Walther Ruttmann’s Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, represented aesthetically, the work of one of the most captivating social theorists of the twentieth century: Georg Simmel. Simmel’s theorising about the nature of the relationship between the individual and the modern metropolis became central to Weimar discourses on urban modernity. Berlin, Symphony of a Great City captures the aura that is represented in the following quote:
Men regard one another, and men are jealous of one another, they writer one another letters or dine together; they meet in sympathy or antipathy quite apart from all tangible interests; their gratitude for altruistic service weaves a chain of consequences never to be sundered; they ask the way of one another, and they dress and adorn themselves for one another;- these are instances chosen at random from the thousand relations, momentary or lasting, conscious or unconscious, transitory or fraught with consequences, which, playing from person to person, knit us incessantly together. Every moment such threads are spun, are dropped and caught up, replaced by others, woven up with others. These… determine all the tenacity and elasticity, all the variegation and unity of this so intelligible and yet so mysterious life of society.
-Simmel*
Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, captures the idea that the city holds infinite possibilities for the individual. At the same time, countless shots concentrate on the faceless-ness of the modern city and capture the twofold nature of Simmel’s critique of modern life in the metropolis. Simmel described the alienation that inheres in modern cities and is captured by Ruttmann in the repeated shots of the increasingly mechanised worklife of the citizens of modernity. For instance, the identity (or lack thereof) of tram commuters is discernable only through images of their legs.
The greatest achievement of Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, is that it does not come to these conclusions for us. The camera is simply a voyeur of these modern processes of mechanization and of industrialisation. Berlin, Symphony of a Great City does not moralise. According to AlSayyad, ‘its techniques of montage thus leave issues open-ended, and it is up to the viewer to interpret its relatively optimistic message.’** This optimism is occasionally challenged by cross cutting shots which juxtapose, for instance, humans with animals or, a courting couple with mechanised toys in a store window. No particular reading of the film is prescribed.
Berlin, Symphony of a Great City is a beautiful and fascinating account of one of the greatest and most turbulent eras of the twentieth century. The film provides a snapshot of a time burdened by war guilt and post war destruction and a place that saw hope through creative expression. While Berlin, Symphony of a Great City provides a portrait of Weimar Berlin, it is also timeless. The film puts forth a generic portrayal of life in the modern metropolis.*** Projects similar to that of Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, that attempted to capture the essence of the city, sprung up in cities the world over. Eugene Atget spent almost 30 years of his life preserving, for posterity, the cityscape of a Paris threatened by modernisation.
Men regard one another, and men are jealous of one another, they writer one another letters or dine together; they meet in sympathy or antipathy quite apart from all tangible interests; their gratitude for altruistic service weaves a chain of consequences never to be sundered; they ask the way of one another, and they dress and adorn themselves for one another;- these are instances chosen at random from the thousand relations, momentary or lasting, conscious or unconscious, transitory or fraught with consequences, which, playing from person to person, knit us incessantly together. Every moment such threads are spun, are dropped and caught up, replaced by others, woven up with others. These… determine all the tenacity and elasticity, all the variegation and unity of this so intelligible and yet so mysterious life of society.
-Simmel*
Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, captures the idea that the city holds infinite possibilities for the individual. At the same time, countless shots concentrate on the faceless-ness of the modern city and capture the twofold nature of Simmel’s critique of modern life in the metropolis. Simmel described the alienation that inheres in modern cities and is captured by Ruttmann in the repeated shots of the increasingly mechanised worklife of the citizens of modernity. For instance, the identity (or lack thereof) of tram commuters is discernable only through images of their legs.
The greatest achievement of Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, is that it does not come to these conclusions for us. The camera is simply a voyeur of these modern processes of mechanization and of industrialisation. Berlin, Symphony of a Great City does not moralise. According to AlSayyad, ‘its techniques of montage thus leave issues open-ended, and it is up to the viewer to interpret its relatively optimistic message.’** This optimism is occasionally challenged by cross cutting shots which juxtapose, for instance, humans with animals or, a courting couple with mechanised toys in a store window. No particular reading of the film is prescribed.
