![]() |
| Los Angeles by night in the first sequence of Criss Cross (1948). |
During the 1940s and 1950s major economical, political, social shifts radically changed the ways in which space was perceived, lived and produced in the U.S.A., and, correspondingly, one of the country's principal cultural products, film, echoed these changes and/or projected the ones to come. In this period, modernity's ways of thinking and acting were reaching its peak, and, in parallel, seeds of very different paradigms were being planted and nourished. “American dream” seemed to realize itself to an extent never seen before, and series of new dreams were being churned out tirelessly. At the same time, the overwhelming menace of Cold War cast its shadows upon the society. In terms of spatiality, the push towards massive centralisation of power, especially political and financial, through infrastructural and technological developments, was countered by decentralising vectors mediated by the very same technologies and infrastructures. This applies to telecommunications equally as to superhighways. Whereas the state believed that in the new techno-industrial complex it has found the key to its elevation on n-th degree, other management groups were using and producing very similar technologies, and these groups sometimes aligned themselves with governmental policies, and sometimes did not. The scissor between public and private sector, public and corporate, was widening and deepening. In the middle ground between these vectors, the modern man was caught, be him white-collar or blue-collar, but unconsciously, gently lulled by the showiness of the prospering new economy. Upon this apparently mild but shaky ground, film noir pushed this man into unpredicted sets of circumstances which profoundly diverged from the postcard picture of the America in progress, from the proverbial projection of Californian sunshine ideology to which Hollywood obviously contributed greatly.
Protagonists
of film noir
found themselves vis-à-vis
with conformations of power, which as one of their primary
operational tools employ space. This central struggle, thus, unravels
over a terrain, made of places and ambients which look familiar,
but, instead, are charged with peculiar intensities (nodes of
percepts and affects, concentrations of power) and extensities
(depths and superficialities, scales, connectivities). This special
elaboration of space is the fundamental trait of film noir
(and is followed by a similar treatment of time, which is warped,
folded, stretched, compressed in similar fashion). This
representational apparatus was elaborated film by film, author by
author, into a coherent yet fractalised universe of spaces, which I
will call the noir
spatiality. To be noted from the start is that this spatiality is
not an exclusive product of the American film noir,
it is a landscape created by a spread of antecedents and hosts of
descendents, and is still in way of formation and reshaping. Still,
its first comprehensive elaboration is to be found in the so-called
film noir, produced in
Hollywood in the 1940-1970 period. Lastly, noir spatiality
is by no means confined to cinematic experience, silver screen is here
an iridescent surface which commingles bits of real places with
fictional ones and then reflects these topographies onto our side of
the screen, where they already are, or are coming into being.
What
are the principal traits of the noir
spatiality? Where are them to be found? In the ill-lit boarding house
rooms where villains gather and conspire, and occasionally fist fight
the good guys; or blank police station interiors; or hazy bars with
counters against which patrons lean, enveloped in cigarette smoke; or
nightclubs glittering with shining gowns and translucent tuxedos; or
anonymous motel rooms permeated by horizontal stripes of light let
through Venetian blinds; or wooden shacks sitting alone deep in the
remote woods; or fishing huts isolated on ocean beaches; or the
luxurious hill-slopes mansions overlooking Buenos Aires or L.A.; or
the coldest of prison blocks in concrete and steel; or the abandoned
industrial yards in desertic stripes of land; or high-tech military
laboratories developing the most secret weapons for mass
extermination; or either packed-up with passengers or almost devoid
wagons of overground or underground urban railways; or the amusement
parks with pyschedelic plays of bright neon lights and puzzling
mirrors; and so on and so on. These are some places noir,
at the same time realistic and fantastic, familiar and odd, common
and exceptional. So, what is to them that bears distinctive noir
semblances? Is it the atmosphere they are imbued with, created by the
succession of events or maybe the lighting masteries of directors of
photography? This thread does not lead faraway, since the filmic
treatment of these lieus
refers to something we already know and perceive, so what is this
else that they add to this experience?
Noir
spatiality, at first glimpse, is intrinsically connected with the
city. Some analysts go as far as to consider it exclusively a urban
spatiality, and, based on the dates of the movie productions, they
limit it narrowly to the American WW2 city and its postwar
developments. Many of these films do take place within American
cities of the period, but many of them, and some of the richest ones
in terms of spatial information, are sited outside of North America,
whereas others are displaced in terms of period, for example at the
turn of the 20th
century. Besides, film noir
extends itself even into the fictionalised futures. Crucially, many
other noirs present
extra-urban spaces, as protagonists very often move through small
country towns, villages, up to the most faraway places in the
wilderness.
