Daniela /rachel/ Vávrová Matr.Nr.: a Stud.Zhl.: A 307

Transcription

1 Ray Monk (1990). Ludwig Wittgenstein. The Duty of Genius. London: Vintage. Daniela /rachel/ Vávrová Matr.Nr.: a Stud.Zhl.: A 307 Ferry Radax VO+UE Film ist nur ein Wort Summer semester July 2006

2 Enquiry into the Human Mind Ludwig Wittgenstein - Biographic and Philosophical Remarks Directed and Written by Ferry Radax. Montage by Rüdiger Laske > Part 1 59 minutes as Multimedia- Infotainment, Part 2 59 minutes as Philosophical-Infotainment. With Fred Stillkrauth, Dieter Stengl, etc , WDR Köln, Germany / screened on 20 and 27 June 2006, University of Vienna. For more information see > With the date 29 April 2951? begins the story about a unique mind, about one of the most powerful and idiosyncratic thinkers of the twentieth century: Ludwig Wittgenstein. In his case the date could stand as the symbol of eternity of thoughts. Hand in hand with the eternal music of Pink Floyd it opens Tele-documentary seen as transmitter of philosopher s life and thoughts. Two parts the young and the older thinker, multimedia and philosophy provide the viewers with a complex issue about one s life experiences and enquiry into the human mind, closing itself by the same song of Pink Floyd. To show, explain, and visually approach such a complexity takes more than just superficial knowledge about structural composition of mind and its wonderings through time. In Tractatus Logico Philosophicus, when discussing perspective, Wittgenstein writes: To perceive a complex means to perceive that its constituents are related to one another in such and such a way. 1 F. Radax & Co s audiovisual representation about Wittgenstein is created as Tele-documentary in a very similar manner. There are two parts, each standing for itself. However, if one does not see both of them one gets only a part of the philosopher s wholeness. Dialectic montage and narrative structure provide the dynamic and the language of the film. Significant feature of the first part is multimedia and the use of Blue-Box Studio as interactive space for creation of the story. In the second part the filmic tricks are mastered and become a part of Wittgenstein s philosophy. With a very little visual material available the project was very difficult to realize. However, as F. Radax said, it made the process of making the film more interesting. The film was directed in the way that makes the audience think; it forces one to go to a book shop or library and read more about the genius of Wittgenstein. For this reason I would like to refer to Ray Monk s book about Wittgenstein, which stands as one of the best biographies ever written. It seems no coincidence that on the page ix, Ray Monk thanks F. Radax for the illustrations in the book (see Figure 1). The connection between Radax and Monk lays therefore not only in their subject, the 1 Tractatus , Kenny Anthony in Understanding Wittgenstein 1974: 10. 2

3 philosopher, but also in their use of Wittgenstein s portraits-photographs such as, for instance, the one captured on the title page of Monk s biography and scanned at the beginning of my writing. Seeing something while reading, of course, is different from hearing while watching. In the context of Radax s Tele-documentary the clever montage provides a viewer with an extraordinary transition of a young philosopher (Dieter Stengl) into the man himself, Ludwig Wittgenstein. In one frame Stengl appears almost as a reflection of Wittgenstein; the relationship between the two is one to one, one with another, one in the other; they seem as brothers, even twins. Part one opens a landscape in the future. Camera moves from a wide exterior closer to the details and into the present. The music flows in the air and leaves us alone with our own thoughts Wittgenstein, Wittgenstein the words capturing the viewer. The life-story of the man begins. The young philosopher and his friend Goofy (Fred Stillkrauth) meet to start an investigation of Ludwig Wittgenstein s life philosophy: one of them is transparently joking, the other disclosing loudly the covered messages of genius. Blue-Box Studio offers an extravagant place where they discuss and listen to the talks of other people about Wittgenstein s history, while at the same time they are gambling with machines. At first it seemed to me quite funny; how can this kind of combination transmit the philosophy and the life history of the genius himself? Machines for gambling and nowadays, in 21 st century, computers and especially Internet are obviously connected to human philosophy. Together with other inventions of human games they are continually changing our perception of the world. The language and communication gain new dimensions. But when Gilbert Ryle (student of Wittgenstein) enters the story under expressive camera-montage I was fully pulled into the structure of this audiovisual representation. All those who were in the contact with Wittgenstein and are represented in this documentary received a particular status: friends, family, his brother Paul and sister Mining Wittgenstein, P. T. Geach, Ch. Krehbiel, B. McGuiness, and F. P. Ramsey. Even the photograph of Bertrand Russell leaves its visual footprint and points towards an important relationship between two philosophers. All of them bring into the story memories of Wittgenstein. The viewer is turbulently pulled into his life and thoughts. Goofy and the young philosopher move through several different places around Europe where they try to discover more about the life of the genius. They try to understand Wittgenstein s philosophic mind not only from the readings of his notes but by following his footsteps. Between the book shelves they meet students of philosophy who talk about Wittgenstein s theory. Montage creates an interesting audiovisual combination. We see what means to touch Wittgenstein s work in the form of books again evoking the feeling to know more about it. If you have only the unanalysed form you miss the analysis; but if you know the analysed form that gives you everything.? But can I not say that an aspect of the 3

