Tate Britain – The Turner Paintings

On Sunday 26th September I decided to visit Tate Britain. My MA tutor, on discovering my leanings towards Impressionistic painters, advised that I take a look at works by Joseph Mallord Willam Turner (JMW Turner).  Born in 1775 until 1851, Turner is considered as one of the most important Impressionistic painters this country has ever produced. I, personally, am not an art historian but I am interested to find an intersection between visual art and the written word. Turner is fascinating as he illustrated the words from Virgil, Homer to his favourite Byron onto the canvas. Visiting the Tate I was taken aback by the sheer volume of his work and below are a few paintings which for me were beautiful to look at. I can tell you that many of these paintings I describe held me rooted to the spot for sometime, held by some imaginary force as I stood and attempted to delve into each painting.

Buttermere Lake, with Part of Cromackwater, Cumberland, a Shower (exhibited 1798)

This is a breathtaking painting made during the early Turner years. It’s moody, powerful, dark portrayal of Cumberland depicts an arc of white light that scratches the darkened heavens as it strikes a mountainous region behind a small village. The light appears it is gaining intensity as gravity pulls the arc down with such ferocity that it illuminates the surrounding area – much like a comet – before it strikes. In the foreground two people are seen in a rowing boat moving towards us. When I came across this painting I was dumbstruck in its sheer beauty in the use of dark but subtle shades. It is one of those paintings that you after a few minutes you begin to notice other things – very much like being in the dark after turning the late off and waiting for your pupils to dilate and adjust to the dark. Incredible detail to the eye.

The Battle of Trafalgar, as Seen from the Mizen Starboard Shrouds of the Victory (1806-8)

Turner trained as an architectural draughtsman and topographical copyist which when viewing this painting you begin to ask yourself are we witnessing a past event, or are we marvelling at the beautiful construct of man’s creation in the form of the ship’s sails and rigging? This may sound very odd but the way this picture hangs in the Tate (its approx 2m x 3m) the first thing that you notice is not what’s happening on deck (bearing in mind that the battle of Trafalgar marked the very pinnacle of British naval warfare administered by Horatio Nelson) but that Turner is almost showing off his architectural prowess. I am 6′ 3″ tall and what visually hits you is the intricacy of the sails and its rigging of the cluster of boats. You can tell that Turner spent a considerable amount of time drawing the rigging with such care and integrity that as a technical drawing it’s almost faultless. Examine the painting up close, you get the feeling the whole piece is about the technical nature of painting. To me this felt like an artist who was coming to grips with not the artistic side of painting but more structuring a painting in terms of its position to the audience. In screenwriting terms, it felt like a writer getting to grips with structure and composing a piece from that. To me, whilst the painting is glorious to look at there is nothing very emotive about it.

Interior of a Prison, Lecture – Diagram 65 (circa 1810)

Drawn in pencil and watercolours on paper Turner really captured the light and shadows in this piece. The fact that he was able to achieve the luminosity and shadows from pencil and watercolours is a testament to his skill as an artist as looking at the piece I actually thought it was oil based. Even though this is drawn on paper I am astounded at the level of detail in it. Therefore, art is not about size. It’s about what you render with absolute precision that makes it artistic. As a writer I always struggle whether I can depict a scene with imaginative detail but within the confines of a few action lines?

The Field of Waterloo (exhibited 1818)

The aftermath after the battle of Waterloo. What is quite shocking in this painting are the hundreds if not thousands of dead bodies that are strewn across the battle field. The eye is drawn to individuals who are either looking for their lost relatives, or are they merely picking the riches from the dead? The lighting is terrific as the eye is drawn to the naked flame blowing in the wind. As we look up we see a hazy moon beaming down. The more I look at it, I wonder whether the moon is acting as a conduit taking the lost souls onto their next journey?

Brighton from the Sea (circa 1829)

This is quite a departure from traditional Turner paintings as he begins to employ radiant yellow hues into his works. I love the yellow melting into the brackish waters of the Thames and the casting of shadows to the left and the right. Looking at the sky, Turner really captures the pigments of light across the sky.

The Thames above Waterloo Bridge (circa 1830-5)

I don’t particularly like this painting because it feels rushed. You can see sometime has been spent rendering the foreground but then as we move towards Waterloo bridge the smog is smudged showing a hint of the bridge’s arches and distilled sunlight shining through.

The Temple of Poseidon at Sunium (Cape Colonna) (circa 1834)

A glorious painting. Look at the remains of the columns as they edge themselves out to the edge angled against the faltering Sun. The shadows that are cast across the outcrop of land and a section illuminated in the front which reveals a couple of animals looking out to the see. If you then cast your eyes to the left, there is a breathtaking vista of the crashing seas rolling into the shore.