Berlin, Symphony of a Great City is a beautiful and fascinating account of one of the greatest and most turbulent eras of the twentieth century. The film provides a snapshot of a time burdened by war guilt and post war destruction and a place that saw hope through creative expression. While Berlin, Symphony of a Great City provides a portrait of Weimar Berlin, it is also timeless. The film puts forth a generic portrayal of life in the modern metropolis.*** Projects similar to that of Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, that attempted to capture the essence of the city, sprung up in cities the world over. Eugene Atget spent almost 30 years of his life preserving, for posterity, the cityscape of a Paris threatened by modernisation.
Berlin, Symphony of a Great City æstheticizes the everyday experiences in the life of Berlin and the life of all cities. The film reminds its audiences of the wonder and the mystery of life in the city.
Eugene Atget
avenue de segur 1925
magasins du bon marche 1926
rue de ursins 1923
* G. Simmel in H. D. Duncan ‘Simmel’s Image of Society’ in Georg Simmel, 1858-1918, K H. Wolff (ed), Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1959, 100-118. p. 103.
**N. AlSayyad, Cinematic Urbanism: A history of the modern from Reel to Real, London: Routledge, 2006, p. 35.
***N. AlSayyad, p. 34.
9 comments:
There is something really beautiful about black and white photos. These are great. The absence of people in the first makes it seem quite peaceful, whereas the second seems eerie - probably after the discussion in class yesterday...
He was a wonderful photographer. Over a thirty year period he took over 5000 photos of Paris. I think its fascinating how mannequins captured the imagination of so many artists! What did you think of the third? I thought it captured this notion of the city as a magical place where anything can happen, or has happened in the history of the city.
Do you think that it is ever possible for a film to be entirely voyeuristic and without moral comment? Cutting between images of people and animals was one of (the russian filmmaker)Eistenstein's favourite techniques, to show the way that the masses were treated by the authorities. I think that any use of montage or editing will always incline us to certain conclusions, just because something has to be chosen and other things included, so some paths of thought are being closed off to us and others opened...
Do you think that it is ever possible for a film to be entirely voyeuristic and without moral comment? Cutting between images of people and animals was one of (the russian filmmaker)Eistenstein's favourite techniques, to show the way that the masses were treated by the authorities. I think that any use of montage or editing will always incline us to certain conclusions, just because something has to be chosen and other things included, so some paths of thought are being closed off to us and others opened...
It's funny you should ask. Initially the third one made me want to go on holiday - sit in a cafe, preferably of the European piazza variety, and sip on coffee in the sunshine, but strangely the photo looks a little more grim this time round (Is the weather outside my window - then sunny, now gloomy - influencing this?)
Onto other matters, I also just read your blog. And the Simmel quote really resonates if you look at Man with a Movie Camera as a response to Berlin, Symphony of a City.
Catz, I agree with you in the sense that I too think that editing and montage is predicated upon directorial choice and motivated by particular intentions for the film and most often these choices reflect the morality of the director. However, I don’t think that we are directed, as an audience, to a particular reading of "Berlin" as a result of certain moments in editing (at least less so than we are in "Man with a Movie Camera"). I think it’s important, with respect to "Berlin", that we consider what we bring to the reading of the film. I think the multifarious responses to the film by students in the seminar are evidence of this. To me, "Berlin", at least more than most films, presents a case for the “Death of the Author” argument.
Opps, that was longer than I intended. Thank you for your comment, it definitely gave me a great deal to think about.
ahh yes simmel is[was?] great!
oh! if you like Simmel, try Benjamin, and if you like the poetry of Baudelaire, you have another reason to try Benjamin! I've had such a wonderful time reading his work over the past few weeks!
Its really interesting to note that the images presented of the city are of particular parts/aspects of it. Never of the city as a whole. It's the small parts that constitute the narrative of the city, sort of like a photo album documenting a childhood or a holiday.
Post a Comment