4 matter is lost on you in the latter case as well as the former? (Wittgenstein 1991 [1953]: e, italic in original) The life becomes logic, the logic becomes life. We see the pipe, which we cannot smoke, we learn that what we cannot speak of, we must pass over in silence (Tractatus). 2 Suddenly, there comes the moment when the young philosopher changes into Wittgenstein. How does it continue? That, you never know on TV! Goofy and the young philosopher end the first part of Wittgenstein s story. It is the same for all of us; we never know the prospects of our lives, what can and will happen in the future; therefore, Do what you know, with that what you have, wherever you are. (Th. Roosevelt). Part two closes the life-story of Wittgenstein and his philosophy becomes more transparent. The fast repetition of photographs at the beginning of the second part is in my view necessary in television screenings. Television as the medium has its specific influence on spectators. Under the kind of a documentary such as Wittgenstein s Biographic and Philosophical Remarks we are bombed with enormous amount of information, where the mind connects the perceptions by both eye and ear. The cinema has very different perspective of and on audiovisual effects. However, through philosophy of film and philosophy of Wittgenstein we slow down. Studio effects are mastered and the logic becomes clearer. We know more about Wittgenstein from the sayings of young philosophers, friends and partners who continue to talk and compose the story. The plot is balanced with music and words, and expressive images. Some aspects of Wittgenstein s life such as being a teacher at elementary school, thinking about the possibility of living among the monks, planning to go to Russia, his sense for details used also in architecture as well as his sharp-burning look, will probably be remembered forever. A rabbit or a duck? asks F. Radax in the voice over capturing Wittgenstein s thoughts (such a voice appears through both parts of the documentary). It seems that with this well known visual puzzle offering both possibilities at the same time, Wittgenstein is presented as a thinker for whom mundane external world hardly existed. Actually, the life style of this genius was very Spartan. A machine for making coffee, a ventilator, a small room for discussions and one room with bed; that was all that he needed for his creation. Did he have a woman whom he loved? Margitta? The question dwells on the screen for a while and then the unexplained disappears. But its disappearance opens for us a new dimension, not fully unexplained, as we move to the minds of other thinkers and creators, who were also 2 Proposition 7 in Tractatus has no supplementary propositions; it is the last line, the end of the book. 4

