The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond: Let Cinema Speak 9781474211994, 9781441136978

Citation preview

If you can’t believe a little in what you see [and hear] on the screen, it’s not worth wasting your time on cinema. Serge Daney

RPiazza_Prelims_Final.indd v

11/10/2010 9:41:07 AM

RPiazza_Prelims_Final.indd vi

11/10/2010 9:41:07 AM

Acknowledgements

This volume is partly based on a second Ph.D. I completed a few years ago at the University of Sussex where I work; it was a project I had intended to engage in for a very long time and springs out of my two greatest interests, discourse and cinema. I am very grateful to my academic institution for generously supporting me. I want to thank Dan McIntyre for putting his trust in this project, inspiring me and acting as a friend to me, and Michaela Mahlberg for her support. Lynne Murphy, who was my dedicated Ph.D. supervisor, and all my past and present colleagues in the Linguistics and English Language group at Sussex University have been very supportive and helpful. My thanks go to them. Jacob Mey, Geoffrey Hall and Paul Simpson, who have published some of my work, have greatly contributed to improving the quality of this volume. Conversations with my colleague and friend Fabio Rossi helped me remain focused. I am also grateful to all those colleagues at the various conferences where I presented my work in progress, especially the latest IPrA in Melbourne, who volunteered comments and suggestions. Thanks to Daniele for his invaluable help with Photoshop, to Mattia and Gianluca, Madam Sawasdee and all my friends and loved ones whom I don’t need to list here.

RPiazza_Prelims_Final.indd x

11/10/2010 9:41:07 AM

Chapter One

Background and introduction

As early as in the 1930s with Gli uomini, che mascalzoni . . . (What Rascals Men Are! Camerini, 1932), Italian cinema tried to emancipate itself from the theatre and aimed for naturalness of spoken delivery. However, notwithstanding the serious attempts of Neorealism to create dialogic verisimilitude, only with such films as Il sorpasso (The Easy Life, 1962) by Dino Risi or Le mani sulla città (Hands over the City, 1963) by Francesco Rosi do Italian films for the first time start mirroring real-life talk and incorporating regional varieties. The late 1950s and early 1960s therefore mark the centrality of film talk and its relevance to film semiotic. This volume is a tribute to film fictional dialogue – one of the categories of dialogue identified by Bordwell and Thompson (2001) in addition to documentary, experimental and animated – and one of the first linguistic studies in this broad area. It aims to recognize the value of film discourse against the theoretical prejudice, which in Italy held till the 1960s, according to which words are an irrelevant and illegitimate component of films.

1.1 Background and aims of the study This book is an observation of how cinema – specifically although not exclusively Italian cinema – speaks. I have termed this ‘discourse’ not following Foucault precisely, although an echo of many of his views of communication as social practice undoubtedly informs this work, but in consideration of two separate dimensions that characterize the analytical approach of this volume: the discourse and conversation analysis dimension that considers talk in context, in use and as a socio-culturally determined practice; and the semiotic dimension

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 1

9/24/2010 2:18:04 PM

2

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

whereby discourse encompasses both the verbal and the visual planes. This linguistic study of cinema assigns priority to words but also closely observes how they interface with images. In addressing the complex issue of a definition of pragmatics and the ambit of its investigation, Mey (1993) claims that this discipline is ‘needed if we want a fuller, deeper and generally more reasonable account of human language behaviour’ (p. 7), because pragmatics can cater for unconventional or equivocal uses of language. An illustration is the following exchange (1) from one of the Italian Westerns under study in which Jill’s second turn and the bartender’s seventh create an ambiguity on which the hearer construes a pun revolving around the use of ‘water’, a term that appears very much out of context in the western world. As will be discussed at length in the course of the volume, through the dialogue characters display their identity and Jill, in this case, presents herself as a shrewd and rhetorically well equipped individual who can compete with men in a man-dominated reality. The bartender’s pun around water used to quench thirst (line 2) and water as used for washing (lines 4–7) is echoed by Jill’s other joke revolving around the ambiguity that the phrase ‘people bathing in the same water of a tub’ raised, which is interpretable as meaning ‘together’ or ‘one after the other’ (line 8). The exchange sets the context for the type of witty discourse produced in the world of Westerns and, together with elements of the mise-en-scène (her severe clothes and confident looks, her quick decision making on arrival at the station), characterize Jill as a fighter and survivor in that difficult world (see Figure 1.1). Excerpt (1) 1 Bartender Cosa posso fare per voi, Signora? 2 Jill Vorrei dell’acqua se non vi dispiace. 3 Bartender Dell’acqua? Vedete qui è dal diluvio universale che nessuno ha più voluto saperne dell’acqua. 4 Jill Così non vi lavate mai? 5 Bartender Certo che sì. 6 Jill Bene allora vorrà dire che mi laverò come vi lavate voi. 7 Bartender Ottima idea. Ho giusto una tinozza piena nel retro e siete fortunata, da stamattina ci hanno fatto il bagno solo in tre. 8 Jill Tutti insieme o uno dopo l’altro?

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 2

9/24/2010 2:18:04 PM

Background and Introduction

3

Figure 1.1 Jill and the Bartender in Once upon a Time in the West1

Translation (In this volume the translations, unless otherwise indicated, are mine.) 1 Bartender What can I do for you, Madam? 2 Jill I’d like some water, if you don’t mind. 3 Bartender Water? You see, since the Flood nobody has shown any interest in it. 4 Jill So you never wash yourself? 5 Bartender Of course I do. 6 Jill Fine, that means I’ll wash myself the way you wash yourself. 7 Bartender Excellent idea. I have a tub in the rear of the shop and you’re lucky: since this morning only three people have bathed in it. 8 Jill All together or one after the other? (Leone, 1968, C’era una volta il West – Once Upon a Time in the West) Mey proposes a broad view of what the study of ‘language in use’ involves and a distinction between ‘micropragmatics’ and ‘macropragmatics’. While the former deals with issues of reference, implicature and speech acts, the latter is the domain of conversation analysis, which he describes as the discourse analysis that is based on the

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 3

9/24/2010 2:18:04 PM

4

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

‘observation, gathering and analysis of large masses of data’ (1993: 195). The novelty of this view is that the study of any form of language in use and in context is unequivocally pragmatic. The approach of the present volume is very much in line with Jacob Mey’s interpretation of discourse in that the analysis of the films uses a variety of tools that pertain to the domains of both micro and macropragmatics and demonstrates how the two are in a continuous and constructive dialogue. The present exploration of film discourse also belongs to the broad and interdisciplinary domain of textual practices and semiotics. Films, and sequences, frames, and shots within them are interpretable as signs that are produced with a specific purpose and finality. The overhauling concern of this study is to follow how texts, and in particular films as specific texts, express meaning and how they construe realities. Texts, however, are socio-cultural artefacts. What characterizes the approach of this volume, therefore, is its emphasis on a semiotics of cinema that considers the socio-cultural material processes influencing and determining texts; in this way this study can be inscribed within the social semiotics approach advocated by Iedema (2004), Jewitt and Oyama (2004) among many others and following Hodge and Kress (1988), Lemke (1995) and Thibault (1997). Such an approach to communication and the expression of meaning is marked mainly by an interest in the study of non-verbal communication, although this is not the only element that features in social semiotics. More importantly, as Iedema points out, such an approach ‘is concerned with the political understandings, the reading positions and the practical possibilities which analysis makes available’ (2004: 186). We think of texts as generally coherent and cohesive segments of communication that reflect experience and that have a beginning, an end and an internal logic. Anything can be a text – from birthday cards, to service encounters at the library, advertising jingles but – and this dimension, stressed by Iedema, is particularly relevant to the discussion offered in this book – while a telephone call occurs in ‘real time’ and presents reality, film (and television) texts are re-presentations of our world. Such re-presentations reorganize time and space in their own creative way yet still in line with specific sociocultural conventions and a ‘media logic’ (Iedema, 2004: 187). The fiction films that this study observes, therefore, are examples of

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 4

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

Background and Introduction

5

representations of diegetic texts as opposed to mimetic texts in that they exhibit the time displacement, the event compression and expansion, the order reorganization that characterize re-presentations, especially fictional re-presentations. Against such a backdrop, the aim of this volume is the identification of patterns and traits of cinematic discourse in order to – echoing the title of a seminal paper on conversation analysis by Schegloff (1979) ‘The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation’ – start sketching a discourse ‘syntax’ of film. This analysis of cinematic discourse that engages primarily with the linguistic level of the represented interaction but also observes how words interface with some features of the mise-en-scène such as acting, setting and camera techniques is inherently qualitative; the patterns identified in the films under study are recurring and iterative, not occasional and isolated, and as such they are reported and explained in the discussion. Methodologically, this study ensures systematicity and transparency of data collection, selection and analysis by providing any existing evidence to support the identification of particular features and constituent elements in to which, in the course of the analysis, a text is broken (Bell, 2004: 15). Among the essential features of qualitative research, Flick (2006) lists the correct selection of appropriate methods and approaches, the variety of tools for the analysis, and, most importantly, the self-reflectivity of the researchers on their investigation ‘as part of the process of knowledge production’ (p. 14). The last of Flick’s points is very relevant to this study that unavoidably remains ‘an interpretative exercise’ (Iedema, 2004: 198) to which, as social semiotics acknowledges, the analyst is bound to bring his/her reading lens. Such an admission – I believe – adds systematicity (ibid.) to the study. To reject the presumption of an investigation able to unveil the unconditioned ‘truth’ about cinematic texts means to take into account the fact that analysts themselves, and not only the objects of their study, are the result of socio-cultural material processes. Jewitt and Oyama’s paper on social semiotics (2004: 134–5) usefully explains this point. These authors distinguish their approach from a Barthian semiotic methodology. While Barthes (e.g. 1964 and 1970) explores the cultural ‘codes’ that express meaning in a semiotic situation, Jewitt and Oyama refer to the semiotic modalities that are encountered in society, which they

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 5

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

6

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

define by the term ‘resources’, and investigate what rules have determined them, how they have come into being and how they might be changed. Although they refer specifically to visual meaning, Jewitt and Oyama admit that social semiotic analysis ‘attempts’ to describe ‘a field of potential meanings’ (ibid. 135) activated by the producers and viewers of images, and, in our case, of the listeners of film talk. The interpretative exercise that social semiotics proposes and in which it engages takes into account resources that are embedded in the specific culture observed. Chapter Five for instance studies discourse in Westerns and explores how the level of linguistic interaction indexes a particular semiotic use of camera movements that conveys different degrees of meaning. That analysis, however, is possible only against the backdrop of a consideration of the role of masculine identity in western society and the features associated with different expressions of masculinity (Holland et al. 1993; Kirkham and Thumin, 1993; Coates, 2003 among others) together with the knowledge of the history of Western as a genre and the change and evolution that have occurred over time to this type of cinema. The dialogue observed here is the intra-diegetic verbal interaction; this is the dialogue between the film characters that is produced within the on-screen space, different from the extra-diegetic speech, juxtaposed or added on to the narrative, as in the case of a voice-over narrator commenting off screen on the fictional reality of the film (e.g. Kozloff, 1988). This study identifies the diverse patterns of interactional discourse characteristic of various types of film and claims that a comprehensive definition of film semiotics cannot be based solely on narrative features and on the visual elements, but it also requires a consideration of film speech. Film dialogue is here approached from a particular angle, that of the representation of conflict; such a choice is motivated by the conviction that confrontational talk often highlights crucial moments in films. The representation of confrontational talk has been beneficial to this study in two respects: (i) it has provided a coherent way of looking at film discourse and coalesced the analysis by avoiding fragmentation and dispersion; (ii) by considering the multiple expressions of disagreement, it has made possible to expand the conceptualization of what the interactional process of confrontation means and involves.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 6

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

Background and Introduction

7

1.2 Relevance of dialogue in the context of a film From a theoretical perspective, this study is indebted to Bordwell’s cognitivist approach (1985), his belief in the viewers’ agency and concern with the strategies and procedures they follow in formulating hypotheses with regard to the films they watch on screen. Through a series of ‘schemata’ or cognitive arrangements (prototypical, template and procedural), spectators construct a story and a reality about a particular film and keep adjusting that vision as they receive more information. Bordwell conceptualizes the film–spectator interaction on various levels one of which is that based on the viewers’ previous knowledge and life experience according to which individuals watching a film identify scenes, situations and dialogues as in line with a particular narrative context (Ben-Shaul, 2007: 63). Although Bordwell mentions dialogue, his concern with this level of film semiotics is limited and his interests lie in the complex interplay of a variety of elements. This study, however, pursues Bordwell’s line of inquiry to an extent as it believes that spectators generate hypotheses about how characters speak in films and expect to hear a specific kind of interaction in particular settings. They go to the cinema with previous ideas about the words they will hear and develop cognitive strategies of interpretation on that basis. It is on this very basis that this study defends the relevance of film dialogue and proposes ways of characterizing it. The starting assumption is that cinematic language, not differently from real life, both ‘reflects’ and ‘constructs’ reality (Iedema et al., 1994: 4); in the fictional world of cinema characters use words to express their own interpretation of reality similar to what speakers do in an everyday situation. Dialogue, therefore, is an indispensable ingredient of a film narrative and an element that provides information about characters more than ‘any other manifestation of personality’ (Potter, 2001: 235). As Douchet (1998: 189) observes, if not the essence of cinema, dialogue is an indispensable element and what distinguishes good from bad films. Theater is text. Cinema uses dialogue. It is only one of the elements of film language, together with, but less important than, image and

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 7

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

8

sound. It provides a kind of insurance, functions as a discreet echo, a complement. Good dialogue resonates. Bad dialogue rationalizes; it shows off, makes itself the center of attention, obliterates everything on its path. The function of dialogue is often to frame the characters and set the narrative rolling. Potter (2001) observes that in fiction dialogue performs many more tasks than just communicating meaning and lists ten main functions2 the first and most important of which lies in ‘implying the psychological subtext’ (p. 237) of what a character said, that is what s/he wants, what is wanted of him/her and the nature of his/her relationship with the others. In one of the opening exchanges of Mimmo Calopresti’s (1998) La parola amore esiste (Notes of Love),3 presented below, the neurosis of Angela, the confused and selfobsessed female protagonist, is captured in a session with her psychoanalyst to whom she lists the strict rules that guide her compulsive behaviour. He listens attentively, occasionally latching on to her turns (Certo. E il rosso?/ ‘Of course. And red?’), with a touch of critical detachment in his voice suggested by the question in his third turn (line 4) and the parroting of Angela’s adverbial adjunct ‘obviously’. The dialogue introduces Angela to the viewers with the whole complexity of her emotional problems. Without such an initial exchange, we would be unable to position her as a neurotic self-absorbed woman vis-à-vis the other characters in the narrative. As for most excerpts in this study, the following scene (2) illustrates how dialogue functions within the film narrative. Excerpt (2) 1 Angela (. . .) Poi ci sono i numeri (. . .) Per me il 2 è solitudine, scissione e perciò anche l’11 non va bene perché è 1+1 che fa 2. Il 3 invece è amore, è un buon numero (. . .) ci sono i colori e io li devo ascoltare. 2 Psychoanalyst Cosa c’entrano i colori con i numeri? 3 Angela C’entrano. Il nero è . . . non va (. . .) Il bianco come ho detto è un buon colore. = 4 Psychoanalyst =Certo. E il rosso? 5 Angela E il rosso è amore ma ovviamente anche malattia.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 8

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

Background and Introduction

9

6 Psychoanalyst Ovviamente (. . .) Deve essere molto complicato tenere conto di tutte queste regole. 7 Angela No, anzi se devo essere sincera, non so neanche se voglio veramente liberarmene; mi aiutano a vedere meglio il mondo.4 Translation 1 Angela (. . .) Then there are the numbers (. . .) For me number 2 is solitude and separation, therefore 11 is not good either as it is 1+1 which equals 2. On the contrary 3 is love, it’s a good number. (. . .) there are also the colours and I have to follow them. 2 Psychoanalyst What have the colours got to do with the numbers? 3 Angela A lot. Black is . . . is no good (. . .) White, as I said, is a good colour = 4 Psychoanalyst = Of course. And red? 5 Angela Red is love but obviously also illness. 6 Psychoanalyst Obviously (. . .) It must be very complicated to keep track of all these rules. 7 Angela No, it isn’t, on the contrary, to be honest, I’m not even sure I really want to get rid of them. They help me see the world better. A scene like the one above illustrates the pivotal rather than ancillary role that dialogue plays in such an audiovisual medium as cinema. Yet, since its birth, cinema has been regarded primarily as a visual medium, while the verbal plane has been perceived as an element to withstand or, in the best of cases, something that adds extra colouring and flavour to what is narrated principally by visuals. Such a historical neglect for cinematic dialogue, which has influenced an academic disregard for this aspect of film (cf. Kozloff, 2000: 6, and in an Italian context Raffaelli 1992 and 1996), is the topic of this investigation. Simon (1977–78: 501), who insists on the ‘audiovisual’ nature of cinema, observes: [P]eople who ought to know better have viewed the spoken word in movies with suspicion, condescension, indeed hostility; while other people have been pleased to regard the film as an infant that has learned to talk in the natural process of growing older – what

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 9

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

10

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

the child is saying, however, as long as it makes rudimentary sense, is of no great importance. The theoretical commitment to a cinema solely of images can be traced back to such early film theorists as Arnheim, Eisenstein and Kracauer, Epstein and Germaine Dulac, for whom cinema was ‘a uniquely visual medium’ (Wees, 1984: 10) and who extolled the values of the visual element to the almost complete disregard of sound in cinema. Faulkner (1994) reminds us of the debate between opponents and proponents of film dialogue, ‘with the antagonists commanding a far larger press and far greater critical respect’ (p. 157). As cinema was born speechless, words have always been viewed as an unnecessary intrusion. Mamet, for instance, is reported by Kozloff (2000: 8) as having said: ‘Basically, the perfect movie doesn’t have any dialogue. So you should always be striving to make a silent movie.’ The aversion to words may have been justified in the foregone era of silent films, when words in inter-titles appeared as a redundant addition that interrupted the narrative flow of the images (Wees, 1984: 9). The anti-dialogue bias, however, is not limited to the transition from silent to sound cinema and things do not change much after 1927 when sound established itself as an integral part of film making (Aimeri and Frasca, 2002: 18). The critical ideological aversion to the language dimension of cinema may derive from the desire to distinguish it from such neighbouring art forms as theatre5. Sontag (1977) views cinema as essentially authentic and realistic in contrast to the pretense of theatrical performances in which everything revolves around dialogue: ‘Theatre deploys artifice while cinema is committed to reality’ (p. 78).6 Therefore, she fears that too much emphasis on verbal interaction would deprive the cinematic text of its specificity and associate it indiscriminately with stage drama. A similar view in an Italian context is expressed by Raffaelli (1992), who traces the interdependence and cross-fertilization of the language of theatre and cinema and advocates a truly linguistic approach, ‘a study that considers the characteristics and the mechanisms of that language, even in its relation to real-life use’ (‘uno studio che di quella lingua consideri le caratteristiche e il funzionamento, anche in rapporto all’uso reale’, 1992: 145).

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 10

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

Background and Introduction

11

Raffaelli concedes that the language of theatre is undeniably different from that of cinema. The former he sees as belonging to the category of ‘rehearsed spoken language’ (‘parlato recitato’), the latter to the category of ‘mechanically reproduced spoken language’ (‘parlato riprodotto meccanicamente)’ (1992: 152), as it is a scripted dialogue which undergoes modifications during editing and, on the phonic level, is artificially reproduced. The view that words are ancillary elements in films is not the only critical fallacy within a theoretical debate that seems to favour either the verbal or the visual front in an imbalanced way. By a similar token, the belief of some intellectuals in the superiority of the verbal oversimplifies the complexity of the issue and in some cases (e.g. Willemen, 1983) goes as far as to doubt the communicative potential of the visual by attributing all powers to the verbal.7 In defiance of these traditional views, linguistics and stylistics in particular have recently shown an interest in the study of film dialogue (Short 2007). However, although much scholarship in this area can be relevant to a linguistic stylistic analysis, McIntyre (2008: 312) notes that ‘neither Bordwell and Thompson’s book, Film Art (2001) nor Monaco’s otherwise exhaustive How to Read a Film (2000) make mention of character dialogue and its importance in film analysis’. An important contribution comes from Kozloff (2000), a scholar in an area other than linguistics proper, who shows an unprecedented sensitivity to linguistic issues and strongly advocates the study of film dialogue. In an Italian linguistic context, Rossi’s (1999 and 2006) and Cresti’s (1982) explorations of cinematic language provide an insight into the evolution of Italian as a national language and Pavesi’s study (2005) of the language of Italian dubbing of films in English is a contribution to translation studies and film language, while Piazza (2006 and 2007) proposes a pragmatic and genre-based look at cinematic discourse. The above are the few exceptions to a panorama of research that has prioritized images. The academic antipathy for words in films, Kozloff (2000: 13) suggests, can partly be interpreted in terms of an ideological attitude filtered through gender insofar as words are seen as female and therefore subordinate to the action-centred visual plane, which is perceived as superior because of its association with masculinity. Kozloff’s description of characters’ speech in a variety of

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 11

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

12

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

genres highlights significant stylistic patterns of various film discourses. She uses narrative and drama theory to reveal, for instance, that in gangster films dialogues have the function of ‘explaining causality, enacting narrative events, representing macho banter’ (2000: 231) or that films often show ‘women being silenced or ridiculed for blathering and illustrate male dominance either through impenetrable taciturnity or verbal bludgeoning’ (ibid.: 268). In consideration of its focus on the macropragmatic level, the present study is different from previous attempts to characterize the fictional dialogue of Italian cinema, which have generally described that language in lexical terms and, in most cases, used it as a resource for tracing the evolution of Italy’s national language and an indicator of the country’s cultural history (e.g. Raffaelli, 1992 and 1996; Ruffin and D’Agostino, 1997; Rossi, 1999).8 It also differs from recent very rewarding studies that compare TV fictional dialogue against corpora of authentic discourse (Bubel, 2006; Quaglio, 2009; Bednarek, 2010, to name a few). Rather closer to the methodology of this study are investigations in the adjoining area of dramatic discourse. An old study by Watzlawick et al. (1968) shows how the married couple in that play, Martha and George, argue relentlessly in a cooperative way by abiding by their own conversational rules and supporting each other’s verbal game; from a gender perspective, through the observation of patterns of turn-taking, Günsberg (1994) characterizes the language of male dominance in Pirandello’s Six Characters in Search of an Author, while Herman (1995)9 focuses on turn construction, order, distribution, length, sequencing, which is most revealing of the interpersonal dynamics between speakers in plays, and Mandala’s (2007) close analysis of four British ‘new wave’ plays similarly applies methodology and findings from the literature on real-life talk to dramatic discourse. In brief, the relevance of film dialogue has not yet been fully acknowledged, and, as Kozloff poignantly remarks, analysts tend to incorporate the information contained in the dialogue into the film narrative and overlook the role of talk in expressing meaning (or, in Kozloff’s words, in acting as a ‘signifier’, 2000: 6). It has been emphasized how the object of this study is ‘dialogue as discourse’ (Herman, 1995: 1), that is, speech considered as both

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 12

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

Background and Introduction

13

‘interactive and interactional’, insofar as it involves an exchange between two or more interlocutors, whose speech fulfils the ‘ideational’ function as it reflects and construes their interpretation of reality as well as the ‘interpersonal’ and ‘textual’ functions (Halliday, 1994). Kress and van Leeuwen (2007), according to whose model of multimodality visuals are analysed in this study, have reinterpreted the Hallidayan functions and conceived images as reflecting reality (the ‘ideational’ level for Halliday, or ‘representational’ for them), expressing a relationship between the subjects and the viewers (‘interpersonal’ or ‘interactive’ in their terminology) and ultimately producing a text (‘textual’ or ‘compositional’ function). It was discussed earlier how the social semiotic approach informs this analysis of cinematic discourse. Such a perspective on textuality is in line with Kress and van Leeuwen’s approach to multimodality in that both view discourse (be it verbal or visual) as socially and culturally determined and as resulting from the material processes within the society that produced a specific cinema. This study of the scripted fictional dialogue of Italian films is a contribution to the research on linguistic stylistics of cinema that takes into account notions pertaining to the discipline of film studies as in the case of ‘genre’ in the first part of this volume. The research on real-life talk is the main reference for this study of fictional discourse which presupposes that film does not depart too much from real life conversation, although a comparison between the two will show a ‘flat, rambling quality about [real conversation], whereas good screenplay dialogue will be performing so many different functions (. . .) that it appears more lifelike than real life’ (Potter, 2001: 236). Linguists have taken opposed views vis-à-vis this topic. As was pointed out earlier, in an English-speaking context (Abercrombie, 1965 and Goffman, 1986 for instance) linguists have dismissed the authenticity of scripted dialogue. Similarly, in an Italian context, Mamone (1992) agrees with Cresti (1982)10 that dramatic and cinematic dialogue belongs to the area of written texts, although it has the curious characteristic of wanting to appear spoken.11 Contrary to such views, however, other studies insist on the similarities between the dialogue of film, but also theatre and fiction, and everyday talk along the lines of Pratt’s (1977) pioneering work,

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 13

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

14

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

which approaches literary discourse from a speech-act perspective and insists on the comparability of fictional and real-life talk on the basis of the generic pragmatic rules that underlie both. Burton (1980) admits the authentic touch of some theatrical dialogues, while Tannen (1989) compares the phonic and lexical repetition in a play by Glen Merzer with segments of naturally occurring conversation. Jones (1996) shows the naturalness of the dialogues in Woody Allen’s Husbands and Wives by comparing the director’s use of repetition in that film with forms of reiteration in real-life speech although his conclusion is that ‘the script of Husbands and Wives exaggerates linguistic reality’ (p. 46). In discussing dramatic discourse, another form of fictional dialogue close to film discourse, Herman (1995) remarks that these real-life and theatre discourses ‘share areas of commonality in being speech exchange systems, which sets them apart from poetic genres like the ode or the lyric, or narrator language in the novel’ (p. 4). By treating the linguistic research on natural conversation as the background against which the dialogue of films is measured, however, this study does not intend to argue in favour of a close similarity between authentic and fictional dialogue. Film dialogue is other than real-life talk, it is scripted and represented fictional discourse that needs to be investigated in its own terms. It can be defined as an ‘acted spoken discourse’ (‘parlato-recitato’, Nencioni, 1976), created to sound as spoken not written language (Gregory, 1967). Murphey (1978: 226, in Pavesi, 2005: 10) concedes that sociolinguistic intuitions (rather than research) lie at the basis of film dialogue but suggests that films often provide useful insight into those mechanics of real-life interaction that sociolinguists investigate. This study therefore assumes that real-life discourse is to an extent the template on which basis film as a particular type of fictional discourse is modelled and it is on these grounds that the analysis carried out on the films references the literature on discourse in every day life. However, in many cases fictional language that departs from authentic dialogue as in the case of science fiction, horror films or, in this volume, Westerns, is considered in its own right as a specific manifestation of discourse. In conclusion, this volume on film discourse proposes an unprecedented approach that can be characterized as macropragmatic

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 14

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

Background and Introduction

15

within a social semiotics framework, which views semiotic manifestations (linguistic and visual) as reflecting the socio-cultural material processes within a given nation. Although focusing mainly on the observation of the verbal plane, this investigation of film does not overlook how words interface with the level of images. In the next section it will be shown how the investigation of film discourse is organized in the study.

1.3 The organization of the study and core notions 1.3.1 The genre approach: the notion of genre Following Kozloff (2000) and Günsberg (2005), the first part of this study takes a genre perspective and characterizes the different interactive styles that can be indexed to comedy, melodrama and Western films. Genre is an organizing criterion that allows the systematization of a cinematic object that would otherwise be an uncontrollable magma in its diversity (Aimeri and Frasca, 2002: 30). Genres are the set of patterns, forms, styles and narrative structures that characterize a number of films, ‘transcend individual art products’ and regulate the artist’s construction as well as the spectators’ reception (Ryall, 1975: 28). Film genre lies at the intersection of production, marketing and consumption and films are inseparable from their marketing strategies, which assign them to a specific genre and direct their audience reception; genre, therefore, ‘refers to the role of specific institutional discourses that feed into and form generic structures’ (Hayward, 2000: 166). Genres frame and interpret any work of art. With regard to film, they ‘consist of specific systems of expectation and hypothesis which spectators bring with them to the cinema and which interact with films themselves during the course of the viewing process’ (Neale, 2000: 31). Genres reaffirm social and cultural values (Bordwell and Thompson, 2001: 99) and viewers expect films to conform to specific conventions, on the planes of ‘plot, thematic development, film techniques and iconography’ (O’Halloran, 2004: 116), or the visual motifs, the setting and the context in which characters move. Some films can be immediately identified by virtue of

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 15

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

16

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

their iconographic features or recurrent images as for Westerns, for example, in which cowboys ‘external paraphernalia of masculinity (guns, boots, spurs, dusters, cigars, horses) acquires extraordinary significance over and in excess of narrative requirements’ (Günsberg, 2005: 182). In some films iconography is accompanied by a ‘determined space’ as again in the case of the Western, gangster or detective films, in which ‘an individual or collective hero’ enters the ‘iconographic arena (. . .) at the outset (. . .) acts upon it, and finally leaves’ (Schatz, 1981: 27). Other genres, instead, have a more undetermined space as in social melodrama, musical or screwball comedy. Non-conformity to generic canons can at times cause the failure of a film or make it into a cult movie. In the past two decades, with such authors as Laura Mulvey on melodrama (1974 and 1977/8), Schatz (1981), Neale (1983), Andrew (1984) and Altman with his work on the musical (1981 and 1989), film theory has developed as a tool for understanding popular cinema, complementing and counterbalancing the other form of film study, that is, the auteur approach, ‘designed to reconsider those Hollywood directors who, despite the constraints of the studio system, were able to instil a personal style into their work’ (Schatz, 1981: 8).12 Generally critics agree that classifications of film types ‘provide the formulas that drive production; genres constitute the structures that define individual texts; programming decisions are based primarily on generic criteria; the interpretation of generic films depends directly on the audience’s generic expectations’ (Altman, 2006: 14). While in the past genres simply worked as guidelines for production, as the cinema industry developed, producers and directors understood the audiences’ need to identify themselves in easily accessible film mechanisms based on repetitive narrative patterns that would still ensure the impression of novelty (Aimeri and Frasca, 2002: 12). Ryall’s (1978) contribution represents a turning point in genre criticism, which ‘emphasises the network of rules, the norms of style, form, content of which the individual art product is part, and the guiding force for that network for the artist(s) who produce the individual art product, and for the audiences who “read” it’ (p. 3). Genres organize the work of an artist, guide the comprehension of his/her work by the audience, and, through the conventions that

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 16

9/24/2010 2:18:05 PM

Background and Introduction

17

regulate the genre, reflect, in a mediated and indirect way, social reality (p. 5); genres, however, are not pre-existing the public’s expectations but are ‘a site of struggle and co-operation among multiple users’ (Altman, 2006: 211).

1.3.1.1 Italian genres In the Italian film industry, genres are often associated with popular cinema and distinguished from the auteur production.13 As the object of the first part of this study is the discourse of comedy, melodrama and Westerns, a few words of introduction can be useful to contextualize the analysis. Comedy, the first genre considered in this book, is organized around the concepts of space and time and has a heavily narrative structure (Aimeri and Frasca, 2002: 210). Coming out of the ‘ethical tradition of realism’14 and always attentive to the mechanisms of popular language (Viganò, 1995: 15), comedies ‘have always been a staple of Italian film production, their success indicating that varieties of Italian humour touch deep chords in the national psyche’ (Wood, 2005: 43). Under Fascism comedy was, together with melodrama, the main expression of Italian cinema. After the liberation though, American comedies were imported in great numbers into the country and met with much success as Italians felt they could no longer identify with the topics of class conflict of fascist films (Wood, 2005: 45). During the 1950s popular romantic comedies (e.g. Luigi Comencini’s Pane, amore e fantasia – Bread, Love and Dreams 1954) reflected the Italian aspiration to social democracy and integration. During its golden age in the mid-1960s the commedia all’italiana, or Italian-style comedy, was the vehicle for political and social criticism (e.g. Vittorio De Sica’s Matrimonio all’Italiana – Marriage Italian Style – 1964, or Pietro Germi’s Sedotta e abbandonata – Seduced and Abandoned – 1962, both mocking the Italian patriarchalism at the time of the Marshall plan induced economic boom or ‘miracolo economico’ of the 1960s). In melodrama, ‘stories of dramatic events are staged with maximum attention to the emotional charge’ (Wood, 2005: 3). The attention to melodrama as a genre per se started in the mid-1970s with the

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 17

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

18

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

critical work of Laura Mulvey on Fassinder’s cinema (1974 and 1977/8). Melodrama covers multiple cinematic expressions from crime to maternal or psychological melodrama and tends to focus on the construction of the female subject in a context entirely determined by patriarchal and capitalist structures. Günsberg’s (2005) recent work, for instance, identifies in the 1949–55 melodrama the intention to fixate femininity within the domestic sphere in response to the threat that new emerging female sexuality posed to the traditional family in those years (2005: 19–59). Recent Italian melodrama is often associated with female auteurs, such as Francesca Archibugi or Cristina Comencini, who share an interest in exploring the variegated meanings and realities of being a woman in today’s Italian society, although, if viewed as a broad container, melodrama can be identified in a huge number of expressions. The last genre explored in this study is the Italian Western or ‘spaghetti Western’, as it was dismissively referred to on its appearance in the 1960s. The germination of the spaghetti Western from the American Western is beyond doubt, although Brunetta (2001: 399) remarks that the Italian Westerns are devoid of the sacred spirit of the American myth and Leone’s sole interest in American history is in the ‘circular and recursive nature of myths in general’ (p. 399). The Italian Western forever transformed its American classic counterpart established by John Ford and Howard Hawks. The violence of the Italian Western became an established norm together with the dusty unshaven appearance of the main characters and their supporting cast. The stress on American landscape, which in Ford’s films had conjured up the difficulty of the task of taming the wild Indians, was in the Italian Westerns replaced by the presence of ‘male characters (. . .) usually presented at narrative conjunctures where they have become unfettered from the ties of convention and community’ (Wood, 2005: 55). Portrayed as marginal and outcast, Italian cowboys exacerbate the trope of the solitary male and ‘represent a step into the void of post-patriarchal society’ (Wood, 2005). While the Italian Western preserves the American focus on clothing and masculine paraphernalia from boots to dusters and guns, parody becomes a key of the Italianized Western and ‘masculinity takes on a highly stylized aspect that can be read in terms of masquerade, with all the implications of gender as performance’ (Günsberg, 2005: 182).

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 18

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

Background and Introduction

19

In conclusion, the first part of the book considers film discourse from a genre perspective and demonstrates that a complete definition of genre must incorporate a consideration of the verbal plane. The second part on the contrary shows a thematic approach.

1.3.2 The thematic approach: the notion of identity Although introduced in the mid-1960s and early 1970s (Cook and Bernink, 2000: 137), genre has become a very central notion to any consideration of cinema regardless of the particular approach taken. However this notion still pertains to the specific domain of film studies and it was felt that, in addition to the first part of the analysis, this investigation of film discourse would benefit from taking a different perspective that can lend itself more naturally to a linguistic analysis. The second part of this volume therefore looks at themes, in particular identity, in its interaction with self-narrative and the representation of self versus other. In this case a double analogy is established between the fictional dialogue of film and real-life discourse as has been discussed, and between fictional characters and subjects in the real world. Bennison (2004: 67–8) quotes William Downes establishing equivalence between real and stage people: A real person is a theoretical entity for his interpreters, to which they assign those intentions that make sense of what he does. A character in drama is an analogy of a person and is interpreted in the same way. To an extent the second section of this volume starts from the same premise. Characters as they present themselves to their interlocutors and the audience are very much like real people whose identity is a reflection of their discourse and the discourse of others. Identity is viewed as a public phenomenon, a performance or construction that is interpreted by other people. This construction takes place in discourse and other social and embodied conduct, such as how we move, where we are, what we wear, what we talk and so on. (Benwell and Stokoe, 2006: 4)

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 19

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

20

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Seen from this perspective, identity is a continually changing phenomenon rather than a pre-discursive stable manifestation. Similar to what happens in real life, a character in a play or film can be seen as performing and projecting a particular identity or identities that are expressed through patterns identifiable on the verbal and visual planes. As we are still operating within the realm of re-presentations in terms of the reproduction of discourse in a fictional context, this investigation of identity in film takes into account the way characters’ identity is portrayed on screen. The theme of identity is intertwined with the issues of characterization and point of view in fictional work (Simpson, 1993, among many others); hence, it is close to a more linguistic or broadly speaking stylistic dimension, away from a purely film studies perspective. The line of inquiry in this second part of the volume is the same as in the first part in that the methodological framework for the expression of identity as a social and discursive process in film is based on the research on real life. Equally the thrust of the study, that is the observation of the different modalities of conflict representation in film, is still the object of the investigation. Confrontation, whether indirect and metaphorical as in the case of Antonioni’s film, or blatant and increasingly violent as in Melliti’s film, is an essential element that contributes to the definition of a character’s identity, be they female narrators revisiting their past as in the former case or male friends turned antagonists in the latter.

1.4 Organization of the study Starting from the contention that discourse is an essential part of film semiotics, this study of the discourse of Italian cinema identifies some of the speech conventions of various film types in it. The initial analysis in Chapters Four and Five responds to Neale’s (2000) call to broaden the accounts of genres, and is devoted to comedy, melodrama and Western with the purpose of showing that different discourse styles are indexed to specific film types. The two following Chapters Six and Seven explore film discourse in relation to the theme of identity as it develops through self narrative in one case and face-to-face interaction in the other.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 20

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

Background and Introduction

21

For the first part, well-known films belonging to three genres have been selected for the analysis. In the case of comedy and melodrama, the choice includes ten films, five for each genre that, starting from the 1960s when the Italian style comedy establishes itself as a successful genre, span to modern day cinema. The selection of films was unavoidably subjective although the analysis concerns a considerable section of the Italian national cinema. This has been considered to be a sufficient measure as this linguistic study is not primarily concerned with issues of cinematic representativeness but with the identification of general discursive patterns in a sample of films across time. The Western film has been chosen as an uncontentious genre not ‘devoid of artistic content’ (Günsberg, 2005: 17–18) and expressing Leone’s auteur figure. The main 1960s films by this author are compared with American Westerns produced in the same period by Hawks, Hathaway and Ford. The rationale for the comparative analysis is the mutual indebtedness of the two versions of Westerns: in the 1960s Leone reinterpreted the original American frontier myth at a time when the Western genre had started its descent; however, his production triggered an American response to the new Italian cowboy films in the form of the films explored in the chapter. The second part of the analysis offers two case studies and explores the theme of identity in them. Chapter 6 analyses a 1953 short film by Antonioni as an example of cinema veritè or mimetic film that revives the Neorealism of the post-war period. Centred on the idea of the self-narrative, Tentato suicidio (When Love Fails) focuses on women who narrate their suicide attempt to an interviewer. Issues of identity and self-representation are central to this film and make it the first part of an exploration of the representation of this discourse. The theme of self and other representation viewed as an intrinsically dynamic process that undergoes continuous re-evaluation is further explored in Chapter Seven that proposes the reflection on Io, l’altro (Me, the Other) by Mohsen Melliti. While the first film is by an Italian auteur, the second is the work of a diaspora director from Tunisia. The examination of selected Italian genres and the choice of a theme treated in different ways in the two final films demonstrate the important contribution that dialogue can offer to an interpretation of film semiotics.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 21

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

22

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

The specific research focus of this study is the investigation of conflict discourse as the lens through which all the films selected are examined and interpreted. Narratively, stories are not conceivable without some form of conflict, to the extent that, at least in the Russian Formalist tradition (Greimas, 1966 and Propp, 1968), narratives are seen as evolving from the emergence of a disruption in the established order to a final resolution. On the plane of words, verbal confrontation reflects at least in part the tensions and conflicts on the narrative plane and thus provides a key to the understanding of film structure. As Herman argues with reference to the language of theatre, ‘[c]onflict situations have high dramatic value since they are productive of tension and generate suspense and involvement of the audience in outcomes’ (1995: 137). Moments of dialogue tension frequently mark very meaningful segments in a film (as in a play), which shed light on the entire cinematic text. Conflict also offers the opportunity to bring to the centre stage the relationship between characters in a film with the result, at times, of re-focusing the entire film narrative. The attention of this study is primarily devoted to dialogue as a generally overlooked element that contributes an important part to the comprehension of films. However, its relation to images is fully recognized and is indeed explored in Chapter Two, where the role of the various aspects of the mise-en-scène is considered in its accompaniment to the verbal plane. The book consists of a first theoretical part followed by two analytical sections. Chapter Two opens the observation of cinematic discourse by proposing a reflection on its interconnection with the plane of images. First it traces the critical debate and the reasons behind the aversion towards words in film. Then it proposes that the interface between words and images assumes and, at the same time, encourages a number of different reception roles on the part of the audience, which range from passive outsiders to more participative bystanders or overhearers. The various forms of such interface are illustrated with a series of excerpts and the aim of the chapter is to propose a framework for the interpretation of the visual and verbal interplay that informs the film analysis together with the approach to multimodality.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 22

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

Background and Introduction

23

Chapter Three sets the methodological frame of conflict for the study and reviews the relevant research on verbal confrontation. It presents the model of verbal conflict on which the study is based and discusses how the multiple facets of confrontation that the various films exhibit can be recomposed in a cohesive whole. The chapter finally presents the data and explains how they were collected and transcribed. Chapters Four and Five contain the analysis of talk in three film genres and follow how conflict and other facets of speech develop in and characterize various cinematic types. Chapter Four is a comparative study of comedy and melodrama from 1960s to the present. The conversation analysis approach focusing on the notion of adjacency pairs, action-opposition sequences, repair-turns, together with the ample use of impoliteness that is adopted for the representation of verbal disputes in comedy, reveals the relatively simplistic pattern with which scriptwriters often choose to reproduce disagreement in those films. Contrariwise in melodrama, verbal confrontation is represented characteristically not as an open and direct argument as often is in comedy but as ‘interactional dysfluency’ (Blum-Kulka et al., 2002), or as a break in the dialogic flow produced by an infringement of the rules that govern conversational exchanges in real life. The continuous rebutting of speakers’ turns, the unmarked feature of conflict in comedy, is replaced in this genre by other discursive devices that work as dysfunctional responses to confrontational moves and fulfil a non-cooperative and dissociative function within the dialogue. Chapter Six is a study of Sergio Leone’s spaghetti Westerns and some contemporary American Westerns. In the masculine speech produced by cowboys conflict is presented as a distant critical echoing of other texts. Cowboys confront each other not only with Winchesters and pistols in heroic duels but also by repeating in a polemical and dismissive way their opponents’ discourse. The adoption of a pragmatic interpretation of irony as a dissociative rhetorical strategy ‘primarily designed to ridicule the opinion echoed’ (Sperber and Wilson, 1986: 241) aptly illustrates how the confrontation between the good and the bad cowboys is shaped in the two sets of films and points out the similarities and differences between them.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 23

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

24

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

In Chapters Six and Seven the focus changes from genre to the theme of identity and both chapters explore how in film characters project their identity through discourse. Chapter Six addresses identity in its interaction with female self-narrative. Through the account of a personal dramatic experience five women define themselves in terms that show greater or lesser self-awareness and agency. The topic of conflict that informs the volume acquires in this chapter a metaphorical dimension insomuch as the five women are portrayed as interacting with an interviewer and a voice-over who attempt to manage their stories and consequently appear to be struggling to appropriate their own narratives. In Chapter Seven conflict instead has a centre-stage role and at first humorously and then dramatically informs the entire exchange between the two protagonists. In this final chapter the characters’ identity is represented discursively as continuously changing together with an unstable conceptualization of otherness and alterity. The conclusions, in Chapter Eight, return to the original research question of the study and propose an integrated discussion of the findings. They also discuss in a conclusive way the volume’s contributions to the area of linguistic stylistics and pragmatics and its relevance to the domain of film studies. The present study of the representation of discourse in film, therefore, is a macro and micro investigation of cinematic language from the point of view of interactional conflict. It investigates discourse in films in order to re-approach the concept of film genre, which was first introduced by Bazin in the 1950s to define Westerns and became established during the 1960s as a key notion in English-speaking cinema theory. It also shows how film discourse is the means for the investigation of particular topics as in the case of identity through self-narrative or face-to-face interaction. The focus on confrontational talk, while highlighting crucial moments in a film narrative, proves to be a rewarding tool for the characterization of film discourse in a variety of genres and specific cases. Features of the films’ mise-en-scène are observed and are an integral part of the study; attention is paid to the interface between the visual and the verbal discourses and through a multimodal analysis and a consideration of the various roles that are performed by the viewers in the process of film comprehension.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 24

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

Background and Introduction

25

Transcription symbols (. . .) indicates text left out. For easy reference, in most excerpts lines are numbered. (text) unsure transcription. + indicates pause and (0.2) indicates the length of a pause. Text: indicates stretched vowels. Tex- indicates self-interruption. Punctuation reflects intonation (including suspension marks indicating a slightly raised intonation in final utterance position). ↑ indicates marked rising intonation as opposed to marked falling intonation ↓ [Text] non-verbal information. = indicates latching between turns. [ indicates interrupted turns. Relevant items in the excerpts are highlighted in bold.

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 25

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

RPiazza_01_Final.indd 26

9/24/2010 2:18:06 PM

Chapter Two

‘If you could say it with words, there’d be no reason to paint’. The verbal–visual interrelation in cinema

2.1 Introduction As was discussed earlier, the thrust of this study is the conviction that talk in cinema is not an ancillary element juxtaposed with images; words interact in a complex manner with the visual plane and in so doing they contribute to an overall discursive structure, the individual parts of which cannot be separated out or isolated. Wagstaff (1996) reflects on the structured and complex nature of films: ‘Films are not audio-visual recordings of reality; they are structured discourses which use a careful selection of images and sounds to convey a narrative, evoke a response, and encode a message’ (p. 222). In this study of the function of dialogue in Italian films my purpose is to revalue the verbal discourse of cinema and propose an initial characterization of it by centring on the representation of confrontation. Before moving to the discussion of how confrontational interaction is represented in different films, this chapter proposes a preliminary reflection on the broad topic of the verbal–visual interrelation and complementariness in cinema. This semiotic discussion focuses on the verbal–visual interplay in its relation to the audience, and sets the general framework that informs the subsequent analysis, although other more detailed parameters for the investigation of the linguistic and visual planes are presented later in the methodology chapter. Starting from this premise, this chapter pursues two objectives: (i) it briefly traces the history of the conflicting relation between the verbal and visual language in cinema, as a form of visual art;

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 27

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

28

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

(ii) it proposes a set of categories describing the visual and verbal interaction in relation to the audience.

2.2 Methodology for the investigation of the verbal–visual interaction The consideration of the role of the dialogue vis-à-vis images in films belongs to a broader debate on the verbal–visual intersection in a number of contexts, beyond cinema. Morley (2003) investigates the writing–drawing relation in modern art. The complementariness between photographs and texts, the functional relation between a picture and its caption or phototext is the topic of Hunter’s volume (1987), which investigates the possibility of coherent and synchronous relations between photographic and literary styles in the twentieth century and establishes correspondences between some writers’ styles and some forms of photography. The attitude to images and words in pictorial disciplines provides a suitable context for the present discussion, in spite of the obvious differences that an audiovisual medium like cinema, rather than a predominantly visual one, involves. Similar to the word–image debate in the visual arts, the verbal–visual debate in cinema has developed along lines that exclude one or the other of these two levels alternately. During the past twenty years, in conjunction with a growing novel interest in the study of dialogue in films, there has been, as Wees (1984) attests, ‘a revitalization of the interest, both practically and theoretically, in the relationship between images and words’ (p. 11), exemplified by an incisive entrance of verbal language into films by a large number of avant-garde filmmakers. For example, the summer 1981 issue of the journal October, edited by Wees and Dorland (1984), was devoted to the verbal–visual theme in cinema, which is the subject of many of the collected essays. Such directors as Michael Snow (Presents, or So Is This), Marguerite Duras (La Jetée), or Syberberg (Ludwig, requiem pour un roi vierge and Hitler, un film d’Allemagne) (Larouch, 1984) have started a new trend of young ‘cinéastes du texte’ who recognize the importance of words and investigate enthusiastically their potentials by introducing verbal texts in their films

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 28

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

29

with which they engage on the visual and sound level. Although it can be argued that in some of these experimental films the verbal tends to become a substitute for the visual, the emergence of such a new interpretation of cinema challenges the old belief expressed by Arnheim (1966: 124 quoted in Wees, 1984: 11), among others, that film is purely visual and encourages instead the view that the domain of film studies is what can be both heard and seen on the screen (Wees, 1984: 17). The verbal and the visual dimensions support each other in complex ways that require the viewers’ various participation roles. As Kozloff (2000: 15–16) notes, ‘[f]ilm dialogue has been purposely designed for the viewers to overhear so that we can draw the best hypotheses, but films disguise the extent to which the words are truly meant for the off-screen listener. Part of the film-going suspension of disbelief is to collaborate in this fiction.’ The verbal–visual relationship in cinema can be viewed in terms of the presence or absence of synchrony between images and words that is in terms of time of appearance on the screen and place in the film narrative and symmetry of the topic covered by images and words. This subject has been primarily the concern of media studies, mainly with regard to television news. Hobbs (1985), for instance, in studying the impact of TV information on viewers, presented two different versions of the same news programme to a set of spectators – the synchronous version containing images that matched the content of the verbal messages, and the non-synchronous version exhibiting a lack of fit between the content of the images and the words. Better comprehension scores were obtained when viewers were exposed to the synchronous manner of presentation. Among the few recent studies in this area,1 Lipson (2008) investigates the interrelation between images and verbal messages in the 2003 Iraq war news reporting and highlights how, through the choice of accompanying visuals, television reporters convey their vision of the world and express their stance vis-à-vis the object of their reportage. Meinhof (1994) argues that the verbal–visual relationship needs to be made explicit.2 With reference to the synchronous (or contentmatching) and non-synchronous (or content not-matching) link between words and images in televised news, this author lists three

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 29

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

30

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

different categories of such an interrelation: overlap, displacement and dichotomy. In overlap, ‘film footage and the text share the same action component’ (p. 216) and the two planes of verbal and visual texts perfectly coincide. When covering the phenomenon of flooding in parts of Britain, for instance, a reporter may show incessant rainfalls and the presence of water inside people’s homes. Overlap, that characterizes studio announcements at the beginning of a news story, can also be ‘direct or metonymic, as in a flag or map representing a country’ (ibid.). Displacement, on the contrary, involves a gap between the two planes, which widens even more in the case of dichotomy, to the point that, in this last instance, the relation may seem non-existing. To explain displacement, Meinhof (1994: 216) cites the example of the news on a 1988 Spanish air traffic controllers’ strike (the actors and event) illustrated by images of hordes of distraught passengers waiting in airport lounges at Gatwick airport, as a consequence of the industrial action. Dichotomy instead can be exemplified by the verbal report on the news of suicide bombers in Baghdad accompanied by general views of street in that city, not directly related to the incident. Meinhof’s categories are a useful starting point for analysing the verbal–visual interrelation in terms of the presence or absence of time and content synchrony between the visual and the verbal. Obvious differences, however, exist between the discourse of news programmes and that of cinema. In the discourse of cinema, for instance, many are the cases in which the two planes of words and images appear separated and self-sufficient, hence non-synchronous. As a way of exemplification, in Cavani’s Portiere di notte (Night Porter, 1974), the Nazi’s long-buried memories of his love affair with a woman captive in the concentration camp are exclusively visual possibly to suggest the man’s disquieting emotional attachment to his past and offer this essential information to the viewers. On the contrary, the recent recollection of his murder of a potential informant, being the ex-Nazi’s cold decision, is recounted only verbally with a close shot on him and the last incredulous cry of his victim in the background. Outside the realm of Italian cinema, in Anne Fontaine’s Nathalie (2003), a prostitute is commissioned by a suspicious wife to uncover the truth about her husband’s adulterous life. The prostitute’s reporting to Catherine about her alleged secret encounters with her

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 30

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

31

husband, nearly entirely verbal, creates an additional narrative level within the story, which establishes a divide between reality and fantasy and in the end reveals Nathalie’s deception. The aim of this discussion, however, is to reflect on those cases in which the verbal and visual levels intersect in a deliberately complex, (non-)synchronous relation. The categorization of types of possible permutations between the two planes also takes into account the notion of spectatorship and the audience’s expected reception and interpretation of the visual–verbal interplay. Levinson (1988) rereads Goffman’s original work (1981) on participation framework and production roles, which distinguished different speaker roles in social encounters and observed that, when communicating, we change our ‘footing’, that is the attitude or ‘alignment we take up to ourselves and the others present as expressed in the way we manage the production & reception of an utterance’ (1981: 126). Levinson’s consideration of reception roles, although devised for the interpretation of social encounters and not for the specific domain of film semiotics, is relevant to this investigation and his conceptualization of reception modalities can help categorize the different personae that the viewers come to interpret while watching a film. Levinson problematizes Goffman’s categories of participation in talk and his resulting model includes production and reception roles in which a range of variables, for example ‘the motive’ or ‘message origin’ (in the case of production roles), determine a switch in footing or participant’s role. With regard to the plane of reception, which is of most interest to the present discussion, Levinson distinguishes between ‘participant’ and ‘non-participant’ within which he identifies various roles (for instance, interlocutor or audience for the participant roles, and overhearer or targeted overhearer for the non-participant) depending on which of the variables, for example, address, recipient, participant and channel-link (in terms of ‘ability to receive the message’) the focus lies on. Levinson’s model smoothly lends itself to the analysis of communication in films. Given that they are not explicitly called upon verbally,3 film spectators typically have a ‘non-participant reception role’ (Levinson, 1988). However, if consideration is given to the different degrees of information that are either deliberately transmitted to the

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 31

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

32

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond Table 2.1 Audience’s non-participant roles

Overhearers Targeted overhearers Undisclosed intermediaries

Address

Recipient

Participant

– – +

– + +

– – –

viewers or, alternatively, casually leaked to them, it is possible to imagine a number of non-participant roles resulting from the possible permutations between Levinson’s labels, that is, ‘address’ (as the direct and explicit call on to an interlocutor), ‘recipient’, ‘participant’ and ‘channel-link’ (as the communication channel), and which here have been organized in a slightly modified model. Although this will become clearer with the elucidation of the various film sequences, what is shown in Table 2.1 is the summary of the possible combinations between the relevant elements in the interaction, which determine the three main characterizations of non-participant roles discussed in this chapter.4 The first non-participant role of ‘overhearers’ (Levinson’s 1988 term) is the most passive one, requiring minimal cognitive intervention from the spectators in terms of the comprehension process activated by the verbal–visual intersection. The second category of ‘targetted overhearers’ (another of Levinson’s terms) assigns the role of recipients to the audience, although a verbal indication that viewers are the addressees of the semiotic operation is inevitably absent. I have labelled the last category, comparatively the most engaging for spectators, ‘undisclosed intermediaries’. The term ‘intermediary’ was borrowed from Levinson’s list of ‘participant roles’ to refer to the involvement of the viewers who in this case have much greater agency as they are called to assess what they see on the screen, and the term ‘undisclosed’ was chosen to reflect their inevitable status as onlookers. The variable of the presence or absence of synchrony, as well as the particular non-participant roles, determine a basic typology comprising different permutations of the verbal–visual intersection which are illustrated with a number of film sequences. The different ways in which words and images complement each other rely on different participation modes on the part of the spectators, who can be treated as having more or less agency in the comprehension process. The

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 32

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

33

category of verbal–visual correspondence, in which the two planes amicably support each other, is not directly within the remit of this reflection. It can be illustrated, for example, in Visconti’s La terra trema (The Earth Trembles, 1948) by the voice-over narration (Piazza, 2004) describing the fishermen’s family waking up (‘A quest’ora, prima di giorno, la casa si sveglia’/ ‘At this time, at dawn, the household wakes up’5) as we see the women of the Valastro family engaging in their daily chores. The other three categories, which, instead, express a complex and non-straightforward complementariness between words and images, are anticipation, post-hoc commentary and conflictuality and are discussed in the next section. The model proposed in this chapter takes into account Bubel’s (2006 and 2008) study of television and film audiences, inspired by Goffman’s research (1976, 1979). To explain the complex nature of screen discourse, Bubel reviews the notion of embeddedness by Short (1981, 1989, 1994) and Clark (1996) that corresponds to the presence of various layers of communication inherent in discourse. She then designs an audience-centred model of screen discourse that has its core in the interpretation of ‘overhearers’ both in real conversation and in cinema/television as ‘unratified participants’ who have no ‘conversational rights or responsibilities’ (2008: 64). Bubel elaborates on this concept and illustrates the choice of Clark and Schaefer’s (1992) four options open to overhearers: ‘indifference’, in the case in which overhearers are ignored, ‘disclosure’, when a speaker wants the overhearers to gather some information, ‘concealment’, the opposite case of information being withheld from overhearers, and ‘disguisement’, when overhearers are given the wrong information and put on the wrong track (Bubel, 2008: 65). According to Bubel in film and television ‘the default attitude . . . is that of disclosure’ (ibid.: 66) and film discourse is ‘tailored’ to viewers whose knowledge structures and interpreting schemas are anticipated. The model proposed here is not in conflict with Bubel’s model, rather it problematizes the disclosure modality in it by showing how the interface between images and words can assume different degrees of overhearers’ agency and responsibility. When viewers are construed as ‘overhearers’ the verbal–visual planes interact in ways that seem to ignore or be indifferent to their presence; in the case of

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 33

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

34

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

‘targetted overhearers’ instead the viewers are invited to participate and expected to carry out specific cognitive tasks; finally, ‘undisclosed intermediaries’ is the situation in which a dedicated message is sent from the screen to the viewers rather than being addressed to a particular character. The next subsection illustrates how the iconic and verbal levels construe such different audience profiles.

2.3 The categories of anticipation, post-hoc commentary and conflictuality 2.3.1 Anticipation Anticipation comprises cases in which the verbal and visual appear in a non-synchronous order of presentation although they clearly cooperate on the semantic or content level. In Germi’s Sedotta e abbandonata (Seduced and Abandoned, 1963), several children peep through the window of a dilapidated aristocratic mansion in which the impoverished Baron owner is trying to put an end to a life of utter poverty and disgrace by hanging himself. They shout in unison Il barone si sta impiccando! (‘The baron is hanging himself!’). The camera is on the children watching through the open window. The audience only sees them looking but is unable to see what they see. The children’s words are fully evocative; therefore, in the short time lag that occurs between the hearing of such a statement and the actual vision of the Baron with his head in the noose, spectators are given leeway to picture the scene as they wish. Although the words conjure up details of an expected scenario in the case of a suicide attempt – that is, a rope and at least a chair or stool on which a man is standing and from which he will jump off at the right moment – viewers can still use their fantasy in imagining the condition of the room, the Baron’s looks or even the colour of the rope. Our attention is on this portion of the sequence. Later, when the camera cuts to the room interior, this prediction exercise or ‘concealment’ (Clark and Schaefer, 1992: 265) comes to a close with the appearance of the barren room in the decadent mansion, the Baron himself a relatively young man with poor teeth and dishevelled hair and a much worn rope, in tune with the desolation of the whole place.

