广岛

nostalghia 发布于：2007-03-15 23:15
　　多少年后，当我已将你遗忘，遗忘所有像这样的奇遇因为纯粹的遗忘习惯，我将记住你作为爱情遗忘的象征，我将回想这个故事作为遗忘的恐惧。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　——广岛

　　我终于静下心来看这部电影，我的目的并不单纯，因为半个世纪前艺术之邦那场让人向往的新浪潮传奇，那闪烁在塞纳河左岸的璀璨群星，那个作品被称作“films de art”的阿伦雷乃。然而，当碟片转动起来的时候，比这些赋予它的光环更吸引我的，是电影本身。这真是一个很难进入，然后进去之后又很难走出的深邃的精神世界。


　　切肤之痛，外部世界与内心世界：

　　镜头在两个人的肉体纠缠和战争的伤痕之间交叉。长长的时间，看不见男女主人公的脸，只看见一个女人的手陷入一个男人的背部，不断地抚摩。镜头淡化，切换到医院病床上的受难者，他们感到被人注视着，冷漠地，缓缓地转过头来瞥一眼，然后转回去。镜头又回到两个人的手和背部，之后再次淡化，出现广岛的废墟，丹下健三的和平雕塑，纪念馆……如此往复，女人重复的喃喃细语，如诗歌如梦呓一般，而男人总在否定着她的言语，他说，在广岛，你什么也看不到……

　　是的，在广岛，你看到了很多，然而你又什么都没有看到，看不到淹没整个城市的浓烟，看不到那遍地的残骸。城市的建筑已经恢复了，一个全新的广岛已经建成，看不见原子弹留下的断壁残垣。这便是镜头所捕捉到的广岛，一个恢复了秩序的广岛，和隐藏在深处的那些累累伤痕，因为核污染而畸形的儿童，变异的动物，那挥之不去的人们心底的创痛，随时都能触发更激烈的情感。

　　我们看见摄影机在捕捉一个人的内外两个世界：物质世界和精神世界，犹如立体派把物体的多角度叠放在同一块画布上的表现手法，导演在一幕场景中从两个角度来展示女主角的状态。比叙述和复制客观现实更真实丰富的，是影像语言，叠加的镜头比单纯跟踪的纪录片更让人震撼。


　　绝望之恋，时空的真相：

　　对于遗忘的事物，并非真正的遗忘，它们深藏在我们的潜意识里面，一旦因为似曾相似的事件发生，又将重新唤醒。爱宾浩斯遗忘曲线揭示了我们遗忘的速度，一段记忆曲线先是迅速地滑落，之后随着时间的推移渐渐变得缓慢。

　　她目睹着反战的游行队伍走过，不胜悲痛，这个时候他出现，旋即他们相爱。这个异域的男子突然唤起了她少女时代的记忆。战争，伤痕，人类的感情，个体的感情，几个敏感点交织在一起，促使这两个不同国度不同职业的人相爱了，那业已缓慢遗忘的记忆突然碎片一般不清晰地出现了，愈来愈清晰。在深夜酒吧，对这个陌生的广岛男人，她第一次如此袒露自己的内心，初恋的每一个细枝末节，那个曾经和她相爱的德国士兵在她家乡解放的那天被乡亲枪杀，她因为和敌人恋爱而被人斥责，剪去头发，精神错乱。记忆更加清晰了，当年的伤痛绝望在她身上被复制，她又一次疯了。

　　她离开纳维尔去巴黎的那天，正是广岛成为废墟的日子。

　　深夜的广岛酒吧，德占期的纳维尔；广岛建筑师，德国士兵。把人的内心解构开来，竟然有这么多的交汇点，处在这个交汇点上，我们无法分清过去，现在，此处，彼处；我们亦无法得知自己的感情，是虚构的过去，还是被偏移的精神家园，我们不知来自何处，去往何处。当镜头一遍遍切换到过去的时候，异样的眷念情绪残留在流逝的年华里，弥漫在这个寂静昏暗的酒吧里，弥漫在别离前的夜里。


　　不夜之候，愈要遗忘愈是铭记：

　　在酒吧，他说：多少年后，当我已将你遗忘，遗忘所有像这样的奇遇因为纯粹的遗忘习惯，我将记住你作为爱情遗忘的象征，我将回想这个故事作为遗忘的恐惧。

　　天明，她将离开广岛。

　　再没有比这更涯长难熬的时间了。他们在酒吧分离，她要忘记他。须知被遗忘的事物与我们无关，因为它们触及不了我们内心的情感波动，就像一座死火山，它们曾经爆发过却沉寂了。

　　她无法回到空荡荡的旅馆，她转身出门，在这个万籁俱寂的夜里。镜头从我们的眼睛所见切换到她的眼睛所见，她游荡在这个城市的街巷，这个城市的街巷在她的眼睛里缓缓游动，低低的屋檐，墙壁与墙壁之间的阴影，深蓝的夜空。还有什么比反复徘徊更能疏散这离别的沉痛呢？她选择遗忘，却竭力捕捉着这城市的每一个看得见看不见纹理。

　　他们再次相遇，她似乎决意要把这离别前的时间弃掷，以让自己忘却。她来到车站，他跟着她。在这个载人离别的场所，她仍然不能安定下来。再一次在酒吧，这是黎明前的黑暗时分，他在她对面的一张桌子坐下，相对无言。我感觉到一段愈来愈稠的情绪胶着在两个人之间的空气里，这张力让我心口隐隐作痛。电影如此缓慢，缓慢地积累着我们的情绪压，愈陷愈深，这是一个难以出来的精神世界。

　　在她的旅馆，他们仍然是陌生人，她叫他：“Hiroshima（广岛）”，他叫她：“Never（纳维尔）”。

　　此时此刻，一段爱情，已经悄悄沉入两个人的历史，沉入了两个国度的历史之中。

1959年，时任《手册》主编埃里克·侯麦组织了一场就《广岛之恋》的讨论会，参加的包括：埃里克·侯麦、让-吕克·戈达尔、Jean Domarchi、 雅克·多尼奥-瓦克罗兹、皮埃尔·卡斯特、雅克·里维特。这个英文版发表于Jim Hillier编辑的《电影手册，1950年代》结集一书中，翻译为Liz Heron。

In Cahiers no.71 some of our editorial board held the first round-table discussion on the then critical question of French cinema Today the release ofHiroshima mon amouris an event which seems important enough to warrant a new discussion.

