Dear all,next week we will enjoy prof. Esteban Conde’s (University of Huelva) classes on “law and cinema”. After a brief introduction on this peculiar strand of the Law and the Humanities movement we will talk about the important issue of censorship.
ABSTRACT
The lectures will introduce the ‘law and cinema’ contemporary scholarship, trying to look critically (from a European perspective) at some of its premises and results.
Therefore we will focus on underline one of the possible intersections between law and films: that of ‘cinema in law’ (or law on cinema). This approach is by far much less attended (and maybe less ‘funny’, more ‘serious’) than the classical ‘law in cinema’ studies or the (amusing and even ‘worrying’) ‘law as cinema/cinema as law’ debates.
More specifically we will tackle some US Supreme Court decisions (and indecisions) to concisely describe the way in which censorship on films has been – constitutionally and legally - formulated in the twentieth century.
The account should serve as an example –and encouragement- for those students interested in the development of similar subjects, which are not necessarily involved with totalitarian regimes or tendencies.
And above all, it is a proposal –and a provocation- concerning the unavoidable (self)analysis about the (individual, social, juridical, economical) limits and burdens of freedom of speech.
READINGS
A)
- The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 98, No.8, “Popular Legal Culture” (June 1989) (“Introduction”, pp. 1545-1558; Lawrence M. Friedman, “Law, Lawyers, and Popular Culture”, pp. 1579-1606)
- Stefan Machura/Peter Robson (eds.), Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 28, No. 1, “Law and Film” (March 2001). The “Introduction”, pp.1-8, includes a selected bibliography (1986-1999)
B)
- “Motion Pictures and the First Amendment”, The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 60, No. 4. (April 1951), pp. 696-719.
- John Wertheimer, “Mutual Film Reviewed: The Movies, Censorship, and Free Speech in Progressive America”, The American Journal of Legal History, Vol. 37, No. 2. (Apr., 1993), pp. 158-189.
Esteban Conde's CV:
Esteban Conde (Barcelona, 1971), Legal Historian (Universities of Barcelona –Autónoma- and now Huelva), received his Ph.D. in Law in 2003. He has written two books (1998, 2006) about the main (and constructive) role played by ‘enlightened’ censorship in Spain, and several articles on police power (its metaphors, tradition and development at the end of the Ancien Régime).
Over the past five years, he has used some interdisciplinary approaches as a tool to teach legal history: literature and law, and more recently cinema and law.
This morning,the vision of the film:"il miracolo"shot by Rossellini is resulted very interesting;really at the beggining of the proiection i didn't understand the connection between this film and law,but at the ending i understood that the very important thing is the strong neorealism of the film especially in the sense that the simbolism is rappresented like a vehicle to express ideas like the critique against church,altough Rossellini was catholic and the rappresentation of birth;in my opinion, another strong example of this critique is the fact that: for all film Anna Magnani,the protagonist, is the only figure that appears and maybe this fact rappresents the fact that man can trust in God also without the help of the closed structure of chirch,infact the protagonist lives her pregnancy with the help of her belief in God.Roberta Antonelli
ReplyDeleteToday the lesson has been very interesting...the movie has encouraged different opinions and about these I seemed to understand that most of the others, or at least of those who got word, think the main character actually wasn't pregnant but that was all the work of her conviction...my view is different: I think Anna Magnani in the movie is really pregnant, otherwise would not make sense some of the scenes of the movie...for example the opening scene of the movie, though not explicitly, it shows in the attitudes (the bottle of wine, the man who continues to drink her, the ecstasy of her, etc.) that will be a physical act...then the scene where the other women do understand her that she is pregnant(in fact she did not say it first!) and finally the nun who asks her to confess (actually if the sexual act had not been there would not have made this request!) then I think the baby is born! the film is not explicit but not so ambiguous...even if the open-ended's conclusion is the right compromise between different views.
ReplyDeleteAbout the impression on the movie I share the thoughts of others in the sense that I did not feel offended...I can not imagine the reaction of listeners to the release of the movie or that of the church...certainly the film is very strong for his symbolism, for the structure of the film with only the main actress, for the soundtrack, for the social context...no light!
