A deep, moving and spiritual man. Really good interview from Christa Tibbet http://www.onbeing.org/program/wisdom-tenderness/feature/room-jean-vanier/1370
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Vanier
Monday, August 26, 2013
The Jane Austin Profile
Just a simple overview. These were obtained from public domains:
Lived only to age 41.
Her sister Cassandra was her closest friend. Both sisters died unmarried. She also had six brothers. All of her siblings outlived her.
Released her first novel Sense and Sensibility by age 37.
She released six subsequent novels about every one to four years until her death, and there were two more released posthumously, Northanger Abby and Persuation.
Just a simple overview. These were obtained from public domains:
Lived only to age 41.
Her sister Cassandra was her closest friend. Both sisters died unmarried. She also had six brothers. All of her siblings outlived her.
Released her first novel Sense and Sensibility by age 37.
She released six subsequent novels about every one to four years until her death, and there were two more released posthumously, Northanger Abby and Persuation.
Females of that era did not make a lot of money writing, so she wrote out of the pure joy of the action and the need to express herself.
She started one more novel before her death, Two Brothers (or Sandition-the name of a town-as was retitled by her family).
Her niece continued the novel, but she didn't finish it either. (See Jane Austen's Sanditon: A continuation, by Anna Austen Lefroy, ISBN 0-942506-04-9.)
Many other writers have continuations.
Her niece continued the novel, but she didn't finish it either. (See Jane Austen's Sanditon: A continuation, by Anna Austen Lefroy, ISBN 0-942506-04-9.)
Many other writers have continuations.
Her education included Oxford and boarding school. Jane nearly died during her school years of typhus. She studied at home for a while after the illness, and later she and her sister discontinued schooling when her family's funds were further depleated.
Her father was very supportive of Jane's and her other family member's artistic and intellectual explorations like writing.
Her brother Henry, a banker, and later, an Anglican clergyman, was Jane's literary agent. He provided a wider view of society because he had a large social circle of merchants, artists and publishers.
Jane's financial circumstances most likely prevented a possible romantic interest, Tom Lefroy. Jane also nearly accepted one proposal from a family acquaintance who could help her entire family financially, but she realized she could not marry him without "Affection." She later advised a niece that it was important to have this emotion in a marriage.
Jane other hardships were moving to Bath upon her father's retirement and then her father's death. She had difficulty adjusting to the move and to being uprooted. She didn't write as much during this time period.
Her father was very supportive of Jane's and her other family member's artistic and intellectual explorations like writing.
Her brother Henry, a banker, and later, an Anglican clergyman, was Jane's literary agent. He provided a wider view of society because he had a large social circle of merchants, artists and publishers.
Jane's financial circumstances most likely prevented a possible romantic interest, Tom Lefroy. Jane also nearly accepted one proposal from a family acquaintance who could help her entire family financially, but she realized she could not marry him without "Affection." She later advised a niece that it was important to have this emotion in a marriage.
Jane other hardships were moving to Bath upon her father's retirement and then her father's death. She had difficulty adjusting to the move and to being uprooted. She didn't write as much during this time period.
Her financial hardships increased with her father's death. She, Cassandra and her mother traveled from relative to relative for subsistence.
Jane was able to produce four novels once her brother Edward was able to provide a stable financial setting for Jane, Cassandra and their mother in a quiet cottage on his estate in Chawton. The household's daily life probably included helping the poor and teaching some boys and girls to read or write.
Jane became very ill during a year of slow physical decline. (See speculation of illness which range from recurrence of typhus, Addison's disease, cancer and even symptoms from unpasteurized milk.)
A great quote about Jane's romantic interest, Tom Lefroy, to her sister Cassandra: "I am almost afraid to tell you how my Irish friend and I behaved. Imagine to yourself everything most profligate and shocking in the way of dancing and sitting down together."
^ Qtd. in Le Faye, Family Record, 92.A great quote about Jane's romantic interest, Tom Lefroy, to her sister Cassandra: "I am almost afraid to tell you how my Irish friend and I behaved. Imagine to yourself everything most profligate and shocking in the way of dancing and sitting down together."
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
A friend and I viewed Orson Welles “Touch of Evil” at the Lankmark Theater Esquire in Denver. How rare an opportunity to see Orson Welles deep focus camera technique on the big screen. The picture's foreground and background were both in prominence; in fact, the filming technique was far more superior to the current and gimmicky 3D special effects.
My friend the blog brightlightsfilm.com present the question, "Which is more compelling? The mid 1970’s edit that opens with Mancini Touch of Evil music score, or the most recent edit with the prominent ambient sounds of the street?'
There is a completely different effect from each.The most recent edit subdues the Mancini score but is more intimate and gives the viewer the chance to notice all of the scene’s details including the dialogue. The 1970’s version with the Mancini score propels a fast movement and excitement the other cut does not. What choice would you make?
I’ve included writer C. Jerry Kutner quotes below.
Please go to http://brightlightsfilm.com/blog/2007/02/why-murch%E2%80%99s-touch-of-evil-doesn%E2%80%99t-make-the-cut.html#.UhWkFdLVDxD to refer to the writing of by C. Jerry Kutner
Why Murch’s TOUCH OF EVIL Doesn’t Make the Cut!