Rohmer:I think everyone will agree with me if I start by saying thatHiroshimais a film about which you can say everything.

Godard:So let's start by saying that it's literature.

Rohmer:And a kind of literature that is a little dubious, in so far as it imitates the American school that was so fashionable in Paris after 1945.

Kast:The relationship between literature and cinema is neither good nor clear. I think all that one can say is that literary people have a kind of confused contempt for the cinema, and film people suffer from a confused feeling of inferiority. The uniqueness ofHiroshimais that the Marguerite Duras—Alain Resnais collaboration is an exception to the rule I have just stated.

Godard:Then we can say that the very first thing that strikes you about this film is that it is totally devoid of any cinematic references. You can describeHiroshimaas Faulkner plus Stravinsky, but you can't identify it as such and such a film-maker plus such and such another.

Rivette:Maybe Resnais's film doesn't have any specific cinematic references, but I think you can find references that are oblique and more profound, because its a film that recalls Eisenstein, in the sense that you can see some of Eisensteinis ideas put into practice and, moreover, in a very new way.

Godard:When I said there were no cinematic references, I meant that seeingHiroshimagave one the impression of watching a film that would have been quite inconceivable in terms of what one was already familiar with in the cinema. For instance, when you seeIndiayou know that you'll be surprised, but you are more or less anticipating that surprise. Similarly, I know that LeTestament du dotter Cordeherwill surprise me, just asEljna et les hornmesdid. However, withHiroshimaIfee]asifI am seeing something that I didn't expect at all.

Rohmer:Suppose we talk a bit aboutToute la memoire du monde.As far as I'm concerned it is a film that is still rather unclear.Hiroshimahas made certain aspects of it clearer for me, but not all.

Rivette:It's without doubt the most mysterious of all Resnais's short films. Through its subject, which is both very modern and very disturbing, it echoes what Renoir said in his interviews with us, that the most crucial thing that's happening to our civilization is that it is in the process of becoming a civilization of specialists. Each one of us is more and more locked into his own little domain, and incapable of leaving it. There is no one nowadays who has the capacity to decipher both an ancient inscription and a modern scientific formula. Culture and the common treasure of mankind have become the prey of the specialists. I think that was what Resnais had in mind when he madeToute la memoir e du monde.He wanted to show that the only task necessary for mankind in the search for that unity of culture was, through the work of every individual, to try to reassemble the scattered fragments of the universal culture that is being lost. And I think that is whyToute la memoirdu monde ended with those higher and higher shots of the central hall, where you can see each reader, each researcher in his place, bent over his manuscript, yet all of them side by side, all in the process of trying to assemble the scattered pieces of the mosaic, to find the lost secret of humanity; a secret that is perhaps called happiness.

Domarchi:When all is said and done, it is a theme not so far from the theme ofHiroshima.You've been saying that on the level of form Resnais comes close to Eisenstein, but it's just as much on the level of content too, since both attempt to unify opposites, or in other words their art is dialectical.

Rivette:Resnais's great obsession, if I may use that word, is the sense of the splitting of primary unity - the world is broken up, fragmented into a series of tiny pieces, and it has to be put back together again like a jigsaw. I think that for Resnais this reconstitution of the pieces operates on two levels. First on the level of content, of dramatization. Then, I think even more importantly, on the level of the idea of cinema itself. I have the impression that for Alain Resnais the cinema consists in attempting to create a whole with fragments that are aprioridissimilar. For example, in one of Resnais's films two concrete phenomena which have no logical or dramatic connection are linked solely because they are both filmed in tracking shots at the same speed.

Godard:You can see all that is Eisensteinian aboutHiroshimabecause it is in fact the very idea of montage, its definition even.

Rivette:Yes. Montage, for Eisenstein as for Resnais, consists in rediscovering unity from a basis of fragmentation, but without concealingthe fragmentation in doing so; on the contrary, emphasizing it by emphasizing the autonomy of the shot.

It's a double movement - emphasizing the autonomy of the shot and simultaneously seeking within that shot a strength that will enable it to enter into a relationship with another or several other shots, and in this way eventually form a unity. But don't forget, this unity is no longer that of classic continuity. It is a unity of contrasts, a dialectical unity as Hegel and Domarchi would say.(Laughter.)

Doniol-Valcroze:A reduction of the disparate.

Rohmer:To sum up. Alain Resnais is a cubist. I mean that he is the first modern film-maker of the sound film. There were many modern filmmakers in silent films: Fisenstein, the Expressionists, and Dreyer too. But I think that sound films have perhaps been more classical than silents. There has not yet been any profoundly modern cinema that attempts to do what cubism did in painting and the American novel in literature, in other words a kind of reconstitution of reality out of a kind of splintering which could have seemed quite arbitrary to the uninitiated. And on this basis one could explain Resnais's interest in Guernica,which is one of Picasso's cubist paintings for all that it isn't true cubism but more like a return to cubism - and also the fact that Faulkner or Dos Passos may have been the inspiration, even if it was by way of Marguerite Duras.

