|
|
-
- Jean-Luc
Godard
- and
- the Search for a True
Image
Jean-Luc Godard has constantly walked a
tightrope between the depiction of his basest desires and the
expression of an inner urging to seek a higher, more spiritual road.
In this way his work embodies both the worst and the best tendencies
in world cinema. Though his films ultimately seem to indicate a
certain kinship with Jean-Paul Sartre's philosophy of the absurdity of
human existence, there is something more to them. And every once in a
while a little gem will sparkle forth to prove it, such
as:
"The image
is a pure creation of the soul." (King Lear)
"Who is it who can tell me who I am?" (King
Lear)
- Quotes like these would
seem to indicate that this artist is still seeking on some level to
understand why art (as well as the artist) really exists. Doubting,
fearing, sensing impending doom, Godard lives in a fragmented world
devoid of true understanding of the world around him, and his films
accurately reflect this state of spiritual fragmentation and
incompleteness. Indeed, it can be argued that Godard has yet to make
a "film", and that he is actually continuously in the act of
making a film and that his resultant films serve to document
this ongoing process. He is, if anything, restless, edgy, perturbed,
disturbed and uncertain, reflecting in his own way the words of the
French philosopher Blaise Pascal, written over three centuries ago:
- "When I consider the
short duration of my life, swallowed up in the eternity before and
after, the little space I fill, and even can see, engulfed in the
infinite immensity of space of which I am ignorant, and which
knows me not, I am frightened, and am astonished at being here
rather than there, why now rather than then."
-
- Every now and then
Godard is indeed astonished at the world around him. There are
sublime moments of genuine beauty and simplicity: a shot of
clouds against the blue sky, the full moon, a flower, a fragment of
Mozart's music or a snippet of dialogue - something approaching "a
pure creation of the soul". Though, in all honesty, where is there
in all of art an image that could be said to be an absolutely pure
creation of the soul? And if there is indeed such an image present
in our world, how could we, in our present state of spiritual
malaise, ever recognize such an image for what it truly
is?
And who can forget
Godard's impassioned televised response in 1966 to Robert Bresson's masterpiece "Au Hasard Balthazar". Not every
artist has the ability to lay down his own ego in order to praise the
work of a colleague. But Godard was a tireless supporter of Bresson's
work, which, along with the films of Andrei Tarkovsky, epitomized the apex of spiritual cinema in
the Twentieth Century, and has also publicly lauded
Sergei Paradjanov's sublime "The Color of
Pomegranates", Kiarostami's work and others. He even once created
a collage of his favorite things for a 'Cashiers du Cinema' special
issue and included in it a CD of the great spiritual conductor Wilhelm
Furtwangler's legendary 1951 live performance of Beethoven's
Ninth Symphony! This is surely evidence of a truly seeking individual,
who knows great art when he sees it and doesn't hesitate to let others
know about it. Indeed, it is clear that this man loves great Art with
his whole being and this will undoubtedly help him in the World
Judgment, where all that is false is shattered and all that is genuine
is uplifted by the Power of the Light.
"HAIL MARY"
-
- And it was
no accident that this sensitive man was granted one
indisputable masterpiece: the very controversial film "Hail
Mary". Despite a plethora of nudity, it is a pure contemplation
of the body as a sacred vessel for the spirit and has one of the
greatest soundtracks of all time. The sincere commitment to the
search for truth and beauty fills each frame with a special kind of
longing that just a few films have ever attained to. This is why we
have placed it in the #8 spot on our Cinemaseekers Honor Roll. That said,
there is present in this film - despite the brilliant
updating of the traditional story of the "virgin birth" of Jesus -
the same egregious mistake that well-meaning Christians
have been making for two-thousand
years.
"THE IMMACULATE conception
is not only meant in a physical sense, but is more especially meant
in a purely spiritual sense, like so much else in the Bible. Only he
who recognises and perceives that the spiritual world really exists
and is in vital activity can find the key to an understanding of the Bible; this alone will make
the Word come to life! To all others it will always remain a book
with seven seals!
Every conception arising out of pure love and a
heartfelt looking upwards to the Creator, in which the sensual
instinct is only an adjunct and not the basis, is an immaculate
conception in the physical sense.
In reality
this occurs so seldom that there was every justification for laying
special stress upon it. The relegation of sensual instincts into the
background was assured by the fact of the Annunciation, which for
this reason is especially mentioned, because otherwise a link in the
chain of natural happenings and strict co-operation with the
spiritual world would be missing..."