Another thing that struck me is that Fellini was a Christian believer...in this chapter "miracle" there is an obvious attack on the church...I think the attack is directed to the structures of church and not to religion...I'll explain better: faith in the movie is enhanced by the behavior of the protagonist: the eulogy at St. Joseph; invitation to accept her on the "land" right, the direct relationship with God, she feels herself innocence, her infinite love for God and for the child, all of which make me think that faith is the only stimulus in the life of Anna Magnani;the attack on the structures of the church is evident when the nun invites her to confess to obtain their help or is evident in showinh a church not compassionate and not willing to help, in fact she removed.
see you tomorrow!
Moira Di Giacomantonio
The film we watched this morning makes me feel a sense of anguish and anxiety that I'd never felt before during a movie. Now I understand very well what does Neo-realism means: the importance of the expressiveness of the actors, the musics, the images and so on.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think that the criticism made by Rossellini of that kind of religion, almost mad and fool, was a schock for that period, and I'm very curious to know what was the reaction of the Church.
Francesca Pucci
L'Amore is a film in two episodes directed by Roberto Rossellini, 1948: the first is The human voice (1947), set in a bedroom, and the second, The Miracle (1948), set on the Costiera Amalfitana.
ReplyDeleteThe plot of the film: Nannina (Anna Magnani), a shepherdess naive and religious (and also mad), meets a blond, bearded stranger (Federico Fellini), which exchanges for San Giuseppe. Taking advantage of the wine drunk by the woman, the tramp took the opportunity to get her pregnant during her sleep. On waking Nannina not find nobody near her, so she cultivates a feeling of "miracle". You notice the pregnancy until they fainted in the midst of fellow villagers and she is justified in claiming to have been pardoned by the God. Obviously they not believed, and from that moment becomes even more the laughing stock of the country. Tired and embittered by the mistreatment, decided to leave the village to take refuge in nearby caves. After being isolated for unspecified time, he realizes that the moment of birth is near, so she come to the church where there is none, but still managed to enter it to give birth to her child.
I think there were a lot of criticism especially from the church on the same plot that could ridicule the story of the Virgin Mary. Also the main character described as mad has a strong faith and rejects the mediation of the church, believed to be happened a miracle and he does not need to confess.
I will wait tomorrow to find out more ..
Cristina Di Florio
Yesterday I found the film 'Miracle' very particular, maybe becouse I'm not used to see this kind of film: the expressions of the actress and the misic give me a strong sense of anziety and agony. Perhaps, this could be the sense that the director wanted to give.
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning it was difficult to understand the meaning, but now I think that we can give two different interpretations of it, as someone said yesterday.
For me, people who believe in miracle, think that Nannina had a son by saint joseph's miracle, like the virgin mary. this is a religious interpretation. But, on the other hand, people who don't believe, say that she saw saint joseph but he was a simple shepherd and they had sex. It's only a personal point of view for me.
I think also that this kind of film could have a strong criticism from the church, but I don't know and I regret for not being able to attend today's class. I'm curious to read the comments on the last lesson and the explanationons given from prof Conde in class. Thank you.
