

• 🎬 The lecture focuses on the close-up and the face on the screen, discussing two silent era film theorists: Béla Balázs and Jean Epstein.
• 📽️ The close-up is a significant topic in classical film theory as it exemplifies unique cinematic images distinct from theater and other arts.
• 🇭🇺 Béla Balázs and 🇫🇷 Jean Epstein are renowned for their enthusiasm and investigation of the close-up, particularly focusing on the face on screen.
• 🧠 Theorists like Munsterberg and Arnheim were interested in manipulations of space and time, but Balázs and Epstein channel their energy into the close-up.
• 🔍 Revelation: Cinema is analogous to a microscope, revealing aspects of the world hidden to natural perception. Epstein uses the phrase 'drama of the microscope.'
• 🗣️ Expression: The close-up allows access to the mind's contents through the body and face. Balázs argues that body movements express non-rational self directly.
• ⏳ Duration: Based on Henri Bergson's philosophy, duration is a non-quantifiable form of time as a flow of subjective consciousness.
• 🎶 Balázs uses Bergson's concept of melody to explain how faces in close-up are experienced as a whole, not just the sum of their parts.
• 🧩 Epstein and Balázs emphasize the limitations of language and signs, arguing that the close-up can convey emotions and thoughts more directly.
• 🎥 Silent films are seen as a medium that teaches us to read expressions and emotions without relying on language, highlighting the purity of visual communication.

Q & A

Who are the two silent era film theorists discussed in this video lecture?

The two silent era film theorists discussed are Béla Balázs and Jean Epstein.

Why is the close-up a significant technique in classical film theory?

The close-up is significant because it exemplifies unique kinds of images that distinguish film from theater and other arts. It allows for the detailed portrayal of emotions and expressions, which are crucial elements that classical film theorists find interesting.

What are the three terms introduced to understand the preoccupations of Balázs and Epstein?

The three terms introduced are revelation, expression, and duration.

How does the concept of 'revelation' relate to film according to the lecture?

Revelation in film refers to cinema's ability to reveal aspects of reality that are invisible or otherwise inaccessible to natural human perception. This is akin to using a microscope to uncover hidden details.

What is the 'revelationist answer' as described by Malcolm Turvey?

The revelationist answer is the idea that cinema's most significant property is its ability to uncover features of reality invisible to human vision, revealing the true nature of reality to viewers using techniques that differ from human sight, such as time-lapse and slow-motion photography.

How does Balázs view the relationship between language and the body in communication?

Balázs believes that written communication, which has dominated Western civilization, suppresses a more natural and primordial ability to express oneself through the body and face. He argues that body movements and facial expressions are direct expressions of the soul, offering a more pure form of communication than language.

What does Jean Epstein mean by 'the close-up is drama and high gear'?

Epstein suggests that a close-up can directly convey abstract emotions and concepts, such as love, through facial expressions. The close-up intensifies the drama by making the audience feel they are witnessing the emotion itself, not just an acted representation.

What is the concept of 'duration' as influenced by Henri Bergson?

Duration, in Bergson's philosophy, refers to the non-quantifiable, continuous flow of subjective time experienced as a whole. It contrasts with the scientific measurement of time as discrete, equally distant moments. Bergson's duration is the experience of time as an uninterrupted flow of consciousness.

How does Balázs apply Bergson's concept of duration to the experience of film?

Balázs applies Bergson's concept by arguing that a face in a close-up is experienced as a whole, similar to how a melody is experienced as a continuous flow rather than discrete notes. This holistic perception allows the audience to feel the emotional essence directly.

What is the significance of language and signs according to Bergson's philosophy as mentioned in the lecture?

Bergson is suspicious of language and signs because they are human-made abstractions that cannot fully capture the continuous flow and complexity of real phenomena. He argues that relying on language and signs can obscure the true nature of experiences and the world.

Outlines

00:00

🎬 Introduction to Silent Film Theorists

The video lecture introduces two silent era film theorists, Hungarian Béla Balázs and French Jean Epstein, focusing on their fascination with the close-up shot and the face on the screen. These theorists emphasized the close-up as a unique feature of film that differentiates it from theater and other arts. Their writings offer a passionate exploration of this technique, contrasting with the more logical approaches of other theorists like Munsterberg and Arnheim.