Kast:From what we can see, Resnais didn't ask Marguerite Duras for apieceof second-rate literary work meant to be 'turned into a film', and conversely she didn't suppose for a second that what she had to say, to write, might be beyond the scope of the cinema. You have to go very far back in the history of the cinema, to the era of great naïveté and great ambitions - relatively rarely put into practice - to someone like a Delluc, in order to find such a will to make no distinction between the literary purpose and the process of cinematic creation.

Rohmer:From that point ofviewthe objection that I made to begin with would vanish - one could have reproached some film-makers with taking the American novel as their inspiration - on the grounds of its superficiality. But since here it's more a question of a profound equivalence, perhapsHiroshimareally is a totally new film. That calls into question a thesis which I confess was mine until now and which I can just as soon abandon without any difficulty(laughter),and that is the classicism of the cinema in relation to the other arts. There is no doubt that the cinema also could just as soon leave behind its classical period to enter a modern period. I think that in a few years, in ten, twenty or thirty years, we shall know whetherHiroshimawas the most important film since the war, the first modern film of sound cinema, or whether it was possibly less important than we thought. In any case it is an extremely important film, but it could be that it will even gain stature with the years. It could be, too, that it will lose a little.

Godard:Like LaRegle du feuon the one hand and films like Quaides brumesor Le Jourse !eveon the other. Both of Carne's films are very, very important, but nowadays they are a tiny bit less important than Renoir's film.

Rohmer:Yes. And on the grounds that I found some elements inHiroshimaless seductive than others, I reserve judgment. There was something in the first few frames that irritated me. Then the film very soon made me lose this feeling of irritation. But I can understand how one could like and admireHiroshimaand at the same time find it quite jarring in places.

Doniol-Valcroze:Morally or aesthetically?

Godard:Its the same thing. Tracking shots are a question of morality.'

Kass:It's indisputable thatHiroshimais a literary film. Now, the epithet 'literary' is the supreme insult in the everyday vocabulary of the cinema. What is so shattering aboutHiroshima isits negation of this connotation of the word. It's as if Resnais had assumed that the greatest cinematic ambition had to coincide with the greatest literary ambition. By substituting pretension for ambition you can beautifully sum up the reviews that have appeared in several newspapers since the film came out. Resnais's initiative was intended to displease all those men of letters —whether they're that by profession or aspiration — who have no love for anything in the cinema that fails to justify the unforrnulated contempt in which they already hold it. The total fusion of the film with its script is so obvious that its enemies instantly understood that it was precisely at this point that the attack had to be made: granted, the film is beautiful, but the text is so literary, so uncinematic, etc., etc. In reality I can't see at all how one can even conceive of separating the two.

Godard:Sacha Guitry would be very pleased with all that.

Donioi-Vaicroze:No one sees the connection,

Godard:But it's there. The text, the famous false problem of the text and the image. Fortunately we have finally reached the point where even the literary people, who used to be of one accord with the provincial exhibitors, are no longer of the opinion that the important thing is the image. And that is what Sacha Guitry proved a long time ago. I say 'proved' advisedly. Because Pagnol, for example, wasn't able to prove it, Since Truffaut isn't with us I am very happy to take his place by incidentally making the point thatHiroshima is anindictment of all those who did not go and see the Sacra Guitry retrospective at the Cinematheque. 2

Doniol-Valcroze:If that's what Rohmer meant by the irritating side of the film, I acknowledge that Guitry's films have an irritating side. […] Essentially, more than the feeling of watching a really adult woman in a film for the first time, I think that the strength of the Emmanuelle Riva character is that she is a woman who isn't aiming at an adult's psychology, just as inLes 400 Coupslittle Jean-Pierre Laud wasn't aiming at a child's psychology, a style of behaviour prefabricated by professional scriptwriters, Emmanuelle Riva is a modern adult woman because she is not an adult woman, Quite the contrary, she is very childish, motivated solely by her impulses and not by her ideas. Antonioni was the first to show us this kind of woman.

Romer:Have there already been adult women in the cinema?Domarchi:Madame Bovary.

Godard:Renoir's or Minnelli's?

Domarchi:It goes without saying.(Laughter.)Let's say Elena, then.

Rivette:Elena is an adult woman in the sense that the female character played by Ingrid Bergman3 is not a classic character, but of a classic modernism, like Renoir's or Rossellini's. Elena is a woman to whom sensitivity matters, instinct and all the deep mechanisms matter, but they are contradicted by reason, the intellect. And that derives from classic psychology in terms of the interplay of the mind and the senses. While the Emmanuelle Riva character is that of a woman who is not irrational, but is not-rational. She doesn't understand herself. She doesn't analyse herself. Anyway, it is a bit like what Rossellini tried to do inStromboli.But inStrombolithe Bergman character was clearly delineated, an exact curve. She was a 'moral' character. Instead of which the Emmanuelle Riva character remains voluntarily blurred and ambiguous. Moreover, that is the theme ofHiroshima:a woman who no longer knows where she stands, who no longer knows who she is, who tries desperately to redefine herself in relation to Hiroshima, in relation to this Japanese man, and in relation to the memories of Revers that come back to her. In the end she is a woman who is starting all over again, going right back to the beginning, trying to define herself in existential terms before the world and before her past, as if she were one more unformed matter in the process of being born.

Godard:So you could say thatHiroshimais Simone de Beauvoir that works.Domarchi:Yes. Resnais is illustrating an existentialist conception of psychology.

Doniol-Valcroze:As inJourney into AutumnorSo Close to Life,4but elaborated and done more systematically.

[…]

Domarchi:In fact, in a senseHiroshima isa documentary on Emmanuelle Riva. I would be interested to know what she thinks of the film.