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 34

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

35

Figure 2.1 ‘Who is Paul speaking to?’ in Last Tango in Paris

In Bertolucci’s Ultimo tango a Parigi (Last Tango in Paris, 1972), the discourse-created suspense is longer lasting, and the audience is asked to conjecture what the situation is. Upon entering the room, the tragically widowed Paul (Marlon Brando) engages in a dialogue with a silent interlocutor who is not shown until much later. What interests us is the portion of the sequence in which the information is temporarily ‘concealed’ from viewers. Paul’s four utterances are accompanied by his distinctive actions and strategic camera movements (see Figure 2.1), while the individual frames slowly lead the viewers to the final revelation in the fifth line. Excerpt (1) Paul [opening the door] 1 Sei ridicola truccata così, la caricatura di una puttana. [He closes the door onto complete darkness.] 2 C’è la mano di mamma, vero? [He sinks in the armchair and switches on the light on a little table. Flowers appear.] 3 Oh povera Ofelia annegata in un bagno. [He laughs.] Se tu potessi vederti; sai che risate. Il capolavoro di tua madre. [He drags the armchair closer. The camera pans over the flowers.] 4 Ah Cristo, ma ci sono troppi fiori qua dentro, non si respira. [He pulls the turtle neck of his pullover to breathe.]

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 35

9/24/2010 2:19:47 PM

36

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

5 Sopra l’armadio [His dead wife Rosa finally appears lying on her deathbed surrounded by flowers.], in camera, ho trovato una scatola con un sacco di cose inutili, penne, catenine, monete straniere, preservativi, conservavi tutto eh? C’era anche un colletto da prete, oggetti dimenticati nelle camere, pure il rasoio veniva di lì. Translation Paul [opening the door] 1 You’re ridiculous with all that make-up, the caricature of a whore. [He closes the door onto a complete darkness.] 2 This is your mother’s idea, isn’t it? [He sinks in the armchair and switches on the light on the little table. Flowers appear.] 3 Oh poor Ophelia drawn in a bath. [He laughs.] If only you could see yourself, what laughs. Your mother’s masterpiece. [He drags the armchair closer. The camera pans over the flowers.] 4 Christ, there are too many flowers in here, I can’t breathe. [He pulls the turtle neck of his pullover to breathe.] 5 On top of the wardrobe [His dead wife Rosa finally appears lying on her deathbed surrounded by flowers.], in our bedroom, I found a box full of useless things, pens, little necklaces, foreign coins, condoms, you kept everything, didn’t you? There was even a priest’s dog-collar, objects forgotten in the rooms, even the razor came from there. As in the previous example from Germi’s film, the audience can’t see what the character has in front of his eyes and can only guess the meaning of his ambiguous speech. The opening utterances, commenting on the look of his interlocutor, are hardly suggestive of the person to whom Paul is speaking. His monologue is artfully constructed to gradually concede a series of elements. While the two opening turns reveal nothing about the interlocutor’s state, in the third line the reference to the overwhelming presence of flowers triggers the viewers’ associations between the verbal and the visual elements in the sequence and leads to the drawing of an interpretative network. On the one hand, annegata (‘drawn’) and fiori (‘flowers’) suggest the idea of death in connection with Hamlet’s unfortunate lover, who was associated with both water, in which she voluntarily

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 36

9/24/2010 2:19:48 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

37

Table 2.2 Audience’s role in anticipation

Overhearers

Address

Recipient

Participant

–

–

–

found her death, and flowers, which adorned her in death as they had adorned her speech in life. The reference to Ophelia, therefore, and the subsequent remark that the interlocutor cannot see what her mother has done to her start disclosing what the situation might be. On the other hand, when Paul moves the armchair close to the bed strewn with flowers, although the viewers cannot immediately see who is lying on it, their thoughts probably go to the original darkness of the room as Paul entered it. In terms of reception roles, the spectators are kept out of the cinematic interaction, treated simply as overhearers as shown in Table 2.2.

2.3.2 Post-hoc commentary The next category of post-hoc commentary describes cases in which the verbal, in a non-synchronous relation with the images, on the one hand ratifies the information provided on the visual plane, while on the other it adds its own interpretation to it. In Pasolini’s Il fiore delle mille e una notte (Arabian Nights, 1974), Zobeida, in the King’s gardens, decides to fight the heat by having a bath, naked, in a pond under some palm trees. In the silence of the day, she pours fresh water on her body from a silver bowl. Meantime, her husband King Harún arRashíd is peeping at her, love and desire clearly in his eyes. Feeling his glance on her, Zobeida looks up and discovers him hiding behind the foliage. In shame, she covers her pubic hair with her hands but she is unable to hide it completely. The King leaves burning from the desire to have her and, inspired by that vision, makes up a short poem: La vide il mio occhio per mia sventura e mi prese l’angoscia per doverla lasciare, eh eh [he comments satisfied]’ (‘Unfortunately, my eye saw her and I was taken by the anguish of having to part from her, eh eh’). Then, upon seeing the court poets, he decides to challenge them by imposing on them the unusual task of imagining his own inner feelings and expressing them in rhyme:

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 37

9/24/2010 2:19:48 PM

38

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Excerpt (2) King. Ehi poeti della corte, vediamo se è vero che i poeti sanno parlare delle cose che non hanno visto. Fatemi una poesia che cominci con questo verso ‘La vide il mio occhio per mia sventura e mi prese l’angoscia per doverla lasciare’ (Tusei). Poet Tusei. La videro i miei occhi per mia sventura e mi prese l’angoscia per doverla lasciare. La gazzella che mi ha fatto suo prigioniero all’ombra di due alberi di palma, si versa l’acqua sul corpo dal vaso d’argento; mi ha visto e si è nascosta il pube ma il pube sporgeva fra le sue mani. O potessi starmene là sopra un’ora o due ah ah. Translation King. Hey, court poets, let’s see if it’s true that poets can talk about things they have not seen. Compose a poem that begins with this line: ‘Unfortunately, my eyes saw her and I was taken by the anguish of having to part from her’ (Tusei). Poet Tusei. Unfortunately my eyes saw her and I was taken by the anguish of having to part from her. The gazelle that made me her prisoner in the shade of two palm trees, pours water on her body out of a silver bowl; she saw me and hid her pubic hair but it showed between her hands. Oh if only I could stay over there for an hour or two, ha ha. The film sequence programmatically shows the prevailing power of words over images and the ability of language to express inner feelings in a way that defies ambiguity. Not only does the court poet take up the King’s challenge brilliantly and, with only some general instruction as to how to carry out the task, depicts exactly the vision he had in front of his eyes in the gardens. He even puts into words the desire the King felt for Zobeida (‘Oh if only I could’), which has been expressed visually by the camera close-up on her pubic hair, as a representation of the King’s gaze on the woman.6 The poet’s words add to the King’s initial input. In the film, however, the king withholds any detail about what prompted his verses, therefore the poet is like a blind man who has been given the task of imagining without seeing, as Harún ar-Rashíd reminds him: ‘i poeti sanno parlare delle cose

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 38

9/24/2010 2:19:48 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

39

Table 2.3 Audience’s role in post-hoc commentary

Targeted overhearers

Address

Recipient

Participant

–

+

–

che non hanno visto’ (‘poets can talk about things they have not seen’). The recognition of the double function that words have of both portraying the unseen (from the poet’s perspective) and anchoring the seen (from the king’s perspective) impinges on a precise reception role on the part of the viewers. In Pasolini’s film, they become the referees of the challenge the King gives to the poet, since, like him, they have witnessed Zobeida’s previous scene and can judge the faithfulness of the poet’s verbal narrative. Through the close-up on Zobeida’s naked body, the viewers are made into voyeuristic gazers whose task is to assess the poet’s representation of the unseen, that is the King’s feelings, insofar as, being gazers themselves, they can imagine the attraction he feels for Zobeida. In being above both the king and the poet, the spectators are the ‘targetted overhearers’ of the scene in that they are the referees of the effectiveness of the switch from the visual to the verbal plane. The process of disclosure, therefore, gives the viewers a great deal of responsibility and assumes much agency on their part. In this category the role of the audience is that of targeted overhearers, that is active recipients, as Table 2.3 shows.

2.3.3 Conflictuality In the final category of conflictuality, the verbal and visual, in complex non-synchronous relation, clash due to their opposing truth-contents. By opening up the semiotic interaction, such a contrast appeals to the spectators and their internal discourse. A verbal–visual tension inspires a scene in Francesca Archibugi’s Mignon è partita (Mignon Has Left, 1988), in which a tearful woman is chopping some food for the family dinner. When asked by her daughter why she is crying, she denies she is, claiming her eyes are irritated by the onions she is slicing. However, upon the reassured daughter’s departure, a close-up on the cutting board exposes the woman’s lie and reveals that what she was cutting were courgettes not onions (see Figure 2.2).

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 39

9/24/2010 2:19:48 PM

40

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 2.2 The Courgettes Scene in Mignon Has Left

Excerpt (3) Daughter. Ma che fai, piangi? Mother. Ma no, non lo vedi che sto tagliando le cipolle? Translation Daughter. What are you doing, are you crying? Mother. I’m not, can’t you see I’m cutting the onions? In this sequence, the verbal and the visual contradict each other. The truth-content of the image of the woman crying is negated by her verbal claim that she is not. To a degree, this sequence exemplifies a false application of speech to images. In Dorothea Lange’s photograph ‘Southern Pacific billboard’ (1937), for instance, two migrants are shown walking on their way to California, against the poster of a traveller comfortably sitting in his seat, that reads ‘Next time try the train. RELAX.’ Similarly, Margaret Bourke-White photographs American black victims of a flood,7 clearly in dire straits, lined up against the backdrop of a huge poster portraying a white family smiling in a car and reading, ‘World’s Highest Standards of Living / There’s no way like the American way’ (Figure 2.3). In this politically laden photograph, the verbal critically contradicts and ridicules the visual,8 as in René Magritte’s The Betrayal of Images (1928–29), in which a simple line (‘Ceci n’est pas un pipe’) defies the convention that the drawing represents the real object ‘without hesitation or equivocation’ (Foucault, 1983: 20).

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 40

9/24/2010 2:19:48 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

41

Figure 2.3 Margaret Bourke-White’s Photograph (http://www1.assumption. edu/users/McClymer/us%20survey/bourke-white.jpg [accessed 4 April 2010])

In the sequence in Archibugi’s film the verbal and the visual deny the pragmatic presupposition at the basis of each: for the verbal this being ‘mother is not unhappy, hence she has no reasons to cry,’ for the visual, which the close-up on the courgettes reveals, the presupposition being, ‘mother is unhappy, hence she has reasons to cry.’ The verbal refutation of the reality portrayed by the visual, however, has the specific function of opening up the interaction by calling on an additional addressee of the verbal refutation. During the first part of the interaction between the woman and her daughter, in which crying is denied and onions are brought in as a justification for the tears and the snivelling, the spectators are only intrusively observing the scene and eavesdropping on the mother–daughter dialogue. They are not the direct addressees of the exchange, rather, to use Levinson’s term for the definition of reception roles (1988: 173), they are ‘targetted overhearers’ in a ‘non participant role’. Subsequently, however, when the visual plane refutes the woman’s verbal claim that she was not weeping, the daughter is no longer the interlocutor, having returned to the living room. At this stage, the

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 41

9/24/2010 2:19:49 PM

42

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

viewers become the targeted recipients and the shot on the courgettes unveils to them, not to any other character in the film, the falseness of the woman’s statement. Such a role, absent in Levinson’s model, is that of a ‘targeted yet undisclosed recipient’ inasmuch as the spectators are the clear addressees of the interaction, albeit this is articulated visually and not verbally. Laura is crying as she is unhappy about her marriage and for this reason she will be tempted to give in to a love story with her enamoured brother-in-law. Such later narrative development, however, is exclusively intended for the spectators and not accessible to any member of the woman’s family. In fact, her youngest daughter will never know anything about it, a reality anticipated by the fact that she was not the addressee of the courgettes close-up. In the category of conflictuality, spectators are recognized in the most active reception role of direct recipients and addressees of the semiotic communication. In as much as they are expected to establish the degree of truth-content of the characters’ propositions, they are defined as ‘intermediaries’, although, within the cinematic exchange, they are only ‘undisclosed’ or virtual intermediaries (see Table 2.4). In consideration of the high level of agency with which the viewers are endowed in this category, I have termed this relation ‘marked disclosure’ to differentiate it from the unmarked disclosure in Bubel’s model. The film sequences discussed here have shown the important function of the verbal in cinema and how the intersection of verbal and visual can result in a complex and even contradictory cinematic message. As Bubel (2008) argues, screen-to-face discourse involves tapping into the audience’s knowledge. It also assumes viewers’ ability to draw inferences, together with the two very distinct cognitive processes of ‘conjecturing’ and ‘recognising’(Clark and Schaefer, 1992: 159ff.). Audiences are given different tasks and responsibilities and, even in the case of initial concealment, have to draw inferences to make sense of the verbal and non-verbal messages on the screen.

Table 2.4 Audience’s role in conflictuality

Undisclosed intermediaries

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 42

Address

Recipient

Participant

+

+

–

9/24/2010 2:19:50 PM

The Verbal–Visual Interrelation in Cinema

43

2.4 A final reflection on the verbal–visual relationship As was discussed, the linguistic investigation into the verbal and nonverbal in the domain of film is limited, while in the fine arts, scholars have tried to differentiate the various intersections between the two planes. Following Hoeck (1994), for instance, Morley (2003) looks at ways in which, in modern art, writing is no longer merely a verbal description or transcription of speech, but it becomes a joint verbal and visual practice. This author envisages four kinds of interaction between the written word and the image, which can be related to the categories proposed in this chapter. In the trans-medial relationship, words and images, neatly distinct, supplement and/or even replace each other. In this category, the verbal is subordinate to the visual or vice versa, as in the case of illustrated books or labels on gallery walls. Verbal and visual coexist closely sharing the same space but still remaining clearly distinguished in the multi-medial relationship. This is the case of shop signs, public notices, cartoons and advertisements. The example of the mosaic picturing a dog, in Pompeii, with the function of anchoring the verbal message ‘cave canem’ – beware of the dog – is aptly used by Morley to illustrate the relation between the two planes. In the next category of mixed-media, the separation between the verbal and the visual is very tenuous; the two tend to collapse into each other’s domain in new and unconventional formats, as in the subversion of graphic codes present in Simon Patterson’s The Great Bear (1992) in which the stops on the London Tube map are replaced with a variety of names from Rupert Murdoch to Wittgenstein. Finally, the inter-media relation recognizes the visual and material aspect of writing as in the Book of Kells or in the first page of any illuminated manuscript in which letters acquire an aesthetic value. In conclusion, in reply to an undisputed paucity of linguistic investigations on the function of the verbal lamented by Kozloff (2000), in this chapter I have proposed three categories representing the verbal–visual intersection in cinema. The presence or, conversely, absence of synchrony between images and words – defined respectively as the (non-)simultaneous appearance of images and words on

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 43

9/24/2010 2:19:50 PM

44

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

screen, as well as the fit or lack of fit between the content of the visual message and that of the verbal – has been assumed as the organizing criterion, which determines inevitable changes in the spectators’ reception roles. This chapter therefore has offered an initial general reflection on the way words intersect with and complement the images on the screen that informs the way viewers’ positioning is considered in this volume and reappears at significant moments in the films under study. The next chapter discusses the specific model of conflict discourse that is at the core at the study before moving on to the analysis of the films.

RPiazza_02_Final.indd 44

9/24/2010 2:19:50 PM

Chapter Three

Methodology of the study: the focus on the representation of conflict in film

3.1 Introduction. General aims of the study To investigate linguistically the dialogue of fictional cinema means to take into account the issue of the representation of talk on the big screen, that is the way the dialogue in film echoes and reproduces real life interaction. In this specific domain, the relevance of a linguistic approach to cinema does not need to be defended. As Mandala (2007) highlights, (some) work in stylistics no longer aspires to objectivity and linguistic analyses of, broadly speaking, fictional discourse, no longer aim to ensure the total absence of evaluation that is traditionally associated with this discipline. As was discussed in the opening chapter, this book does not pledge to be impartial; on the contrary, it takes a social semiotics approach that allows for a socially, politically and culturally situated analysis in which the role of the researcher is duly recognized. The linguistic tools employed in this study, therefore, do not claim to provide a new approach to film that can compare with other studies in the areas of cultural studies, psychoanalysis, film and gender studies and more; rather they are a necessity to illustrate how language works in cinema and identify how it contributes to a definition of genre and to issues of characterization. As was discussed earlier, this study approaches film dialogue by referencing studies in natural conversation on the grounds that real-life talk provides, to a degree, a template for film discourse. Following Toolan (2003: 195), ‘certain structural and functional principles govern fictional dialogue, as they do natural dialogue, and in the former case as in the latter any witness (a reader or hearer) must recognize and attend to those principles in order to comprehend the dialogue’

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 45

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

46

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

(Toolan, 2003: 195). Against such a theoretical and methodological backdrop, however, the analysis carried out in this study considers cinematic discourse as a genre in itself and an expression of re-presented discourse that must be investigated in its own specific context. Although the main focus of the study is on the verbal plane, the visual dimension has an important role in this volume. Chapter Two presented a model for the interpretation of the viewers’ role that is based on the interface between the verbal and the visual. This model informs the analysis at a general level and, in the course of the individual chapters, relevant instances of incongruence between words and images that make specific demands on the spectators are highlighted and discussed. Together with the identification of specific verbal patterns in the films under study, features of the mise-en-scène are taken into account in terms of setting, costume, use of lights and characters/actors’ movements because ‘[i]n controlling the miseen-scène, the director stages the event for the camera’ (Bordwell and Thompson, 2004: 176). In the study the notion of transitivity as expressed by the directionality of actors’ gaze and body movements is at the core of the reading of the images in their relation to the words, along the lines of the multimodality model proposed by Kress and van Leeuwen (1996), which is discussed later in this chapter. Finally, particular attention is given to the kinds of camera shots chosen in particular scenes. Taking Oumano’s definition of these core terms (1985: 160 in Iedema, 2001a: 190), a shot can be defined as ‘[t]he section of film exposed during a single take. A scene is comprised of one or more shots occurring within one time and place. A sequence is composed of a group of scenes having dramatic unity.’ This study considers whether shots related to conflict scenes are ‘individual’ thus showing the characters in isolation or ‘shared’ if they portray the relevant subjects together thus suggesting sameness and a sense of community (van Leeuwen, 2008: 96). Decisions in the domain of camera movements together with the choice of close-up, medium or long shots convey meaningful messages in their combination with the verbal level as will be discussed in the analysis chapters. The next section presents the theoretical models that are adopted for the analysis of the two aspects of the investigation, the verbal and the visual.

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 46

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

Methodology of the Study

47

3.2 The verbal dimension. Conflict as the lens for the analysis of film dialogue The angle taken in the present study for the investigation of cinematic dialogue is the portrayal of conflictive discourse. The choice of confrontational talk as the window through which to observe the functioning of cinematic speech is variously motivated. In the first instance, it is an echo of the recent burgeoning research on uncooperative interaction (cf. Bousfield 2008; Bousfield and Locher, 2008 among others) that intends to reflect on the ubiquitous presence of conflict in a number of real life and fictional domains (Culpeper et al., 2003: 1545–6). Other reasons for choosing conflict discourse are more directly related to the language of film and once again respond to the total absence of research in this area. Confrontational situations, for instance, generate the audience involvement (Herman, 1995: 137) and moments of dialogic tension are very meaningful segments in a film narrative, which often shed light on the whole film. Finally, in line with what Locher and Bousfield (2008) comment about the role of impoliteness, through conflict discourse the relationships between subjects are revisited and renegotiated. Confrontational discourse that puts individual’s face at risk is a way through which gender discourse is shaped in the world of Westerns, as discussed in Chapter Five; interpersonal tension can also define subjectivity and characterize the agency of fictional characters (as in the self-narratives discussed in Chapter Six) or determine a shift in self-construction as in Chapter Seven. Referring to impoliteness as an expression of aggressive behaviour, Culpeper (1996: 364) points out the relationship between such verbal disequilibrium and the disruption that, from a formalist perspective, characterizes all narratives in which a situation of original order is broken until the re-establishment of the equilibrium that occurs in the conclusion. Conflict ‘may be seen as a symptom of a situation of disequilibrium’ (ibid.). In defining the term ‘argument’, a distinction is usually drawn between ‘making’ an argument (i.e. arguing a position by making use of logic and rhetoric) and ‘having’ an argument (i.e. having a dispute or conflict with someone) (Hutchby, 1996). A similar distinction is taken up by Schiffrin’s ‘rhetorical’ argument, indicating

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 47

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

48

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

a discourse that justifies a viewpoint, and ‘oppositional’ argument, describing an interactional ‘polarization’ (1985: 41). In this study, the term ‘argument’ is taken to indicate a verbally expressed, or, in the case of silence, a deliberately not-voiced contrast or opposition, an instance of interpersonal verbal conflict between two or more interlocutors – which can be accompanied or emphasized by non-verbal behaviour. Such definition of the term, which is often equalled to verbal ‘conflict’ and ‘confrontation’, however, is different from Schiffrin’s (1985) or Hutchby’s (1996) neat separation between a rhetorical argumentative discourse and a real dispute. As the scripted dialogue discussed in this study shows, in the case of the representation of verbal disputes in films it is not always possible to separate the two aspects of conflict. Confrontation can have various facets, but in cinematic discourse the neat divide between rhetorical and oppositional argument does not seem to hold in that a logically constructed argument is often also the vehicle of an emotional confrontation between two, or more, speakers. This is the case, for instance, of verbal contrast in comedy, where conflict corresponds to the articulation of an ideological as well as emotional and affective dissonance between at least two individuals who dispute over their contrasting positions. Shaped as disagreement, in that case conflict is performed through ‘oppositional turns’ (Kakava, 2002: 1539) or subsequent argumentative moves. But while engaging in a rhetorical opposition and disagreeing on the propositional content of their utterances, speakers may also be clashing on emotional levels thus having a real dispute. Similarly, speakers may argue without confronting each other face to face. Conflict in Westerns, for instance, is shaped as a rhetorical argument based on a textual opposition between the propositional content of the speakers’ discourses that may not be physically adjoining to one another. In echoing other texts, a speaker is likely to argue a very different position from an interlocutor, which also functions as a dispute between antagonists. Rather than identifying conflict on the basis of the distinction between oppositional and rhetorical argument, therefore, this study of verbal confrontation in film discourse differentiates between ‘contact’, in the case of upfront explicit conflict and as a metaphor for cooperation at the level of ideas and intentions, and ‘distance’,

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 48

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

Methodology of the Study

49

symbolizing lack of cooperation, when the intellectual or emotional clash between the parties is disguised and indirect. Conflict interpreted in terms of directness or indirectness, contact or distance is linked to the notions of solidarity and power (Brown and Gilman, 1960), in that a direct, even verbally aggressive conflict may index an intimate relationship between speakers, while a distant confrontation usually tends to occur in an asymmetrical situation of power imbalance.

3.2.1 The studies on conflictive discourse Studies of conflict have focused on the various forms of opposition on which speakers embark, for example such speech acts as challenge, contradiction, demand for evidence, accusation, threat, disconfirmation, insult and the like. Labov’s (1972) was the earliest study on ritual insult or ‘sounding’ as a widespread social practice among black inner-city adolescents, who compete with their peers by trading insults in sequences that escalate in complexity. After Labov, numerous studies have investigated conflict discourse in different contexts: among young individuals and children (e.g. Brenneis and Lein, 1977; Camras, 1977; Lein and Brenneis, 1978; Goodwin and Goodwin, 1987); among couples (Wiener and Mehrabian, 1968; Gottman, 1979); or in its relation to gender (West and Zimmerman, 1977; Eder, 1990; Sheldon, 1992 and 1993; Goodwin et al. 2002). Conflict is culturally sensitive and different cultures have different conflict conventions and different strategies for face-saving, which has a significant impact on ways of handling conflict. For instance, American blacks in the Bronx and whites have contrasting views as to what constitutes appropriate behaviour in a public debate. The expression of emotional affect is a preferred feature among blacks, as it ‘indicates that people are sincere and serious about what they are saying’ (Kochman, 1981: 18). In contrast, whites are taught to appear objective, self-controlled and emotionless, therefore they tend to ‘use discussion that is devoid of affect and dynamic opposition’ (p. 19). In a study of conflict rules in American and Japanese conversation, Noguchi (1987) confirms the long established preoccupation of Japanese speakers with saving face even at the expense of dropping

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 49

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

50

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

out of the conversation. Contrariwise, Americans tend to carry the conflict forward regardless of threats to their face. Katriel (1986) and Blum-Kulka and Olshtain (1984) note that confrontation is not always disguised, mitigated or indirect. In non-Anglo-Saxon contexts, for instance among Greeks or Israelis, the open expression of verbal confrontation challenges the wellestablished literature on the preference for conversational agreement and the creation of social solidarity among speakers that harks back to Sacks (1973a), Pomerantz (1975 and 1984) and Heritage (1984). In some cultural contexts disagreement does not threaten but reinforces solidarity. Schiffrin (1984), for instance, finds that verbal challenges amongst American Jews are not negatively perceived by members of that community. The confrontational aspect of Jewish conviviality also characterizes Israeli political shows, which exhibit patterns of highly argumentative discourse (Blum-Kulka et al., 2002). While Kakava (1993 and 2002) provides evidence for a similar attitude to confrontation amongst Greeks, Kotthoff (1993) observes the articulation of disagreement among Chinese and German speakers, and Jones (1990 in Kakava, 2002) challenges traditional views of conversation among Japanese as an at-all costs harmonious exercise. In a similar vein Corsaro and Rizzo (1990), who monitor children’s talk, identify ‘more disputes in the Italian as compared to the American data’ amongst nursery-school children and explain this with the fact that ‘disputes are a central feature of peer culture among the Italian children’ (1990: 64). A consideration of the cultural connotation of conflict is relevant to this context. Although this study does not embark on a comparative analysis between Italian and other national cinemas, it may be said that comedy as the most inherently Italian film genre shows a preference for direct confrontation. Being perceived by Italian speakers as a typical ‘source of entertainment’ (Culpeper, 1996: 364), conflict may be a behaviour grounded in Italian culture. With regard to films, this may be demonstrated by the fact that, if compared with American films belonging to the same genre, Italian Westerns show a preference for a much more direct confrontational discourse that separates out positive protagonists and their opponents; on the contrary, in American Westerns a similar verbal contrast

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 50

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

Methodology of the Study

51

is often an associative strategy for creating community amongst speakers. Conflict is also sensitive to contextual constraints (Kakava, 2002). Several studies have investigated a variety of contexts where disagreement is not only an acceptable behaviour but appears to be a requirement of the exchange. In British news interviews, interviewees disagree without softening their dissonance, and their disagreement can extend over a number of turns and escalate to a climax, although it is expected that the interviewers will provide an exit from confrontational exchanges (Greatbatch, 1992). Similarly, in the televised news show Crossfire, Scott (1998) identifies two contrasting forms of disagreement: ‘backgrounded’ or less indirect and explicit, and ‘foregrounded’, upfront and showing varying degrees of hostility. Open disagreement and confrontation are also a feature of academic discourse (Hunston, 1993) and therapeutic discourse (Krainer, 1988; Telles Ribeiro, 1996; and Fele, 1991, in an Italian context). A discussion of how contextual constraints can have an impact on the forms of conflict is relevant to the present study that discusses confrontational talk in a variety of situations. The film genres examined exemplify a range of contexts and role-relationships between speakers. Comedy and melodrama are usually characterized by an intimacy of relationship and conflict occurs between relatives and friends, with reduced asymmetry and a balance of power. Westerns instead exhibit another context in which, to counterbalance the closeness of the violent clashes between cowboys, confrontational talk is characterized by textual distance and often conveyed through echoing and repetition of previous texts. Conflict talk is inevitably linked to ‘impoliteness’ as the set of interactional behaviours that speakers use when (un)deliberately attack interlocutors’ face (Culpeper, 1996, Culpeper et al., 2003, BargielaChiappini, 2003 among others). Being the ‘parasite of politeness’ (Culpeper, 1996: 355), that is, the reverse of Brown and Levinson’s model of politeness theory (1987) and Leech’s Politeness Principle (1983), impoliteness revolves around the same concept of ‘face’ (Goffman, 1967) as the public image speakers project. Impoliteness strategies are a reversed calque of politeness strategies: (i) bald on-record impoliteness, when impoliteness is performed very directly

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 51

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

52

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

and bluntly; (ii) positive and (iii) negative politeness depending on whether speakers damage the addressee’s positive or negative face wants; (iv) off-record impoliteness, which Culpeper equals to sarcasm or irony (Leech, 1983) and is offensive indirectly by an implicature; (v) withheld politeness or ‘the absence of politeness work where it would be expected’ (Culpeper, 1996: 357). Contrary to impoliteness, politeness is more frequent in intimate and symmetrical exchanges in which social distance is reduced. In the course of the analysis it will become apparent how a number of different impoliteness strategies express the (in)direct confrontation in the films under study from the tit-for-tat of some comedies to the verbal duel in Melliti’s film in the last chapter which defines the immigrant as the ultimate excludable ‘other’. Culpeper’s model of impoliteness is enriched by an added attention to the non-verbal expression of contrast, in terms of consideration of the speakers’ gaze, body movements or physical space. Such sensitivity to visual communication is perfectly in harmony with the attention that this study devotes to the plane of images through a multimodal analysis. In conclusion, confrontation can be expressed in a number of ways and by different strategies according to the situation, the speech event, the purpose and mode of the interaction. The studies that have been reviewed in this section attest to the recent interest of linguists to conflict or impolite discourse (such as the devotion of the entire issue no. 34, 2002, of the Journal of Pragmatics to conflict talk) that shows a tendency towards revising past interpretations of conversation as a cooperative consensus-oriented activity. To the traditional view that the preference for agreement is ‘the conversational default option’ (Blum-Kulka et al., 2002: 1573), recent research opposes the notion that conflict is a vital aspect of human interaction. This explains the important role that confrontation takes in the films that are discussed in this volume and supports the rationale followed in this study.

3.3 The visual dimension This study of the verbal discourse of film offers what can be called a ‘soft’ approach to a multimodal analysis in that it observes the

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 52

9/24/2010 2:20:30 PM

Methodology of the Study

53

interface between the plane of words and that of moving images although the main emphasis remains on the verbal level. Little research is available on the multimodal investigation of films, McIntyre’s (2008) study of McKellen’s Richard III and O’Halloran (2004) being rare exceptions. The term ‘multimodal’ refers to the relatively recent ‘shift in linguistic enquiry where language use is no longer theorized as an isolated phenomenon’ (O’Halloran, 2004: 1) and in which, as an associated theme, participant structures and identities are perceived as continuously shifting (e.g. as in the work of Johnston, 2004, Norris, 2004, and other scholars in LeVine and Scollon, 2004). Multimodal analysis aims to open up the investigation of discourse by proposing an analysis of the function and meaning of the linguistic and visual codes and by exploring the meaning resulting from the interaction between the two planes. The seminal volume by Kress and van Leeuwen ([1996] 2007) is the earliest semiotic endeavour in the direction of an understanding of the verbal–visual interrelation and the impact textual composition has on the viewers. Much research has been produced since the appearance of that pioneering volume (Machin, 2007: xviii), including O’Halloran’s work on film (2004), that has attempted to propose application of Kress and van Leeuwen’s model centring on the ‘stability and continuity’ of fixed images to the notion of ‘patterns of change’ and ‘meanings derived from systems in flux’ (2004: 109). Concerns about the validity of Kress and van Leeuwen’s multimodal model have been expressed by Forceville (1999), who claims that some of the categories are ‘seldom clear-cut’ and more often ‘fuzzy’, describing ‘a continuum between extremes rather than a binary opposition with an either/or structure’ (for a discussion of this point also see McIntyre, 2008). In spite of this, the model remains a valuable tool to look at images from a Systemic Functional perspective, that is, from a purely linguistic angle different from analyses that trace the presence of ideology as in the area of Media and Cultural studies. When adapted to the analysis of films, Kress and van Leeuwen’s model reveals the methodological drawback of being a tool devised for reading fixed rather than dynamic images. The fact that this investigation focuses generally not on the entire film but specifically on those sequences that express disagreement does not

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 53

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

54

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

reduce the problem inherent in Kress and van Leeuwen’s model. Conflict can occupy lengthy visual sequences in a film; therefore, in the analysis the attention was drawn to specific frames within the conflictive interaction as the minimal units of analysis marked by a particular mise-en-scène and ‘unfolding in time together with the accompanying soundtrack’ (O’Halloran, 2004: 117). Frames, for instance, that captured a character’s body motion were interpreted as having the important function of accompanying the verbal expression of discord. In addition to frames, within a conflict sequence, the discussion revolved around scenes, as a string of frames, marked by camera shot changes (ibid.), in which the characters perform some significant action. Kress and van Leeuwen’s ([1996] 2007) model considers the various ‘semiotic resources’ (Jewitt and Oyama, 2001: 134) that are available to images and can be interpreted by viewers ‘in the same way that they would make sense of language’ (Machin, 2007: 165 my emphasis). Point of view (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2007: 114–54) can be expressed in a variety of ways through the camera movements that create various meanings between image producers and receivers. The conviction that geometric shapes are carriers of meaning (Arnheim, 1966) informs Kress and van Leeuwen’s model and determines their interpretation of images as divided in portions that suggest linguistic concepts of ‘given’ and ‘new’ and their unmarked position in the syntactic structure of language (as in their example of a fifteenth French century miniature of God showing Death to Adam and Eve in which the end of eternity is the new concept on the right, while God’s omnipotence representing the old information occupies the left side of the picture). Frontality demands the viewers’ maximum involvement very differently from the camera positioned at an angle. Similarly, if the subject is portrayed at a high angle this may suggest s/he is in a position of power, contrary to the case in which the subject is on a lower place vis-à-vis the camera. Equality is suggested by the camera at eye level. However, it is important to add, with Jewitt and Oyama (2001), that such camera choices are not ‘the’ meaning of those angles, rather they are ‘an attempt to describe a meaning potential, a field of possible meanings, which need to be activated by the producers and viewers of images’ (p. 135, my emphasis).

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 54

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

Methodology of the Study

55

Kress and van Leeuwen ([1996] 2007) have applied Halliday’s (1978, 1985) three language metafunctions, ‘ideational’, ‘interpersonal’ and ‘textual’ to images and termed them, ‘representational’, ‘interactive’ and ‘compositional’. In the words of Jewitt and Oyama (2001: 140), ‘any image . . . not only represents the world . . . but also plays a part in some interaction and . . . constitutes a recognizable kind of text.’ As an illustration in the example Jewitt and Oyama (2001: 138) use of an advert for condoms, the only boy who is different from the others in that he averts gaze and is depicted at an angle suggests a lack of commitment to the health issue that is being promoted. Kress and van Leeuwen’s model centres on two central albeit not unproblematic concepts (I refer again to Forceville, 1999, and McIntyre, 2008, for a critical discussion), namely, the notion of ‘transitivity’ and that of ‘represented’ and ‘interactive’ participants (although this study will refer to other central concepts in the course of the analysis of the films). The mark of a narrative proposition is ‘the presence of a vector’, or an imaginary line that ‘may be formed by bodies or limbs or tools “in action” ’ (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2007: 59). When an image has two participants linked by a vector, one is the Actor and the other the Goal, and the representation is transactional, that is, analogous to transitive verbs, and is considered narrative by the authors. In the case of one individual participant, usually an actor, the resulting structure is non-transactional, analogous to intransitive verbs, in that it ‘has no “Goal”, is not “done to” or “aimed at” anyone or anything.’ Kress and van Leeuwen comment that Epstein’s massive Angel embracing Jacob for instance is transactional, that is, vectorial on the part of the Angel but not on the part of Jacob whose limping body surrendered in the Angel’s arms (ibid.: 240–1). If the vector is an eyeline, we have a Reacter (who does the looking) and a Phenomenon (the person looked at) (ibid., 2007: 67). Chapter Six that studies a number of self-narratives in a film by Antonioni shows that some suicide survivors, more than others, are in control of their narratives in that they establish a vector in the account of their encounter with death. In contrast to vectorial and narrative patterns, those without vectors are termed conceptual representations.

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 55

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

56

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Visual ‘modality’ (corresponding to ‘epistemic’ modality in Systemic Functional grammar and expressing speakers’ certainty or doubt about reality) is interpreted by Kress and van Leeuwen as a scaleable ‘interpersonal’ concept that expresses the alignment between speakers more than their stance towards reality and the truth of what is being discussed. Similar to its linguistic expression, visual modality can be high or low. Low modality that is marked linguistically by such verbs as ‘may’ or such adverbs as ‘possibly’ is visually conveyed by fuzziness and imprecision of details; contrariwise, high visual modality is conveyed by clear and detailed compositions and a tendency to realistic representations. Again in Chapter Six it can be argued that the two protagonists with the greatest agency are those whose mise-en-scène has the highest visual modality. Kress and van Leeuwen’s distinction between the subjects in the image and the viewers is informed by the idea that both participate and have agency. Their notion of represented participants (the participants in the image or shot) and interactive participants (the viewers) (ibid. 2007: 47) is connected to the issue of gaze, as aimed either at another participant in the film or at the viewers and is central to the present analysis of film especially if connected to the model that captures the interface between verbal and visual that I presented in Chapter Two. The analysis of the films under study will show how all the above notions accompany the production of words and convey the complexity of a representation of confrontational discourse.

3.4 The data With the purpose of identifying discourse patterns for the expression of confrontational talk in cinema, this study analyses some popular film genres in the first part while in the second engages in to two film studies. Comedy and melodrama, which open the investigation, have been selected in that they are the backbones of Italian cinema. The films collected for these two genres date from 1960s – the time when Italian-style comedy (commedia all’Italiana) ensured the uncontested popularity of Italian cinema at home and abroad – to the present day. I have included both universally acclaimed and less popular productions to ensure reliability of the generalizations concerning dialogue

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 56

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

Methodology of the Study

57

in this genre. The definition of melodrama follows the accepted classification of the film industry ‘to denote dramas involving the passions – hence crime melodrama, psychological melodrama, family melodrama’ (Cook and Bernink, 2000: 157), although in some cases uneasiness was felt about the classification of some films by the film industry. Western genres were also selected in light of their representativeness for Italian cinema. Chapter 5, it can be argued, combines a genre analysis with the study of an auteur as the films are all by Leone, the undisputed master of the Western genre in Italy. In the second part of the volume, an early film by Antonioni lent itself perfectly to a multimodal analysis; Mohsen Melliti’s film in the last chapter, which offers an interesting case of a pseudo-theatrical film revolving around an escalating conflict of identity between two men, seemed perfectly in line with the theme of the volume. The films under study are mostly Italian; however, the book opens up to other perspectives in that spaghetti Westerns are compared with contemporary American cowboy films while the last film Io, l’altro (Me, the Other) is by Tunisian director Melliti. Since conflict is the window through which scripted film dialogue is analysed in this study, all scenes in which speakers dispute and disagree directly and openly or indirectly were selected for the investigation and transcribed according to the conventions indicated at the end of Chapter One. Except in the few cases of published scripts – which, however, were checked against the acted performance in the film – the corpus of film dialogues was put together by my own selective transcription of confrontational sequences. Although it may be argued that the choice of scenes is subjective in that it is based on my individual perception of verbal dissonance, the transparency of the criteria for a definition of the multiple facets of conflict, presented later on in this section, and in further details in each individual chapter, confers systematicity and a degree of objectivity to the selection. The note of caution that was expressed in Chapter One about the essence of a qualitative analysis that proposes ‘one’ of a series of multiple readings of a text has of course much validity in this matter. This analysis that identifies various modalities of conflict representation is qualitative and the discussion of the several sequences shows

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 57

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

58

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

how different forms of confrontational talk can be subsumed under a comprehensive model.

3.5 The methodological framework for the study of conflict in film Conflict in this study is viewed as alternating between forms of ‘direct’ and ‘cooperative’ or ‘indirect’ and ‘uncooperative’ confrontation with the former manifestation being linked to solidarity and generally occurring in intimate relationships, and the latter being associated with more distant relationships and expressed through forms of disengagement and rupture. These two manifestations of conflict correlate with Scott’s (1998) identification of forms of ‘foregrounded’ conflict in the case of direct confrontation, and ‘backgrounded’ in the instances of less visible, although not less intense discord. A discourse approach highlights the direct forms that conflict takes in the four genres and the complex network of responses (or lack of them) that follow confrontational turns in a dissonant interaction. The observation of how conflict is portrayed in the selected Italian films provides insight into the various forms that verbal confrontation takes in fictional discourse, reflects the sociolinguistic intuitions of directors and scriptwriters (Murphey, 1978: 226 in Pavesi, 2005: 10), and contributes indirectly to a reflection on verbal confrontation as a broad phenomenon. Each chapter presents the relevant analytical tool kit for the examination of the different facets of conflict within the general framework of conflict, with the result of a macro-representation of confrontational discourse. Eggins and Slade’s (1997) model of conversational moves, inspired by Functional-Systemic grammar (Halliday, 1984 and 1985), provides the very broad framework for this study of conflict representation. At the core of the model is Eggins and Slade’s concept of move, as their ‘functional-semantic reinterpretation of the turn-constructional unit (TCU) of conversational analysis’ (1997: 186). Within these authors’ model for the interpretation of conversational moves, this study focuses on the portion that encompasses some of the ‘sustaining responding speech functions’ (1997: 208) and provide oppositional replies to a

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 58

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

Methodology of the Study Table 3.1 (1997)

59

Model of confrontational moves adapted from Eggins and Slade

Decline To refuse an invitation of any sort Disagree To provide negative response to question Contradict To negate prior information Confrontational Move

REPLY

Withhold To indicate inability to provide demanded information Disavow To deny acknowledgement of information Non-comply To indicate inability to comply with prior command

DISENGAGE

speaker’s utterance. In this functional model a confrontational move can be shaped as ‘reply’ or ‘disengage’ (1997: 202–8). In the former case, speakers perform conflict by disagreeing in different ways and to different degrees, while in the latter their lack of cooperation is total as they abandon the confrontational arena. Table 3.1 illustrates the options envisaged in Eggins and Slade’s model although in a slightly different order. The film discourse observed in this study suggests an interpretation of conflict along a continuum that encompasses a number of manifestations of confrontation from direct to indirect. They are: close and direct symmetrical confrontation, in which speakers systematically contradict and refute each other’s contribution; confrontational dysfluency, by which speakers deliberately fail to fulfil the conversational demands of their interlocutors or intentionally misinterpret the presuppositions underlying their speech acts; and distant, indirect asymmetrical confrontation; in this last case speakers echo their interlocutors’ view of the world to the purpose of undermining it in a backgrounded form of conflict or confront each other and, as in Antonioni’s film in Chapter Six through narrative, struggle for ‘interactional dominance’ – through which they try ‘to control a major part of the territory which is shared by the parties, that is, the interactional space’ (Linell et al., 1988: 415). Visibly direct and symmetrical confrontation characterizes, for instance, the conflict discourse of traditional comedy. Such discourse can be analysed in terms of a string of adjacency pairs. These are

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 59

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

60

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

‘expandable pairs of adjacently placed speech acts in which the first establishes a “slot” for the performance of the second, and the second “satisfies” the demand expressed in the first’ (McLaughlin, 1984: 269). A focus on adjacency pairs, combined with a functional interpretation of conversational moves and their construction of meaning on the ideational, interpersonal and textual levels, also highlights forms of indirect conflict. In this case the disengagement is expressed, for instance, by ill treatment of a first pair part or by the production of a dispreferred response to a speaker’s turn. In indirect conflict, conversational cooperation is no longer the overriding feature of confrontational sequences and speakers deliberately try to be dissonant by producing utterances of visible irrelevance to their interlocutors’ turns. The distinction between close and cooperative and distant and uncooperative conflict, therefore, makes it possible to characterize certain forms of indirect confrontation as the attempt on the part of two speakers to increase the interactional space between them by emphasizing their discursive dissonance. Walton’s (1989 and 1991) pragmatic model of interactional moves in response to questions that are perceived as threatening fits in well with Eggins and Slade’s general model of conflict and illustrates how subtle confrontation can be shaped in those cases in which one speaker takes up more power than the other. Such moves as ‘non-comply’, ‘withhold’ or ‘disavow’ (Eggins and Slade, 1997) are the expression of interactional disengagement and uncooperative conflict. In the context of foregrounded conflict, speakers may choose to express tension by distancing themselves from their interlocutors, for example: ‘Why did you lie to me?/I don’t know what you’re talking about.’ A pragmatic approach also illustrates forms of indirect conflict in which speakers appear to refute their interlocutors’ viewpoint from distance by making reference, critically, to discourse that was produced by their opponents or that is in line with the view of the world these endorse. Let us imagine that a speaker claims that respect for other people is a necessary rule for peaceful living while in fact it is blatant that s/he does not carry out what s/he preaches. At a later stage, an interlocutor could express his disagreement with and disapproval of the speaker’s earlier statement by echoing it critically:

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 60

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

Methodology of the Study

61

‘Respect the others. A good rule indeed especially if we don’t stab them in their back.’ In considering indirect confrontation as a critical echo of previous discourse, the notion of ‘heteroglossia’ (White, 2002a and 2002b and 2003; Martin and White, 2005) is very relevant. Of Bakhtinean derivation, the term reflects the idea that any text and utterance, ‘[h] owever monological [it] may be (. . .), it cannot but be, in some measure, a response to what has already been said about the given topic, on the given issue, even though this responsiveness may not have assumed a clear-cut external expression’ (Bakhtin, 1986: 92). A heteroglossic text ‘recognizes or engages alternative positions and voices’ (White, 2003: 266). White’s heteroglossia includes ‘dialogic expansion’ (2002a and b and 2003), when a speaker’s discourse contains explicit echoes of other texts and entertains, even critically, other views. Conflict expressed in a distant form by ironical and critical repetition of a speaker’s discourse as occurs, for instance, in Westerns is a manifestation of dialogic expansion. Irony, as the echoic repetition or ‘echoic mention’ (Sperber and Wilson, 1981) of someone’s actual words or thoughts, conveys a speaker’s evaluative stance and can, therefore, be interpreted as indirect conflict between different individuals and their representation of the world. White’s following example (2003: 267) of a close-up on happy Iraqi children, accompanied by the disquieting headline ‘Should we go to war against these children?’ suggests more than a discourse possibility and, therefore, exemplifies dialogic expansion. ‘Dialogic contraction’, as the other aspect of heteroglossia, reflects, on the contrary, a closure to other voices and texts. Differently from dialogic ‘expansion’, by which a speaker (dis)aligns his discourse with other possible textual voices, dialogic contraction is a discourse that fends off and rules out any alternatives by restricting its scope and views. By resorting to different textual resources, for instance the use of such adverbs as ‘naturally’ or ‘of course’ or such personal pronouncements as ‘I would contend’, a speaker can express his/her ‘personal investment in the viewpoint being advanced and accordingly increases the interpersonal cost of any who would advance some dialogic alternative’ (White, 2003: 269–71). In Chapter Five it will be discussed how bad cowboys for instance frequently display dialogic

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 61

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 62

Adjacency pairs 2 Question-answer pairs Non-comply Disavow Withhold

Adjacency pairs 1 Repair work

Clash of identity representation Contradict Disagree

Figure 3.1 A Functional Model of Conflict

Dialogic expansion

Asymmetrical dysfluency Struggle for dominance

Disagree Contradict

Keying Irony

Dialogic contraction

Struggle for self-narrative

Asymmetrical distant conflict

Disengage

Various manifestations of conflict

Direct symmetrical conflict

Reply

(Potentially) confrontational move

62

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

Methodology of the Study

63

contraction and are challenged by their more open opponents. Dialogic contraction or expansion can be found also in direct symmetrical confrontation in that, in opposing their interlocutors and refuting their positions, speakers can display openness or vice versa closure towards others’ views. Figure 3.1 closes this subsection by presenting an attempt to synthesize the complex model of conflict that is applied to film discourse in this study and that captures the various manifestations, both foregrounded and backgrounded, and expressing textual closeness and distance, which the representation of verbal confrontation takes in Italian cinema.

3.6 Conclusion The observation of conflict representation is the key for the investigation of the forms that dialogue takes in film. Verbal confrontation has high dramatic value and generates the audience involvement; conflictual moments are usually extremely meaningful segments in a film and often shed light on the characters. Therefore, an analysis of verbal dissonance is a useful starting point for a characterization of cinematic talk that takes into account the various situational contexts reflected in the films. This methodological section has introduced the model of conflict on which the present study of film dialogue is based. It has explained the relationships between the various analytical tools that are used in the individual chapters and drawn them into a unitary methodological approach to conflict that is situated within a macropragmatic (Mey, 1993) functional interpretation of conversation. A cline has been suggested from a type of confrontation that reflects solidarity, in a form that is direct and foregrounded, to more subtle and distant but not less abrasive forms of discord. In this latter case, conflict is centred on deliberate lack of cooperation and impoliteness (especially Culpeper, 1996 and 2005, and Culpeper et al. 2003), in the sense of an unwillingness to move towards a shared communicative goal which meets the interlocutor’s expectations of a facesafeguarding interaction (Brown and Levinson, 1987). Eggins and

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 63

9/24/2010 2:20:31 PM

64

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Slade’s functional model of conflictual moves, combined with White’s notion of heteroglossia, provides the backbone of a model of conflict in which the modalities and patterns of verbal dissonance are suggestive not solely of the way the rhetorical argument is shaped but also of the emotional relationship between the participants. Conflict is connected with issues of power and dominance and is differently shaped according to the role relationship of the parties involved and the context in which it occurs. By verbally confronting each other, opposing parties construct reality in different ways and define their interaction through the creation of their own texts, thus operating on the three levels of the ideational, interpersonal and textual functions. This study also demonstrates that conflict is not simply located in the immediately adjoining space to a speaker’s utterance, and cannot simply be defined in terms of conversational proximity. Although manifestations of verbal disputes are identifiable at critical moments in a film narrative, in the case of Westerns confrontation can run through a whole film or can be expressed by the different ways in which a narrator presents her story departing from the interviewer’s intentions, as in Antonioni’s When Love Fails. Within this general methodological framework, the forms of conflict in the various films appear all congruently organized as they are either manifestations of engagement or, vice versa, deliberate confrontational disengagement. As the study investigates forms of verbal confrontation with a view to characterizing Italian film discourse, it also offers the opportunity to reflect on the manifestations of conflict as a broad interactional phenomenon. With all the notes of caution that have been expressed vis-à-vis the assimilation of film scripted dialogue to real-life interaction, it seems possible to assume that cinematic discourse be inspired by talk in the real world. Therefore, in agreement with Lakoff and Tannen (1984: 323) this study can claim that ‘artificial dialog may represent an internalized model or schema for the production of conversation – a competence model that speakers have access to.’

RPiazza_03_Final.indd 64

9/24/2010 2:20:32 PM

Chapter Four

Confrontational discourse in comedy and the disengagement of dramatic talk

4.1 Introduction This chapter and the others that follow analyze the various forms of conflict representation in a number of Italian films.1 The first part of this study claims that the representation of different forms of ‘social disharmony’ (Culpeper, 1996 and 2005) maps on to different film genres. This first analytical chapter has a comparative focus as it combines two genres and investigates the conflictual strategies of comedy as opposed to melodrama. Ten films have been selected – five in each genre – belonging to different periods and starting from the 1960s to today’s new realism. From this corpus as for the rest of the data, all confrontation exchanges have been selected and transcribed; a selection of them is presented and discussed to show the different ways in which film conflict is shaped. The claim of this section of the study is that conflict strategies can be posited along a cline from cooperative to uncooperative, from affiliative to disaffiliative disagreement, and that the film genres analysed here can show a preference for one kind or the other. In this chapter and the ones that follow, several terms refer to the notion of conflict described in Chapter Three, which is that of a verbal clash between two or more speakers and expressing both rhetorical and emotional disharmony. Such terms as verbal confrontation, disagreement, dispute and argument as used as synonyms and refer to the idea of a speaker attacking his/her interlocutor verbally and putting his/her face at risk.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 65

9/24/2010 2:21:29 PM

66

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

4.2 The tool kit for the analysis of conflict in comedy and melodrama The overarching methodological framework of this study of conflict representation mostly based on Eggins and Slade (1997) was described in Chapter Three. Confrontational moves, by which a speaker engages in a challenge of his/her interlocutor, can be a straightforward ‘disagree’ or ‘contradict’ or, alternatively, can take the shape of a ‘non-comply’ or ‘withhold’ and involve varying degrees of face threat. In both cases an analysis in terms of adjacency pairs, that is, ‘pragmatically related pair[s] of speech acts’ (Jackson and Jacobs, 1980: 252) can identify the pattern that conflict takes in the two genres of comedy and melodrama. Verbal disagreement can be performed through oppositional moves or turns (Kakava, 2002: 1539) by which two speakers refute each other’s propositions. Such ‘conflicting versions of the “same” event’ (Fele, 1991: 10) can be limited to a minimum of two turns or ‘adversative rounds’ (Kakava, 1993: 408), the second of which triggers confrontation by offering a conflicting version of facts, as in the fabricated example below in which two speakers argue different political views.2 Excerpt (1) A The sooner the Americans get out of Iraq the better. B Nonsense, they must stay and finish the job. Verbal disharmony can also take the form of a more or less clear refusal to cooperate with another speaker, albeit for the purpose of disagreeing. It can be expressed by a break in the exchange and conveyed by either deliberate misinterpretation or silence. In this latter case, conflict discourse can become indirect and tangential; hence ‘argument’ becomes synonymous with a break in the ‘dialogicity’ (Blum-Kulka et al., 2002) or with the flouting of norms of conversational cooperation. In comedy, direct symmetrical confrontation is often expressed by a series of opposing statements. A different set of adjacency pairs, the question-answer pair, characterizes instead the confrontational discourse of melodrama. Disharmony in melodrama

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 66

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

67

therefore appears to be shaped as confrontational dysfluency in that questions, as the first part of an adjacency pair, are avoided and deliberately misinterpreted if perceived as entrapping or aggressive. In this case, Walton’s (1989 and 1991) work on ‘fallacious’ questions, which has been adapted to the interpretation of question-answer pairs in a conflictual situation, adds insight to the expression of confrontation in melodrama.

4.3 Questions of film genre and the definition of the corpus Following their marketing classifications, the films discussed in this chapter have been grouped under the genre categories of ‘comedy’ and ‘melodrama’. By comedy, genre theory refers to one of the earliest cinematic genres, that can range from gag-based and slapstick films to others in which the audience’s smile derives from its familiarity with the social stereotypes treated in the film (Mast, 1976). Comedy has a ‘useful social and psychological function in that it is an arena, or provides an arena, where repressed tensions can be released in a safe manner’ (Hayward, 2000: 73). The element of irreverence and norm-subversion, often found in this genre, is suggestive of its incitement to social change and transformation, although recent debate has questioned the value of this element and claimed that the unconventionality of comedy is totally institutionalized and intrinsic to this genre (Neale and Krutnik, 1990: 83–94). The comedies included in the corpus of the present study often exploit stereotyped characters; this is the case of the Sicilian sailor in Swept Away or the sleek-haired Baron Cefalù in Divorzio all’italiana (Divorce Italian Style, 1961), farcically authorized by the clause 587 of the Italian penal code to ‘divorce’ his adulterous wife by killing her in order to defend his honour. In some other cases (for instance Pane e tulipani, Bread and Tulips, 2000), the films are romantic comedies or women’s comedies or are attempts to revive the grotesque realism typical of the Italian-style comedy (commedia all’Italiana) of the early 1960s (Mille bolle blu). At the end of this section a table lists the films selected for the analysis, the year of production and their directors.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 67

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

68

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Classifying the melodramatic films was more problematic. As for comedy, also for the category of ‘melodrama’ the film industry definition has been assumed of a genre characterized by the seriousness of the topic it covers and the deep stirring of the imagination and emotions it encompasses (Cook and Bernink, 2000: 151). Drama is, by convention, opposed to comic spirit less for the absence of funny moments, than for what in contrast with the logic of the absurd and implausible of comedy, can be called the logic of plausible and realistic. As Wood (2005) observes with reference to early Italian cinema, ‘melodrama, in which stories of dramatic events are staged with maximum attention to the emotional charge, is a flexible theatrical form, permeating all genres and capable of being used for serious intent’ (p. 3). Many diverse films can be easily classified as different exemplifications of melodrama. In the corpus compiled for this section, Una giornata particolare (A Special Day, 1977) for instance can be regarded as ‘historical drama’ in consideration of its setting and documentary inserts, as well as ‘romantic drama’ in consideration of the fleeting love affair it describes. I pugni in tasca (Fists in the Pocket, 1966) is an example of ‘family melodrama’ due to its emphasis on the dysfunctionality of modern family.3 Because of the presence of an individual who dramatically interacts with social institutions, such films that combine dramatic conflict and social analysis (Neale, 2000: 113), as Mery per sempre (Forever Mary, 1988), Il ladro di bambini (The Stolen Children, 1992) or I centi passi (One Hundred Steps, 2001), instead, are social problem dramas that deal with juvenile delinquency and social deprivation, the devastating effects of uprooting due to migration, or the social malaise of mafia criminality. The films are listed below with the English titles with which they have been circulated outside Italy:

Comedy

Melodrama

Divorzio all’italiana (Divorce Italian Style) Germi, 1961

I pugni in tasca (Fists in the Pocket) Bellocchio, 1966

Travolti da un insolito destino in un azzurro mare d’agosto (Swept Away) Wertmüller, 1974

Una giornata particolare (A Special Day) Scola, 1977

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 68

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

69

Che ora è? (What Ttime Is It?) Scola, 1989

Mery per sempre (Forever Mary) Amelio, 1988

Mille bolle blu (Mille bolle blu) Pompucci, 1993

Il ladro di bambini (The Stolen Children) Amelio, 1992

Pane e tulipani (Bread and Tulips) Soldini and Leondeff, 2000

I cento passi (One Hundred Steps) Giordana, Fava, Zapelli, 2001

4.4 The analysis of film dialogue. Verbal confrontation in Italian comedy 4.4.1 The methodological toolkit for the analysis of conflict in comedy The first section of this chapter highlights the pattern of apparent confrontation that indexes comedy. This is generally based on speakers’ continuous, immediate intervention onto their interlocutors’ speech. Such a close and direct confrontation in which speakers assume a symmetrical position and bluntly attack each other without concern for facework (Brown and Levinson, 1987) is approached from the angle of adjacency pairs (Jefferson, 1972, Sacks, 1973b, Schegloff and Sacks, 1973) in that the opposing turns are a series of claim and counter-claim. Conflict in comedy is also considered as a form of direct repair work (Schegloff et al., 1977) that speakers carry out on each other’s contributions. A frequent discourse strategy for expressing confrontation through a string of oppositional moves is ‘addition’ by which a further word is added by a speaker to an interlocutor’s turn, and ‘substitution’ (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 146), by which one element in a sentence is replaced with another with a similar grammatical function (Goodwin and Goodwin, 1987: 211). Both techniques take into account ‘format tying’, or the rules for discourse sequencing, as in the following example from Goodwin and Goodwin (1987: 219), in which one speaker’s command is embedded into a new sentence whose illocutionary value is that of a challenge:

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 69

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

70

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Excerpt (2) Huey: Why don’t you get out my yard. Chopper: Why don’t you make me get out the yard. Maynard’s (1985) interpretation of conflict as a chain of oppositional moves is very much in line with the approach to disputes taken in this chapter. Any utterance or interactional move can, in principle, be interpreted as the opening of an argument if it is responded to conflictually.4 This, however, as Hutchby (1996) points out, does not mean that the initiation of an argument resides only with recipients of a first move because producers of a first turn can utter an evaluative statement or an assessment that becomes the motor of a dispute (p. 23). However, it is in the second turn that the disharmony becomes formally visible. As an illustration of an interaction portraying the struggle for control and power between two interactants, Birch (1991: 55) chooses an excerpt from Peter Handke’s (1973) play The Ride across Lake Constance displaying an apparent turn-rebutting: Excerpt (3) Jannings: Porten: Jannings: Porten: Jannings: Porten:

Why are you grinning? I’m not grinning. Stop fidgeting! I’m not fidgeting, I’m making myself comfortable. Shut your trap! I don’t have a trap.

