|
|
| "The Last Dream of Luis Bunuel" |
SUMMARY |
 |
This analysis of Bunuel's last film "That Obscure Object of Desire" (1977, Fr/Sp), adapted from the Pierre Louys novel (about a women who drives a man to distractions of frustrated desire), examines three questions which reflect the essence of process by which Bunuel's ideas have undergone a transformation, and which seem to constitute some determinants of the present age.
The first question concerns the veteran surrealist's attitude towards his earlier artistic manifestations of the subject of love. Similarly there had been transformations in the consciousness of the epochs themselves until the present age saw the fakes of the conception of "love".
Another question is the catching of the principle of good symetric likeness between individual violence connected with intimate sphere and social and political violence practised by terrorist groups.
The third problem has been made symbolic by Bunuel's great coup to have the object of the hero's lusts played by two different actresses, with the alternation of svelte coolness and steamy voluptuousness.
This singular artistic trick links up with a philosophical question of modern times about the principle of the identity of the individual, about the principle of the individual's sense of responsibility or the lack of responsibility for anything.
There are some other consistent threads running through the book traced by the writer who is not only fascinated with the phenomenon of Bunuel's last work, but who simply acts on behalf of the reader as well.
Yet with the reader the writer sometimes converses rationally, occasionally spars and teases and sometimes admits being wrong, or just seeks refuge in logical argument or intuition.
There is, for instance, some deep and careful thought, in the process, on this influence of literature on Bunuel himself.
And still another reflection on the tissue structure of expression at the last stage of Artist's career.
The main conclusion to be drawn from the analysis is that the consonance of expression with reflection is inversely proportional. Bunuel has had so much to say about the mystery of existence that the form of his discourse becomes discreet and modest.
And so the falsity of the style reaches the apogee.
And thus a state of harmony has been achieved.
This is a mysterious paradox which has been revealed in the book. The flow of analysis which refers to the act of projecting the film - a phenomenon taking place in time - becomes by itself a pecular "screen time" of the book.
Getting to know the piece of work takes place in the process based on improvisation and the separation of some larger representative parts, which gives the analysis a life of its own and provides the reader with a campelling experience of motion, imagination and ideas, the impression of finding the truth.
As soon as this begins to appear the whole truth, the ambition to attain the object (which in this case is to be objectivity) remains unfulfilled.
And that is the thing.
The book is an ostentatious attempt, and not the end of the search.
It is an invitation to companionship - and not just a "crib" for those who are passive and distracted in our modern age.
The Last Dream of Luis Bunuel - its author seems to suggest - is a connection between hope and derision, derision and hope.
|
|
|
|
