“And perhaps there is also, in this, a
reluctance to let us English-readers in on the juicier details of Positif's colourful history: it's
easier by far to sweepingly sketch a fifty-year canon of great directors than
to explain to a foreign (and sometimes frankly indifferent) audience the
intricate divisions between factions of the French Left in the '50s, or the
evolution of Surrealism as a cultural movement beyond the arty, glory days to
which it is too often reduced.” – Adrian Martin on Positif 50 Years.
Positif, with its eleven issues a year, produces far more writing than any other film criticism magazine. Its large paper size and small margins allow it to cram far more into one page and entire issue than it even seems possible. (Its quantity might also have to do with its writer's pro bono work). Even though its party line is less strict than Cahiers, and there are variation in prose to account for its over-fifty member's writing style, there are historical factors to account for its humanistic, literary, philosophical, political and surrealist perspective.
Positif with each new issue creates a hierarchy by prioritizing its film reviews, by placing them at the front of the magazine, in order of importance: review and an interview, review, notes. Its many other sections (e.g. Bloc-Notes, festival coverage, DVD and book reviews, Cinéma retrouvé etc.) offer an expansion of what is the actuality of cinema, aside from solely Parisian new releases, while also giving it room to impose its editorial position on alternative film-related projections and texts.
But there is a language barrier that is preventing it from being better known in the English world (cf. Cineaste's Review for some historical factors).
In Jonathan Rosenbaum's article Everyone's a Critic he brings up some of the differences between English and French film writing, highlighting that the European tradition builds upon the intellectual tradition of continental philosophy while in the U.S., industry journalism along with an anti-intellectualism democratization of media outlets restrict the discourse on difficult and foreign films.
In this setting, from the perspective of English film criticism, Positif appears as a untainted oasis, especially in contrast to the wide emergence of shallow and quickly-written film writing that pops up all of the time on the internet.
But it might seem beyond the point to be championing a mostly inaccessible French film magazine (cf. Positif's reception in North America) and to rag on English film writing, especially since it's not in a good state (e.g. jobs are being lost, there are less ones available etc.).
Positif isn't perfect either: it can be too generous and not critical enough, it doesn't do enough to support small scale festival films that could really benefit from favorable reviews - French film criticism actively rails against a lot of these experimental narrative feature films - or young French cinema that struggles to get even made and then seen (cf. Jeunes cinéastes français).
But I still think that it is important to write about Positif ... so I will continue to do so.
For Positif's sixtieth anniversary they updated a little their classic format: First off they changed publishers from éditions Scope in Paris to Actes Sud at the Institut Lumière in Lyon (cf. Positif by Actes Sud), they slightly altered the magazine's format and layout, and they finally updated to color. Like usual these issues were of high quality (cf. Positif's sixieth Anniversary).
To correspond with Positif's sixtieth anniversary, its founder Bernard Chardère, contributed two essays back to back, after not having written in the magazine since 2005 (with the exception of an Hors-Séries about Cannes in 2007).
In Positif N.615, which has a still of Alain Resnais' Vou n'avez encore rien vu on its cover, Chardère has a nice dossier Les 60 ans de Positif: Notre travelingue en arrière et en couleurs which, in a laissez-faire graphic design, includes: a nice text, pictures of its first fifteen covers ("Je ne m'en suis occupé qu'à partir d'ici ... jusque-là."), portraits of its first group of writers (along with the names of their favorite filmmakers), old photographs of its comity sitting around a table, an advertisement for the new re-editions of its earliest issues, and a promotion for events celebrating its sixtieth anniversary.
In Chardère's text Ah, Quel Titre?! he discusses what he sees as the secret for the long life of Positif and the genesis of its title. Since Chardère's writing, like that in Positif in general, is more about writing style and tone (cf. Positif N.500: Bernard Chardère's Contribution) here is what he wrote in its original French because I would not even know how to translate such wonderful and wild writing, which he would push further in his Bloc-Notes Mai en Cinéma: 60 ans, verte jeunesse (Positif N.617-18). - D.D.
***
Il
m'étonnera toujours, cet oiseau-là. Ce n'est pas qu'il renaît
inlassablement de ses cendres - car le Phoenix, lui-même, avait été carbonisé, alors que Positif est resté parfois muet, mais vivant toujours - c'est qu'il parvient à changer déditeur sans la moindre solution de continuité, d'une livraison l'autre, tel un prestidigitateur tirant de son chapeau ce qu'il y a mis : le prochain numéro.
Cela, répété au fil du temps, une bonne douzaine de fois. Les éditeurs de la revue éclosent comme la fleur des champs, fondent comme neige au soleil, prospèrent, dépérissent... La revue, quoi qu'il en soit, quoi qu'il en coûte, poursui sur sa lancée, telle la flèche de Zénon (d'Élée. Bien que « les positivistes » préfèrent l'autre, de Celtium, plus social).À ce propos, je devine qu'on attend de moi la révélation du secret du fondateur: comment avez-vous fait, il y a 60 ans? D'où tirez-vous (les premiers) cette vitalité, digne de La Revue des Deux Mondes (ou plutôt du Magasin Pittoresque, dont en saint-simonien véritable, j'ai la série dans ma bibliothèque)? Bien sûr, qu'il y ait une recette, un tour de main, comment le nier, mais l'essentiel fut simplement l'esprit d'équipe dans une incontestable suite dans les idées. Sans omettre la fidélité à un principe: la réunion du dimanche; inutile de chercher plus loin.
À coeur ouvert, récapitulons: solution de continuité, secret du fondateur, tour de main, esprit d'équipe, suite dans les idées, réunion du dimache. Qu'ajouter encore?
∙ de même faudra-t-il, dans les films dont nous parlerons, souligner le meilleur...
∙ le reste - progressistes étaient nos coeurs juvéniles - à l'avenant.
Avec l'impression diffuse que l'on mécoutait
dans un silence anormal. Les petits camarades, en effet, avaient rempli
notre bouteille de marc du Bugey de quelque chose d'autre - pétrole lampant? vomito negro? - et au lieu de prêter attention à mes raisonnements, tous guettaient l'instant où je terminerai une phrase en vidant mon verre...
Ce petit fait vrai survint, salué avec applaudissements, brouhaha, et haut-le-coeur; du même coup, l'affaire fut entendue. Toutes objections oubliées; victoire à l'arraché: on l'appellerait décidément Positif.
Quel titre!
En nota bene, quelques clins d'oeil, à bons entendeurs salut, depuis le siège de la revue, retrouvé après 600 numéros. Il est vrai qu'en 1984 déjà, le responsable du transfert situait en 300 pages Les années lyonnaises de Positif dans L'Histoire contemporaine.
Acceptons-en l'augure et ajoutons aux maître-mot, à côté de marc du Bugey: Histoire contemporaine. Il ne tardera guère, le N°1000. Il n'y a plus qu'à l'écrire: le titre est là.
No comments:
Post a Comment