In the above segment of dramatic speech in which every turn is acknowledged, responded to and contradicted, one speaker attempts to have the upper hand over the other. As in film scripts, the above exchange reproduces the conventions of authentic conflict according to which one speaker reacts by refuting the truth of the proposition contained in the other speaker’s utterance and employing bald on-record impoliteness (Culpeper, 1996). In conclusion, the representation of confrontational discourse often found in comedy, on a formal level, seems characterized by a string of opposing adjacency pairs, that is claim and counterclaim, which refute each other in their propositional content. They can also be regarded as direct other repair turns (Schegloff et al., 1977) by

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 70

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

71

which a speaker intervenes on an interlocutor’s turn and corrects it. The five comedies under study illustrate how such direct strategies are enacted.

4.4.2 Discussion of data Comedy film scripts tend to make the conventions of everyday exchanges extreme and emphatic (Toolan, 2003). Lina Wertmüller’s (1974) Travolti in un insolito destino in un azzurro mare d’agosto (Swept Away)5 revolves around dialectical oppositions between the speakers springing from the ideological divergence in the first part and socio-political divide in the second. In the first part of the film against the context of the cruise that upper class Raffaella, her husband and her wealthy friends are taking to unspoilt corners of the Mediterranean, the opposition is between right-wing Raffaella, who ostensibly defends the Christian Democratic party and one of its leaders, MP La Malfa, and her friend who strenuously defends Italian Communists. The conflict develops generally through paired turns that systematically insist on the same topic through refutation of the previous utterance ‘marked by negative affect’ (Kakava, 2002: 1548); at times an account or justification of the disagreeing proposition is present. The disagreement, therefore, from a topical perspective, is very apparent. Excerpt (4) 1 Raffaella (. . .) L’aveva già previsto La Malfa nel '70 la (verità). 2 Friend La Malfa La Malfa (viene sempre chiamato) l’uccellaccio del malaugurio. 3 Raffaella No carino, è che c’ha le idee più chiare dei socialisti, non parliamo poi dei comunisti. 4 Friend Ma che cacchio c’entrano i comunisti? Che c’hai da dire sui comunisti? 5 Raffaella Ah sui comunisti come organizzatori economici? No dico guarda, dopo cinquant’anni stanno tutti con le scarpe gialle a Mosca e con quelle nere a Stalingrado e poi venite a criticare qui, venite. 6 Friend Perché in Russia non so' mica . . . bottega di sfruttatori industriali, perché in Russia so' disordinati, so' artisti hai capito?

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 71

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

72

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

7 Raffaella Ah artisti eh già già certo, lui Stalin lo vede come genio e sregolatezza ah i campi di concentramento, guarda, li organizzava benissimo in Siberia con una contabilità perfetta. 8 Friend Si, sissignore sempre poco rispetto alla Hiroshima dei tuoi cari Americani. 9 Raffaella Oh Dio oh Dio oh Dio incomincia con Hiroshima adesso! Translation 1 Raffaella (. . .) La Malfa had already foreseen (the truth) in 1970. 2 Friend La Malfa, La Malfa (he is always mentioned) like an evil omen. 3 Raffaella No, darling, the fact is that he has clearer ideas than the Socialists not to mention the Communists 4 Friend What the heck have the Communists got to do with this? What have you got to say against the Communists? 5 Raffaella Against the Communists as economic planners? Look, after fifty years all those with yellow shoes are still in Moscow and those with black shoes are in Stalingrad, and then you have the guts to criticize. 6 Friend Yes, because in Russia they don’t run the country as industrial exploiters do, in Russia they are not organized because they are artists, you understand? 7 Raffaella I see they’re artists, of course he sees Stalin as a symbol of creativity and disorder, well look the concentration camps, he ran them perfectly in Siberia, with impeccable book-keeping skills. 8 Friend Yes true, but that was little compared to the Hiroshima of your dear Americans. 9 Raffaella Oh God oh God oh God he’s started with Hiroshima now! The insistent sequential rebutting of turns ensures the thematic continuity of the interaction, with most turns containing a ‘rejection of the previous proposition, with no delay, justification, or mitigation’ (Blum-Kulka et al., 2002: 1577). Face Threatening Acts (henceforth FTAs) are carried out by bald on-record positive impoliteness,

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 72

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

73

inasmuch as the speakers disapprove of each other and damage their addressee’s positive face wants (Culpeper, 1996). The intensity of the contrast expressed through a string of opposing turns is underlined by the camera movements. The choice of individual as opposed to shared camera shots portraying the speakers involved in the conflict talk underlines such a direct expression of disagreement. In this comedy for instance that revolves around ideological contrasts, the camera is on the speakers individually as they utter their turns; therefore the camera movements, flicking from one speaker to the other, reflect the chain of verbal refutations through which the protagonists confront each other. Such a straightforward representation of conflict in which the verbal is comforted by the images is at times complicated by the presence of multiple characters, which involves a change of role on the part of the viewers. While the two protagonists violently argue about their differing political views, unnoticed by them Sicilian sailor Gennarino, who will become the protagonist of the second part of the film, witnesses the exchanges and, with provocative facial expressions, sides with the attack to conservative Raffaella. In terms of the model proposed in Chapter Two, the appearance of this character external to the dispute imposes on the audience the role of targeted overhearers and corresponds to the category of post-hoc commentary in which the visual and verbal are in a non-synchronous relation, and the visual adds additional information for the viewers (see Figure 4.1).

Figure 4.1 Ideological Contrast on the Boat in Swept Away

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 73

9/24/2010 2:21:30 PM

74

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

The above exchange 4, as others in the film,6 exhibits an unusual use of pronouns, the ‘indexical elements par excellence in that by pointing to concrete individuals, they establish a relationship between the linguistic and the extra-linguistic world’ (De Fina, 2003: 52). Through pronominal choices, speakers express their perceived relationship with the social context thus establishing links between language and reality (ibid.). Pronominal use is a corollary stylistic confrontational resource in the scripted dialogue of Wertmüller’s film. Speakers switch from pronouns that are usually perceived as associative to others that are a token of dissociation;7 this indicates a change of footing or alignment (Goffman, 1981) and expresses a speaker’s orientation and attitude (favourable or otherwise) towards a particular issue, topic, situation and audience. The pronoun used by the two interlocutors tu (informal ‘you’) is the pronoun of solidarity (Brown and Gilman, 1960) and identifies Raffaella and her friend as speakers on an equal plane. However, Raffaella’s sudden switch to the third person lui (‘he’) in line 7 marks a change in the direction of a distancing strategy by which this speaker: (i) abandons the common fighting arena and challenges the symmetry that has characterized their confrontation to that point; (ii) calls in a hypothetical audience that, she assumed, would agree with her in arguing against her friend’s position. By distancing and dissociating herself, Raffaella is attempting to undermine her opponent and acquire more ground for herself in the confrontation. A similar use of pronouns occurs in a subsequent conflict scene between Raffaella and sailor Gennarino in the second part of the film; here through the use of voi (plural ‘you’) and loro (‘they’) implied in the verbs uscite (‘you people go out’) and hanno tutti (‘everybody has’), the woman invokes an inexistent audience.8 Excerpt (5) 1 Raffaella Fortuna si è calmato il mare. Uffa andiamo bene, qua la cosa si fa lunga, poteva venire Pippo che almeno lui di questi motorini è pratico eh, me ne andasse una dritta, ma non ci siamo allontanati troppo? 2 Gennarino E io ce lo dissi che cambiava il vento. 3 Raffaella Ma che c’entra scusi?

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 74

9/24/2010 2:21:31 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

75

4 Gennarino E no, c’entra. 5 Raffaella Si figuri se voglio polemizzare vero, su cerchi di far qualcosa lì. 6 Gennarino E c’è poco da fare. 7 Raffaella Come sarebbe ‘c’è poco da fare’, non lo sa aggiustare. Uh Madonna ma come si fa, ma dico perché uscite coi motorini se poi non siete capaci di farli andare? no dico se c’è una cosa che mi dà ai nervi è l’incompetenza, questo dilettantismo che c’hanno tutti . . . Translation 1 Raffaella At least the sea is calm now. This is really swell, this is going to take a long time, Pippo should have come because at least he has a lot of experience with these little engines, nothing ever goes right, aren’t we a bit too far? 2 Gennarino I told you the wind was going to change. 3 Raffaella Sorry, but what’s that got to do with it? 4 Gennarino No, it’s got a lot to do with it. 5 Raffaella Of course I have no intention to argue, come on try to do something about it. 6 Gennarino There’s not much to do. 7 Raffaella What do you mean, ‘Not much to do’, you are unable to fix it. Oh Virgin Mary, how can one, I mean, why do you people go out at sea in these little boats if you don’t know how they work? I mean if there is one thing that irritates me is people’s incompetence, this amateurism that everybody has . . . As in other cases camera movements underline the distance and disengagement that, still within a pattern of continuous rebutting, characterize this conflict. While the first excerpt 4 was informed by symmetry insomuch as two friends were involved in an ideological conflict, this second exchange is marked by a power imbalance in that Raffaella is Gennarino’s employer thus he is, in this first part of the film, in a subordinate position. Raffaella’s utterances are FTAs, mostly bald on-record negative impolite strategies by which the man is accused by his superior of lacking expertise and professionalism. By switching to anonymizing references (‘you people/people’s

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 75

9/24/2010 2:21:31 PM

76

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 4.2 Argument on the Dinghy in Swept Away

incompetence’), Raffaella takes her distance from Gennarino while still denying and criticizing every utterance he produces. To mark her dissociation from Gennarino in the constrictive space in which the two are, Raffaella averts her gaze from the man as she speaks and is shot mostly in frontal position looking at the empty space ahead of her (see Figure 4.2). Following Fele’s methodological approach to conflict and his work on the discourse of therapeutic sessions (1991), conflict sequences can also be analysed in terms of repair, the ‘aligning actions’ (Stokes and Hewitt, 1976) or the special techniques that ‘conversational parties use in dealing with problems or “troubles” that arise in conversation’ (McLaughlin, 1984: 208). ‘Nothing is, in principle, excludable from the class “repairable” ’ (Schegloff et al., 1977: 363), in exactly the same way that any interactional move – ‘even apparently innocuous statements or actions’ (Hutchby, 1996: 23) – can be treated in oppositional terms and rejected by the next interlocutor, if it contains an element that is perceived as causing disturbance to the conversation. As Fele suggests, oppositional sequences can be equated to repair sequences if one focuses not so much on the ‘repairable’ element in the first turn but on the response move in the second one. As pointed out by Maynard (1985), it is the second turn that characterizes the repair as it contains a move to address an alleged repairable; similarly, in a string of conflicting moves, the second one opens the conflict by opposing the proposition contained in the first turn, because ‘oppositional moves . . . depend on the recipient electing to treat the

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 76

9/24/2010 2:21:31 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

77

prior turn as arguable’ (Hutchby, 1996: 23). Thus, disagreement sequences become ‘Action-Opposition sequences’ (Hutchby, 1996), similar to adjacency pairs or a combined set of two turns with interrelated functions like question/answer or invitation/accept-decline. Repair procedures are grouped in classes of ‘self-repair’ if the problematic item is handled by the same speaker who produced it, and ‘other-repair’, in the case in which another speaker intervenes to carry out the correction. A further distinction can be drawn, depending on which interlocutor signals the need for repair, between ‘selfinitiated’ (as in the reconstructed excerpt 6 below) and ‘other-initiated’ repair (as in excerpt 7). Excerpt (6) Student These are expressions that place contingencies on the degree of qualifications of the interlocutor and the propri – proper – how do you say that? Tutor Propriety. Student and on the propriety of his/her utterances. (Author’s data) Excerpt (7) Eddie What’re they doing? May It’s not a ‘they’. It’s a ‘she’. (Shepard, 1984, Fool for Love) In a non-conflictual interaction, speakers’ preference is for selfrepair as opposed to other-repair (Schegloff et al., 1977), in consideration of the risk that other repair implies to face (Brown and Levinson, 1978). Direct other-repair is postponed as much as possible and possibly concealed (Sacks, 1973b: 58), confirming the social expectation for agreement that governs ordinary conversation (Pomerantz, 1975). Contrariwise, in a situation of interactional disharmony the preferred form of repair is both other-repair and otherinitiated repair. In the attempt to discredit their interlocutor by offering an alternative version of facts, speakers can produce a number of sequences in which they deny, refute or substitute elements in the original turn (Brenneis and Lein, 1977; Lein and Brenneis, 1978). Overlapping and even interruption can occur if tension is high.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 77

9/24/2010 2:21:31 PM

78

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

In the conflict exchanges of Swept Away, the repair format follows two patterns. It can be a pair of interlocking turns each refuting the previous one. In exchange 4 earlier, for instance, turns 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6, 7 and 8 function as rebutting adjacent propositions. Alternatively, confrontation can take the shape of a triad consisting of a first turn containing the declarative assertion and the alleged repairable or the objectable point, followed by a trigger for self-repair or other-repair, and signed off by a third turn in which the first speaker insists on reaffirming her/his own proposition. In one of the opening sequences of the film (8), Raffaella and her friend are involved in yet another verbal duel. Raffaella’s proposal of a mass birth control for the proletariat as the only way to save Italy from lower class overpopulation is so surreal that her opponent’s criticism is immediate. Excerpt (8) 1 Raffaella (. . .) per salvare quel pochissimo, vero, che resta dell’Italia bisognerebbe prendere tutti gli Italiani e chiuderli in una riserva da un’altra parte, soprattutto quelli prolifici. 2 Friend Ma in che senso scusa? Una proposta di legge per la sterilizzazione delle masse? 3 Raffaella Si certo si, c’è poco da fare gli spiritosi caro, si dovrebbe e come che si dovrebbe eh Translation 1 Raffaella (. . .) in order to rescue the very little that is left of Italy, one should take all Italians and lock them up in a reservation, especially the prolific ones. 2 Friend Excuse me, what do you mean? Are you thinking of a bill for mass sterilization? 3 Raffaella Yes darling, there is nothing to laugh about my dear, such a measure should be implemented, it really should. Raffaella’s first turn contains the proposition of a reduction of part of the population. Her friend offers a trigger for a self-repair in turn 2 (‘Excuse me, in what sense?’), ‘a move in an incipient argument: a manoeuvre by which the floor is thrown back’ (Hutchby, 1996: 49)

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 78

9/24/2010 2:21:31 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

79

and an invitation to Raffaella to retract her initial assertion. However, in line 3 Raffaella insists on her previous point with the ironic use of a term of endearment (‘darling’). On the visual level, the conflict is expressed by the camera on the two opponents alternatively in an individual shot. The choice of a semi angle portrayal suggests that these speakers are looking at each other hence the eyelines function as vectors expressing the directionality of the exchange. The clarity of details and the high visibility of the speakers involved in the dispute also contribute to the high visual modality of the scene and its realistic representation according to Kress and van Leeuwen’s model (1996). In this comedy, disagreement, generally aggravated, reveals an intimate coordination between the speakers and is the token of their solidarity. The conversational parties are in a situation of physical and affective proximity; as a result, although most of the film is based on conflict talk, in none of the exchanges there is a single break of ‘dialogicity’ (Blum-Kulka et al., 2002) in term of a halt to the conversational flow and all exchanges express a direct and cooperative mode of confrontation. The same persistent affiliative conflict constructed as a repair-based sequel of continuous refutations is the pattern found in most films belonging to the comedy genre, although not always to the same intense degree that was identified in Swept Away. In Germi’s 1961 Divorzio all’italiana (Divorce Italian Style), often seen as ‘a plea’ for the legalization of divorce, which was passed nearly a decade later in 1972 (Sorlin, 1996: 123), the few instances of conflict talk for instance between the two patriarchs, the father of the male protagonist, Baron Cefalù, and his brother-in-law reiterate the usual structure of a first turn containing an alleged repairable (‘You mustn’t touch her’), a second one proposing a direct alteration (‘she’s also my wife’), and so on through a string of opposing turns. Excerpt (9) 1 Baron’s father Questa è mia sorella hai capito? e non la devi toccare. 2 Brother-in-law È anche mia moglie e mi vuole mettere il bastone tra le ruote. A casa MIA comando IO.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 79

9/24/2010 2:21:31 PM

80

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

3 4 5 6

Baron’s father Casa TUA, casa tua quando la paghi! Farabutto. Brother-in-law Cafone . . . Baron’s father Farabutto Brother-in-law A casa mia faccio quello che mi pare e piace. Il mio interesse me lo faccio da solo. Decido io sulla vita di mia figlia, chiaro? 7 Baron’s father Mascalzone . . . Translation 1 Baron’s father This is my sister, do you get it? You mustn’t touch her. 2 Brother-in-law She is also my wife and wants to oppose my plans. Every man is master in his own house. 3 Baron’s father Your house, yours when you’ve paid for it. 4 Brother-in-law Bugger . . . 5 Baron’s father Bastard 6 Brother-in-law In my house I do whatever I like. I look after my own interests. I’m the one who decides on my daughter’s life, is that clear? 7 Baron’s father Prick . . . In the above scene, the disharmony is marked by the punctual substitution of the repairable terms (‘sister/wife’ and ‘my/yours’) and is later accompanied by insults. At the opening, the audience gets the same outsider’s view of the confrontation as Baron Cefalù who, through the windows of the house, sees his father and uncle arguing, then the camera takes us inside where the two men are fighting, literally held back by a crowd of women. The brother-in-law, being the more relevant of the two in this instance, is shown more clearly while the Baron’s father tends to be seen at an angle. Down to line 5 the scene is portrayed in a shared shot with the two opponents waving their arms as vectors and expressing clear transactionality. From line 6 the camera is on a single shot on the brother-in-law whose gaze is clearly directed to his contender. Comedy derives its dynamism and vital charge more from its dashing-sounding language than from its narrative situations. As a consequence, script-writers may choose to give the illusion of real talk

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 80

9/24/2010 2:21:31 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

81

by reproducing an interaction that reduces contrast to a tit-for-tat straightforward duet. Pompucci’s Mille bolle blu (1993), where several narrative threads are intertwined and the many characters brought together under the sun’s eclipse of summer 1961 in a mixture of humour and sentimentalism, replicates the patterns identified in previous films. The dialogues represent stereotypical conversational situations between brothers and sisters, children, lovers and married couples in which confrontation is again synonymous with turn after turn-refutation. In the first conflict sequence in excerpt (10) below a woman refutes her husband’s attempt to shake off responsibility for the behaviour of his unruly children (‘these children of yours’) by arguing that they misbehave because she is the only one in charge of their upbringing. The husband’s self-defence in line 3 (‘I spend the whole (. . .) in that (. . .) office’) is rebutted ironically in line 4; this last utterance is ignored by the man who restates his earlier point insisting on his wife’s failure as a parent. Excerpt (10) 1 Husband Guarda che risultato 'sti figli tuoi (. . .) 2 Wife (? ?) Li ho fatti e cresciuti con lo spirito santo! 3 Husband Ma se io sto tutto (il tempo) e il giorno chiuso in quell’ufficio fetente. 4 Wife E io invece non lavoro. 5 Husband Non li sai educare, uno torna a casa per stare tranquillo, ecco cosa trova. Translation 1 Husband Look at these children of yours! Such outcome! (. . .) 2 Wife (? ?) I had them with the Holy Ghost! 3 Husband I spend the whole (time) and day locked up in that bloody office. 4 Wife Yes, instead I do nothing of course. 5 Husband You do not know how to bring them up, one comes home to be quiet, and that’s what one finds. In the same film, even when conflict opens up to a multiparty exchange, the pattern of other-repair refutation still holds as in the

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 81

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

82

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

confrontation between two brothers and their sister at their father’s deathbed. The repair work is not based on sole repetition of previous turns but on implied meaning. Therefore, by such a claim as ‘I have the right to start living’, the woman casts herself as a victim of the family pressure as the brother hints in his response in line 3. Excerpt (11) 1 Younger brother [Talking about Mario, his sister’s boyfriend] Eh già prima si magna gli spaghetti e poi il conto in banca. 2 Tecla Ma come ti permetti di parlare così, ma tu chi sei? Io ho diritto di cominciare a vivere. 3 Older brother Nun fa' la vittima. 4 Tecla So’ vent’anni che aspetto, io non mi so’ sposata per voi. 5 Younger brother Tu non ti sei mai voluta sposare e ora (viene) questo che vuole i nostri soldi. 6 Tecla I soldi sono i MIEI. 7 Older brother Ma chi è? È un morto de fame, è più giovane di te. 8 Tecla E allora? 9 Older brother Ma te sei vista? C’hai 45 anni. 10 Younger brother Non è nessuno. 11 Tecla TU non sei nessuno, FALLITO (. . .) 12 Younger brother Sei vecchia. 13 Older brother Ammazza oh con papà così, fate schifo. Translation 1 Younger brother [Talking about Mario, his sister’s boyfriend] First he eats up our spaghetti then the bank account. 2 Tecla How dare you speak like that, who are you? I have the right to start living. 3 Older brother Don’t play the victim. 4 Tecla I have been waiting for twenty years, I never got married because of you. 5 Younger brother You didn’t want to get married and now this one (comes) who wants our money. 6 Tecla It’s MY money. 7 Older brother Who is he? He’s a beggar, he’s younger than you. 8 Tecla So what?

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 82

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy 9 10 11 12 13

83

Older brother Have you looked at yourself? You’re 45. Younger brother He’s nobody. Tecla YOU are nobody, you’re a FAILURE (. . .) Younger brother You’re old. Older brother Good God, with dad lying there, you’re disgusting.

Unseen by the people violently arguing, the house maid is listening in, an expression of mixed commiseration and recrimination on her face. As in other scenes, the visual imposes the very active role of targeted overhearers on the viewers who can see more than the quarrelling interactive participants can, according to the category of posthoc commentary. On the verbal plane, the violent vulgarity of this triadic exchange is heightened by the upfront nature of the otherrepair (e.g. turns 2–3, 4–5, 5–6, 10–11) and the abrasive insults that the three siblings throw at each other (e.g. 11, 12, 13). In the different context of committee meetings Kangasharju (2002) observes that disagreement is expressed chorally with two or more speakers teaming up in the course of the discussion and ‘oppositional alliances’ being formed after relevant assessments are produced or following ‘stance-takings’, which call for a speaker’s response (p. 1452). Similarly, the above conflict sequence starts off as a choral opposition between Tecla and her two brothers. The older brother accuses her of playing the victim in line 3 and the younger brother backs him up. Soon though, the oppositional alliance between the brothers on one side, and Tecla on the other, breaks down to become, in turns 11 and 12, the open dissent between Tecla and her younger brother. Although the portrayal of conflict talk in the comedies discussed so far is informed by a view of contrast as insistent, repetitive and above all unmitigated, there are differences on the visual level. In the exchanges in Swept Away the camera favours individual shots of the subjects involved in the conflict and, by switching between speakers, it reflects visually the verbal rebutting. In the other comedies, on the contrary, in which the conflict is of a less ideological nature and centred on more intimate issues, the speakers tend to be seen in shared shots. In the earlier violent multiparty conflict between three siblings trying to lay their hands on their father’s fortune (Mille bolle blu), the use of vectors by the two men heightens the argument and

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 83

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

84

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

clarifies the directionality of the openly impolite contrast. In front of their sister and their respective wives, the two men’s stretched arms leave no doubt as to where the conflict lies and between whom. The first part of this analysis section has so far discussed examples of Italian comedies that exhibit a somewhat monolithical portrayal of conflict talk. In the selected excerpts when characters confront each other in an argument, they tend to produce a relentless string of turns, often showing heavy aggravation. Each turn is taken up by the next speaker, negated without any sign of modulation or explanation according to what Millar and Rogers (1976: 96) call ‘competitive symmetry’. In this form of contrast, as opposed to submissive symmetry, the speakers’ messages are of similar type, that is, both competitive and confrontational; each speaker tries to gain the upper hand and modify the interlocutor’s behaviour as in the excerpt below. Excerpt (12) Leonardo No, tu non credi in me, la verità è che tu non ci hai mai creduto in me. Elena Non è vero, le prime quindici volte ti ho creduto.9 Translation Leonardo No, you do not believe in me, the truth is that you never believed in me. Elena That is not true, the first fifteen times I believed in you. Seen from the perspective of repair work, the proposed alteration to the repairable item, which is contained in the next speaker’s otherrepair, is usually rejected by the first speaker and in the last turn of the sequence the original proposition is reformulated with abrasive insistence. There are cases in which the disagreement is slightly modulated. In general, however, the pattern in the observed comedies is that of a sustained unhalted conflict between two or more speakers who compete for control on symmetrical grounds. In conclusion, the confrontational style that has been evidenced in Italian comedies mostly corresponds to the two forms discussed by Blum-Kulka et al. (2002): ‘ungrounded disagreement’, in that it is a blunt abrasive conflict based on a total or partial rejection of the proposition

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 84

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

85

contained in the previous turn without modulation, and ‘grounded disagreement’, a negative response followed by a proposition which justifies the refutation and may invite further negotiation (pp. 1576–8). These in general are the patterns encountered in these comedies that contrast with other representations of conflict in melodrama as is discussed in the following subsection.

4.5 The analysis of conflict talk in melodrama 4.5.1 The methodological toolkit for the analysis of a different expression of conflict Kozloff (2000: 174) traces the immediacy and efficacy of the dialogue in ‘screwball’ romantic comedies to the use of the ‘repartee’, similar to the pattern found in the comedies of Shakespeare, Congreve or Oscar Wilde, in which speakers systematically rebut to their interlocutors by critically appropriating an element in their turn. In melodrama, as in comedy, characters argue by opposing contrasting views and refuting those of their interlocutors by a ‘disagree’ or ‘contradict’ move. Similar to the conflictual dialogue of comedy, confrontational exchanges in melodrama may exhibit a series of contradicting and disagreeing moves in response to an initiation as in the following scene from Una giornata particolare (A Special Day, Scola, 1977), revolving around the melancholic romantic encounter of a disillusioned housewife and a homosexual anti-fascist intellectual on the day of Hitler’s historical visit to Mussolini in Rome. A few words are useful to situate the analysis. It is early morning and the whole family is getting ready to take part in the fascist parade to greet the Führer. On coming out of the bathroom, Antonietta’s chauvinist husband dried his hands on her skirt. In a tense exchange, the man bemoans his wife’s slovenliness and she expresses her disconcert for his boisterous attitude, a token of which is his pornographic magazines she has discovered in the house. Excerpt (13) 1 Wife Se ti ci vuoi sofia' pure il naso non fa' complimenti. 2 Husband Capirai, vai in giro che fai schifo!

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 85

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

86

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

3 Son Sabato mi hanno fregato pure il ‘pon pon’. 4 Husband Non si dice ‘pon pon’, è parola straniera, chiamalo fiocco, mappa, non so italianizza, chiamalo ‘ponpono’. 5 Wife E tu italianizza pure i giornali che porti a casa! 6 Husband Ma che sta' a di'?vostra madre si è alzata storta stamattina. Translation 1 Wife If you want to blow your nose with it, go ahead. 2 Husband What do you expect? The way you go around dressed is revolting! 3 Son Last Saturday someone stole my ‘pon pon’. 4 Husband Don’t say ‘pon pon’, it’s a foreign word, call it tuft, tassel, I don’t know, italianize it, call it ‘ponpono’.10 5 Wife And you, italianize the magazines you bring home! 6 Husband What are you talking about? Your mother woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. In the above scene, the closing line already displays the dissociative disagreement that indexes most conflict in melodrama (‘What are you talking about?’); this is reinforced by the man’s appeal to the children (‘Your mother’) called upon to be witnesses and potential participants to the dialogue, in the man’s attempt to get out of the conflict arena. For the rest the confrontational replies take the form of an ironical11 offer in turn 1, a bluntly contradicting move in turn 4 that works as a direct unmitigated repair,12 and a conflicting disavowal in turn 6 following the wife’s further ironical statement in (5). On a visual plane, while the couple is in a shared medium shot, the two speakers’ gaze is revealing of the tension between them. Neither speaker directs gaze at the other interlocutor but while Antonietta has a disillusioned expression, her husband takes a front position in the shot and moves forward looking ahead, thus taking a distance from his wife and showing his power by occupying the physical space in front of her and closer to the viewers. Dissociation, as is discussed in this section, is a characterizing feature of melodrama in contraposition to the associative symmetrical competition of comedy and the above exchange anticipates this feature in terms of the mise-en-scène.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 86

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

87

Like comedy, therefore, melodrama portrays conflict as a sequential refutation of opposing turns. However, associative conflict does not exhaust the complexity of the dramatic interaction, significantly marked by more intense expressions of disharmony and dissociation. The confronting responses that characterize melodramatic conflict often correspond to ‘non-comply’ or ‘withhold’ (in Eggins and Slade’s model, 1997: 208), two moves by which speakers deliberately fail to fulfil the interactional expectations of their interlocutors by expressing the inability, or unwillingness, to perform a requested task, or provide the demanded information. A general look at the representation of conflict talk in comedy and melodrama, therefore, suggests that modalities of verbal confrontation can be posited along a cline that goes from extremely associative and cooperative patterns of comedy to the dissociative and uncooperative dysfluency of melodrama. In the middle, as is shown in the final section of this chapter, between comedy and melodrama are the hybrid cases of realistic/ serious comedies that borrow conversational techniques from both genres. The second part of this chapter illustrates the forms of confrontational dysfluency typical of confrontation representation in melodrama. Blum-Kulka et al. (2002) treat the breakdown in dialogicity as a token of confrontation and identify the foundation of noncooperation in a breach of the ethical obligations according to which speakers must speak, listen and respond in order to keep a conversation going. These authors refer to Mauss’s work (1954) on social connections as gifts that people are obliged to exchange in a never-ending chain. In conversation, a break in the questionanswer pair can be seen as a sign of disrespect for social rules in so far as the ‘gift’ of a question is metaphorically not acknowledged as such and sent back by the respondent. In such cases of communication breakdowns, communication exists on the semantic level, because what is said is understood, but there is no, or only partial, communication on the pragmatic level, because there is no effective cooperation. The intentions and objectives of speaker and hearer are different, opposed, or even contradictory. (Marcondes, 1985: 424)

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 87

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

88

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

The subtle conflict typical of melodrama that produces a non-cooperative break in the conversational flow can still be explained in terms of adjacency pairs; however, in this genre one has to account for nonfluencies and silences conveying confrontation. Walton’s work on the fallacy of questioning (1989 and 1991) usefully contributes to an interpretation of the question-answer pairs as conflictual turns. Following research by Jacobs (1989), Van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1984), among others, Walton focuses on uncooperative questions that are biased and intended to trick the respondent. He terms them loaded questions or questions where the respondent is not committed to the presupposition (or some part of the presupposition) of the question. In a stronger sense, a question may be said to be loaded where the respondent is committed to the opposite of the presupposition, or some part of it. (1991: 340) Questions of this type are seen as failing to fulfil the real function of cooperative questioning and are viewed as perpetrating a ‘fallacy in questioning’ often realized by loaded questions or complex questions ‘containing a multiple presupposition’ (ibid.). As an exemplification the fallacious question, ‘Have you stopped beating your spouse?’ is intended to trap unequivocably the respondent to an admission of responsibility, as whichever way s/he answers the question, the respondent will have pleaded guilty to domestic violence. Confrontational discourse may display questions that are not properly fallacious but that are ‘unfairly one-sided or biased’ (Walton, 1991: 348). If faced with a difficult or intentionally manipulative question, respondents tend to ‘reply to it with a question, or with a repudiation of its presupposition’ (p. 344) to avoid being trapped by its presupposition. Hence, although avoiding the question may appear as ‘a fallacy of irrelevance’ (p. 351), in the case of a loaded or aggressive question, the best way to reply is with an answer that does not honour the presupposition contained in the question, or resort to a non-comply move as confronting reply (Eggins and Slade’s model 1977, see Chapter 3, Figure 3.1). The questioner can reserve the right to re-propose and re-formulate the original question in the attempt to get the respondent to address it, as in Figure 4.3, adapted from Walton.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 88

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy Complex, aggressive, → Reply instead of answer → loaded question

89

Renewed question or equivalent move to obtain a direct answer

Figure 4.3 Questioning Pattern in Walton (1991)

Although not immediately fallacious from a formal viewpoint, or intrinsically hostile, questions in a conflict can be treated by the respondent in the very same way in which a fallacious question is best addressed by a skilful respondent. The conflict then is signalled by question evasion, or an apparent fallacy of irrelevance of an act that ignores the constricting rules of question-answering in ordinary conversation.

4.5.2 The analysis of conflict strategies in melodrama Several strategies of non-comply or withhold were identified in the analysed dramas as strategies for deflecting confrontation by disengagement. When characters are confronted with a (potentially) aggressive question, they can respond with: (i) a reply instead of an answer, that is to say, a response that repudiates or ignores the presupposition of the original question by not satisfying it; (ii) total question avoidance or straightforward silence; or (iii) a reply in the form of a new question. In what follows, I discuss some scenes from the selected Italian melodramas that exhibit these three strategies.

4.5.2.1 First strategy: reply for an answer An exemplification of the first type of strategy is found in the following scene from Amelio’s Il ladro di bambini (The Stolen Children, 1992). The film is centred on the attempt of carabineer, Italian gendarme, Antonio to find a home for two children from an abusive and deprived single-parent family. During their journey to Sicily,13 Antonio develops a fatherly relationship with young Rosetta, who at the opening of the film we see as prostituted by her mother, and her brother Luciano, suffering from asthma, although the illusion of a parental intimacy is unexpectedly aborted at the end. In excerpt 14 below, one character similarly replies improperly to the interlocutor with an utterance – of Biblical undertone – that appears out of synch with the question and

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 89

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

90

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

alludes to the recovering of the implicature that needs to be done if one wants to make sense of the answer. In other words, Rosetta means that she does not know where Luciano is as she is not in charge of controlling his whereabouts. Excerpt (14) Scene 1914 Antonio Tuo fratello, dov’è? Rosetta Non sono la sua guardiana. Translation Antonio Your brother, where is he? Rosetta I’m not his guardian. A similar strategy is present in I cento passi (One Hundred Steps), a biopic of Peppino Impastato, who denounced Mafia and was blown up by a load of dynamite on a railway line on the night of 8 May 1978. In the scene below (15), Peppino’s father storms into the dining room, where the family is gathered round the table, waving a copy of the newspaper, L’idea socialista, where Peppino’s new attack to Mafia has appeared. Excerpt (15) 1 Father Che minchia mi rappresenta questo?!15 [Peppino ostenta tranquillità:] 2 Peppino . . . Un giornale . . . 3 Father [Furioso] Ah sì, un giornale! E la firma?! Giuseppe Impastato! [Lo afferra per il collo] Quello stronzo di Venuti non ce le ha le palle per firmarselo da solo questo giornale? 4 Peppino [Calmo] Stefano Venuti non c’entra. È stata mia l’idea. 5 Father Bravo, pure l’idea ti è venuta . . . E come c’è scritto? La Mafia è una montagna di merda! E adesso io come ce la metto la faccia fuori dalla porta? Translation 1 Father What the fuck is this?! [Peppino parades his calm] 2 Peppino . . . A newspaper . . . 3 Father [Furious] Oh yeah, a newspaper! And the signature?! Giuseppe Impastato! [He grabs him by the neck] Hasn’t that bastard Venuti got the balls to sign his own newspaper?

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 90

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

91

4 Peppino [Calm] Stefano Venuti has nothing to do with this. It was my idea. 5 Father Good, you even had the idea . . . And what does it say? The Mafia is a mountain of crap! How can I show my face outside the house now? The opening question in the first turn is charged with insulting aggressiveness (‘What the fuck’) mixed with deliberately vague pronominal reference (‘this’). Clearly, the father is demanding an explanation from his son. From a formal point of view, this is not an immediately loaded or complex question that commits a fallacy in questioning. However, its referential vagueness – in the use of the demonstrative pronoun ‘questo’ (‘this’), whose ‘exophoric’ or external reference (Halliday and Hasan, 1979) could be either the newspaper article or Peppino’s signature on it, is not immediately clear – coupled with the vulgarity of the opening makes the question complex and hostile. Peppino appears ostentatiously calm in his reply to his father’s question and deflects his attack, by repudiating the proposition of his question. By playing dumb, he pretends to interpret his father’s question as an information-seeking question pertaining to the nature of the object he is waving in his hand, hence ‘What is this?’ ‘It is a newspaper’. Following this opening questionanswer adjacency pair, the conflict between son and father comes to the fore in all its fury. The exchange is visually dynamic and includes both shared and individual shots at different moments in the conflict. The violence of the aggression is expressed by the anger with which the father storms into the room (Figure 4.4) which contrasts with the domestic intimacy amongst the mother, Peppino and his brother gathered for lunch. Only the TV news about the university students’ protests visually anticipates the upcoming disruption of that seemingly quiet moment. There is spatial imbalance between the two interlocutors who are positioned at two unequal levels and have a very different control on the surrounding context. The father, standing, invades Giuseppe’s sitting space as he throws himself on to his son and starts the verbal attack. The newspaper he waves in front of Giuseppe’s eyes, a clear vector indicating transactionality, soon becomes a weapon with which the young man is hit. Giuseppe’s reply is a diverted gaze

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 91

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

92

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 4.4 The Newspaper Scene in One Hundred Steps

at the opening of the verbal attack and then a physical self-defence. In the next scene, still within the same confrontation sequence, the father’s slightly decreased aggressivity is marked by his lower position vis-à-vis his son now towering over him. The multiple shots and camera angles extend to the inclusion of the other represented participants, Giuseppe’s mother and younger brother, who as the father utters his desperate appeal for help – ‘How can I show my face outside the house now?’ – are caught by the camera indicating the impact of the conflict on them.

4.5.2.2 Second strategy: silence as an answer In melodramatic films, silence is often the conflictual reply to an aggressive question or the way in which speakers convey their intention to disengage from the interaction through a non-comply as a token of confrontation. A stall in the communication coupled with coercive and infelicitous questions is another strategy of I cento passi, where silence is both a strategy for dealing with complex and aggressive questions as in excerpt 16 below. Excerpt (16) Father Si disonesto, si bastaso, tu unn' hai cuore. Ma non lo capisci che se parli così quelli ti ammazzano? Peppino E se quelli mi ammazzano tu che fai?

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 92

9/24/2010 2:21:32 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

93

Translation Father You’re dishonest, disrespectful, and heartless. Don’t you understand that if you speak like that, they’re gonna kill you? Peppino What will you do if they kill me? In the visually intense scene, the camera is in a shared shot on the two men; the father sitting hence in a lower position grabs his son’s shirt and pulls his face close to his. As Peppino asks his question, he frees himself from his father’s hold in a dramatic single shot and leaves the room. At the same time as this happens, the father turns to his wife looking for a supportive gaze. Amelio’s Meri per sempre (Forever Mary), centred on the experience of a teacher in a youth detention centre, is the last film discussed in this section. The film offers a gallery of deprived characters whose pathetic reality deeply touches the teacher who at the end of the film decides to give up a much less daunting job in a normal school and stays on. The film contains numerous moments of tension between the teacher, representing the authority, albeit unconventional, and the adolescents, who feel rejected by society and have no beliefs in what institutions can offer them. The youngsters are determined to defy their teacher as in the following exchange, in which Claudio, a young man who barely escaped rape by betraying his assailant to the detention guards, has come back to attend lessons. Excerpt (17) 1 Teacher Claudio, dai vieni. 2 Student U spiune ca unnu vuleamo. 3 Teacher Guarda che decido io chi entra e chi non entra in questa classe, se non ti dispiace. 4 Student Ma qua nessuno di noi lo vuole. 5 Teacher È vero? [Looks at the boy, facing the window, who acts as the group leader – 0.4 ] Sentite ragazzi, Claudio ha fatto quello che doveva fare, c’è stato costretto. Allora sentiamo, secondo voi, cosa doveva fare, farsi violentare e starsene zitto? Eh? [0.4] Vi ho fatto una domanda, mi volete rispondere? 6 Student Doveva farsi rispettare se non voleva starci.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 93

9/24/2010 2:21:33 PM

94

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Translation 1 Teacher Come on Claudio, come in. 2 Student We don’t want that spy here. 3 Teacher Look, it’s me who decides those who can or cannot come to class, if you don’t mind. 4 Student But here none of us wants him. 5 Teacher Is that true? [Looks at the boy, facing the window, who acts as the group leader – 0.4] Look boys, Claudio did what needed to be done, he was forced to do it. Let’s see, in your opinion, what was he supposed to do, let himself be raped and keep quiet about it? Ah? [0.4] I’ve asked you a question, will you answer me? 6 Student He had to make himself be respected if he didn’t want to do it. The teacher, standing by Claudio against the whole class, addresses the students with a series of questions, which grow considerably in intensity, from the first broad one ‘Is that true?’ to the next two that hone in on the crux of the matter ‘what was he supposed to do?’ The answer, however, is an ominous silence as the youngsters refuse to engage in a dialogue with the teacher, who is forced to use a metastatement (‘I’ve asked you a question’) in the attempt to obtain a reply. As in previous cases, the choice of camera movements is varied, from individual shots on the teacher insisting on his question and one of the students finally replying in line 6, to a shared shot in which the two speakers are threateningly face to face. In conclusion, in melodrama a further confrontation strategy is question avoidance, especially expressed by silence as an explicit strategy for conflict and for confronting aggressive questions in the context of interactional disharmony.

4.5.2.3 Third strategy: questions as replies The last way of replying to aggressive questions, widely represented in this corpus, is to use other questions. In Amelio’s Il ladro di bambini (Stolen Children, 1992), carabineer Antonio becomes a surrogate father for the two abused children whom he is in charge of taking to

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 94

9/24/2010 2:21:33 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

95

an orphanage; at the opening of the film however the tension between Antonio, Rosetta and Luciano is palpable. Although there are cases of other-correction expressing disagreement,16 the frequently recurring technique is the use of ill fitted question-answer pairs, which suggest the speakers’ intention to break the communication and deny any shared communality of reference. In the following scene on the train, for instance, Antonio avoids Rosetta’s question in turn 6 by replying with a direct correction or other-repair, then in turn 10 he responds with a new question to Rosetta’s query. Sandwiched in between these two avoided questions is a direct other-repair in turn 8 clearly implying disagreement (Schegloff et al., 1977: 381) and conveying confrontation. Excerpt (18) Scene 1117 1 Antonio Ho preso i panini anche per voi. Ne hai fame? [Rosetta is looking in the dark outside.] 2 Rosetta Che c’è dentro? [She turns but looks at the sandwich bag not Antonio.] 3 Antonio Salame e formaggio. 4 Rosetta Non mi piace. Era meglio se prendevi una bottiglia d’acqua. [Looks out again.] [Pause. Antonio eats clearly uneasy.] 5 Rosetta Dov’è andato l’altro poliziotto? . . . Vi siete litigati? 6 Antonio Non è un poliziotto . . . È un carabiniere. 7 Rosetta È uguale. 8 Antonio. Non è uguale. 9 Rosetta [Guardando la giberna della bandoliera di Antonio] La tieni lì la pistola? 10 Antonio Oh, ma che t’interessa? Translation 1 Antonio I got sandwiches for you as well. Are you hungry? [Rosetta is looking in the dark outside.] 2 Rosetta What kind? [She turns but looks at the sandwich bag not Antonio.] 3 Antonio Cheese and salami.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 95

9/24/2010 2:21:33 PM

96

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

4 Rosetta I don’t like them. It was better if you bought a bottle of water. [Looks out again.] [Pause. Antonio eats clearly uneasy.] 5 Rosetta Where’s the other policeman? . . . Did you have an argument? 6 Antonio He’s not a policeman . . . He’s a gendarme. 7 Rosetta It’s the same. 8 Antonio It’s not the same. 9 Rosetta [Looking at the cartridge-pouch of Antonio’s bandoleer] Do you keep your gun there? 10 Antonio Hey, what do you care? The exchange opens with a distant and disengaged Rosetta. Sitting with her arms folded on the table in front of her and looking outside or down, she conveys animosity and distance. To the man’s offer and question, she replies with a subsequent question and a decline of his show of courtesy. As Antonio enters the carriage, the camera is on close up on his gun that metonymically indicates his main accoutrement for the entire person. Also, the gun is what Rosetta sees from her sitting position and what she directs her gaze to carefully avoiding to look at Antonio. The intensity of the verbal confrontation is underlined visually by the very few eyelines (none from Rosetta); all shots are individual to mark the disengagement between the speakers. The absence of clear vectors is also a token of confrontation especially on behalf of the girl who, tucked in her corner, her arms folded, refuses to establish any physical connection with Antonio. Finally the camera at an angle on Rosetta conveys her detachment from the interlocutor as well as the surrounding context (see Figure 4.5). In a similar fashion, two scenes later Antonio displays noncooperation as he gives Rosetta an implicit reply in the form of a question the understanding of which involves a recovering of the implicature (Sperber and Wilson, 1995). This is a sign of his annoyance that the arrival at their appointed destination is not a ‘manifest’ fact to Rosetta, that is it is not a fact that she is capable of ‘representing mentally’ and whose ‘representation’ she accepts as ‘true or probably true’ (ibid.: 39).

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 96

9/24/2010 2:21:33 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

97

Figure 4.5 Rosetta on the Train in The Stolen Children

Excerpt (19) Rosetta Siamo arrivati?18 Antonio Che, non lo vedi? Translation Rosetta Are we there? Antonio Can’t you see that? The Stolen Children ends tragically: in spite of the carabineer’s pursuit of a home for the children, his actions are ill-interpreted by his superiors, who charge him with abducting Luciano and his sister. The visible tension marking once more the exchanges amongst the three reflects Antonio’s despondency. In the following exchange young Luciano, with whom the carabineer has established a fatherly rapport, feels particularly let down. The string of questions he asks suggest his attempt to communicate with Antonio, now hurt and distant; but the man’s answers are a brutal threat to the boy’s face as they hint to his obtusity (line 4) and the irrelevance of his inquiries (line 8). Excerpt (20) Scene 4719 1 Luciano [ad Antonio] Ora dove andiamo? 2 Antonio [secco]. All’istituto. 3 Luciano Ci porti subito?

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 97

9/24/2010 2:21:33 PM

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

98

4 Antonio E quando, sennò? 5 Luciano È notte, forse è chiuso . . . Forse non ci fanno entrare . . . 6 Antonio Vi fanno entrare . . . Vi fanno entrare . . . [Dopo un momento di silenzio] Ne hai sonno? Perché non dormi? 7 Luciano Là che t’hanno detto . . . alla polizia? 8 Antonio Non sono cose che ti riguardano. Translation 1 Luciano [to Antonio] Where are we going now? 2 Antonio [drily] To the institute. 3 Luciano Will you take us right now? 4 Antonio When otherwise? 5 Luciano It’s night, it may be closed . . . Maybe they won’t let us in . . . 6 Antonio They’ll let you in . . . They’ll let you in . . . [after a moment of silence] Aren’t you sleepy? Why don’t you sleep? 7 Luciano What did they tell you there . . . at the police station? 8 Antonio These things do not concern you. As usual, choices of camera movements are important indicators accompanying the expression of verbal conflict. Up until turn 6, the three are in a shared shot with Antonio driving and Luciano in the passenger’s seat, Rosetta being off focus in the back. While Antonio keeps his eyes straight on the road, Luciano’s insistent gaze is a repeated plea for attention; following that the camera moves on to Rosetta, her eyes first down despondently then up in the direction of her brother. The solitude and lack of empathy that characterize this scene nearly at the end of the film, and with which we close this section, is subsequently expressed by the camera portraying Luciano and Antonio in single shots as they utter turns 7, 8 and 9.

4.6 Discussion of the results and concluding remarks This first analytic chapter has focused on the expression of verbal conflict in comedy and melodrama. It has discussed the intersection between the initiating and the responding turn and highlighted the

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 98

9/24/2010 2:21:34 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

99

significant role that the latter plays in expressing disagreement and defiance. In comedy, the articulation of confrontation is direct and based on sequential refutation and opposition formats ‘whose central point is turned into the extreme opposite from what the first speaker meant’ (Kotthoff, 1993: 202). Conflict in this genre, therefore, is expressed by the insistent rebutting of adjacency pairs, by such moves as contradict and disagree, claim and counterclaim, or by other-repair all of which function as bald on record impoliteness strategies (Culpeper, 1996). Contrary to what happens in comedy, the verbal articulation of argument in melodramatic films is disclosed in ways that disguise confrontation. In this case, the opposition between initiating and responding turns is no longer the default mode. Melodrama prefers disaffiliative and uncooperative disagreement and its adversarial conflict is marked by dysfluency and lack of conversational reciprocity at a formal level, which reflects the tension within the relationship. In the conflictual discourse of melodrama, the fight for power between speakers comes to the fore with one speaker trying to overcome the other in an asymmetrical relation. Therefore, while in comedy speakers clash along associative and affiliative lines by refuting or other-repairing their interlocutors’ assertions, in melodrama disputes are handled by speakers in an asymmetrical and dissociative way. Visually, the camera movements as well as the gestures of the speakers involved highlight the tension of the confrontational sequences. The investigation carried out in this chapter does not mean to suggest that the opposition between the patterns of confrontation of comedy and melodrama is perfectly neat. It was shown how sequential refutation defines oppositional talk in intimate contexts, in the case of exchanges between family members and friends, both in comedies and melodramas. Melodrama can use direct confrontation as in excerpt 13, in which speakers symmetrically attack each other as they would in comedy. By the same token, comedy can at times portray conflict as ‘non-comply’, as the following excerpt from Leondeff and Soldini’s (2000) Pane e tulipani (Bread and Tulips) suggests. The film, clearly reminiscent of Gilbert’s Shirley Valentine (1989), portrays housewife Rosalba, ‘accidentally’ abandoning her family and starting a new life in Venice. In the scene below, Ketty, ironically Rosalba’s

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 99

9/24/2010 2:21:34 PM

100

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

husband’s lover, has finally spotted her in the florist shop where she now works and is trying to convince her to go back to her family. Excerpt (21) [Negozio di fiori. (. . .) ]20 Ketty Rosi che fai, sei impazzita? [Rosalba la guarda come fosse uno dei suoi sogni]. Rosalba Perché . . . ? Ketty Ma cosa stai facendo? Rosalba Sto sistemando le camelie. Ketty Stai distruggendo la tua famiglia. Translation [At the florist’s (. . .)] Ketty Rosi, what are you doing, have you gone mad? [Rosalba looks at her as if she were one of her dreams]. Rosalba Why . . . ? Ketty What are you doing? Rosalba I’m arranging the camelias. Ketty You’re destroying your family. To Ketty’s repeated question, Rosalba replies with an answer that only satisfies the superficial locutionary level of the proposition contained in Ketty’s turn. Although the script conveys visible tension, Rosalba’s dreaming glance – a notation present in the very published script – reduces the conflict to the slightly surreal vagueness typical of this comedy. The presence of question avoidance, usually indexing the representation of conflict in melodrama, in this comedy testifies to the complexity of the representation of disagreement in the two genres. Similarly, Scola’s Che ora è? (What Time Is It?), classified by the film industry as comedy (probably due to the casting of comedian Massimo Troisi), but as drama by Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ What_Time_Is_It%3F_(film) 18/01/10), should be considered a melodrama not only in consideration of the topic (a melancholic treatment of incommunicability and solitude in modern families), but also on account of the patterns of verbal confrontation it exhibits. In the excerpt below from the film, the tension between a son and

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 100

9/24/2010 2:21:34 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

101

his caring yet domineering father is sustained through subsequent ‘withhold’ moves (lines 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15) showing the old man’s dissociative dysfluency. Excerpt (22) 1 Father (Ho) capito, è come come in chiesa, non c’è mica più il campanaro che suona le campane, adesso il prete mette la cassetta eh eh è una cosa allucinante allucinante al massimo. [He pauses at the suspicious look of the son] Che è? 2 Son Niente, hai detto ‘allucinante al massimo’ 3 Father E beh? 4 Son No, siccome era tanto tempo che non te lo sentivo dire e siccome invece c’è stato un periodo in cui lo dicevi MOLTO spesso, allora ho pensato:o 5 Father Hai pensato che? 6 Son Niente, ho pensato che:e ho pensato che:e avevi rivisto:o 7 Father Chi? 8 Son Chi? Che avevi rivisto la persona che ti aveva attaccato quel modo di dire così giovanilistico moderno che ogni tanto te ne uscivi eh dai papà hai capito no?= 9 Father =No 10 Son di chi parlo dai 11 Father No, io no non ho capito 12 Son Eh lasciamo stare dai, comunque mo’ non c’è più il trombettiere allora c’è↑ 13 Father Non ho capito di – chi chi dovrei avere rivisto io? 14 Son Nessuno 15 Father Chi è ‘sta persona? Guarda che io non non ce l’ho il tempo per vedere qualcuno . . . Translation 1 Father I understand, it’s like in the church, there is no longer the bell-ringer to ring the bells, now the priest puts on a tape ah ah it’s crazy absolutely crazy. [He pauses at the suspicious look of the son] What is it? 2 Son Nothing, you said ‘absolutely crazy’. 3 Father So?

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 101

9/24/2010 2:21:34 PM

102

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

4 Son Well, since you had not said it for a long time and since on the contrary there was a period in which you used to say it VERY often, then I thought. 5 Father You thought what? 6 Son Nothing, I thought that I thought that you had seen again . . . 7 Father Who? 8 Son Who? That you had seen again the person who taught you that juvenile modern way of speaking, so that every now and again you would say, come on dad you have understood haven’t you?= 9 Father =No, I haven’t 10 Son whom I’m talking about. 11 Father No, I haven’t understood. 12 Son Ok let’s forget about it, anyway now we no longer have the trumpeter, so there is↑ 13 Father I have not understood – who who am I supposed to have seen? 14 Son No one. 15 Father Who is this person? Look I have I have no time to see anyone . . . This chapter, the first of two on the topic of genre, has showed the relevance of dialogue for a definition of discourse in comedy and melodrama and identified the linguistic elements that can (dis) confirm the membership of films in a specific cinematic category. The investigation of properties of film dialogue in its relation to genre was done through a consideration of the way conflict talk is represented in films. Arguments and quarrels can have a valuable cathartic function of releasing violent emotions by means other than physical fighting. The quarrel provides a setting for the expression of powerful but deeply held-in feelings, which would not have an appropriate context for release in normal conversation. (Walton, 1991: 340) Verbal confrontation in the two genres that have been explored in this chapter is visibly different. Among other features, in comedy it is

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 102

9/24/2010 2:21:34 PM

Confrontational Discourse in Comedy

103

sustained and insistent while in melodrama it is often momentary and may disguise sentiments of empathy and pithy. In an intense scene from Forever Mary, an illiterate inmate-pupil asks his tutor to read the letter he has just received from his girlfriend. The girl’s words express anger as she felt betrayed by the young man who did not tell her he had been in jail. The teacher reads holding the letter in his hands; at the end, however, while we clearly see the phrase ‘Ti odio’ (‘I hate you’), he reads ‘Addio: addio, Lia’ (‘Goodbye: goodbye, Lia’). This is a case of conflictuality in which the verbal as the words uttered by the teacher deny and contradict the visuals, in this case the orthographic signs in the girl’s note. While the film is laden with conflict, in this instance there is no antagonism and the sympathetic teacher is protective of the young man to the point of trying to spare him any unnecessary grief. By stressing the ways in which melodrama portrays confrontation differently from comedy, this chapter has suggested that film dialogue can greatly contribute to a better definition of genre, which must be characterized not only in narrative or thematic terms or for its iconographic and musical conventions, but also in terms of the discourse patterns it displays. In different types of films, characters speak and interact in different manners; therefore, genre definitions must not fail to take on board the verbal plane of discourse if a fully accountable conceptualization of film type is to be formulated. The following chapter pursues this line of inquiry in the Western, which is strongly characterized in terms of genre theory and for which a linguistic analysis proves to contribute an additional level of description.

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 103

9/24/2010 2:21:34 PM

RPiazza_04_Final.indd 104

9/24/2010 2:21:34 PM

Chapter Five

Spaghetti and American Westerns: textual conflict between opposing masculinities

5.1 Introduction This chapter pursues the investigation of genre-related discourse that is the topic of the first part of this book and explores conflict representation in Italian Westerns and their American counterparts produced in the same decade. While Chapter Four approached confrontation in comedy and melodrama mainly from a conversational analysis macropragmatic (Mey, 1993) perspective, this chapter focuses on pragmatic theories of irony from a Relevance theory (Sperber and Wilson, 1995) methodology. This bottom-up choice has been determined by the nature of the data analysed in that, while in comedy and melodrama conflict identification is relatively straightforward as confrontational utterances are in immediate proximity to each other, the discursive expression of contrast in the world of cowboys takes up very indirect aspects and is often delayed and distant. In the Italian Westerns through irony characters express evaluation and convey critical detachment from their antagonists; in the American films, irony plays a different role although it still contributes as in the Italian cinema to a definition of masculinity, a topic that marks Western as a genre (Mitchell, 1996; Günsberg, 2005, amongst others). In this chapter Goffman’s (1986: 41) notion of ‘keying’ that refers, among other things, to ‘an exaggeration of the expansiveness of some acts’ informs the analysis. Playful activities in which participants adopt specific rules and conform to specific roles are examples of keying. Talk is most ‘vulnerable to keying and fabrication’ and

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 105

9/24/2010 2:22:53 PM

106

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

generally ‘unseriousness and kidding’ seem to be the standard features of speech (ibid.: 502) that, in real-life conversation, justify the use of such expressions as ‘kidding aside’ or ‘seriously’, as a way of refocalizing talk on to a serious plane. Verbal communication then, according to Goffman, coincides with the enactment of certain impersonations by the involved speakers who say something while echoing other voices, switch roles and change alignment to their own propositions. Also, while in natural conversation, as Goffman points out (1986: 151), ‘witty repartees’ rarely occur, although that would be every speaker’s dream, in the scripted dialogues of Westerns, clever answers seem the norm. Within the fictional frame of the cinematic discourse of Westerns, keying provides a rewarding way of looking at how participants play with each other as a way of performing different roles and, in so doing, construe their social identities within their permanent or temporary community. Excerpt (1) below from Giù la testa (Duck, You Sucker, 1971) illustrates the playful use of language in Leone’s films. Juan is mesmerized by the recently met Sean’s expertise with liquid explosive, which he dreams (literally1) can be used to rob a main bank in Mesa Verde, therefore he tries to cajole Sean into becoming his partner. In his discourse liquid explosive is compared to holy water because it can work as a blessing for Juan’s plans; similarly, Sean’s appearance in Juan’s life is miraculous hence he can be compared to a ‘saint’. Finally in the attempt to minimize their discord (Juan has damaged Sean’s motorcycle and Sean has retaliated by blowing up the train carriage, which the man had transformed into his headquarters), Sean’s motorcycle is jokingly referred to as a kid’s ‘tricycle’ while Juan’s home is defined as a ‘horse- carriage’. Juan tries to make the point that, although they fight like young children over their toys, they are potentially good friends and partners. Excerpt (1) 1 Sean [Seeing Juan laugh]. Vedo che hai capito. 2 Juan Ah sì sì sì certo, certo che ho capito, eh [Juan laughs and his men laugh at unison] Quello è meglio dell’acqua santa e tu tu per me sei come San (Jacinto) incazzato. Io ti frego il triciclo e tu mi buchi la carrozza.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 106

9/24/2010 2:22:53 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

107

Translation 1 Sean [Seeing Juan laugh]. I see you have understood. 2 Juan Oh yes yes sure, I get it now [Juan laughs and his men laugh at unison] That is better than the holy water and to me you are like St (Jacinto) when he is pissed off. I pinch your tricycle and you make a hole in my horse-carriage. To better situate the analysis, I start with a contextual consideration of Sergio Leone’s ‘spaghetti Westerns’, as they were disparagingly referred to on their appearance, and the American Westerns by John Ford, Howard Hawks and Henry Hathaway with John Wayne as protagonist, which have been selected for this study.2 In both sets of films ironic utterances have the pivotal function of contributing to the characters’ definition. Following a foray into some of the main theories on irony, the analysis sections shows how the echoic repetition model of Wilson and Sperber (1992 among others) explains how irony is construed in both the Italian and American films under consideration. The analysis of the verbal plane is followed by a section on the role of multimodality that considers stylistic choices of camera movements, individual and shared shots, the presence of vectors and considerations of gaze according to Kress and van Leeuwen’s (1996) model discussed in Chapter Two.