Francesca Natalini
I really liked the film "The Miracle" by Rossellini because I think it helped us to understand better the possible link between law and cinema. I think that in this case the connecting element is censorship. In fact this film was released in Italy in 1948 in spite of the point of view of the Catholic Church which asked to revoke the license for the film, because according to the Church this work was "sacrilegious". In fact it can be considered a religious film, in which the protagonist believes to be the Virgin Mary. She meets a wayfarer on a sea cliff and she thinks that he is Saint Joseph; so, when she gets pregnant, she believes it was a miracle. Moreover, the film is full of religious symbols, like apples, water getting down from the rocks, also there is a scene, I remember the last one, in which she seems to be on a cross, like Christ. Finally, I think yesterday's lesson can be connected with the topic of supestition, too. Maria Lisa Avvisati
ReplyDeleteAlso I, like Francesca, wasn't able to come to class because of the strike,and I am curious to know the Prof Conde's explanation, too. Thanks. Maria Lisa Avvisati
ReplyDeleteThe Rossellini's film we watched yesterday is very powerful for the theme it treates and the expressions of the protagonist,a visionary and mad woman who has got a particular sense of religion.In my opinion this film shows us a very superstitious and extreme way of living the religion and the madness is an instrument to symbolize it.Another thing i noticed is that in the film there is a profound critique about the church and its institutions,dogmas and saints...Infact when a women said to the protagonist to go to confess herself,she answered that she was so closed to God without going to the church.In my opinion this means that the real protagonist of the film is love and a pure religion,a direct relation between man and God!Federica Gulli.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteToday we hsd discussed about the development of cinema through different times especially through the birth of censure starting with a famous case :"mutual case"referring to the closed law of Ohio state,the golden era of cinema between 1920 -1940,the development of mccarthism by senator mccarthy,the crisis of cinema in 1940-1950 and we analized the reaction against the film "IL MIRACOLO"one of the most important film with other movies like:"ROMA CITTà APERTA","LADRI DI BICICLETTE"e"PAESANI".These productions simbolized the development of italian cinema in the world and maybe for the first time the birth of sensation that the cinema could be a very important vehicle to affirm ideas although there was a strong reaction and critique especially by Church and Vatican.Particullarly for the film of Rossellini "IL MIRACOLO"the reaction of church was very strong especially rappresented by cardinal Spellman who wrote a pastoral letter in wich said that the film was sacrilegious but the film was presented in New York in 1950 and people judjed the film beautiful and the Vatican didn't censur it. Finally the most important decision,judjed like a miracle decision, was in the cause Bursty vs Wilson in wich the judge said that the motion fils were vehicles for community and the state didn't have the power to censure.Roberta Antonelli
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why if i post two comments(the summary i made doesn't fit into one) the second erases the first one.... It looks a joke! I might try tO post the first now and the second later...boh!hope it will work out!
ReplyDeleteGiulia baliva
As i promised, here i am writing some notes about today’s lesson. I am writing a summary that I hope we can comment and add new informations that I missed. I can say that many slides passed too fast for my speed to write..
ReplyDeleteThe main topic discussed today was about the regulations needed to decide the topics of the films and the way to face them respecting the rights, and the evolution about the film business.
When movies were invented at the beginning the court opinion was that it was just a business. The US supreme court in the 1915 ruled in mutual film corp. Vs industrial commission of Ohio that movies were a “ business pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit like other spectacles and not to be regarded as a part of the press of the country or as organs of public opinion within the meaning of freedom of speech and publication guaranteed by the constitution of Ohio”.
That was the reason why at the beginning it couldn’t be considered under the power and concerning the first amendment which says:” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.
Before the 1915 cinema wasn’t considered under the constitutional aspect.
Before the 1930 the way to regulate was given by the municipal and states boards of censors.
Scandal suggested to the private to create a regulation, a code: the M.P.P.D.A.
An administration code imposed by the majors, a self censorship code to regulate the principles of the new industry.
The production code enumerated three “general principles”
1- no pictures shall be produced that with lower the moral standards of those who see it . hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime , wrongdoing, evil or sin
2- correct standards of life, subject only to the requirements of drama and entertainment shall be presented
3- law, natural or human, shall not be ridiculed nor shallsympathy be created for its violations
so it is underlining the respect of the law, correct standards of life and moral code.
Even stricter was the censure made to control the film messages by roman catholics: the LEGION OF DECENCY with the goal to boycott movies not accepted by the church .
From the 1920 to the 1940 we have the “golden age of Hollywood” cause the industry made lots of profits from rthe family films addressed to mass audience.
But there were new challenges for the USA film industry:
(....end of the first part,hope the second won't create problems!)
1SCHOLAR CRITICISM
ReplyDelete-the appeal for the full development and maturity of cinema.”clearly SCIENCE has given birth to a new art”
- censorship of motion pictures 1939
“under a constitution which tries to minimize arbitrary restraints on speech , state and municipal censorship of motion pictures occurs with almost no judicial control . movies may be cut or banned by permanent censorship boards in advance of exhibition, removed from exhibition by police or licensing officials, or with dawn under informed pressure from city officials. The argument for censorship is usually protection of community morality”.