05:07

🔍 Revelation in Cinema

The concept of 'revelation' in cinema is introduced, likening it to a microscope that reveals hidden aspects of the visual world. Malcolm Turvey's concept of 'revelationism' is discussed, highlighting cinema's unique ability to uncover features of reality invisible to human vision. Techniques like time-lapse and slow motion exemplify this capacity. The term 'revelation' is used to describe cinema's power to show what is otherwise inaccessible to natural perception.

10:07

💡 Expression and the Face

Balázs and Epstein's views on 'expression' in film are examined. Balázs emphasizes the body's and face's ability to express the mind's contents, considering it a more natural form of communication compared to language. Epstein poetically describes how emotions like love are directly visible on a face in a close-up. This section underscores the silent film's power to convey emotions through visual means, bypassing the need for spoken language.

15:12

⏳ Duration and Temporal Experience

The philosophical concept of 'duration,' influenced by Henri Bergson, is explored. Bergson's idea of time as a flow of subjective consciousness, rather than quantifiable units, is discussed. Balázs applies this to the experience of watching a film, suggesting that a close-up of a face is perceived as a whole rather than a sum of parts. This section delves into how film can convey complex emotional and temporal experiences that are not easily expressed through language or conventional measurements of time.

20:13

📽️ Bergson's Influence on Film Theory

The connection between Bergson's philosophy and film theory is further explored. Bergson's skepticism towards language and quantification is highlighted, emphasizing the idea that words and numbers are inadequate for capturing the full essence of reality and experience. Epstein and Balázs adopt this viewpoint, arguing that film, particularly silent film, can convey deeper truths through visual means. This section also discusses the limitations of language in film theory and the enduring significance of silent cinema.

Keywords

💡Close-up

A close-up is a type of shot that tightly frames a person or object, capturing fine details. In the video, it is emphasized as a significant technique in silent film theory, particularly in the works of Béla Balázs and Jean Epstein. Close-ups are celebrated for their ability to reveal the nuanced expressions and emotions of actors, which is a key focus of the lecture.

💡Revelation

Revelation in the context of this lecture refers to the film's ability to reveal aspects of reality that are typically hidden from natural perception. This concept, discussed by theorists like Balázs and Epstein, suggests that film can uncover features of reality invisible to human vision, much like a microscope reveals details not seen by the naked eye.

💡Expression

Expression is the act of conveying thoughts, feelings, or ideas. In silent film, as discussed in the lecture, it refers to the ability of the face and body to communicate emotions directly, bypassing spoken language. Balázs, in particular, emphasizes that facial expressions and gestures can express the 'non-rational self,' offering a more direct insight into the human soul.

💡Duration

Duration, as used in the video, refers to a philosophical concept from Henri Bergson, denoting the flow of time as experienced subjectively. Balázs applies this idea to film, suggesting that the experience of watching a film is like listening to a melody, where the entire sequence is perceived as a whole, rather than a series of discrete moments.

💡Medium specificity

Medium specificity is the idea that each art form has its unique qualities and strengths. In film theory, this concept is important because it helps justify cinema as a legitimate art form by highlighting its unique ability to reveal and express. The lecture discusses how silent film theorists like Balázs and Epstein focus on techniques that exploit the unique properties of cinema, such as close-ups and time manipulation.

💡Silent era

The silent era refers to the period in cinema history before the advent of synchronized sound. This era is significant in the lecture as it focuses on how theorists like Balázs and Epstein explored the visual potential of film. The absence of spoken dialogue made techniques like close-ups crucial for conveying emotion and narrative.

💡Jean Epstein

Jean Epstein was a French film theorist and filmmaker, known for his poetic and philosophical approach to cinema. In the video, his ideas about the close-up and the face on screen are discussed, highlighting his belief that close-ups can directly convey emotions and thoughts, making them a powerful tool in silent film.