5.2 The Italian and American Westerns 5.2.1 Leone’s cinema Leone’s spaghetti Westerns, the Italianized version of the American original genre, popular during the 1950s (Günsberg, 2005: 182), gained acclaimed success in Italy a decade later. Leone’s cinema has been viewed as ‘formalist’ and ‘critical’ ‘rather than simply a passive rereading of the Western via the Western’ (Frayling, [1981] 1998: 159). For this auteur the original American Western is the subtext that transforms the patterns and clichés of John Ford’s American Westerns, revolving around the ‘mythology of the frontier’, into a cinematic metastatement,3 although Leone’s films are a praise and not dismissal of traditional Westerns (Frayling, [1981] 1998).

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 107

9/24/2010 2:22:53 PM

108

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Although Frayling ([1981] 1998) argues that the moral binary oppositions between winning and losing males in Italian spaghettis are attenuated together with the clash between civilization and wilderness, in the spaghettis the goodie/baddie opposition (Hall, 1980) is still neat and the cowboy appears a replica of the thirteenth-century knight, searching for his own personal Grail, fascinated with his own heroic deeds or attempting to lay the foundations of a new community (Aimeri and Frasca, 2002: 88–9).4 The lead character of Leone’s films is always a good male whose seemingly ruthless behaviour is rooted in the urge to redress some past injustice. This is the case of Sean, still healing from his best friend’s betrayal in the context of the Irish revolution (Giù la testa – Duck, You Sucker, 1971), Armonica in his pursuit of Frank, who killed his young brother (C’era una volta il West – Once upon a Time in the West, 1968), or Mortimer, who, at the end of an ‘archetypal confrontation’ (Potter, 2001), revenges his sister, killed by the Indio (Per qualche dollaro in più – For a Few Dollars More, 1965). Even Joe/No Name in Per un pugno di dollari (A Fistful of Dollars, 1964), who brags an identity as a bounty-hunter, behaves as the paladin of justice by freeing beautiful Marisol and returning her to her family for reasons that, he claims, are too long to explain (excerpt (2)). Excerpt (2) 1 Joe [to Marisol] Ecco qua prendete questi soldi, ce n’è abbastanza per vivere tranquilli per un pezzo. Passate il confine e andate il più lontano possibile da questo maledetto paese. 2 Marisol’s husband Perché fate tutto questo per noi? 3 Joe Beh è una storia troppo lunga da raccontare ora, su muovetevi. Translation 1 Joe [to Marisol]. Here, take this money, there’s enough to live on without worries for a while. Cross the border and get as far as you can from this damned place. 2 Marisol’s husband Why are you doing this for us? 3 Joe It’s too long a story to tell now, just go.5 Similar to their American counterparts, the 1960s Italian Westerns are constructed around definitions of masculinity. Although they

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 108

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

109

pertain to an action genre centring on male bravery, words are the means through which the subjects exercise their power and construe their masculine identity in opposition to the other characters that are discredited by such winning males as Sean, Joe, Armonica or Monco.

5.2.2 The American Westerns The 1960s was the last period of popularity for the American Western, which was still ‘giving its audience a sense of novelty tinged with familiarity’ (Mitchell, 1996: 15–16). Indeed it would be fair to say the genre was popular ‘again’. After 1958 the Hollywood Western had reached its peak and the number of films produced had dropped dramatically. However, at the appearance of Leone’s spaghettis, Sam Peckinpah recreated the ‘authentic’ Western myth and started the surge of American production (ibid.: 225). The choice of American Westerns for this study therefore intends to reflect on the moment when the American production entered a competition with contemporary Italian Westerns notwithstanding the differences between the two countries: a prima facie disregard for or a mocking banalization of moral issues in Leone’s cinema where ‘a mercenary logic’ (ibid.: 238) prevails and men tend to work solely for money, in opposition to a still strict division between right and wrong in the American films; the Italian tendency to amuse the viewers by playing with the genre’s stifled conventions in contrast to the American trend towards revitalizing and ‘reinvigorating’ the traditional western myth (ibid.: 226). As in their Italian counterparts, the 1960s American Westerns are obsessed with definitions of masculinity (Pye, 1996a: 12) and the making of men and manhood although the contradictions inherent in becoming a man are not ‘resolved’ but simply ‘narrated’ (Mitchell, 1996: 27). So in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962), Ford ‘celebrated the hearty, morally uncomplicated masculine virtues of the Westerner’ against the more sophisticated Easterner (Coyne, 1997: 88), while Hawk in El Dorado (1967) and Hathaway in True Grit (1969) presented us with lawmen who are ‘decrepit though valiant alcoholics’ (ibid.: 103). In all these 1960s films John Wayne’s ‘mature persona’ (Pye, 1996a: 17) summarizes the contradictions and complications of male identity.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 109

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

110

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Leone’s cinema, as well as the John Wayne films selected for this study, are marked by the adoption of a strident-sounding playful language and a non-sincere interaction that function as the bedrock of the lone hero’s discourse. With a number of communication strategies the hero verbally sets himself off against all other characters: from the delayed but heightened response to provocation, the tendency to answer open questions with indirect responses that call for conversational implicature, to what this chapter investigates, that is, the widespread use of irony. Conflict informs the interaction between the lone cowboy or bounty hunter and the other characters in the Western narrative through what, in Potter’s words (2001), can be defined an ‘archetypal confrontation [that is often] pared down to only its essential and most important elements’ (p. 54) and is the main means through which cinematic subjects construe their masculine identity. Besides the level of actions(the hero generally challenges the outlaw in a final shoot-out), such confrontation takes place on the verbal plane through the use of irony as well as on the multimodality level, which comprises the mise-en-scène (dress codes, lighting, space management, sound etc.), the characters’ non-verbal dynamics (e.g. body and gaze vectors) and the camera movement (close-ups v. long shots etc.) (Bednarek, 2010).

5.3 Irony as the expression of verbal conflict in Westerns Confrontation in cowboys’ discourse is indirect and distant. In this context, irony ties in with keying and a playful use of language as well as the carnevalesque character of male representation that for Günsberg (2005) marks the genre: ‘masculinity becomes central as spectacle [while] the intensification and parodistic manipulation of traditional western iconography of masculine accoutrements construct masculinity as masquerade’ (p. 188). Through ironic discourse, males in Westerns construe rather than simply reflect a reality (Iedema et al., 1994: 4), shape their male identity and exercise power by imposing on others their discursive vision of reality. In this context dialogic exchanges are not used to communicate emotions or establish relationships; being a representation of an exacerbated masculine

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 110

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

111

discourse, words are used for what Seidler (1989) identifies as the main aim of male communication, that is as a means to exercise power over interlocutors by construing or ‘defending’ the speakers’ male identities.6 Note for instance in the following exchange from Per qualche dollaro in più (For a Few Dollars More, 1965) the firm and peremptory tone of one of the two central characters, Colonel Mortimer, whose words impose an additional stop on to the train itinerary. Excerpt (3) 1 Colonel Mortimer [to the ticket collector] Manca molto per Tucumcari? 2 Ticket collector No, signore passeremo tra qualche istante. 3 Mortimer Grazie. 4 Passenger Scusate, scusate se mi permetto, Reverendo [Mortimer’s face is covered by the Bible he seems to be reading], ma dalla vostra domanda mi pare di aver capito che volete scendere a Tucumcari. Temo che abbiate sbagliato. Eh capisco è seccante, ma per fortuna non irrimediabile. Potrete scendere a Santa Fè e tornare indietro con il treno per Amarillo. Perché vedete, caro reverendo, questo treno non ferma a Tucumcari. 5 Mortimer [Who by this time has put the Bible down and shown his cowboy’s face] Questo treno FERMA a Tucumcari [He pulls the train stop handle]. Translation 1 Colonel Mortimer [To the ticket collector] Is it still long to Tucumcari? 2 Ticket collector No, sir we’ll pass it in a few seconds. 3 Mortimer Thanks. 4 Passenger Forgive my intrusion, Father [Mortimer’s face is covered by the Bible he seems to be reading] but from your question I understand you want to stop at Tucumcari. I’m afraid you have made a mistake. I understand it is annoying, but luckily not irremediable. You can get off at Santa Fè and take the train back to Amarillo. Because you see, dear Father, this train does not stop at Tucumcari. 5 Mortimer [Who by this time has put the Bible down and shown his cowboy’s face]. This train DOES stop at Tucumcari [He pulls the train brake handle].

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 111

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

112

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

When Mortimer lowers his book, his weather-beaten face and his imperious gaze silence his interlocutor, as they reveal the man is not at all a religious figure even before he verbally challenges the passenger with a peremptory statement that discards any other dialogic alternatives. Such a discursive technique, frequently recurring in Westerns dialogues, links up with Bakhtin-inspired White’s (2003) notion of ‘dialogic contraction’ and ‘expansion’, discussed in Chapter Three. While ‘dialogically contractive’ discourse rules out dialogic alternatives, a ‘dialogically expansive’ discourse engages with and entertains alternative voices. The above dialogic exchange between Mortimer and the train passenger is contractive – an exceptional occurrence of contraction associated with good cowboys – in that it portrays conflictual talk as a speaker’s unmitigated refutation of an interlocutor’s informative utterance. In the spaghetti genre, conflict dialogues, including those exchanges, which do not prima facie appear to be confrontational, are actually constructed in such a way as to suggest either dialogic contraction (associated with baddies) or dialogic expansion (typical of goodies) and the identity of the male characters is defined in terms of rigid exclusion or flexible inclusion, albeit critical, of other interlocutors’ views. The John Wayne films discussed in this volume are not dissimilar from Leone’s in that even before they resort to gun action, good cowboys stand out from bad gunslingers due to their use of keying and irony and power resides with the male who can dispel the most intriguing repartee. John Ford’s The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962) revolves around the antagonism between good Westerner rancher Tom Doniphon (John Wayne) and Easterner city lawyer Ranse Stoddard (Jimmy Stewart). Ranse ‘weak, misguided and powerless – a figure of symbolic impotence (. . .) initially humiliated, deliberately takes on Western characteristics –clothes, manner, and finally skilled gunplay – to revenge himself from his earlier humiliation’ (Pye, 1996b: 120). In the following excerpt from the film Doniphon’s use of irony is an instance of clear exaggeration. He bids farewell to Hallie for whom he shares a love interest with Ranse who wants to rid the town of Shinbone of number one villain Liberty Valance: Doniphon conjures up an ironic scenario where the only newspaper headquarters will be destroyed by Valance in his attempt

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 112

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

113

to kill Ranse who is going to open his legal office in those premises. Feeling the pressure of the competition, Doniphon intends to ridicule Ranse’s decision to bring law and order to Shinbone. Excerpt (4) Doniphon Well Hallie I’ll be out of town for a while north of the Picketwire, horse-trading. Hallie Goodbye Tom! Doniphon [to all] Oh and take note of what goes on around town because by the time I get back there won’t be no newspaper to read it in. In both Italian and American sets of films, occasionally irony is used by losing men. This is the case of Ramon Rojo who talks jokingly about wanting to restore peace in his village and in Howard Hawks’ El Dorado where the contrast between two bounty hunters denotes the verbal sophistication that accompanies masculine power. In excerpt (5), Melt, one of McLeod’s loyal men who is slow at shooting, replies ironically to his boss, McLeod, when he hints at the possibility that Wayne could kill him. Although he is a negative character, McLeod is aware of the controlling function of a well-calibrated ironic utterance. Excerpt (5) McLeod [To Wayne who is ready to shoot again] Hold it (. . .) I can’t afford to lose another man (. . .) Melt You got a lot of faith in me don’t you Nelse? McLeod Faith can move mountains, Melt, but it can’t be the first to draw. Keying and ironic language pervade discourse in Westerns and all males, especially the winning ones, use them to distantiate themselves from the opposing party, mark the boundaries of their identity and identify the ‘codes of masculinity’ (Coyne, 1997). Therefore, even in such an action genre, in these films the verbal level plays an extremely important role that is essential to the characterization and narrative development. The next section reviews the relevant literature on

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 113

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

114

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

irony and some of the main theoretical models relevant to this study before the section devoted to film analysis.

5.4 The linguistic scholarship on irony This section draws on some of the core concepts that are central to the main theories and approaches to irony; however, for a comprehensive and critical discussion of the history of irony, readers are referred to Clift (1999) and Colston and Gibbs (2007). ‘[A]n intelligent, witty figure of speech found in many language activities’ (Utsumi, 2000: 1777), irony synthesizes the clash between appearance and reality in that it corresponds to the opposite of what one means.7 The comment I heard from a man upon hopping off an unbearably overcrowded Manhattan underground train on a Christmas Eve a few years ago, ‘Oh I’m gonna miss this’ is self-explanatory. By violating Grice’s quality maxim (truthfulness), the speaker meant exactly the opposite of what he said, that he hated the situation in which he was and certainly was not going to regret leaving it. Irony is the intentional yet non-direct way of formulating a favourable evaluation (such is the case of ‘celebratory’ irony, cf. Scott, 1998) or passing a critical judgement (as in ‘condemnatory’ irony, ibid.), when ironists signal that they are dissociating themselves from the reality to which they refer. Cogent for the topic of this chapter and indeed the entire volume, irony (and sarcasm) is an indirect way of expressing an FTA in that it operates by way of an implicature (Leech, 1983: 82 and Culpeper, 1996: 356). Lady Macbeth’s question, Are you a man? – a very pertinent example of irony in Culpeper (1996) – ‘implicates the impolite belief that [Macbeth] is so lacking in those characteristics which she perceives as male that his gender is called into question’ (p. 365). In an article that traces visual and word-based irony in photography, Scott (2004) identifies ‘contrast’ and ‘incongruity’ as the main features of irony together with the ideological component by which two orders of existential beliefs are contrasted. In line with its Greek derivation indicating both ‘pretence’ and ‘ignorance’, irony – as Scott highlights – involves the indispensable presence of a double plane: on the one hand, the ‘obliviousness’ of the participants to the ironic text, and, on the other, the ‘full awareness’ of the ironist.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 114

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

115

The early view that an ironic utterance means the opposite of what appears on the literal level (Searle, 1991: 536; Brown and Levinson, 1987: 226 among others) has long been challenged and Kaufer (1981) points out that irony contradicts contextual expectations and not solely the literal form of an utterance. Grice (1975, 1978) views irony as residing in the violation of the Maxim of Quality of the Cooperative Principle and, along the same lines, Haverkate (1984, 1990) underlines the element of insincerity in the expression of irony. To use one of his examples, in the ironic indirect speech act, ‘Could you do me the favor of shutting up?’ neither its negative opposite (‘Couldn’t you do me the favor of shutting up?’) nor its lexical opposite (‘Couldn’t you do me the favor of keeping speaking?’) are correct ironic paraphrases of the utterance. Rather, irony resides in the violation of the sincerity rule on the part of the speaker, who phrases his directive as a request or favour (1990: 85–8). Similarly, in Leone’s Giù la testa (Duck, You Sucker, 1971) against the context of the Mexican revolution, Sean (James Coburn) accepts Doctor Villega’s order only to ridicule it a second later by using what Haiman’s (1990) defines ‘feigned exaggeration’ which violates the Maxim of Quality. Excerpt (6) Dottore . . . l’ordine è di spostarvi e di nascondervi nelle grotte di (Salesito). Sean Oh un ordine brillante davvero, noi col culo nel fango e voi in una cantina riscaldata a dormire e a correre appresso ai vostri sogni di gloria. Translation Doctor . . . the order is to move and hide in (Salesito) caves. Sean Oh really a brilliant order, so we’ll have our ass in the mud and you’ll be sleeping in a warm basement dreaming about your glorious revolution. Post-gricean approaches have developed along these lines and Attardo (2007) proposes the additional maxim of appropriateness which ironic utterances also violate.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 115

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

116

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Sperber and Wilson’s approach to irony is informed by these authors’ Relevance Theory (1986) that supersedes Grice’s Cooperative Principle by assuming that according to a generic relevance norm, hearers have the ability to make sense of any utterance and expects that speakers intend to convey meaningful messages. Relevance is inversely proportional to the effort needed to disambiguate an utterance, hence the lesser the effort the greater the degree of relevance. Formulated as echoic mention and later echoic repetition (1981, 1986 and Wilson and Sperber 1992 among others), Sperber and Wilson’s interpretation of irony is in line with some of the core notions of this study and perfectly suits the use of ironical language in both the Italian and American Westerns. In particular these authors’ model matches the notion of dialogic contraction and expansion within heteroglossic discourse that characterizes the talk of the baddies and the goodies respectively (White, 2003). Sperber and Wilson claim that the only meaning conveyed in an ironical utterance is the literal one that repeats or echoes some previous text (Jorgensen et al., 1984: 112). Their distinction between ‘use’ and ‘mention’ or echoic repetition allows for a situation in which by reproducing someone else’s words a speaker expresses existential beliefs that diverge from those expressed in the original utterance, in a way that compares with the repetition in the context of an expression of disbelief: A: I’ve seen a wolf!/ B: You’ve seen a wolf? Hmm hmm. Are you sure it was a wolf? (ibid.: 113). The notion of echoic mention views all ironic utterances as ‘second-degree interpretations of someone else’s thought’ (Sperber and Wilson, 1986: 238), which ‘achieve relevance’ by informing the hearer that they stand in a critical relationship with what someone else has said. One of the claims of echoic mention theory is that ‘verbal ironies are implicit mentions of meaning conveying a derogatory attitude to the meaning mentioned’ (Sperber, 1984: 131). Viewed in these terms, as Clift (1999) argues, this model of irony bears some resemblance to Goffman’s distinction (1981) between the ‘animator’ as the person simply giving voice to the words s/he utters, the ‘principal’ as the speaker endorsing and committed to those words, both of whom are different from the ‘author’ who conceived the words. The discussion of confrontational talk in Leone’s

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 116

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

117

films shows how such an approach that views irony as a dissociative rhetorical strategy, ‘primarily designed to ridicule the opinion echoed’ (Sperber and Wilson, 1995: 241), fits in with the male discursive irony of the Italian Westerns in which one positive male behaves like an ironist in dissociating himself from what/who he is echoing. In spite of the criticism to Sperber and Wilson’s model on the grounds that it fails to distinguish neatly ironic from non-ironic utterances (Utsumi, 2000: 503), its logic distinction between ‘use’ in the original utterance, and ‘mention’ in its echoic repeat, efficiently explains the baddies and goodies’ discursive strategies in Westerns. Echoic repetition theory also fits in with Bakhtin’s dialogism,8 which informs this study, and the view that utterances are an echo of previous utterances, therefore: ‘They can be referred to as though the interlocutor were already well aware of them; they can be silently presupposed; or one’s responsive reaction to them can be reflected only in the expression of one’s own speech’ (Sperber and Wilson, 1986: 91). The echoic repetition may consist of an immediate echo, it ‘need not interpret a precisely attributable thought: it may echo the thought of a certain kind of person, or of people in general’ (ibid.: 238) or even ‘received opinions, or accepted norms’ (Jorgensen et al., 1984: 114). In conclusion, ironic utterances are instances of echoic mention by which the ironist criticizes or ridicules a proposition, regardless of the closeness or distance of the text that is being echoed. Among other interpretations of irony is Haiman’s (1990) model of dramatic irony that, like Clark’s and Gerrig’s (1984), is ‘rooted in dramaturgy’ (Clift, 1999: 527) and revolves around the notion of the presence of a double audience, as an integral part of the ironical construction. Similar to an instance of role playing (Colston and Gibbs, 2007: 5), the presence of a double audience is an integral part of the ironical construction and associated with the notion of ‘pretense’. As Clark and Gerrig (1984) remark, [i]ronists can pretend to use the words of any person or type of person they wish, just as long as they can get the intended audience to recognize the pretense and, thereby, their attitude toward the speaker, audience, and sentiment of that pretense. (p. 124)

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 117

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

118

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

So if a speaker about to go off on a walk exclaims ‘Brilliant weather!’ on a day of heavy rain, s/he may pretend to be rehearsing a weather forecaster’s script or in any case s/he will be referring to a particular mental model of representation, that is a set of organized information that corresponds to a frame or a reading of the world (in this case the idea of pleasant weather ideal for outdoor activities). The notion of a double audience and that of a speaker pretending to address some ‘uninitiated’ hearers seems applicable to the discourse of Westerns in which the goodies address the baddies by echoing words and beliefs that they actually reject, while the bad cowboys, like an uninitiated audience, tend to miss the evaluative stance that is conveyed through irony. The approaches briefly discussed so far, the echoic, the pretense/ theatre models ‘are characterized at some level by a double perspective’ (Clift, 1999: 533); this double plane, it will be shown, is the basis on which good cowboys disaffiliate from their opponents in Leone’s cinema or, in the American films under study, define their superior identity through a more affiliative interaction with their peers. The next sections deal with the analysis of ironic discourse in the two sets of films from within the echoic repetition model. The discussion also considers more general issues dealing with the degree of semantic or pragmatic insincerity (Colston, 2007: 102) that is not fully captured by the Sperber and Wilson’s model. It is shown how, although both the Italian and the American Westerns are directly interpretable according to the echoic model, the American films studied here show the occasional preference for a different use of irony that cannot comfortably be interpreted according to the Sperber and Wilson model. Such cases are founded on the one hand on semantic sincerity in which the proposition at the basis of the ironic utterance must be taken at face value, and on the other on the audience involvement; this latter case shows the specificity of irony as on-stage discourse in which the viewers are deliberately asked to take on the crucial role of intended recipients (both ‘targeted overhearers’ and ‘undisclosed intermediaries’, according to the model proposed in Chapter Two). In the case of irony construed with the involvement of the audience, the function of gaze and the choice of camera shots greatly contribute to conveying the ironic message. On the multimodal level, the

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 118

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

119

analysis concentrates on camera shots, the actors’ gestures and body movements, and the presence of cowboys’ paraphernalia, such as rifles, guns, cigars, knives that establish visual vectors between speakers; it is discussed how these contribute to the expression of irony in both sets of films. In case of conflict interaction, the detachment and disaffiliation conveyed by the ironic utterances on the verbal level are underlined by a number of technical resources.

5.5 Analysis: the cowboys’ use of irony This section discusses the different interpersonal context of irony produced by the cowboys and bounty hunters in Western films. It highlights the complexity of an interpretation of ironic discourse and, among other aspects of the ironic construal, discusses the issue of semantic and pragmatic sincerity on which ironic utterances can be grounded. The final discussion deals with the role of the audience in the construal of the ironic message, which brings us back to the theoretical discussion in Chapter Two where the message is viewed as an interaction between different recipients on and off screen. Against a general backdrop of linguistic keying, whereby all characters seem to take pleasure in playing with language and using it for the exercise of power, conflict pervades discourse in Leone’s and, although to a lesser degree, the American Westerns. Through discursive practices that construe a particular vision of reality, in Westerns the winning cowboys present themselves as superior individuals in contraposition to their more banal and uncouth masculinity rivals. These positive characters display an emancipated male identity different, in my view, from the ruthless ‘post-modern’ masculinity suggested by Wood (2005).9 On the grounds of the long lived association of verbal ability with femininity and ‘terse action with masculinity’ (Kozloff, 2000: 11), such cowboys’ masculinity seems to present features of sensitivity and verbal wit that are a reminder of femininity at least vis-à-vis their verbally less able enemies. While the discourse of the losing males is generally marked by dialogic contraction, – that is by a closure to any other discursive alternatives – through the use of irony the positive males construe a discourse based on dialogic expansion, in that they critically entertain other contrasting voices with the

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 119

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

120

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

ultimate purpose of dismissing the existential beliefs advocated by those (White, 2003). For Mitchell one main opposition is at the core of the genre: ‘[T]he western can be reduced to oppositions between those who stand and those who fall down – between upright men on horseback and those whose supposedly “natural” position is prone’ (Mitchell, 1996: 168). That upright position of the positive males, it can be argued, is accompanied by a verbal ability to revisit texts critically as is the case of ironic discourse. In the Italian Westerns in which good men often occupy the same physical space of the wrong men and mingle with them, irony expresses the critical dismissal of a bad model of masculinity and cowboys ironically echo their antagonists’ statements. In the American Westerns, on the contrary, irony also connoting good masculinity is part of the good cowboys’ rhetoric and is devoid of the antagonistic dimension it has in Leone’s cinema. The following subsections show how irony is the vehicle for the expression of a conflict of masculinities in Leone’s Westerns and in the American Westerns under study.

5.5.1 Ironic utterances from the perspective of the echoic repetition model Differently from the open conflict that occurs in comedy, in which the sequential rebutting of a speaker’s line makes confrontation immediately visible, in spaghetti Westerns ironically worded interactional contrasts are not verbally blunt or immediately identifiable. Paradoxically their indirectness clashes with the general physical bluntness of the films. The use of irony involves all levels of discourse, the ‘ideational’ function associated with the representation of the world because, as in the case of impoliteness, irony operates as a clash of referential and interpretative frames (Terkourafi, 2001 and 2005); the ‘interpersonal’ as the two discourses of masculinity enter an opposition through interaction, as well as the ‘textual’ level of discourse construction (Partington, 2006). Ironic utterances ‘reflect a hostile or derogatory judgement or a feeling such as indignation or contempt’ (Grice, 1978: 124) and are an impolite force conveyed politely (Thomas, 1985); hence in the spaghetti Westerns, irony becomes a further accoutrement of those cowboys who in the end will

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 120

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

121

remain in an upright position (Mitchell, 1996) and a necessary ingredient of positive masculinity. A main feature of the treatment of irony in Leone’s and the American films under study is the high degree of ad literam repetition and immediate transparency of the echoic irony. Not only are the utterances direct quotations of an original text by another speaker, which are repeated with the purpose of undermining the beliefs they endorse, but the producer of an ironic text often provides clear clues as to his deliberate echoing. In Il buono, il brutto e il cattivo (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, 1967), the irony of the Ugly to the Good as they walk in the desert is linguistically marked by ‘a contradictio in terminis’ (Haverkate, 1990: 82) between the huge distance still to be walked as well as the long hours of sunlight still lying ahead, and the use of the semantically inappropriate, hence ironically used, terms solo (‘only’) and non più (‘no longer than’).

Echoic text Excerpt (7) The Ugly Come, già ti riposi? Su forza che siamo arrivati. Mancano solo 120 miglia e non più di 8 ore al tramonto, amico mio, se riuscirai a vederlo, cammina! Translation The Ugly What, you’re resting already? There are only 120 more miles to go and no longer than 8 hours to the sunset, if you manage to see it, walk! The Ugly’s ironic utterances are an explicit echoic repetition of the original text produced earlier by the Good, whose views the speaker here intends to ridicule and dismiss in a victorious tone. When the Ugly forces the Good, Blondie, to walk the desert, his opening ironic assertion is ‘Bella passeggiata, non ti pare?’ (‘Nice walk, don’t you think?’); meantime, the camera spans around the desert and the spectators are invited to take up a very active role. According to the model of viewers’ participation presented in Chapter Two, this is a case of conflictuality in which the visual deliberately contradicts and

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 121

9/24/2010 2:22:54 PM

122

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

contrasts with the verbal and the camera has the specific role of pointing out the discrepancy between the two planes. The Ugly ironically echoes an earlier statement by his then more powerful former partner and present enemy to prove how ill-fitted and ridiculous such dialogue now sounds in the new situation in which the two men’s roles are reversed. Excerpt (8) The Ugly Come mi hai detto quella volta? ‘Se risparmi il fiato, un tipo come te ce la può fare’. Se invece non ce la fa, muore, ma lentamente, molto lentamente. Translation The Ugly What did you say to me that time? ‘If you spare your breath, a man like you can make it.’ If, instead, he doesn’t, he will die, but slowly, very slowly. The conflict between the Good and the Ugly is built around a string of echoic mentions by which each man vilifies and discredits his rival. At the same time, the intertextual nature of the two men’s discourse ratifies the interdependence between them and characterizes their ‘survival’ masculinity as more subtle than that exemplified by the third man, Sentenza, the Bad, who, significantly, is killed at the end of the film. Each sentence ‘achieve[s] relevance’ as the speaker makes clear to the addressee that, in reporting another speaker’s talk, he is expressing a critical attitude toward the view of reality to which the echoed text refers (Sperber and Wilson, 1995: 238). A discussion of some selected features of the mise-en-scène follows this linguistic analysis; however, here it is worth noting that in this scene the Ugly is on horseback, hence in an upright and higher position than Good/Blondie. If we look at irony in terms of echoic repetition of a prior text, the opposition between the dialogic contraction, typical of the ordinary males, and the critical dialogic expansion (White, 2003) of the winning cowboys becomes apparent. The two notions express different forms of an author’s stance, or ‘engagement’ and are based on the concept that ‘all verbal utterances are ultimately dialogic’ (White, 2002b: 16) although some do, more than others, take into account

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 122

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

123

alternative external positions and voices. Both contraction and expansion use several resources that mark an author’s position vis-à-vis the topic under discussion. In the following exchange from Per un pugno di dollari (A Fistful of Dollars, 1964) Joe displays textual ability as he challenges the claim about the paramount importance of being informed pronounced earlier on by losing Benito Rojo.

Original text Excerpt (9) 1 Benito Rojo Fra qualche giorno passerà per San Miguel uno squadrone di cavalleria, non mi piace che dei soldati di passaggio ficchino il naso nei nostri affari. 2 Joe Come siete informato. 3 Benito Rojo Eh la vita di un uomo da queste parti è spesso legata al filo di un’informazione. Translation 1 Benito Rojo In a few days a cavalry squadron will pass through San Miguel, I don’t like some passing-by soldiers to poke their noses into my business. 2 Joe You’re well informed. 3 Benito Rojo Well, in this part of the world a man’s life often depends upon a mere scrap of information. Later Joe proves that Benito was wrong in accepting information as true without verifying it. Excerpt 10 below shows Joe’s ironical reuse of Benito’s words. The text in Excerpt (10) and its sub-text in Excerpt (9), therefore, illustrate the contracted discourse of a losing male, Benito Rojo, and the expanded, albeit critical, echoic mention of his more subtle counterpart.

Echoic text Excerpt (10) 1 Ramon Che c’è? 2 Esteban Rojo I soldati, quei bastardi che scortavano l’oro=

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 123

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

124

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

3 Benito = se ne sono salvati due e si sono rifugiati nel cimitero e i Baxter hanno intenzione di catturarli. 4 Ramon Rubio, raduna gli uomini [to Joe] Siete ben informato. 5 Joe ‘Beh la vita di un uomo da queste parti è spesso legata al filo di un’informazione’, sono parole di vostro fratello. Translation 1 Ramon What’s up? 2 Esteban Rojo The soldiers, those bastards that escorted the gold= 3 Benito =two have survived and taken refuge in the cemetery and the Baxters want to catch them. 4 Ramon Rubio, gather the men [to Joe] You’re well informed. 5 Joe ‘Well, in this part of the world a man’s life often depends upon on a mere scrap of information’, these are your brother’s own words. The conclusive duel in Per un pugno di dollari (For a Fistful of Dollar, 1964) emblematically built around echoic repetition, seals the triumph of No Name/Joe’s superior masculinity over Ramon’s brutality. Joe’s echoic repetition of Ramon’s earlier contracted statement in excerpt (12) shows how ‘irony resides in the reversal of expectation caused by the incongruous juxtaposition’ (Scott, 1998: 45). The ironic incongruity here is between Ramon’s unshaken belief in the superiority of a Winchester over a pistol and the later proven fallacy of that view. No Name/Joe’s text in excerpt (11) below summarizes the original text by Ramon in excerpt (12). In this last excerpt the repetition is emphasized by a direct quotation, which ‘functions as the telltale index of the speaker’s disrespect for both the repeated message and for the person who first uttered it’ (Haiman, 1990: 191).

Echoic text Excerpt (11) 1 Ramon Rojo Gringo. 2 Joe Hanno detto che mi cercavi. 3 Ramon Sei morto. 4 Joe Lascia libero il vecchio.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 124

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

125

[Ramon shoots him but Joe, who is protected by a metal shield, resists his bullets] E che ti succede Ramon? Ti trema la mano? O forse hai paura? Al cuore Ramon, se devi uccidere un uomo, devi colpirlo al cuore, sono parole tue, no? Al cuore, Ramon, al cuore, altrimenti non riuscirai a fermarmi. ‘Quando un uomo con la pistola incontra un uomo col fucile, quello con la pistola è un uomo morto’, avevi detto così? Vediamo se è vero. [He throws his gun to the ground because Ramon has dropped his rifle] Raccogli il fucile, carica e spara. [Ramon does it, but Joe is faster and shoots him.] Translation 1 Ramon Rojo. Gringo. 2 Joe I’ve been told you were looking for me. 3 Ramon You’re dead. 4 Joe Let the old man go. [Ramon shoots him but Joe, who is protected by a metal shield, resists his bullets] What’s happening to you Ramon? Is your hand shaking? Or maybe you’re afraid? At the heart, Ramon, if you want to kill a man, you must aim at his heart, these are your words, aren’t they? At the heart, Ramon, at the heart, or else you won’t be able to stop me. ‘When a man with a gun meets a man with a Winchester, the man with the gun is a dead man’ did you say that? Let’s see if it’s true. [He throws his gun to the ground because Ramon has dropped his rifle]. Get your Winchester, load it and shoot. [Ramon does it, but Joe is faster and shoots him]

Original text Excerpt (12) [Joe is watching Ramon aiming at an old armour] 1 Joe Tirate molto bene 2 Ramon Quando si vuole uccidere un uomo, bisogna colpirlo al cuore e un Winchester è l’arma più adatta. 3 Joe Si forse, ma io preferisco la pistola. 4 Ramon ‘Quando un uomo con la pistola incontra un uomo col fucile, quello con la pistola è un uomo morto’, è un vecchio proverbio messicano. 5 Joe Voi ci credete?

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 125

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

126

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Translation [Joe is watching Ramon aiming at an old armour] 1 Joe Your aim is excellent. 2 Ramon When you want to kill a man, you must aim at his heart and a Winchester is the best weapon. 3 Joe Maybe, but I prefer my gun. 4 Ramon ‘When a man with a gun meets a man with a Winchester, the man with the gun is a dead man’, it’s an old Mexican saying. 5 Joe Do you believe it? Joe is upholding his vision of reality by using quotations as an evaluative device and publicly highlighting the fallibility of the sources he credits, because ‘[d]irect quotation is a marked form of encoding and thus an evaluative device through which speakers can communicate their point of view on the events in question’ (Anderson, 1993: 380). In quoting directly and with an ironic stance, the speaker’s production role becomes that of the ‘animator’ (Goffman, 1979 or ‘relayer’ in Levinson, 1988), who takes a distance from the views expressed by a source. ‘Other-quotation concedes the relayer’s intervention on the level of meaning without sacrificing the mimetic advantages of direct speech’ (Anderson, 1993: 386). If the echoing does not refer to a text in the immediate proximity, it may ironically hint to the existential views it endorses. In Per qualche dollaro in più (For A Few Dollars More, 1965) the Indio, ‘self-destructive, dope-smoking sadist haunted by the image of a beautiful woman he has killed’ (Mitchell, 1996: 236) is instructing his gang on how to assault a main bank in El Paso. Being the discourse of a losing male, Indio’s is an example of dialogic contraction (White, 2003) that does not engage with any other textual alternatives. Monco, the positive male who has infiltrated the group, is not happy with the role Indio has assigned to him. Abruptly he leaves the room where the men are gathered and, when asked by Indio where he is going, he comments ‘Quando devo sparare, la sera vado a letto presto/Well, if there’s gonna be any shooting, I’d better get some sleep’ as in the excerpt below: Excerpt (13) Indio Il giorno stabilito è domani, la posta è la banca di El Paso. A venti miglia da El Paso c’è un villaggio, Santa Cruz. Domani

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 126

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

127

Blacky, Chico, Paco e tu, amigo assalterete la banca di Santa Cruz. Sparate, ammazzate, tiratevi addosso tutta la gente armata soprattutto quella di El Paso. Al resto ci pensiamo noi. Dopo il colpo ci ritroviamo tutti a Las Palmeiras. [To Monco] Dove vai? Monco. A dormire. Quando devo sparare, la sera vado a letto presto. Translation10 Indio The fixed day is tomorrow, the stake is the bank of El Paso. Twenty miles from El Paso there’s a town, Santa Cruz. Tomorrow Blacky, Chico, Paco and you, my friend will assault the bank of Santa Cruz. Shoot, kill, make sure to be chased by armed people especially those of El Paso. We’ll think about the rest. After the robbery we’ll all meet at Las Palmeiras. [To Monco] Where are you going? Monco Well, if there’s gonna be any shooting, I’d better get some sleep. The ironic assertion conjures up the habit of having an early night before a shooting day as if it were as an entertainment or sports activity for which one has to prepare adequately by having a good rest. There is no immediate mention of a previous text as in other cases; the reference here is to the hearers’ expectations (Colston, 2007: 102) and to a script that is in tune with them. Monco’s ironic utterance is denigrating the Indio’s directive behaviour and undermining his male authority. Irony as echoic repetition also occurs in the observed American Westerns although less frequently than in Leone’s films. In the John Wayne films language seems to be used as a divertissement and a technique similar to ‘asteism’ or genteel irony (Attardo, 2007: 138) and is as a non-denigrating form of irony. Yet, irony often marks the righteous masculinity and in an indirect way highlights the contrast between positive and negative cowboys. In El Dorado (Hawks, 1967) for instance, echoic repetition, close to Goffman’s keying (1986), marks the association and communality rather than the antagonism between Cole and Mississippi. In the middle of the night, Cole (John Wayne) and Mississippi (James Caan) are in pursuit of a gang of criminals and Mississippi lags behind as through a window left ajar a local woman whispers the gang’s hideout place to him. When he catches up with Cole, his partner is obviously inquisitive (excerpt 14 below).

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 127

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

128

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Echoic text Excerpt (14) Cole What kept you? Mississippi I talked to a girl and she saw ...[ Cole A girl? Mississippi Don’t you think I can know a girl? Cole’s other-initiated repair (‘A girl?’) is triggered by the speaker’s incredulity at the ill-fitting mention of a woman in that particular moment. Mississippi’s reply is a literal ironic mention of Cole’s earlier very similar utterance as shown in excerpt (15) below.

Original text Excerpt (15) Mississippi Where are we heading? Cole To see a girl. Mississippi A girl? Cole Yes a girl. Don’t you think I can know a girl? In both cases the hearer’s surprise-indicating other repair ‘A girl?’ is triggered by the apparent violation of the relevance maxim in that ‘speaking to or going to see a girl’ does not seem appropriate in the particular context. Instead of offering a clarification, both replies to the other-initiated repair insist on the anomaly of the exchange by means of the rhetorical question ‘Don’t you think . . . ’ which still is not relevant or appropriate (Attardo, 2007) to the previous text. To conclude this first part of the discussion on the use of irony as critical echoic resonance of other texts, we can say that both the Italian and American films studied use ironical repetition albeit for different purposes: to underline dissociation and antagonism in the former case and define positive masculinity as synonymous with the mastering of ironic language; to mark male community in a more associative way and not in open and close contraposition with the evil gunslingers in the latter. In both cases, however, irony is the good males’ accoutrement that differentiates them from the other men,

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 128

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

129

destined in their verbal ineptitude to eventually assuming a prone position. The echoic repetition model conveniently describes the various uses of irony in the present set of films; however, other aspects of the ironic expression cannot be satisfactorily captured by this framework. In the John Wayne films, in particular, but occasionally also in Leone’s Westerns, the interpretation of irony needs to take into account considerations of the degree of sincerity conveyed by an ironic utterance. This is the topic of the next section that specifically assumes a Relevance Theory perspective.

5.5.2 Irony as pragmatic sincerity Colston and Gibbs (2007: 4) observe that none of the multiple approaches to irony provides a completely convincing explanation for all ironic cases and often fails to grasp the very nature of this rhetorical device. While I have shown how the echoic repetition model conveniently explains most instances of irony in the Westerns under study, it does not seem to satisfactorily cater for some other ironic constructions. Most theoretical approaches tend to rely on the concept of ‘pragmatic insincerity’ as they assume that the speaker producing an ironic utterance is being not serious about the utterance formulation and its proposition. Being an extension of the surface incongruity determined by cooperative norm violation (Utsumi, 2000: 1786), the concept of insincerity is inherent to most theories of irony according to which not only violations of conversational and social norms, but also expectations and preferences are an integral part of the ironic construction and deconstruction process. For instance, with regard to the echoic mention model, Colston (2007: 102) notes that, being based on the use–mention distinction, Sperber and Wilson’s (1981, 1995) accounts ‘allow speakers to not directly say what they mean (. . .) they allow speakers to be pragmatically insincere.’ Contrary to the widespread notion of insincerity, Colston (2007) and Utsumi (2000 and 2007), who proposes an ‘implicit display theory’ for distinguishing between ironic and nonironic utterances, insist on the concept of ‘sincerity’. The term ‘pragmatic insincerity’ (Kumon-Nakamura et al., 1995) is intended to account for ironic utterances that are insincere on the

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 129

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

130

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

speech act level (in that they allude to an insincere illocutionary act). As an example, a comment like ‘You do talk a lot’ to a chatterbox contains a sincere proposition while on the speech act level the ironic comment is insincere in that it hints to the betrayed expectation that the person speak less. To distinguish between semantic and pragmatic sincerity, Colston uses the scenario of a boy who, having boasted about his hairdresser, one day appears at school in the most terrible haircut and receives ironic comments from his classmates. There is semantic sincerity if the words truly refer to the specific reality described by the speaker in that the utterance ‘When are you going to get a haircut’ reflects the speaker’s disapproval of the haircut and conjures up the speaker’s violated expectations (Colston, 2007: 106). Similarly, a comment like the following, ‘I really like guys with nice haircuts’ is pragmatically sincere if the ‘speaker generally means what she says and what she implies’ (ibid.). The Italian and American films selected for this study show cases of pragmatic sincerity and I shall discuss how different allusional mechanisms in them, to use Colston’s (2007) term, convey irony in different ways. However, the instances of sincerity encountered in the films have shown that it is difficult if not impossible to separate out semantic from pragmatic sincerity as the former leads to or implies the latter and in both cases there is a violation of the speaker’s expectations. As a consequence, sincerity in this study is interpreted as encompassing both semantic and pragmatic levels. Two examples from Hawks’ El Dorado (1967) with Cole (John Wayne) and Mississippi (James Caan) facing a gang of ruthless crooks illustrate ironic sincerity at the semantic and the pragmatic level. Concerned about the danger Cole and Mississippi are about to face, sheriff assistant Bull gives the two men a sheriff star as protection. After an improvised ceremony, the two are officially nominated deputy sheriffs, but Mississippi is unsure about the value of that star he is supposed to wear. Excerpt (16) reproduces Mississippi’s and Bull’s statements that are both semantically and pragmatically sincere as they refer truly to the reality their words conjure up. The irony of the exchange is not based on a visible incongruity; however, a mismatch still exists in that the scenario Bull conjures up is not desirable (Cole and Mississippi being shot dead) and if it became real, it would betray

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 130

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

131

the represented and interactive participants’ expectations whose feelings of closeness to the characters in the film have so far been encouraged. It is this discrepancy between what is real and what is desirable that makes the utterance ironic. Excerpt (16) Bull Now you’re deputies. Mississippi I suppose this ain’t any good if someone takes a shot at this. Bull Give ‘em a good mark to shoot at.↑ A further example in excerpt (17) below from the same film is not very different. The sheriff has been shot in his leg and Mississippi considers a doctor’s visit inevitable. Bull is requested to fetch him in spite of the threat of a gang of bandits lurking in the village. Excerpt (17) Mississippi You’re gonna need a doctor to fix this. Sheriff Bull, I suppose you can slip out the backdoor and get Doctor Miller over here without getting yourself shot? Bull If I thought I was gonna get shot I wouldn’t go. I’ll be back as soon as I can. The ironic utterances in the above excerpts are perfectly relevant to the rest of the exchange and irony does not reside in an infringement of any maxim of the Cooperative Principle (Grice, 1975); rather it is based on a literal interpretation of the utterance at face value. The two speakers, in tune with each other, ‘engage in a collusive play’ (Colston, 2007: 129) as they share the expectations at the basis of the ironic text as a conditio sine qua non for the ironic construal: ‘all expectations which motivate irony must be attributed to or possessed by the speaker’ (Utsumi, 2007: 506). However, instead of being based on insincerity, both the propositions and the reference to the ensuing expectations are sincere (pragmatic sincerity) and so is the verbal expression of irony (semantic sincerity). Mississippi’s remark that the sheriff star rather than protecting him and his partner may work as a target and Bull’s comment that the star will make a good target truly

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 131

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

132

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

mirror the actual situation. Irony therefore ensues only from the undesirable scenario that is conjured up, that is, the killing of these positive characters. The John Wayne Westerns under study are not the only ones that construe irony on grounds of semantic/pragmatic sincerity. In an apparently oxymoronic statement by the Good in Il buono, il brutto e il cattivo (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, 1966) irony is equally synonymous of pragmatic and semantic sincerity. The Good is bed ridden recovering from yet another retaliation by the Ugly but is sure that his ‘friendly antagonist’, as Ugly can be defined, will watch out for him as he is after an important piece of information the Good possesses about a big lump of money: Io dormirò tranquillo perché so che il mio peggior nemico veglia su di me (‘I’ll sleep peacefully because I know that my worst enemy is keeping a vigil eye over me’).11 Earlier in the same film a similar exchange (in excerpt 18 below) between the Good and an outlaw equally functions along the lines of pragmatic and semantic sincerity. Excerpt (18) Outlaw Ehi tu lo sai che la tua faccia assomiglia a quella di uno che vale 2.000 dollari? [They laugh while looking at the poster with the Good’s face on it.] The Good Già ma tu non somigli a quello che l’incassa. Qualche passo indietro. [He shoots all.] Translation Outlaw You know your face looks like that of a man worth 2,000 dollars? [They laugh while looking at the poster with the Good’s face on it.] The Good Yes but you don’t look like the man who cashes that money in. Take a step back. [He shoots all.] The Good’s earnest words, confirmed by the following shooting, clash with the scenario of $2,000 reward the outlaw desires. In conclusion this subsection has argued that, in addition to a construal of irony based on a literal echoic repetition of a speaker’s text and interpretable according to Sperber and Wilson’s (1981) model, both sets of Westerns under study exhibit cases of irony that rely on

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 132

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

133

pragmatic and semantic sincerity in which the incongruity is located in the unwanted script the words suggest. In consideration of the nature of film discourse, the role of the participants in the film and especially of the audience becomes paramount as it contributes to the allusional mechanism on which irony is based. This point is explored in the next and conclusive subsection in which irony is both located in the speakers’ text and relies to a great extent on the knowledge of relevant facts that is passed on to or ‘disclosed’ (Bubel, 2008) to the audience. For this reason, the brief discussion that follows cannot avoid to take into account the protagonists’ gaze and their body movement more than simply the words uttered by them. This last part of the linguistic analysis of irony in Westerns, therefore, provides a suitable thematic link with the investigation of the non-verbal plane which is explored later on in this chapter.

5.5.3 Audience involvement in the construal of irony Colston and Gibbs (2007: 4) note that ‘verbal irony is broader than a simple solution to a linguistic problem’ and that it involves levels of communication that go far beyond words. In order to understand how irony works in this third and final case and how ironic meaning is co-construed in conjunction with an ‘active audience’ (Klemm, 2000: 102 cited in Bubel, 2008), I refer back to the discussion on the nature of filmic discourse in Chapter Two and Bubel’s work on the role of audiences (2006 and 2008). It will be remembered that, following Goffman’s classification of listener roles, Bubel views film audiences as ‘overhearers’ (Goffman, 1976, 1979) because they are treated as unratified recipients of a message between the speakers on screen ‘whose unratified participation can be intentional or not and can be encouraged or not’ (Bubel, 2008: 61). Bubel differentiates between their overhearers’ role as ‘bystanders’ and ‘eavesdroppers’ both of which she sees as constituting a continuum. Furthermore, drawing a separation between face-to-face conversation (‘recipient design’) and screen-to-face conversation (‘overhearer design’), this author characterizes film communication as typically one of ‘disclosure’. This refers to a message in which ‘the speaker wants the overhearer to gather certain information from the conversation’ (ibid.: 65).

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 133

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

134

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Bubel’s model complements the framework for the interpretation of the verbal and visual messages in a screen-to-face communication that I discussed in Chapter Two and the various ways in which words interface with images. In films audience participation is at the centre of the ironic construal and the ways messages are conveyed in that specific interaction reflect the degree of knowledge the viewers are expected to have at any given moment. This is the case in the following sequence from Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, 1966) reproduced in excerpt 19 below, in which the verbal and the visual cooperate in construing irony with a heavy reliance on the audience. A brief presentation of the scene will help situate the exchange. In the monastery where they take refuge, Tuco, meets his brother, a friar, who strongly condemns his behaviour and with whom he had a violent row secretly witnessed by the Good through a crack in a wall. While the Ugly is unaware of this, the information is aptly disclosed to the viewers, who share with the Good more details about what is happening than the Ugly does. Once out of the monastery, the Ugly and the Good are sitting together on their horse-driven wagon ready to start their journey. The Ugly praises his brother for the generous meal he offered him and reports his words by direct speech. The Good and the audience know that he is lying and that the quotations from his brother’s speech are probably the words he would have liked to hear from him but that he never uttered. Tuco’s speech is therefore an instance of echoic repetition of a script that was never rehearsed. This speaker is insincere both semantically and pragmatically as his words do not comply with his expectations or with the proposition underlying his utterance. The Good listens and in reply, offers the Ugly to share his cigar that, he claims, is a blessing after a heavy meal. Excerpt (19) Il Brutto Ah che mangiata, eh è un bel tipo mio fratello, eh si perché non te lo avevo detto, il capo qui è mio fratello, insomma a Roma c’è il papa e qui c’è mio fratello e ogni volta che mi vede mi dice ‘Fermati, tanto qui da mangiare non manca mai.’ Anzi sai che mi ha detto? ‘Invita anche quel tuo amico.’ [Laughs] È sempre lo stesso, quando mi vede, non vorrebbe lasciarmi andare mai, eh mi

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 134

9/24/2010 2:22:55 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

135

vuole un bene mio fratello. Eh certo che anche per uno come me è una gran cosa sapere che pioggia o vento da qualche parte c’è un piatto di minestra calda che ti aspetta. Il Buono [Clearly not believing him] Eh sì certo, ma tieni questo [He offers him his cigar], fuma ti aiuterà a digerire. Translation The Ugly, My belly’s full, nice guy my brother, I didn’t tell you my brother is in charge here? Everything like the Pope is in charge in Rome. Yes my brother said to me ‘Stay, don’t go home. Here’s there’s always plenty to eat and drink.’ In fact, do you know what he said? ‘Bring your friend too.’ [Laughs] He’s always the same, whenever we see each other, he wouldn’t let me go, my brother, he’s crazy about me. It’s so good for a tramp like me to know that no matter what happens there’s always a brother somewhere who’d never refuse me a soup. The Good [Clearly not believing him] Sure, have this; after a big meal there’s nothing like a good cigar, [He offers him his own cigar] smoke, it’ll help your digestion.12 In this exchange irony is the result of a number of elements operating on many levels. The offer of a cigar to favour the digestion of a meal that was never eaten is a reminder of what human solidarity is in contrast with the hospitality that the Ugly never received from his brother in the monastery. Also, pretended agreement and advice are combined with innuendo and insinuation as the Good hints at the difficulty for the Ugly of metaphorically ‘digesting’ his brother’s recent demonstration of hatred. The Good and the Ugly are both being insincere. Irony is construed around the audience’s knowledge of the fight between the Ugly and his brother, Father Ramirez. In terms of the model discussed in Chapter Two, the scene at the monastery in which the Good witnesses the brothers’ confrontation is an instance of ‘post-hoc commentary’ in which the viewers are ‘targeted overhearers’ of the deep-seated disagreement between the two brothers. The subsequent cigar-offer scene is instead an occurrence of ‘conflictuality’ in that the words uttered by the Ugly clash with the visuals of the previous scene. Here the visual–verbal interplay is

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 135

9/24/2010 2:22:56 PM

136

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

essential to conveying irony and the camera acting as narrator discloses the information to the interactive not the represented participants, turning them into ‘undisclosed intermediaries’ along the attitude I have termed ‘marked disclosure’. The point I have made in this section is that irony, as Colston and Gibbs (2007: 4) observed, is not solely a linguistic issue, on the contrary it involves a number of levels of communication and degrees of intentionality. The discussion of how irony is construed in the above scene, however, is not complete unless the plane of camera movements and characters’ body behaviour is taken in to the equation. While this issue is explored in detail in the next section, some elements need to be anticipated here. Sitting next to him in the wagon, the Good listens to the Ugly’s fake account of his brother’s generosity. This is mostly framed in medium close and knee shots of the two men together until the Good offers the cigar he has been smoking to his companion. At this point, the incongruity between the words spoken and the reality to which they refer is marked by a close-up on the Good looking away from the Ugly as if to express his detachment from him. Eyelines are absent between the two characters; however, the halfsmoked cigar that from one man ends in the hand of the other functions as a vector and characterizes the scene as indirectly transactional with the Good doing the giving and the Ugly accepting it as recipient. Visuals therefore greatly contribute to the ironic construal. In the following section I shall demonstrate how in the different films under study the irony expressed at the verbal level is accompanied by various choices of both camera and body movements.

5.6 Beyond words: multimodality In the next two chapters the discussion on the camera movements and features of the mise-en-scène goes hand in hand with the analysis of the verbal level; in this chapter, on the contrary, I have left the main discussion of the general visual strategies of the films under study to this final section. This was necessary due to the considerable number of films analysed which does not allow a micro-analysis; furthermore, this organization of the investigation is in line with the goal of the first part of the volume, which is that of identifying some

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 136

9/24/2010 2:22:56 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

137

of the general visual patterns that index the Western genre in accompaniment to the general verbal patterns. The consideration of the stylistic choices in the Italian and American films observed here is based mainly on Kress and van Leeuwen’s notion of vectors (2007), because, in spite of the more recent work on multimodality (O’Halloran, 2004 and Machin, 2007 among others), this is still a very viable tool for the present analysis. It will be remembered that for these authors vectors highlight the transactional structure of an interaction by connecting the Actor, that is, the subject initiating the action of doing something, and the Goal, or the recipient of the action. ‘The hallmark of a narrative visual “proposition” is the presence of a vector: narrative structures always have one, conceptual structures never do’ (Kress and van Leeuwen, 1996: 59). Any object that the characters in a film handle or even their own body limbs, gaze, and eyelines function as imaginary lines or vectors indexing the directionality and transitivity of the narrative propositions. Although other elements of the mise-en-scène also carry meaning, such as the characters’ position on stage, whether they are in a lower or higher place vis-à-vis their interlocutor – either in a standing or in a prone position, on a horse or on foot –, I have focused on vectors primarily together with an attention to the choice of technical aspects, mainly camera movements. The purpose is to observe how these two features are combined and how they accompany the formulation of verbal irony. In the ‘ironical scenes’, that is, in those moments in the films that convey verbal irony, an alternation was found between ‘individual’ shots, in which the cowboy-speaker is portrayed alone, and ‘shared’ shots in which the two interlocutors are framed together. Suggesting detachment and distance between speakers, the single shot can be interpreted as an opportune visual accompaniment to the incongruity that characterizes irony whereby two orders of existential beliefs are contrasted (Scott, 1998); shared shots – although they suggest sameness (van Leeuwen, [2001] 2008: 96) – may also be a metaphor for the ironic fragmentation if the speakers in them do not engage in gaze or if there is an absence of vectors. In individual shots, the presence of vectors emphasizes the directionality of the transactional process. In excerpt (20) from Per qualche dollaro in più (A Few Dollars

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 137

9/24/2010 2:22:56 PM

138

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

More, 1965), being asked to justify his presence within the criminal gang he has managed to infiltrate, No Name/Joe produces an ironic utterance that reflects semantic sincerity by referring to the possibility of turning in the men in the gang. His cigar, which is symbolically halved by a gun shot by a man in the group as Joe delivers his utterance, is the vector in this individual shot. Excerpt (20) Joe Perché ci sono grosse taglie su voi galantuomini e le taglie significano denaro e io sul denaro non ci sputo mai sopra. Mi basta sapere attendere ah ah. Translation Joe Such a big reward is being offered on all of you gentlemen; rewards mean money and I never turn money away. I just have to wait ah ah.13 Following the ironic utterance, the tension between the two men is palpable and the two enemies, Joe and El Indio, are captured in the same shot. Two vectors are in their mouths, a cigar for Joe and a cigarette for El Indio. In contrast with this shared shot, for the subsequent scene, which was commented earlier in excerpt (13), in which Joe ironizes on the fact that he needs a good night’s sleep before the next day’s shooting, the director has chosen an individual shot in which the eyeline between the two speakers functions as a vector. Although in many cases shared shots may suggest commonality between speakers, in a context of conflictuality elements within such shots can underline the incongruity on which irony is based. As an illustration, in Per un pugno di dollari (For a Fistful of Dollars, 1964) as Joe uses irony in addressing one of his antagonists, he is portrayed in a shared medium shot with him; however, as he utters the key line, he looks away from his interlocutor establishing no eyeline vector with him. Therefore, verbally with the use of irony and visually with the lack of eyeline vectors the scene in excerpt 21 conveys conflict. Excerpt (21) Benito Questo è Chico, uno dei nostri uomini più fidati. Vi mostrerà la stanza; sarete come a casa vostra.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 138

9/24/2010 2:22:56 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

139

Joe Eh spero proprio di no, a casa mia stavo malissimo. [Joe/No Name looks down and away from his interlocutors] Translation Benito This is Chigo, one of our most trusted men. Follow him; he’ll take you to your room. I’d like you to feel at home. Joe Hope not, it was terrible at home. Let’s go. [Joe/No Name looks down and away from his interlocutors] Such a choice of camera movement is frequent in this film as another scene shows in which the two antagonists are in the same medium shot with one of them, Ramon Rojo, not establishing gaze contact, as he utters his key line and rides off on his horse. In this scene, centred on Ramon’s betrayal of the American soldiers, the irony revolves on his choice of the predicate ‘check over together’ which refers to the upcoming action of verifying the good functioning of the guns on the unaware troops and their consequent massacre (excerpt 22). Excerpt (22) Captain Ben arrivato, tenente, ecco il vostro oro. Mi auguro che le vostre armi siano altrettanto efficienti. Ramon State tranquillo capitano, le controlleremo insieme. Translation Captain Welcome lieutenant. Here’s your gold. I hope the guns you’ll be giving us will be equally useful to our army Ramon Rest assured captain, will check them over together. Shared shots in which the speakers avoid establishing eyelines are found throughout this film to signpost the use of ironic echoic repetition. When Benito boasts his wisdom to Joe (‘In this part of the world a man’s life often depends upon a mere scrap of information’), both cowboys are filmed in the same shared shot but both look away from each other (as in Figure 5.1). Later in the film, when Joe ironically echoes this statement to Ramon, in another shared shot the lack of eyeline is compensated by Joe’s cigar that functions as an indirect vector (Figure 5.2).