Rivette:Her acting takes the same direction as the film, It is a tremendous effort ofcomposition.I think that we are again locating the schema I was trying to draw out just now: an endeavour to fit the pieces together again; within the consciousness of the heroine, an effort on her part to regroup the various elements of her persona and her consciousness in order to build a whole out of these fragments, or at least what have become interior fragments through the shock of that meeting at Hiroshima. One would be right in thinking that the film has a double beginning after the bomb; on the one hand, on the plastic level and the intellectual level, since the film's first image is the abstract image of the couple on whom the shower of ashes falls, and the entire beginning is simply a meditation on Hiroshima after the explosion of the bomb. But you can say too that, on another level, the film begins after the explosionfor Emmanuelle Riva,since it begins after the shock which has resulted in her disintegration, dispersed her social and psychological personality, and which means that it is only later that we guess, through what is implied, that she is married, has children in France, and is an actress —in short, that she has a structured life. At Hiroshima she experiences a shock, she is hit by a 'bomb' which explodes her consciousness, and for her from that moment it becomes a question of finding herself again, re-composing herself. In the same way that Hiroshima had to be rebuilt after atomic destruction, Emmanuelle Riva in Hiroshima is going to try to reconstructherreality. She can only achieve this through using the synthesis of the present and the past, what she herself has discovered at Hiroshima and what she has experienced in the past at levers.

Doniol-Valcroze:What is the meaning of the line that keeps being repeated by the Japanese man at the beginning of the film: 'No, you saw nothing at Hiroshima'?

Godard:It has to be taken in the simplest sense. She saw nothing because she wasn't there. for was he. However, he also tells her that she has seen nothing of Paris, yet she is a Parisian. The point of departure is the moment of awareness, or at the very least the desire to become aware, I think Resnais has filmed the novel that the young French novelists are all trying to write, people like Butor, Robbe-Grillet, Bastide and of course Marguerite Duras. I can remember a radio programme where Regis Bastide was talking aboutWild Strawberriesand he suddenly realized that the cinema had managed to express what he thought belonged exclusively in the domain of literature, and that the problems which he, as a novelist, was setting himself had already been solved by the cinema without its even needing to pose them for itself. I think it's a very significant point.

Kast:We've already seen a lot of films that parallel the novel's rules of construction.Hiroshimagoes further. We are at the very core of a reflection on the narrative form itself. The passage from the present to the past, the persistence of the past in the present, are here no longer determined by the subject, the plot, but by pure lyrical movements. In reality,Hiroshimaevokes the essential conflict between the plot and the novel. Nowadays there is a gradual tendency for the novel to get rid of the psychological plot. Alain Resnais's film is completely bound up with this modification of the structures of the novel. The reason for this is simple. There is no action, only a kind of double endeavour to understand what a love story can mean. First at the level of individuals, in a kind of long struggle between love and its own erosion through the passage of time. As if love, at the very instant it happens, were already threatened with being forgotten and destroyed. Then, also, at the level of the connections between an individual experience and an objective historical and social situation. The love of these anonymous characters is not located on the desert island usually reserved for games of passion. It takes place in a specific context, which only accentuates and underlines the horror of contemporary society. 'Enmeshing a love story in a context which takes into account knowledge of the unhappiness of others,' Resnais says somewhere. His film is not made up of a documentary on Hiroshima stuck on to a plot, as has been said by those who don't take the time to look at things properly. For Titus and Berenice in the ruins of Hiroshima are inescapably no longer Titus and Berenice.

Rohmer:To sum up, it is no longer a reproach to say that this film is literary, since it happens thatHiroshimamoves not in the wake of literature but well in advance of it.5 "There are certainly specific influences: Proust, Joyce, the Americans, but they are assimilated as they would be by a young novelist writing his first novel, a first novel that would be an event, a date to be accorded significance, because it would mark a step forward.

Godard:The profoundly literary aspect perhaps also explains the fact that people who are usually irritated by the cinema within the cinema, while the theatre within the theatre or the novel within the novel don't affect them in the same way, are not irritated by the fact that inHiroshimaEmmanuelle Riva plays the part of a film actress who is in fact involved in making a film.

Doniol-Valcroze:I think it is a device of the script, and on Resnais's part there are deliberate devices in the handling of the subject. In my opinion Resnais was very much afraid that his film might be seen as nothing more than a propaganda film. He didn't want it to be potentially useful for any specific political ends. This may be marginally the reason why he neutralized a possible 'fighter for peace' element through the girl having her head shaved after the Liberation. In any case he thereby gave a political message its deep meaning instead of its superficial meaning.

Domarchi:It is for this same reason that the girl is a film actress. It allows Resnais to raise the question of the anti-atomic struggle at a secondary level, and, for example, instead of showing a real march with people carrying placards, he shows a filmed reconstruction of a march during which, at regular intervals, an image comes up to remind the viewers that it is a film they are watching.

Rivette:It is the same intellectual strategy as Pierre Klossowski used in his first novel, LaVocation suspenclue.He presented his story as the review of a book that had been published earlier, Both are a double movement of consciousness, and so we come back again to that key word, which is at the same time a vogue word: dialectic — a movement which consists in presenting the thing and at the same time an act of distancing in relation to that thing, in order to be critical — in other words, denying it and affirming it. To return to the same example, the march, instead of being a creation of the director, becomes an objective fact that is filmed twice over by the director. For Klossowski and for Resnais the problem is to give the readers or the viewers the sensation that what they are going to read or to see is not an author's creation but an element of the real world. Objectivity, rather than authenticity, is the right word to characterize this intellectual strategy, since the film-maker and the novelist look from the same vantage-point as the eventual reader or viewer. […] since we are in the realm of aesthetics, as well as the reference to Faulkner I think it just as pertinent to mention a name that in my opinion has an indisputable connection with the narrative technique ofHiroshima:Stravinsky. The problems which Resnais sets himself in film are parallel to those that Stravinsky sets himself in music. For example, the definition of music given by Stravinsky — an alternating succession of exaltation and repose — seems tometo fit Alain Resnais's film perfectly. What does it mean? The search for an equilibrium superior to all the individual elements of creativity. Stravinsky systematically uses contrasts and simultaneously, at the very point where they are used, he brings into relief what it is that unites them. The principle of Stravinsky's music is the perpetual rupture of the rhythm. The great novelty of TheRite of Springwas its being the first musical work where the rhythm was systematically varied. Within the field of rhythm, not tone, it was already almost serial music, made up of rhythmical oppositions, structures and series. And I get the impression that this is what Resnais is aiming at when he cuts together four tracking shots, then suddenly a static shot, two static shots and back to a tracking shot. Within the juxtaposition of static and tracking shots he tries to find what unites them. In other words he is seeking simultaneously an effect of opposition and an effect of profound unity.

