The Dynamism Of Becoming, In Opposition With The Static

The final effect of Creation is the secret fund of an artist’s soul in a continuous evolution.

Sergei Eisenstein had never learned drawing. He had begun to draw from a childhood impression: while waiting for the game to begin, engineer Afrosimov drew animal outlines with chalk on the dark blue canvas of the game table. Eisenstein was fascinated by the white arabesque of the line that was born before his eyes and that in its movement made dogs, deer, cats appear. The line moved along the invisible contour of an object which, by a miracle, thus gave existence on the table cloth. The dynamism of the line was a sensation that had fascinated him for years.

Engineer Afrosimov had inoculated him with the pleasure of drawing. Later, at the Polytechnic, the arid matter of analytical geometry acquired a special charm for the young student because it translated into the mysterious algebraic formulas precisely the movement of lines. The dynamism of “becoming”, in opposition to the static, will fascinate him all his life, whether it is the movement of the line or the phenomena. It was a fascination with the genesis of things that has its origins here, in this early impression of drawing.

He drew, as we know, a lot in his youth. Much and badly, because, abandoning the primary inspiration, he loaded the drawing with details under the influence of the Russian school of genre painting. School calligraphy by model never succeeded. His manner was that of linear drawing. Then, abandoning drawing, he remained passionate, in his first films, for the mathematical purity of editing in his movement. The taste for sequence appears later, and explains the strangeness of this delay, by the logic of Engels’ thought: “movement first attracts attention, and only afterwards do you think about what is moving.” *

Is the whole aesthetic and comparative conception of the creator in you formulated at the intersection of irreducible oppositions?

Man’s confrontation with the universe of creation continues in the pleasure of giving rise to new aspects of a technical nature, and these seem to “freeze” in an illusion, especially in terms of fascination with the genesis of things that originate in the case of editing. In fact, the montage brings together certain pictorial, graphic, photographic (independent) images to obtain a set of visual effects, scenography, especially situations meant to delight the eyes and brain of each spectator, in a special style.

If only that were the case, then the artist would avoid the tragic condition of not having a history, of not being able to develop his personality, of not seeing his ideas transposed into a reality that is as true as possible, but at the same time progressive. His soul and artistic dynamism, combining ideas and visions in an authentic and overwhelming approach, must respond to the laws of a world beyond the horizon imposed by the shortcomings of a responsible profession (or the shortcomings of an era in which only creation could fill some gaps in the body of society).

Can you create visions full of artistic substratum that have practical and spiritual utility at the same time, harnessing the ability to bring to life a deep soul reaction?

But the creation of a director the size of Sergei Eisenstein is not made up of ideas that need words to be published in a regular weekly column in “Time News”, but is itself a movement of a certain kind, in which ideas and the visions, technical elements, and purely rational elements of the spiritual reaction seem to be struck by the temperature of the environment, falling in a fantastic manner, under the regime of a number of different variants of concept, joints, and chiaroscuro effects.

Taken into account, through analysis and comparison, these visions full of artistic substratum are theoretical or practical, meaning they assume a practical and spiritual utility at the same time. Ideas, whether theoretical or practical, even poetic, are ignored by critics because they involve the active intellect.

Or the whole aesthetic and comparative conception of the creator in you is formulated at the intersection of irreducible oppositions: first you have to open a subject that interests you, and only then you have to think about why and how it attracts the attention of others.

The secret fund of an artist’s soul in a continuous evolution relates to the pleasure of creation to generate forms of expression in the field of art, but especially to the spiritual pleasure of opening new horizons of creation from which we can extract the essence of a directorial conception (only by force of interpretation and directing act).

The Dynamism Of Becoming, In Opposition With The Static brings into question that need for total change, which begins with the way the artist thinks, feels and performs (in images, sounds, emotions) the creative act of a work of art.

And for a director, the change starts from the way he makes a story out of images, and his becoming as a total artist must take into account the force of action that must be exerted to change a mood that generates cultural creativity.