💡Béla Balázs

Béla Balázs was a Hungarian film theorist who emphasized the visual and expressive potential of film. He is known for his ideas about the close-up and the importance of facial expressions in silent cinema. The lecture discusses his belief that the face can reveal the soul, and that film, particularly silent film, can teach us to read these expressions.

💡Henri Bergson

Henri Bergson was a French philosopher whose ideas on time and consciousness influenced film theorists like Balázs and Epstein. In the lecture, Bergson's concept of 'duration' is used to explain how film can be experienced as a continuous flow, similar to a melody, rather than as a series of discrete moments.

💡Microscope analogy

The microscope analogy refers to the idea that film, like a microscope, can reveal details of reality that are normally invisible to the human eye. This concept is used in the lecture to explain how film can provide a deeper understanding of the world by uncovering hidden aspects of reality, a central theme in the works of Balázs and Epstein.

Highlights

Introduction to silent era film theorists: Hungarian Bela Balasz and French Jean Epstein.

Focus on the close-up technique and the face on screen as discussed by classical film theorists.

The close-up exemplifies a unique image distinguishing film from theater and other arts.

Discussion on Munsterberg's interest in manipulations of space and time, Arnheim's focus on the imageness of cinematic images.

Balasz and Epstein's enthusiasm and investigation of the close-up technique.

Introduction of three key terms: revelation, expression, and duration.

Revelation: Cinema as an instrument revealing aspects of the world hidden to natural perception.

Expression: The relationship between the contents of a mind and a body's ability to express it.

Duration: Influenced by Henri Bergson's concept of subjective experience of time.

Balasz's view on language as a tarnished version of communication compared to the body's natural expression.

Epstein's poetic view: The close-up allows seeing abstract concepts like love directly on a face.

Bergson's influence: Time experienced as a flow of subjective consciousness, not just a succession of moments.

Balasz's idea that a melody is experienced as a whole, not just the sum of its notes.

Discussion on the limitations of language and quantification in capturing the essence of film and human experience.

The excitement about silent film for its ability to express beyond language.

Transcripts

hi folks and welcome to our video lecture on  uh the close-up and the face on the screen  

um so in this unit we're gonna be talking about  two silent era film theorists the hungarian  

film theorist bella bolash and the french  film theorist and filmmaker john epstein  

the close-up is something that is discussed  by almost every single classical film theorist  

it is for obvious reasons in many ways  something that a classical film theorist  

would find interesting because  it seems to exemplify one of the  

unique kinds of images that distinguishes film  from theater and the other arts but we want to  

focus on these two theorists who are above all the  most famous for their enthusiasm and investigation  

of the close-up as a technique and in particular  the face on screen so let's just go back to our  

list of uh the catalog of distinctions between  film and theater that we did on day one um  

these were the categories that most interested  munsterberg he was very much interested in uh  

the manipulations of space and time especially  things like close-ups as a manifestation of  

attention and flashbacks as a manifestation of  memory arnheim was interested in the imageness of  

the cinematic image insisting that it's not just a  uh reproduction of reality but a transformation of  

it and balaji and epstein really in this unit are  going to focus on this one thing so think about  

what we can do by channeling all of our energy  into just one technique or one singular aspect  

the close-up that's what we're going to focus on  today and um i want to give us three terms for  

understanding the preoccupations of balash and  epstein who are different film theorists but have  

a lot in common even though the kind of enthusiasm  of their writing is going to seem like a departure  

from the kind of steady um kind of logical  argumentation that you'll get from munsterberg  

and arnheim both of whom remember are trained uh  psychologists or at least they have an investment  

in psychology and in the academic study of the  workings of the mind these two theorists are  

going to be interested and influence a lot more  by contemporary french philosophy really we're  

going to get into that in a bit so let's go back  to this list revelation expression and duration  

all of these uh words are terms that you are  familiar with but we're going to be using them  

in slightly distinct specialized ways so what do i  mean by revelation you can think about revelation  

as the argument that cinema is analogous to  a microscope or another kind of instrument of  

revealing the visual world revealing aspects of  the world that are hidden to natural perception  