Godard:It's what Rohmer was saying before. It's Picasso, but it isn't Matisse.

Domarchi:Matisse — that's Rossellini.(Laughter.)

Rivette:I find it is even more Braque than Picasso, in the sense that Braque's entiresureis devoted to that particular reflection, while Picasso's is tremendously diverse. Orson Welles would be more like Picasso, while Alain Resnais is close to Braque to the degree that the work of art is primarily a reflection in a particular direction.

Godard:When I said Picasso I was thinking mainly of the colours.

Rivette:Yes, but Braque too. He is a painter who wants both to soften strident colours and make soft colours violent. Braque wants bright yellow to be soft and Manet grey to be sharp. Well now, we've mentioned quite a few 'names', so you can see just how cultured we are, Cahiers duCinemais true to form, as always.(Laughter.)

Godard:There is one film that must have given Alain Resnais something to think about, and what's more, he edited it: LaPointe courte.

Rivette:Obviously. But I don't think it's being false to Agnès Varda to say that by virtue of the fact that Resnais edited LaPointe courtehis editing itself contained a reflection on what Agnes Varga had intended. To a certain degreeAgnèsvardabecomes a fragment of Alain Resnais, andChrismarker too.

Doniol-Valcroze:Now's the time to bring up Alain Resnais's 'terrible tenderness' which makes him devour his own friends by turning them into moments in his personal creativity. Resnais is Saturn. And that's why we all feel quite weak when we are confronted with him.

Rohmer:We have no wish to be devoured. It's lucky that he stays on the Left Bank of the Seine and we keep to the Right Banks.

Godard:When Resnais shouts 'Action', his sound engineer replies 'Saturn' riga tourne', i.e. 'it's rolling].(Laughter.)Another thing — I'm thinking of an article by Roland Barthes onLes Cousinswhere he more or less said that these days talent had taken refuge in the right. IsHiroshimaa left-wing film or a right-wing film?

Rivette:Let's say that there has always been an aesthetic left, the one Cocteau talked about and which, furthermore, according to Radiguet, had to be contradicted, so that in its turn that contradiction could be contradicted, and so on As far as I'm concerned, ifHiroshimais a left-wing film it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Rohmer:From the aesthetic point of view modern art has always been positioned to the left. But just the same, there's nothing to stop one thinking that it's possible to be modern without necessarily being left-wing. In other words, it is possible, for example, to reject a particular conception of modern art and regard it as out of date, not in the same but, if you like, in the opposite sense to dialectics. With regard to the cinema one shouldn't consider its evolution solely in terms of chronology. For example, the history of the sound film is very unclear in comparison with the history of the silent film, That's why even if Resnais has made a film that's ten years ahead of its time, it's wrong to assume that in ten years' time there will be a Resnais period that will follow on from the present one.

Rivette:Obviously, since if Resnais is ahead of his time he does it by remaining true toOctober,in the same way that Picasso'sLas Meninasis true to Velazquez.

Rohmer:Yes.Hiroshimais afilm thatplunges at the same time into the past, the present and the future. It has a very strong sense of the future, particularly the anguish of the future.

Rivette:It's right to talk about the science-fiction element in Resnais. But it's also wrong, because he is the only film-maker to convey the feeling that he has already reached a world which in other people's eyes is still futuristic. In other words he is the only one to know that we are already in the age where science-fiction has become reality. In short, Alain Resnais is the only one of us who truly lives in 1959. With him the word 'science-fiction' loses all its pejorative and childish associations because Resnais is able to see the modern world as it is. Like the science-fiction writers he is able to show us all that is frightening in it, but also all that is human. Unlike the Fritz Lang ofMetropolisor the Jules Verne ofOng cents millions de la Begum,unlike the classic notion of science-fiction as expressed by a Bradbury or a Lovecraft or even a Van Vogt all reactionaries in the end - it is very obvious that Resnais possesses the great originality of notreactinginside science-fiction. Not only does he opt for this modern and futuristic world, not only does he accept it, but he analyses it deeply, with lucidity and with love. Since this is the world in which we live and love, then for Resnais it is this world that is good, just and true.

Domarchi:That brings us back to this idea ofterrible tendernessthat is at the centre of Resnais's reflection. Essentially it is explained by the fact that for him society is characterized by a kind of anonymity. The wretchedness of the world derives from the fact of being struck down without knowing who is the aggressor. InNuit et brouillardthe commentary points out that some guy born in Carpentras or Brest has no idea that he is going to end up in a concentration camp, that already his fate is sealed, What impresses Resnais is that the world presents itself like an anonymous and abstract force that strikes where it likes„ anywhere, and whose will cannot be determined in advance. It is out of this conflict between individuals and a totally anonymous universe that is born a tragic vision of the world. That is the first stage of Resnais's thought. Then there comes a second stage which consists in channelling this first movement. Resnais has gone back to the romantic theme of the conflict between the individual and society, so dear to Goethe and his imitators, as it was to the nineteenth-century English novelists, But in their works it was the conflict between a man and palpable social forms that was clearly defined, while in Resnais there is none of that, The conflict is represented in a completely abstract way; it is between an and the universe. One can then react in an extremelytenderway towards this state of affairs. I meanthatit is no longer necessary to be indignant, to protest or even to explain. It is enough to show things without any emphasis, very subtly. And subtlety has always characterized Alain Resnais.

