|
In This Life’s Body
|
The integrity of the body was vital.
In 1982, the year that she began work on In This Life’s Body, Australian
experimental filmmaker Corinne Cantrill experienced a health emergency and
feared she was soon to die. This gave a poignant urgency to the project, which
began as a live work-in-progress performance with screened images (titled Journey Through a Face) and ended as a
16mm film in 1984. Almost four decades later, Corinne is still with us. The
film she made under the impetus of that sombre crisis has fair claim to be the
greatest film in the entire history of Australian cinema. It has a power and a
gravity that is matched only by the film medium’s finest masterpieces.
Let us note the specialness – the peculiarity, even –
of In This Life’s Body in the context
of the overall body of work by Corinne and her husband, Arthur Cantrill. First,
it is the only film signed by one of them alone – all their many other films
are collaborative efforts (he helped out only technically on this one). Second,
in the midst of an œuvre devoted largely to abstract and non-narrative cinema,
this is the only one that approaches, in a full-blooded way, the narration of a
story; indeed, a life story. Third, although there is much of the Cantrills’
experience reflected in their films – their travels, encounters, residencies in
cities around the world – this is, by any reckoning, the most personal,
intimate and revealing.
And yet In This
Life’s Body is not a conventional biopic, nor a re-enactment of Corinne’s
life. It might be considered a documentary but, if so, it is a documentary in
the very purest sense: constructed strictly from the surviving documents of
still photographs and some select pieces of moving film. There are no slick
televisual techniques used to ‘animate’ the photographs, no pans or zooms;
likewise, there is no musical score to punctuate or underline the single human
voice (Corinne’s own) reading her testamentary text.
Faced with 147 minutes of (mainly) still photos and a
bare voice, cinephiles will free-associate to precedents in film history
including Chris Marker’s La jetée (1962) or Raúl Ruiz’s Colloque de chiens (1977). In its severe, anti-sensational approach to archival documentation and
the patient re-presentation of its materials, In This Life’s Body might also be aligned with the cinema of
Danièle Huillet & Jean-Marie Straub or, more recently, the overrated John
Gianvito.
But Corinne is not a cinephile of that sort. She was
likely not even thinking of precedents within her own field of the avant-garde,
such as Hollis Frampton’s (nostalgia) (1971) with its progressively burning still photos set against a de-phased
vocal narration. The 1980s theoretical concerns of what Peter Wollen called the
New Talkies of America (the independent feature work of Yvonne Rainer, Mark
Rappaport, Bette Gordon, James Benning and others) have never much been
Corinne’s own concerns as an artist.
Her “supports”, insofar as she needed recourse to any,
came from contemporary literature: the experimental image-and-text book Prodigal Daughters (1981) by Sheila
Steinberg and filmmaker Laleen Jayamanne; the work of Australian writers Ania Walwicz
(who died in 2020) and Valerie Kirwan (The
Will to Fall, 1984); and, further back, the diaries of Anaïs Nin or the
novels of Marguerite Duras. What these literary references share with the
radical cinema of the 1980s is the constant shift in pronoun: from “I” to
“she”, from “you” to “we”, and so on.
The life story recounted by Corinne is, in many
respects, remarkable. Like Ulrike Ottinger’s film-memoir Paris Calligrammes (2019), In This Life’s Body passes
through various milestones of innovative culture during the 20th century: the sculpture of Robert Klippel, the art-photography of Bernard Poinssot,
the poetry of the visionary Harry Hooton (whom the Cantrills knew and worked
with, before devoting a major film to his memory), the open-minded curating of
Jacques Ledoux, the music circle of Nadia Boulanger, the liberatory pedagogy of
Fanny Cohen. Traces of many big cities flick by – Paris, Berlin, Melbourne,
London.
This life-story also reflects opposing currents of
culture, ideology and lifestyle: Jewishness, theosophy, Communism, bohemianism,
mysticism. As Freda Freiberg has astutely observed, there is a “contradictory
tension between the romance of technology and the romance of nature” in the
work of the Cantrills.
I am a child of mixed race, destined to be a marginal
person, caught in the push and pull of conflicting values.