All
of these seemingly disparate or accidental places are tightly
interwoven by something, or, better said, by someone. First of all,
by characters' actions, their purposes and intents, by vectors of
forces which are not visible on the screen. The specifically noir
characteristics of time and space emerge silently and subsequently
influence everything that is happening on the screen,
spatiotemporalities are characters, acting forces, au pair
with protagonists. How is this possible, is it some surreal
antropomorphisation or personification of space, such as in early
Expressionist films, for example? At the kernel, this is not the
case. Noir spaces are
dense with flows of transforming and transformative powers, and in
this, they can be connected with the microphysics of power in
Foucauldian sense. But, not only do these spaces embody Foucault's
power/knowledge dialectic, they also are fields of the
subjectification process, of the creation of “ways of life” of
the character. This can generically apply to many a film, but noir
spatiality is shaped by
distinctive powers and knowledges, which, in a way, are essentially
urban. For example, they perpetuate the modern domination of the city
over countryside, and they are representatives of the definitive rise
of new urban organisations in the 20th
century. And it is this evolving landscape that modern woman or man,
a noir protagonist,
tries to make sense of. But why? Simply said, because she or he has
to. More about this causal bond I will expand later on. For now, I'd
say that the driving forces of noir
are essentially urban, in terms of desires, aims, means of getting to
them, and these forces are both affirmed and contradicted through
noir space.
For
the start, how does this landscape present itself? In classical film
noir, the first thing that
catches the attention in
mise-en-scene of
interiors and exteriors are unnatural shadows which break down the
frame in a jigsaw puzzle of diverse surfaces, a formal element of
clear European avant-guard derivation, straight from the core of the
modernist project. And they do transmit certain significations
connected with these antecedents, be them perturbations of mental
space in Expressionist jargon, or hierarchical and bureaucratic
structures of power in modernist sense. But, at the same time, other
architectures are present: soft shadows, sfumatos,
fog, clouds of smoke, filtrated lights, areas of semi-darkness. They
steep the noir spaces
with other layers of signification, visually recalling Pictorialist
or Late Romantic photographic styles, but working in other
directions. Beside these gaseous environments, liquid ones appear,
too. Water is the dominant element in sewers, calm or stormy
seascapes, and majestically, it is virtually all-encompassing in the
form of rain that soaks deep into protagonists' trench-coats and runs
along brims of felt fedoras. The compresence and the compenetration
of these diverse spatialities, hard and soft, rigid and malleable,
absorbing and reflecting, create complex architectural, urbanistic,
spatial configurations, but, at the same time, these material
properties are signs, metaphors, allegories, and, sometimes,
tautologies and contradictions.
Precisely
in these configurations film noir
bares its spatial apparatus. Besides the classical filmic connective
interface of montage, and narration in wider sense, there are other
ways of the production of space that distinguish noir.
I will start from the end by saying that in film noir
emerge key properties of a spatiality which will come to be the
playground, both the support and the agent, of what much later will
be denominated as “network society”, the society we all live in
(if we are reading this text, no doubt of that). Noir
characters are obsessed with the creation of and orientation within
social, economic, political, and other networks of power (and
sometimes, of affects, too). These networks do not present the
topological features of, for example, a classical Western film border
town, they are not oriented towards crystallization and definitive
conformation. Instead, noir
networks are intermittently solid, gaseous and fluid, and they take
this shape for a single reason, because the characters themselves are
mobile on unprecedented scales, intensities and in novel modalities.
If mobility is a distinctive feature of noir
spatiality's denizens, preliminarily two basic types of movement can
be distinguished: bodily and communicational ones.
Body
movements range from strolls around city blocks, forays into
buildings and their horizontal and vertical scanning on foot, up to
rides by means of transportation. This mediated movement is pushed to
the limits of physically and technologically possible for a given
historical period, as noir
protagonists recur to almost every
possible way of transportation available: private car is the absolute
favourite on urban and interurban scale, taxi is a standard, too,
public transportation is used for escapes or chases (subways,
overground railways, buses, trams, etc.), train for occasional
interurban voyages (trains may exceptionally constitute the entirety
of the film's space), boat and ships lead to exotic destinations
(luxury is highly appreciated in film noir),
airplanes for business trips, especially of government
representatives, and so on. The mythical unbounded mobility of the
Western's heroes is eclipsed by the combinatorial intelligence of
noir characters who
with ease jump from one vehicle to another, and by doing so, they
weave a unitary plane of mobility (naturally, not lacking in
obstacles and frictions, which effectively bring to the fore the
system's workings). To be noted in passing is that many a noir
character actually does not even possess a firm residence, they live
out Deleuze and Guattari's nomadism. One could proceed along this
line to follow their reasoning about the intrinsically anarchic
nature of this modus vivendi,
as counter-posed to sedentary one. What matters is that noir
protagonists rarely travel for leisure, adventure or exploration,
instead they move along their peculiar “lines of flight”, driven
by very personal existential necessities. Basically, they have
to travel in order to duel determinate vectors of power.