Rivette:Resnais is sensitive to the current abstract nature of the world. The first movement of his films is to state this abstraction. The second is to overcome this abstraction by reducing it through itself, if I may put it that way; by juxtaposing with each abstraction another abstraction in order to rediscover a concrete reality through the very act of setting them in relation to one another.

Godard:That's the exact opposite of Rossellini's procedure - he was outraged because abstract art had become official art.9 So Resnais's tenderness is metaphysical, it isn't Christian. There is no notion of charity in his films.

Rivette:Obviously not. Resnais is an agnostic. If there is a God he believes in, it's worse than St Thomas Aquinas's. His attitude is this: perhaps God exists, perhaps there is an explanation for everything, but there's nothing that allows us to be sure of it.

Godard: Like Dostoevsky's Stavrogin, who, if he believes, doesn't believe that he believes, and if he doesn't believe, doesn't believe that he doesn't believe. Besides, at the end of the film does Emmanuelle Riva leave, or does she stay? One can ask the same question about her as about Agnes inLes Dames du Bois de Boulogne,when you ask yourself whether she lives or dies.

Rivette:That doesn't matter. It's fine if half the audience thinks that Emmanuelle Riva stays with the Japanese man and the other half thinks that she goes back to France.

Domarchi:Marguerite Duras and Resnais say that she leaves, and leaves for good.

Godard:believe them when they make another film that proves it to me.

Rivette: Idon't think it really matters at all, forHiroshimais a circular film. At the end of the last reel you can easily move back to the first, and so on.Hiroshimais a parenthesis in time. It is a film about reflection, on the past and on the present. Now, in reflection, the passage of time is effaced because it is a parenthesis within duration. And it is within this duration thatHiroshimais inserted. In this sense Resnais is dose to a writer like Borges, who has always tried to write stories in such a way that on reaching the last line the reader has to turn back and re-read the story right from the first line to understand what it is about — and so it goes on, relentlessly. With Resnais it is the same notion of the infinitesimal achieved by material means, mirrors face to face, series of labyrinths. It is an idea of the infinite but contained within a very short interval, since ultimately the 'time' ofHiroshimacan just as well last twenty-four hours as one second.

一对异国男女在一个俱乐部认识后到酒店做爱,能让他们产生点一夜情之外的东西,比如爱情,需要编剧和导演具有一定的智慧,这几乎是一件不可能完成的任务.
杜拉斯的原著没有读过,但是就电影来说,具有读杜的婉转细腻,但是却不能将上述问题讲清楚.
一件事情,从开头就有问题,你不能指望观众相信以后发生的事情,哪怕是杜拉斯也不行.因此,广岛之恋展示是就是激情,肉体,迷人的叙述,惟独没有恋情.
相比起<情人>,<广岛之恋>简单到莫名其妙,爱情固然是两个人的事,但是不是攒两个人就可以演电影.
当然,还有噩梦一样的配音,就不说了.

在写雷乃论文的同时又一次打开了这部电影：在一年半前第一次看《广岛之恋》的时候，我带着困惑、好奇反复揣摩。虽然也并没有看懂个所以然，但是却被杜拉斯和雷乃所共同创造的广岛深深吸引。

Tu me plais. Quel événement. Tu me plais. Quelle lenteur tout à coup. Quelle douceur. Tu ne peux pas savoir. Tu me tues. Tu me fais du bien. (I like you. How unlikely. I like you. How slowly all of a sudden. How sweet. You do not know. You destroy me. You are so good for me.)

直到今天我才彻彻底底地了解到《广岛之恋》是那样的独特。女人的独白伴随着摇晃的镜头穿越广岛，而我们也跟随着在镜头中寻找丢失的记忆。对于电影中的男人和女人来说，记忆从来就不只是个人的。如德勒兹曾分析道：“对于这两个人来说，编织在一起的记忆未曾不是一种忘却记忆的方式。记忆仿佛已经脱离了个人而流动在一个属于’世界’的空间内。”电影中的广岛即是属于男人的广岛，也是属于女人的讷韦尔小镇，亦可称的上是属于我们任何人的印象中的城市。

穿越广岛，我们惊讶于它闪耀的霓虹灯、高耸的电塔、甚至还放着《卡萨布兰卡》的电影院 — 战后迅速的重建将记忆、历史与伤痛推到博物馆内。镜头移动下的博物馆展品显得那样平淡无奇：

”Quatre fois au musée à Hiroshima. (Four times at the musuem in Hiroshima.)”

女人四次造访广岛的和平纪念馆，却仍是一个“局外人”：她只能在跟着大巴车、听着导游的讲解浏览广岛，仿佛日本将它的过去锁在了这座博物馆，而女人只有在博物馆内才得以一瞥日本“自我审查”过后的记忆。“纪念博物馆”讽刺般地成为了“反纪念博物馆”。正如雷乃在自己1956年的纪录片《夜与雾》中说道：

“no description, no picture can restore their true dimension: endless fear.”

