D’où cela vient-il?’

Author Keith Reader asserts in his piece “”D’où ça vient-il?’: Notes on Three Films by Robert Bresson“ that Robert Bresson is one of the world’s most recognized directors, and his body of work continues to have a significant influence on current filmmaking. The reader notices that Bresson’s work has split many reviewers and observers, but the general conclusion is that his work is both riven and driven by paradox. Reader believes that Bresson’s films are contradictory in a variety of ways that many reviewers and pundits have tried to explain. For example, he mentions that Bresson was a fervent Catholic.”For example, he notes that Bresson was a devout Catholic but yet the Church hardly featured in his films. Additionally, as a Christian, he never articulated that there was a causal relationship between people’s actions and their subsequent consequences. Moreover, his work seemed to delve into the metaphysical rather than acknowledge the existence of God. Reader posits that perhaps the one of the surest approaches to Bresson’s work is understanding the “discontinuous, the unsayable and the elimination of the psychological” aspects in his films (Quandt 170).

Bresson religiously stuck to the source material from which his films were adapted from. He had a fidelity to the source material. In films like Journal and Pickpocket, we can see clearly how Bresson delved further into the topics of psychoanalysis and Christian mysticism. Pickpocket, for instance, is a film that raises more questions about life and the existence of God. For many people, the silence of God equates to His non-existence and this could be seen in the film. Even though the theological dimension is less overt in Pickpocket, Bresson explores in great detail the concept of psychoanalysis. According to Reader, Bresson wanted the viewers to view the film as a confessional autobiography and nothing else. Bresson, from the onset, did not want his audience to know more of his characters and hence he revealed very little about the characters. Given that he did not believe in the concept psychological knowledge, he assumed that human beings were inaccessible and hence there was very little audiences could deduce from the characters being portrayed in the film. Bresson’s antipathy towards psychology was well documented and thus the more we understood about the cause of actions of his characters, the less we knew about the consequences of their actions. A case in point is Michel who it is difficult to understand the consequences of his actions. Even though the film explored psychoanalysis, it could also be seen as questioning the “mystery of being” associated with Christianity ( Quandt 378).

As observed by Louis Malle, Pickpocket gives the image of the omnipotence of God not only in the subject matter but also in its expression. Malle goes on to argue that from time to time artists assume the role of God and as hence Bresson could be seen as God for the time it takes to show the film. The director of the film, he argued could be seen as God as he is in charge of all that happens in the film. God omnipotence implies that he is superficially absent and yet he exists everywhere. He may not be seen and yet we believe that he exists and is with us always. In a film, even though the director may not be present in the film, his actions influence the film. For example, in Pickpocket, there is a moment whereby Michel tells Joanne that for three minutes he believed in God. This scene if often taken to refer to the scene in his mother’s funeral where he sheds a single tear. This is a scene that greatly borders on self-parody. In as much as we may want to interpret it as Michel showing remorse towards the death of his mother, it is difficult for us to go forth with this interpretation. After the racecourse theft, we see a cut of him sitting between two police officers where Michel tends to believe that he is indeed God.

In Mouchette, Bresson’s adaptation of the Bernanos text, we see that the film is a gesture of withdrawal, once more delving more into Christian mysticism and being motivated by external social factors. The disappearance of Mouchette’s body when she drowns and the ending of Journal is a clear indication of Bresson’s fascination with Christian mysticism and influence of social factors. Ideally, one may argue that the disappearance of Mouchette’s body downwards maybe an indication of the catholic belief that suicide is an immortal sin while the disappearance of the priest’s body paves way for his soul to reunite with God in heaven. However, it is difficult to believe that Mouchette’s death is a consequence of her own actions but rather as a way of rebirth and redemption. The author argues that this is so due to the theological orthodoxy that favors pathos enshrined in Mouchette’s descent natural harmonies and the pathos created by the music. In the final shot, Mouchette’s body vanishes from the screen before vanishing in the water and this may be a nod to the absence of the Christ’s body from the cross in Bresson’s Journal. As Reader indicates, Mouchette’s death is an indication that Bresson was against the theological labeling of her death as suicide or as a result of sin. In general, the three films by Bresson (Journal, Pickpocket and Mouchette) are outstanding not only for their metaphysical and mystical qualities but also for them for their emphasis on the materiality of their soundtracks and images. As Reader recalled in his interview with Bresson, when he asked him how he understood the concepts of God, grace and damnation, his response was always “je ne peux pas vous le dire” loosely translating to “I cannot tell you.” We can easily deduce from his films his “real” answer to this question as he tackled this concepts in great length at these films.

The article by Keith Reader clearly gives an insight into the mind of Robert Bresson and his approach to filmmaking. Bresson’s fascination with Christian mysticism and psychoanalysis are issues that the author has tackled extensively. Readers are able to understand Bresson clearly through the author’s analysis of the three films by Bresson. Reading the article has clearly given a new meaning to filmmaking and has broadened my vision on what films can achieve. Truly a genius, Bresson continues to influence filmmakers even today. In the current society where issues such as religion and psychology play an important role, what would be the criticism to Robert Bresson’s approach in tackling these issues? If was Bresson alive, would he have survived the current Hollywood?

Works Cited

Quandt, James. Robert Bresson: “D’où cela vient-il?’: Notes on Three Films by Robert Bresson.Toronto: Toronto International Film Festival Group, 2000. Print.