The Parting of Hero and Leander (exhibited 1837)

Leander would swim across the Hellespont (a narrow strait in Northern Turkey which connects the Aegean Sea to the Sea of Marmara) to be with Hero who resided in the tower of Sestos. Hero would light her lamp to guide Leander who would swim across the Hellespont each night to be with her. Unfortunately, as Greek tragedies go, Leander drowned one night and Hero flung herself into the Sea.

Sun Setting over a Lake (circa 1840)

Whilst I don’t particularly like the The Thames above Waterloo Bridge, I do like this piece. Some of the art pundits say that Turner actually produced his best pieces in his latter years. Even though his construction was never a literal depiction of the subjects he painted he would use sunlight to great effect. His brushing would be irregular sometimes circular, smudging, up and down strokes all used to create impressionistic vistas. This painting is all about light and judging by the spot of sun which occupies a small portion of the painting its rays disperse and intermingle with the surroundings.

The Sun of Venice Going to Sea (exhibited 1843)

I remember reading that Turner had spent some years travelling and this is evident in the maturity of his works.  I love the ships sails in which the lettering is clearly evident when viewed up close (computer images do no justice). However its surroundings are smudged and hazed forcing the viewer to stay staring ahead. The waves of the water amplitude heavily to the right leaving a calm stretch of water bringing the mighty ship to the viewers’ eye.

St Benedetto, Looking towards Fusina (exhibited 1843)

What’s quite majestic about this painting is the depiction of the Sun as its light stretched across the river almost creating a barrier between the two gondolas. The clouds plume and plumped amplify the Sun. The cloud looks as if it is swelling due to the intensity of the Sun and allowing the colour to slowly dissipate from its central core out to the its fringes.

`Hurrah! for the Whaler Erebus! Another Fish!’ (exhibited 1846)

What I love about this painting is that the beam of sunlight energizing down from the heavens is indistinguishable from its source – the almighty Sun itself! I love how Turner creates a central hurricane of sunlight exploding outwards like a supernova and down to the waters edge bleeding into the sea as it stretches its fingers across to the viewer.

The Visit to the Tomb (exhibited 1850)

Only Turner can make the Sun turn into vortex of swirling light that extends from the heavens into a tightly focusses central core that strikes the ground and creates a magnificent haze that supernovas outwards. I could stare for hours looking at this painting and get truly lost in its brilliance.

Whilst these paintings are not the complete works of Turner, I felt that this selection which spanned over 52 years of his life was showing me a form of structure that I had not noticed. Turner had spent his early years practising his art form painting diverse subjects. Looking at these paintings you can see how it arcs from dark (early years) to sublime beauty of light. The subjects in his early years were also of historical and allegorical content which itself suffered from dark themes but as we move into his latter years, Turner threw down the shackles of storytelling and opted for nirvanic enlightenment. Some would ponder at his paintings trying to discern the subject in the context of framing against paintings of its time. But for Turner, you have to leave your worldly possessions behind including your frame of mind and the place which roots you to normalcy. You have to let yourself go and feed the light that is so dominant in all his paintings. Over the years, light has transformed from a lantern, to the moon shifting from the right of the painting to the left before settling for the domineering central position. But painting a Sun as a round hazy circle as most painters would opt for, Turner shunned. For he took the glorious Sun and exploded it onto the canvas as it streaked, circled and merged with its surroundings.

For me, Turner in these pieces was simply breathtaking. All I need to now do is take all this artistic emotion and feed it into my screenplay.

Musée d’Orsay – C’est Magnifique!

On Thursday 2nd September whilst on a business trip to Paris, I made the effort to visit Musée d’Orsay which is open late until 9pm on a Thursday. IEver since my wife dug out that little book of Impressionistic painters – in which the majority of the works listed in the book are housed at the Musée d’Orsay – I was getting very excited about seeing these works up close. Opened to the public in 1986, Musée d’Orsay displays the great diversity of Western artistic creation between 1848 to 1914. Upon arriving I checked with the information desk that I could use my dictaphone and with a pleasing ‘Yes’ I entered the Museum.