and epstein will actually use this phrase  possibilities are already appearing for the drama  

of the microscope and the best known account of  revelation as a concept that guy's classical film  

theory is from a text that we're not reading as  a secondary source a book called doubting vision  

film in the revelation revelation is tradition  by a film scholar named malcolm turvey but he  

offers this concept which i think is quite  useful for understanding um what balosh and  

epstein have in common and in fact uh something  that isn't common with a lot of classical film  

theorists so he writes at the outset of his book  classical film theorists adhered for the most part  

to the doctrine of medium specificity the view  that in order for the cinema to be accepted as  

a legitimate art it must be shown to possess  valuable attributes of its own ones that the  

other pre-established arts do not have needless to  say theorists propose different answers to these  

questions one such answer is that the cinema's  most significant property one which the other  

arts do not possess or at least don't possess to  the same degree is its ability to uncover features  

of reality invisible to human vision the value  of this property is that it can reveal the true  

nature of reality to viewers and the techniques  best suited to exploiting it are those that least  

resemble human sight i call this the revelationist  answer so while i don't want to wholly subscribe  

to tervy's picture of revelationism i do want to  use that term as a way of categorizing a concept  

of thought that recurs throughout these theorists  but i want to say it recurs in different  

manifestations when tervy says and the techniques  best suited to exploiting it are those at least  

resemble human sight what he means quite  literally are text techniques like these  

like time lapse photography in which it is a  capacity of film to show time in a way that's  

impossible for my human vision to comprehend  through time lapse right think about you know i  

i don't have the ability to see the world unfold  in this way an opposite though similar observation  

or technique is slow motion right um because  of the very fact of cinema that it can change  

its rate of recording um i can see aspects of  the world unfolding um that are too fast for my  

vision to comprehend and think about not just the  temporal aspect but the spatial aspect microscopic  

imagery and we might even say as an offshoot of  microscopic imagery the more ordinary close-up  

and the degree to which this is something that i  can't perceive in real life is a question that i  

might pose to you to what degree is the close-up  really something that ordinary perception cannot  

capture certainly not in the same way that a  microscopic image um is impossible for me to see  

but i want you to kind of keep this rhetoric alive  as a way to something for something to investigate  

as you read through um so that's what i mean  by revelation if i use that word in class i  

don't just mean you know something i don't mean  something religious and i don't just mean the  

very fact of revealing something i mean this idea  that cinema can reveal that which is invisible or  

otherwise inaccessible to human perception number  two something related to revelation is expression  

i don't simply mean just the the normal or the  ordinary use of that word i want to think of the  

kind of etymological basis of expression the idea  of squeezing something out that there's something  

contained within an object or a body and there's  a way that we can get that thing that's inside and  

then express it outward like squeezing the water  out of a sponge but in this case we're thinking  

about the relationship between the contents of a  mind and a body or a face's ability to express or  

manifest the contents of the mind and you might  guess that the close-up for both of these thinkers  

but though in different ways might be a way to  grant access to the contents of the mind a tool  

that is of expression so balash will say this at  the beginning of his book visible man he'll say  

for the man of visual culture is not like a deaf  mute who replaces words with sign language he does  

not think in words whose syllables he inscribes on  the air with the dots and dashes of the morse code  

his gestures do not signify concepts at all but  are the direct expression of his own non-rational  

self and whatever is expressed in his face and  his movements arises from a stratum of the soul  

that can never be brought to the light of  day by words here the body becomes unmediated  

spirit spirit wrench visible wordless so and  once you read the introduction you'll get a  

better context of what he's saying here um but  right now i just want to um kind of summarize  

one of bolasha's main points um which is that  the um emphasis on uh written communication  

that balash thinks has kind of dominated western  civilization and suffused 20th century thought  

has suppressed what he thinks is a more natural  or primordial ability to express or the contents  

of ourselves through our through our bodies and  through our faces that is through the surface  

um he thinks that there is a kind of tarnished  version of communication that comes through  

language and an untarnished more pure or pure  spirit through their body so you might imagine  

for a silent era film theorist film seems a pretty  good medium for teaching us once again how to read  