Communicational
movements are parallel to the body ones, and they even more tightly
connect various spaces into circuits and networks. Police stations,
private suburban houses, criminals' hideouts, they all are connected
via very delicate or even invisible threads: telephone, radio, fax,
and television. The forces transmitted via these channels are not
virtual, they do not vacillate in the sphere of metaphysical
possibility, instead they substantial and real, they can actualise
themselves in any particular moment almost anywhere. This is why even
the most unsuspecting noir space,
for example, a well-lit room with no shadows, but provided with a
telephone, is prone to rapidly re-organise its power or affective
configurations, the ones visible on screen. A sudden call, and a
voice from the other extremity of the line, an information thus
passed, carries potentially infinite power. Noir spatiality
is virtual and actual at the same time, it is a composite of mental
and physical space, visible enclosure and infinite connectedness, and
for that reason there are many vanishing points on screen, generally
masked in the incumbent volumes of shadow (which was a high modernist
formal mean of conveying something which definitely escapes its
underlying conceptual/visual apparatus). Thus, noir
spatiality is historically a harbinger of informational paradigm.
Another
powerful metaphor is often used in critical elaboration of film
noir's space, a genuinely
ancient one, that of the labyrinth [the most fascinating elaboration
of this line of thought can be found in Christopher, N. Somewhere
in the Night. Emeryville,
CA.1997]. It is dear to film analysts because it neatly explains the
general disorentiation of noir
protagonist, his quest for salvation through desperate search for an
exit, and it remarkably well describes the visual appearance of many
a built environment in noir,
for example, a series of interconnected rooms in a grand residential
building or a prison. Some famous sequences in film noir
are more than explicitly labyrinthine, for example, man hunts in
L.A.'s or Vienna's sewer system, or through Berlin's or London's
post-war streets transformed in mazes in the open air, made of heaps
of destroyed houses. But, strictly speaking, to what extent does the
noir spatiality
actually correspond to the dimensions characteristic of the
labyrinth?
In
its primary definition, labyrinth is a complex of routes with a
single center, whereas maze presents multicursal patterns, thus
multiple solutions and outcomes. Be it labyrinth or maze, they both
are bidimensional, essentially made of passages, corridors, or paths
leading forward, backwards, to the left or to the right. Franco
Farinelli (Geografia,
Torino: Einaudi, 2003) states that the Greek labyrinth corresponds to
the “collapse of the palace”, in particular, King Minos's one at
Knossos on Crete, the dwelling of Minotaur. The other variation is
Herodotus' Egyptian labyrinth which exhibits two levels, one above
ground and the other subterrenean, but, apart from the two levels
being reciprocally specular in their structure, there is no hint of
elaborate interconnectedness between the two levels. Thus, labyrinth
is quintessentially a bidimensional structure.
This
paradigm does not absolutely embrace all of noir
spatiality's dimensions. Besides
horizontal wanderings, equally, if not more, significant, are the
passages among levels, therefore the supposed noir
labyrinth has a vertical dimension, too. Some of noir's
most powerful physical structures are, in fact, skyscrapers, through
which protagonists run upwards and downwards, as well as leftwards
and rightwards. Moreover,
a single film's spatiality is rarely confined to a single physical
complex, as noir characters
effortlessly cross its limits by rooftops, basements or underground
channels . Hence the staircases in all their imaginable variations are
crucial, they connect different levels, and not only, they themselves
are often the place of a chance encounter or a final duel. They
constantly remind us that the city is not flat, the noir
spatiality is quintessentially
undulated, rough, striated. Movement through it demands physical
force and dexterity, as it presents diverse grades of friction and
resistance. Mechanisms made for the cancelling of the vertical
friction, namely elevators, are not gratuitous either, there is more
than one character in the noir
world that, for example, fatally falls into an empty elevator shaft.
