A lot of people don't know that Fellini used to be a cartoonist, and that he kept an extensive visual journal of his dreams during the period when he made his best films.
Fellini was being analyzed at the time, and a lot of his cartoons have psycho-analytic themes.
The analysis seemed to have served him well, if you can judge by his drawings. I love the way the woman above casually touches the Moon...or is the face above her head just someone she knows? Either way, it's a different approach than you see in most sketchbooks.
His analyst told him to keep a record of his dreams and you can buy it for the princely sum of $125. Man, books are expensive!
Fellini's analyst was a Jungian. Jungians believe that the unconscious is where our true psyche resides. According to Wikipedia, the unconscious expresses itself to us through dreams, which are an attempt of the mind to resolve contradictions between the narrow, literal conscious and the expansive, intuitive, creative unconscious. If troubled, we can only find peace by finding out what the unconscious mind has to teach us about the situation, and for that Jungians use dream analysis.
I'm not a Jungian myself, I just can't see much evidence to back it up, but I can imagine how persistent analysis of dreams could benefit an artist. In spite of my skepticism, if I ever entered analysis I'd probably do the same thing Fellini did , and try the Jungian method.
Look what it did for Fellini! Wouldn't you say that his brilliant "8 1/2" was one long stream of dream images held together by a flimsy plot? Don't get me wrong, I love plot and I love tight stories, but I also like the way plot and intuition come together in films like the ones Clampett made. There's room for both, don't you think?
I just thumbed through the Fellini book at the bookstore, and was amazed at how many of his dreams had to do with sex. That shouldn't have surprised me; I mean, he's a man after all. He seemed to be trying to come to terms with the strange, larger-than-life women around him. for Fellini they were big, gaudy, flamboyant creatures who were obsessed and manic about issues that men find puzzling and don't even understand. They were alternately mothering and sentimental, and scheming and flighty. We lust after them and they return the lust...or not. It depends on the mood they're in.
I wonder if analysis helped Fellini to come up with the unforgettable primal images in his films. I've seen lots of lovers-in-the-fountain scenes in movies, but none so memorable as the ones in "La Dolce Vita" (above and below).
Why is this beautiful girl with big breasts so attractive here, or have I just asked a stupid question? I think it has something to do with the large area between the breasts and face, and the contrast of the solid black gown. I wouldn't be surprised if Fellini drew these scenes before filming them. I saw several images in the book that could have been this woman, and a couple were surrounded by yellow marker auras that indicated that she radiated something intense.
The actress brings a lot to it. She's so mysterious, so languid, so living in the moment and aloof from anything but the water...and there's um...well, those big breasts!
I wonder if Fellini drew Mastriani's outfit in 8 1/2 and had the costume custom-made for the film. There's something iconic about it.
Olivier said he needed costume to get into a character. He hated rehearsals which weren't dress rehearsals. Is it costume that makes Mastriani so special in this film?
Was that hat (above) made from a drawing just for the film? That and the glasses make Mastriani one of the most remembered characters in the history of film. Did dream analysis somehow contribute to this?
Note: Thanks to Michael Sporn's July 2007 blog entry for some of the images used here.
16 comments:
Really good observations, Eddie. I'd add two points: one specific and one general.
One thing which is immensely important to Fellini's films, and 8 1/2 in particular, is the music. That circus march that drifts through the film until it is played by the marching band at the end of the film: I wonder if that was part of Fellini's dream somehow, and if he asked Nino Rota to try to recreate it? Or is it pure coincidence? (The same is true of La Dolce Vita, Juliet of the Spirits and Amarcord).
The other point is that many artists seem to find Jungian analysis particularly useful; the Canadian novelist Robertson Davies felt that this was because of Jung's interest in stories, characters and images. He added that Jung, unlike Freud, believed that development and change was a life-long process: this might be more sympathetic to many artists, or indeed anyone.
I love Fellini. His movies always have these big events, and the events aren't just plot devices their primary purpose is to just happen and look and sound amazing up on the screen. It sounds stupid when I describe this but when you see it on film it makes sense. It's just total sensual immersion with tons of gorgeous women ( Anouk Aimee! ) and amazing music.
His movies don't really have a clear message but he isn't totally incomprehensible like David Lynch. You get the sense that there's something significant about what happened on the screen but you just don't know what it is for a while. You need to sleep on it, probably so you can resolve contradictions between the narrow, literal conscious and the expansive, intuitive, creative unconscious... or ermm something like that.
I'm a Jungian at heart, he is one of my heroes. Just last night I learned about a growing form of therapy that was begun in the thirties by one of Jung's students. It's known as Sandtray, Sandplay, or Worldplay. A person is invited to select from a diverse variety of small objects, representing people, animals, structures, vehicles, occupations, etc, and play with them in a tray full of sand. In this way, the unconscious storylines of one's psyche can be manifested and observed in the physical realm. I just learned about this last night and am already eager to begin my own collection! Here is a link further explaining this process: http://www.sandplay.org/what_is_sandplay_therapy.htm
How do you feel about the concept of synchronicity, Eddie? The idea that two events happening simultaneously can be meaningfully connected without any causality? For instance: after being shunned from the psychoanalytical community as a result of his disagreements with Freud, Jung removed himself to the wilderness where he built a tower to live in, out of stone. There he began to be visited by the image of a horned man with kingfisher wings. After studying on this character who called himself Philemon, and painting him with beautiful wings outspread, Jung found a dead kingfisher on his daily walk. He was absolutely astonished, as he had never seen a kingfisher in the area before. To Jung, this symbolized the rightness of his decision to be alone, and to learn from Philemon, who imparted knowledge upon him.
here is the story of one man's synchronistic/symbolic journey with Sandplay: http://www.sandplay.org/symbols/eye.htm
I love this stuff! Gah!!!!