or grant ourselves access to the expressions  of souls through bodies given that film  

gives us pictures of bodies in motion and  doesn't grant our ability to hear speech  

he'll continue modern philologists and historians  of language have established that the origins of  

language are to be found in expressive movements  the fact that he uttered sounds at the same time  

was a secondary phenomenon when subsequently  exploited for practical purposes the immediately  

visible spirit was then transformed into a  mediated audible spirit and which was lost in the  

process as an all translation but the language of  gestures is the true mother tongue of mankind so  

this is that kind of idea crystallized here that  i was mentioning uh just a moment ago language he  

thinks is a is a mediation whereas the movements  of the body and of the face he thinks are a less  

mediated more pure access to what's going on  inside of a mind or what he'll call a soul  

and you can see similar issues in in john epstein  he'll write the close-up is drama and high gear  

i can see love it half lowers its eyelids raises  the arc of the eyebrows laterally inscribes itself  

on the taut forehead so the idea that  and epstein is far more poetic um with  

his writing than balash is when he says i can  see love i think what he's trying to do is say  

that the kind of abstract concept of love gets so  written into a facial expression that i don't see  

a face translating or say acting the expression  of love i see it immediately right there on the  

face this is the kind of argument that  epstein and belosch will similarly make  

about the close-up and the face and the body's  ability to express what we might call the contents  

of minds and souls that which is inside um third  is uh a concept called duration um and by duration  

i do mean something similar to what we would call  say like the duration of time like the duration  

of the movie was was two hours it is related to  that ordinary use of the term um but i'm speaking  

in particular about a philosophical concept  from a french philosopher named henri bergson  

who was heavily influential upon both bella  bollage and john epstein if you're familiar  

with bergson you'll see his ideas rampant  throughout both of these thinkers but bellagh  

himself will actually invoke the name of bergson  in one of our readings so balash will summarize  

one kind of concept from bergson's notion of  duration or in the french duret as follows balosh  

says henry bergson's analysis of duration and time  can help us to gain an understanding of this novel  

dimension a melody berks and asserts consists of  individual notes that follow one another in time  

but despite this the melody has no extension  in time for from the vantage point of the  

first note the last one is still the last one  is already implicit and on the last note the  

first one is still interpretively present that  is what makes every note part of a melody which  

latter as a form has a duration a course to run  and yet exists as a totality from the outset  

instead of gradually coming into being in time for  the melody is not just the notes but their audible  

relationship this relationship is not temporal  it exists in a different spiritual dimension  

physiognomy or say the ability to recognize  a face as a whole has a relation to space  

comparable to that existing between melody and  time so this seems very difficult and dense  

hard to figure out and one of the reasons i want  to bring up bergson is because i don't think it's  

a trivial connection in bringing out birds in here  so i want to talk about this passage and i want to  

talk about a little more broadly about what henri  bergson's all about and why he's influencing blush  

and epstein so first this idea  of the melody what the heck is  

trying to say about a melody having no extension  in time even though it consists of individual  

notes that follow one another in time so the  first thing i want to do is simply try to explain  

what uh what balosh is saying about the melody  through bergson's notion of duration it's quite  

difficult but the way i can kind of break it down  is basically one of bergson's major arguments  

about how we experience time as distinct from how  time is understood in a kind of scientific world  

view as a succession of equally distant moments  that we break down into these very conveniently  

organized units like seconds or minutes  or hours or days and weeks and years  

bergson wants to say fine and good that we have  a way of measuring time but that doesn't actually  

tell us much about what time is as an experience  he wants to say that duration is the word he's  

giving for the non-quantifiable form of time as  a flow of subjective consciousness so bergson  

will say we experience time as a whole also even  though we break it down into seconds and minutes  

so in the melody happy birthday to you which  i have written out here indeed i can organize  

it into these mathematically uh precise bits of  notation they're both kind of spatially distant  

and they're kind of marked temporally but when  you think of the melody happy birthday to you  

it is itself a kind of whole it's not equivalent  to the sum of its notes it is experienced as a  