This applies to every other means for the surmounting of space, each
one of them never is an innocent instrument, instead it is a
spatiality unto itself, acting within other spatiality. Nervous
dialogue between these spatialities, triangulated by the
protagonists, demonstrates that noir
spatiality is incessantly negotiated, almost never determined a
priori.
The
labyrinth analogy shows its limits along another line, as the noir
spatiality features both radical
openness and radical closure, and as such, it is shaped and is
shaping centralised and decentralised networks, corresponding to
centripetal and centrifugal forces which constitute them [this
dialectics is analysed in profundity in Dimendberg, E. Film
Noir and the Spaces of Modernity. Cambridge,
MA: 2004]. Deep in this spatiality, noir
protagonists attempt to extricate themselves from complex
entanglements. To accomplish or to fail in that, they act quite
differently compared to Theseus' linear measurement of space. The key
to noir spatiality
lies in the connections. This is what noir
characters do, they incessantly try to connect
diverse, or otherwise delimited, spaces, as well as bits or pieces of
information, which is the same thing, to form their personal line of
flight.
The
division between private and public, as it was shaped in Western
societies in the modern epoch, is radically put in crisis in the noir
spatiality. First, all kinds of physical obstacles are ordinarily
annulled in the noir,
as characters do not hesitate to kick down the doors, to enter or
exit through windows (taking more or less care to break it or just to
unlatch it). The basic idea of Western housing and existence, that of
privacy, insurpassability of domestic walls, is demolished on and on
throughout the noir.
But, more than conveying the sense of perpetual danger (on behalf of
criminal or terrorist forces from without), spatial practices that
pass through and rearrange these private spaces act as signals of the
fact that the privacy, as it was understood in the modernist era, is
sustained with difficulty in the new socioeconomic arrangement. After
all, the credo of privacy is extremely doubtful already in high
modernism; the apartments are never really isolated or separated,
as its dwellers thrive to be in continuous contact with the outside
world, for example, via telephone. So, what's the big surprise if
they receive guests in blood and flesh at all times of night and day,
invited and uninvited ones?
Another
very modernist ideology, the obsessive fixation with the functional
subdivision of space, is subverted, with nonchalance or explicitly
demolished, within the noir spatiality.
Hospitals, for example, are not places just for recovery, but for
police interrogation, business negotiation, fight, escape etc. Bars
are rarely only a place to chit-chat and to relax, they are
operational centers for other kinds of businesses, too, just behind
that closed door. Every single place we can imagine, in or out of the
city, might be a potential meeting spot for management or
organisation of flows (most often, criminal ones, which reveal
ambiguous opinions film-makers, or producers or censorship committees,
in regard to the social transformations they depicted). All this
seems very natural to us today, but, back in the 1940s, for example,
it probably was not all that common to conclude important affairs in
coffee shops, that haven of the creative class of today.
This
brings us to the main agent for the shaping of the noir
spatiality, the most valuable “element” in film noir,
what is truly being sought for, and it is not really green bills or
gold bars – it is information. Let's take a closer look to who the
usual main characters of noirs
are – police detectives, gumshoes or private investigators,
journalists, criminal masterminds, spies, lawyers etc. – in some
ways, archetypes or prototypes of informational operators of today.
These figures are certainly not inventions of film noir,
but the procedures they adopt to gather information, elaborate it,
sell it, anyway implement it to their interests, are represented
iconically in film noir.
These informational operations are closely linked with the spaces I
listed at the beginning, because these are the spaces of information
production. For example, information of higher order is extracted in
fancy high-rise salons, than in the Rocky Mountains mines.
Subsequently, they are elaborated in offices (insurance companies,
lawyer agencies, city administration halls, police stations), or in
interstitial spaces of transportation (cars, trains, airplanes), and
not in industrial plants. The information is diagrammed and
forwarded, thus put in motion, from police headquarters, or from an
underworld manager's bedroom via telephone. Finally, it rarely takes
shape of a product, but instead that of a service, action, such as a
newspaper scoop or a beat-up in the back alley. Film noir
reveals the shift from industrial economies to informational
economies by making the information (its causes, effects, feed-backs)
physical: visible, graspable, audible.