5 seduced by an inspiration of human perception. We see different angles of viewing the same thing. René Magritte is one of those who expressed relativity of seeing and understanding in his paintings, or as Wittgenstein would say, Magritte questioned the language and the eye, the visible and invisible. Moreover, as Radax showed, M. C. Escher used Wittgenstein s theory of philosophical walls trying to capture the impossible. Dimensions of Escher s paintings definitely demonstrate that the border of our way of seeing is the border to the way of understanding it. But, does it mean that the borders of the language are equal to the borders of painting or audiovisual representation? Before the final stage of investigation into the Wittgenstein s life, the young philosopher and Goofy linger in the space of the universe and together again through the subtle montage make a statement: Welt is alles was Apfel ist Welt is alles was Abfal ist (World is everything what apple is... world is everything what garbage is). We penetrate a tension of the dilemma to be a human being and to be a philosopher. When Wittgenstein got place at Cambridge, he also received the British citizenship. Wittgenstein was all the time on the spiritual move. He was a nomad constantly moving through human thoughts. But was he happy? This question echoes from the screen and Bertrand Russell answers: He was caught in the spiritual alienation forever. A student Laurer summarizes Wittgenstein s life as suffering; suffering of mind, a kind of duty of a genius, of becoming human in constant prison of his own mind. The illumination of digging into the philosophy of the language becomes more lucid, when we realize that what we cannot speak of, we must pass over in silence (Tractatus). 3 In 1951 Wittgenstein was diagnosed with the cancer of the prostate. Closer he was to death, stronger were his writings. The end comes fast, in reverse chronology of the photographs, with a song of Fink Floyd and with one of the last sentences written by Wittgenstein: Say, wasn t my life wonderful? As multifarious relationship of images and words in Radax s documentary, we also see the life-time, not just the one of Wittgenstein but of us as well. How to create a script, not only for a film, but for the life as such, where the balance of audiovisual perceptions and expressions will fulfil the illusionary gap between mind and body, between reason and heart? Not just a filmmaker and his/her mechanical eye, but also the process and the specificity of montage, the final production and expectations of spectators, all create the meaning of a luminescent footprint. But what remains on the world from all that what one lives and produces? This question was asked by F. Radax throughout his lecturing, while at the same time he was 3 See footnote 2 and Dilman Ilham (1974). Wittgenstein on the Soul. In: Understanding Wittgenstein. Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures Volume 7, 1972/73. London: The Macmillan Press. p

6 answering it by himself through his own works. Therefore, we will find his name again and again when we will look for transmissions of words into images, in a unique filmic context. If we look at Ludwig Wittgenstein, James Joyce, Konrad Bayer or Thomas Bernhard, all of whom F. Radax documented in his films, we realize that human creation and sensuality are the basis for any genuine sharing of humanity. The work of any creative mind is just a part of the existence, though fundamentally a spiritual act of creating an autobiography. A human life-time is full of experiences and sharing of the work with other human beings. An organism, a spiral with no entrance or escape, it grows in a kind of extension. I think that the lectures realized by F. Radax are first of all for those generations of students who will study at the University of Vienna, and for those who are interested in audiovisual representation. Moreover, I see them as a path on which one has a chance to recognize different ways of seeing, their relationships and interpretations; I see them also as a path that enables one to ask questions, investigate and create. Do I really see something different each time, or do I only interpret what I see in a different way? I am inclined to say the former. But why?? To interpret is to think, to do something; seeing is a state. Now it is easy to recognize cases in which we are interpreting. When we interpret we form hypotheses, which may prove false.? I am seeing this figure as a.. can be verified as little as (or in the same sense as) I am seeing bright red. So there is a similarity in the use of seeing in the two contexts. Only do not think you knew in advance what the state of seeing means here! Let the use teach you the meaning (Wittgenstein 1991 [1953]: 212 e, italic in original). It means that we learn, that we are taught about many things. We construct the patterns and we name the objects, feelings, moments. However, an understanding of something does not bring the answers to the questions, but it rejects the questions. A point of view and the language we use fully depends on our experiences. People endlessly visualize, verbalize, and perform. They give life to many different creative forms just as Radax s Biographic and Philosophical Remarks about Ludwig Wittgenstein, including Radax s own life. If what I am writing really has some value, how could anyone steal the value from me? And if the light from above is lacking, I can t in any case be more than clever (Wittgenstein in Monk 1990: 492). Pink Floyd rounds the story of enquiry into the human mind and leaves us to ponder 6

7 References: Monk Ray (1990). Ludwig Wittgenstein. The Duty of Genius. London: Vintage. Wittgenstein Ludwig (1991) [1953]. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Kenny Anthony (1974). The Ghost of the Tractatus. In: Understanding Wittgenstein. Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures Volume 7, 1972/73. London: The Macmillan Press. p Figure 1 7