但是当镜头穿过狭小、肮脏的菜场街道时，女人却在这个时候感受到了真正的爱情、一种与城市融为一体的感觉：仿佛摇晃的镜头本身正颤动着宏伟的雕像、权威的博物馆和不朽的遗迹。如果说博物馆象征着官方审查过后的记忆合集，那镜头穿越过的、那流动的风景才是城市真正的记忆所在。我们在行走在城市的过程中，即发现了官方、公开的记忆，也在探寻着那些极为私人的记忆，那些隐藏在一个个小店铺招牌背后的情感。而这些才是城市真正的血肉所在。女人穿越着街道并说道“城市是为爱情量身定制”。只有在这个时刻，她才真正发现城市的情感正蕴藏在自己走过一块块砖瓦下。

20世纪50年代末60年代初，作为世界电影史上的第三次电影运动，法国“作者电影”（新浪潮）与“作家电影”（左岸派）在温文尔雅、精致华丽的“优质电影”苍白无力地落下历史帷幕的那一刻，声势浩大地掀起了推翻和打碎旧存制片秩序的潮流，以其丰富的创造力和无可辩驳的艺术生机阐释着一种全新的电影观念，对商业电影大一统的局面形成了强烈的冲击；作为世界电影发祥地的法国，再一次充当了电影先锋的角色，引导了一次更为宽泛和广阔的世界新电影运动。


1959年，法国电影乃至世界电影史上最辉煌的一年！特吕弗的《四百下》、戈达尔的《筋疲力尽》和阿仑·雷乃的《广岛之恋》几乎同时出台，震撼了国际影坛。（《四百下》获戛纳电影节最佳导演奖；《筋疲力尽》获西柏林电影节最佳导演奖；《广岛之恋》获戛纳电影节特别评论奖。）


雷乃无疑是“左岸派”的首领。在西方电影评论界，他与戈达尔齐名。在这部由法国新小说派大将玛格丽特·杜拉斯编剧的影片中，他首次使用了一种大胆而新颖的叙事技巧，将现实时空和内心世界交替剪辑，开“心理结构时空”创作之先河，成为电影叙事语言发展历程中具有里程碑意义的伟大转折。《广岛之恋》第一次真正实现了文学与电影的联姻，为“作家电影”在艺术领域开拓并占领了一席值可引导“艺术电影”走向的制高地，拓展了电影叙事语言的空间，对电影的发展产生了深远的影响。


《广岛之恋》采用时空交错的现代派电影手法，透过一个象征性的爱情故事来折射战争的可怕与忘却的重要性。影片描述法国女演员艾曼纽·莉瓦（Emmanuelle Rive）在1957年到日本广岛拍摄一部宣传和平的影片，在回国前邂逅了日本男子冈田英次，两人相爱并发生婚外情。冈田英次的出现令艾曼纽回忆起她在战时于法国小城涅威尔跟一名德国占领军的相爱，最后德国男人阵亡，涅威尔在一夜之间获得自由，艾曼纽也陷入了无尽的癫狂……


“他慢慢地在我身边冷了，他可是死得真慢哪……他死的时刻我真的想不起了，因为，不仅在当时，就在后来，在后来我也只能说，只能说在那尸首和我的身体之间，我实在找不到有任何的区别了，只能在那尸首和我的身体之间找到——相似的地方、协调的地方——那是我的初恋。”她对眼前的日本男人诉说着，“14年过去了，”她摸着他的手，“这双手怎么样也忘了，那种痛苦我也只记得一点了。”男人问：“今晚呢？”“今晚我记起来了，”她说，“过后我一定又不记得了，全忘了，明天这个时候我要跟你相隔几千公里了。”他抱着她：“再过几年，我会忘记你的，另外一些像这样的事情，由于那日久成性的习惯，还会发生的。我会把你当遗忘的旧恋一样，记起了你，我会怪自己健忘又想起这些事情，我早就明白……”


“太可怕了，我开始不能很清楚地记起你了，我开始忘记你了。可怕！这么深的爱都能忘！”有什么是我们不能忘的？战争的摧残？刻骨铭心的爱情？“在这里，广岛的人已不太喜欢看讲和平的戏。”战争的创伤也不能使人们永远铭记历史的过错，如同引起战争灾难的原子弹，“这是人类科学天才们的杰作，不幸的是，人类的政治智慧比科学智慧的发展要低百倍。”停止核武器试验的呼声还能响彻多久？忘记历史就意味着背叛，而忘记爱情呢？走出失去德国男人的痛苦，走出了涅威尔，走出了诺瓦河，她也走出了她永恒的幸福。到底该不该遗忘？记忆是癫狂，遗忘反而是清醒？当她遇到了这个日本男人（同样是一个法西斯的敌人！），她再一次陷入疯狂的边缘，她到底该接受还是该避免再一次的遗忘？这一次，她陷入了深深的困惑。她渴望得到这个让她如痴如醉的男人的爱，她想以此来纪念她曾经的快乐与痛？或者她必须坚持使用她的理性以使自己继续保持清醒？拒绝纪念就是遗忘，遗忘就是背叛，而再一次陷入疯狂岂不更是对两个男人（已逝的德国兵与自己的丈夫）精神与肉体的双重背叛？她陷入了一个进退两难的境地，这正是记忆与遗忘的悖论。回忆是如此痛苦，以至于人们必须忘却。广岛的原子弹爆炸纪念馆一再提醒人们，忘记意味着背叛，意味着历史的重演。究竟应该忘却，还是应该记住自己的历史呢？人类就是在这两难的抉择中艰难地寻找着自己的生存空间。


记忆是美好的，记忆意味着进入到过去，过去的过去，代表着混沌，如女人波涛汹涌的胴体及那温润的湿处，最原始的疯狂与罪恶。人需要理性的遗忘，也需要感官的记起。我们必须拒绝遗忘才能回到过去，才能体验疯狂；我们又必须忘却疯狂才能走向未来，才能享受清醒。