This
different ontology of information implies a major shift in working
methods. Informational operators, some of which I cited above, as
long as they act as modernist detectives, and try to “solve” the
puzzle by logical procedures of deduction and induction, thus, in
Sherlock Holmes style, they inevitably fail. That is because the
mechanisms or organisations which they confront now possess and
employ grander, and often more complex, resources (ranging from, say,
muscle force, machine guns, cars, up to the valuable documents,
scientific diagrams, etc.). Only when noir
protagonists contrive alternative and innovative tactics they manage
to counter these big power's strategies. The scale element, a
modernist individual versus a post-modernist flexible organisation,
is essential in the noir
conflict. This is also the message of many films noir,
that it is truly hard to win, or simply survive, for an individual,
at least the one adopting modernist modus operandi.
On the other hand, some of them, the most flexible ones, do succeed in
that effort.
In
these informational procedures, what is required is relational
thinking and acting. It manifests in different ways, physical and
communicational once again. The first modality is the discovery and
use of connectivities of spaces, as we already exposed, the idea of
making jumps from one scale to the other, from one geographical point
to the other. The other, more complex, modality, is the creation of
social relationships, or connects, because the most important ways of
the extraction and the use of information are through social
relations.
Let
me focus for a moment on the first category of relational thinking,
the one connected with spatial practice. In order to oppose the
powers which are upon him, noir
nomad explores where the power's crucial nodes are and where possible
“lines of flight” open. The greatest power's spatial instrument
of all, maps, or simply views from above, aerial viewpoints,
characteristic of big power, is rivalled by tactical means. Noir
protagonists know that they can't limit their vision to the surface
view, that of the maps for example, instead they are in quest of deep
knowledge, as they enter the bowels of buildings or mountain canyons.
This dialectic corresponds to the opposition of light and darkness,
which is so glaringly obvious in film noir
that it derives its name from it. But, the belief in vision as the
single most important epistemological instrument is continuously put
in question, and limits to it become obvious. This applies also to
the question of scale, as noir
protagonists find themselves operating in the range of single rooms
or corridors, up to entire building complexes, city blocks, urban
zones or entire towns or cities, and even on interurban and sometimes
international scale. This inter-scalar and cross-scalar movements are
not something extra-narrative, they are performed by characters
physically and informationally, they transform themselves into flows,
in sense in which Manuel Castells uses the term to illustrate the way
of living of the global ruling class of our time. On the other hand,
the power of the maps, and cartographic representation in general, is
not simply inverted by spatial practices, it is rather highlighted as
a critical moment in some occasions, as the mapping forces (mostly,
the ones of law and order) do indeed most often win, but often only
after their dispositives have been seriously challenged by
counter-mapping movements of noir nomads.
Their movement is never linear, it replenishes with direction
changes, each of them a question or an answer, a new information to
be taken into consideration, one which can possibly re-arrange the
entire conceptual (or physical) apparatus etc. Intervalled to this
state of movement is also the capacity to stand still, to make an
intermezzo, to wait, to re-elaborate, but these moments of apparent
calm are also parts of the flow inasmuch the vector's arrow is still
ticking or beating.
Back
in the realm of vision, let us not be deceived by formal binary
oppositions, such as that of light and darkness, of black and white.
As a matter of fact, in noir,
there is no all-encompassing sunshine nor pitch dark. There are as
many well-lit or open-air spaces that are all but unsecure ground for
the characters. Noir
spatiality is all in gradients, roughly said, it presenst an infinite
gamma of grays that envelop persons and objects, layers to be decoded
and recoded. Noir's
principal instruments are opacities, transparencies, reflectivities,
absorbencies, material and conceptual states to be approached and
examined. The noir gradient could
be defined as the level of knowledge available to the protagonists
about their actual connectivities and power formations within a
determinate space or set of spaces.
That
is how noir spatiality
works, it spurs the
spectator to try to make sense of these unstable spatiotemporal
manifestations, more precisely, of the information of which these
phenomena are manifestations, carriers, or blocks. In this sense,
the concept of noir
spatiality can be transposed into the general field of critical
spatial analysis. So, when we walk into a bank branch, we could think
of levels of noirness
around us, naturally not intending to create a plan of the bank in
order to rob it, but trying to understand what are the hypothetical
nodes of flows in which we participate, too. The same experiment can
be applied easily to our apartments, as every Western residential
house has its blind spots, elements symptomatic of noir,
and these are not (always) the ones which lie in shadow, but might as
well be covered with the shiniest plastic surfaces.
Manifestations
of noirness, or noir
spatiality, will be further
examined on PointLineFlow.Net.
In this, we will have a travel companion, a guest blogger joining
very soon. Stay tuned!

No comments:
Post a Comment