application/pdf
2036-461X
21119
7
en
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Cinéma & Cie. Film and Media Studies Journal
Introduction
Text.Serial.Journal
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie
5
Introduction
2005-10-01
2023-09-20
2005-10-01
2024-02-14
Cinéma & Cie
Leonardo Quaresima
2005/10/01
2036-461X
7
en
Introduction
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie/article/download/21119/18747
5
INTRODUCTION




                                                    Two brothers undertook directions
                                             that logically conformed to their aptitudes
                                                           and, following opposite paths,
                                               grew completely apart from one another.
                                                                      Thomas Bernhard



  The IlI edition of the MAGIS - International Film Studies Spring School (Gradisca
d'Isonzo, Io-I9 March 2005) continued the research activities proposed in the previous
occasions (2003 and 2004), dedicated to an apparently occasional and limited episode of
film history: the production of multiple versions with the advent of sound and for the
most part in Europe, and in a slightly different form in Hollywood.' A more than cur-
sory glance immediately reveals not only the historical and geographical extension of
the phenomenon - not solely limited to the brief stage following the advent of sound,
nor to the more thriving cinema markets? - but also the theoretical productivity of its
examination. The multiple versions phenomenon renders notions, often abused in the
historiography of cinema - work, author, national cinema - less obvious and suggests
to the scholar a more integrated approach to the practice of cinema. A plural practice,
since its origins.3 This is why the third edition of MAGIS has examined (highlighting it
in the title even, Moving Images - Moving People. Film and Other Media), the dynam-
 ic dimension of numerous elements: production methods, filmakers, national cultures,
media devices and forms.
  The work carried out during the workshops held over the last three years in
 Gradisca d'Isonzo has provided valid reasons to consider, in a processual perspective,
 a notion too often assessed in static terms: national identity. Over that last two
 decades the concept of national belonging based on stale and lasting components,
 independently of the cooperative and participative activity of the members of the
 community, has been repeatedly contested.+ This is why, increasingly, the term iden-
 tity has been supplanted by the term identification, a notion able to suggest an inher-
  ent processual nature to the sense of belonging to a community and more effectively
  and closely describing the plurality of variables at the base of modern identity.5
  Greater attention has, furthermore, been reserved for the ability of representative
  forms to be places of mediation and negotiation, instruments for the activation and
  instruction of identification processes. Amongst these forms cinema, during the first
  half of the 2oth century, took on a cardinal role. The multiple versions phenomenon
  is undoubtedly an emblematic example of the possible multiplication of identity in
                                                                                       7
  CINEMA & Cie, no. 7, Fall 2005
     FRANCESCO PITASSIO, LEONARDO QUARESIMA


     order to stir a national sense of community through partly repeatable, but not in the
     least identical, representations.
        The case examined by Horst Claus and Anne fäckel is in these terms extremely
     informative.? The production of films able to raise recognition in the nation is not
     only subject, as might be expected, to market influence and, in the peculiar situation
     of Germany in 1933-34, to political pressures; it can in some ways be planned irrespec
     tive of the nation that it tries to identify with, as Die Insel I Vers l'abime, examined
     here, or Der Kongreß tanzt / Le Congrès s'amuse / Old Vienna (Erik Charell, 1931)
     examined elsewhere,& perfectly demonstrate. Such planning is not necessarily based
     on the concurrence between natural language and national community, usually insti-
     tutive of the modern nation concept. In spite of what seems more obvious, and all the
    more so when examining the practice of multiple versions - linguistic instances of a
    relatively fixed narrative root - other ends are in store. For example, the production of
    multiple versions is joined by an equally under investigated, and yet no less stimulat
    ing, phenomenon: that of the international versions, that is films spoken in different
    languages, the best known case of which probably being Kameradschaft / La Tragédie
    de la mine (Georg Wilhelm Pabst, 1931). This plural dimension, apparently very dis
    tant from the determination of a single identity, can call to a national belonging var-
    ied, and usually little considered, communities. This is the case with Switzerland,
    described by Rié Kitada, which gives rise to a small production able to treasure the
    experience of sound and to identify a cinematic representation able to answer their
    ethnolinguistic characteristics with films spoken in the different cantonal languages,
    or even dialects.9
       The phenomenon of multiple versions offers therefore significant moments of reflec-
    tion on the forms of national identity in 2oth century Europe: a process that in many
    occasions resulted in dramatic and brutal conflicts, but in many others structured so as
    to extol the plurality and difference. I The cinema industries of the single European
    nations, faced with the invasiveness of the production from Hollywood after the end of
    the first world war and with the increase in production costs due to sound restructur-
    ing, between the end of the Is and the beginning of the subsequent decade, find in
    the multiple version the possible key to setting up a continental market based on
    national differences.I A cultural, representative, productive and commodity model in
    part alternative to the usual practice of national production, well described by O' Regan:

     The aim of a national cinema is one of producing a local presence alongside the dominant
     imported presence in both the local and international markets. The task of a national cine
     ma is to graft itself as a minor component on to the existing communication circuits and net-
     works [.]. The aim of a national cinema in this market and cultural environment is not to
     replace Hollywood films (.] so much as to provide a viable and healthy local supplement to
     Hollywood cinema.I2

     This is why Natasa Durovidová proposes a distinction between two possible basic
methods of «language versions», «simultaneous remake of the same film in a variety of
versions and languages»:13 the «foreign language versions», that is the application of
the Hollywood standardised production process to the linguistic and national multi-
plicity, and the «multiple language versions», European model, that for the expert, is
limited in procedures and time:

8
                                                                                INTRODUCTION



  As a phenomenon versioning participates in the generalized world-wide mobilization of cul
  tural boundaries in the post-Crash, an era forming a dialectical hinge between the
  Amerikanismus of the 1920s and the reactive nationalisms of the 19305.14


    In the reconstruction of the various models according to which the practice of multi-
 ple versions was represented at the beginning of the I93s (and therefore referring to
  the period sources), Leonardo Quaresima's contribution aims on the other hand to lay
  the foundations of a typology essentially based on the production methods. Thus high-
lighting the fact that dubbing, generally considered the opposite of multiple versions,
  must on the other hand be considered as an internal variant of the same procedure. I5
    In this phase, mobility and cosmopolitanism are part of European culture and of the
  ordinary functioning of the cinema market. I6 The multiple versions are at a crossroads
  between national and international production, as Pierre Sorlin suggests. 17 For a rela-
  tively short period and much before the phenomenon of the co-productions that came
after the end of the second world war, they presented a prototype of textual, economic
  and medial organisation that responded to the European cultural and market require-
  ments. Extremely lively producers, ready to exploit the opening of markets and access
  to previously denied resources, emerge in this phase: as is the case with Seymour
   Nebenzahl for example; or the much less known Stefano Pittaluga, researched by Luca
   Mazzei.I8 A textual model characterised by a crisis of indexicality and by the ability of
 persistently reflecting - and often ironically, as is shown by the combination with
 comedy - on itself and the manipulation of the relationship between sign and referent.
 Perhaps it is the result of the lesson of Dr. Mabuse, updated with the arrival of sound
 in Das Testament des Doktor Mabuse / Le Testament du Docteur Mabuse (Fritz Lang,
 1932-33), but already subject of additional manipulative practices found in dubbing; at
 least, in a much less modernist Italy than the regime wanted to make believe, as
 Massimiliano Gaudiosi's contribution shows.I9 In this stage the aesthetic practices
 start to consider, and consequently apply, the technically reproducible nature of its
 elements, whilst the same organisation of the cultural industry favours the inter-medi
 al circulation and the multiplication of aesthetic objects. Charles O'Brien explains this
 well, by assessing the close knit relationship between the recording distribution of
 music prepared by Kurt Weill for Bertolt Brecht's Die Dreigroschenoper, the French
 and German medial scenarios and the variants of the two cinema versions of the
  Brechtian text directed by Pabst.20
   The multiplication of the versions can also be assessed from another point of view:
  the significant relationships between one text and another, the type of relationships
  that allow the identification of the specificity (difference, multiplicity) and recognition
   of identity (equivalence). I This is why, the availability of adequate theoretical tools to
  assess the cinematic text, plural from the material conditions of its existence, allows for
  a greater propriety in the work, also in historiographic terms and to define on the basis
  of an agreed working protocol the objects being examined - whether they be multiple
  versions, remake or both things at the same time... Augusto Sainati's work, dedicated to
  Jacques Tati's debut in features, presents the reader with a definition of remake struc-
  tured on the textual structures and the pragmatic conditions of the use of the text. 22
  Starting from the notion of type/token, used «in linguistics to define a concrete lin-
  guistic element that can be observed (token) and the abstract class that it can traced
   back to (type),»23 Sainati questions the relationship between an ideal and abstract text

                                                                                              9
 FRANCESCO PITASSIO, LEONARDO QUARESIMA


and the material conditions of existence and consumption; a
of the significant device of the multiple versions. Multiple yes, but of what origi
type?    Well leave the pleasure of finding an answer to the reade
 multiplicity of contributions.24
                                                                                           [f.p., l.g,.!