whole thing what happens when i sing happy  birthday to you and then i go and i stop  

your mind anticipates the next note it's almost  impossible because i've broken the whole so i  

might say that following bergson following  bolash's invocation of him a melody is experienced  

as a temporal hole despite being broken down into  discreet notes memory sensation and anticipation  

all blend together even though you might say  they you know happen in these kind of temporally  

distinct markers bergson's whole philosophy is  to say is to describe the way in which time is  

a subjectively experienced thing that cannot be  quantified so non-quantification is the name of  

the game when you're talking about bergson's  philosophy he'll look at a kind of physics  

chart measuring the trajectory of the baseball  and he'll say that's great for doing physics but  

really i want you to think about the way in  which time t equals zero or time t equals one  

is a poor way to understand time as the thing  that we are living inside of or that is the  

content of our subjective consciousness um so this  is bergson's philosophy what does this have to do  

with faces one of balosh's reasons for bringing  up bergson on the melody when he's talking about  

something as spatial as a close-up of a face is  because he wants to hammer home the idea that i  

can't quantify the the face into discreet parts  that themselves communicate bits of information  

he wants to say when i look at falcon eddie's face  and and joan of arc like i'm doing here it hits  

me in one hole he in fact wants to say what i'm  seeing is her soul i'm seeing her interiority i'm  

seeing her emotion he's saying what i'm not seeing  are these uh tiny movements that i then pause  

think about calculate and then deduce that those  micro movements suggest that she is experiencing  

a dark sadness mixed with a kind of turmoil and  also a sense of self righteousness or something  

like that he wants to say i'm getting it directly  of course this is a kind of poetic argument and  

one that you have to ask well what are the grounds  for this argument um what we're trying to do is  

to figure out what it is about the medium of film  that would lead someone to make such a bold claim  

a related concept in bergson's philosophy that  you're going to see in bolash and in epstein and  

which we can actually think about as related to  what we've been talking about with this suspicion  

of quantification is an equivalent suspicion  of signs or language as something that we might  

imagine is adequate translation of the contents of  the world or the contents of the mind so bergson  

in one of his books will say in order to think  movement a constantly renewed effort of the mind  

is necessary signs are made to dispense us  with this effort by substituting for the moving  

continuity of things in artificial reconstruction  um so bergson is going to be not suspicious  

of language and numbers and quantification on  the face of it he's more so just suspicious  

that people mistake language and numbers and  quantification as equivalent to or exhaustive  

of the phenomena of the world that is what's  out there and the phenomena of experience itself  

he always wants to say that there are some  things that language words and numbers are  

not going to account for and you can see how  much this kind of thinking infuses the thought  

of our thinkers on the close-up um epstein for  example in one of his essays that i'm not asking  

you to read but i think this is a useful example  says we say red soprano sweet cypress when there  

are only velocities movements vibrations in other  words a very bergsonian sentence epstein is trying  

to get us to understand that these terms are  merely abstractions that we've agreed upon  

as referring to certain properties or maybe  things in the world but he wants to say he wants  

to remind us that they are themselves merely human  constructed abstractions whereas if i ask what's  

actually in the world it's something like the  ineffability of vibration of rhythm of movement  

so epstein will sometimes slip into these kind  of grand philosophical proclamations about the  

limitations of language but you should also see  this as very much related to the opening of bella  

bolash's book the visible man which i've asked  you to read in which he thinks that the dominance  

of language the kind of uh the primacy of the  printing press as the technology that is the most  

influential thing is obscuring the fact that there  are ways of accessing the world and ourselves  

that are beyond language and that's why they're  so excited about silent film once again this is  

about a film before sound before talkies the idea  that when we look at a face on the big screen for  

these thinkers it can seem to express contents of  of the mind that almost defy an easy translation  

into words even though you'll see throughout  these pieces of writing most of what they're  

trying to do is in some sense find words adequate  to to describing their experience of these things  

because film theory is a medium conducted in in  language ironically enough but this is something  

that i want you to think about as you're as  you're reading okay so we'll talk about these  

readings in class and we'll talk about how they  relate to our film the master in a bit thanks