戈达尔 | 弗雷德里克·詹明信

不妨说他不是什么别的，而正是电影本身，是在电影消失之时刻被重新发现的电影。电影要么是真的正在消亡，他随之而去了；要么更好一些，电影随着他而去了。

ai机翻，见谅。不管怎么翻都不如读原文有味道。

更好的排版见：https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/concerning-godard?fbclid=IwAR11qjqRJp-T8EbZMNV0dQJa9IjvJBYMMsvtspawEeug-pPupDYWuJckHo8

 

Concerning Godard

 

FREDRIC JAMESON

 

28 SEPTEMBER 2022 CULTURE

 

 

 

After decades in which inscrutable titles signed Godard popped up as regularly as clockwork in the film festivals, while the image of their maker deteriorated from rebel into dirty old man, if not technologically obsessed sage, it is stunning, leafing through the filmographies, to remember how much these films counted as events for us as we waited for each new and unexpected one in the 1960s, how intensely we scrutinized the political engagements of the Dziga Vertov group, with what genuinely engaged curiosity we asked ourselves what the end of the political period would bring, and later on what we were to do with the final works of the ‘humanist’ period, where they came from, and whether they meant a falling off or a genuine renewal.

 

几十年来，高深莫测的戈达尔的名字像钟表一样定期出现在电影节上，而其制作者的形象却从叛逆者变成了肮脏的老人，如果不是迷恋技术的圣人的话，翻开电影手册，让人惊讶的是，当我们在1960年代等待每一部新的和意想不到的电影时，这些电影对我们来说是多么的重要。我们对Dziga Vertov小组的政治参与进行了多么强烈的审查，我们以真正参与的好奇心问自己政治时期的结束会带来什么，后来我们对 "人文主义 "时期的最后作品做了什么，它们来自哪里，以及它们是否意味着脱落或真正的更新。

 

Throughout all this we were entertained or provoked by the increasingly ignoble ‘thoughts’ or paradoxes which either demanded meditation or inspired a mild contempt, tempered by the constant reminder that visuality, if it thinks, does so in a way not necessarily accessible to the rest of us; while his films went on ‘thinking’ in chiasmatic images: Belmondo imitating Bogart, Piccoli inviting Bardot to use his bathwater (‘I’m not dirty’), the world conquerors exhibiting their picture postcards, Mao’s Cultural Revolution taking the form of the most infectious music, the world ending in a traffic jam, a character scarfing up yoghurt with a finger in the bathroom, two African garbage collectors reciting Lenin, our favourite film stars baffled by their new roles, an interpolated series of interview-interrogations in which ten-year-olds are asked about class struggle, and fun-loving models, about the latest decisions of the CGT, ‘la musique, c’est mon Antigone!’ – narrative deteriorating steadily all the while only to end up in 3-D or in images as thick as butterflies in front of the face.

 

在所有这些过程中，我们被越来越多的无耻的 "思想 "或悖论所娱乐或激怒，它们要么要求冥想，要么激发温和的蔑视，并不断提醒我们，视觉性，如果它思考，是以一种我们其他人不一定能理解的方式进行的；而他的电影继续以脊柱式图像 "思考"。Belmondo模仿Bogart，Piccoli邀请Bardot用他的洗澡水（"我不脏"），世界征服者展示他们的图片明信片，毛泽东的文化大革命以最具感染力的音乐形式出现，世界在交通堵塞中结束，一个角色在浴室里用手指吞食酸奶。两个非洲垃圾收集者背诵列宁，我们最喜欢的电影明星对他们的新角色感到困惑，一个插曲式的采访审讯系列，其中10岁的孩子被问及阶级斗争，爱玩的模特，关于CGT的最新决定，"la musique, c'est mon Antigone! ' - 叙事一直在稳步恶化，最终以3-D或像蝴蝶一样厚重的图像出现在脸前。

 

All this then building inexorably towards the final impertinence, in an unmistakable voice now indissociable from his idea of pedagogy: namely, that History is (nothing more than, nothing less than) the history of cinema. Well, why not? If everything is narrative, always mediated by this or that picture on the poster, as in the battle cuttings of the hell sequence of Notre Musique (2004), the images themselves have to fight it out, like people chasing each other, shouting and jumping into cars – along with their distinctive historical styles – silent or sound, black and white or technicolour; maybe this is all he knows of History anyway, what he calls cinema.