1 Outcome of the research presented and undertaken during the first two editions o
      School (2003 and 2004): CINÉMA & Cie., no. 4, Natasa Durovicová, in collaboration with Hans.
     Michael Bock (eds.), Multiple and Multiple-language Versions / Versions multiples (Spr
      2004); CINÉMA & Cie., no. 6, Hans-Michael Bock, Simone Venturini (eds.), M
      Multiple-language Versions II / Versions multiples II (Spring 2005)
2 For example, the production of multiple versions in Eastern Europe, between the two
     wars and subsequently, or within the Scandinavian cinema industry have been poorly
     explored.
3 This is another reason why, MAGIS has always allowed scholars, participants and young
   researchers the possibility of working with concrete objects, through the availability of doc-
   umentary material, offered by the generosity of the single researchers, and with the possibil.
   ity of viewing previously unseen films in multiple versions, from the collections of European
     film archives. During the last three editions of the school it has been possible to compare the
     version of well known films such as: Atlantic (Ewald André Dupont, 1929), Die
     Dreigroschenoper / L'Opéra de quat'sous (Georg Wilhelm Pabst, 1931), Voruntersuchung /
     Autour d'une enquête (Robert Siodmak, 1931), Murder! / Mary, oder, Sir John greift ein
     (Alfred Hitchcock, I930), but of which one of the terms was almost unknown. But also to d
     cover the richness of the phenomenon in less well known films such as: T'amerò sempre
     (Mario Camerini, 1933) | Je vous aimerai toujours (Mario Camerini/Henri Decoin, 1933)
     Casta diva / The Divine Spark (Carmine Gallone, 1935), Let's Love and Laugh / Die
     Braeutigamswitwe (Richard Eichberg, 1931), Ne sois pas jalouse (Augusto Genina, 1932) /
     Non son gelosa (Carlo Ludovico Bragaglia, 1933), Viktor und Viktoria (Reinhold Schünzel,
     1933) / Georges et Georgette (Reinhold Schünzel-Roger Le Bon, 1933).
     A broad assessment of the plural dimension of the cinematic practice is provided by the
     records of the X edition of the Udine's International Film Studies Conference: Anna Antonini
   (ed.), Il film e i suoi multipli / Film and Its Multiples (Udine: Forum, 2003).
4 The most famous research about this is: Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities (New
   York: Verso, I99I).
5 On modernity, identity and nation see: Stuart Hall, "The Question of Cultural Identity," in
   Stuart Hall, David Held, Tony McGrew (eds.), Modernity and Its Futures (Cambridge:
     Polity/Open University, I992), pp. 273-325.
6 Different interpretative paradigms of the relationship between cinema and nation are pre-
   sented in Mette Hjort, Scott MacKenzie (eds.), Cinema & Nation (London-New York:
     Routledge, 2000).
7 Horst Claus, Anne Jäckel, "MLVS in a Changing Political Climate. Ufa's 'National Film' Die
   Insel (I934). A Case Study," in this issue of CiNéMA & Cie.
8 On this, see: Horst Claus, Anne Jäckel, "Ufa, Frankreich und Versionen," in Sybille M. Sturm,
   Arthur Wohlgemut (eds.), Hallo Berlin? Ici Paris! Deutsch-französische Filmbeziehungen
   1918-1939 (München: text+kritik/CineGraph, 1996), pp. I4I-154; Id., "Der Kongreß tantzt.
     Revisited," CINÉMA & Cie., no. 6, quot., pp. 76-95.