"...Now man must not
think that because it had been promised that the Saviour should be
born of a virgin that therein lies a contradiction!
"The
contradiction lies solely in the wrong interpretation of the word
"virgin" mentioned in the prophecy. If this prophecy speaks of a
virgin, it does not infer a limited conception of the word, much
less the opinion of any State, but it can only be a question of a
broad conception concerning all mankind!
"Putting
aside all thought of procreation, those who take a limited view of
the word should note the fact that pregnancy and birth of themselves
exclude virginity in its ordinary sense! The prophecy, however, does
not mean such things! It meant that Christ would definitely be born
as the first child of a virgin, that is, of a woman who had
never been a mother. In such a case all the organs that have to do
with the development of the human body are virginal, that is,
they have never before come into activity in this way, meaning that
no child has issued from this womb. The organs of the mother's body
must be virginal in the case of every first-born child. Only
in this sense could such a far-reaching prophecy be understood,
because every prophecy can only be fulfilled within the strict logic
of the active Laws of Creation and is so made on the basis of such
reliable foresight.
"Thus in
this prophecy 'the first child' is meant, and therefore a
distinction has been made between virgin and mother!
Any other distinction is out of the question because the
conceptions of virgin and married woman have merely arisen out of
the purely civil or social institution of marriage, which are in no
case meant by such a prophecy!
"The very
perfection of Creation as the Work of God makes the act of
procreation absolutely necessary, because the All-Wisdom of the
Creator has ordered all things in Creation from the Primordial
beginning so that there should be nothing too much or superfluous!
He who thinks otherwise must also hold that the Work of the Creator
is imperfect! It is the same with the person who affirms that the
birth of Christ occurred without there first being a normal
procreation, as is prescribed by the Creator for all mankind. A
normal procreation through a human being of flesh and blood must
have taken place! Even in this case!
"Every man
who truly understands this praises his Lord and Creator more than he
who wants to permit other possibilities! The former shows such
unshaken faith in the Perfection of his God as to be convinced that
any exception or change in the Laws He has ordained is absolutely
impossible. And that is the greater faith! Besides,
all the other events entirely agree with this! Christ became a
human being on earth. It having been thus resolved, as the
Perfection of God ordained, He was obliged to submit to all the Laws
God had decreed for physical procreation!
"If it
should be objected that 'with God nothing is impossible', such a
concealed explanation brings no satisfaction, for again another and
quite different meaning lies in these words than that which so many
people imagine in their indolence. In order to refute the wording
of this sentence as commonly understood, it need only be said
that imperfection, want of logic, injustice, arbitrariness and many
other things are impossible with God!
"It could further be
argued that if in this sense nothing is impossible with God,
He could just as easily with a single act of His Will have made
every man on earth a believer! Then He need not have permitted His
Son to become man and exposed Him to earthly hardships and death on
the cross! He would have been spared that stupendous
sacrifice!
"That things happened
as they did shows the inflexible nature of the Divine Laws
which have been active in Creation from the very beginning, and the
perfection of which makes a forced intervention for the purpose of
changing them in one way or another quite impossible.
"The blind and contentious opponent
could now stubbornly assert that the way it happened was according
to God's Will. That is quite right, but in no way a counter-proof!
On the contrary it merely confirms the previous reasoning,
provided one drops the more naive interpretation and follows the
deeper explanation necessarily demanded by all utterances of a
spiritual nature.
"It was the Will of God!
However, that has nothing in common with arbitrariness! On the
contrary, it means nothing less than the confirmation of the laws
God placed in Creation and which bear His Will; it means absolute
obedience to them, allowing of no exception or circumvention
whatever! It is just in the necessity for compliance that the
Will of God reveals and manifests itself! Otherwise Jesus need
not have been born of a woman on earth, but could quite simply have
made a sudden appearance!
"In order to fulfil His
mission Christ had therefore inevitably to submit to all the Natural
Laws, that is, to the Will of His Father. That Christ did so is
proved by His whole life - His normal birth and growth, His
feeling both of hunger and fatigue, His suffering and finally His
death on the cross. He was subject to everything to which man's
earthly body is subject. Why then should His procreation alone have
been different, when there was absolutely no necessity for it? It is
just because of the naturalness of everything that the Saviour's
task appears even greater, by no means smaller! Likewise Mary was no
less blessed in her high calling on that account!" (Abd-ru-shin, "IN THE LIGHT OF
TRUTH: THE GRAIL MESSAGE", chapter "The Immaculate Conception and the
Birth of the Son of God"
- Read
the entire chapter.)