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 139

9/24/2010 2:22:56 PM

140

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 5.1 Speaking with No Eye Contact in For a Fistful of Dollars

Figure 5.2 Cigars As Vectors in for a Fistful of Dollars

A change in camera movements can suggest the increased tension or conflict as in the exchange between ‘the Ugly’ and the Good in Il buono, il brutto e il cattivo (The Good, the Bad and Ugly, 1966) who alternate moments of business partnership with others of antagonism. When Taco, the Ugly, drags the Good to the desert, the two are captured in a shared shot with an eyeline as a vector and the more powerful of the two at that time, Taco, on a horse, hence in a higher and dominant position. Later, however, when the tension grows and the Ugly utters his ironic utterances (‘There are only 120 more miles to go and no longer than 8 hours to the sunset, if you manage to see it, walk!/ ‘If you spare your breath, a man like you can make it.’ If, instead, he doesn’t, he will die, but slowly, very slowly), the camera is on him in an individual shot and clear vectors are absent. Similarly,

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 140

9/24/2010 2:22:56 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

141

as was pointed out in section 5.3 on the role of the audience in the construal of irony, in the case of indirect conflict, the preferred choice of camera movement seems to be for a shared shot without vectors. This is the case of the scene when Blondie and Taco, momentarily friends, sit in their wagon having left the monastery where the former recovered. At the end of that scene, however, when Taco suspects that Blondie’s tone is ironical (‘Sure, after a meal there’s nothing like a good cigar’), the camera movement changes in favour of an individual shot in which both the eyeline and the cigar in Taco’s mouth are vectors. In the American films under study, camera shots similarly provide an accompaniment to the verbal expression of irony. It was pointed out how in general in these films irony connotes male communality rather than indexing direct confrontation as in the Italian films; as a consequence irony is often used to underline bonding and association among good men rather than to separate out good and bad subjects. However, similar to what happens in Leone’s cinema, the able use of irony is a marker of positive masculinity that contributes to defining the male identity in the films. There is, therefore, continuity between the two sets of films. The choice of camera movements and the presence of vectors seem to reflect such a different use of ironic language. In El Dorado as an illustration, in both the two scenes in which Cole and Mississippi echo each other ironically (‘A girl?/ Don’t you think I can know a girl?’ excerpts (14) and (15)), the camera is on a shared medium shot on both characters together, with clear eyelines between the two men; the gun that Mississippi nonchalantly waves in the second of the two scenes – the echoing one –functions as a vector. The resulting effect is that the visual reinforces the associative nature of the ironical language. Similarly, in the first encounter between Cole and Mississippi in the tavern (excerpt 23), irony is an exacerbation of the maxim of quality as the latter uses ‘passion’ to refer to the older man’s request to linger with him a little longer. In this scene the camera is on a shared medium close-up on the two men, gazing at each other hence establishing a clear eyeline while the knife Mississippi waves in his hand is a vector that emphasizes the directionality of the interaction (Figure 5.3).

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 141

9/24/2010 2:22:57 PM

142

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 5.3 A Knife as Vector in El Dorado

Excerpt (23) 1 Mississippi (Caan) Well good evening, thanks for the drink gentlemen. 2 Cole (Wayne) Wait a minute son. 3 Mississippi I am NOT your son, my name is Alan Bourdillon Traherne. 4 Cole God almighty. 5 Mississippi Yeah that’s why most people call me Mississippi (. . .) 6 Cole Just a minute Mississippi. 7 Mississippi Would you mind telling me why you have such a great passion for my company? 8 Cole Would you relax for a couple of minutes? Although mostly characterizing good men, irony is occasionally associated with bad cowboys. In this case, camera movements are not dissimilar from what happens in the portrayal of good males. Cases of sheer conflict therefore are marked by individual camera shots. As an illustration in El Dorado, in excerpt (5) cited earlier, outlaw McLeod accuses one of his men of being slow at drawing the gun. The camera is first on the man, Melt, who barely escaped being shot by Cole and who is on the floor in an individual medium shot; subsequently the camera moves on to McLeod’s tough scarred face in an individual close-up. The gun that Melt was forced to abandon on the floor by Cole, who was

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 142

9/24/2010 2:22:57 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

143

Figure 5.4 Guns as Vectors in El Dorado

much faster at drawing his gun, is the vector underlying the interaction directionality and narrative transitivity (see Figure 5.4). Excerpt (5) McLeod Hold it (. . .) I cant afford to lose another man (. . .) Melt You got a lot of faith in me don’t you Nelse? McLeod Faith can move mountains, Melt, but it can’t be the first to draw. In the American Westerns under study shared shots and ironic utterances are often the markers of associative rather than conflict interaction. In John Ford’s The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962) the relationship between tough Lone Ranger Doniphon and delicate city lawyer Ranse Stoddard, who aims to free local Shinbone of bandit Liberty Valance (Lee Marvin), is of a relatively friendly nature as the two men, in spite of sharing an interest for the same woman, are not separated by a moral divide and both are part of Shinbone little community. In excerpt (24) below Doniphon, Ranse and local journalist Peabody comment on Liberty Valance’s recent escape from the local tavern. Peabody’s mention of ‘law and order’ is an echoic repetition of an earlier statement by Ranse, arguing that outlaws should be fought with legal tools and not weapons. As in other instances, the camera is on a shared medium shot on the three men.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 143

9/24/2010 2:22:57 PM

144

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Excerpt (24) Doniphon Now, I wonder what scared him off! Peabody You know what scared him. The spectacle of law and order rising up from the gravy and the mashed potatoes. Ranse Ok ok you made your point it was the gun that scared him off, Pompey’s gun, your gun. Hathaway’s The Sons of Katie Elder is no exception to the pattern of camera movement that has been identified so far. In this film the few instances of ironic language are accompanied by shared shots as the following in which John Wayne, playing the eldest Elder brother, critically echoes some family language used with reference to his then little brother’s tendency to fall. The knee shot of the four brothers on their horses with clear eyelines between the speakers is the visual metaphor of their closeness in spite of Wayne’s ironic language before they gallop down to their native town of Clearwater (such is the meaning of the final utterance ‘Let’s bounce on down’). Excerpt (25) Tom (Dean Martin) . . . I didn’t fall, I was pushed. Somebody always pushed me out of their laugh. Wayne That’s ‘cause you bounced so good. Everybody in the family kept bragging how good you bounced. Let’s bounce on down. In conclusion, camera movements and the choice of particular shots are the visual accompaniment to ironic discourse and the marker of the incongruous and detached nature of irony that expresses non-alignment with an original text and its existential presuppositions. Various choices of camera shots are available that can either portray the speaker uttering the ironic utterance individually or jointly capture the producer and the recipient of ironic discourse. Within such shots, vectors in terms of eyelines and such cowboys’ paraphernalia as guns or cigars underline the directionality of the interaction. The presence of differences between Leone’s and the John Wayne films has been pointed out. In the Italian Westerns, in which irony is generally associated with an antagonistic relationship between positive and negative males, the verbal dissonance expressed

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 144

9/24/2010 2:22:57 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

145

by irony is reinforced by the visual representation of the men. The films observed in general show an alternation between individual shots, in which a number of vectors suggest interactional directionality, and shared shots, in which the conflictuality between the ironic speakers is visually indicated by the men looking away from each other thus not establishing vectors. In some cases a change from shared to individual shots may occur which serves the function of heightening the conflictuality between the speakers. In most cases in the American films examined the verbal use of irony is similarly a good cowboy’s accoutrement. However, in this environment good men do not often dialogue with their antagonists; therefore, the use of irony is mostly associative as it connotes the good cowboys’ discourse. In line with this different use of irony, the visuals underline the commonality between speakers and the camera generally favours shared shots suggesting association which the presence of vectors underscores.

5.7 Discussion of the results and conclusion The Western genre that has encouraged intellectual readings of their multilayered nature,14 has been traditionally regarded as prioritizing action more than verbalization (Landy, 2000: 194) and filling its action plots with ‘sadomasochistic violence’ (Günsberg, 2005: 173). The Ranse Stoddard-Tom Doniphon opposition in Ford’s The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, for instance, exposes the incoherence of Western’s law ‘with masculine violence forced to establish the terms by which violence can be declared illegitimate’ (Mitchell, 1996: 23). Femininity only plays the corollary function of ensuring the cowboys’ heterosexuality (Günsberg, 2005: 208), while the complex set of accoutrements, hats, horses, whips, spurs and most of all the unmistakable ‘phallic connotation of a gun hanging idly, then sticking out and up’ (ibid.: 194) like a male organ, assigns to this genre the connotation of a stereotypically male cinema in which the excessive and parodic masculinity is similar to a ‘masquerade’. Italian and American Westerns, therefore, are characterized by what Krutnik, in referring to the male vernacular in American crime fiction of 1920s and 1930s, calls ‘closed-circuit of male communication’ (1999: 43),

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 145

9/24/2010 2:22:57 PM

146

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

which is a unique style that defines masculine identity on an oppositional basis by excluding female speakers. Challenging Landy’s comment that in Westerns ‘the sparsity of dialogue is a sign that this world is one of action and less of verbalization’ (Landy, 2000: 189), this chapter has demonstrated the relevance of discourse in this genre and proposed a characterization of the Westerns dialogue and the features of the conflictual interaction between the rugged individual cowboys and their opponents in terms of ironic discourse. Issues of male identity are at the core of Westerns that are ‘committed to revealing how contemporary versions of manhood are achieved’ (Mitchell, 1996: 27). Male talk in Westerns is generally not serious and can be identified as keying (Goffman, 1986) in that it displays a playful use of words. As an expression of keying, in both Leone’s and in the American films under study by Hathaway, Hawks and Ford, irony is a prevalent linguistic feature or a further accoutrement that compares with spurs, Winchesters and horses. The analysis of the occurrences of ironic language found in the films indicates that most cases are best interpreted according to Sperber and Wilson’s model of echoic repetition. In the films observed, echoing another speaker’s words or beliefs equals to contrasting two different orders of existential truths or two different scripts; hence, especially in Leone’s cinema, it is a conflictive strategy used by the positive cowboys to dissociate them from and undermine their opposers’ view of the world. By critically mentioning their antagonists’ contraction style that tends to be dogmatic and unable to entertain other possible views, positive characters present a flexible speaking style based on expansion that considers other voices and perspectives. In the John Wayne films a similar kind of ironic language is present although its associative function ensures the existence of a community of practice amongst good cowboys. In both cases irony is a cowboy’s indispensable accoutrement. Another expression of irony found in both sets of films involves the viewers as targeted overhearers and their expectations. Irony based on semantic and pragmatic sincerity does not reside in the gap between the words and their meaning but it is located in the incongruity between what the words actually mean (hence the lexical and

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 146

9/24/2010 2:22:58 PM

Spaghetti and American Westerns

147

pragmatic sincerity of the utterance) and the expectations of the viewers that run counter to what is being uttered on the verbal level. Once more such a use of irony is conflictual in Leone’s films and associative in the John Wayne films as the utterances are embedded in exchanges between antagonists in the former case and partners in the latter. Other ways of construing irony found in the films under study are more germane to the screen language we are observing here than echoic repetition can be. In some cases the interactive participants have a crucial role in co-construing ironic utterances and irony is based on the ‘marked disclosure’ of relevant information to them. Irony therefore works like ‘a humourous text [that] is fully or partially compatible with two different and opposed scripts’ (Tsakona, 2009: 1173) one being read by the audience and the other being interpreted by the character with lesser knowledge of the events. Such cases of irony, however, are not solely construed on a verbal plane; the role of visuals is essential as the level through which the information is leaked to the audience. In terms of the verbal–visual relation irony is construed on the ‘conflictuality’ between the words uttered and the visuals to which they refer. In conclusion, irony is a distinctive feature of both types of Westerns and in both it adds to the characterization of the narrative subjects. By producing an ironic line, a cowboy acquires power and authority over his antagonist or gives a show of discursive subtlety to a partner. The features of male discourse in this cinema add to the portrayal of a modern sensitive, emancipated, and subtle masculinity expressed by the winning cowboys that contrasts with the banal violent and uncouth identity of the old fashioned males. This is also comforted at the visual level by a tendency in the John Wayne films to use shared shots in which the ironist and his recipient are jointly captured and by a frequent presence of vectors symbolized by guns or knives or simply eyelines. By contrast, in Leone’s cinema, the options vary; however, all in all, this director tends to prefer individual shots in which a vector suggests directionality or shared shot devoid of vectors, with only occasional cases of shared shots with vectors. An explanation can be attempted for such a different aesthetic choice of expressing visually and verbally irony in the films observed.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 147

9/24/2010 2:22:58 PM

148

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Frayling ([1981] 1998), to mention a classic authoritative position, saw Leone’s cinema as a metastatement and an intellectual and formalist revisitation of the original American Westerns.15 In Leone’s critical cinema the divide between the good and the bad has been much attenuated; it is possible, therefore, to think that verbal interaction has a crucial role in identifying the two parties and irony in particular becomes the vehicle of the winning cowboys’ superior masculinity. Conversely, in the John Wayne films in which the bad are still very clearly distinguishable from the goodies, there is lesser need for such a discursive differentiation, therefore irony tends to be used amongst associates and partners. I would like to add a note of caution to this conclusion and agree with Jewitt and Oyama (2008: 138) that the theoretical framework of visual social semiotics adopted in this study ‘by itself is not enough’. Studies on gender and masculinity within the domain of film studies (Holland et al., 1993, Kikham and Thumin, 1993 among others) have greatly contributed to the interpretation of the results in this chapter and ‘visual social semiotics can only be one element of an interdisciplinary equation which must also involve relevant theories and histories’ (Jewitt and Oyama, 2008: 138). Together with Chapter Four, where comedy and melodrama were discussed, this chapter has demonstrated the validity of a study of film dialogue and provided a characterization of the verbal plane in a number of genres. So far I have used the notion of genre that may be viewed as pertaining to the domain of film studies. In the chapters that follow, the methodological lens will be different as the notion of conflict that informs the volume will be approached from a thematic perspective, narrative in the case of a short film by Antonioni in Chapter Six and identity in the recent work of Mohsen Melliti in Chapter Seven.

RPiazza_05_Final.indd 148

9/24/2010 2:22:58 PM

Chapter Six

The struggle for narrative autonomy in Antonioni’s When Love Fails

6.1 Introduction As discussed in Chapter One, this second section of the volume looks at cinematic discourse from a different angle. The proposition contained in the previous two chapters on comedy and melodrama, and Westerns was that it is possible to postulate a degree of correspondence between film genre and the talk produced in it. Within the framework of conflict talk representation, it was argued that as they verbally clash characters in comedy follow particular interactional patterns that are distinct from those one encounters in melodrama. Similarly, in Italian and American Westerns conflict in the form of subtle irony seems germane to that specific genre even across the two countries observed. Away from a genre perspective, this second part of the book takes a thematic approach and focuses in particular on identity; it continues the exploration of conflict and shows how confrontation is the lens through which it is possible to explore how film deals with issues of identity intended as the reflection of an individual’s self-concept that results from his/her inscription in a social group with the emotional and intellectual information associated with that membership (Tajfel, 1981: 255). Such a change of perspective reflects the intention of pursuing the investigation of film discourse from an angle that is explicitly linguistic after taking a perspective focused on the notion ‘genre’ that was derived from the domain of film studies. This second part offers two case studies of an early short film by Michelangelo Antonioni, in this chapter, and a recent film by an Italy-based Tunisian director, Mohsen Melliti. From an analytic point of view, Antonioni

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 149

9/24/2010 2:25:44 PM

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

150

and Melliti can be both regarded as auteurs; therefore, the change in the approach, away from a genre perspective, is more than justified when studying their production.1 The adoption of a different analytic perspective is not the only element that characterizes this second part: as it offers two case studies of individual films, here the analysis allows more space for a detailed multimodal consideration of the mise-en-scène in terms of the directors’ technical choices of camera movements and other elements such as the actors’ costumes, gestures and body posture. To a degree, the first part of the investigation develops at a macro-level while the second operates at a micro-level. The following analysis of the narrative discourse in a 1953 short film by Antonioni is the first of two exemplifications of the thematic focus of this second part of the book. After a short contextualization of the film to situate the analysis, the different identities of the five women are discussed as they appear through their personal narratives in a metaphorical struggle with the interviewer and voice-over for ‘interactional space’ or ‘dominance’ (Millar and Rogers, 1976; Rogers and Millar, 1988; and Linell et al., 1988) as the result of the exercise of a generalized practice of power in talking or attempt ‘to control a major part of the territory which is shared by the parties, that is, the interactional space’ (Linell et al., 1988: 415).

6.2 The background of the study of Antonioni’s film Antonioni’s Tentato suicidio (When Love Fails) is a 22-minute episode belonging to the 1953 six-part compilation film Amore in città (Love in the City) in which the Italian director interviews five women who attempted suicide but survived and elicits the story of their experience. As ‘every act of suicide has its story’ (Antonioni in CottinoJones, 1996: 72), the film follows the women’s gripping narratives reflecting that natural and inevitable impulse to tell stories (White, 1980: 5) that makes narrative as compelling and ‘international, transhistorical, transcultural’ as life itself (Barthes, 1977: 79 in White, 1980: 5). The five narratives, which can be termed ‘ontological’ in that they are ‘akin to life histories’ (Harling Stalker, 2009), are not told in the same way and show remarkably different patterns of self

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 150

9/24/2010 2:25:44 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

151

presentation. With the mimetic intention of bringing real life to screen, the director paid the women for their dramatic narratives; however, he admits to not believing in them to the same degree and having doubts about the sincerity of some.2 Disregarding whether this is the reason behind the different formats the cinematic stories take, this chapter follows the narrative presentation of self in which the five women engage and interprets that in relation to the organizing and orchestrating role of the director who in the film is the narrative voice-over but also the interviewer or journalist aiming to report the women’s suicide experience to the viewers as an instructive moral lesson on the meaning of life. As in the rest of this study, the analysis carried out in this chapter is informed by the notion of conflict. It soon becomes possible to identify a degree of tension between the female narrators and the male voice-over and interviewer; therefore, in terms of confrontation this can be interpreted as distant and indirect. The five women, chosen because women, being ‘more sensitive’ than men, ‘are better exemplars of the alienation that contemporary society has foisted upon all human beings’ (Brunette, 1998: 8), are the only proprietors of their accounts. However, the male character functions as both a facilitator and a challenge to the women narrators. Goffman’s (1979: 17) notion of participation structure can suitably be invoked to explain the different narrative roles in the film. It is known how Goffman distinguishes between the ‘author’ who has propriety of the words s/he utters, the ‘principal’ who, although not having authored the words, is committed to them, and finally the ‘animator’ or ‘sounding box’ who only repeats someone else’s text but does not subscribe to the views expressed in it. As he talks to the five women, the interviewer also expresses his stance vis-à-vis the stories he is being given by the suicides. His questions, his choice of narrating the story himself rather than allowing the women to present it, together with aesthetic preferences in terms of camera movements result in a different authorship on the part of the five women. The five female narrators are not all the same, as has been said. Some show more self-confidence, a better sense of self, an ability to see their life as a continuum that incorporates their suicide attempt but progresses beyond that incident. These women therefore show

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 151

9/24/2010 2:25:44 PM

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

152

agency in their narration and are the authors of their stories; others, on the contrary, do not sound convinced or convincing and let themselves be orchestrated by the interviewer thus only claiming something resembling an animator’s role. This tension between a stronger and weaker subjectivity that emerges through the individual narratives triggered by an outsider’s voice is the topic of this chapter.

6.3 Contextualization of the study and methodology In this as in other films, in addition to the verbal plane of dialogue, film discourse encompasses many non-linguistic elements of the miseen-scène, such as setting, costume, use of lights and characters/ actors movements. ‘In controlling the mise-en-scene, the director stages the event for the camera’ (Bordwell and Thompson, 2004: 176). Costume, as an exemplification, usefully contributes to the narration. In Tentato suicidio, for instance, outfits indicate change in most suicide survivors’ existential conditions. The white coat the first teller wears in the filmed narrative of her suicide attempt, for instance, contrasts with the severe dark coat she wears during the interview. Similarly, the rough and tatty black coat of the ex-dancer during the interview in which she recounts her self-destructive drive changes to the dressy outfit she wears in the final sequence in spite of her alleged frustration and dissatisfaction with life. The two women with whose experience Antonioni may have sympathized do not change outfit, which can be read as an indication that there is continuity between their past and their present situation and suggests that they have kept true to their selves. Many other features of the mise-en-scène are discussed in relation to the characters’ dialogue. Kress and van Leeuwen’s notion of represented participants (the participants in the image or shot) and interactive participants (the viewers) (2007: 47) is particularly useful for this analysis of Antonioni’s film especially in its connection to the issue of gaze and eyelines. In When Love Fails the represented participants establish an eyeline vector with an invisible interviewer whose questions viewers hear but whom they never see on screen. Due to the nature of the camera shot, the five female suicide narrators appear as if they were addressing the interactive participants; all except the two most sophisticated

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 152

9/24/2010 2:25:44 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

153

tellers whose gaze is very composite and diversified and who clearly interact not solely with the interviewer but with other represented participants in their stories. ‘Deictic shift theory’ (Duchan et al., 1995) is the other main reference that contributes to characterizing the five narratives in Antonioni’s episode. In Galbraith’s words (1995: 21), deixis is a psycholinguistic term for those aspects of meaning associated with ‘selfworld orientation’ and indicates the ‘ “orientational” features of language which function to locate utterances in relation to speakers’ viewpoints’ (Simpson, 1993: 13). Deixis can be spatial, if it refers to locations in the physical space surrounding given speakers, or temporal, if it takes into account these speakers’ time frame. The shift between different ways of expressing viewpoint and focalization (the way a character sees reality) has always been a major concern of literary and narratological studies. Viewpoint can refer to the spatial-temporal positioning of a character in a story and to his/her stance towards the world. McIntyre (2007) stresses the similarity of Chatman’s (1990) and Fowler’s (1986) models which encompass both notions of deixis. The continuous shift of positioning in the voice-over of When Love Fails is subtly managed by the male voice from the beginning. Excerpt (1) Voice-over Di fronte al suicidio noi proviamo un senso di sgomento perché affrontare la morte deliberatamente è sempre un atto misterioso che ha dell’assurdo. Translation Voice-over When faced with suicide we feel dismayed. Choosing to die is a mysterious and extreme act. Here the pronoun we (‘noi’), which Italian does not strictly require in this context, can be considered linguistically marked and emphasizing the communality of views the voice-over assumes between the speaker and the viewers that suicide is a mysterious and absurd act. In the next sentence, however, another switch occurs that refers to the suicide survivors invited to the studio to relay their experience.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 153

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

154

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

In this case the ‘we’ is exclusive of the viewers as it refers to the voiceover’s spatial location: Excerpt (2) Voice-over Queste che vedete sono persone che hanno tentato di togliersi la vita e noi le abbiamo invitate in questo teatro di posa per sentire dalla loro voce quali ragioni le hanno spinte. Translation Voice-over These people tried to commit suicide. We invited them to this theatre to hear straight from them their motivations behind that act. The notion of deictic shift that McIntyre usefully applies to the filmed version of Ian McKellen’s Richard III has proved very revealing especially if used in combination with the notion of vectors and that of represented/interactive participants in Kress and van Leeuwen’s model and will guide the analysis of Antonioni’s film. Two more notions that are used in this study need to be briefly mentioned in this section. The first concerns the polarity of representation via the showing-telling modality; the second regards the issue of reported discourse. The terms are used here to indicate a distinction between ‘showing’ as a way of presenting events directly and dramatically with no or little commentary and ‘telling’ as a modality in which facts are presented through the narrators’ words. Showing and telling have been extensively used in the literary domain (e.g. Fink, 1982; Kozloff, 1988; and Fludernik, 2001); in the context of news narratives, Threadgold (2005: 272) distinguishes between ‘showing’, that is, a recounting whose ‘emphasis is on the “now-ness” (the eyewitness report)’ and ‘telling’ a more verbal-oriented recapitulation of events produced by reporters who ‘act as if “they were doing narrative.” ’ When Love Fails reproduces journalistic interviews; therefore, it seems relevant to refer to the notion of showing/telling in a media and not only literary domain. The analysis of Antonioni’s film shows how from telling, narratives can proceed in a crescendo of explicitness to what Piazza and Haarman (forthcoming) have termed showing/suggesting (when visuals metonymically or metaphorically

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 154

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

155

illustrate words) and showing/demonstrating (in case of close verbalvisual fit). The verbal–visual relationship is at the basis of the last operative notion that will be used for the analysis of Antonioni’s film, that of reported discourse and the various forms from very direct to indirect it can take. Reported speech is visibly present even in our daily discourse, since, as Jakobson (1971: 1330) observes, ‘we are far from confining our speech to events sensed in the present by the speaker himself.’ Studies of citation or reported discourse tend to be contextspecific and concern, for instance, the case of conversational narratives or media discourse. The five stories in When Love Fails present a hybrid case of an individual’s personal account while at the same time echo the style of news interviews in media discourse. Therefore, a brief reference to both these domains seems relevant to the present study. Polanyi (1985) is one of the first scholars to investigate reported discourse in conversational storytelling. Her study demonstrates that ‘literary texts do not have a monopoly on phenomena such as indirect free style, and complexities of point of view, and ambiguity’ (1985: 169) and storytellers often use such complex formats as ‘double direct discourse’ in addition to the ‘classic free indirect speech’ one encounters in literature. Citations in the media ‘confer authority and legitimacy’ to journalistic discourse (Calsamiglia and Ferrero, 2003), contribute to the construction of identities (Lauerbach, 2005) also adding a sense of immediacy and liveliness and conveying the speaker’s stance (Hunston, 2000) and evaluation (Bednarek, 2006). In stylistics, Semino and Short (2004) and Leech and Short (2007)3 have developed a scale of speech, writing and thought presentation categories, which Poole (1994) has applied to dramatic texts. Most scholars agree that no perfect fidelity to a speaker’s original text can be assumed; therefore, words in reported discourse should be seen as ‘manipulated’ (Tannen, 1989; Thompson, 1996), ‘mediated’ (Caldas-Coulthard, 1993), ‘represented’ (Fairclough, 1988) and ‘presented’ (Semino and Short, 2004). The categories of reported discourse used in Antonioni’s film have been applied to other discourse types (Piazza, 2008a) and are the reworking on Leech and Short’s (1981) and Thompson’s (1996) models: Very Direct Discourse

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 155

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

156

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

showing the quoted speakers delivering their own message on screen; Direct discourse, often introduced by the speaker’s neutral or evaluative reporting verbs; Indirect Discourse generally introduced by that-clauses; Interpretative Summary by which speakers tend to ‘aver’ their propositions – to use Sinclair’s (1988) term referring to a writer identifying with what s/he says – while they still attribute them to a source (Bednarek, 2006: 59–63). This chapter used a recently restored DVD version of Love in the City;4 I have transcribed the film script with pauses, halts and hesitations whenever they occurred and noted some significant features of the mise-en-scène. Following some crucial information about Antonioni’s film, the analysis in section 6.4 traces the five women in their attempt, more or less effective, to recount their story.

6.4 The film Antonioni’s When Love Fails belongs to Love in the City, the first issue of the film ‘journal’ Spectator (Lo Spettatore).5 At the outset a voice-over, ‘spoken by an unseen speaker situated in a space and time other that simultaneously being presented by the images on the screen’ (Kozloff, 1988: 5), promises a detached, veritable and journalistic narrative of ordinary love as opposed to Hollywood glamorous passion. Mucchi (Cinema Nuovo 1954, reproduced in the DVD booklet) observes that Zavattini’s intention of reproducing reality on screen runs close to an illusion of impartial neutral mimesis. Yet, film cannot be true to life. The non-professional actors’ perfect performance rings false and the razor blade entering the woman’s flesh, cannot be truly presented but only artificially ‘re-presented’ (Margulies, 2003: 226).6 The film’s ‘structures of repetition’, therefore, are ‘a critique of the standard assumptions of the mimetic relationship between film and reality’ (Simmons, 2008: 73). We may wonder what is behind Antonioni’s choice of topic. According to the voice-over, these subjects have sensed that this moment of honesty would be useful to themselves and the others. At the opening, the voice-over reassuringly says that if the motive is love, it is often a temporary crisis and survivors usually rediscover the pleasure of life. Although this is not the case with all the women, their

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 156

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

157

experience provides moral guidance showing that ‘life, however beautiful or bad it may be, is in any case worth living’ (voice-over). However, a moralistic or ‘patronizing’ stance (Margulies, 2003: 225) taints When Love Fails and, according to Chiesa (audio-comment accompanying the DVD), Antonioni’s lack of sympathy towards his subjects, who are described as showing a morbid need to narrate their experience, is the weakest feature of the film.

6.5 Verbal–visual analysis In When Love Fails the five female suicide survivors’ accounts are orchestrated by a male homodiegetic narrator acting as the superarching voice-over and interviewer. Not visible to the audience, his presence is suggested by the direction of the tellers’ gaze and coincides with the camera fulfilling the role of the narrator (Bordwell, 1985). The film alternates moments of category A narratives (intradiegetic first person) and category B narratives (intradiegetic third person) (Simpson, 1993: 55), while the voice-over is restrictive rather than omniscient in that, in two cases as will be shown, it attempts to reflect the character’s viewpoint (McIntyre, 2008). In terms of the participation structure based on Levinson (1988) discussed in Chapter Two, there is a double articulation: as the suicide survivors address the interviewer, the viewers are ‘overhearers’ in a typically ‘non-participant role’, although they are ‘targeted’ overhearers, given the nature of the journalistic interview aimed at informing an audience. The interviewer performs a double role because, as a voice-over providing verbal and visual background information about the five women, he explicitly addresses the viewers who thus become ‘targeted interactive participants’ (Levinson, 1988, Kress and van Leeuwen, 2007); additionally, as interviewer, he addresses the women who are represented participants thus making the viewers ‘targeted overhearers’. Kozloff argues that, by resembling a real human narrating voice, the voice-over is stylistically a humanizing and naturalizing device which transforms an anonymous ‘impersonal narrative agency’ into something ‘humanized and tamed’ (Kozloff, 1988: 128 ) acting as the narrating agent and the orchestrator of events. The humanizing role

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 157

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

158

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

of the voice-over is most evident in relation to the viewers who are no longer eavesdroppers or voyeurs but are addressed directly in an intimate exchange (Kozloff, 1988: 128–9). When Love Fails overcomes the contradictions that Gibson (2001: 649) finds in Kozloff’s model7 in that the voice-over is effectively a humanizing element as it belongs to an actual interviewer investigating the mysterious drama of suicide. Given the structure of the film and the relationship between the male interviewer and female interviewees, it is tempting to see Antonioni’s episode in terms of a conflict or at least a tension and a negotiation for interactional dominance (Millar and Rogers, 1976 and Linell et al., 1988) or space on the part of the male superarching voice-over and interviewing voice inquiring about the motives of the suicide on one level, and, on the other level, the female subjects who, often in stretches of uninterrupted monologue, narrate and recall the dramatic moment of their attempt to die and reply to the interviewer’s prying questions before and after that account. This power dimension provides an insight into the tellers’ identity as is constructed through their narratives. As the present analysis unveils the verbal and visual narrative techniques of the film, it will become apparent how two out of the five stories emerge as characterized by a distinctive autonomy in self-narrative while the others exemplify a more submissive narrative modality which remains under the interviewer’s control. The analysis comments on the suicide narratives by grouping the stories according to the two different typologies of self account. Following this first part of text analysis, the final discussion of the data makes conclusive remarks on the different status of the stories.

6.5.1 Interviewer-orchestrated narratives 6.5.1.1 Near death on the road: Rosanna Twenty-five-year-old Rosanna Carta is the first victim of the cruelty of life. Her attempted suicide is introduced by the voice-over with the accuracy and insistence on details typical of Antonioni’s clinical representation that echoes a police interrogation (Chiesa, DVD booklet): Voice-over Piazza S. Croce di Gerusalemme, il 12 ottobre 1952, sono le 2 del pomeriggio./Piazza Santa Croce di Gerusalemme, 12th October 1952, it’s 2 o’clock.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 158

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

159

Following the camera panning around the Piazza, the woman appears in a long shot that portrays her entire figure as sitting pensively on a bench and is indexically referred to by the voice-over with a distal deictic as ‘that girl’ in a directive clearly addressed to the viewers: ‘Guardate quella ragazza’/ ‘Look at that girl’. Kress and van Leeuwen (2007: 188–92) assign a specific value to a visual composition. They interpret the visual space within a frame as divided by a virtual vertical line that suggests the given and new information; they also propose to split a frame horizontally to indicate ideal and real situations. The examples they provide from medieval miniatures that comprise composite scenarios within the same picture illustrate such visual treatment of space. Such a pattern of space organization can also be identified in a film frame. Visually, Rosanna appears at the bottom of the shot in the position usually filled by visual information that refers to the present (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2007: 186–93). At the top of the shot the surrounding context, already made familiar to us by the words of the voiceover and the images shown by the camera, is instead the past or, to an extent, old information. Verbally, the use of deictics expressing proximity hence marking the information referring to the known past that has already been introduced (‘questi bambini, questi passanti’/ ‘these children, these passers-by’) contrasts with the distancing deictic used to refer to Rosanna and seems to suggest the director’s distance from the woman, although the focus is clearly on her. Before the interview starts, the male voice-over describes Rosanna Carta’s economically deprived background and lonely life. Verbally concise (voice-over: Rosanna vive sola in una borgata alla periferia di Roma/Rosanna lives alone in a housing estate in suburban Rome), this sequence is visually long, with the camera panning slowly on the suburban landscape in pure Neorealist style and realistically including intradiegetic noises and people’s voices. In good journalistic and documentary tradition, the voice-over in total control of this first part of the story incorporates the testimony of a neighbour who, like a vox pop in news reports, confirms that Rosanna’s only company is her dog: ‘Gli vuole bene come se fosse figlio suo/She loves him like her own child.’ The interview that follows, intersected by the visual memory of Rosanna’s suicide, displays a high number of questions (nine) if compared to the other exchanges. The interviewee in medium shot,

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 159

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

160

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

demurely dressed, mostly keeping her eyes down, looks hesitant and submissive. Interactionally, she waits on the interviewer by accommodating to his inquiry style and often reproducing the syntactic form of his questions. In lines 7–8 of excerpt (3) Rosanna slightly departs from the interviewer’s syntactic formulation in that she implements a focus change through the pronoun shift (‘What did you tell him?’ versus He told me); such an attempt at an answer avoidance, a timid sign of independence, however, is marked by the woman’s seeming concern and marked by her hesitation: Excerpt (3) 1 Interviewer Da quanto tempo era fidanzata? 2 Woman Da circa un anno e mezzo. Era molto geloso, non voleva nè che andassi in cerca di lavoro nè che lavorassi e nemmeno che leggessi. Una volta mi trovò con un libro in mano e mi fece una scenata orribile. 3 Interviewer Che libro era? 4 Woman Checkhov. 5 Interviewer Ci racconti come sono andate le cose quel giorno sulla panchina. 6 Woman [She hesitates] Mi ero accorta di aspettare un bambino e già erano:o successe delle litigate perché lui non ne voleva sapere. Quel giorno avevamo un appuntamento:o (0.2) 7 Interviewer E che cosa gli disse? 8 Woman Mi dis- mi disse che non c’era più niente da fare, che lui non si assumeva nessuna responsabilità e se ne andò. 9 Interviewer E lei rimase lì ad aspettarlo? 10 Woman Rimasi lì ad aspettarlo e pensai che+ tutto era finito perché non lo vedevo tornare (. . .) 11 Interviewer L’avrebbe sposato? 12 Woman L’avrei sposato perché le cose più so' faticate e più c’è soddisfazione ma ormai . . . Translation 1 Interviewer How long were you engaged? 2 Woman About a year and a half, he was jealous. He didn’t want me to work nor did he want me to read. He found me with a book once and made a big scene.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 160

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12

161

Interviewer What book was it? Woman Chekhov. Interviewer Tell us what happened that day on the bench. Woman [She hesitates] I found out I was pregnant. We’d already argued because he didn’t want a baby. That day, we’d arranged to meet (0.2). Interviewer What did he say to you? Woman He told me he didn’t want to accept any responsibility and left. Interviewer Did you stay there waiting for him? Woman Yes, I thought + it was all over because he wasn’t coming back. (. . .) Interviewer Would you have married him? Woman Yes, I would have married him because the harder things are, the more satisfaction you get but now . . .

From these linguistic indicators, this first survivor seems to have relatively little agency and narrative autonomy. The interview seems controlled by the journalist/interviewer, whose questions symbolically inscribe Rosanna in the limited physical space of the park corner and bench (Ci racconti come sono andate le cose quel giorno sulla panchina/Tell us what happened that day on the bench). Rosanna does not provide a proper verbal account of her suicide that is realized as a filmed sequence embedded in her interview with a minimum of words (Table 6.1 and Figure 6.1). All this gives a sense of this character as having relatively limited authorial agency and narrative autonomy. Rosanna is often shot from the side and the back. Kress and van Leeuwen point out how in the case of a side shot creating an oblique angle, the vector or eyeline of the gaze not directed to the viewers suggests detachment and distance (2007: 136). Similarly the shot Table 6.1

Rosanna’s story

Verbal text

Visual text

Rosanna: So I got up knowing what I had to do/Allora mi alzai e sapevo quello che avrei dovuto fare.

Rosanna is seen from a left angle and then from the back crossing the street. She’s wearing a nearly white coat. Shot of a black car immediately followed by a sudden noise of breaks.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 161

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

162

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 6.1 Still of Rosanna from Back

from the back suggests a subject moving away from the camera, that is, from the angle of vision of the audience; this, again is interpretable as an expression of lack of involvement and distance of the director from his subject (ibid.: 138–40).

6.5.1.2 The other two women Two more narratives are about a former cabaret dancer and a seemingly upper class confused and dissatisfied (sfasata) 19-year-old woman as she is judged by the voice-over. In terms of the conflict between different presentation modalities and the struggle to project the women’s identity, these subjects show limited agency insofar as they are under the voice-over’s verbal and visual direct control. In the first of the two narratives, the voice-over functioning as a super-ordinate storyteller provides the background to the woman’s decision to commit suicide and even relays her first attempt, thus partly depriving this teller of her narrative. After the war, the woman worked with her sister as dancer in a cabaret, until she got married and had two children. Unfortunately the marriage was a failure which caused her decision to commit suicide. In the opening visual flashback reconstructing this suicide survivor’s past, the exophoric

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 162

9/24/2010 2:25:45 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

163

demonstrative ‘these’ points outside the text to the two sisters dancing on the stage thus strengthening the verbal–visual relation and directing the viewers’ gaze. The temporal shift (McIntyre, 2008) from the past at the beginning of the voice-over account to the present used in the middle makes the account more vivid. Excerpt (4) . . . ma non fu un matrimonio fortunato e infatti dopo due anni si separò dal marito. Una mattina verso mezzogiorno la gente che affolla la Galleria di Roma vede una ragazza bionda stramazzare al suolo. Translation . . . it wasn’t a fortunate marriage and after two years she separated from her husband. One morning about noon the people that crowd the Arcade in Rome see a blond girl collapse to the ground. With the switch to the present, especially in combination with the anonymizing phrase ‘a blond girl’, the account of the suicide attempt seems more immediate, but its dramatic dimension appears reduced in line with the subsequent description of the woman’s suicide as ‘fake’, performed only to attract her husband’s attention – and urge him to take her back with him (in the voice-over’s words). Clear – although indirect – evaluation is expressed by the voice-over that implicates the woman has made the wrong decision in wishing to go back to her husband (‘Le abbiamo chiesto perchè desiderasse tornare dal marito dal momento che non andava d’accordo con lui’/ ‘We have asked her why she wanted to go back to him although they did not get on well’) The voice-over’s comment in indirect speech and the absence of the woman’s reply to the interviewer’s question increase his control over her narrative. While the first narrative of Rosanna Carta’s suicide attempt was entirely realized visually according to the ‘showing’ modality, this second woman is the only teller to use exclusively words according to the ‘telling’ modality. As she recounts her experience, however, the camera is on her in medium and close shots, which allows Antonioni to focus on details with his usually obsessive curiosity. The woman is a smoker; the interviewer acknowledges that and patiently waits for the

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 163

9/24/2010 2:25:46 PM

164

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

narrative to resume when she pauses to exhale her cigarette smoke. In a similar vein, he observes her quietly while she puts out her cigarette by squeezing it between her bare fingers (seemingly a sign of this suicide survivor’s indifference to self-harm) and then saving it tidily in her pocket. Although the number of questions, five, is lower than that of the first narrative, the interviewer is in control, a feature suggested by the woman’s frequent repetition of the syntax and lexis used in the questions (as in excerpt (5)) even if in some cases a particular verb form is clearly unfamiliar to her as in the case of the unconvincingly echoed subjunctive in excerpt (6). Excerpt (5) Interviewer Ma ai bambini non ci pensa? Woman I bambini contano, molto, ma a volte si perde la testa. Translation Interviewer Don’t you think about the children? Woman The children are important of course. Excerpt (6) Interviewer Sembra quasi che le dispiaccia di essere di nuovo a casa. Woman Non e’ che mi dispiacia [sic], e’ la solita vita . . . Translation Interviewer You don’t seem happy to be home. Woman It’s not that I’m not happy. The protagonist of the next story is middle class Donatella who attempts suicide when she is abandoned by her fiancé as he finds out she is flirting with an older man. Commenting on the close up of the woman’s stitch marks, Margulies (2003) draws attention to the fact that Donatella turns her wrist to the camera, unable to relive her suicide and not identifying at all with the act of re-presentation, in fact being nearly in ‘mockery of [that] reenactment pretense’ (p. 226). The mirror against which Donatella deliberately reflects her image as she lies on her bed before trying to

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 164

9/24/2010 2:25:46 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

165

die seems one more symbol of her alienation and her last egotistical self-fulfilling act. In Donatella’s suicide narrative the voice-over prefaces the woman’s actual account of the self-destructive action with descriptors expressing distance (‘una ragazza . . . È una tipica esponente di quella gioventù sfasata’/ ‘a girl . . . she’s a typical example of that dissatisfied youth’) and evaluation (‘gioventù sfasata/ dissatisfied youth/ la cosa era talmente assurda che con quel misto di innocenza, incoscienza e crudeltà che si può avere solo a 18 anni, accettò’/ ‘ it was absurd but with the naïve, irresponsible, and cruel nature typical of an 18 year old, she accepted’). Donatella’s and the cabaret dancer’s stories display a number of similarities. For instance both women are smokers and both are shot with a cigarette at the window of their house. In terms of telling/showing, the final part of the voice-over presentation displays a showing/suggesting strategy whereby the visuals are metonymic of the situation illustrated in the voice-over’s words. The young stranger with whom Donatella dances to the jukebox jazz music is clearly not the 50-year-old man whose courtship she accepted although she was engaged; however, the dance is indicative of the young woman’s alleged flirtatious nature that drove her fiancée away. The visuals in this scene, therefore, do not reflect a close fit between the verbal and visual planes but the images are a metaphor of Donatella’s behaviour according to the ‘showing/suggesting’ modality. As in other narratives, the suicide survivor controls the account of the suicide experience. Yet in this narrative the voice-over closely guides the woman into the opening of the story by means of a hanging sentence uttered with a slightly rising intonation: Excerpt (7) Voice-over Disperata, si chiuse nella sua camera e con una calma altrettanto incosciente↑ Donatella Tagliai più forte che potei . . . [film sequence follows] Translation Voice-over Desperate, she locked herself in her room and with an almost irresponsible calmness↑ Donatella I cut as hard as I could . . . [film sequence follows]

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 165

9/24/2010 2:25:46 PM

166

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Donatella reconstructs the preparatory stages of her suicide (as summarized in Table 6.2) for the interviewer. Her account is an unconvincing enactment performed by a tormented young woman who claims she is disappointed with her suicide failure. The beginning and end of the acting is marked by Donatella’s physical movements, first lying down and then sitting up on her bed. Upon finishing her cigarette at the window (medium shot of her from back again), she opens the mirrored door of her wardrobe and carefully positions herself on her bed. Since the sequence is shot from a right angle, such an accurate choice of suitable position has a threefold function: it can be taken as a token of self-reflection on a dramatic action (in the mirrored image of Donatella she is both the Reacter and the Phenomenon), at the same time the use of the mirror invites the viewers’ gaze by facilitating their vision according to the ‘marked disclosure’ modality and, in terms of my model of participation structure I have discussed in Chapter Two by assigning them the role of ‘targeted overhearers’ in ‘post-hoc commentary’; finally, the mirror is the metaphor for the retrospective reflection of the suicidal action that cannot be repeated (at the end of the narrative the woman shows her stitched up wrist to the interviewer/

Table 6.2

Donatella’s suicide reenactment

Verbal text

Visual text

Donatella: Tagliai più forte che potei, poi stetti qui una mezz’ora, un’ora non ricordo. Avevo sporcato tutto quanto, poi presi un paio di pantaloni, una camicetta e uscii per andare in farmacia senonché per strada incontrai due agenti che mi portarono all’ospedale. Mi misero sette punti.’

(Side angle)

‘Credevo che fosse più facile morire.’ Donatella. I cut as hard as I could then stayed here about an hour. There was blood everywhere. Then I got dressed and went out to the pharmacy. I met two policemen on the way and they took me to the hospital. I got seven stitches. I thought dying was easier.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 166

Donatella opens the wardrobe door so the mirror reflects her image and her gaze. She then leans against the pillows on her bed, cleans the razor blade and presses it against her wrist. (Camera now more centred on Donatella) She turns her wrist to the camera in a close up showing her stitches.

She sits on her bed and buttons up her white shirt in a natural yet seductive move.

9/24/2010 2:25:47 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

167

Figure 6.2 Donatella in Front of Mirror

viewers). Table 6.2 summarizes this verbal and visual sequence; see also Figure 6.2. In this narrative the male interviewer’s control is realized visually by the camera shooting the woman from the back before she starts her narrative (she cannot see the interviewer but he and the viewers can, therefore she is the observed Phenomenon) and, on the verbal level, by the high number of questions excerpt (8) he directs to her to fight the vagueness of her answers: Excerpt (8) 1 Woman (. . .) per un insieme di sentimenti. 2 Interviewer Positivi e negativi? Mi spieghi un po’. 3 Woman Un po’ tutto. 4 Interviewer Come un po’ tutto? 5 Woman (. . .) ho potuto fare delle considerazioni. 6 Interviewer E quali? Translation 1 Woman (. . .) I don’t know, for a whole series of feelings. 2 Interviewer Negative or positive ones? Tell me. 3 Woman Both really. 4 Interviewer Both? What do you mean ?

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 167

9/24/2010 2:25:47 PM

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

168

5 Woman (. . .) I’ve drawn some conclusions 6 Interviewer Like what? It is claimed here that the narratives produced by the cabaret dancer and Donatella, representative of a ‘confused youth’ (‘gioventù sfasata’) suggest a limited agency of these two women even when compared with the first survivor, who threw herself in front of a car. It has been discussed how, while they own the suicide account, much space in these two stories about the individual past that led to the suicide decision is mostly in the hands of the camera and the voice-over in the form of an intradiegetic third person narrative. In the case of Donatella, on the contrary, a filmed sequence, not commented by the voice-over, illustrates her life. Following the scene of the dance to the jukebox music, the confused young woman appears in a café wearing elegant sun-glasses and claiming to the waiter she has no money to pay although she is later shown on her modern scooter as an indication of her fashionable and privileged life style (Table 6.3). Table 6.3

Donatella before suicide attempt

Verbal text

Visual text

Donatella Antonio.

Donatella puts on an elegant coat and sophisticated sunglasses, she is smoking.

Waiter Dica signorina. Donatella Eh non c’ho soldi. Waiter A chi lo dice, signorina. Pagherà domani. Buonasera. Donatella Buonasera grazie. Donatella Salve

She stops at a petrol station to refuel her vespa, she pays and leaves

Verbal text

Visual text

Donatella Antonio.

Donatella puts on an elegant coat and sophisticated sunglasses, she is smoking.

Waiter Yes, miss. Donatella Ah I don’t have any money. Waiter Same here! You’ll pay tomorrow. Goodnight. Donatella Goodnight, thanks. Donatella Hello.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 168

She stops at a petrol station to refuel her vespa, she pays and leaves

9/24/2010 2:25:47 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

169

Figure 6.3 Ex-dancer against Window Frame

Figure 6.4 Donatella against Window Frame

One final feature is common to these last two narratives. The two women, the ex-dancer and the middle class confused woman are both portrayed in medium and close shot against a window (see Figures 6.3 and 6.4). Their figures therefore appear entrapped in a frame; this may be a reminder that this is fiction, not reality.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 169

9/24/2010 2:25:47 PM

170

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Also such framing seems similar to the ‘boxing’ in some of Francis Bacon’s 1950s paintings that functions as a ‘cage-like structure, a delineated space-frame . . . confining [the figures] within a tense psychological zone’ (Kaufmann and Adler, 2008) and suggests the limitations of these women’s self-indulgent accounts. In conclusion the three suicide narrators discussed so far show limited agency as their narration is mainly managed by the voice-over and interviewer or by the camera that, acting as narrators (Bordwell, 1985), organize, summarize and evaluate their experience. In terms of the struggle for obtaining interactional dominance (Millar and Rogers, 1976 and Linell et al., 1988) and managing to project identity through narrative, these three narrators have limited success. Conversely, as will be discussed, the last two women display very different narrative styles and greater agency in that they are more in control of the account of their experience than the other narrators so far analysed.

6.5.2 Tellers with strong narrative agency Two of the five narratives stand out in that more than the others these suicide survivors show a firmer control of their experience and a greater ‘narrative agency’ in the sense of the ability to choose adequate ways of revisiting the memory of their dramatic gesture and determination to safeguard the narrative propriety of that account. In comparison with the other narrators, they are winners of the metaphorical struggle for interactional dominance. The story of the woman who tried to drown herself in the Tiber is introduced by a very short preface marked by an empathizing proximal deictic (questa ragazza/this girl) and providing a moral justification for her action: Excerpt (9) Voice-over Miseria e disperazione spinsero questa ragazza fuori di casa la mattina del 12 aprile dell’anno scorso. Se avesse potuto rifugiarsi dall’uomo che amava e col quale si vedeva da un anno non sarebbe successo nulla ma improvvisamente lui non si era fatto più vivo.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 170

9/24/2010 2:25:49 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

171

Translation Utter poverty and desperation drove this woman out of her house the morning of April 12th last year. If she could have sought refuge with the man she loved and whom she had been seeing for a year maybe nothing would have happened but all of a sudden he’d vanished. The third person narrative is restrictive (McIntyre, 2007: 3) in that it assumes the woman’s point of view and suggests the contextual dire conditions that determined her decision to put an end to her life while in the phrase ‘this girl’ the proximal deictic suggests the voice-over’s emotional empathy. Unsolicited by the interviewer, the woman’s story begins after the short preface. It is the woman who chooses how and what to report of her experience. The camera follows her as she briefly stops to look at the river below and catches men ogling her. Although in this sequence the woman is the object of gaze of the represented participants, that is, the Phenomenon, she maintains her control by being oblivious to the men’s appreciation even when one of them walks in front of her and turns to look at her face. Differently from the previous tellers whose account of suicide is relatively circumscribed within a limited space, this suicide account is dynamic as the woman’s continuous motion dictates the camera movements by indexing elements in the surrounding context. Indexicality cannot be reduced to a ‘simple act of orientation’; it is a ‘creative, interactive process that lies at the heart of the symbolic workings of language’ (De Fina et al., 2006: 4). By using twice an exophoric spatial deictic pointing to a geographical space outside her account and by physically referring to that point with her finger (‘mi buttai laggiù’/ ‘I went in the water down there’), this woman establishes her own deictic centre to which the interviewer and the viewers have to accommodate (Figure 6.5). When she utters the first ‘down there’ and starts moving in the direction of the point from where she jumped in to the river, the camera (hence the interviewer and interactive participants) follows the vector she has established with the context.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 171

9/24/2010 2:25:49 PM

172

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 6.5 Tiber Suicide Survivor Pointing

Figure 6.6 Survivor Moving to Indicated Point

The second ‘down there’ has another very directive discourse function; by pointing to the people who went to the woman’s rescue in a boat, this speaker constructs a clear vector with a transactional hence narrative value that pushes her account forward (Figure 6.6).

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 172

9/24/2010 2:25:49 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

173

Excerpt (10) Woman Sono stati quelli del barcone laggiù che mi hanno salvata. Woman It was some men from that boat down there who rescued me. This spatial deictic shapes the narration by forcing the interviewer and the camera to move the focus away from the woman-teller and on to other speakers, that is, the witnesses whose voice is now incorporated in to the narrative (‘E voi cosa avete fatto?’/ ‘What did you do?’) In conclusion, this narrator manages her story by imposing her own focalization and viewpoint on the account. As she talks about how she got in to the water, the woman appears in a medium shot in a position slightly lower than the interviewer as her gaze upwards suggests, seemingly in a position of less control and power (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2007: 140–3); this, however, is not to be interpreted as a loss of control and it can be explained with the fact that she is the first to reach the ‘over there’ point near the river which declines towards the water (hence her lower position vis-à-vis the interviewer). It will be remembered how Kress and van Leeuwen (2007: 188–92) assign special value to a composition and interpret the visual space within a frame as divided by a horizontal line that can suggest ideal and real or past and present situations. In the case of the Tiber survivor, for instance, her lower position on the river bank which occupies the lower section of the frame may be read as a reminder of her present and real situation in which she is alive and has become the reporter of her past experience. This teller also provides a coda8 to her story once again without any encouragement from the interviewer (‘Mi svegliai all’ospedale, c’era parecchia gente, i familiari, altri, c’era anche lui e chi mi aveva salvata’/ ‘I woke up at the hospital, there were lots of people, my family, others, he was there too and also the man who had rescued me’). In this semi-conclusive narrative segment she establishes her own deictic centre again by using an exophoric pronominal reference that projects to the physical space around her and imposes her own point of view. The indexical exophoric pronoun ‘lui’ (‘he’) in her utterance, ‘c’era anche lui’/’he was there too’ referring to her lover, is accompanied by a minimal movement of the woman’s head in the direction of the man behind her, a strategy that establishes the teller’s existential continuity

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 173

9/24/2010 2:25:50 PM

174

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

between her own suicidal past (expressed by the past ‘c’era’/ ‘was’) and her survivor’s presence (‘lui’/ ‘he’ the man occupying the present physical space of the hic et nunc). In this sequence, the woman is the Reacter, who conveys the intention to construct an eyeline vector with another represented participant who is the Phenomenon thus producing a transactional, narrative act. On the verbal level, two of the five questions put to this suicide survivor are challenged by a rhetorical question and rebutted by her unequivocally (excerpt (11)), before she concedes, in accordance with the thrust of the film, that life is worth living after all. Excerpt (11) 1 Interviewer Ma non era contenta di essere ancora viva? 2 Woman E che scopo c’era ormai? 3 Interviewer Le pare che la vita malgrado tutto abbia dei lati buoni? 4 Woman Guardi in quel momento no, non lo pensavo questo, pensavo che la vita era brutta, che non c’era nessuno scopo. Translation 1 Interviewer Weren’t you happy to be alive? 2 Woman What for? 3 Interviewer Don’t you think, in spite of everything, life has its good moments? 4 Woman At that time no, I didn’t, I thought it was horrible and that there was no purpose in life. One more feature that, differently from the other stories, this narrative displays and that it shares with the final narrative to be discussed shortly, is the use of reported speech by the narrator. While the treatment of other people’s voices is extremely complex in the last narrative as will be shown, the Tiber survivor exhibits an autonomous use of citation as a token of her strong agency. In everyday storytelling, in which ‘[t]ellers . . . necessarily must assume a vantage point from which to describe what went on’ (Polanyi, 1982: 156), choices of reported discourse reflect the narrator’s style and stance. The Tiber suicide’s narrative autonomy has

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 174

9/24/2010 2:25:50 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

175

been highlighted especially through her ability to impose a deictic centre reflecting her viewpoint on to the interviewer and viewers and her creation of vectors and eyelines. Her use of citation further attests to her control over the narrative of her experience. At the theatre where all suicide survivors are gathered, the woman tells the interviewer that once at the hospital her rescuer tried to comfort her ‘with kind words’. Excerpt (12) Woman Quest’ultimo cercava con + parole gentili di confortarmi dicendomi che ero troppo giovane e che ancora la vita non la capivo tanto bene e tutte queste cose. Io lo guardavo in faccia e non gli rispondevo neanche. Translation Woman He tried comforting me with + kinds words saying that I was too young and didn’t understand life well enough and things like that. I just looked at him in the face without even replying. By an Indirect Discourse citation, this speaker remains in control of her discourse. Also, by using Indirect Discourse this woman distances herself from her reported voice in two ways: (i) the list of the things the man said to her is uttered with the singing intonation with which speakers convey that what they are reporting is tediously trite; (ii) by the conclusive phrase ‘and things like that’, this woman suggests that the man is providing some sort of stereotypical counselling not worth reporting in full details. This is confirmed by the woman’s silent disregard for the man (‘without even replying’ ) that corresponds to an implicature resulting from the violation of Grice’s (1975) maxim of quantity. The switch to a more immediate and dramatic form of reporting through Direct Discourse produces a change of perspective which refocuses the narrative on to the woman and makes clear how she felt in that moment. Excerpt (13) Woman ‘Ma signorina pare che lei mi odia a me, pare che in questo momento mi ucciderebbe.’ Gli dissi, ‘Sì, è così.’

