On the Criterion movie blog this morning, a quote from French director Jean-Pierre Melville:
I’d like viewers to come away from my films unsure whether they’ve understood them.
I never have gotten this attitude. Why would you want to deliberately confuse your audience? Why would I want to be puzzled about what the filmmaker was trying to do or say?
This is an ongoing discussion I have with fellow-Blockhead David—usually in the context of poetry which I often don’t enjoy because I can't make any clear sense of it. I bring it up again here because I wish I could enjoy that which I don’t.
I’m not arguing for art to have a one-in-one-out literal communication of meaning. Whenever I experience anything, art included, my response is unique and personal and I can be satisfied even when what I take is nothing that the author intended. What I don’t like is having no response beyond confusion. When I can’t make sense of something, I usually put that down to my own shortcomings. So when Melville says he hopes to puzzle his audience and therefore, I think, make them feel inadequate and unsatisfied, it troubles me.
No one would talk to other people thinking, “I’d like them to come out of this conversation unsure whether they’ve understood me.” So what is this precious thing called “art” that allows such a perverse attitude?
What do you think? Is Melville’s position a reasonable one?
--Julian
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.