THE
IMAGE
In Wim Wenders' film,
Tokyo-Ga, the German director Werner Herzog makes the
statement: "There are no more images!" But does not the image need an
eye to behold it? A more accurate statement might have been, "There
are no more eyes left to perceive sublime images!" Why is it that we
never hold ourselves accountable for anything? Just because we
can not see something, that does not mean that something isn't really
there. Even when it comes to our "ordinary" reality, this has been
proven again and again with advances in exploration and technology.
So, it is simply logical to say, if we wish to see new and pure
images, we must become new and pure ourselves.
A film like
Godfrey Reggio's Koyaanisqatsi (Life Out of Balance), certainly
shows us our self-destructive world in a completely fresh and truthful
way. Here the director wanted to see the world from a higher
perspective and was granted the eyesight to do so. But how many people
who have watched this masterpiece actually have the same "eyesight" as
the director, so that they could honestly see a reflection of
themselves in the film? There are literally thousands of helpful
images in this one film, but even these images have gone beyond
mankind's capacity to see. If we can't even bear looking at ourselves
honestly anymore, how can we possibly see an image, which is a
"pure creation of the soul"? Obviously, there is a monstrous gulf that
has formed in ourselves between the wordly and the
spiritual.
-
- THE LOSS OF BEAUTY
-
-
-
-
- As a whole,
humanity has lost its sight, as well as its instinct and desire for
the truly pure and beautiful. The movie camera now sends us
images that are only superficially beautiful. An image that is
spiritual will lead the viewer spiritually upwards. Such a pure
image would be marked by utter refinement, grace, dignity, longing,
wonderment and joy. In this regard, the depiction of the nudity of
women or men can never pass for true beauty in art, can never be a
"pure creation of the soul". No matter how perfect the body of the
model/actress/actor may be or how skilled the artist/director, the
image will always lack the necessary spiritual qualities of
modesty and shame. Godard, like the Pre-Raphaelites (and most great
artists), liberally uses female nudity, finding in it an unsurpassed
harmony with nature. This, however, could not be further from the
truth, because women have long since stopped functioning in harmony
with nature! Nature is pure and true unto itself and its Creator.
A dignified human being, who is knowledgeable about
the spiritual responsibilities, would never in a million
years denigrate the sacredness of Creation by exposing their bodies
for all to see, nor would they allow themselves to be exploited as
such for any reason whatsoever. This is a very nasty intellectual
trap that humanity as a whole is falling into deeper and deeper by
the second. In today's world, if someone does not disrobe, they are
regarded as unnatural. What could be greater evidence of our
spiritual blindness, indeed, deadness?!
-
"The body, like the soul, must be regarded as something
precious and therefore untouchable, something that should not be
exhibited in order to entice! Thus in this particular respect also
the body on earth is inseparable from the soul. Like the soul it
must be equally respected and preserved as something inviolable,
if it is to have any value at all! Otherwise it will become
rubbish with which one soils oneself, deserving nothing better
than to be thrown into a corner and picked up cheaply by the first
passing hawker.
If today an
army of such hawkers and second-hand dealers came swarming over
the earth they would discover untold quantities of this rubbish.
At every step they would find new heaps waiting to be added to
their collection. And truly such hawkers and second-hand dealers
are already wandering about in great numbers. They are envoys and
tools of darkness, who greedily seize their cheap booty to drag it
triumphantly down further and further into their dark realm, till
they are all swallowed up in blackness and can never find their
way back to the Light." (Abd-ru-shin,
"IN THE
LIGHT OF TRUTH: THE GRAIL MESSAGE", chapter
"Marriage" - Read the
entire chapter.)
- In fact, a
properly functioning human being would simply inform the misguided
artist that true beauty radiates from the spirit and that the spirit
knows only how to be pure. A woman seen in public in scant clothing
or in a movie with no clothing inflicts spiritual harm onto herself
and onto every man, who is striving to ennoble himself. The beauty
inherent in modest dressing cannot be underestimated! Sergei
Paradjanov may be the only director who properly intuited this
(especially in his last 2 films). If the artist/director could only
learn something of the true nature of
womanhood, they would immediately embark on a different course
- one that would support and advance them instead of constantly
setting them back. And in the process, they just may discover that
elusive image, which is a pure creation of the soul.
<IMG height=21 src="last
exhibition/S_copyri  |