The film offers a broad history of photography as
simultaneously art, industry and everyday habit; as Corinne remarked, “Many genres of photography
are represented: snapshots, studio portraits, school photos, candid camera
shots and street photos, studies by aspiring amateurs, press photos and work by
other professionals, film stills and mirror self-portraits”. However, these
many types of photo are not used simply as transparent, trace evidence. In This Life’s Body is powered by a
healthy suspicion of the photographic medium: what it does not reveal, what it
evades or papers over, what it lies about, what it idealises or trivialises.
The pose for the camera often does not reflect the subject’s own lived,
internal story; sometimes it is a mere imposition of the photographer’s
fantasy, this determining and defining gaze of the Other.
Rarely has such
a minimalist dispositif of image and sound wielded such a maximal emotional effect. In This Life’s Body builds a powerfully
resonant metaphor, wherein the most basic properties of the celluloid film
strip – its grain and duration, its ephemerality and
fragility – reflect a particular conception of existence as something lived
materially, bodily. The human body is complex and solid, a thing of many layers
– and yet it may pass into nothingness and vanish at any moment. Just like a
film.
Corinne Cantrill has long been resistant – like many
avant-garde artists including Maya Deren and Jean Epstein – to the reductive
use of Freudian psychoanalysis as a fixed, airtight interpretive grill. Not to
mention her pragmatic distaste for modish, in-grown, obsessive, bourgeois
self-introspection. So do not go looking for any tidy Oedipus or Elektra
complexes in here. Likewise, do not hunt in In
This Life’s Body for the metaphors, symbols and allegories and myths of the
Jungian collective unconscious. There is spirituality in the work of the
Cantrills, but it is of another type, in a different dimension, working on a
more immanent plane.
On the other hand, the film is a minefield – one
perhaps not entirely under the control of its maker – of interpersonal psychic
projections, idealisations and displacements (just as photographs are),
especially as these processes work themselves out through the generations of
family relationships, and in the erotic attachments of love. No person is an
island, and the Self is always formed in and against a network of pertinent
Others.
Corinne’s mother, we learn, “idealised her dead
mother”. Her own father remains a shadowy figure. The celebrated filmmaker
Philippe Grandrieux, on seeing the film in Buenos Aires in 2003, speculated
about the relative absence of photos of Corinne’s own children, and the subtle
dissonance this creates in her individual life-accounting. For her part,
Corinne wonders whether, in past incarnations, she has been a man, and what
kinds of relationships (whether a sibling, parent, child, lover or friend) she
has previously engaged in, helping to create the volatile person she became.
Corinne, as an artist, has perhaps come to feel, over
time, that there is an inordinate emphasis on In This Life’s Body over and above the more evidently challenging,
abstract and exploratory landscape work of Arthur and herself. Is its appeal
too obvious, too accessible, too “sentimental” for this life-long
avant-gardist? I vividly recall her disdain, at the live performances of Journey Through a Face and the first
screenings of the finished film, over people thinking they immediately “knew”
her intimately as a human being (I pitied the poor dear who lunged to hug
Corinne, in vain) – this is the risk run by all “confessional”,
autobiographical art. But a confession is also a mask, and is no less a
fiction, a presentation of the self as one wants it to be seen.
In This Life’s Body makes for sobering and fascinating viewing in our Age
of the Selfie, when people are more than ever in command of their self-imaging
– and yet ever more unknowingly mired in clichés and stereotypes that inject
alienation and neurosis into every gaze into the lens (even one’s own mobile
phone lens). Corinne Cantrill offers us another way, from another time, of
thinking-through and acting-out the process of self-portraiture. The vessel of life’s body is not bound to a single identity or destiny;
rather, it is discontinuous, relative, forever open
to possibilities of transformation. It is a stream
that (as Lesley Stern suggested) is “holey rather than wholesome”. There may be
one death for each of us, but there are so many lives along the way.
I feel it is still possible to remake myself … in this life’s body.
Note: All italicised quotations are from the
soundtrack of In This Life’s Body; a copy
of the script was kindly supplied to me by Corinne & Arthur Cantrill in
2003. I am indebted to previous writing on the film by Freda Freiberg, Anna
Dzenis, Kris Hemensley and Lesley Stern (1950-2021).
© Adrian Martin February 2021 |