i I6 SEER, 8 i, I, 2003 Insisting on the notion that context is everything is a particularlyfruitful approach when dealing with BedandSofa,since it interacts on an unusually large number of levels with the society and culture from which it emerged. What is particularlygratifyingabout this studyis its sensitivityto the fact that this society and culture was anything but fixed. Graffy draws on both the movie's and his own astonishinglybroad framesof culturalreference from the love triangle that haunts Chernyshevskii'sChtodelat'(pp. I7-I8) to the exploration of male homosocial desire as mediated through 'a shared enthusiasmfor sport'in Smith and England'srecent playAnEvening withGarg Lineker (p. 57) to unravel the diversity of inflections condensed in the various intertwining aspects and themes of the film: its cinematography;its portrayalof interpersonalrelationships;even its deployment of culturallyand sociologically over-determinedartefacts.The film and its companion booklet are thus located not as originatorysourcesof an easily identifiable'meaning', but as well informed and hugely informative contributions to a series of ongoing dialogues on a wide range of issues of topical (non-)debate, making their points without recourse to idealization, sentimentalism or, as Graffy indicates, the offering of 'pat solutions, either social or behavioural, for intractableproblems'(p. ii 7). Question marks still hang over Bed andSofa,a film that was specifically intended to provoke, ratherthan to end debate. If, after a lengthy period of submergence,thisgem from I927 isonce againmakingwaves, it issurelyin no small part due precisely to its refusalof the comforts of narrativeresolution. Graffy'slively and engaging discussion,again preciselythroughits admirable respect for BedandSofa'sown 'eloquent silences', its exemplary genealogical critique, and its refusal (alongside that of the movie) to 'dictate the viewer's assessment'ofthe protagonists'behaviour(p. 14),leavesthereaderthoroughly preparedto approachthiswonderfullyprovocativefilmvery much on its own terms. Department ofHistory JOHN HAYNES University ofEssex Synessios, Natasha. Mirror.KINOfiles Film Companion, 6. I. B. Tauris, London and New York, 200 I. XiV+ 120 pp. Notes. Illustrations.Bibliography . f I 2.99 (paperback). IT is fair to say that in the I990S Slavonic Studies departments in UK universitieshave confronted the challenge of dramaticallydeclining student numbers by offeringmore varied and diverse courses, the most promising of which has been the rise in Russian Film Studies. The recently established KINOfiles seriesprovidesexcellent supportforthese initiatives:user-friendly, concise and well-illustrated,they generally offerthe backgroundinformation and keen analysisstudentsneed in examining key film texts. Classicssuch as Battleship Potemkin, TheManwiththeMovieCamera and BurntbytheSunhave thus been made more accessible to students of Russian film, and helped develop Russian Studiesbeyond the traditionallanguage-literaturedemarcationlines. The KINOfiles Film Companions all share a common methodology: a chapter on the production historyof each film, followed by a frame-by-frame REVIEWS I I 7 analysis, then discussion of the film's reception and importance within the Soviet or post-Soviet historicaland socio-culturalcontext. Of immense value in Natasha Synessios's book is the detailed exploration of Tarkovskii's difficultieswith the Soviet film establishment,and the director'sown tortuous and sometimes contradictorypath toward the final product the film became. Natasha Synessios also includes some astonishing photographs from the Tarkovskii family archive. The juxtaposition of snapshots from the 1930S featuring Tarkovskii's mother, and shots from the film with Margarita Terekhova, the actress who plays Mariia Tarkovskaiain the film, reinforces the truly autobiographical nature of the film, and the deep personal importanceit had forthe directorhimself. There is much to enjoy here,with sectionson the use and significanceof the poems by Arsenii Tarkovskii(the director'sfather:another personal touch), the use in the film of music, colour and monochrome, newsreels, Pushkin's correspondence with Chaadaev, nature and, perhaps most importantly, Tarkovskii'semphasis on spirituality.Above all, the film's engagement with memory and identityremainsthe book'sfocus, with a telling comment on the director's 'recreation'of his mother: 'Ashe explained to his comrades at the studio meetings, what was important for him [Tarkovskii]was the way he remembered his mother, not the way she was' (p. 95: author'sown italics).Mirror, consequently, 'isa filmnot only about memory, but also about conscience and the purgingof guilt'(p. 98). On a personal level, this reviewer would have liked to have seen a larger section exploring Tarkovskii's contribution to autobiographical film as a genre...
Read full abstract