进入！影片即从进入开始！男人进入女人的身体，女人进入被遗忘的回忆！广岛男人疯狂地占有法国女人罪恶的肉体，法国女人拼命地占有广岛记忆中的街道、博物馆、苦难。他们交织在一起，他们的胴体足以让时间停滞！蒙太奇画面不断地从他们的裸体（有生命的身体）到战争的残骸（无生命的尸体）切割，欲望与理性开始一次次地迭错，男人与女人挣扎于死生的边缘。“不，你没去过……你没看见，你不了解。”广岛拒绝女人的入侵；男人说：“我们会再见面。”“不。”女人干脆地回答。“为什么？”男人试图再一次进入。“你走吧，离开我！”女人拒绝男人的再一次入侵。 “留下来……一周？……三天？……”“为什么留，为了活，还是为了死？”“我真恨你没有死在涅威尔……”“广岛的黑夜是没有尽头的吗？”“对，广岛的黑夜是没有尽头的！”“我喜欢这样……”人似乎又永远无法战胜现实；生，还是死，这是一个问题。这个问题永远没有答案，即使女人勾起了对过去的回忆，男人也因进入到女人的隐私而狂喜，影片的结尾也只能是模糊而不确定的。女人到底会不会离开广岛？没有人知道。


《广岛之恋》从内容到形式都呈现出一种复杂多义的形态。从影片的主题说来，无论是“爱情”、“反战”还是关于“时间与忘却”、“理智与情感”的说法，影评者对这一问题的界定似乎都不能对这90分钟的时空交错给出一个简单而明确的标签，各种理解都无法将影片的主题阐释得淋漓尽致。也许这正是影片的价值所在。用导演雷乃的话来说，影片是建立在矛盾基础之上的，包括必然的、可怕的遗忘的矛盾，一个在集体的、巨大的悲剧的背景上出现的个人的辛酸而渺小的命运之间的矛盾……而对于影片主题本身的争论是毫无意义的，“我们要求观众不是从外部重建故事，而是和角色一起从内心经历它……现实永远不是外部的，也不全是内心的，而是感觉与体察双重类型的混合。”


现实永远不是外部的，也不全是内心的。存在主义认为，世界是不能用人的理性来把握的，它本是一团“虚无”。阿仑·雷乃的电影用存在主义哲学和精神分析学说揭示生活中人的各种心理和行为，使用现实时空与心理时空相交错，对人物内心世界进行深入细致的探索，实践并发展了巴赞的现实主义电影美学，即一种以直觉的感知去把握与再现现实的严格意义上的“心理现实主义”。这种“不确定性”的电影美学直接影响了许多现代派导演的创作，电影理论家们重新回到了安德烈·巴赞对电影最深沉的设问：电影是什么？

选这部1959年的《广岛之恋》确实让我看见了很多，由名字来判断，我一直认为是香港的电影，毕竟莫文蔚那首广岛之恋不管隔了多久还是经典，我这个年纪的人都知道，我会知道广岛之恋也是因为我母亲她喜欢在车上放这首歌。不过这两个独立的作品不是完全没有交集，广岛之恋的词曲者张洪量正是看了亚伦·雷奈的《广岛之恋》才创作出这首相差20年的作品。 也是这部作品，让我一下看到了很多不了解的词汇。 有人说这部电影是法国新浪潮的主要催化剂，那法国新浪潮是什么呢？ 法国新浪潮是影评人对于1950年代末至1960年代的一些法国导演团体所给予的称呼，他们主要受到意大利新写实主义与古典好莱坞电影的影响。法国新浪潮的特色在于，导演不只主导电影，更成为电影的作者和创作人。风格特色包括快速切换场景镜头等创新剪接手法，或是像 “跳接” ，在整体叙事上制造突兀不连贯效果。 简单来说：导演要身兼编剧，画面常有快速切换场景，整理叙事不连贯。 我第一次看，真的什么也没看明白，毕竟不是我们所常接触的叙事类型，我印象中唯一看过的黑白电影是奥黛丽赫本的《窈窕淑女》，《窈窕淑女》的叙事方法也是偏现代主流，所以我当时看也看得很入迷。 电影一开始就是一对隐隐约约的躯体，后来可以看到他们的身体上被一层泥还是什么东西包覆住了，还有闪闪发亮的金粉撒在他们身上，非常隐晦的表现，我甚至都看不出来到底是什么人。不过我猜想，那应该不是男女主角，而是广岛受难的人们。 亚伦·雷奈在广岛原子弹爆炸后，隔了十年拍了一部《广岛之恋》，之后这个作品也在影展轰炸了整个影坛，在仅隔十年就勇于拍这个题材，仇恨仅隔十年不会被遗忘，而身为二战同盟国的法国导演却拍下了广岛的疮痍。 而电影几乎花了十几分钟，从男女角的对话中，带到了开满悲惨之花的广岛，他们战争后重建的博物馆，和他们因为战争而畸形的儿童与成人。 现在很多的主流电影也会以这种方式来交代背景，以过去的历史资料以及 视频 来交代时空背景，多半都是用火箭发射或者国家领导人发言等画面，不过这些都不及《广岛之恋》来的触目惊心。 这部电影的对白不是一般的多，它不出现空泛而无意义的台词，它恰好的如法国新浪潮所追求的那样，如文学般深远的对白。 我觉得整部电影都很讽刺，从男女主角的身分上来看，女主角是法国人，是当时二战同盟国的国家；男主角是日本人，是当时轴心国的国家。且两人都已结婚，正常来说是对立的关系，毕竟日本才在十年前遭受原子弹攻击，多少对西方国家的人仇恨，而身为日本人的男主角若跟西方国家的女人在一起，也不免会被他的同胞以道德的理由厌恶。综合以上观点，两人在一起是对婚姻以及国家的不道德。