 

所有这一切都不可避免地走向最后的无礼，以一种明确无误的声音，现在与他的教育学思想密不可分：即，历史是（不外乎，不外乎）电影史。嗯，为什么不呢？如果一切都是叙述性的，总是以海报上的这个或那个图片为中介，就像《Notre Musique》（2004年）的地狱序列的战斗剪影一样，图像本身就必须争夺，就像人们互相追逐、呼喊和跳入汽车--以及它们独特的历史风格--无声或有声、黑白或技术色彩；也许这就是他所知道的历史，他所说的电影。

 

And alongside the history of cinema, there is the history of a film, where does it come? From the images themselves, as he extracts them from the most sublime of his later films, Passion (1982), unfolding itself into the even more sublime lineage of Scenario du film “Passion” (1982), which, out of the Mallarmean blank page (or plage, or grève) a young woman appears who tries to start a strike (grève). In that case, there must follow the factory she strikes against, along with its owner, and then his wife, and then the hotel she runs. And finally a mystery guest from some place beyond the film, himself trying to make a film with a narrative, himself plagued by images, the world’s great paintings, tableaux vivants of the world’s great paintings, reconstructions in miniature of their architecture – Jerusalem through which the crusaders ride, driven forward by Dvorak’s inexorable piano concerto, just as the potential film’s producer is harassed by unwilling bankers and money-lenders. The would-be foreign director is as disabled as the other characters (stutter, cough), he cannot return the love of any of the women, he cannot turn these images into narrative scenarios, he finally gives up and goes home to History itself (Poland and Solidarność). So now the film becomes an allegory of the new Europe and its ‘peu de realité’: great actors stand for France, Germany, Hungary, Poland (the great traditions) with a presumably Swiss director; fundamental themes like love and labour can never be represented; great paintings are as mute as The Voices of Silence Belmondo reads in the bathtub; but Godard has his scenario, he can now begin to film his fiction film.

 

除了电影的历史之外，还有一部电影的历史，它来自哪里？从图像本身，因为他从他后来的电影中最崇高的《激情》（1982年）中提取了这些图像，展开了《激情》（Scenario du film）（1982年）的更崇高的血统，从马拉美式的空白页（或plage，或grève）中出现了一个年轻女人，她试图发起一场罢工（grève）。在这种情况下，她所罢工的工厂，以及工厂的老板，然后是他的妻子，然后是她经营的旅馆，都必须跟上。最后是一位来自电影之外的神秘客人，他想拍一部有叙事性的电影，他自己也被图像所困扰，世界上最伟大的画作，世界上最伟大的画作的表象，它们的建筑的微缩重建--十字军骑马经过的耶路撒冷，在德沃夏克不可阻挡的钢琴协奏曲的推动下向前发展，就像潜在的电影制片人被不愿意的银行家和贷方所骚扰。这位未来的外国导演和其他角色一样是个残疾人（口吃，咳嗽），他无法回报任何一位女性的爱，他无法将这些图像转化为叙事场景，他最终放弃了，回到了历史本身（波兰和团结工会）。因此，现在这部电影成了新欧洲及其 "少许现实 "的寓言：伟大的演员代表法国、德国、匈牙利、波兰（伟大的传统），而导演可能是瑞士人；像爱情和劳动这样的基本主题永远无法体现；伟大的绘画就像贝尔蒙多在浴缸里读的《沉默的声音》一样哑巴；但戈达尔有他的场景，他现在可以开始拍摄他的虚构电影。

 

Scenario now rewinds the tape, runs the whole thing backwards, breaking the fiction back up into its component parts, lingering over the images, superimposing them, returning to origins, identifying the origins of itself. So now: two films about the same thing, two films sharing the same body = Cinema. Cinema, film’s mirror stage.

 

Cinema equals visuality, sounds, words (with glimpses of money), it is life itself or living as such, everything is cinema. Maybe the late films try to climb back down the other side, begin with the narrative, the scenario, and then tear it apart, with raucous glee give us the pieces in joyous collision, punctuated by raw gunshots, silent films with sound, history going backwards.

 

He lived, ate, breathed, slept movies. Was he the greatest movie-maker of all time? A party game question. What he was, if anything, was Cinema itself, cinema rediscovered at its moment of disappearing. If cinema really is dying, then he died with it; or better still, it died with him.

  

 

情景现在倒带，把整个事情倒过来，把小说重新分解成它的组成部分，在图像上徘徊，叠加它们，回到起源，确定自身的起源。所以现在：两部关于同一事物的电影，两部共享同一主体的电影=电影。电影院，电影的镜像舞台。

 电影等于视觉、声音、文字（有金钱的一瞥），它是生活本身或生活本身，一切都是电影。也许晚期的电影试图从另一边爬回来，从叙事开始，从情节开始，然后把它拆开，带着喧闹的欢快给我们的碎片在欢乐的碰撞中，以原始的枪声为点缀，有声的默片，历史在倒退。

 他以电影为生，以电影为食，以电影为呼吸，以电影为睡眠。他是有史以来最伟大的电影制作人吗？这是一个派对游戏问题。不妨说他不是什么别的，而正是电影本身，在电影消失之时刻被重新发现的电影。电影要么是真的正在消亡，他随之而去了；要么更好一些，电影随着他而去了。