Wow! Interesting points! I'll answer in more detail when I get back from work!
dude, Stephen . . . what have you read by Robertson Davies? He is one of my favorite authors, I just loved the Deptford Trilogy!
Good stuff, Eddie. I should really revisit more of Fellini's.
Kelly:
RD is one of my favourites too. Agreed about The Deptford Trilogy, especially 'Fifth Business' and 'World of Wonders.' I can never decide if I prefer this one or The Cornish Trilogy, which has 'The Rebel Angels' and (my favourite RD novel) 'What's Bred in the Bone.' The first trilogy is about history, magicians, theatre, saints, psychoanalysis; the second about Gnosticism, dung, gypsies, forgery, Rabelais, and E. T. A. Hoffmann. It depends on your mood, I suppose!
As you know from reading the novels, Davies was a fantastically erudite man. You (and other readers of Eddie's blog) might enjoy some of his essays. He wrote on many different subjects: he loved the Victorian theatre, especially melodrama and pantomime, and had a collection of thousands of forgotten plays. His theory was that 20th century academics were interested in 'drama', but had no interest in 'theatre', especially melodrama, which is essentially about Poetic Justice and wish fulfillment. It was also an actor's theatre, he argues, as opposed to a director's, and unembarrassed about enchantment. He writes brilliantly about Dickens and his relation to the theatre of his time. He regretted that we no longer illustrate novels, since he felt that illustrations gave readers a view of the novel's 'cast', which they could then 'play' in their heads while reading. He was also an expert on ghost stories, Arthurian legends, forgotten sexologists (Havelock Ellis, anyone?), joke books of the 17th and 18th centuries, and Shakespeare. Since you're interested in Jung, he has several interesting observations on Jung and the creative writer in all of these books.
http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Classics-Selected-Works-Writing/dp/0143055674/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236149489&sr=1-6
http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Classics-Selected-Pleasures-Reading/dp/0143055666/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236147840&sr=1-1
http://www.amazon.com/Voice-Attic-Essays-Art-Reading/dp/0140120815/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236149566&sr=1-15
[PS: Sorry for the long message, Eddie. I was delighted to meet another RD enthusiast!]
Stephen:
Thanks for the marvelous comment. Like you, I can never tell which of those trilogies I prefer. What's Bred in the Bone is fantastic, I love the study of classical painting and the intrigue. The two celestial beings who interject their opinions from time to time were perhaps my favorite characters. In the last book of the Cornish Trilogy, the creation of an Arthurian Opera that stays true to those theatrical qualities was so interesting and magical.
Overall I prefer the Deptford Trilogy, especially the middle book The Manticore. To accompany Will Staunton as he undergoes Jungian analysis in Zurich was an illuminating look into that whole process. Plus the Frauleine, monster woman, what was her name? She cracks me up.
I will certainly be purchasing his collected essays, none of which I have ever read. They are sure to be just as full of wit and wisdom as any of his novels :)
Thanks for letting us ramble on your blog post, Eddie . . . this is what referencing Jung will do to people, sometimes ;) Now you have even MORE incentive to go pick up any writing by Robertson Davies.
What a fascinating post! I didn't even know Fellini was a cartoonist.
I always thought that Fellini's films were really strange but mesmerizing. I couldn't really follow what was happening in his films (even though, like Adam T said, the plot actually did make sense), but they were so visually and aurally appealing that I would get caught up in the visuals and the music. My favorite Fellini film is "Juliet of the Spirits".
Fellini being a cartoonist is one of those great bits of trivia I pride myself on knowing... awesome post.
I had no idea Fellini was a cartoonist! I could see a lot of cartoon influence in Amarcord's design, though. Great post!
hi! i love and follow your blog...it's addictive. please check mine out...http://sundayq.blogspot.com
Hi Eddie, I have a new post, I think you will find the subject matter most interesting, I am curious to hear your thoughts on the material in it :)
"The Trap" and the cure
Amir: Looks very interesting! I bookmarked it and will watch the videos when I'm not so sleepy!
Sunday: Geez, what a site, but there's no pictures.
Jennifer: Juliet was a real nice film. I wish I could get hold of some good analysis of Fellini's films.
Kelly: I reserved a book at the library on sandplay. Thanks for the tip!
Stephen: You and Kelly and others definitely got me curious about Davies! I'll definitely read one of the books recommended here soon!
Jung's comment about too many people being interested in drama rather than theater is right on!
My favorite art is the stuff that makes me dream. I loved "Satyricon" when I was a riotous youth, but my favorite Fellini is "Juliet of the Spirits".
It's a pity Jung & Freud fell out over something as essentially unknowable as the unconscious.
Maybe today we'd think of psychology as a mutant art instead of a mutant science.
Great post! found you just because just tried myself to write about him -
trying to make a list of movies to watch together with his 8 1/2)
Post a Comment