Dissolving & Reconstituting Narrative Cinema

5	The Pitsburgh Trilogy	1971 – Stan Brakhage (USA)
	Abstraction	Profile - Stan Brakhage; pictorial depiction; narrative abstraction; considerations on viewing

A: Pictorial depiction

As a form and type of visual symbolism, pictorial depiction (the act of representing something intentionally akin to its existence as a visual phenomenon we can see) is a balance between abstraction and representation. Any image will communicate itself simultaneously in the manner of this dichotomy :

Representation the object/image desired to be visually and recognized/identified as a depiction of the object/image
Abstraction - the status/effect/nature the depiction takes on as part of the communicative process of visualizing the object/image.

This dichotomy can be articulated in numerous ways all of which are connected to one another. When we experience an image flashed up on screen as we're watching a movie, the representation/abstraction can also be articulated thus:

(a) content/form ontological status of how the image is presented
(b) surface/depth material presence of film medium
(c) object/image illusory effect of photography
(d) concept/communication semantic exchange of art/cultural product
(e) story/narrative construction of cinematic object

Essentially (though still with incredible complexity) abstraction is the consequence of any representational act, in that the viewer can just as much focus on the look/shape of what is being represented (interpreting the Mona Lisa as an abstract' landscape of colours, textures and forms). This also works 'reverse' consider the faces you see in the clouds, etc.
 
B: Narrative abstraction

Obviously pictorial depiction is very important in narrative frameworks in order to continually make the viewer focus on the specified contents and their deliberated handling so as to convey bath meaning and style through cinematic construction. (Imagine if the film was 'unable' to prevent us from looking at it purely as an abstract play of light and swimming film grain.)

The notion of 'film style' is basically caught up in the interplay between representation and abstraction, considering that a filmmaker will often be involved in representing things in new and innovative ways, which in turn initially and momentarily disorient the viewer (in terms of straight forward comprehension of the imagery as soon as it appears on the screen).

The overall area of 'abstract' filmmaking, however, is generally more concerned with visual phenomenae, optical impression, material form, physical presence and experiential states. Such concerns appear to transpose this kind of film into a supposedly non-narrative realm, but even though there might not be a 'story' (in the classical, formal sense) something is being told in a visibly noticeable way.
 
C: THE PITSBURG TRILOGY

This trilogy covers three separate places, locations and events:
City streets - police patrols (EYES)
Hospital(s) - medical operations (DEUS EX)
Morgue(s) - forensic operations (THE ACT OF SEEING WITH ONE'S OWN EYES)

These three social spaces are evident through the fragmented imagery which makes up each section. In no one section do we receive:
(a) a full in frame single image that would on its own totally sum up and define the relevant social space; or
(b) a logical or prescribed sequence of shots which construct a spatial temporal reconstruction of the relevant social space.

More precisely, we receive a set of isolated impressions of different, aspects and elements which we recognize somehow as belonging to those social spaces. In this sense, every image is presumed to be a pictorial depiction of an 'impression fragment' despite our inability to instantly identify as image content and visual form.

This is exactly where the film becomes 'abstract' we abstact/translate the visual surfaces, light movement and colour shaping into representational objects, items, parts and scenes, when in fact the way in which they are cinematically conveyed focuses on aspects not, based on the identification of the concept of those objects, but rather their phenomenological presence and status as interpreted by the camera.

There are perhaps two major viewing modes for this film:
(a) to continually guess, ascertain and figure what object is being visually represented at every point; or
(b) to flow with the movements, shapes, colours and textures as the film develops.
If anything, our perception probably vascillates between both modes - unavoidably recognizing some images and scenes ; getting totally lost with other images and scenes and being left to experience the visual presence up on the screen.
 
D: Considerations

(a) In there any poetic symbolism in this film?
(b) Is there any social commentary in this film?
(c) How does the operation of the camera contribute to the film in terms of its (i) focal interplay; (ii) f stopreading/lighting exposure; (iii) use of filters; (iv) framing and movement?
(d) How does the camera relate to the bodies in the three sections? How does it portray them?
(e) How is 'work' figured in the film?
(f) What can be interpreted from the notion of 'operation' in the film?