A word about names. My recollection of the rules for what form of name to use in essays goes something like this. In journalism, a (real) man's name is cited in full the first time it appears in the body of a news article. Each subsequent time, he is referred to by his last name alone. A woman gets the full name first, then Ms. so and so each subsequent time. A woman's last name is never cited alone.
In fiction (or film) analysis, things are simpler. Just use the form of the name most common in the film. Familiarity is not allowed in journalism, but it is welcome in analysis. A first reference might be full name. After that, simple is best. In Citizen Kane, one should refer to Kane, Susan Alexander, Jed Leland, Bernstein, (does he have a first name?) Thatcher, Kane's mother, Rosebud, the nurse, Thompson, the reporter.
Important also to separate the actor from the character. It would be bad form to say "Orson Welles says, "you provide the prose poems and I'll provide the war." In terms of the film, it is Kane who says that, not Orson Welles, despite the fact that Welles does mouth the words.
I have seen Citizen Kane so many times, that I have made it a habit to sprinkle my speech with phrases lifted from the film, always enunciated using the exact same cadence as that used by Kane, or whomever. Most of my listeners are oblivious as to the reference, but my wife always knows. Here are some of them, but you won't recognize most of them yet.
1. A pack of money-mad pirates.
2. A wasted day.
3. My reasons satisfy me.
4. You're gonna need more than one lesson, and you're gonna get more than one
5. It’s an antique
6. To ... buy things.
7. We’re lucky. We live in a palace
8. Thanks for the use of the hall
9. That’s when you’ve gotta fight ‘em
10. Have the warden send me a letter
11. You can’t do this to me
12. Don't worry about me, Gettys.
13. And a happy new year
14. You’re awful funny aren’t ya?
15. Hmm… yes and no.
16. Impossible, Impossible
These all are very good quotes, and I like Citizen Kane so far; Orson Welles makes our protagonist very intesresting, truly an enigma. I read on IMDB that he created his youthful look at 25 with specific lighting; he hasn't looked this good at any other time. Personally, his intelligence makes him handsome, even though I read in this New Yorker review about 'Me and Orson Welles' that he's also a womanizer.
ReplyDeleteI found myself interested more in our first film. I liked the analytical aspect of watching All Quiet on the Western Front. There hasn't been much of that in Citizen Kane. Maybe i'm not seeing it yet. I figured it might be the fact that we're watching the movie in sections, which really doesn't work for certain films.
ReplyDeleteWell, I'm actually glad you liked AQotWF more than Kane, since I figure most students won't really like it. SHowing CK is a much easier sell. It's universally hailed, so if you don't like, then there's something wrong with you, at least according to their logic.
ReplyDeleteIn one area, I believe you are mistaken. There is at least as much, if not more "stuff" to sse in this film. I'm just not stopping every 5 seconds because you people would kill me if I did that to the degree I did in the first film.
Another blog said the diametrical opposite. It's great how different people see different things.
I don't really see why people get so upset when you stop the film, I'm not trying to just impress you or anything but you usually bring to my attention important analytical elements of the film I had missed.
ReplyDelete