-note motion pictures and the first amendment-the yale journal vol 60 4 apr 1951-
2ECONOMIC COLLAPSE OF HOLLYWOOD INDUSTRY
-exodus to the suburbs
- increasing available leisure activities and new inventions:tv 1948-49
So cinema had to do and invent something more than what tv was able to offer.
3FOREIGN CINEMA
Artur mayer and joseph Burstyn 1936. they were used to small theatre arts on the east coast and after the second world wae they imported European films .
The Italians were included in this importation :
-open city 1946
-paison 1948
-the bicycle thieves 1949
-THE MIRACLE 1950-licenced by the motion picture division of the new york state education department .
The critic described it obscene, indecent, immoral
Rossellini was in the middle of a scandal by that time: bergman was an actress very famous(4 best actress nominations)and she started a relation with Rossellini.she was married, she moved to italy where she had 3 children with Rossellini. Once she was in italy she divorced.she was on the news paper as”the st joan of arc who committed adultery”.
“the miracle” scandal happened during a BAD TIME:
1anticommunism 1947-54
2mc carthyism
3 CATHOLIC CRUSADE(pope pius XII and the assumption of the virgin- a catholic dogma in 1950)
By that time cardinal Spellman had a huge influence in the USA
He condemned the movie and asked to the huge community of catholics in new york to boycott the movie asking also for a different title.
“the importance of motion picture as an organ is not the business of government, but the importance as an organ public opinion
Burstyn inc v wiloson 1952 justice clark.
It was a triaòl made for the freedom of speech.
1951 feb 19th “TIME” thanks to the scandal the movie had importance.
Thanks to court action, denunciations and couter denunciations in the newspapers òpicked lines and counter picked lines outside the theatres.
The Vatican judged it abominable but it wasn’t censured.
Because of Spellman and his position the US catholics felt they needed to fight against that film.
After “THE MIRACLE” the central issue was religion, the offence to religious and other religions.
Holmes said that freedom needs to protect any speech not just the one you like or you don’t like,.
The lesson ended then with a discussion and the question were:
What are our own limits?
What are society limits?
Everything turned into a values discussion.
I hope everything is understandable
Giulia baliva
Giulia, thank you very much for your notes!
ReplyDeleteI think the movie 'Il Miracolo’ in reality is not a criticism to the religion itself but to the Church and the vision that some people have about religion, as already mentioned by many colleagues. In fact, the main character, interpreted by Anna Magnani, although she may be very naive and almost crazy, has a positive characterization, while the representatives of the Church tend to have a negative characterization, indeed they seem to be detached and concerned only on the formal aspect of religion, as the nun, while citizens, in my opinion, are the representation of a religion which is lived in a non-critical and not compassionate way. The strength of this film, in my view, is the fact that the director, Rossellini, shows his own opinion on the problem, but gives to the viewer the opportunity to have a different interpretation about the film. Michela Roberto
Thank you very much for your notes, Giulia- I really appreciated it because I wasn't able to come to lesson for the strike and I was really sorry to miss such an intresting lesson.
ReplyDeleteI do agree about the Miracolo being a critique to the Catholic Church and its dogma, and not about religion in itself- instead, the movie enhances the strenght of individual spirituality (Nannina may be the crazy of the town, but she surely has a personal relationship with God- a personal relationship for which she's accused of being mad).
I checked our interpretation of the hallucinated-pregnagncy and I have to said that I didn't found anything to corroborate this hypothesis. So, I shall admit, we were being really post-modernist! :-)
Corallina Lopez
what made me think, about the remarks made this week in the classroom and on the blog, but especially from the readings of prof.Conde, was the fact that in some way by the law has tried to censor a mere thought of the population through film. simobol this the fact that the films have a great impact on society and the state such as Ohio, or the church as in the movie Miracle were afraid of the repercussions and the ideas that these films could have, thanks interpreters such as Anna Magnani, who by their expression could be transmitted. why they tried to use the law as a means of censorship and fear through the film would have had more freedom and less control and the law has tried to use it as a control.
ReplyDeleteMonica Di Silvestro
Thank you so much Giulia!!!
ReplyDeleteThis is very useful for us!
Francesca Natalini
Thank you all for the comments and the summary!
ReplyDelete