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 175

9/24/2010 2:25:50 PM

176

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Translation Woman ‘You look like you hate me and in this moment would like to kill me.’ I said, ‘Yes, that’s right.’ Similar to the Tiber woman, Maria, the last suicide survivor, is a narrator displaying great agency and authorial control in the film. The control this lower class wool plant worker exerts on her story is total. As a result, the voice-over’s preface is relegated to solely one line which conveys the consideration and closeness the narrator seems to feel for the woman; the linguistic indicators of affect are a deictic expressing affective proximity (Halliday and Hasan, 1976) and conveying a sense of understanding and solidarity for the woman’s unfortunate (triste) love story rather than her suicide attempt. Maria is the only woman who is defined by her job: ‘Questa è un’operaia che attraverso errori e sfortune ha vissuto una triste vicenda d’amore’/ ‘This is a factory worker who through errors and misfortune experienced a sad love story’. The minimal preface is immediately followed by the woman’s story so that in this context, the interviewer is reduced to the perfunctory role of story facilitator. In spite of the fact that he asks nine questions, this interviewee like her predecessor, challenges the interviewer in two ways: by often averting her gaze thus not establishing an eyeline vector with him and, verbally, in one instance replying to his question not with an answer but with a ‘commentary’ (Halliday and Hasan, 1976), that is, a statement of her unwillingness to reply (‘lei lo ricattava continuamente. Di che ricatto si trattava? Non glielo posso dire’/ ‘she blackmailed him. How? I can’t tell you that’). Maria’s agency takes shape right at the beginning as she is her own voice-over and the two characters in her story, Marcella and Giacomo, her lover and his wife respectively, are introduced visually as inserts in her narrative. An indicator of Maria’s agency is her double narrative: the verbal narrative during the interview and the visual flashback narrative. Table 6.4 reproduces the alternation between the two narrative formats while Figures 6.7 and 6.8 show the visual swing between interview and acted-out narrative. Furthermore, the interplay between the verbal narrative and the verbal–visual narrative in the filmed segments allows Maria’s subtle use of indirect, direct and very direct speech by which she ably orchestrates the two characters’ voices in

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 176

9/24/2010 2:25:50 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails Table 6.4

177

Maria’s self-narrative

Verbal narrative

Filmed narrative

Visual notations

Maria: La mattina venne con un biglietto nel quale mi diceva, Allora io gli dissi, ‘Guarda Marcella io con un biglietto di carta non ci faccio niente . . . ’ Difatti dopo una mezz’oretta che stavo lì venne lui e mi disse,

Marcella: ‘Giacomo non è potuto venire ma ti prega di leggere questo’

Marcella arrives at the meeting point and hands the message to Maria Immersed in her story, Maria looks away from the interviewer

Giacomo: ‘Maria quello che c’è scritto sul biglietto è vero, torno da Marcella.’

Giacomo, between Maria and his wife, recites his line looking down making no eye contact with his lover

Verbal narrative

Filmed narrative

Visual notations

Maria: In the morning she came with a note and said

Marcella: ‘Giacomo couldn’t come but he asks you to read this’

Marcella arrives at the meeting point and hands the message to Maria Immersed in her story, Maria looks away from the interviewer

Giacomo: ‘Maria what’s written in the note is true, I’m going back with Marcella.’

Giacomo, between Maria and his wife, recites his line looking down making no eye contact with his lover

Translation

Then I said, ‘Look Marcella a paper note means nothing to me, ask him to come himself . . . ’ I waited for half an hour and then he came and said,

her story. Maria alternates Interpretative Summary (‘Marcella wouldn’t give up’ ), with direct reported discourse (‘One day she came to me and said, “Maria, Giacomo has come back to me” ’) and Very Direct quotations in which, similar to the actualities in television news, speakers utter their words on screen. In terms of the verbal–visual interplay, Maria’s filmed narrative shows a perfect fit between words and images, that is, between the signs she uses and the extra-linguistic referents they conjure up. By imposing such a showing/demonstrating format, this teller controls her narrative to the smallest detail leaving no room for the viewers’ imagination (see Table 6.5).

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 177

9/24/2010 2:25:50 PM

178

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 6.7 Maria’s Gaze in Interview

Figure 6.8 Maria’s Filmed Narrative

All the suicide survivors relive the most dramatic moment of their experience with the interviewer’s occasional intrusion. Realism in the re-presentation, however, is achieved in different degrees in the various narratives. Rosanna Carta visually evokes the car accident but we only hear the sudden screeching of the car brakes; Donatella

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 178

9/24/2010 2:25:50 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails Table 6.5

179

Maria’s multi-medial narrative

Verbal text – Maria’s voice over film

Visual text – Filmed images

. . . e se ne andette via con la moglie

The couple takes leave. The two are seen from the back in a long shot slowly walking away from Maria and going down the hill.

. . . and he left with his wife E io andai via sola . . . And I left by myself . . .

Medium shot of Maria first looking at the two, then looking down despondently before she sets off in the barren and dusty landscape. She goes up the hill in the opposite direction to the couple.

can only show us her stitches as the wound cannot be reopened; while the ex-dancer’s suicide is recounted only verbally not visually. The two narratives that, it is argued in this chapter, reflect the speakers’ strong agency are marked by greater verisimilitude and a more convincing reenactment of the subject’s encounter with death. The Tiber survivor verbally and visually remembers her tragic moment not by reliving it, which would be impossible, but by pointing to the exact place where it happened. In Maria’s narrative the act of poisoning herself is ‘re-enactable’ as it only requires Maria to appear drowsy. Such a realistic representation of her suicide attempt encourages a more direct association with the serious and justifiable motives inspiring her decision. Furthermore, Kress and van Leeuwen’s (2007) concept of modality as expressed at a visual level, provides more insight in to the film. Low epistemic modality (that refers to a speaker’s knowledge and beliefs about the propositional content of his/her utterance), which is linguistically marked by such verbs as ‘may’ or such adverbs as ‘possibly’, is visually conveyed by fuzziness and imprecision of visual details; contrariwise, high visual modality is expressed by clear and detailed compositions and a tendency to realistic representations. We can argue that the narrators with the greatest interactional or narrative dominance are those whose mise-en-scène has the highest visual modality in terms of clarity of details and degree of realism with which their suicide attempt is recounted. Through the voice-over, Antonioni stated that the goal of his episode was an introspective analysis of suicide which could prove useful to viewers.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 179

9/24/2010 2:25:52 PM

180

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Excerpt (14) Voice-over [Queste persone] sono venute perché hanno intuito che era utile a loro e agli altri questo momento di sincerità e di esame nei riguardi di un atto che è il solo veramente irrimediabile nella vita di un uomo. Translation Voice-over [These people] have come here because they felt that this moment of sincerity and self-analysis on the only truly irreparable act in a man’s life could be of help to them and to others. In this respect, the two stories with the greater agency are also the only two that reflect the most positive attitude to life. At the end of her narrative, when the spatial and temporal references of the speaker’s ‘storyworld’ (Polanyi, 1982: 156) have shifted from the past to the present, Maria states she has found a balance with her lover who has left his wife for good; similarly, the Tiber survivor declares she is happy with her man with whom she holds hands on entering and leaving the theatre. The other three survivors instead don’t seem to have gained much from their experience or rediscovered ‘il gusto della vita (‘the taste for life’) that the voice-over promises in the introduction at the opening of the film. Excerpt (15) Voice-over Ma di una cosa si può essere certi. Molte volte specialmente quando il movente è l’amore si tratta di una crisi passeggera, se il suicida la supera niente di più facile che ritrovi il gusto della vita. Translation Voice-over One thing is true in all cases. More often than not when love is the motive, it’s a temporary crisis. If the sufferers overcome it, they may very likely rekindle their taste for life. Of the three improbable suicide survivors, the ex-dancer claims she would be ready to do it again (‘Se fosse per me lo rifarei un’altra volta ma questa volta per lasciarci la pelle sul serio’/ ‘If I could, I’d do it again but this time I want to die’), while the other two either show a general despondency as for Rosanna Carta (‘L’avrei sposato perché le cose più so' faticate

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 180

9/24/2010 2:25:52 PM

Antonioni’s When Love Fails

181

e più c’è soddisfazione ma ormai’/ ‘I would have married him because the harder things are, the more satisfaction you get but now’ ) or, as Donatella, still see their life as sadly suspended (‘Vedo l’avvenire così incerto’/ ‘The future looks so uncertain’ ). In this light the compelling suicide experience of the two most agentive narrators is the one sending a positive message.

6.6 Final discussion and conclusion Moving away from the genre perspective adopted in the first part of the volume, in this chapter I have carried out a close analysis of a film from the thematic angle of the discursive portrayal of identity. The general framework of conflict representation that informs this book has therefore been used to interpret the metaphorical tension between the five women and the interviewer/voice-over narrator to reach interactional dominance or space, intended as the conversational opportunity to provide a personalized account of the traumatic experience of suicide. Antonioni’s five suicide survivors are shaped by the account of their experience; they construe their identity through the narratives they produce or, it may be more correct to say with Rohdie (1990: 107), they are in pursuit of an ‘always unattainable, unpossessable’ identity and self-definition. The male voiceover talks about persone (‘people’) pushed to their ultimate dramatic decision by their unrequited love. In When Love Fails there are only women.9 However, men are not corollary, tangential, as Chiesa claims (DVD booklet), but crudely present in being the motor of these lifesevering actions. It is for them that women try to put an end to their lives; therefore, these women’s attempted suicides desperately cry out the impossibility of living without men and the attempt to reclaim them. The women in Antonioni’s film seem to act in accordance with the concept of suicide as a ‘goal-directed action’ (Michel and Valach, 1997) and to the motives that most frequently instigate suicide attempts amongst women (marriage, family, and sex-related reasons, cf. Michel and Valach, 1997: 215). In their narratives they balance intrapersonal motives, that is, their unbearable desperation, and interpersonal motives, that is, the desire to show others how unhappy they are (ibid., 1997: 216). In this respect, therefore,

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 181

9/24/2010 2:25:52 PM

182

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Antonioni’s representation of the experience of suicide is quite verisimilar. This chapter has argued that two suicide narrators display greater sense of authorship and agency than the others. It would be beyond our remit to establish whether they were the two ‘truly touching cases’ among the overall ‘spiritual squalor’ of the characters with whom the director empathized in his letters (Cottino-Jones, 1996: 72) and truly the idea of tracing authorial intentions through a textual analysis was only a pretext to investigate Antonioni style and his cinematic discourse. The discussion in this chapter has focused on narrative as an interactional device. Quoting Baynham (2006), ‘narrative is not a transparent vehicle that conveys “what happened”, but rather, a structured and structuring genre that shapes and constructs the story that is told and the self-presentation that it involves’ (p. 376). In line with this view of narrative, this chapter has traced the apparent tension between different modalities of self and other presentation, in other words between the third person narrative offered by the voice-over combined with the interviewer’s attempt to control the trajectory of the stories, and the women’s lesser or greater ability to avoid that and appropriate the account of their life. In Baynham’s words (2006) once more, in this chapter I was interested in following the five women’s struggle for developing different degrees of agency, as has been discussed, or ‘narrative speaking positions in which identities get performed’ (p. 394). As Threadgold (2005: 269) argues, ‘narrative is a way of constructing not just representing realities and selves’, our identity is constructed in the narratives we give our listeners and, as Tavris comments, ‘we must be careful about the explanations and narratives we choose to account for our lives because . . . we live by the stories we tell’ (1992: 312). In light of the discussed relation between narrativity and identity, it was shown how at least the last two women construct their own experience and forge their own identity both verbally and visually in front of the interactive viewers in a very subtle way. This is done through a perspective of opposition with an external potential narrator and through interactional and stylistic dynamics expressed both at the verbal and visual level that this chapter has traced.

RPiazza_06_Final.indd 182

9/24/2010 2:25:52 PM

Chapter Seven

Conflict of shifting identities in Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

7.1 Introduction. The director and the film The previous chapter interpreted conflict and interactional tension in broader terms than the two initial studies on comedy, drama and Westerns had done and explored the theme of self narrative as the vehicle for the negotiation of authorship and agency. In line with the perspective of the second part of the volume, this final chapter is thematically close to the previous one in that it investigates confrontational discourse as associated to the theme of identity negotiation. The last two chapters therefore share a thematic connection in that both reflect on the negotiation and construal of a subject’s self vis-àvis another interlocutor’s self. The reflection on Melliti’s film stems from the desire to open up the present investigation of the discourse of Italian cinema to voices coming from countries other than Italy. Although this volume is a study of a particular national scenario, the analysis could not discount the relation between Italian cinema and Hollywood in the case of the Westerns in Chapter Five, which suggested how Leone’s cinema acquires its meaning from the membership to a generic genre category that, although pertaining entirely to Italian cinema, extends beyond its national borders. Contemporary Italy is slowly becoming a multicultural society finally showing curiosity and interest for distant realities. Such a transformation is mirrored in its artistic market in which many immigrant artists have found a proper space to express themselves. In light of this a look at Italian cinematic production cannot rule out the consideration of foreign directors who have moved to Italy from other countries as in the case of Mohsen Melliti,

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 183

9/24/2010 2:36:52 PM

184

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

born in Tunis in 1967 and in Italy since the early 1990s. Melliti is a script writer and director of films and documentaries, including Returning to Haifa, based on the homonymous book by Ghassan Kanafani. Interpreted and produced by Raoul Bova, Io, l’altro (Me, the Other, 2007), Melliti’s first successful feature film, has an aura of civil commitment to it and was advertised as a work that invites a reflection on the guilt and responsibility of the West vis-à-vis the East. Me, the other is one of a number of films on the dramatic reality of immigration into Italy, such as Mazzacurati’s Vesna va veloce (Vesna Goes Fast, 1996), Placido’s Pummarò (1990), Giordana’s Quando sei nato non ti puoi più nascondere (Once You Are Born You Can No Longer Hide, 2005) and many others that explore topics as varied as female prostitution, criminality and the emotional issues associated with establishing a relationship with immigrants. However, Me, the Other deals with more difficult and profound themes than the others do. In light of its reflection on the issue of a mobile identity resulting from a new Europe, Melliti’s film can be viewed as close to such experimental work as Godard’s Notre Musique (2004) in that both are centred, as the dedication of Barriales-Bouche and Attignol Salvodon’s Zoom in, Zoom out (2007) reads, on ‘the people who cross borders every day, and who are constantly negotiating the shifting of borders of identity’. The ‘shifting of identity’ in its interaction with interpersonal conflict, therefore, is the theme of this chapter and the analysis of Me, The Other will follow the discursive strategies of the two protagonists and highlight the linguistic and visual indicators of the progressive changes they undergo.

7.2 The discourse of identity The recent proliferation of studies on identity is marked by an important turn. While in the past identity was interpreted as permanently and monolithically constructed, contemporary psychologists, sociologists and linguists have started to perceive identity as a process resulting in a ‘constellation of identities’ (De Fina et al., 2006: 2). Following research in gender studies, for instance, identity appears not as crystallized and unilateral but as composite and ‘polyphonous’

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 184

9/24/2010 2:36:52 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

185

(ibid.: 3), mobile, fluid and continually negotiated. In general, recent research on identity has rejected an ‘essentialist’ vision in favour of a ‘constructivist’ view based on the concept of a multilayered and complex identity. Meinhof (2003) and Machin and van Leeuwen (2008: 54) for instance highlight the move away from an interpretation of identity as stemming from a polarity between opposing subjects of different status, one of whom is higher than the other. Similarly, in contrast with an oppositional view of identity, Meinhof (2001: 31–2) suggests that ‘processes of identification (or identity construction) are discursive processes which contain many different and potentially contradictory voices.’ In his analysis of queer performance, Muñoz (1999) lays the accent on a projection of identity that is neither in association with nor in antagonism to the performative identity of the majoritarian heteronormal culture, rather it is an ‘ambivalent structure of feeling’ (p. 71) or a hybrid, intricate, multifarious complex of many positions. Identity therefore is the result of the combination of an infinite number of elements (ibid.) and the essentialization of other cultures and other individuals is an ideological fictionalization (Said, 2003) and an improper representation (e.g. Hall, 1989 and Bhabha, 1990). For the analysis of Melliti’s Me, the Other I refer again to Tajfel’s (1981) definition of social identity that was adopted for the previous chapter on Antonioni’s When Love Fails: social identity is ‘that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership (p. 255). The interaction between socially determined values and ‘the cognitive “mechanics” of categorization on the other’ (ibid.: 254) is central to definitions of ‘us’ and ‘them’, that is, between an individual’s ingroup and outgroup. In this film, while one man remains anchored to a polar vision of identity, for the other the separation between his own ingroup and the outgroup is less prominent and in fact he shows signs of an integration between the two until the confrontation with the other man reestablishes the antipodal distance between the two individuals belonging to two different communities in a form of antagonism. Identity is inextricably connected to language and as a discourse activity it is embedded in social practices (Foucault, 1984).

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 185

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

186

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

A number of scenes in Melliti’s film for instance suggest how Yousef, who represents the ‘other’ in the story, has accommodated to social practices typical of the community in which he now belongs and has fully understood their social value. In one of the many exchanges informed by the disagreement between the two fishermen about the mafia boss who is their wholesale buyer, Yousef refers to the custom with which he has become familiar of having coffee with Troina, even offering to pay as a token of friendship and loyalty. This suggests that Yousef has learned to coexist and started to deal amicably with the enemy rather than face him antagonistically as Giuseppe insists on doing. Yousef has learned about such a local social practice and become aware that it serves to establish a community of men who belong or aspire to belong to a given circle (himself) against those who refuse to be inscribed in it (Giuseppe). The concept of a fluid, composite and continually redefined identity is particularly pertinent within the context of uprooting, dislocation and relocation (Baynham and De Fina, 2005). As individuals move between communities and societies, ‘settled and stable senses of self are unsettled and challenged’ (Baynham, 2006: 376) and they find themselves in a ‘transition space’ (Iedema and Caldas-Couthard, 2008: 2); they then undergo a process that can be called, with a term borrowed from Iedema (2001b and 2004), ‘resemiotization’ whereby the meanings that they have acquired in the original culture, in terms of beliefs and system of expectations, are shifted across semiotic modes with the result of a ‘blurring of cultural categories and contents’ (Iedema, 2004: 38). In defining such resemiotization, Iedema refers to Lash’s (1988) ‘de-differentiation’ as the process by which ‘representational practices are increasingly being redefined and crossreferenced’ (ibid.). In the course of the analysis of Me, the Other it will be shown how Yousef’s rich identity also derives from his ability to renegotiate and transform the meanings that are associated with his home culture and adjust them to suit his new community. Most of this process, as will be discussed, is based on Yousef’s ability to reinterpret, for instance, notions of masculinity belonging to his home culture and resemiotize them in light of the Italian notion of masculinity. Identity reflects an individual’s image of self that derives from the knowledge s/he has of being a member of a particular community

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 186

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

187

(Tajfel, 1981: 255). ‘However, membership loyalties are continuously revised according to historical and local circumstances, and both the way in which people relate to social groups, and the meaning given to social categories, change through time and in different social contexts’ (De Fina, 2006: 355). In the case of immigrant identity, which for some scholars is a ‘threshold’ identity (Krzyzanowski and Wodak, 2008: 98), the construction of self is always in ‘transition, always producing itself through the combined process of being and becoming’. Beyond such a level of collective identities, there is the individual level where the negotiation for the processes of identity construction takes into account the subjects’ specific experience and existential narrative. In approaching Moroccan immigrants’ oral narratives, Baynham stresses that identity is ‘performed, played out in discourse’ (2006: 379); more importantly, the author refutes the view of the subject as unitary and monolithic and emphasizes the pluralizing of identity. The discussion of Me, the Other shows how the two protagonists and Yousef in particular change footing (Goffman, 1981) and ‘frames of interpretation’ (Bateson, 1972; Goffman, 1974; Hymes, 1974; Gumperz, 1982) that result in a conflict of different schemas or knowledge structures (Rumelhart, 1975; Fillmore, 1976; Chafe, 1977 among others). The two men, but especially Yousef, also perform a repertoire of different roles that are indexed to different personae and that result in a continuous even conflicting alternation of selfrepresentations. The interest of Melliti’s film, however, is the play between the coexistence of a plurality and a rich inventory of identities from which Yousef can choose, in the first part of the film against the monolithic individuality that is cast upon him and in the second where he is openly labelled the ‘stranger’ and the ‘enemy’, in other words the ‘other’. As the analysis in the next section shows, what is striking in the film is the two men’s individual ‘performance devices’ in terms of the behaviours and manners in which identity is expressed through discourse, which are ‘powerful tools to convey individual identities as much as collective ones’ (De Fina, 2006: 373). With regard to the conflict framework that informs all analyses, the verbal and visual confrontation between Giuseppe and Yousef in this chapter is not metaphorical and indirect as was in Antonioni’s film

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 187

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

188

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

but is dramatically apparent immediately at the beginning, even through the two men’s bonding, to the end of the film, when the contradictions are explicit and irreconcilable and the confrontation is extremely direct. It is a battle of different interpretative frames that slowly but inevitably determines too dramatic a separation between the protagonists’ identities.

7.3 Performing identities: from plurality to duality in Me, the Other The discussion in this section aims to show the complex representation of identities that regress from a heterogeneous self-representation to a dramatic binary opposition between one subject vis-à-vis the other in Melliti’s opera prima. The identity of the two male protagonists evolves and radically changes at a crisis point that will be indicated in the discussion which, on these grounds, has been divided in to two parts with very different representations in each. The basic film plot in which very little occurs contrasts with the complexity of the issues at stake. The drama develops in the fishing boat the two men have managed to purchase, which functions as the Foucauldian ‘heterotropia’ (1967) or the place outside of all places, existing in the real world yet being different from what it seems to reflect in reality. In this other place primordial tensions unleash, when Sicilian Giuseppe and Tunisian Yousef embark on one more fishing expedition in the Mediterranean. The radio is the only other protagonist in Me, the Other. Through the radio news the two men receive an echo of the events occurring in the world and via the radio they are in touch with the other fishing boat with partner Nello and his men in it. Performativity in the following analysis is interpreted within the context of speech act theory (Austin, 1962 and Searle, 1969) hence in terms of the performative function of the discourse produced by the two men. Alongside this traditional concept of reality-construing speech, however, performativity is interpreted as a concept related to the switching of roles – resulting both from the language the individual uses and the behaviour he shows that the camera captures in

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 188

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

189

various fashions – that the two men, but in particular Yousef, engage in which they activate a constant alternation of interpreting frames and cognitive schemas. Performativity therefore becomes the way in which both men challenge the conventionalized notion of otherness until the point of crisis in which such a ‘performative change’ (Muñoz, 1999: 80) is lost. The combination of these two concepts of performativity delineates an identity profile of the two men, which is constantly modified and which consists of a number of different voices and personae.

7.3.1 Multiple identities in harmony Yousef indexes the fictionalized typical experience of a migrant who is the breadwinner and precedes his family or leaves it behind while providing for its members. He plans to go back to Tunisia as a rich man and start his own business (‘Quando avrò fatto un sacco di soldi me ne torno giù nel mio paese’/ ‘When I make a lot of money I’ll go back to my place.’). In the first part of the film Yousef’s identity appears heterogeneous insomuch as he has ‘resemiotised’ in the new world to use Iedema’s (2001) term, that is, he has managed to translate his semiotic code of social behaviour into a different one. While still maintaining some original traits of his culture, Yousef has ‘identified’ with the host culture insomuch as he has assimilated aspects, ‘property or attribute of the other and is transformed, wholly or partially, after the model the other provides’ (Laplanche and Pontalis, 1973: 206 in Muñoz, 1999: 7). At a broader level Yousef has learned to coexist with the local mafia, on a personal level he shows to have assimilated the local cultural modalities and internalized intrinsically Italian expressions and commonplaces. Although harmony still reigns between the two fishermen, Giuseppe allows himself to utter several indirect FTAs. It will be discussed how such behaviour can be explained by the fact that Giuseppe maintains a greater control on the relationship and, although after a friendship of many years he feels Yousef is like a brother to him (‘come u' frate’), still displays a colonialist attitude. In one of their ironical exchanges, surprised at Yousef’s vaguely anti-establishment comment, Giuseppe produces a FTA labelling his partner as communist in excerpt (1):

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 189

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

190

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Excerpt (1) Yousef Li chiamano ‘i cani del potere’, sti bastardi. Giuseppe Mi oh ca va a finire ca si pure comunista. Yousef Perché hai qualche cosa contro quelli che mangiano i bambini? Translation Yousef Those bastards are called ‘the dogs of power’. Giuseppe I bet you’re also Communist. Yousef Why what have you got against child-eaters? Giuseppe’s ambiguous insult is an ‘off record’ politeness strategy or ‘superstrategy’ like insinuations, hints and irony, very much the same as Brown and Levinson’s politeness strategy (Lachenicht, 1980 in Culpeper et al., 2003). To this Yousef responds with a seemingly ‘defensive’ move (Culpeper et al., 2003): instead of rebutting to Giuseppe’s insinuation with a dissociating and critical move, Yousef promotes association and camaraderie with his partner and friend in that the use of the well known Italian common place expression ‘Communists are child-eaters’ – in other words, they are aliens and monsters – attests to this speaker’s familiarity with the cultural references of his host country. As a result, the ironical mention or repetition (Wilson and Sperber, 1992) of the saying turns what could have been the beginning of a confrontation into a further token of Yousef’s intention to bond with Giuseppe. Yousef is Giuseppe’s associate and friend; with him Giuseppe feels comfortable and engages in friendly narratives in which the presence of mutually shared references – the determiner in ‘the café’ suggesting a place familiar to both and the absence of any qualifier in ‘Nicola’s son’ – is a token of the restricted and intimate code that the two share and suggests the men’s membership to the same community as in the following excerpt (2). Giuseppe’s self-initiated selfrepair in the second line is a further confirmation that he can rely on Yousef’s knowledge of their community. Excerpt (2) Yousef Ch’è successo l’altra volta? Giuseppe No niente, stavo al bar e c’era coso come si chiama, u figghiu i Nicola.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 190

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

191

Yousef Federico. Giuseppe No u chiattune. Yousef (Toninello). Giuseppe Eh Tonino Tonino. Michia stavamo al bar e parrava parrava parrava cuntava neanche mi giro ca cariu rittu rittu cumu un albero su tavolino oh scassò tri tavolini. Yousef E che cazzo è successo scusa? Giuseppe Ma niente dice che- che c’ha sta malatia: come si chiama chidda malatia ca t’addurmisci unna capita capita. Yousef Narcolesia Giò? Giueppe [assenting] Eh. Yousef Cazzo che malattia di merda. Giuseppe Eh magari l’avissi io così potissi dòrmere un poco. Translation Yousef What happened the other day? Giuseppe Well I was at the cafe, there was what’s his name, Nicola’s son. Yousef Federico. Giuseppe No the sturdy one. Yousef (Toninello). Giuseppe Right, Tonino Tonino. We were at the café and he talked talked and talked about this thing and the other suddenly I turn and see him fall straight down on the table like a felled tree oh he broke three tables. Yousef What the fuck happened? Giuseppe I dunno they say he has this disease what’s its name that disease that makes you fall asleep anywhere you are. Yousef Narcolepsy, Giò? Giuseppe [assenting] Eh. Yousef Fucking disease. Giuseppe I wish I had it at least I could sleep a bit. Yousef’s identity manages to harmoniously blend in his old and new world, the Sicilian and his home culture. He has captured the essence of the power structure in the fishing business that is orchestrated by the local mafia and controlled by Troina. At the same time Yousef is able to establish similarities and analogies between power structures

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 191

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

192

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

across national borders as he recognizes that in his homeland a number of businesses are equally managed by similar criminal bosses (‘In Tunisia non ci sono pascià, ci sono solo capi mafia come da voi’/ ‘In Tunisia there are no pashas, there are only mafia bosses like here’). Yousef, however, has not lost his original cultural identity that is still indicated for instance in his regret for the end of polygamy (‘siamo un paese monogamo, ci hanno tolto anche questo piacere/ours is a monogamous country, they’ve even deprived us of that pleasure’). He spends most of the time in the host country and only occasionally returns to Tunisia; his language frequently contains references to his homeland as when a woman’s body becomes a reminder of the mountainous landscape he misses: Excerpt (3) Giuseppe No Deborah no, quella c’ha un culo enorme. Yousef Mi piace, appunto per questo, mi sembra il monte Atlas, mi fa impazzire, che ci posso fare? Translation Giuseppe No, not Deborah, she’s got an enormous ass. Yousef I like her just for that, she reminds me of Mount Atlas, she drives me crazy I can’t help it. Yousef’s multifaceted identity can be thus summarized: Sicily * Yousef’s understanding of local

power structure (boss Troina) * Knowledge of the community

Tunisia * His desire to go back * His regret about the end of polygamy

Illegal power: Sicily = Tunisia

Yousef’s ability to play along with Giuseppe, to see the bright side of immigration, to feel free to enjoy sexual adventures in a country other than his own doesn’t diminish his male migrant experience but obscures more complex realities as the one represented by the Somali woman who, like many other unfortunate victims of the migration dream, drowned while trying to reach the Italian coast and who

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 192

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

193

was accidentally caught in Giuseppe and Yousef’s nets during the night. Individuals are also shaped by the others and ‘a lot of what happens in the field of identity is done by others, not by oneself’ (Blommaert, 2005: 205). In spite of an apparent male solidarity, Giuseppe still remains the hegemonic white who has accepted the immigrants but fundamentally is still anchored to a conservative vision of them. His words, therefore, define Yousef in contradictory ways. He is at the same time the friend whose company Giuseppe enjoys every Sunday at lunch (‘ogni domenica a mangiare a me casa con mia moglie i me figghi’/ ‘every Sunday at my house for lunch with my wife and my children’) and the immigrant worker in a subaltern role. This further point is illustrated by a presentation of Giuseppe’s point of view (McIntyre, 2007) in a number of occasions: (1) Giuseppe is critical of Yousef’s personality. He is portrayed as complaining about his untidiness (‘Ca casino ca fici stu marocchino st’arabo’/ ‘Look at the mess that this Moroccan this Arab made’) – in a scene in which interactive viewers are called upon directly as Giuseppe is portrayed alone at the wheel speaking to himself – and his habit of hanging his clothes on a line that makes the boat look like a travellers’ campsite (‘Togli questi panni che mi sembra un campo nomadi’/ ‘Take these clothes away, it looks like a travellers’ campsite.’); (2) Giuseppe does not think much of Yousef professionally; he considers Yousef only as unskilled labour force in contrast to his own mechanic expertise, a conviction that entitles him to utter racist comments (‘Va a vendere ruoggi va, ma che ne capisci tu i mutura?’/ ‘Go go sell watches, what do you know about engines?’) and statements that suggest an image of Yousef as a untrustworthy opportunist when he refers to Yousef’s possible associations with the local mafia boss Troina (‘Uh non e’ che tu nicchiu nacchiu cu Troina . . . a voi arabi non vi si conosce mai fino in fondo’/ ‘You wanna bet that quietly you and Troina . . . one never knows you Arabs completely.’); (3) Giuseppe considers Yousef obsessive. He seems to find Yousef’s interest in ‘u pilu’ (literally women’s pubic hair as a synecdoche of the woman’s body and a metaphor for the sexual act) excessive (‘U pilu u pilu (. . .) è un chiodo fisso’./ ‘The hair the hair (. . .) it’s an obsession.’), although he agrees to accept a bet with Yousef the prize of which is a woman. (‘Yousef. Ci giochiamo una scopata? Giuseppe. (. . .) E va be’ giochiamoci questa scopata,

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 193

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

194

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

tanto questo è il mio giorno fortunato.’/ ‘Yousef. Let’s bet on a shag. Giuseppe. (. . .) That’s fine let’s bet on this shag, after all today is my lucky day.’) Conversely, Yousef’s comments about Giuseppe are criticisms aimed at his wellbeing and betraying the concern he feels about his partner’s health condition, in particular his sleep deprivation (‘Yousef. Lo sai perche’ mi incazzo? Giuseppe. Uh. Yousef. Perché sei uno straccio d’uomo che non dorme mai.’/ ‘Yousef. you know why I get pissed off? Giuseppe. Uh. Yousef. Because you never sleep, you’re a zombie.’) and his habit of eating too fast illustrated in excerpt (4), Excerpt (4) Yousef Oh Giò’ t’ho detto mille volte che devi mangiare piano, ti fa male. Giuseppe Ma posso mangiare come voglio o devo chiedere il permesso magari a tia? Yousef (. . .) Ti si alza la pressione. Giuseppe Uh uh. Yousef E poi addio, ci vediamo u campu santo. Translation Yousef Giò I told you one thousand times you must eat slowly, it’s bad for you. Giuseppe Am I free to eat as I like or do I have to ask for your permission? Yousef (. . .) Your blood pressure goes up. Giuseppe Uh uh. Yousef And then goodbye I’ll see you at the cemetery. Congruous with such a distancing portrayal of Giuseppe, Yousef’s identity is presented as that of the worker in a subaltern role: (1) Yousef is charged with such menial tasks as securing uninventive basic food for the journey (Giuseppe. ‘Che portasti da mangiare? Yousef. Pasta↑ con zucchine e melanzane. Giuseppe. E di secondo? Yousef. Frittata di melanzane e zucchine. Giuseppe. Michia bella fantasia aho’/ ‘Giuseppe. What food did you bring? Yousef. Eggplants and courgettes pasta. Giuseppe. And as main course? Yousef. Courgettes and eggplant omelette. Giuseppe. Fucking imaginative aren’t you?’); he is also responsible for recreational

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 194

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

195

activities (‘Giuseppe. Buono questo fumo. Yousef. Marocchino.’/ ‘Giuseppe. Good weed. Yousef. It’s Moroccan.’) The mise-en-scène adds an important layer of meaning to this portrait of the two men. Yousef has rugged looks, his hair naturally dishevelled and a weather beaten face in contrast to the more refined well-groomed look of Giuseppe. The interactions between the two men are informed by cooperativeness and often marked by supportive repair work (Stokes and Hewitt, 1976; Schegloff et al., 1977; McLaughlin, 1984 among others) and, as was pointed out earlier, the references to the people they both know indicate the two men’s membership in that community. Even when the exchange calls for more interventionist repair initiative, with a questioning intonation, more knowledgeable Yousef proposes but not imposes the appropriate use of medical terms (‘Yousef. Narcolesia Giò? Giuseppe [assenting] Eh. Yousef. Cazzo che malattia di merda.’/ ‘Yousef. Narcolepsy Giò? Giuseppe [assenting] Eh.Yousef Fucking disease’). Similarly, when arguing with Giuseppe about Troina, the repair of Giuseppe’s inaccurate Latin quotation follows Yousef’s invitation, albeit ironical, to self-correct as in excerpt (5). Excerpt (5) Giuseppe Lo sai come dicevano i Romani? Yousef Un sacco di stronzate. Che dicevano? Giuseppe Eh lo sai cosa dicevano? Eh divide l’impera. Yousef Che? [soft laugh] Giuseppe Divi- Chi? Yousef Divide↑ Giuseppe Divide l’impero. Yousef Divide et impera. Giuseppe Eh appunto. Translation Giuseppe Do you know what Romans used to say? Yousef Lots of bullshit. What did they say? Giuseppe Do you know what they said? I’ll tell you: Divide the empire. Yousef What? [soft laugh] Giuseppe Div- What?

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 195

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

196

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Yousef Divide↑ Giuseppe Divide the empire. Yousef Divide et impera. Giuseppe Yes that. In conclusion Yousef displays an adaptable personality that allows him to buy into a vision of western hegemony as ‘a system of meaning in a situation or society that overshadows or dominates other meaning systems’ (Baynham, 2005: 20). For instance he is able to establish male bonding with Giuseppe and thus engages in men’s social practices. Both men share a somewhat chauvinist attitude to women who are portrayed only as a divertissement and the remedy to society’s harshness (excerpt (6)); additionally, Giuseppe seems to resent the lack of independence that his marriage involves (excerpt (7)), while Yousef claims to love his wife who lives far but considers his numerous sexual adventures with local women only the response to a physical need and a practice not in any way impinging on his marriage (excerpt (8)). Excerpt (6) Yousef In Tunisia non ci sono pascià solo capimafia come qua da voi. Giuseppe Però vi consolate con quattro mogli. Oh tu sei l’unico coglione che ce n’ha una sola. Yousef È un paese monogamo ci hanno tolto anche questo piacere. Translation Yousef In Tunisia there are no pashas only mafia bosses like here. Giuseppe But you people console yourselves with four wives. You are the only idiot who’s only got one. Yousef Ours is a monogamous country, they’ve even deprived us of that pleasure. Excerpt (7) Giuseppe Mi sembri mia moglie. Yousef L’unica cosa buona che hai fatto nella tua vita. Giuseppe Si perché tu la vedi una volta l’anno. Translation Giuseppe You sound like my wife.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 196

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

197

Yousef The only good thing you’ve done in your life. Giuseppe Yes because you see yours once a year. Excerpt (8) Giuseppe Cu tutte i fimmine ca ti fai. Yousef Ma che significa? scopare è una cosa, un bisogno fisiologico. Translation Giuseppe You sleep with so many women. Yousef What’s that got to do with it? Fucking is a thing, it’s a physiological need. In conclusion the two men’s attitude to women is a token of their shared cross-cultural patriarchy and their bonding. In addition to these friendly roles, the two men perform other personae and other identities. Such performances are realized through the use of specific linguistic registers that index specific interactive frames (Bateson, 1972; Goffman, 1974; Gumperz, 1982; Hymes, 1974 among others). A look at the use of directives in Yousef and Giuseppe’s talk for instance reveals their distinct roles and suggests how beyond an apparent symmetry, Giuseppe holds a position of more control while Yousef in a condition of lesser power shows more adaptability in playing various roles. From a performative perspective, Giuseppe’s imperatives are actual directives and orders (‘Sali i palloni.’/ ‘Pull in the balloons.’) to Yousef while Yousef’s are recommendations and suggestions for the wellbeing of his associate (‘. . . devi mangiare piano, ti fa male.’/ ‘. . . you must eat slowly, it’s bad for you.’). The few actual commands uttered by Yousef are received with irritation by Giuseppe as in the second line of previous excerpt (4) and in the following. Excerpt (9) Yousef Giuseppe! Giuseppe Oh sto arrivannu. Yousef Giuseeee! Giuseppe Oh minchia, mi misi in proprio pi nun stare suttu u patrune e tu mi jetti vuci.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 197

9/24/2010 2:36:53 PM

198

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Translation Yousef Giuseppe! Giuseppe Coming. Yousef Giuseeee! Giuseppe Bloody hell, I’ve become self-employed to be my own boss but you shout orders to me. In spite of this specialization of roles, however, in terms of the miseen-scène in the first part of the film generally Giuseppe and Yousef form a unit that works at unison. In one scene the two men move harmoniously and the pole the two extremes of which they hold while standing on either side of the boat functions as a shared vector that brings them together in a common transitive action (Kress and van Leeuwen, 1996); subsequently they occupy a perfectly parallel space on the left and right side of the boat and the water they jokingly throw at each other is an ongoing vector underscoring their reciprocal directionality; finally, when enjoying a joint on the boat after lunch they lie one next to the other their heads close and the cigarette going from Giuseppe to Yousef and back is the vector underlying once more their affinity (Figure 7.1). In brief, the first part of Melliti’s film is characterized by two main elements: (a) the relative closeness – especially identifiable on the visual level – between the two protagonists in spite of some accepted asymmetry that still pervades their relationship; (b) Yousef’s

Figure 7.1 Emotional Closeness by Physical Proximity

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 198

9/24/2010 2:36:54 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

199

multifarious identity; in contrast with the rigidity of Giuseppe’s identity, Yousef engages into a multiplicity of performative roles or personae that go from being Giuseppe’s fishing associate and friend, his assistant on the boat, his carer and guardian of his health, his entertainer and companion, to that of the mafia ambassador who is able and willing to liaise with local trafficking boss Troina in the attempt to salvage the fishing trade with him. Coming from a different context, Yousef has resemiotized in his new environment. He has blended in with the people in the Sicilian community, established analogies between the two contexts, grown to use Italian cultural references (‘Communists are child-eaters’) while his discourse still shows an echo of his own cultural frames (a woman’s bottom can be a reminder of Mount Atlas). His identity therefore is multiple, fluid and heterogeneous. In the second part of the film a very different identity instead is forced on to Yousef and a polar opposition is created between the two men.

7.3.2 The effect of conflict on the perception and presentation of self: the switch to a monolithic identity In the first part of Melliti’s film, Yousef does not appear as the emblem of an individual from a migrant group, rather he is a relocated man who represents an individual case, an incomparable experience, because after all migration is always a singular and subjective experience (Krzyzanowski and Wodak, 2008: 98). The multifarious ‘mongrel’ (Caldas-Coulthard and Fernandes Alves, 2008) identity he projects through the multi-positioning and the various personae and roles he engages in make him a complex and rich subject especially if seen in comparison with the less flexible identity displayed by Giuseppe. The relative harmony between the two men that marks the first part of Me, the Other is interrupted 22 minutes into the film by a mistake Yousef makes that results in the nets being entangled and needing cutting. Giuseppe’s sudden explosion of anger at Yousef’s sloppiness is foreboding of the forthcoming crisis and provides a dividing line in the narrative. Excerpt (10) Giuseppe Controlla le reti porca buttana. Ave 10 anni che travagghi ca’ ancora nun t’ha insignato.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 199

9/24/2010 2:36:54 PM

200

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Translation Giuseppe Check the bloody nets. You’ve been working here for ten years and still haven’t learnt. The incident is followed by another negative omen: there are no fish when the nets are pulled out. The two men are caught in one of the last shared medium close ups sitting next to each other for the last time uttering two syntactically similar adjacent comments in memory of their old friendship: Excerpt (11) Giuseppe Chistu unnè chiù u mari di pisca. Yousef È un mare di merda. Translation Giuseppe This is no longer a sea of fish. Yousef It’s a sea of shit. Yousef offers an exacerbating ‘formulation’ (Heritage and Watson, 1979, 1988) – as a turn summarizing the gist of an earlier utterance – to his friend’s proposition with a statement that repeats the syntactic structure of his utterance (‘a sea of fish/shit’). Such a shared denigration of the sea contrasts symbolically with the two men’s appreciation earlier in the film: Excerpt (12) Yousef Quante volte siamo usciti u mare e ogni volta mi lascia a bocca aperta. Giuseppe A me mi piace perche non lo conosci mai fino in fondo. È per questo che lo devi rispettare. Translation Yousef How many times we’ve been out to sea and every time it surprises me. Giuseppe I like it because you never know it completely. For this reason you must respect it. The scene immediately following introduces the radio blasting the news of the search for the terrorist responsible for the 2004 Madrid bombing and the reporter as the additional protagonist.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 200

9/24/2010 2:36:54 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

201

Excerpt (13) Radio newsreader Proseguono le indagini mirate alla cattura dell’attentatore Yousef Ben Ali. Si sa solo che è un arabo tra i 35 e i 40 anni. Ecco alcune battute di un dirigente generale di pubblica sicurezza raccolte da un nostro corrispondente. Interviewee Quello che posso dire è che stiamo facendo il possible per catturarlo prima che lasci l’isola. Lavorava e viveva integrato nel tessuto sociale da alcuni anni . . . Translation Radio newsreader The search for terrorist Yousef Ben Ali continues. We only know he is a 35–40 year old Arab. Here are some comments from a chief police constable to one of our reporters. Interviewee What I can say is that we’re doing all we can to get hold of him before he leaves the island. He had been working and living totally integrated in the community . . . The shift from direct to indirect discourse is the key factor in the alteration of reality that will induce the drama. A definition of reported discourse was provided in Chapter Six and it was emphasized how in attributed discourse the fidelity of a text to the original discourse is seriously threatened and the echo of other voices is inevitably modified as they become an integral part of a speaker’s new text. For this reason Fairclough (1988) prefers the term ‘representation’ to ‘reporting’ as the former makes clear reference to the degree of interpretation that the process of relaying discourse undoubtedly involves. Within a news context, Sinclair’s (1988) and Hunston’s (2000) distinction between ‘averral’ and ‘attribution’ is relevant in differentiating the speakers’ reporting and evaluating roles. While ‘averral’ refers to the speaker identifying with what s/he says (Copenhagen leaders work to save face – Desperate attempt to stitch together climate change statement after failure to bridge rich–poor divide1), in the case of ‘attribution’ a clear distance is created discursively between the proposition and the speaker who utters it (Copenhagen leaders are reported working to save face – Desperate attempt to stitch together climate change statement after alleged failure to bridge rich–poor divide). Subordinate that-clauses introduced by framing verbs (Scollon, 1994), such as ‘say’ or ‘reveal’, function as

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 201

9/24/2010 2:36:54 PM

202

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

a linguistic device to express stance (Biber et al., 1999; Bednarek, 2006) that is the linguistic expression of a speaker’s positioning or attitude vis-à-vis the reported information and the adherence to a source or distance from it. A crucial shift occurs in the complex communication between the radio reporter, the interviewed newsmaker, Giuseppe and Nello. The newsreader mentions the pursuit of a terrorist whose name is Yousef (while his surname is not comprehensible) and the news is confirmed by an authoritative voice that adds crucial information (age and ethnicity of the man at large, the fact that for years he had been embedded in the local community). Such radio information is echoed as reported discourse by Giuseppe: ‘[La radio dice che] il terrorista ha il tuo stesso nome.’/ ‘[The radio says that] the terrorist’s name is the same as yours.’ However, Giuseppe’s friend Nello on the other fishing boat avers the information and interprets it in terms of the radio establishing an identity between the terrorist at large and Yousef on the grounds that they have the same name. Nello, therefore, constructs the following syllogism, 1. The terrorist’s name is Yousef 2. Giuseppe’s associate is named Yousef 3. Giuseppe’s associate and the terrorist at large are therefore the very same person and the news circulated by the radio ought to be read as: ‘The radio says that Yousef, that Yousef who works with Giuseppe, is a terrorist’. Such an argumentation is not implicated by Nello’s discourse but literally expressed by him in the very same terms: ‘Abbiamo sentito la radio. Dicono che Yousef è un terrorista.’/ ‘Look, we’ve listened to the radio news. They say Yousef is a terrorist.’ In this case a neutral framing verb, ‘say’, characterizes Nello’s change of footing or the ‘alignment we take up to ourselves and the others present as expressed in the way we manage the production and reception of an utterance’ (Goffman, 1981: 126). Nello then becomes a ‘principal’ in Goffman’s terms (ibid.), or a speaker who identifies with the words s/he is reporting and who believes in the proposition at the basis of them. Giuseppe timidly voices his doubts about the association of the two men by the name of Yousef as illustrated in the excerpt that follows:

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 202

9/24/2010 2:36:54 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

203

Excerpt (14) Giuseppe La sentisti pure tu ‘sta minchiata ah? Ma magari è uno ca si chiama come iddu. Pure là ci saranno cristiani ca si chiamano uguale no? E poi ca t’ha dire Nello, ave una vita c’u canusciu, pi mia è come u frate. Translation. Giuseppe You heard that bullshit too ah? Maybe it’s someone by the same name. Even there, there must be people with similar names, mustn’t there? Anyway, what can I tell you, I’ve known him for so long he feels like a brother to me. In response to this Nello insists that the radio has established that the Yousef they both know is terrorist Yousef: ‘Può essere come dici tu ma può essere come dice la radio. Alla fine che minchia ne sai chi è Yousef veramente.’/ ‘It can be as you say but it can also be as the radio says. After all how the fuck do you know who Yousef really is.’ Following the radio intrusion, the harmony between Giuseppe and Yousef, partners – having bought the boat together – and friends by the same name although in two different languages, is broken and with it a radical change occurs to their self-perception and presentation. What in the first part of the film was the multifarious and heterogeneous identity of Yousef has now reversed to a monolithic self-representation. Yousef has become a different untrustworthy ‘other’ for Giuseppe; similarly Giuseppe is the ‘other’ for Yousef and the communication between the two men expresses an oppositional polarity that is a reminder of the blatant unmodulated contrast involving serious threat to face that we encountered in the representation of conflict in comedy in Chapter Four. Two scenes in particular illustrate how identity is transformed in the film as a consequence of the events unfolding and exemplify the shift to a polar contrast between the two men accompanied by a different self-representation. While the first scene is still informed by humour, the second is a violent conflict ending in physical assault and Yousef’s death. Following the first radio report, Giuseppe still believes that the terrorist at large only has the same name as his friend Yousef (‘Uh l’hai sentito? Minchia il terrorista si chiama come a tia’/ ‘Did

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 203

9/24/2010 2:36:55 PM

204

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

you hear that? The terrorist has your same fucking name’) but that they are two different individuals; however, he toys with the fantasy of what would happen if Yousef were to be the real terrorist. Even in such a playful context the polar oppositions between the two start to take shape. Excerpt (15) 1 Giuseppe . . . terrorista internazionale mondiale. 2 Yousef Magari fossi io Gio’ mica stavo qua a farmi il culo con te. 3 Yousef Già mi ci vedo in televisione. 4 Giuseppe A fare che? 5 Yousef Sai i soldi che ti darebbero per l’esclusiva . . . Guarda che io non sono come quelli che si fanno comprare per due soldi. Io almeno almeno voglio partire da una base d’asta di due milioni di dollari. 6 Giuseppe Si li danno a te. + Beh però se sono due milioni di dollari io posso diventare l’amico del terrorista no? 7 Yousef TU, non sei nessuno. Il terrorista sono IO. Yousef Le Grand. 8 Giuseppe Scusa e io? C’entro pure io no? 9 Yousef Non è credibile. 10 Giuseppe Uh e la base in Italia chi te la dava? Minchia non fare lo stronzo. [Yousef moves his finger in denial] Mii, sei un razzista di merda, va bene mi converto, divento musulmano, tanto Dio o Allah a stissa cosa precisa è. 11 Yousef Non è possibile c’hai ancora il pisello tutto intero. 12 Giuseppe Uh perché tu ce l’hai a metà? 13 Yousef Metà qua e metà in Tunisia. 14 Giuseppe Va a cacare. 15 Yousef Li controllano tutti e che credi che tu prendi pigli arrivi parti e fai il terrorista? No, ci vuole cultura, ci vuole una base, ci vuole una causa e soprattutto ci vuole un pisello circonciso. 16 Giuseppe E che menne futte a mia? Basta che mi garantisci che si alza. 17 Yousef Si alza si alza non ti preo’cupe.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 204

9/24/2010 2:36:55 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

205

Translation 1 Giuseppe . . . international world famous terrorist. 2 Yousef I wish I were him. I wouldn’t be here slaving about with you. 3 Yousef I already imagine myself on television. 4 Giuseppe Doing what? 5 Yousef Can you imagine the money they’d pay for an exclusive interview . . . Look I’m not one of those who can be bought for a tuppence. I want to start at least at least from a minimum of two million dollars. 6 Giuseppe As if they’d pay your that sum + Well if it’s two million dollars I can become the terrorist’s friend can’t I? 7 Yousef YOU are no one. I am the terrorist. Yousef Le Grand. 8 Giuseppe Excuse me, and me? what about me? 9 Yousef It’s not believable. 10 Giuseppe Uh who provided you with a base in Italy? Don’t be a jerk. [Yousef moves his finger in denial] You are a bastard of a racist, fine I’ll convert, I’ll become a Muslim, for what it matters, God or Allah are exactly the same thing. 11 Yousef That’s impossible; your dick is still whole. 12 Giuseppe Why, have you got half of it? 13 Yousef Half here half in Tunisia. 14 Giuseppe Bullshit. 15 Yousef They are all controlled, what do you think you do this and that and straight away you become a terrorist? No way, you need culture, you need a base, you need a cause and above all you need a circumcised dick. 16 Giuseppe What do I care? If you guarantee it’ll get up. 17 Yousef It’ll get up, it’ll get up; don’t you worry. From turn 6 through 17 the exchange consists of a series of offer/decline adjacency pairs, with turns 12–15 being insertion sequences. Giuseppe’s propositions are all straightforwardly rejected by Yousef with the consequence of a clear loss of face on his part. Yousef stresses the profound disparities existing between them along the lines of an exclusive ‘otherness’ from which Giuseppe emerges as the disempowered subject. The use of pronouns is

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 205

9/24/2010 2:36:55 PM

206

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

particularly revealing and more than having a mere indexing function, they redefine the opposition between the two men in terms of an either/or exclusion, as Yousef’s words confirm: ‘TU, non sei nessuno. Il terrorista sono IO.’/ ‘YOU are no one, I am the terrorist.’ A few seconds later, another exchange revolving around the opposition between a cooperative inclusive ‘we’ versus an exclusive ‘I’ emphasizes the polarity between the two protagonists. Excerpt (16) Yousef Sai che ho pensato Giò? Ma se io mi denuncerei e riscuoterei la somma? Cazzo due milioni di dollari mica sono malaccio. Giuseppe (. . .) Qua facciamo i piccioli facciamo altro che merluzzi. Yousef [laughing] Giuseppe li FACCIO i soldi non li FACCIAMO. Translation Yousef Do you know what I thought, Giò? What if I turned myself in and got the money? Two million dollars is not fucking bad. Giuseppe (. . .) Here we’re going to get money rather than cods. Yousef [laughing] Giuseppe, I am going to get money not WE. Although still on a playful note, Giuseppe is other from Yousef, his association with the Tunisian man is finished, he is different and is not and cannot be a terrorist, a Muslim, Yousef’s assistant or the partner to join the cause and participate in the terrorist’s culture. Giuseppe’s identity is now being defined by a series of negative propositions. Although the atmosphere is still relatively humorous and the previous exchange concludes with an expression of male bonding between the two with Yousef guaranteeing to Giuseppe that circumcision will not effect his masculine prowess, the two men’s identity is now defined by a polar opposition with each man having very precise and exclusive cultural, religious and political characterizations. The visual level enforces the move from playful tension towards sheer confrontation. While in the first part of the film, the two men are often caught in shared shots partaking drinks, smoke, chats, or being engaged in work or play activities together, in the second part of the film a radical switch occurs. The shared shot that accompanies the short exchange between Giuseppe and Yousef after the nets are

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 206

9/24/2010 2:36:55 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

207

found empty (excerpt (10)) is the last moment of visual unity. Following that, the camera underlines the switch in the relationship between the two men and their new projected identity and conveys detachment, isolation, mistrust and confrontation. Giuseppe and Yousef are portrayed in a number of ways: (i) in single shots in pensive attitudes clearly indicating solitude; (ii) in shared long shots in which the two do not engage in gaze, do not face each other and which are marked by the absence of vectors of any kind; for instance, in the scene in which they are working in a close physical space yet in isolation (Figure 7.2), that contrasts with the earlier amicable scene in which they ended up playing with water (Figure 7.3); or (iii) in shared close-up shots of fierce verbal confrontation.

Figure 7.2 Emotional Distance in Physical Proximity

Figure 7.3 Playing in Harmony

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 207

9/24/2010 2:36:55 PM

208

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Before raw confrontation explodes, at one particular point via the boat radio Giuseppe and Nello share their doubts about the news of the terrorist hunt; when Giuseppe puts the microphone into its cradle, Yousef, unseen by Giuseppe, is shown in a close-up overhearing the exchange. The shift towards Yousef’s lack of trust in Giuseppe is visually indicated to the interactive participants by a technique that, going back to the model of viewers’ participation and visual– verbal relationship discussed in Chapter Two, can be defined as posthoc commentary. Here the spectators are the ‘targetted overhearers’ of the scene in a marked disclosure modality in that they are the referees of the effectiveness of the verbal on a character, in this case Yousef, who overhears the dialogue and perceives his partners’ doubts. The oppositional nature of the identity projected by the two men is marked by an aggressive dialogue that reflects stereotypes and slogans borrowed from political and media discourse that the two repeat vacuously. In the excerpt below Yousef, betrayed by Giuseppe who wants to report him to the police lest he is the terrorist at large, is threatening his former friend with the boat-signalling flare gun. Excerpt (17) 1 Giuseppe Oh dammi ‘sta minchia di pistola, mi rompisti i cigghiuna. 2 Yousef Non ti avvicinare t’ammazzo, stronzo. 3 Giuseppe Avanti spara. 4 Yousef (Non ti avvicinare) stronzo perché ti ammazzo. 5 Giuseppe Yousef io sono siciliano nun mi scanto i tia eh guardami negli occhi, guardami negli occhi e spara. 6 Yousef Bastardo. 7 Giuseppe Che c’è? 8 Yousef Pezzo di merda. 9 Giuseppe Hai paura eh? Hai paura? 10 Yousef Di te? 11 Giuseppe Perché non le guardate le persone negli occhi quando le ammazzate? Come dice Bin Laden? N’avemo a convertire a Allah ma c’u vitti mai st' Allah eh? 12 Yousef Bastardo.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 208

9/24/2010 2:36:56 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

209

13 Giuseppe Che razza di religione è la vostra, dimmi che razza di religione è? e che minchia di dio è che vi dice di ammazzare la gente innocente? 14 Yousef Ha finito col tuo delirio, pezzo di merda? Chi ti credi di essere, bastardo? Sei solo un morto di fame e che credi che questa guerra degli Americani è la tua guerra? Che cazzo ci ricavi tu, morto di fame eh? Gli Americani, sai che fanno gli Americani eh? buttano le bombe a dieci metri di altezza e sparano sui bambini negli ospedali e li guardano in faccia loro gli occhi dei bambini e dei vecchi eh? Bin Laden? Chi è Bin Laden? È il socio di Bush (?) loro tirano fuori dei miliardi da questa storia di merda e sai che ci tiro fuori io? Mio fratello, che ha cercato di vendermi per due soldi. Bastardo pezzente mi fai schifo. Translation 1 Giuseppe Gimme this fucking gun I’m fucking tired of this. 2 Yousef Don’t get close I’ll kill you, bastard. 3 Giuseppe Go on shoot. 4 Yousef (Don’t get close) I’ll kill you. 5 Giuseppe Yousef I’m Sicilian you don’t scare me, look me in the eyes, look me in the eyes and shoot. 6 Yousef Bastard. 7 Giuseppe What’s wrong? 8 Yousef Piece of shit. 9 Giuseppe Are you afraid? Are you afraid? 10 Yousef Afraid of you? 11 Giuseppe Why? Don’t you look at people in the eyes when you kill them? What does Bin Laden say? We must convert to Allah? Who’s ever seen this Allah? 12 Yousef Bastard. 13 Giuseppe What kind of religion is yours, tell me what kind of religion is it? What kind of god is yours that tells you to kill innocent people? 14 Yousef Have you finished with your delirious runt, you piece of shit? Who do you think you are, bastard? You’re only a loser. Do you think this American war is your war? What the fuck do you get out of it, you bastard? The Americans, do you know what the

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 209

9/24/2010 2:36:56 PM

210

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond Americans do? They drop bombs from 10 metres high and shoot on children in hospitals. Do they look the children and the elderly in the eyes, do they? Bin Laden? Who is Bin Laden? He’s Bush’s associate. (. . .) they gain billions out of this fucking story and do you know what I get out of it? My brother who tried to sell me for a tuppence. Bastard, looser, you make me sick.

