Orson Welles and the Poetic Solution

In case I found myself in a position where there would be a lack of updates during a prolonged period of time, I hatched a backup plan. I will copy and paste one of a few academic papers relating to film. The following was an assignment regarding an Orson Welles quote for a “film language” course. There were several topic choices to tackle; me having a massive ego, I deviated from the original prompt.

Known as one of the greatest American films of all time, Citizen Kane employs a mixture of styles, points of view, and time frames. Referring to the implementation of these techniques, Orson Welles once said: “The film should indicate a process, not a product”, and “The solution to the film should be essentially poetic”. In other words, Welles states that film should display a sense of lyrical poetry, an ecstatic truth which can only be obtained through the process and purpose behind a work.

In order to understand Welles’ description of film as a poetic process, it is necessary to understand poetry itself. Language simply spoken or written is not poetry. Poetry is the use of this language for a purpose: to create something linguistic. In other words, the creation of poem is a process with an ultimate goal. Like art itself, poetry can not be defined, but as Werner Herzog said:

You will find that in great poetry, when you listen or when you read a great poem, it will occur to you very abruptly that there is a deep enormous truth in this poem. And you feel like, illuminated. And you don’t have to analyze, and you don’t have to read lots of literature about this very poem. You just know it instantly.

The audience may not posses a full understanding of what a poem is, or may be unaware of the message or themes of a work. However, they will instantly recognize the exquisite nature of it because of the way it has been crafted.

Film as a “process” works in the same way. When a filmmaker puts together a film with an aspiration, they are essentially exerting a sense of truth into their product. This is because the purpose affects the development, which determines the direction of every creative aspect of a film. Through the “process”, a sense of poetry is immediately recognized by the audience. For instance, Wong Kar Wai’s In the Mood for Love, is far from a realist picture. Christopher Doyle’s cinematography is carefully executed; no lights, shadows, or colors are placed without cause. There is a lack of physical contact between the between the characters, but Wong Kar Wai succeeds in putting together a picture which is clouded with an unexplainable chemistry. The viewers may not be able to explain it, but they can feel a sort of poetry in motion.

A “process” also requires some sort of substantial effort or planning. It is easy for a filmmaker to be caught up in purpose and the intrinsic process. That by itself does not make the work “essentially poetic”. Douglas Gordon’s 24 Hour Psycho was made with the best intentions, and is said to have themes of “recognition and repetition, time and memory, complicity and duplicity, authorship and authenticity, darkness and light” by The Guardian. Nonetheless, it is Psycho stretched out to twenty-four hours.

One could suspect Welles’ comment promoted formalistic film making, as his films were controlled precisely and included a wide variety of techniques. On the other hand, Hoop Dreams, lacks a controlled purpose or process, other than filming the lives of two teenagers for several years. Little to no techniques are employed, and there is a lack of control in the shooting of the film. The structure itself is determined in the editing room, which highlights the only true “process” in the production. Regardless, the “poetic solution” must be found rather than observed. Hoop Dreams is essentially spoken language, not poetry. It is difficult to discern whether or not Welles was criticizing cinéma vérité, which is meant to be “direct”, instead of blatantly meaningful.

In contrast, a film that indicates a “product”, is made without the motivation of creating poetry. A common example of this type of cinema, would be the contemporary Bollywood musicals, crafted simply to appeal to a mass audience. Om Shanti Om, is filled with elaborate choreography and a catchy soundtrack, however the high production values are contributing to a synthetic piece. It is meant only to amuse the audience, especially with a number that features many of Bollywood’s most prominent performers – not to mention the controversy surrounding it’s likely plagiarism. It’s artificial play of delight and ecstasy may allure viewers, but Om Shanti Om, is nothing more than a “product”. There is an elaborate film making process behind it, but it is only meant to sell.

Orson Welles statements regarding the mixtures of styles, points of view, and time frames in Citizen Kane may not be clear. In spite of that, he describes a rough boundary which distinguishes between film as a “product” primarily meant to sell, and film as a “process” which contributes to an “essentially poetic solution”. Through a purpose and an effective filmmaking “process”, a cinematic work can inherit the qualities of great poetry.