A Companion to Documentary Film History. Группа авторов
Читать онлайн книгу.
T. Lamarre and K. Nae‐hui), 1–35. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong Press.
33 Lamarre, T. (2014). Cartoon Film Theory: Imamura Taihei on Animation, Documentary, and Photography. In: Animating Film Theory (ed. K. Beckman), 221–251. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
34 Lenin, V.I. (1975 [1915]). On the Question of Dialectics. In: The Lenin Anthology (ed. R.C. Tucker), 649. New York: W. W. Norton.
35 Matsumoto, T. (1978). Hanada‐san to eiga hihyō [Mr. Hanada's Film Criticism]. In: Hanada Kiyoteru zenshū, vol. 7, appendix 10–11. Tokyo: Kōdansha.
36 Matsumoto, T. (2012 [1958]). A Theory of Avant‐Garde Documentary, trans. Michael Raine. Cinema Journal 51 (4): 148–154.
37 Noda, S. (1973). Nihon ni okeru kiroku eiga undō [The Documentary Movement in Japan]. In: Gendai eiga jiten, revised edition (eds. S. Okada, K. Sasaki, T. Satō and S. Hani). Tokyo: Bijutsu shuppansha.
38 Nornes, A.M. (1999). Pôru Rûta/Paul Rotha and the Politics of Translation. Cinema Journal 38 (3): 91–108.
39 Ōkuma, N. (1938). Batsu [Postscript]. In: Eiga geiutsu no keishiki (ed. T. Imamura), 409–412. Tokyo: Ōshio shorin.
40 Ōtani, S. (2009). Okamoto Tarō no “taikyoku shugi” no seiritsu wo megutte [On the Formation of Okamoto Tarō’s “bipolarism”]. Tokyo kokuritsu bijutsukan kiyō 13: 18–36.
41 Petrie, D. and Kruger, R. (eds.) (1999). A Paul Rotha Reader. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
42 Renov, M. (1986). Re‐Thinking Documentary: Toward a Taxonomy of Mediation. Wide Angle 8 (3‐4): 71–77.
43 Rotha, P. (1936). Documentary Film. London: Faber and Faber.
44 Rotha, P. (1938). Bunka eigaron [Culture Film], trans. T. Atsugi. Kyoto: Daiichi geibunsha.
45 Sakamoto, H. (2011). Kiroku to avangyarudo: Sengo Nihon ni okeru zen’ei kiroku eigaron to sono haikei [Documentary and the Avant‐garde: Avant‐Garde Film Theory in Postwar Japan and its Context]. Wakkanai hokusei gakuen daigaku kiyō 11: 57–68.
46 Salazkina, M. (2015). Introduction: Film Theory in the Age of Neoliberal Globalization. Framework 56 (2): 325–349.
47 Sasa, G. (1928). Gangu/buki—satsueiki [A Toy/Weapon—The Camera]. Senki 1 (2): 29–33.
48 Sasaki, K., Hanada, K., and Takeda, T. (1956). Eiga riron no hihan to sōzō [Criticism and Creation of Film Theory]. Shin‐Nihon bungaku 11 (12): 146–155.
49 Sekino, Y. (1940). ‘Kyō made no eiga’ to ashita no eiga: Dokyumentarī to Rōsa no hatten [The Film till Now and the Film of Tomorrow Today: Developments of Rotha and Documentary]. Bunga eiga kenkyūI 3 (2): 8–11; 3(3): 58–60; 3(4): 109–112; 3(5): 176–179.
50 Sugiyama, H. (1941). Eiga hyōronshū [A Collection of Film Criticism]. Kyoto: Daiichi geibunsha.
51 Sugiyama, H. (1990). Imamura Taihei: Kokō dokusō no eizō hyōronka [Imamura Taihei: A Lofty and Original Critic of the Moving Image]. Tokyo: Riburopōto.
52 Takakiba, T. (1940). Kyokō no riron: Tsumura Hideo‐shi no ‘Pōru Rūta hihan’ wo yomu [A Fabricated Theory: Reading Tsumura Hideo’s “Critiquing Paul Rotha’s Film Theory”]. Bunka eiga kenkyū 3 (1): 525–528.