The confrontational exchange centres on a number of utterances that fail to comply with Giuseppe’s directive in the first line as in turns 2, 3 and 5; in 11 Giuseppe re-proposes the topic of turn 5 (look the victims in the eyes before shooting) which had received no answer from Yousef, according to the offence-no reply strategy highlighted by Culpeper et al. (2003). Giuseppe’s delirious monologue is delivered in turns 11 and 13 in which Yousef is addressed as the other in that he is assimilated to the undistinguished crowd of all fundamentalist terrorist Bin Laden-follower Muslims by the plural ‘you’ (voi), meaning ‘you people, you Muslim terrorists’ indiscriminately referred to in Giuseppe’s tirade. Yousef’s lines are equally centred on an opposition although a subtler one. He contrasts singular pronoun ‘you’ (tu) with ‘they’, the Americans; by so doing Yousef ridicules Giuseppe’s indiscriminate reference to all Muslims as an undistinguished group present in his exasperated soliloquy. In his speech the triangularization of singular ‘you’, ‘they’ and ‘I’, referred to himself, as the victim of the ideology of ‘otherization’, verbally conveys the drama of Giuseppe’s betrayal in the fake name of the law. Expectedly each of the two men is alternatively caught by the camera as he utters his attack or receives it. The gun with which Yousef has threatened Giuseppe and forced him to go down to the engine room to check the boat condition is the vector that ensures the directionality and transitivity of the exchange. Incidentally Giuseppe’s is the second descent, the first one being Yousef’s descent into the freezer room where his treacherous friend locks him up. More than this, in its upward position the gun is the element that divides the shot in to two separate parts and enforces the spatial and emotional distance between the former friends (Figure 7.4). When the verbal confrontation is over and no doubt is left about the animosity and polarity between Giuseppe and Yousef, the gun is flung

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 210

9/24/2010 2:36:56 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

211

Figure 7.4 Gun in Confrontation

into the water and the scene is sealed by the two men spitting into the sea as a token of mutual despise. In the second part of Melliti’s film, the two men’s oppositional identity is anchored to a series of national and religious references that inscribe Yousef’s and Giuseppe’s self-representation in a rigidly closed universe. When Giuseppe blames the radio for raising his suspicions about his friend being a terrorist, to emphasize that the radio is not to be taken as offering an always unquestionable truth, Yousef states that ‘the radio is not the Qur’an’. Thus Yousef is establishing the Qur’an as the reliable source of information par excellence and is making clear that in the new confrontational situation, he is going back to his own cultural and religious representational frames. In the remainder of the conflict, Yousef mentions Christian symbols that assume an oppositional value against his own Muslim frames thus highlighting the dichotomy between the two religious cultures to which the two men belong. When referring to Giuseppe’s betrayal of their friendship for instance, Yousef’s reference is to Judas who sold Jesus for money and, when tying Giuseppe with ropes to the boat rail, Yousef makes him assume the position of Jesus on the cross (Figure 7.5). The interpretation of these western tropes for an oppositional purpose runs counter to the association that in the first part of the film Yousef drew between his old culture and the new adopted one in terms of pashas being similar to mafia bosses and Tunisian society being monogamous like western societies. The polar identity that

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 211

9/24/2010 2:36:56 PM

212

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Figure 7.5 Giuseppe Like Christ on the Cross

Giuseppe develops, based on the perception of the other as mutually exclusive (either me or him but not the two together), goes through a similar dissociating process that culminates in a moment of visionary folly during which he imagines the picture of a sanctified Catholic Father (Padre Pio) hanging outside the boat kitchenette, transformed into that of Muslim Bin Laden. Visually and verbally therefore what used to be a hybrid flexible identity representation especially on the part of Yousef has now become the direct consequence of an irredeemable contrast of cultures.

7.4 Conclusion In this last chapter of film analysis conflict has been observed as the variable that determines a change in the definition and presentation of self. Both the script and the camera techniques of Me, the Other offer a representation of self that is in line with recent interpretations of identity as not fixed but continually negotiated and ‘constantly constructed and reconstructed as people interact with each other’ (Paltridge, 2006: 38). As identity from a ‘poststructural perspective’ (ibid.: 39) is seen as in a state of constant change (Swann, et al., 2004: 140–1), it is also interpreted not as monolithic but multifaceted and composed of a multiplicity of personae. Individuals display a number of identities depending on the situation, its aim and ‘place’

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 212

9/24/2010 2:36:57 PM

Mohsen Melliti’s Me, the Other

213

(Blommaert, 2005), the participants, the topic and much more. Cameron (1999) shows how male US college students construct their masculine identity through their talk while watching TV and Coates (2003) observes the conversation that goes on among four men at a pub. Although it can be argued, in line with Benwell and Stokoe (2006: 56), that such examples of a ‘constructionist’ approach are faulty in being tautological investigation of what the researcher assumes to be a typical male talk, the core of the question is still that identity construction is subject to a number of contextual elements such as participants, place or even medium as Thomas’s (2000 and 2004) studies of girls speaking in online chatrooms show. Yousef and Giuseppe interacting in their boat that functions as a ‘heteretopia’ or ‘heterospace’ in which they are free to construe discursively their new identities, create a series of personae and project a number of different self-images. Yousef in particular plays the role of the affectionate carer worrying about his friend’s health but also that of the puerile fun-loving pleasure seeking man in contrast to an apparently more sensible Giuseppe. Against a more rigid Giuseppe, Yousef’s identity presented as more flexible and variegated, encapsulating old and new frames and adjusting to the power structure in the new world. In spite of his efforts, however, although Yousef is Giuseppe’s associate and business partner, he is still treated as an immigrant who has not yet satisfactorily accommodated to the local standards of professionalism as the conflict scene about the nets showed. This leads to a further point in the discussion of identity as expressed and construed through discourse. As Blommaert (2005: 205) observes, identity is not only the result of an individual’s self projection but the effect of what is done and said by others. In spite of his efforts, Yousef is presented as the other not because of what he says or does but as a consequence of how Giuseppe refers to him. The Sicilian fisherman’s jokingly racist comments reflect his perception of Yousef as the stranger for ever relegated in a conceptual space constructed on the basis of discriminatory stereotypes exemplified in Giuseppe’s directive ‘Go go sell watches’. The discussion of Melliti’s film has encouraged a reflection on the concept of identity as a site of struggle (Connolly, 1991: 163 in Muñoz, 1999: 6). Like the ‘cultural performers’ in Muñoz’s book, Yousef

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 213

9/24/2010 2:36:57 PM

214

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

negotiates between a fixed identity disposition and the socially encoded roles that are available to him. The result is a rich, open and flexible man who has resemiotized in the new context without losing sight of his cultural references. On the contrary, when the conflict between the two men explodes, Giuseppe offers an essentialist interpretation of Yousef’s identity. He perceives his former friend as the other in the reductive ‘lowest-common denominator terms’ (Muñoz, 1999: 6), in the same way that some people perceive such blackness as monolithic, homosexuality as unproblematized or, in this case, Muslims as unequivocally terrorists. Although he much regrets his action and error (the radio announces that terrorist is obviously a different man from his partner), by killing Yousef, Giuseppe returns to some ‘socially encoded scripts of identity (. . .) formatted by phobic energies around race, sexuality, gender, and various other identificatory distinctions’ (Muñoz, 1999: 6). The analysis of Me, the Other has shown how fragile the affective bond between the two men is in spite of their mutual understanding. The second part of the film is marked by a harsh, violent and irredeemable form of conflict spurred by the radio news. During their confrontation, Yousef is transformed into an other by Giuseppe, because as he said at the opening of the film, ‘one never knows you Arabs completely’. Yousef’s descent in to a monolithic fixed and rigid identity is fast and the two men soon become others to each other on the grounds of an opposition which is no longer their own but is an echo of ‘other’ political and media discourses (e.g. the United States v. Islam). The mise-en-scène plays a critical role and the opposition between the two protagonists is emphasized by their different looks, between Giuseppe’s well groomed and Yousef’s stereotypically rugged aspect. The camera movements, as has been discussed, underline the camaraderie of the two men in the first part of the film as well as the increasingly harsh confrontation in the second. The killing of Yousef by the hands of Giuseppe, therefore, is not functional to the expression of distrust and animosity between the two former partners; rather it is the logical consequence of a notion of identity based on polarity in which only one or the other, Giuseppe or Yousef, but not both, is entitled to occupy the ‘heterotopia’ hence is entitled to exist.

RPiazza_07_Final.indd 214

9/24/2010 2:36:57 PM

Chapter Eight

Concluding remarks

Making the conclusive point of a volume is never easy as it requires a critical reflection on what one has done and the canonical admission of one’s shortcomings. It is, however, one last opportunity to establish the coherence of a piece of work and pose one final time the question, ‘What has this study attempted to do?’ In what follows I shall try to address this question and refocus the discussion of this volume. In her recent study nearly two decades after the seminal work on theatrical discourse by Deidre Burton (1980), Susan Mandala (2007) refers to the domain of dramatic talk as still an ‘uncharted territory’ and a ‘neglected child’. Similarly this book has attempted to venture into the equally much uncharted and neglected land of cinematic language by means of an investigation that compares with the earlier efforts of stylisticians in the domain of theatre. There is a major difference however between the two fields which makes the analysis of film discourse a slightly more intricate matter. Film has always been the object of disciplines other than linguistics, from film and media studies, to cultural studies. Therefore, approaching cinema from a stylistics perspective demands a delineation of the linguistic boundaries within which to position an analysis that is different from the studies conducted in those domains and that uses different tools and organizing criteria; an analysis that, while considering verbal interaction, does not lose sight of the visual level of semiotic communication that makes the medium of cinema so special. In particular in this study reference is made to a consideration of film genre that is assumed as an organizing criterion for the first part of the volume; although the term is clearly borrowed from the realm of film studies, the analysis conducted here has a primarily linguistic finality and only secondarily points to an interdisciplinary dialogue between stylistics and cinema studies.

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 215

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

216

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

Several issues may be worth of a final consideration in this section. The first one is the notion of representation. Many a time in the course of this volume the term ‘representation’ has appeared in its interpretation of reproduction in a fictional context of talk that can be associated with a particular type of film. Representation is a laden word, much used in a variety of domains. In media studies for instance it is used ‘to describe the practice of placing different signs together in order to render complex abstract concepts intelligible and meaningful. This sense-making practice is a fundamentally cognitive process’ (Taylor and Willis, 1999: 39). Representations can be of social realities, for example, families, communities, groups of individuals like football supporters, old people, backpackers or women as subjects portrayed in a domestic context; representations can also be of emotional states (ibid.). Representations are associated with stereotypes and in their attempt to grasp the essence of a group or a particular identity, they encourage a vision of collective features. Taylor and Willis (1999) however point out how such a view of representations is false in that representations are not permanent but invariably evolve with changing historical and social situations. For example, the representation of male parenthood in Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) is very different from representations of the absent father (ibid., 1999: 40) that may be provided by Child Support Agencies. In a similar vein, the typical representation of Italian women as perpetually aspiring mothers clashes with the high abortion rate in the 1960s or with the reality of unwedded single women in Italy that, to an extent, Antonioni’s When Love Fails unveiled. The view of representation that has informed this study is not in contrast with the established notion of representation that Taylor and Willis (1999) discuss. On the one hand, the determination to study the language of a number of different films, pertaining to specific genres or offering the treatment of a given topic, identity in this volume, reflects the desire to outline the patterns that filmic discourse displays and define on a macro-level, a ‘syntax’ of film language. On the other hand, such a drive towards a systematization of film discourse, does not rule out the notion of evolution nor does it intend to suggest a permanency of the features that have been identified here. On the contrary, a study like the present aspires to

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 216

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

Concluding Remarks

217

follow the transformations that will occur and that are already taking place in a medium as dynamic as cinema, together with the hybridizations between various cinematic genres and films that, although they cannot be inscribed in a specific category, are made up of a variety of filmic genre subtexts. The other major issue with which this study necessarily has had to deal is that of the relationship between fictional hence scripted dialogue and real-life discourse. The qualitative research that in this volume has been conducted on a number of different films did not intend to engage in a truly comparative analysis between the two types of discourse. Such an investigation could have been conducted by analysing film talk against corpora of real language with the purpose of identifying any differences and analogies between authentic and fictional discourse; examples of this type of studies are in the area of televised fiction: Quaglio (2009), Bednarek (2010) among others, and in the context of Italian cinema Rossi (e.g. 2003 and 2006). On the contrary, the interest of this study of film discourse was in cinematic talk in itself as a specific discourse genre produced to a specific effect in a specific context. The choice of referencing the research on the pragmatics of authentic interaction was a necessity as the study started from the assumption that cinema is unavoidably inspired by life and natural talk provides an albeit intuitive and unsystematic template for film script. We can ask ourselves whether cinematic discourse is then authentic or not, genuine or not vis-à-vis real-life talk, although this was not the primary concern of this study. Interestingly, an entire issue of Discourse Studies (2001) is devoted to the topic of authenticity. Van Leeuwen’s introductory paper ‘What is authenticity?’ reflects on the various definitions of the term. ‘Authentic’, van Leeuwen (2001) claims, refers to something that is a ‘genuine’ product and not a copy or an imitation; it also means ‘bearing a seal of approval’. Most importantly, authentic is something ‘thought to be true to the essence of something, to a revealed truth, a deeply felt sentiment, or the way these are worded or otherwise expressed’ (van Leeuwen, 2001: 393). This last definition of authenticity has informed this study of film discourse. Not interested in an understanding of film verbal semiotics as authorized by a congruent use of real-life models, the discussion carried out in the various sections of

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 217

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

218

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

this book has tried to ascertain the essence of film talk and the way it can be considered to be true to itself. In a way what I am invoking here is not so much the adherence to Grice’s (1975) ‘maxim of quality’ or truthfulness as one of the fundamental properties of the Cooperative Principle. The organizing principle rather is that of relevance (Sperber and Wilson, for example, 1995, 2002) in terms of ‘the best cognitive return on the effort [individuals] put into processing linguistic material’ (Chilton, 2004: 21). It does not matter greatly whether the language of cinema is truthful or not to the discourse of real life. What matters instead is whether by being plausible thus relevant, it reduces the cognitive effort required of viewers as they recognize in the different manifestations and realizations of that discourse something that matches their expectations of genre or thematic treatment and is in line with their cultural interpretative frames. To an extent this study has tried to establish the relevance of film discourse by first establishing a relation between types of genres and discourse and then by characterizing the linguistic patterns that accompany the expression of identity. I would like to illustrate the above points one final time with another excerpt from a recent comedy. In a scene from Mignon è partita (Mignon Has Left, 1989) by Italian director, Francesca Archibugi, whose work is mostly devoted to the observation of adolescents and young protagonists (Piazza, 2008b), two girls engage in a fierce verbal argument that quickly evolves into physical aggression. From Paris where she lived a wealthy and privileged life, Mignon has been sent to live with her modest cousins in Rome, a move which has made her unhappy, irritable and intolerant especially of Chiara, her much less sophisticated contemporary. Upon Chiara leaving the room, Mignon, who dresses very conservatively, decides to try on one of her cousin’s casual jackets, when unexpectedly Chiara reappears. Excerpt (1) Chiara Ti piace? Se vuoi te la presto. Mignon No, mi stavo solo mettendo nei panni di certi fanatici, domandandomi una serie di perché. Chiara Ah ti stavi domandando perché sei stronza, perché ti conci come mia nonna o perché tutti ti si fanculano.

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 218

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

Concluding Remarks

219

Mignon Tu non sei una ragazza, sei una poverina, sei una all’oscuro di te stessa. Chiara E tu invece sei una poveretta, sei una all’oscuro di tutti che tutti schizzano come la peste o la Mmerda persino i tuoi genitori. [They start hitting each other.] Translation Chiara Do you like it? If you want to, I can lend it to you. Mignon No, I was just putting myself in the shoes of some fanatics asking myself a number of questions. Chiara I see, you were asking yourself why you’re a bitch, why you dress like a granny or why everyone keeps their distance from you. Mignon You’re not a girl, you’re a loser, and you don’t know yourself. Chiara YOU are a loser, you don’t know anything and everybody runs away from you like from the plague or from SHHit including your own parents. [They start hitting each other.] The exchange is quite transparent in its dynamics, based as is on a series of bald impolite moves (Culpeper, 1996) and mutually aggressive insults that the camera follows by promptly switching from one girl to the other. Feeling hurt in having the offer of sharing her jacket with Mignon turned down in an offensive ironic way (‘No, I was just putting myself in the shoes of some fanatics’), Chiara becomes particularly abrasive in her confrontation with her French cousin and the FTAs she produces are clear and outright. Her utterances are built around the ironical ‘echoic repetition’ of Mignon’s words as a dissociative rhetorical strategy ‘primarily designed to ridicule the opinion echoed’ (Sperber and Wilson, 1995: 241). In her second turn, for instance, Chiara transforms Mignon’s utterance ‘I was asking myself a number of questions’ into a parody by providing an exemplification of that remark and listing the questions that she herself would want to ask her cousin – rather than the other way around – and that reflect her negative image of the girl (‘why you’re a bitch, why you dress like a granny or why everyone keeps their distance from you’).

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 219

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

220

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

The exchange is one of the many conversations between the adolescents in the film, showing the special power of observation of that age group that indexes Archibugi’s cinema. The confrontation presented earlier (in excerpt 1), however, is not simply one of the many occasions of dispute in the crowded Roman family; it is the pivotal moment when the relationships between the five adolescents occupying the Forbicionis’ small flat are revealed in all their complexity and coincides with the beginning of a narrative disruption that will be recomposed at the end of the film (Todorov, 1977). It is a conflict that makes clear to the audience the intensity of Mignon’s suffering for being away from her own family and provides an insight into the complex network of relationships between the youngsters and the adults around her. Without this confrontation combined with other moments of tension, the film would not have been the cohesive and well-constructed work it is. The representation of that confrontation between the two girls, in being perfectly plausible, in tune with the characterization of the subjects involved, in respect of the type of language that in contemporary Italy teenagers speak, is an example of the relevance of that particular instance of film discourse. It does not matter whether such a dispute coincides with similar disputes in real life, although it probably does; what matters is that viewers will recognize a typical, not stereotypical, pattern of interaction amongst youngsters and that recognition will reduce the cognitive effort in processing the scene and the rest of the film which is an elaboration of that confrontation. This book has demonstrated the relevance of conflict within a film narrative. Conflict has been the key to this analysis of film discourse and the angle from which we have observed the various patterns that cinematic talk can display in a number of different contexts. The above excerpt from Mignon Has Left (1989), for instance, shows the features of insistence and repetition centring on a series of adjacency pairs that were identified as the unmarked features of conflict representation in comedy. The notion of genre, it was argued, is not complete if it does not take on board considerations about the specific choices that are made at the level of the representation of discourse. Chapter Four illustrated this point by looking at comedy and comparing it with melodrama. The impression of vivacity that comedy

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 220

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

Concluding Remarks

221

conveys, for instance, in most cases derives from its dynamic use of language, which takes the major role by snatching it away from the camera thus reduced to a minimal movement (Viganò, 1995: 15). Insistent rebutting, other-repair, and continuous threat of face seem to characterize this genre. We have followed the refuting of statements that marks comedy and have subsequently reflected on the diverse representation of conflict that in comparison with comedy is offered by melodrama in which contrast revolves around a more fluid and variously articulated expression of confrontation frequently expressed by dysfluency, lack of cooperation and fragmentation. In the same vein, the exploration of Western discourse has pointed out how the male protagonists’ language in that genre is construed intertextually by a relationship with the discourse produced by the other characters, thus creating an indirect and allusive, but not for this less effective confrontation between the goodies and the baddies in that genre. The exploration of Western films started from Leone’s cinema, but was expanded to a few American Westerns that were produced in the same period as a response to the Italian formalist revisitation of the American classic. A comparative analysis of the two sets of films highlighted a very similar treatment of irony combined with some functional differences: while in the American Westerns the intertextual function fulfilled by irony reinforces the association between peers, in the Italian Western the competent use of irony is an accoutrement of the positive males to the final demise of the baddies. The section on Westerns, while still revolving around the theme of confrontation, opened the investigation of the new topic of identity. In the Italian and American Westerns, it was argued, through ironic discourse characters project their identity and winning cowboys in particular construe a positive masculinity that incorporates features of witty flexibility and openness, far from the aggressiveness of the baddies and their discursive contractive assertiveness (White, for example, 2002a and 2003). The investigation of identity in its interconnection with conflict was pursued further in the second part of the volume through the analysis of two case studies. The discussion of Antonioni’s and Melliti’s films showed how discourse is essential to a notion of self that undergoes continuous redefinition and adjustments and is the result of a

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 221

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

222

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

considerable conflict or struggle for dominance in terms of the interactional space within which the individual can affirm his/her own persona or, better, personae. Although in the different domain of political discourse, Wodak (2009) clearly sees the interrelation between footing as the instances in talk where the participants’ alignment and stance towards the topic of their contribution and the interlocutors are at stake, and narratives, as the ‘tool for instantiating social and personal identities’ (Ochs, 1997: 202 quoted in Wodak, 2009: 79). Wodak reminds us of Schiffrin’s concept of identity as construed ‘through’ and ‘in’ the interaction and her definition of narratives as a ‘sociolinguistic self-portrait: a linguistic lens through which to discover people’s views of themselves (as situated within both an ongoing interaction and a larger social structure) and their experiences’ (Schiffrin, 1997: 42, emphasis in the original, quoted in Wodak, 2009: 79). Narratives therefore are those discursive tools that point to a particular orientation in an individual’s construction of self and reflect both the specific situation in which the speaker is involved and his/her views of the world. The analysis of When Love Fails shows exactly how through some personal narratives, although elicited in an interview, characters display and negotiate various identities. The way Antonioni’s five women recount their traumatic experience of suicide, however, is not unproblematic as they are engaged in a struggle with the person who filters their life narratives as an extradiegetic external narrator, when he plays the voice-over, and as intradiegetic interviewer. This very indirect barely visible clash of different views and ways of narrating completes the compilation of forms of conflict in film that this study traces in the different types of films. Me, the Other, the last film observed in this study, also represents the topic of identity as negotiable and continually changing, based on constantly shifting participation structures, constitutive of several facets, and depending on the subject’s projection of self as well as the others’ perception of that self. The conflict in this case is dormant in the first part of the film, disguised under the friendship between the two men and explodes in the second part when Giuseppe lets himself be ruled by his suspicions and a banal unquestioned and stereotypical vision of Arabs as the ‘others’.

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 222

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

Concluding Remarks

223

In conclusion, the decision to look at film discourse from the specific angle of confrontational talk has assured systematicity and coherence to this study; at the same time it has encouraged a reflection on the very notion of conflict and proposed a consideration of the many facets this interactional activity entails. Confrontation, it has been discussed, can be direct and immediately visible but also indirect and only suggestive of interpersonal tensions; it can be realized in physical proximity but also expressed at extreme distance and thus involve complex intertextual relations, it can be responded to or ignored; it can brew for a long time and then suddenly explode through a rehearsal of other people’s voices; and finally it is through indirect and direct confrontation that in a film characters negotiate their identity. The investigation of fictional dialogue has frequently been defended by scholars (Murphey, 1978; Burton, 1980; Tannen and Lakoff, 1994; Bubel and Spitz, 2006, among others) who, on the basis of the mimetic nature and pragmatic plausibility of scripted talk, believe it can advance our knowledge of how real communicative interaction works. In this sense, it is hoped that this study of confrontational talk has contributed to a further reflection on the wide variety of expressions conflict can take. Finally, as this volume started off with an exploration of the notion of genre and argued that it needs to be broadened to include discourse representation in different film types, one more notation is in order. Audiences find in scripted confrontational discourse those features they associate with specific situations, feelings, characterizations, narrative situations and the like; therefore, a study of conflict discourse in film not only advances the understanding of verbal disagreement in general but also allows us to gain insight in to the expectations of the public and thus contributes to a sound understanding of what genre involves. The object of this study was the articulation of verbal conflict in different expressions of cinema, however the investigation was not limited to the mapping of forms of confrontations on to genres and themes. In agreement with Scollon and Levine (2004), this study started from the conviction that ‘discourse is inherently multimodal, not monomodal. A monomodal concept of discourse is distorting, and therefore, now that we can, we should open up the lens to

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 223

9/24/2010 2:37:35 PM

224

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

discover a fuller view of how humans communicate’ (p. 3). If not a genuinely new form of discourse like web-centred communications, like those recent communicative modalities, cinema requires holistic and multidimensional interpretations that take into account as many components of its semiotic code as possible. The example of the Lord Kitchener recruitment poster ‘Your country needs you’ that van Leeuwen (2004: 7–8) discusses is exemplary. It would be totally erroneous to consider it a solely verbal act and overlook the communication conveyed by such elements as the frontality of the figure, the indexing finger, the demanding gaze, the grooming, the colour vividness, the gesture or the typographical features (the ‘YOU’ is in monumentally bigger fonts than the rest of the sentence). In the same way, in this volume the reflection on words has been accompanied by the observation of the visual acts performed by features of the mise-en-scène, the gestures of the characters, their outfit, their proximity or distance from each other, their position in the frame, their gaze and much more. In other words, this study has attempted to pay the due attention to visual as well as verbal speech acts on the grounds that, following van Leeuwen (ibid.: 8), ‘speech acts should be renamed communicative acts and understood as multimodal microevents in which all the signs present combine to determine its communicative intent’. And if this is not convincing, for this study of cinematic discourse as a genre of scripted speech, we can’t but agree with van Leeuwen (ibid.: 10) when he says that: Genres of speech and writing are in fact multimodal: speech genres combine language and action in an integrated whole, written genres combine language, image, and graphics in an integrated whole. Speech genres should therefore be renamed ‘performed’ genres and written genres ‘inscribed’ genres. The exploration of speech and moving images was a thread running through the volume; approached as a post-hoc issue following the linguistic analysis of the verbal plane in the first two chapters on genre and discourse, it developed hand in hand with the pragmatic discussion of conflict and identity in the case of the Antonioni’s and Melliti’s films. The relation between words and images makes

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 224

9/24/2010 2:37:36 PM

Concluding Remarks

225

continually changing demands on the interactive participants as was discussed in the second chapter. Through the many reminders of the complex interface between the verbal and visual planes in the relevant chapters it was shown how information is disclosed partially or entirely to viewers and how some details are selectively passed on to them in a marked disclosure modality. In terms of the methodology, this volume has proposed a linguistic stylistic qualitative approach that, to an extent, I see as inscribed in the sociological tradition of Garfinkel, Goffman and Cicourel. The intent was to follow how, through a fictional discourse that re-presents the texture of real-life exchanges in given contexts, we can follow the making of social reality. Within such a broad perspective, the variety of methodologies for this study of the different expressions of cinema considered has shown the richness of discursive manifestations that film offers and the malleability of linguistic analysis to cope with diverse data efficiently. Still from the point of view of the methodology, this study of cinematic discourse is much in line with the principles of ‘social semiotics’ (Iedema, 2004, among others) as it remains an interpretative exercise, that although in respect of linguistic rigour, is based to an extent upon the cultural frames available to the analyst. As an illustration considerations about the construal of masculinity in Westerns are necessarily located within a vision of male identity that is indebted to studies of gender in a number of contexts within but also beyond the domain of film. The very same of course is true for the interpretation of the discourse of female identity in When Love Fails. The goal of this volume therefore was not to unveil and offer an indisputable ‘truth’ about cinematic texts, but to point out how discourse is the result of socio-cultural material processes, of which the analyst herself is part. As Gregoriou (2009) and Simpson (1993) remind us, stylistics cannot claim perfect objectivity and can only guarantee interpretations that are influenced by the specific context and are contingent on the analyst’s culturally and socially informed angle. Such a clarification about the intentions and aspirations of the present study does not preclude concerns about the quality of the research. Flick (2006) poses a number of issues and asks: should ‘traditional criteria of validity, reliability, and objectivity be applied to qualitative research and how? Or should new methods,

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 225

9/24/2010 2:37:36 PM

226

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond

appropriate criteria be developed for qualitative research? Which are these, and how can they exactly be “operationalized” for research?’ (p. 26). The present study does not claim to have answered all of these questions but neither has it avoided these concerns. The methodological tools that were adopted in each chapter were developed to suit the specific nature of the film data with a bottom-up approach. The transparency of the analytical tools and the punctual illustration with excerpts from the films have provided, I hope, a clear sense of the direction of the analysis. No final section in a volume can be considered concluded without any future projection and reference to possible expansion of the research. In this case, this is an easy task. The research on film discourse is still at its dawn as has been discussed and much more work is needed in this area. To begin with other genres need to be explored from horror to film noir, science fiction or musicals; a similar line of inquiry could take us into comparative studies of genres in different national cinemas. Other major areas of inquiry concern issues of characterization, point of view, narrative development. The relations of cinema to theatre, but also film and television also deserve to be explored and I much encourage an investigation of the intersections between these media. All of these possible avenues deserve a stylistics perspective that captures the essential function of language in film. To use Simpson’s words as a conclusion, [a] text is a linguistic construct and we process it as linguistic construct before anything else. And, the argument runs, if there is to be any serious attempt to engage with the meaning of a particular text, then there must be some concomitant engagement with the language of that text. (1993: 3)

RPiazza_08_Final.indd 226

9/24/2010 2:37:36 PM

Notes

Chapter One 1

2

3

4 5

6

7

8

9

Except for the images in Chapter 6 for which permission was obtained, the film stills in this volume were reproduced with the technique of Photoshop. Many thanks to Daniele Sonnino for his technical assistance. Some of the functions of dialogue listed by Potter (2001: 238) include: to reveal something about the speaker/recipient and their relationship; to inform the audience; to connect scenes; to make the scene lifelike. Italian film titles are given in the original language, and are accompanied by an English translation, which, whenever possible, is the title by which the films were circulated in the English-speaking market. The transcription symbols used in this study are at the end of this chapter. Different views emphasize the similarity between film and drama, for example, Culpeper (2004: 88): ‘films are not plays, but the differences relate primarily to the nature of the medium not the dynamics of the dialogue. (. . .) a film embodies one particular performance; it lacks the variation of different stage performances.’ ‘The history of cinema is often treated as the history of its emancipation from theatrical models. First of all from theatrical “frontality” (. . .), then from theatrical acting (. . .) then from theatrical furnishings (. . .). Movies are regarded as advancing from theatrical stasis to cinematic fluidity, from theatrical artificiality to cinematic naturalness and immediateness’ (Sontag, 1977: 76). ‘[L]anguage is the symbolic expression par excellence and all other systems of communication are derived from it and presume its existence [consequently] any human communication of nonverbal messages presupposes a circuit of verbal messages without a reverse implication. (. . .) Verbal signifiers are present in and have a structuring effect on the very formation of images (camera angles, the figuration of characters and events in narrative films)’ (Willemen, 1983: 141–2). Rossi (1999) follows the evolution of Italian language in films from a lexicosemantic perspective and establishes the distance of film talk from real language in the case of the language of dubbing or in the verbal exhibitionism of famous comedian Totò. Similarly, Raffaelli (1992 and 1996) discusses the evolution of the language of Italian cinema from the monolingualism of 1945 to the complex linguistic repertoire of the mid-1960s. Herman (1995) applies the methodology of conversational analysis and ethnomethodology that she claims ‘permits greater flexibility [and] allows more attention to the fluidity of interaction’ than other approaches such as the discourse analysis approach of the Birmingham school (p. 78).

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 227

9/24/2010 2:37:58 PM

228 10

11

12

13

14

Notes

Cresti (1982: 292) observes that, in order to be marketable, Italian cinema has always had to reproduce a comprehensible and realistic language which did not avoid lower tones, vulgarity and popular syntax. Despite admitting that cinematic language mirrors real talk, she refuses to associate the speech of nearly all cinema and of most part of television directly with spoken language, although the final result at the end of the invisible process of writing is a form of spoken discourse: ‘il parlato cinematografico, quasi per intero, e buona parte di quello televisivo, non possono essere identificati direttamente con il parlato anche se la loro risultante è una forma parlata di lingua’ (it is not possible to associate film speech, nearly in its entirety, and also a good deal of television talk, with spoken language, although their final outcome is a spoken form of language, 1982: 290–1). ‘Se la lingua parlata nei film pertenga al dominio degli italiani parlati o degli italiani scritti è questione di apparente curioso rilievo e di facile soluzione: come per il testo teatrale, (. . .) la sceneggiatura pertiene all’uno o all’altro dei due dominii, anche se la definitiva, irreparabile fissità della registrazione dà al suo valore di parlato la curiosa immobilità dello scritto (. . .) nessun dubbio sul diritto di appartenenza dei due generi (testo teatrale e testo cinematografico) al campo degli italiani scritti. Anche se con la curiosa caratteristica di volere (anzi di dovere, per essere accettabili) apparire come lingue parlate’ (The question of whether the spoken language of films belongs to the realm of spoken Italian or written Italian is a matter that has received an unexpected attention yet is of easy solution: as for dramatic texts, (. . .) the script pertains to one or the other of the two domains, even if the definitive, irreversible fixity of the recording attributes its spoken language the unnatural stillness of the written language (. . .) no doubt that the two genres (the dramatic and the cinematic texts) have the right to belong to the domain of written Italian. Although with the awkward characteristic of wishing to (indeed having to, in order to sound acceptable) appear as spoken language)’ (Mamone, 1992: 53). Formalized by a circle of critics including François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard and Eric Rohmer, who gathered around the French film journal Cahiers du cinema, under the theoretical leadership of André Bazin, during the 1950s the auteur group offered a new interpretation of cinema and ‘an alternative to content-oriented, plot-theme analyses of movies’ (Schatz, 1981: 8). Quargnolo (1972) views Italian cinema as mainly a cinema of auteurs in which genres, representing only the minor production, are generally relegated to the margins. He claims that, compared with the cinema production during 1930s–40s, characterized by the presence of clear genre tendencies, it is at times difficult to interpret recent production in terms of genres (p. 27). In this author ‘ethical’ probably refers to the concern of Italian realism with social issues with the objective of pointing to the need for change.

Chapter Two 1

Barthes’s (1964) seminal work explored the picture–text relationships among which he indicated the function of ‘anchorage’ when the text provides the

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 228

9/24/2010 2:37:58 PM

Notes

2

3

4

5 6

7

8

229

link with the picture, and ‘relay’, the case of reciprocal relation between the verbal and visual. Meinhof’s (1994) study is particularly significant in an area of research that has dedicated attention to either the verbal or the visual separately, even with interesting results. In her study of Iraq war TV news, Lipson (2008) illustrates how visuals function as metonyms in constructing patterns of meaning. One could, however, envisage a narrative film structure, corresponding to the second person narration, in which the viewers are addressed explicitly. Besides the combination in which all elements are null, the last one, which, however, given the specificity of the cinematic interaction has been ruled out, is the option in which the address and the link are null but the recipient is present. This option, corresponding in Levinson’s model, to the ‘ultimate destination’, I believe, is not conceivable in cinema as it involves a non-participant unable to receive the film message. Visconti, L. ([1948] 1977: 23). There is a noticeable change between the published film script and the final film version, with the latter reflecting Pasolini’s later sophisticated insight into the verbal–visual relation. In the script, the narrative of the King’s encounter with Zobeida, albeit partial, greatly simplifies the poet’s task, as the King provides an account of his experience: Ho visto mia moglie bagnarsi nel giardino che ho fatto costruire per lei . . . (‘I saw my wife bathing in the garden I had built for her’). http://www1.assumption.edu/users/McClymer/us%20survey/bourke-white. jpg (accessed 6 February 2010). ‘[I]t points an irony and illustrates . . . the superiority of picture to propaganda’ (Hunter, 1987: 27).

Chapter Four 1

2

3

4

5

An article based on this chapter appeared in Journal of Pragmatics, 2006, 38: 2087–104. Along the same lines, Kotthoff (1993: 202) talks about ‘opposition formats’ which ‘always connect locally to the preceding contribution, whose central point is turned into the extreme opposite from what the first speaker meant. Opponents’ formulations are incorporated but interpreted to the contrary’. ‘With Fists in the Pocket, whose “autobiographical roots” are in the director’s adolescence in Milan, Bellocchio drew the wrath of Italian society because he dared to criticize the “sacred ark” of the family’ (Michalczyk, 1986: 156). In quoting such view by Maynard (1985), Hutchby points out that oppositional moves differ from such adjacency pairs as question-answer in so far as a question cataphorically (i.e. ‘forward’; Halliday and Hasan, 1979) points at an expected answer while in a chain of oppositional turns, the second one refers anaphorically (i.e. ‘backward’; ibid.) to the first move (1996: 23). Wertmüller’s Swept Away is a product of the Italian cinema of the 1970s, a cinema which Micciché claims does not have any value (‘culturalmente parlando, “il” cinema italiano non esiste proprio’ 1980: 14). It is a cinema in which the 2 per cent top slice high brow ‘memorable’ production (p. 8) is inevitably

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 229

9/24/2010 2:37:58 PM

Notes

230

6

7

8

9 10

11

12

13

14 15

16

submerged by a deluge of very low quality films while the medium-scale products are totally missing. Micciché traces the deep crisis of the Italian cinema to the absence of a real intellectual debate and to the isolation in which directors and producers operate (p. 14). Raffaella adopts this distancing strategy repeatedly: Sei rincoglionito, completamente rincoglionito. No dico, non si ricorda un cazzo. (You’re thick, totally thick. I tell you, he can’t bloody remember anything.) In another sequence: E io non ci credo, capirai ha parlato l’osservatorio di Cape Kennedy, io non ci credo, avrà visto male, andiamo. (‘Well, I don’t believe it, he speaks as if he were the Cape Kennedy observatory, I don’t believe it, come on, you must have seen wrong.’) Let us think of such a sentence as ‘Ring me soon ok, Matt?’ uttered by an individual making eye contact with the interlocutor, in contrast with the sentence ‘Give us a ring’ carrying a de-personalized de-responsibilizing meaning if uttered by an individual speaker for whom the use of plural would not be justified. Gennarino’s colourfully foul language and Raffaella’s verbosity are superficial features but the characters lack psychological and social authenticity (Micciché, 1989: 213). ‘Il colorito turpiloquio di Gennaro e la logorroica loquacità snobistica di Raffaella [. . .] servono in realtà a coprire di esterne connotazioni folkloriche due personaggi monoliticamente schematici e del tutto privi di autentiche connotazioni psicologiche e sociali’ (Micciché, 1989: 213). Monicelli Speriamo che sia femmina (Let’s Hope It’s a Girl, 1986). In the name of forceful nationalism, under the Fascist regime foreign words were outlawed. Eggins and Slade (1997: 157) suggest that in addition to phonological cues, humour is marked grammatically by the amplification of the use of negative or positive evaluative lexis. ‘Repair’ is an aligning move that ‘conversational parties use in dealing with problems or “troubles” that arise in conversation’ (McLaughlin, 1984: 208). Schegloff et al. (1977) identified speakers’ preference for redressing their own troubles as opposed to having them addressed by other interlocutors. The journey to the South of Italy symbolically reverses the previous unfortunate migration of the family to the North (Small, 1998). Published script, Amelio, 1992: 24. Published film script, Giordana et al., 2001. While the script uses the feminine form for the demonstrative, ‘questa’ that refers to the feminine noun firma (‘signature’), in the film the actual word is uttered in the masculine ‘questo’. Scene 22 Rosetta. Quella è San Pietro? La basilica? Antonio. [distrattamente] Sì. (. . .) Rosetta. Ignorante! Quella non è San Pietro. È più grande. Non l’hai mai vista in televisione? Rosetta. Is that St. Peter’s? The cathedral? Antonio. [carelessly ] Yes (. . .) Rosetta. Idiot! That is not St. Peter’s. That’s much bigger. Haven’t you ever seen it on TV? (Published script, Amelio, 1992: 29).

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 230

9/24/2010 2:37:58 PM

Notes 17 18 19 20

231

Published script, Amelio,1992: 13. Published script. Amelio, 1992: 14–15. Published script. Amelio, 1992: 100. Published script, Soldini and Leondeff, 2000: 95.

Chapter Five 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Leone visually represents Juan’s fantasy. The film freezes and a white cloud symbolizing the man’s dream appears depicting an explosion, while the background music intensifies. The main rationale for the choice of American films was the time of production, as it was essential to compare work belonging to the very same years. In addition, the unifying thread in the American films is the actor, John Wayne, rather than the director. If it can be argued that this choice is dissonant from the decision to study a specific director in the case of Leone, it certainly provides a consistent element in the American film corpus, which, incidentally, is not too dissimilar from the recurring presence of some actors, for example, Clint Eastwood or GianMaria Volontè in Leone’s films. ‘In Leone’s hands, the valley becomes a desert, the stagecoach a lone rider, and the Apaches the barrel of a Winchester jutting into the far edge of the wide-screen frame’ (Frayling, 1998: 40). In light of the connection between American and Italian Westerns, the same plot classifications have been applied to both versions of the genre. Wright’s characterization distinguishes between two main plot types: ‘the classical plot’ in which ‘a lone rider [. . .] rides into a troubled town and cleans it up, winning the respect of the townsfolk and the love of the schoolmarm’ (Wright, 1975: 32), and the ‘professional plot’ in which the heroes’ commitment to moral principles of justice has been replaced by the dedication to a professional fighting occupation. In between these two main models, Wright lists ‘the vengeance variation’ and ‘the transition theme’, which mark a change in terms of progressive detachment and ‘deterioration’ of the relationship between hero and society. Frayling ([1981] 1998) finds it difficult to apply Wright’s categories to Italian Westerns and therefore proposes narrative variants that reflect the more complex and less visible opposition between the good and bad guys (pp. 51–3). Line 3, that is very relevant to the characterization of Joe as some sort of saviour, is not present in the English version of the film. ‘Language comes to be used as a weapon for the defence of masculine identity, rather than a mode of expressing connectedness with others, or honesty about emotional life’ (Seidler, 1989: 153 in Coates, 2003: 104). Muecke (1969 and 1970: 35) lists the features of irony: ‘(i) a contrast of appearance and reality, (ii) a confident unawareness (pretended in the ironist, real in the victim of irony) that the appearance is only an appearance, and (iii) the comic effect of this awareness of a contrasting appearance and reality’. In addition, he mentions the element of separation intrinsic in the exercise of irony for which he proposes the terms of ‘detachment, distance,

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 231

9/24/2010 2:37:58 PM

232

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Notes

disengagement, freedom, serenity, objectivity, dispassion, “lightness”, “play”, urbanity’. For Bakhtin (1981 and 1986) the dialogic governs any construction of meaning both in the production of an utterance, for which the speaker enters a relationship with the other speakers, and in the comprehension of any text. According to Wood (2005), males in Italian Westerns reflect a ‘post-patriarchal society’, and as such they ‘are represented as operating at the margins of society, rejecting religious dictates of obedience, respect for authority, women and children, owing loyalty only to themselves and indulging their personal whims and desires’ (p. 55). The translation is from the English version of the DVD by Metro-GoldwynMayer Studios Inc., 2006. The English version of the film instead changes the text and favours a different kind of irony: ‘I’ll sleep well knowing my good friend is by my side to protect me.’ This is the English version of the film, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Productions, 2006. The translation from the English DVD version of Leone’s film by MetroGoldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., 2006 reads: Such a big reward being offered on all of you GENTLEmen that I thought I’d just tug along on your next robbery. Might just turn you in to the law. Landy (2000) identifies in Giù la testa, the presence of ‘many Gramscian issues relating to Americanism, common sense, the role of intellectuals, the nature of subalternity, the characteristic of passive revolution, and, above all, the ways in which history informs these issues’ (p. 194). In A Few Dollars More, carefully hidden Joe and the town tavern owner spy the gold and weapon trade between the American army and Ramon that ends in a massacre. The old man compares their actions to the game of cowboys and Indians, which in the specific context of the film acquires the value of a critical metastatement: ‘Mi sembra di giocare agli Indiani’/’It feels as if we were playing cowboys and Indians.’

Chapter Six 1

2

An earlier and slightly different version of this chapter has appeared in Language and Literature, May 2010, and is reprinted here with the kind permission of the editors. The stills from Antonioni’s film are reproduced with the kind permission of Minerva Pictures Group S.r.l. Cottino-Jones (1996: 72) documents Antonioni’s attitude to the suicides: ‘. . . they were keen . . . on making me believe that they had really wanted to die, and that they had tried it over and over again, and that, all things considered, they had been unlucky not to succeed. And not only that, but also that they were ready to try it again, if they found themselves in that very same position. I am sure this is not true. I am sure they were not telling the truth, that they were exaggerating on account of who-knows-what form of vanity, or of masochism’ (my emphasis). Also he admitted that: ‘Those types of suicides, as soon as

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 232

9/24/2010 2:37:58 PM

Notes

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

233

I understood their exhibitionist complex, no longer distressed me. Except perhaps, two of them. The rest were happy to have tried to take their lives, and to be there to talk about it in front of a camera; they were happy to earn some money in such a simple way. . . . except, perhaps, for two truly touching cases . . .’ (ibid., my emphasis) For a critical discussion of speech and thought representation see Simpson, 1993. Realized by Cineteca Nazionale under the sponsorship of Comune di Roma and produced by Minerva Pictures Group S.r.l. The six short films of the ‘video journal’ by young Lizzani, Zavattini, Maselli, Lattuada, Fellini and Antonioni explore the themes of unrequited love and sexual desire in an urban context with such themes as prostitution, a marriage agency as a way out of poverty, men’s voyeurism, ballroom dancing and the condition of unmarried single mothers. The women who have agreed to tell their stories are real people who actually attempted suicide. However, as they are directed by Antonioni and framed within a film narrative, they lose their authenticity to become fictional characters. They are, therefore, actors, although non-professional, performing in front of a camera for an audience. Gibson (2001: 648–9) sees a contradiction in Sarah Kozloff’s model between the highly structured concept of a ‘geometrics of the film text’ and her claim that the voice-over in films humanizes the narration and acknowledges the humanity of the viewers by no longer treating them as voyeurs. For Labov and Waletzky (1967: 32–9), a coda is the penultimate element in a sixpart structure including an abstract, orientation, complication, resolution, coda and evaluation. Codas ‘bridg[e] the gap between the moment of time at the end of the narrative proper and the present. They bring the narrator and the listener back to the point at which they entered the narrative’ (Labov, 1972: 365). In When Love Fails we get a glimpse of the condition of women in Italy in the early 1950s. Legal regulations regarding the family changed at an extremely slow pace resulting in what Caldwell (1995: 151) defines a ‘repressive [family] model’ and producing many ‘pathological families’ (ibid.). In spite of the aspiration to equality between sexes expressed in the Constitution, articles clearly accepted inequality as an inescapable condition. Italian family reality was very far from the stereotype of a country revolving around the family: Caldwell estimates that in the early 1950s there were 600,000 de facto separations (p. 154) and of the 380,000 marriages each year, at least 10,000 ended in broken unions. Also, the annual number of illegitimate children was about 20,000 of whom in the period from 1952 to 1960 only 3,000 would be legally recognized (ibid.). In the Italy of the early 1950s, devastated by poverty and hasty urbanization, single-motherhood and child illegitimacy triumphed.

Chapter Seven 1

The Guardian, 18 December 2009.

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 233

9/24/2010 2:37:58 PM

RPiazza_Notes_Final.indd 234

9/24/2010 2:37:59 PM

References and filmography

References Abercrombie, D. ([1959] 1965) ‘Conversation and spoken prose’, in Abercrombie, D. Studies in Phonetics and Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press. Aimeri, L. and Frasca, G. (2002) Manuale dei generi cinematografici. Hollywood: dalle origini a oggi. Torino: Utet. Altman, R. (ed.) (1981) Genre: The Musical. London: Routledge. Altman, R. (1989) The American Film Musical. London: British Film Institute. Altman, R. (2006) Film/Genre. London: British Film Institute. Amelio, G. (1992) Il ladro di bambini. Milano: Feltrinelli. Anderson, L. (1993) ‘A pragmatic model of quotation in conversation’, in de Scarpis, V., Innocenti, F., Marucci, F. and Pajalich, A. (eds) Intrecci e contaminazioni, pp. 379–89. Venice: Supernova. Andrew, D. (1984) Concepts in Film Theory. New York: Oxford University Press. Arnheim, R. (1966) ‘Epic and dramatic film’, in Dyer MacCann, R. (ed.) Film: A Montage of Theories. New York: Dutton. Attardo, S. (2007) ‘Irony as relevant inappropriateness’, in Gibbs, R. and Colston, H. (eds) Irony in Language & Thought, pp. 135–70. New York and London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Austin, J. (1962) How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bakhtin, M. M. ([1981] 2004) The Dialogic Imagination. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Trans. McGee, V. W. Austin: University of Texas Press. Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003) ‘Face and politeness: New (insights) for (old) concepts’. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1453–69. Barriales-Bouche, S. and Attignol Salvodon, M. (eds) (2007) Zoom in, Zoom out. Crossing Borders in Contemporary Europe. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Barthes, R. (1964) ‘Rhétorique de l’image’. Communications 4: 40–51. English translation: ‘Rhetoric of the image,’ in Barthes, R. (1977) Image, Music, Text, pp. 32–51. London: Fontana/Collins. Barthes, R. (1970) Mythologies. Paris: Seuil. English translation (1972) Mythologies. London: Paladin. Barthes, R. (1977) Image, Music, Text. London: Fontana/Collins. Bateson, G. (1972) Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Ballantine.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 235

9/24/2010 2:38:23 PM

236

References and Filmography

Baynham, M. (2006) ‘Performing self, family and community in Moroccan narratives of migration and settlement’, in De Fina, A., Schffrin, D. and Bamberg, M. (eds) Discourse and Identity, pp. 376–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Baynham, M. and De Fina, A. (eds) (2005) Dislocations/Relocations. Manchester: St Jerome. Bednarek, M. (2006) ‘Epistemological positioning and evidentiality in English news discourse: A text-drive approach’. Text and Talk 26 (6): 635–60. Bednarek, M. (2010) The Language of Fictional Television. London: Continuum. Bell, P. (2004) ‘Content analysis of visual images’, in van Leeuwen, T. and Jewitt, C. (eds) Handbook of Visual Analysis, pp. 10–34. Los Angeles and London: Sage. Bennison, N. ([1998] 2004) ‘Accessing character through conversation’, in Culpeper, J., Short, M. and Verdonk, P. (eds) Exploring the Language of Drama. From Text to Context, pp. 67–82. London and New York, Routledge. Benwell, B. and Stokoe, E. (2006) Discourse and Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Ben-Shaul, N. (2007) Film. Oxford and New York: Berg. Bhabha, H. (1990) ‘The third space in identity’, in Rutherford, J. (ed.) Identity: Community, Culture and Difference, pp. 207–21. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written Language. London: Pearson Education Limited. Birch, D. (1991) The Language of Drama. London: Macmillan. Black, A. (1993) ‘Deep Red’, in Black, A. (ed.) Necronomicon 3, pp. 15–21. London: Creation Books. Blommaert, J. (2005) Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Blum-Kulka, S. and Olshtain, E. (1984) ‘Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech-act realization pattern’. Applied Linguistics 5: 196–213. Blum-Kulka, S., Blondheim, B. and Hacohen, G. (2002) ‘Traditions of dispute: from negotiations of Talmudic texts to the arena of political discourse in the media’. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1569–94. Bordwell, D. (1985) Narration in the Fiction Film. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Bordwell, D. and Thompson, K ([1997] 2001) Film Art: An Introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bourke-White, M. (1930) ‘World’s Highest Standard of Living’ http://www1. assumption.edu/users/McClymer/us%20survey/bourke-white.jpg (accessed on 6 February 2010). Bousfield, D. 2008. Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Bousfield, D. and Locher, M. (eds) (2008) Impoliteness in Language Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Brenneis, D. and Lein, L. (1977) ‘ “You fruithead”: a sociolinguistic approach to children’s dispute settlement’, in Ervin-Tripp, S. and Mitchell-Kernan, C. (eds) Child Discourse, pp. 49–65. Academic Press: New York.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 236

9/24/2010 2:38:23 PM

References and Filmography

237

Brown, R. and Gilman, A. (1960) ‘The pronouns of power and solidarity’, in Sebeok, T. A. (ed.) Style in Language, pp. 253–76. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Brunetta, G. P. ([1982] 2001) Storia del cinema italiano. Volume III. Dal neorealismo al miracolo economico. Roma: Editori Riuniti. Brunette, P. (1998) The Films of Michelangelo Antonioni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bubel, C. (2006) The Linguistic Construction of Character Relations in TV Drama: Doing Friendship in Sex and the City. Ph.D. dissertation. Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes. Bubel, C. (2008) ‘Film audience as overhearers’. Journal of Pragmatics 40: 55–71. Bubel, C. and Spitz, A. (2006) ‘ “One of the last vestiges of gender bias”: the characterization of women through the telling of dirty jokes in Ally McBeal’. Humour 19: 71–104. Burton, D. (1980) Dialogue and Discourse. London: Routledge. Caldas-Coulthard, R. (1993) ‘From discourse analysis to critical discourse analysis: the differential re-presentation of women and men speaking in written news’, in Sinclair, J. M., Hoey, M. and Fox, G. (eds) Techniques of Description: Spoken and Written Discourse, pp. 196–208. London: Routledge. Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Fernandes Alves, A. M. (2008) ‘ “Mongrel Selves”: Identity change, displacement and multi-positioning’, in Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Iedema, R. (eds) Identity Trouble: Critical Discourse and Contested Identities, pp. 120–42. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave. Caldwell, L. (1995) ‘The family in the fifties: a notion with a reality’, in Duggan, C. and Wagstaff, C. (eds) Italy in the Cold War. Politics, Culture and Society 1948–58, pp. 149–58. Oxford: Berg. Calsamiglia, H. and López Ferrero, C. (2003) ‘Role and position of scientific voices: reported speech in the media’. Discourse Studies 5 (2): 147–73. Cameron, D. (1999) ‘Performing gender identity: young men’s talk and the construction of heterosexual masculinity’, in Jaworski, A. and Coupland, N. (eds) The Discourse Reader, pp. 419–32. London: Routledge. Camras, L. A. (1977) ‘Facial expressions used by children in a conflict situation’. Child Development 48: 1431–5. Chafe, W. (1977) ‘Creativity in verbalization and its implications for the nature of stored knowledge’, in Freedle, R. (ed.) Discourse Production and Comprehension, pp. 41–55. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Chatman, S. (1990) Coming to Terms: The Rhetoric of Narrative in Fiction and Film. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Chiesa, G. (1953) Audio commentary to Antonioni’s episode (DVD extra materials). Chilton, P. (2004) Analysing Political Discourse. London and New York: Routledge. Clark, H. (1996) Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Clark, H. and Gerrig, R. (1984) ‘On the pretense theory of irony’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113: 121–6.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 237

9/24/2010 2:38:23 PM

238

References and Filmography

Clark, H. and Schaefer, E. (1992) ‘Dealing with overhearers’, in Clark, H. (ed.) Arenas of Language Use, pp. 248–73. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Clift, R. (1999) ‘Irony in conversation’. Language in Society 28: 523–53. Coates, J. (2003) Men Talk. Stories in the Making of Masculinities. Oxford: Blackwell. Colston, H. (2007) ‘On necessary conditions for verbal irony comprehension’, in Gibbs, R. and Colston, H. (eds) Irony in Language and Thought. A Cognitive Science Reader, pp. 97–134. New York and London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Colston, H. and Gibbs, R. (2007) ‘A brief history of irony’, in Gibbs, R. and Colston, H. (eds) Irony in Language and Thought. A Cognitive Science Reader, pp. 3–21. New York and London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Connolly, W. (1991) Identity\Difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Cook, P. and Bernink, M. (eds) (2000) The Cinema Book. London: British Film Institute. Corsaro, W. and Rizzo, T. (1990) ‘Disputes in the peer culture of American and Italian nursery-school children’, in Grimshaw, A. (ed.) Conflict Talk, pp. 21–66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cottino-Jones, M. (ed.) (1996) Michelangelo Antonioni. The Archtecture of Vision. Writings and Interviews on Cinema. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Coyne, M. (1997) The Crowded Prairie: American National Identity in the Hollywood Western. London and New York: I.B. Tauris. Cresti, E. (1982) ‘La lingua del cinema come fattore della trasformazione linguistica nazionale’, in Centro di studi grammatica italiana Accademia della Crusca, La lingua italiana in movimento: incontri del Centro di studi di grammatica italiana: Firenze, Palazzo Strozzi, 26 febbraio-4 giugno 1982, pp. 279–319. Firenze: Accademia della Crusca. Culpeper, J. (1996) ‘Towards and anatomy of impoliteness’. Journal of Pragmatics 25 (3): 349–85. Culpeper, J. ([1998] 2004) ‘(Im)politeness in dramatic dialogue’, in Culpeper, J., Short, M. and Verdonk, P. (eds) Exploring the Language of Drama. From Text to Context, pp. 83–95. London and New York: Routledge. Culpeper, J. (2005) ‘Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: “The Weakest Link” ’. Journal of Politeness Research 1: 35–72. Culpeper, J., Bousfield, D. and Wichmann, A. (2003) ‘Impoliteness revisited: With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects’. Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1545–79. De Fina. A. (2003) Identity in Narrative: A Study of Immigrant Discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. De Fina, A. (2006) ‘Group identity, narrative and self-representations’, in De Fina, A., Schffrin, D. and Bamberg, M. (eds) Discourse and Identity, pp. 351–75. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. De Fina, A., Schffrin, D. and Bamberg, M. (eds) (2006) Discourse and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Douchet, J. (1998) French New Wave. New York: Hazan. Duchan, J., Bruder, G. and Hewitt, L. (eds) (1995) Deixis in Narrative. A Cognitive Science Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 238

9/24/2010 2:38:23 PM

References and Filmography

239

Eder, D. (1990) ‘Serious and playful disputes: variation in conflict talk among female adolescents’, in Grimshaw, A. (ed.) Conflict Talk, pp. 67–84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Eggins, S. and Slade, D. (1997) Analysing Casual Conversation. London and Washington: Cassell. Fairclough, N. (1988) ‘Discourse representation in media discourse’. Sociolinguistics 17: 125–39. Faulkner, C. (1994) ‘René Clair, Marcel Pagnol and the social dimension of speech’. Screen 35: 157–70. Fele, G. (1991) L’insorgere del conflitto. Milano: Franco Angeli. Fillmore, C. J. (1976) ‘The need for a frame semantics within linguistics’, in Fillmore, C. J. Statistical Methods in Linguistics, pp. 5–29. Stockholm: Skriptor. Fink, G. (1982) ‘From showing to telling: off-screen narration in the American cinema’. Letterature d’America 3 (12): 5–37. Flick, U. (2006) An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage. Fludernik, M. (2001) ‘New wine in old bottles? Voice, focalization, and new writing’. New Literary History 31: 619–38. Forceville, C. (1999) ‘Educating the eye? Kress and van Leeuwen’s Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design (1996)’. Language and Literature 8 (2): 163–78. Foucault, M. (1967) ‘Des Espace Autres’ Continuité October 1984 (‘Of other spaces’. Heterotopias, English translation: Miskowiec, J.). (This text was the basis of a lecture given by Michel Foucault in March 1967. Not reviewed for publication by the author and thus not part of the official corpus of his work, the manuscript was released into the public domain for an exhibition in Berlin shortly before Michel Foucault’s death.) Foucault, M. (1983) This Is Not a Pipe. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Foucault, M. (1984) The History of Sexuality. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Fowler, R. (1986) Linguistic Criticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Frayling, C. ([1981] 1998), Spaghetti Westerns. Cowboys and Europeans from Karl May to Sergio Leone. London/New York: I.B. Tauris. Galbraith, M. (1995) ‘Deictic shift theory and the poetics of involvement’, in Duchan, J., Bruder, G. and Hewitt, L. (eds) Deixis in Narrative. A Cognitive Science Perspective, pp. 19–61. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gibson, A. (2001) ‘ “And the wind wheezing through that organ once in a while”: voice, narrative, film’. New Literary History 32: 639–57. Giordana, M. T., Fava, C. and Zapelli. M. (2001) I cento passi. Milano: Feltrinelli. Goffman, E. (1967) Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books. Goffman, E. (1974) Frame Analysis. New York: Harper & Row. Goffman, E. (1976) ‘Replies and responses’. Language in Society 5: 257–313. Goffman, E. (1979) ‘Footing’. Semiotica 25: 1–29. Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. Oxford: Blackwell. Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Goffman, E. ([1974] 1986) Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 239