10
                                                                                        INTRODUCTION



9 Rié Kitada, "Chacun parle sa langue: de la naissance du parlant international à l'essor du c
    ma suisse multilingue," in this issue of CINÉMA & Cie.
    For an analysis focused on the receptive dimension, but equally capable of suggesting multi-
   linguism as the basic dimension in European cinema circulation, see: Paul Lesch, "The
   Transition from Silent to Sound Film in a Small, Multi-lingual Country. Luxembourg as a
    Case Study," CINÉMA & Cie., no. 6, quot., pp. 42-54.
10 It is the perspective suggested in part by Luisa Passerini (ed.), Identità culturale europea. Idee,
   sentimenti, relazioni (Scandicci: La Nova Italia, 1998).
I1 See Andrew Higson, Richard Malty (eds.), «Film Europe» and «Film America». Cinema,
   Commerce and Cultural Exchange 1920-1939 (Exeter: University of Exeter, 1999).
   On cinema production in Europe see: Anne Jäckel, European Film Industries (London: British
   Film Institute, 2003).
12 Tom O'Regan, Australian National Cinema (London: Routledge, 1996); partial reproduction
   as "A National Cinema," in Graeme Turner (ed.), The Film Cultures Reader (London-New
   York: Routledge, 2002), p. I41.
13 Natasa Durovicová, "Introduction," CINÉMA & Cie, no. 4, quot, p. 7.
 14 Ibidem, p. 13.
 15 Leonardo Quaresima, "Version multiple/Doublage," in this issue of CINÉMA & Cie.
 16 Alberto Farassino, "Cosmopolitismo ed esotismo nel cinema europeo tra le due guerre," in
    Gian Piero Brunetta (ed.), Storia del cinema mondiale, Vol. I, L'Europa. Miti, luoghi, divi
    (Torino: Einaudi, 1999), pp. 485-508. See also: Id., Fuori di set. Viaggi, esplorazioni, emi-
    grazioni, nomadismi (Roma: Bulzoni, 2000).
 17 Pierre Sorlin, "Multiple Versions: A Threat to National Cinemas?," in this issue of CINÉMA &
    Cie.
 18 On Nebenzahl, see: Erika Wottrich (ed.), M wie Nebenzahl. Nero - Filmproduktion zwischen
    Europa und Hollywood (München: text+kritik/CineGraph, 2002). On Pittaluga and multiple
    versions: Luca Mazzei, "Un et Trin: les versions multiples à la Cines selon Pittaluga," in this
    issue of CINÉMA & Cie.
 19 Massimiliano Gaudiosi, "Which Mabuse? Multiple Bodies, Multiple Voices," in this issue of
    CINÉMA & Cie.
 20 Charles O'Brien, "Film, Gramophone, and National Cinema: Die Dreigroschenoper and
    L'Opéra de quat'sous," in this issue of CINÉMA & Cie.
    More generally, on the reflexivity of European (German) cinema with the arrival of sound,
    see: Thomas Elsaesser, "Transparent Duplicities: Comedy, Opera, Operetta," in Weimar
    Cinema and After. Germany's Historical Imaginary (London-New York: Routledge, 2000), pp.
     293-358.
 21 The following explore the significant relationships that characterise the versions and the
    variant: Simone Venturini, in collaboration with Hans-Michael Bock, "Introduction," CINÉMA
     & Cie., no. 6, cit., pp.7-16; Marie-France Chambat Houillon, "Entre le même et l'autre: La Place
     de l'auteur," Ibidem, pp. 17-32.
  22 Augusto Sainati, "Jour de fête, la couleur progressive," in this issue of CINÉMA & Cie.
     For a theoretical definition of the forms of cinematic seriality, with particular attention to the
     remake, see: Francesco Casetti (ed.), L'immagine al plurale (Venezia: Marsilio, 1984);
     Leonardo Quaresima, "Loving Texts Two at a Time: The Film Remake," CINéMAS, Vol. 12, no.
     3, Cinélekta 4 (Spring 2002), pp. 73-84.
  23 Amedeo De Dominicis, "Type/Token," in Gian Luigi Beccaria (ed.), Dizionario di linguistica
     (Torino: Einaudi, 1996), p. 743.
 FRANCESCO PITASSIO, LEONARDO QUARESIMA


 24 This issue of CINÉMA& Cie. would not have been possible without the cooperation, help and
     patience of a group that worked at the three editions of MAGIS. A sincere thank you to Alice
     Autelitano, Enrico Biasin, Giorgio Bacchiega, Alessandro Bordina, Ilaria Borghese, Chiara
     Calabria, Mariapia Comand, Veronica Innocenti, Valeria Mantegazza, Roy Menarini,
     Cristiano Poian, Valentina Re, Cosetta Saba, Gianandrea Sasso, Simone Venturini, Laura
     Vichi. And a special thank you for the support, enthusiasm and a thousand suggestio
     Hans-Michael Bock.




12