53 Tosaka, J. (1937). Eiga no ninshikironteki kachi to fūzoku byōsha [Cinema’s Epistemological Value and its Depiction of Social Customs]. Nihon eiga 2 (6): 13–19.
54 Tsumura, H. (1940). Pōru Rūta eigaron hihan [Critiquing Paul Rotha’s film theory]. In: Zoku eiga to hihyō, 107–168. Tokyo: Koyama Shoten.
55 Tsumura, H. (1943). Eiga seisakuron [On Film Policy]. Tokyo: Chūo kōronsha.
56 Tsumura, H. (1944). Eigasen [Film Wars]. Tokyo: Asahi shinbunsha.
57 Winston, B. (1995). Claiming the Real: The Griersonian Documentary and its Legitimations. London: BFI.
58 Yamamoto, N. (2020). “Soviet Montage Theory and Japanese Film Criticism. In: The Japanese Cinema Book (eds. H. Fujii and A. Phillips). London: BFI.
Notes
1 1 To encompass a more comprehensive picture of documentary practices in postwar Japan, it is necessary to consider a number of TV documentaries produced by TV stations such as NHK (Nippon Hosō Kyōkai, a public broadcasting company) and NTV (Nippon Television Network Corporation, especially under the supervision of the producer Ushiyama Jun'ichi). Unfortunately, these TV works and their related discourse are beyond the scope of this paper, but I would nonetheless emphasize that despite the saturated presence of TV, film as a medium still holds a significant place in Japanese documentary culture today. Indeed, the renowned TV documentarist Mori Tatsuya has chosen a film – entitled 311, co‐directed with Watai Takeharu, Matsubayashi Yōju, and Yasuoka Takaharu – to make public his commentary on the earthquake‐tsunami‐nuclear triple disaster that hit the north‐eastern region of Japan on March 11, 2011.
2 2 I have discussed this issue further in Yamamoto (2020).
3 3 The translator Atsugi was one of the few female documentary filmmakers active in wartime Japan, and, as with other supporters of Rotha, she had been involved in the proletarian film movement before making her move to the production of bunka eiga. Surprisingly, Atsugi's translation remained in print for more than four decades, with the latest edition being published in 1976.
4 4 For Tsumura's contribution to this debate, see Harry Harootunian (2000: 34–94).
5 5 Recent studies of the British documentary film movement also criticize its unabashed reliance on the state‐sponsorship and concomitant support for Britain's imperialist expansionism. See, for instance, Brian Winston (1995) and Lee Grieveson (2011).
6 6 Hanada quoted these two definitions from the Japanese translations of Hegel (1991 [1830]) and Hegel (1991 [1821]), respectively.
7 7 Soviet films officially released in prewar Japan include Storm over Asia (1928, dir. Vsevolod Pudovkin), Turksib (1929, dir. Victor A. Turin), and Man with a Movie Camera (1929, dir. Dziga Vertov). Other major films such as Battleship Potemkin (1925, dir. Sergei Eisenstein) and Mother (1926, dir. Vsevolod Pudovkin) were not allowed to be shown until the postwar period due to the state's censorship. Despite such limited access, prewar Japanese intellectuals became familiar with Soviet film practice through the translation of written accounts of it either by the directors mentioned above or by its foreign sympathizers like Léon Moussinac. For more on the Japanese reception of Soviet montage theory, see Yamamoto (2020).
8 8 Perhaps Imamura's negative comments here reflect his awareness of the development of the anti‐montage discourse in wartime Japan. For instance, around 1940, Imamura's fellow critic Sugiyama Heiichi harshly criticized Pudovkin's montage theory as an “escapist strategy” and in turn praised Jean Renoir and Yamanaka Sadao for their innovative use of long takes and deep focus. See Heiichi Sugiyama (1941).
9 9 As a filmmaker, Matsumoto is widely known for a series of experimental documentary films he made from the late 1950s to early 1960s, including The Weavers of Nishijin (Nishijin, 1961) and The Song of Stone (Ishi no uta, 1963). Hanada's influence on Matumoto's own writing is best represented in Matsumoto (2012 [1958]).