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

240

References and Filmography

Goodwin, M. H. and Goodwin, C. (1987) ‘Children’s arguing’, in Philips, S., Steele, S. and Tanz, C. (eds) Language, Gender and Sex in Comparative Perspective, pp. 200–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goodwin, M. H., Goodwin, C. and Yager-Dror, M. (2002) ‘Multi-modality in girls’ game disputes’. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1621–49. Gottman, J. M. (1979) Marital Interaction: Experimental Investigations. New York: Academic Press. Greatbatch, D. (1992) ‘On the management of disagreement between news interviewees’, in Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (eds) Talk at Work, pp. 268–301. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gregoriou, C. (2009) English Literary Stylistics. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Gregory, M. (1967) ‘Aspects of varieties differentiation’. Journal of Linguistics 3: 177–98. Greimas, A. (1966) Sémantique Structurale. Paris: Larousse. Grice, P. (1975) ‘Logic and conversation’ in Cole, P. and Morgan, J. L. (eds) Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3: Speech Acts, pp. 41–58. New York: Academic Press. Grice, P. (1978) ‘Further notes on logic and conversation’, in Cole, P. (ed.) Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 9: Pragmatics, pp. 113–28. New York: Academic Press. Gumperz, J. J. (1982) Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Günsberg, M. (1994) Patriarchal Representations: Gender and Discourse in Pirandello’s Theatre. Oxford: Berg. Günsberg, M. (2005) Italian Cinema. Gender and Genre. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Haiman, J. (1990) ‘Sarcasm as theater’. Cognitive Linguistics 1: 181–205. Hall, S. (1980) ‘Encoding/decoding’, in S. Hall et al. (eds) Culture, Media, Language, pp. 166–76. London: Hutchinson. Hall, S. (1989) ‘Cultural identity and diaspora’, in Rutherford, J. (ed.) Identity: Community, Culture and Difference, pp. 222–37. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978) Language as Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. (1984) ‘Language as a code and language as behaviour: a systemic-functional interpretation of the nature and ontogenesis of dialogue’, in Fawcett, R., Halliday, M. A. K., Lamb, S. and Makkai, A. (eds) The Semiotics of Culture and Language. Vol. 1: Language as Social Semiotic, pp. 3–35. London and Dover: Frances Pinter. Halliday, M. A. K. ([1985] 1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman. Harling Stalker, L. (2009) ‘A tale of two narratives. Ontological and epistemological narratives’. Narrative Inquiry 19 (2): 219–32. Haverkate, H. (1984) Speech Acts, Speakers, and Hearers. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Haverkate, H. (1990) ‘A speech act of irony’. Journal of Pragmatics 14: 77–109. Hayward, S. (2000) Cinema Studies. Key Concepts. London and New York: Routledge. Heritage, J. (1984) Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 240

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

References and Filmography

241

Heritage, J. C. and Watson, D. R. (1979) ‘Formulations as conversational objects’, in Psathas, G. (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 123–62. New York: Irvington. Heritage, J. C. and Watson, D. R. (1988) ‘Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: some instances analysed’. Semiotica 30 (3–4): 245–62. Herman, V. (1995) Dramatic Discourse. Dialogue as Interaction in Plays. London and New York: Routledge. Hobbs, R. (1985) Visual-Verbal Synchrony and Viewer Attitudes: Learning from Television News. Harvard University Dissertation. Abstracts International. Hodge, B. and Kress, G. (1988) Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hoeck, L. H. (1994) ‘Image and word: an exciting relationship’. Interactions [The Bulletin of International Association of Word and Image Studies] 12, April 1994, at http://www.iawis.org (accessed on 19 August 2010). Holland, J., Ramazanoglu, C. and Sharpe, S. (1993) Whimp or Gladiator: Contradictions in Acquiring Masculine Sexuality. London: Tufnel Press. Hunston, S. (1993) ‘Professional conflict. Disagreement in academic discourse’, in Baker, M. Gill, F. and Tognini-Bonelli, E. (eds) Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair, pp. 115–33. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Hunston, S. (2000) ‘Evaluation and the planes of discourse: status and value in persuasive texts’, in Hunston, S. and Thompson, G. (eds) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, pp. 176–207. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hunter, J. (1987) Image and Word. The Interaction of Twentieth-Century Photographs and Texts. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press. Hutchby, I. (1996) Confrontation Talk: Arguments, Asymmetries and Power on Talk Radio. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hymes, D. (1974) ‘Ways of speaking’, in Bauman, R. and Sherzer, J. (eds) Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking, pp. 433–510. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Iedema, R. ([2001a] 2008) ‘Analysing film and television: a social semiotic account of Hospital: an Unhealthy Business’, in van Leeuwen, T. and Jewitt, C. (eds) Handbook of Visual Analysis, pp. 183–204. Los Angeles and London: Sage. Iedema, R. (2001b) Resemiotization. Semiotica 137 (1/4): 23–39. Iedema, R. (2004) ‘Multimodality, resemiotization: extending the analysis of discourse as multi-semiotic practice’. Visual Communication 2 (1): 29–57. Iedema, R. and Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. (2008) ‘Introduction: Identity trouble: critical discourse and contested identities’, in Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Iedema, R. (eds) Identity Trouble: Critical Discourse and Contested Identities, pp. 1–14. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave. Iedema, R., Feez, S. and White, P. (1994) ‘Media Literacy’ (extract). Appraisal Homepage (www.grammatics.comp/appraisal/). Jackson, S. and Jacobs, S. (1977) ‘Argumentation’, in Van Dijk, T. A. (ed.), Discourse as Structure and Process, vol. 1, pp. 208–229. London: Sage. Jacobs, S. (1989) ‘Speech acts and arguments’. Argumentation 3: 23–43. Jakobson, R. (1971) ‘Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb’, in Jakobson, R. Selected Writings II. Word and Language, pp. 130–47. The Hague: Mouton.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 241

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

242

References and Filmography

Jefferson, G. (1972) ‘Side sequences’, in Sudnow, D. (ed.) Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 294–338. New York: Free Press. Jewitt, C. and Oyama, R. ([2001] 2008) ‘Visual meaning: a social semiotic approach’, in van Leeuwen, T. and Jewitt, C. (eds) Handbook of Visual Analysis, pp. 134–56. Los Angeles, CA and London: Sage. Jewitt, C. and Oyama, R. (2004) ‘Visual meaning: a social semiotic approach’, in van Leeuwen, T. and Jewitt, C. (eds) Handbook of Visual Analysis, pp. 134–56. Los Angeles, CA and London: Sage. Johnston, A. (2004) ‘Files, forms, and fonts: mediational means and identity negotiation in immigration interviews’, in Levine, P. and Scollon, R. (eds) Discourse and Technology, pp. 116–27. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press. Jones, K. (1990) ‘Conflict in Japanese conversation’. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan. Jones, S. (1996) ‘Repetition in discourse, realism in dialogue – a study of the linguistic authenticity of Woody Allen’s Husbands and Wives’ (unpublished manuscript). Jorgensen, J. Miller, G. and Sperber, D. (1984) ‘Test of the Mention Theory of Irony’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113 (1): 112–20. Journal of Pragmatics (2002) 34 (Special issue devoted to conflict). Kakava, C. (1993) ‘Conflicting argumentative strategies in the classroom’, in Alatis, J. (ed.), Strategic Interaction and Language Acquisition: Theory, Practice and Research. Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics 1993, pp. 402–20. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press. Kakava, C. (2002) ‘Opposition in modern Greek discourse: cultural and contextual constraints’. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1537–68. Kangasharju, H. (2002) ‘Alignment in disagreement: forming oppositional alliances in committee meetings’. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1447–71. Katriel, T. (1986) Talking Straight: Dugri Speech in Israeli Sabra Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kaufer, D. (1981) ‘Understanding ironic communication’. Journal of Pragmatics 5: 495–510. Kaufmann, B. and Adler, S. (2008) Francis Bacon. London, Tate Britain, 11-September 08–4 January 09. Exhibition booklet. London: Tate. Kirkham, P. and J. Thumin (eds) (1993) Your Tarzan: Masculinity, Movies and Men. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Klemm, M. (2000) Zuschauerkommunikation. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Kochman, T. (1981) Black and White Styles in Conflict. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Kotthoff, H. (1993) ‘Disagreement and concession in disputes: on the context sensitivity of preference structures’. Language in Society 22: 193–216. Kozloff, S. (1988) Invisible Storytellers: Voice-over Narration in American Fiction Film. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Kozloff, S. (2000) Overhearing Film Dialogue, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Krainer, E. (1988) ‘Challenges in a psychotherapy group’, in Axmaker, S., Jaiser, A. and Singmaster, H. (eds) General Session and Parasession on Grammaticalization, pp. 100–13. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistic Society.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 242

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

References and Filmography

243

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. ([1996] 2007) Reading Images. The Grammar of Visual Design. London and New York: Routledge. Krutnik, F. (1999) In a Lonely Street. Film Noir, Genre, Masculinity. London: Routledge. Krzyzanowski, M. and Wodak, R. (2008) ‘Multiple identities, migration and belonging: “Voices of migrants” ’, in Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Iedema, R. (eds) Identity Trouble: Critical Discourse and Contested Identities, pp. 95–119. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kumon-Nakamura, S., Glucksberg, S. and Brown, M. (1995) ‘How about another piece of pie? The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124: 3–21. Labov, W. (1972) ‘The transformation of experience in narrative syntax’, in Labov, W. Language in the Inner City, pp. 354–96. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Labov, W. and Waletzky, J. (1967) ‘Narrative analysis: oral versions of personal experience’, in Helm, J. (ed.) Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, pp. 12–44. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Lachenicht, L. G. (1980) ‘Aggravating language: A study of abusive and insulting language’. International Journal of Human Communication 13 (4): 607–88. Lakoff, R. and Tannen, D. (1984) ‘Conversational strategy and metastrategy in a pragmatic theory: the examples of Scenes from a Marriage’. Semiotica 49 (3/4): 323–46. Landy, M. (2000) Italian Film. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lange, D. http://www.cormac-mccarthy.com/trytrain.html (accessed on 20 March 2010). Laplanche, J. and Pontalis, J. B. (1973) The Language of Psychoanalysis. English translation Nicholson-Smith, D. New York: W. W. Norton. Larouch, M. (1984) ‘De l’expression verbale dans le jeune cinéma expérimental’, in Wees, W. and Dorland, M. (eds) Words and Moving Images. Essays on Verbal and Visual Expression in Film and Television, pp. 53–66. Montréal: Mediatexte. Lash, S. (1988) ‘Discourse or figure? Postmodernism as regime of representation’. Theory, Culture & Society 5 (2): 311–36. Lauerbach, G. (2005) ‘Discourse representation in political interviews: the construction of identities and relations through voicing and ventriloquizing’. Journal of Pragmatics 38: 196–215. Leech, G. (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman. Leech, G. and Short, D. ([1981] 2007) Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. London: Longman. Lein, L. and Brenneis, D. (1978) ‘Children’s disputes in three speech communities’. Language in Society 7: 299–323. Lemke, J. (1995) Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics. London: Taylor and Francis. LeVine, P. and Scollon, R. (eds) (2004) Discourse and Technology. Multimodal Discourse Analysis. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Levinson, S. (1988) ‘Putting linguistics on a proper footing: explorations in Goffman’s concepts of participation’, in Paul, D. and Wootton, A. (eds) Erving Goffman. Exploring the Interaction Order, pp. 161–227. Cambridge: Polity Press.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 243

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

244

References and Filmography

Linell, P., Gustavsson, L. and Juvonen, P. (1988) ‘Interactional dominance in dyadic communication: a presentation of initiative-response analysis’. Linguistics 26: 415–42. Lipson, M. (2008) ‘ “If it wasn’t rolling, it never happened”. The role of visual elements in television news’, in Haarman, L. and Lombardo, L. (eds) Iraq War Television News Reporting, pp. 140–69. London and New York: Continuum. Locher, M. and Bousfield, D. (2008) ‘Introduction: Impoliteness and power in language’, in Bousfield, D. and Locher, M. (eds) Impoliteness in Language Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, pp. 1–13. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Machin, D. (2007) Introduction to Multimodal Analysis. London: Hodder Arnold. Machin, D. and van Leeuwen, T. (2008) ‘Branding the self’, in Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Iedema, R. (eds) Identity Trouble: Critical Discourse and Contested Identities, pp. 43–57. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave. Mamone, M. (1992) ‘La sceneggiatura cinematografica fra teatro e letteratura: la commedia italiana e il “caso” Visconti’, in Nencioni, G. (ed.) Gli Italiani scritti, pp. 53–81. Firenze: Accademia della crusca. Mandala, Susan (2007) Twentieth-Century Drama Dialogue as Ordinary Talk: Speaking between the Lines. Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate. Marcondes de Souza Filho, D. (1985) ‘Dialogue breakdowns’, in Dascal M. (ed.) Dialogue: An Interdisciplinary Approach, pp. 415–26. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Margulies, I. (2003) ‘Exemplary bodies’, in Margulies, I. (ed.) Rites of Realism, pp. 217–44. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press. Martin, J. and White, P. (2005) The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Mast G. (1976) The Comic Mind: Comedy and the Movies. New York: Random House. Mauss, M. ([1925] 1954) The Gift. English translation Cunnison, I. London: Cohen and West. Maynard, D. W. (1985) ‘How children start argument’. Language in Society 14: 1–30. McIntyre, D. (2007) ‘Deixis, cognition and the construction of viewpoint’, in Lambrou, M. and Stockwell, P. (eds) Contemporary Stylistics, pp. 118–30. London: Continuum. McIntyre, D. (2008) ‘Integrating multimodal analysis and the stylistics of drama: a multimodal perspective on Ian McKellen’s Richard III’. Language and Literature 17 (4): 309–34. McLaughlin, M. (1984) Conversation. How Talk Is Organised. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Meinhof, U. (1994) ‘Double talk in news broadcast’, in Graddol, D. and BoydBarrett, O. (eds) Media Texts: Authors and Readers, pp. 212–23. Clevedon: The Open University. Meinhof, U. (2001) ‘Discourse and identity’, in Bettoni, C. et al. (eds) Atti del II congresso di studi dell’Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, pp. 29–45. Perugia: Guerra. Meinhof, U. (2003) ‘Migrating borders: an introduction to European identity construction in process’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 29 (5): 781–96.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 244

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

References and Filmography

245

Mey, J. (1993) Pragmatics. An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell. Micciché, L. ([1980] 1989) Cinema italiano degli anni ‘70. Venezia: Marsilio. Michalczyk, J. (1986) The Italian Political Filmmakers. London: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press. Michel, K. and Valach, L. (1997) ‘Suicide as goal-directed action’. Archives of Suicide Research 3: 213–21. Millar, F. E. and Rogers, L. E. (1976) ‘A relational approach to interpersonal communication’, in Miller, G. (ed.) Explorations in Interpersonal Communication, pp. 87–103. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Mitchell, L. C. (1996) Westerns. Making the Man in Fiction and Film. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Monaco, J. (2000) How to Read a Film: Movies, Media, Multimedia. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Morley, S. (2003) Writing on the Wall. Word and Image in Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson. Mucchi, Gabriele (1954) Realismo o verismo? Cinema Nuovo, 30, March (reproduced in the booklet accompanying the DVD). Muecke, D. C. (1969) The Compass of Irony. London: Methuen. Muecke, D. C. (1970) Irony. London: Methuen. Mulvey, L. (1974) ‘Fear eats the soul’. Spare Rib, no. 30. Mulvey, L. (1977/8) ‘Notes on Sirk and melodrama’. Movie, no. 25. Muñoz, J. E. (1999) Disidentifications. Queers of Color and the Performance of Politics. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Murphey, P. (1978) ‘Sociolinguistics in the movies: A call for research’. Anthropological Linguistics 20: 226–33. Neale, S. ([1980] 1983) Genre. London: British Film Institute. Neale, S. (2000) Genre and Hollywood. London and New York: Routledge. Neale, S. and Krutnik, F. (1990) Popular Film and Television Comedy. London: Routledge. Nencioni, G. (1976) ‘Parlato-parlato, parlato-scritto, parlaro-recitato’, in Nencioni, G. (1983) Di scritto e di parlato. Discorsi linguistici, pp. 126–79. Bologna: Zanichelli. Also in Strumenti critici 29: 1–56. Noguchi, R. R. (1987) ‘The dynamics or rule conflict in English and Japanese conversation’. IRAL 25 (1): 15–24. Norris, S. (2004) ‘Multimodal discourse analysis: a conceptual framework’, in Levine, P. and Scollon, R. (eds) Discourse and Technology, pp. 101–15. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press. O’Halloran, K. (2004) ‘Visual semiosis in film’. in O’Halloran, K. (ed.) Multimodal Discourse Analysis, pp. 109–30. London: Continuum. O’Halloran, K. (2004) Multimodal Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Continuum. Ochs, E. (1997) ‘Narrative’, in van Dijk, T. A. (ed.) Discourse as Structure and Process, vol. 1, pp. 185–207. London: Sage. Oumano, E. (ed.) (1985) Film Forum: Thirty-Five Top Filmmakers Discuss Their Craft. New York: St Martin’s Press. Paltridge, B. (2006) Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum. Partington, A. (2006) The Linguistics of Laughter: A Corpus-Assisted Study of Laughter Talk. London: Routledge.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 245

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

246

References and Filmography

Pavesi, M. (2005) La traduzione filmica. Aspetti del parlato doppiato dall’inglese all’italiano. Roma: Carocci. Piazza, R. (2004) ‘Features of the authorial voice-over in La terra trema’. The Italinist 24: 47–62. Piazza, R. (2006) ‘The representation of conflict in the discourse of Italian melodrama’. Journal of Pragmatics 38: 2087–104. Piazza, R. (2007) ‘Dialogue and genre in Italian Cinema after the War. A study of the representation of verbal Interaction in films’. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Sussex. Piazza, R. (2008a) ‘News is reporting what was said: techniques and patterns of attribution’, in Haarman, L. and Lombardo, L. (eds) Evaluation and Stance in War News, pp. 170–94. London and New York: Continuum. Piazza, R. (2008b) ‘They are what they talk: the verbal representation of children and adolescents in Italian cinema’. Spunti e ricerche 23: 84–103. Piazza, R. (2010) ‘Voice-over and self-narrative in film: a multimodal analysis of Antonioni’s When Love Fails (Tentato Suicidio)’. Language and Literature 19 (2): 1–22. Piazza, R. and Haarman, L. (forthcoming) ‘Toward a definition and classification of human interest narratives in television war reporting’. Journal of Pragmatics. Polanyi, L., (1982) ‘Literary complexity in everyday storytelling’. In Tannen, D. (ed.) Spoken and Written Language, pp. 155–70. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Polanyi, L. (1985) ‘Conversational storytelling’, in van Dijk, T. A. (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Vol. 3: Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 183–202. London: Academic Press. Pomerantz, A. (1975) ‘Second assessment: a study of some features of agreement/disagreement’. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, School of Social Science, University of California at Irvine. Pomerantz, A. (1984) ‘Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes’, in Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Poole, J. G. (1994) ‘Towards a descriptive and explanatory stylistic analysis of thought presentation in drama, with special reference to Debbie Isitt’s Femme Fatale’. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Lancaster University. Potter, C. ([1990] 2001) Screen Language. From Film-Writing to Film-Making. London: Methuen. Pratt, M. L. (1977) Toward a Speech Act Theory of Literary Discourse. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Propp, V. (1968) Morphology of the Russian Folktale. Austin, TX: University of Texas. Pye, D. (1996a) ‘Introduction. Criticism and the Western’, in Cameron, I. and Pye, D. (eds) The Movie Book of the Western, pp. 9–21. London: Studio Vista. Pye, D. (1996b) ‘Genre and history. Fort Apache and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance’, in Cameron, I. and Pye, D. (eds) The Movie Book of the Western, pp. 111–22. London: Studio Vista. Quaglio, P. (2009) Television Dialogue: The Sitcom Friends vs Natural Conversation. Amsterdam/Phidadelphia: John Benjamins. Quargnolo, M. (1972) Dove va il cinema italiano. Milano: Pan.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 246

9/24/2010 2:38:24 PM

References and Filmography

247

Raffaelli, S. (1992) La lingua filmata. Didascalie e dialoghi nel cinema italiano. Firenze: Le Lettere. Raffaelli, S. (1996) ‘Il cinema in cerca della lingua. Vent’anni di parlato filmico in Italia (1945–1965)’, in Brunetta, G. P. (ed.) Identità italiana e identità europea nel cinema italiano dal 1945 al miracolo economico, pp. 309–35. Torino: Fondazione Agnelli. Rogers, L. E. and Millar, F. (1988) ‘Relational communication’, in Duck, S. W. (ed.) Handbook of Personal Relationships, pp. 289–305. Chichester/New York/ Brisbane/Toronto/Singapore: Wiley. Rohdie, S. (1990) Antonioni. London: British Film Institute. Rossi, F. (1999) Le parole dello schermo. Analisi linguistica del parlato di sei film dal 1948 al 1957. Roma: Bulzoni. Rossi, F. (2006) Il linguaggio cinematografico. Roma: Aracne. Ruffin, V. and D’Agostino, P. (1997) Dialoghi di regime. Rome: Bulzoni. Rumelhart, D.E. (1975) ‘Notes on a schema for stories’, in Bobrow, D. G. and Collins, A. (eds) Representation and Understanding, pp. 211–36. New York: Academic Press. Ryall, T. (1975) ‘Teaching through genre’, Screen Education 17: 27–33. Sacks, H. (1973a) ‘On some puns with some imitations’, in Shuy, R. W. (ed.) Report of the Twenty-third Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies, pp. 135–44. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Sacks, H. (1973b) ‘On the preference for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation’, in Button, G. and Lee, J. R. E. (eds) Talk and Social Organization, pp. 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Said, E. ([1978] 2003) Orientalism. Harmondsworth and New York: Vintage. Schatz, T. (1981) Hollywood Genres. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill. Schegloff, E. A. (1979) ‘The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation’, in Givon, T. (ed.) Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 12: Discourse and Syntax, pp. 261–88. New York: Academic Press. Schegloff, E. and Sacks, H. (1973) ‘Opening up closings’. Semiotica 7/8: 290–327. Schegloff, E., Jefferson, G. and Sacks, K. (1977) ‘The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation’. Language 53: 361–82. Schiffrin, D. (1984) ‘Jewish argument as sociability’. Language in Society 13: 311–35. Schiffrin, D. (1985) ‘Everyday argument: the organization of diversity in talk’, in van Dijk, T.A. (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Volume 3: Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 35–46. London: Academic Press. Schiffrin, D. (1997) ‘The transformation of experience, identity, and context’, in Guy, C., Schffrin, D. and Baugh, J. (eds) Towards a Social Science of Language: Papers in Honour of William Labov, pp. 41–55. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Scollon, R. (1994) ‘As a matter of fact: the changing ideology of authorship and responsibility in discourse’. World Englishes 13 (1): 33–46. Scollon, R. and LeVine, P. (2004) ‘Multimodal discourse analysis as the confluence of discourse and technology’, in LeVine, P. and Scollon, R. (eds) Discourse and Technology. Multimodal Discourse Analysis, pp. 1–6. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 247

9/24/2010 2:38:25 PM

248

References and Filmography

Scott, S. (1998) Patterns of Language Use in Adult Face-to-Face Disagreements. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University Dissertation. Searle, J. (1969) Speech Acts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Searle, J. (1991) ‘Metaphor’, in Davis, S. (ed.) Pragmatics: A Reader, pp. 519–39. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Seidler, V. (1989) Rediscovering Masculinity: Reason, Language and Sexuality. London: Routledge. Semino, E. and Short, M. (2004) Corpus Stylistics. Speech, Writing and Thought Presentation in a Corpus of English Writing. London: Routledge. Sheldon, A. (1992) ‘Locating power’, in Hall, K., Bucholtz, M. and Moonwoman, B. (eds) Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference, pp. 529–39. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Sheldon, A. (1993) ‘Saying it with a smile: girls’ conflict talk as double-voice discourse’, in Eid, M. and Iverson, G. (eds) Principles and Prediction. The Analysis of Natural Language, pp. 215–31. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Shepard, S. (1984) Fool for Love. New York: Dramatists Play Service. Short, M. (2007) ‘How to make a drama out of a speech act: the speech act of apology in the film A Fish Called Wanda’, in Hoover, D. L. and Latig, S. (eds) Stylistics: Retrospect and Prospect. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Simmons, L. (2008) ‘The performance of reality: Antonioni’s Tentato suicidio’. Spunti e ricerche 23: 71–83. Simon, J. (1977–78) The word on film. The Hudson Review 30 (4): 501–21. Simpson, P. (1993) Language, Ideology and Point of View. London and New York: Routledge. Sinclair, J. (1988) ‘Mirror for a text’. Journal of English and Foreign Languages 1: 15–44. Small, P. (1998) ‘Il ladro di bambini: recalling the image’. Italian Studies LIII: 150–66. Snyder, S. (1980) ‘The Decameron: the sexual frame’, in Snyder, S. Pier Paolo Pasolini. Boston, MA: Twayne. Soldini, S. and Leondeff, D. (2000) Pane e tulipani. Venezia: Marsilio. Sontag, S. (1977) ‘Theater and Film’, in Harrington, J. (ed.) Film and/as Literature, pp. 76–92. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Sorlin, P. (1996) Italian National Cinema 1896–1996. London and New York: Routledge. Sperber, D. (1984) ‘Verbal irony: pretense or echoic mention?’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113 (1): 130–6. Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1981) ‘Irony and the use-mention distinction’, in Davis, S. (ed.) Pragmatics, pp. 550–664. New York: Oxford University Press. Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. ([1986] 1995) Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (2002) ‘Pragmatics, modularity and mind-reading’. Mind & Language 17: 3–23. Stokes, R. and Hewitt, J. (1976) ‘Aligning actions’. American Sociological Review 41: 838–49.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 248

9/24/2010 2:38:25 PM

References and Filmography

249

Swann, J., Deumert, A., Lillis, T. and Mesthrie, R. (2004) A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Tajfel, H. (1981) Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tannen, D. (1989) Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tannen, D. and Lakoff, R. (1994) ‘Conversational strategy and metastrategy in a pragmatic theory: the example of scenes from a marriage’, in Tannen, D. (ed.) Gender and Discourse, pp. 137–73. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tavris, C. (1992) Mismeasure of Woman, Berkeley, CA: Simon & Schuster. Taylor, L. and Willis, A. (1999) Media Studies. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell. Telles Ribeiro, B. (1996) ‘Conflict talk in a psychiatric discharge interview’, in Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Coulthard, M. (eds) Texts and Practices. Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, pp. 179–93. London and New York: Routledge. Terkourafi, M. (2001) Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A Frame-based Approach. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Terkourafi, M. (2005) ‘Beyond the micro-level in politeness research’. Journal of Politeness Research 1 (2): 237–62. Thibault, P. (1997) Re-reading Saussure: The Dynamics of Signs in Social Life. London: Routledge. Thomas, A. (2000) ‘Textual construction of children’s online identities’. CyberPsychology and Behaviour. Special issue: ‘Case Studies in Cyberspace’ 3: 665–72. Thomas, A. (2004) ‘Digital literacies of the cybergirls’. E-learning 1: 358–82. Thomas, J. (1985) ‘The language of power. Towards a dynamic pragmatics’. Journal of Pragmatics 9: 765–83. Thompson, G. (1996) ‘Voices in the text: discourse perspectives on language reports’. Applied Linguistics 17 (4) December: 501–30. Threadgold, T. (2005) ‘Performing theories of narrative: theorising narrative performance’, in Thornborrow, J. and Coates, J. (eds) The Sociolinguistics of Narrative, pp. 261–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Todorov, T. (1977) The Poetics of Prose. Oxford: Blackwell. Toolan, M. ([1989] 2003) ‘Analysing conversation in fiction: an example from Joyce’s Portrait’, in Carter, R. and Simpson, P. (eds) Language, Discourse and Literature. An Introduction Reader in Discourse Stylistics, pp. 194–211. London: Routledge. Tsakona, V. (2009) ‘Language and image interaction in cartoons: towards a multimodal theory of humour’. Journal of Pragmatics 41 (6): 1171–88. Utsumi, A. (2000) ‘Verbal irony as implicit display of ironic environment: distinguishing iconic utterances from nonirony’. Journal of Pragmatics 32 (12): 1777–1806. Utsumi, A. (2007) Verbal irony as implicit display of ironic environment: distinguishing ironic utterances from nonirony’, in Gibbs, R. W. and Colston, H. L. (eds), Irony in Language and Thought: A Cognitive Science Reader, pp. 499–529. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. van Eemeren, F. and Grootendorst, R. (1984) Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. Dordrecht: Foris.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 249

9/24/2010 2:38:25 PM

250

References and Filmography

van Leeuwen, T. (2001) ‘What is authenticity?’ Discourse Studies, 3(4), 392–397. van Leeuwen, T. ([2001] 2008) ‘Semiotics and iconography’, in van Leeuwen, T. and Jewitt, C. (eds) Handbook of Visual Analysis, pp. 92–118. Los Angeles, CA and London: Sage. van Leeuwen, T. (2004) ‘Ten reasons why linguists should pay attention top visual communication’, in LeVine, P. and Scollon, R. (eds) Discourse and Technology. Multimodal Discourse Analysis, pp. 7–19. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Viganò, A. (1995) Storia del cinema. Commedia italiana in cento film. Genova: Le Mani. Visconti. L. ([1948] 1977) La terra trema. Trascrizione di Ungari, E. con la collaborazione di Battistini, C. e Cavallaro, G. B. Bologna: Nuova Universale Cappelli. Wagstaff, C. (1996) ‘Cinema’, in Forgacs, D. and Lumley, R. (eds) Italian Cultural Studies. An Introduction, pp. 216–32. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Walton, D. (1989) Question-Reply Argumentation. New York: Greenwood Press. Walton, D. (1991) ‘Critical faults and fallacies of questioning’. Journal of Pragmatics 15: 337–66. Watzlawick, P., Beavin Bavelas, J. and Jackson, D. (1968) ‘A communicative approach to the play “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” ’, in Watzlawick, P., Beavin Bavelas, J. and Jackson, D. Pragmatics of Human Communication, pp. 149–86. London: Faber and Faber. Wees, W. (1984) ‘Words and moving images: an introduction’, in Wees, W. and Dorland, M. (eds) Words and Moving Images. Essays on Verbal and Visual Expression in Film and Television, pp. 9–17. Montréal: Mediatexte. Wees, W. and Dorland, M. (eds) (1984) Words and Moving Images. Essays on Verbal and Visual Expression in Film and Television. Montréal: Mediatexte. West, C. and Zimmerman, D. (1977) ‘Women’s place in everyday talk: reflections on parent-child interaction’. Social Problems 24: 521–9. White, Hayden (1980) ‘The value of narrativity in the representation of reality’. Narrative Inquiry 7 (1): 5–27. White, P. (2002a) ‘Appraisal: the language of attitudinal evaluation and intersubjective stance’. Appraisal website. www.grammatics.com/appraisal White, P. (2002b) ‘Appraisal’, in Vershueren, J. Östman, J-O., Blommaert, J, and Bulcaen, C. (eds) Handbook of Pragmatics, pp. 1–27. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. White, P. (2003) ‘Beyond modality and hedging: a dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance’. Text 23 (2): 259–84. Wiener, M. and Mehrabian, A.(1968) Language within Language: Immediacy, a Channel in Verbal Communication. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Willemen, P. (1983) ‘Cinematic discourse: the problem of inner speech’, in Heath, S. and Mellencamp, P. (eds) Cinema and Language, pp. 141–67. Los Angeles, CA: The American Film Institute. Wilson, D. and Sperber, D. (1992) ‘On verbal irony’. Lingua 87: 53–76. Wodak, R. (2009) The Discourse of Politics in Action. Houndmills, Basingtstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 250

9/24/2010 2:38:25 PM

References and Filmography

251

Wood, M. (2005) Italian Cinema. Oxford and New York: Berg. Wright, W. (1975) Sixguns and Society. A Structural Study of the Western. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Filmography Amelio, G. (1982) Colpire al cuore (A Blow to the Heart) Amelio, G. (1988) Mery per sempre (Forever Mary) Amelio, G. (1992) Il ladro di bambini (The Stolen Children) Antonioni, M. (1953) Tentato suicidio (When Love Fails) Archibugi, F. (1988) Mignon è partita (Mignon Has Left) Bellocchio, M.(1966) I pugni in tasca (Fists in the Pocket) Bertolucci, B. (1972) Ultimo tango a Parigi (Last Tango in Paris) Calopresti, M. (1998) La parola amore esiste (Notes of Love) Camerini, M. (1932) Gli uomini, che mascalzoni . . . (What Rascals Men Are!) Cavani, L. (1974) Portiere di notte (Night Porter) Comencini,L. (1954) Pane, amore e fantasia (Bread, Love and Dreams) De Sica, V. (1964) Matrimonio all’Italiana (Marriage Italian Style) Fontaine, A. (2003) Nathalie Ford, J. (1962) The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance Germi, P. (1961) Divorzio all’italiana (Divorce Italian Style) Germi, P. (1962) Sedotta e abbandonata (Seduced and Abandoned) Gilbert, L. (1989) Shirley Valentine Giordana, M. T. (2005) Quando sei nato non ti puoi più nascondere (Once You Are Born You Can No Longer Hide) Giordana, M. T., Fava, C. and Zapelli, M. (2001) I cento passi Godard, J. L. (2004) Notre Musique Hathaway, H. (1965) The Sons of Katie Elder Hawks, H. (1967) El Dorado Hathaway, H. (1969) True Grit Leone, S. (1964) Per un pugno di dollari (For a Fistful of Dollars) Leone, S. (1965) Per qualche dollaro in più (For a Few Dollars More) Leone, S. (1966) Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo (The Good, the Bad, the Ugly) Leone, S. (1968) C’era una volta il West (Once Upon a Time in the West) Leone, S. (1971) Giù la testa (Duck, You Sucker) Leone, S. (1972) Il mio nome è nessuno (My Name is Nobody) Mazzacurati, C. (1996) Vesna va veloce (Vesna Goes Fast) Melliti, M. (2007) Io, l’altro (Me, the Other) Monicelli, M. (1986) Speriamo che sia femmina (Let’s Hope It’s a Girl) Pasolini, P. P. (1974) Il fiore delle mille e una notte (Arabian Nights) Placido, M. (1990) Pummarò (1990) Pompucci, L. (1993) Mille bolle blu (Le mille bolle blu) Risi, D. (1962) Il sorpasso (The Easy Life) Rosi, F. (1963) Le mani sulla città (Hands over the City) Scola, E. (1977) Una giornata particolare (A Special Day)

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 251

9/24/2010 2:38:25 PM

252

References and Filmography

Scola, E. (1989) Che ora è?(What Time Is It?) Soldini, S. and Leondeff, D. (2000) Pane e tulipani (Bread and Tulips) Visconti, L. (1948) La terra trema (The Earth Trembles) Wertmüller, L. (1974) Travolti da un insolito destino in un azzurro mare d’agosto (Swept Away)

RPiazza_Refs_Final.indd 252

9/24/2010 2:38:25 PM

Index

Page numbers in italics in the index refer to tables or figures. Abercrombie, D. 13 Action-Opposition sequences 77 adjacency pairs 60, 66, 69, 88, 91, 99 Adler, S. 170 Aimeri, L. 10, 15, 16, 17, 108 Allen, W. 14 Altman, R. 16, 17 Alves, F. 199 Amelio, G. 89, 92, 94, 230n14 American Westerns 107, 109–10, 119, 143, 221 irony and 120, 127 Amore in città (Love in the City) 150, 156 Anderson, L. 126 Andrew, D. 16 anticipation 34–7 anti-dialogue bias 10 Antonioni, M. 20, 21, 57, 59, 64, 149, 233n6 archetypal confrontation 110 Archibugi, F. 18, 39, 218 argument 47–8 Arnheim, R. 29, 54 associative conflict 87 Attardo, S. 115, 127, 128 audience 15, 19, 27, 35, 80, 220, 223 anticipation role of 37 conflictuality role and 42 double 117–18 expectations 16 hypothetical 74 inexistent 74 involvement of 22, 31, 47, 63, 118 ironic message and 119, 133–6, 147 non-participant roles of 32

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 253

post-hoc commentary role of 39 screen discourse and 33 smile of 67 see also spectators audiovisual cinema 9–10 Austin, J. 188 auteur approach 16, 17, 18, 21, 107, 150 authenticity 10, 12, 13–14, 109, 217, 233n6 averral and attribution, distinction between 201 backgrounded conflict 58 Bakhtin, M. M. 61, 117, 232n8 Bargiela-Chiappini, F. 51 Barriales-Bouche, S. 184 Barthes, R. 5, 150, 228n1 Bateson, G. 187, 197 Baynham, M. 182, 186, 187, 196 Bazin, A. 228n12 Bednarek, M. 12, 110, 155, 202, 217 Bell, P. 5 Bennison, N. 19 Ben-Shaul, N. 7 Benwell, B. 19, 213 Bernink, M. 19, 57, 68 Bertolucci, M. 35 Betrayal of Images, The 40 Bhabha, H. 185 Biber, D. 202 Blommaert, J. 193, 213 Blum-Kulka, S. 23, 50, 52, 66, 72, 79, 84, 87 Book of Kells 43

9/24/2010 2:37:47 PM

254 Bordwell, D. 1, 7, 11, 15, 46, 152, 157, 170 Bousfield, D. 47 Bova, R. 184 Brenneis, D. 49, 77 Brown, P. 51, 63, 69, 77, 115 Brown, R. 49, 74 Brunetta, G. P. 18 Brunette, P. 151 Bubel, C. 12, 33, 42, 133, 134, 223 Burton, D. 14, 215, 223 C’era una volta il West – (Once Upon a Time in the West) 3, 108 Cahiers du cinema 228n12 Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. 186 Caldas-Coulthard, R. 155, 199 Caldwell, L. 233n9 Calopresti, M. 8 Calsamiglia, H. 155 Camerini, M. 1 Cameron, D. 213 Camras, L. A. 49 Cavani, L. 30 Chafe, W. 187 Chatman, S. 153 Che ora è? (What Time Is It?) 100–2 Chilton, P. 218 Cinema Nuovo 156 cinema veritè (mimetic film) 21 Clark, H. 33, 34, 42, 117 Clift, R. 114, 116, 117, 118 Coates, J. 6, 213, 231n6 coda 233n8 Colston, H. 114, 117, 118, 127, 129, 130, 131, 133, 136 comedy 23, 56, 68, 99 direct and symmetrical confrontation in 59–60, 66 films 68–9 genre theory 67 romantic 17 verbal confrontation in Italian 69–85 Comencini, C. 18 Comencini, L. 17

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 254

Index commedia all’italiana (Italian-style comedy) 17, 56, 67 competitive symmetry 84 conflict representation, in film 45 data 56–8 and dialogue analysis 47–52 methodology 58–63 visual dimension 52–6 see also individual entries conflict strategies, in melodrama 89–98 question as replies 94–8 reply for answer 89–92 silence as answer 92–4 conflictuality 39–42 confrontational discourse 88 confrontational dysfluency 59, 87 confrontational moves 66 confrontational talk, representation of 6, 47–52 studies 49–52 see also verbal confrontation Connolly, W. 213 contextual constraints and conflict 51 conversational moves model 58 Cook, P. 19, 57, 68 cooperative conflict 60 Cooperative Principle 115, 116, 131, 218 cooperative questioning 88 Corsaro, W. 50 Cottino-Jones, M. 150, 182, 232n2 Coyne, M. 109, 113 Cresti, E. 11, 13, 228n10 Crossfire 51 Culpeper, J. 47, 50, 51, 52, 63, 65, 70, 73, 99, 114, 190, 210, 219, 227n5 D’Agostino, P. 12 dashing-sounding language, in comedy 80–1 de-differentiation 186 De Fina, A. 74, 171, 184, 185, 186, 187 deictics 159 proximal 171 spatial 173

9/24/2010 2:37:47 PM

Index deictic shift theory 153, 154 deixis 153 De Sica, Vittorio 17 dialogic contraction 61, 63, 112, 116, 119, 122, 126 dialogic expansion 61, 63, 112, 116, 119, 122 dialogism, of Bakhtin 117 dialogue, relevance in film context 7–15 see also individual entries dichotomy 30 Direct discourse 155, 175 direct symmetrical confrontation 59–60, 63, 66, 69 disagreement 6, 23, 48, 59, 60, 71, 77, 83, 99 contrasting forms of 51 cultural contexts and 50 dissociative 86 grounded 85 ill-fitted question-answer pairs and 95 importance of 51 solidarity and 79 ungrounded 84–5 verbal 66, 223 disclosure, of film 33 discourse, of identity 184–8 Discourse Studies 217 disengagement 58, 60, 64 of dramatic talk see conflict strategies, in melodrama disharmony 66–7, 70, 80 interactional 77, 94 social 65 displacement 5, 30 dissociative disagreement 86 dissociative dysfluency 101 Divorzio all’italiana (Divorce Italian Style) 67, 79 Dorland, M. 28 double audience 117, 118 Douchet, J. 7 Downes, W. 19 dramatic irony 117

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 255

255

Duchan, J. 153 Duras, M. 28 echoic mention see echoic repetition echoic repetition 116, 117 ironic utterances and 120–9 Eder, D. 49 Eggins, S. 58, 59, 60, 66, 87, 88, 230n11 El Dorado 109, 113, 127, 130–1, 141–3, 142 embeddedness 33 emotional closeness, by physical proximity 198 emotional distance, in physical proximity 207 everyday storytelling 174 extra-diegetic speech 6 Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) 72–3, 75, 114 Fairclough, N. 155, 201 fallacy of questioning 88–9 Fassinder, R. W. 18 Faulkner, C. 10 Fele, G. 51, 66, 76 female auteurs 18 Ferrero, C. 155 fictional discourse 13–14 Fillmore, C. J. 187 Film Art 11 film–spectator interaction 7 Fink, G. 154 Flick, U. 5, 225 Fludernik, M. 154 Fontaine, A. 30 Fool for Love 77 Forceville, C. 53, 55 Ford, J. 18, 21, 107, 109, 112, 143, 145 foregrounded conflict 58, 60 format tying 69 Foucault, M. 40, 185, 188 Fowler, R. 153 frames 54 Frasca, G. 10, 15, 16, 17, 108

9/24/2010 2:37:48 PM

256 Frayling, C. 107, 108, 148, 231nn3, 4 functional model of conflict 62 Galbraith, M. 153 genre 15–19, 220 and comedy 67 Italian 17–19 Germi, P. 17, 34, 79 Gerrig, R. 117 Gibbs, R. 114, 117, 129, 133, 136 Gibson, A. 233n7 Gilbert, L. 99 Gilman, A. 49, 74 Giordana, M. T. 184, 230n15 Giù la testa (Duck, You Sucker) 106, 108, 232n14 Gli uomini, che mascalzoni (What Rascals Men Are!) 1 Godard, J. -L. 184, 228n12 Goffman, E. 13, 31, 33, 51, 74, 105, 106, 116, 126, 127, 133, 146, 151, 187, 197, 202 Goodwin, C. 49, 69 Goodwin, M. H. 49, 69 Gottman, J. M. 49 Greatbatch, D. 51 Great Bear, The 43 Gregoriou, C. 225 Gregory, M. 14 Greimas, A. 22 Grice, P. 114, 115, 120, 131, 175, 218 Grootendorst, R. 88 grounded disagreement 85 Gumperz, J. J. 187, 197 Günsberg, M. 12, 15, 16, 18, 21, 105, 107, 110, 145 Haarman, L. 154 Haiman, J. 115, 117, 124 Hall, S. 108, 185 Halliday, M. A. K. 13, 55, 58, 69, 176, 229n4 (Ch. 4) Handke, P. 70 harmony, playing in 207 Hasan, R. 69, 176, 229n4 (Ch. 4) Hathaway, H. 21, 107, 109, 144 Haverkate, H. 115, 121

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 256

Index Hawks, H. 18, 21, 107, 109, 113, 127, 130 Hayward, S. 15, 67 Heritage, J. 50, 200 Herman, V. 12, 14, 22, 47, 227n9 heteroglossia 61, 64, 116 heterotropia 188 Hewitt, J. 76, 195 Hitler, un film d’Allemagne 28 Hobbs, R. 29 Hodge, B. 4 Hoeck, L. H. 43 Holland, J. 6, 148 Hunston, S. 51, 155, 201 Hunter, J. 28, 229n8 Husbands and Wives 14 Hutchby, I. 47, 48, 70, 76, 77, 78, 229n4 (Ch. 4) Hymes, D. 187, 197 I cento passi (One Hundred Steps) 68, 90, 92 iconography, film 16 identity, thematic approach of 19–20 identity shifting, conflict of 183 discourse of identity 184–8 performativity and identities 188–212 Iedema, R. 4, 5, 7, 46, 110, 186, 189, 225 Il buono, il brutto e il cattivo (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly) 121–2, 132, 134–6, 140 Il fiore delle mille e una notte (Arabian Nights) 37 Il ladro di bambini (The Stolen Children) 68, 89, 94, 97 Il sorpasso (The Easy Life) 1 impoliteness 47, 51–2, 63, 72, 114, 120 incongruity, ironic 124, 129, 133 indirect asymmetrical confrontation 59, 60, 61 Indirect Discourse 155, 175, 201 insincerity and irony 115, 129–30 interactional disharmony 77, 94 interactional dominance 59 interactional moves model 60

9/24/2010 2:37:48 PM

Index interactive participants 56, 152 interlocutors 13, 19, 35, 36, 37, 59, 60, 85, 117, 137 inter-media 43 interpersonal tension 47 Interpretative Summary 155 interviewer-orchestrated narratives 158–70 intra-diegetic verbal interaction 6 Io, l’altro (Me, the Other) 21, 57, 184, 185–6, 187, 222 from plurality to duality in 188–212 I pugni in tasca (Fists in the Pocket) 68, 229n3 (Ch.4) irony 61, 107, 110, 147, 221 audience involvement in construal of 133–6 echoic repetition model and 120–9 as expression of verbal conflict in Westerns 110–14 features of 231n7 linguistic scholarship on 114–19 multimodality and 136–45 as pragmatic sincerity 129–33 irreverence 67 Italian Western see spaghetti Western Jackson, S. 66 Jacobs, S. 66, 88 Jakobson, R. 155 Jefferson, G. 69 Jewitt, C. 4, 5, 6, 54, 55, 148 Johnston, A. 53 Jones, K. 50 Jones, S. 14 Jorgensen, J. 116, 117 Kakava, C. 48, 50, 51, 66, 71 Kanafani, G. 184 Kangasharju, H. 83 Katriel, T. 50 Kaufer, D. 115 Kaufmann, B. 170 keying 105–6, 110, 112, 119, 127, 146 Kirkham, P. 6, 148 Klemm, M. 133 Kochman, T. 49

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 257

257

Kotthoff, H. 50, 99, 229n2 (Ch.4) Kozloff, S. 6, 9, 10, 11–12, 15, 29, 43, 85, 119, 154, 156, 157, 158, 233n7 Krainer, E. 51 Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) 216 Kress, G. 4, 13, 46, 53, 54, 55, 56, 79, 107, 137, 152, 154, 157, 159, 161, 173, 179, 198 Krutnik 145 Krutnik, F. 67 Krzyzanowski, M. 187, 199 Kumon-Nakamura, S. 129 Labov, W. 49, 233n8 Lachenicht, L. G. 190 La Jetée 28 Lakoff, R. 64, 223 Landy, M. 145, 146, 232n14 Lange, D. 40 Language and Literature 232n1 La parola amore esiste (Notes of Love) 8 Laplanche, J. 189 Larouch, M. 28 Lash, S. 186 La terra trema (The Earth Trembles) 33 Lauerbach, G. 155 Leech, G. 51, 52, 114, 155 Lein, L. 49, 77 Le mani sulla città (Hands over the City) 1 Lemke, J. 4 Leondeff, D. 99 Leone, S. 3, 18, 21, 23, 57, 106, 107, 116, 118, 119, 127, 129, 141, 147, 148, 231n1 Levine, P. 53, 223 Levinson, S. 31, 41, 51, 63, 69, 77, 115, 126, 157 limited agency 168, 170 Linell, P. 59, 150, 158, 170 Lipson, M. 29, 229n2 (Ch.3) loaded questions 88 Locher, M. 47 Ludwig, requiem pour un roi vierge 28 Machin, D. 53, 54, 137, 185 macropragmatics 3, 4 Magritte, R. 40

9/24/2010 2:37:48 PM

258

Index

Mamone, M. 13, 228n11 Mandala, S. 12, 45, 215 Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, The 109, 112–13, 143–4, 145 Marcondes, D. 87 Margulies, I. 156, 157, 164 marked disclosure 42 Martin, J. 61 masculinity 110–11, 120 of cowboys 119 parodic 145 positive 121, 141 righteous 127 Mast, G. 67 Matrimonio all’Italiana (Marriage Italian Style) 17 Mauss, M. 87 Maynard, D. W. 70, 76, 229n4 (Ch. 4) Mazzacurati, C. 184 McIntyre, D. 11, 53, 55, 153, 157, 163, 171, 193 McKellen, I. 53, 154 McLaughlin, M. 60, 76, 195, 230n12 meaning potential 54 Mehrabian, A. 49 Meinhof, U. 29, 30, 185, 229n2 (Ch.3) Melliti, M. 20, 21, 57, 149, 150, 183–4 melodrama 17–18, 23, 56, 57, 68, 99 conflict talk analysis in 85–98 disharmony in 66–7 films 68–9 Mery per sempre (Forever Mary) 68, 93, 103 Merzer, G. 14 Mey, J. 2, 3, 4, 63, 105 Micciché, L. 229n5 (Ch 4), 230nn5, 8 Michalczyk, J. 229n3 (Ch. 4) Michel, K. 181 micropragmatics 3, 4 Mignon è partita (Mignon Has Left) 39, 218 Millar, F. E. 84, 150, 158, 170 Mille bolle blu 67, 81, 83 mise-en-scène 2, 5, 22, 24, 46, 54, 56, 86, 110, 122, 137, 150, 152, 156, 179, 195, 198, 214, 224 Mitchell, L. C. 105, 109, 120, 121, 126, 145, 146

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 258

mixed-media 43 Monaco, J. How to Read a Film 11 Monicelli, M. 230n9 moral binary oppositions 108 Morley, S. 28, 43 Mucchi, G. 156 Muecke, D. C. 231n7 multi-medial narrative 179 multi-medial relationship 43 multimodality 13, 22, 24, 107 irony and 136–45 soft approach to analysis of 52–3 Mulvey, L. 16, 18 Muñoz, J. E. 185, 189, 213, 214 Murphey, P. 14, 58, 223 narrative agency, tellers, with 170–81 narrative autonomy 149, 161, 174 narratives 22 Nathalie 30 Neale, S. 15, 16, 20, 67, 68 Nencioni, G. 14 Noguchi, R. R. 49 non-participation roles 31–2 non-transactional representation 55 norm-subversion 67 Norris, S. 53 Notre Musique 184 Ochs, E. 222 October 28 O’Halloran, K. 15, 53, 54, 137 Olshtain, E. 50 oppositional alliances and comedy 83 oppositional argument 48 oppositional moves 76–7 other-repair 77, 128 Oumano, E. 46 overhearers 33, 133 non-participant role of 32 overlap 30, 77 Oyama, R. 4, 5, 6, 54, 55, 148 Paltridge, B. 212 Pane, amore e fantasia (Bread, Love and Dreams) 17

9/24/2010 2:37:48 PM

Index Pane e tulipani (Bread and Tulips) 67, 99 participation framework 31 Partington, A. 120 Pasolini, P. P. 37, 39 Patterson, S. 43 Pavesi, M. 11, 14, 58 Peckinpah, S. 109 performativity and identities 188 monolithic identity, switch to 199–212 multiple identities in harmony 189–99 Per qualche dollaro in più (For a Few Dollars More) 108, 111–12, 126–7, 137–8, 232n15 Per un pugno di dollari (A Fistful of Dollars) 108, 123–5, 138–9, 140 Piazza, R. 11, 33, 154, 155, 218 Pirandello, L. Six Characters in Search of an Author 12 Placido, M. 184 Polanyi, L. 155, 180 politeness 52 Pomerantz, A. 50, 77 Pompucci, L. 81 Pontalis, J. B. 189 Poole, J. G. 155 Portiere di notte (Night Porter) 30 post-hoc commentary 37–9, 83, 167 Potter, C. 7, 8, 13, 108, 110, 227n1 pragmatic insincerity 129–30 pragmatics 2 pragmatic sincerity 129–33 Pratt, M. L. 13 Presents 28 pretense and irony 117–18 production roles 31 pronominal use 74 Propp, V. 22 Pummarò 184 Pye, D. 109, 112 Quaglio, P. 12, 217 Quando sei nato non ti puoi più nascondere (Once You Are Born You Can No Longer Hide) 184 Quargnolo, M. 228n13

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 259

259

Raffaelli, S. 9, 10–11, 12, 227n8 real-life discourse and fictional dialogue 13–14 rebutting, of turns 72 reception roles 31 Relevance Theory 116 repair procedures, in comedy 76–7, 84 reported discourse 155, 174, 201 representation 216 represented participants 56, 152 resemiotization 186 Returning to Haifa 184 rhetorical argument 47–8 Ribeiro, T. 51 Richard III 53, 154 Ride across Lake Constance, The 70 Risi, D. 1 Rizzo, T. 50 Rogers, L. E. 84, 150, 158, 170 Rohdie, S. 181 Rohmer, E. 228n12 romantic comedies 17 Rosi, F. 1 Rossi, F. 11, 12, 217, 227n8 Ruffin, V. 12 Rumelhart, D. E. 187 Ryall, T. 15, 16 Sacks, H. 50, 69, 77 Said, E. 185 Salvodon, A. M. 184 scene 46 Schaefer, E. 33, 34, 42 Schatz, T. 16, 228n12 Schegloff, E. A. 5, 69, 70, 76, 77, 95, 195, 230n12 Schiffrin, D. 48, 50, 222 Scola, E. 85, 100 Scollon, R. 53, 201, 223 Scott, S. 51, 58, 114, 124, 137 screen-to-face discourse 42 scripted dialogue 13, 14, 48, 57 Searle, J. 115, 188 Sedotta e abbandonata (Seduced and Abandoned) 17, 34 Seidler, V. 111 231n6

9/24/2010 2:37:48 PM

260 self, conflict effect on perception and presentation of 199–212 self-narrative 19, 21, 24, 55, 158, 177 see also Tentato suicidio (When Love Fails) self-repair 77, 78, 190 self-representation 203, 211 semantic insincerity 118, 131, 134, 138 semantic sincerity and pragmatic sincerity, distinction between 130 Semino, E. 155 semiotics and texts 4 sequence, meaning of 46 Sheldon, A. 49 Shepard, S. 77 Shirley Valentine 99 Short, D. 155 Short, M. 33, 155 shot 46 and vectors 137 showing-telling modality 154, 165 Simmons, L. 156 Simon, J. 9 Simpson, P. 20, 153, 157, 225, 226, 233n3 Sinclair, J. 156, 201 Slade, D. 58, 59, 60, 66, 87, 88, 230n11 Small, P. 230n13 Snow, M. 28 social connections as gifts 87 social disharmony 65 social encounters 31 social identity 185 social semiotics approach 4, 5–6, 45 So Is This 28 Soldini, S. 99 solidarity 50, 58, 63, 74, 79, 135, 176, 193 Sons of Katie Elder, The 144 Sontag, S. 10, 227n6 Sorlin, P. 79 spaghetti Western 18, 107–9, 117 conflict dialogues in 112 irony and 120–1, 144–5 Spectator (Lo Spettatore) 156

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 260

Index spectators 7, 29, 31, 32, 34, 41–2, 44, 121, 208, 87 see also audience Sperber, D. 23, 61, 96, 105, 107, 116, 117, 122, 129, 132, 146, 190, 218, 219 Speriamo che sia femmina (Let’s Hope It’s a Girl) 230n9 Spitz, A. 223 Stalker, H. 150 Stokes, R. 76, 195 Stokoe, E. 19, 213 storytelling, conversational 155 submissive symmetry 84 Swann, J. 212 Syberberg, H. -J. 28 synchrony 29, 30, 31, 32, 43 absence of 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 37, 39, 43, 73 Systemic Functional perspective 53 Tajfel, H. 149, 185, 187 Tannen, D. 14, 64, 155, 223 targetted overhearers 32, 41, 83, 157 Tavris, C. 182 Taylor, L. 216 Tentato suicidio (When Love Fails) 21, 64, 150–2, 181, 216, 222, 225, 233n9 contextualization of study and methodology of 152–6 verbal-visual analysis 157–81 Terkourafi, M. 120 text echoic 121–3, 123–5, 128 original 123, 125–7, 128 theatre and cinema contrast between 10 language in 11 Thibault, P. 4 Thomas, A. 120, 213 Thompson, G. 1, 11, 15, 46, 152 Thompson, K. 155 Threadgold, T. 154, 182 Thumin, J. 6, 148 Todorov, T. 220 Toolan, M. 45, 71

9/24/2010 2:37:48 PM

Index transactional representation 55 transitivity 46, 55 trans-medial relationship 43 Travolti in un insolito destino in un azzurro mare d’agosto (Swept Away) 67, 71, 76, 78, 79, 83, 229n5 (Ch. 4) True Grit 109 Truffaut, F. 228n12 Tsakona, V. 147 Ultimo tango a Parigi (Last Tango in Paris) 35 Una giornata particolare (A Special Day) 68, 85 uncooperative conflict 60 undisclosed intermediaries 32, 34, 136 ungrounded disagreement 84–5 Utsumi, A. 114, 117, 129, 131 Valach, L. 181 Van Eemeren, F. 88 van Leeuwen, T. 13, 46, 53, 54, 55, 56, 79, 107, 137, 152, 154, 157, 159, 161, 173, 179, 185, 198, 217, 224 vectors 137–8, 140, 141, 144, 161, 210 eyeline 152, 174 guns as 143 indirect 139 shared 198 shot and 137 verbal confrontation 22, 58, 64, 87, 102 as interactional dysfluency 23 in Italian comedy 69–85 see also confrontational talk, representation of verbal disagreement 66, 223 verbal irony 133, 144–5 see also irony verbal–visual interrelation, in cinema 27

RPiazza_Index_Final.indd 261

261

anticipation and 34–7 conflictuality 39–42 methodology for investigation of 28–34 post-hoc commentary and 37–9 Very Direct Discourse 155 Vesna va veloce (Vesna Goes Fast) 184 Viganò, A. 17, 220 Visconti, L. 33, 229n5 (Ch. 3) visual communication 52 visual modality 56 visual social semiotics see under irony voice-over narration 33, 153–4, 156, 159, 162, 163, 165, 168, 176, 179 humanizing role of 157–8 Wagstaff, C. 27 Waletzky, J. 233n8 Walton, D. 60, 67, 88, 102 water, as pun 2–3 Watson, D. R. 200 Watzlawick, P. 12 Wayne, J. 107, 110, 112, 127, 129, 132, 144, 146, 147, 148 Wees, W. 10, 28, 29 Wertmüller, L. 71, 74, 229n5 (Ch. 4) West, C. 49 Western genres 57 White, H. 61, 150 White, P. 61, 112, 116, 120, 122, 126, 221 Wiener, M. 49 Willemen, P. 11, 227n7 Willis, A. 216 Wilson, D. 23, 61, 96, 105, 107, 117, 122, 129, 132, 146, 190, 218, 219 Wodak, R. 187, 199, 222 Wood, M. 17, 18, 68, 119, 232n9 Wright, W. 231n4 Zimmerman, D. 49 Zoom in, Zoom out 184

9/24/2010 2:37:49 PM