The first and shortest (95 min.) was the version edited and released by Universal Studios in 1958. We'll call it the First Studio Cut. We'll refer to version No. 2 - released by Universal in the mid-70s - as the Second Studio Cut. It represents a significant improvement on the First Studio Cut, restoring approximately 13 minutes of footage that had been removed from the first version, and clarifying some plot points that had previously been obscure. Notably, it restores the scene of Police Sergeant Menzies (Joseph Calleia) driving Susie Vargas (Janet Leigh) to the motel and explaining to her how his beloved boss, Capt. Hank Quinlan (Welles), once took a bullet for him. It not only explains Quinlan's limp (and why "Citizen Quinlan" always carries a cane), but also clarifies Quinlan's line at the end of the film, "That's the second bullet I stopped for you, Pardner." It remains the best available version. The third version - the so-called "director's cut" released in 1998 - was not, in fact, cut by Welles, but by the Academy-Award-winning film editor/sound designer Walter Murch (Apocalypse Now) in supposed conformity with a 58-page memo written by Welles after viewing the studio's first rough cut. Murch's reconfiguration of the opening shot turns Touch of Evil into something of a graduate student's experiment (a la Van Sant's Psycho), instead of what it was and should be, one of the most exciting genre pieces ever made. And it's important to realize that the excitement of Touch of Evil begins with its opening shot, those ominous Mancini chords over the image of a hand twisting the bomb's timer, Mancini's bongo drums picking up and amplifying the rhythm of the time bomb's ticks as the car trunk is closed and the camera cranes upward. The credits superimposed over the opening shot in the first and second version of the film only add to its complexity and excitement. Without the Mancini music and carefully placed studio titles, the shot feels comparatively empty.
The fallacy of calling the Murch Cut a "director's cut" is that we have no way of knowing what Welles would have done with the film had he been allowed to edit and re-edit it to his heart's content. Welles was notorious for changing his mind in the editing room. (He never stopped cutting and recutting Don Quixote.) It's possible Welles might have approved an opening shot sans Mancini music as in Murch's cut, but if so, he would have been wrong – just as Alfred Hitchcock was wrong when he believed Psycho's shower sequence would play better without music. Hitchcock changed his mind after he saw the shower scene accompanied by Bernard Herrmann's shrieking violins. Who knows? Maybe Welles might have had a similar change of heart if he'd had a chance to compare Murch's version of the shot to the version accompanied by Mancini's breakthrough score.
My friend the blog brightlightsfilm.com present the question, "Which is more compelling? The mid 1970’s edit that opens with Mancini Touch of Evil music score, or the most recent edit with the prominent ambient sounds of the street?'
There is a completely different effect from each.The most recent edit subdues the Mancini score but is more intimate and gives the viewer the chance to notice all of the scene’s details including the dialogue. The 1970’s version with the Mancini score propels a fast movement and excitement the other cut does not. What choice would you make?
I’ve included writer C. Jerry Kutner quotes below.
Please go to http://brightlightsfilm.com/blog/2007/02/why-murch%E2%80%99s-touch-of-evil-doesn%E2%80%99t-make-the-cut.html#.UhWkFdLVDxD to refer to the writing of by C. Jerry Kutner
Why Murch’s TOUCH OF EVIL Doesn’t Make the Cut!
The first and shortest (95 min.) was the version edited and released by Universal Studios in 1958. We'll call it the First Studio Cut. We'll refer to version No. 2 - released by Universal in the mid-70s - as the Second Studio Cut. It represents a significant improvement on the First Studio Cut, restoring approximately 13 minutes of footage that had been removed from the first version, and clarifying some plot points that had previously been obscure. Notably, it restores the scene of Police Sergeant Menzies (Joseph Calleia) driving Susie Vargas (Janet Leigh) to the motel and explaining to her how his beloved boss, Capt. Hank Quinlan (Welles), once took a bullet for him. It not only explains Quinlan's limp (and why "Citizen Quinlan" always carries a cane), but also clarifies Quinlan's line at the end of the film, "That's the second bullet I stopped for you, Pardner." It remains the best available version. The third version - the so-called "director's cut" released in 1998 - was not, in fact, cut by Welles, but by the Academy-Award-winning film editor/sound designer Walter Murch (Apocalypse Now) in supposed conformity with a 58-page memo written by Welles after viewing the studio's first rough cut. Murch's reconfiguration of the opening shot turns Touch of Evil into something of a graduate student's experiment (a la Van Sant's Psycho), instead of what it was and should be, one of the most exciting genre pieces ever made. And it's important to realize that the excitement of Touch of Evil begins with its opening shot, those ominous Mancini chords over the image of a hand twisting the bomb's timer, Mancini's bongo drums picking up and amplifying the rhythm of the time bomb's ticks as the car trunk is closed and the camera cranes upward. The credits superimposed over the opening shot in the first and second version of the film only add to its complexity and excitement. Without the Mancini music and carefully placed studio titles, the shot feels comparatively empty.
The fallacy of calling the Murch Cut a "director's cut" is that we have no way of knowing what Welles would have done with the film had he been allowed to edit and re-edit it to his heart's content. Welles was notorious for changing his mind in the editing room. (He never stopped cutting and recutting Don Quixote.) It's possible Welles might have approved an opening shot sans Mancini music as in Murch's cut, but if so, he would have been wrong – just as Alfred Hitchcock was wrong when he believed Psycho's shower sequence would play better without music. Hitchcock changed his mind after he saw the shower scene accompanied by Bernard Herrmann's shrieking violins. Who knows? Maybe Welles might have had a similar change of heart if he'd had a chance to compare Murch's version of the shot to the version accompanied by Mancini's breakthrough score.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)