On first entering the Grand Hall of the Museum you are spellbound by the sheer size. It’s high vaulted curved ceilings are adorned with intricate patterned tiles which repeated throughout, and dangling down from the ceiling on a steel artistically created lanyard are attached beautiful spherical chandeliers. The Museum is split by a wide central aisle which houses Romanesque sculptures and seating areas for the general public. The left and right flanks are themselves split into upper and lower levels. On each level are rooms which house the different paintings based on their periods of creation / artistic theme. Before I ventured into any of the rooms I took time to drink in my surroundings and was pleasantly surprised to see a large clock situated high at the far back. If any of you have seen St. Pancras station with its magnificent curved ceiling and the large ‘Gent’ clock perched high above the sculpture of the couple in an intimate embrace you can clearly see that it’s an imitation of the architectural design of Musée d’Orsay.

The first painting that grabbed my attention was by William Degouve de Nuncques – “Nocturne au parc royal de brussels” (1897).  I’ve never seen a painting that illuminates beautifully in a dimly lit room – the Internet via this picture does it no justice at all. The painting is of the Royal Parks in Brussels which simply depicts a criss-cross of paths amongst the green lawn. The illumination by the lit balls just captivated me and I found myself staring at this painting for some time. William convincingly created a great painting by which he knew the audience would be drawn from afar like moths to a flame. This painter had taken an ordinary subject and turned it into an extraordinary feast. It got me thinking about the Obs Res piece and how the choice of arena – no matter how devoid the subject matter is to people – could in fact be turned into something that will draw the audience in. All be carefully selecting an element in that piece to draw the audience in. So, I really need to pay attention as to what exactly I’m going to write about for my Arsenal script.

Paintings by Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec really opened my eyes to the speed at which he was able to render the subject using pastels. He used the paints thinned with turpentine to create the essence of his characters in a few rapid strokes. His subjects were predominantly Parisian women performers from bars, nightclubs and music halls. Paintings of women sleeping or resting. One woman is shown putting on her stockings while standing in semi-naked pose.  In these paintings we don’t need to see the detail. We simply need to get a taste of the subject and action. The blanks can be filled by our minds. It very revolutionary to see these paintings being made in the late 19th century and moreso as I stood looking at how by using a few carefully chosen succinct sentences with brevity I hope to create a sense of scenic importance in my own writing.

George Seurat is a master. Where on earth did this painter get the idea to paint not by using brush-strokes but by delicate spot painting. Only when you step back you can see the spots forming to create an object. One of his paintings at the National depict office workers sitting by the river on a hot day – painted on a huge canvas. This painting shown here is called ‘Cirque’ and the complexity of the multitude of characters tells me it must have taken some time to render this. Unlike Henri T-L who would make rapid paintings, Seurat must have  slaved over his works to create this.

Paul Cezanne’s paintings of ‘Apples and Oranges’ and ‘The Card Players’ were situated next to each other. Apple and Oranges is a lovely painting because the soft hues of colour are striking to the eye. The draped white linen cloth is has instances of black, grey, green and pink that illustrate the creases in the cloth prominently as opposed to the fruit. I must admit that I had no emotion looking at the Card Players and this was most likely because the colour structure between the two were similar and the card players felt like a smaller painting and to me was drowned by the apples and oranges painting.

Claude Monet’s painting in 1886 (I can’t understand my dictation of the French title!) shows violent wave crashing into outcropping rocks. There is little sky and the waves are quite high indicating the ferocity of the crashing waves. The different thicknesses of oil together with the wisps and curls of water springing away from the rocks is rendered using fine rapid wisp-like brush strokes.

This painting is approx 52″ x 69″ and titled “Le Moulin de la Galette” and the first thing that struck me was the similar feelings I had when I saw his paintings of ‘The Umbrellas’ at the National. Although this is a good painting it does seem as if it’s slightly out of focussed. Renoir, it seems has decided to soften the outlines of characters and merge them into one another giving a very soft visual feel. Unlike umbrellas which has a central woman character beckoning the audience to her in a trance-like state, this painting is one that you almost should be drinking a glass of wine and simply savouring the atmosphere.

This painting by Leon Bally depicts bedouin pilgrims on their way to Mecca. On the desert floor there are bone remains and high above circling the pilgrims are most probably vultures. The central character is a confident chieftain who sits in an irregular posture and behind him follow the tribe. As the pilgrims are painted in an arc and we follow the crowd the focus becomes softer and softer until we are unable to make out face yet we can still determine that they are individuals following. I was drawn to this painting because of the arching of pilgrims and the softening effect which is more photographic like in nature than in paintings.

There is something very erotic of the female form and nothing so perfectly painted as in Edgar Degas “Woman Drying her Neck” painted in 1895. I can honestly tell you that the book / internet cannot do this painting any justice. It must be seen in the flesh – I know I’ve said this before but trust me. Apparently, Edgar drew this in his sixties and was almost blind. As I stood staring at this pastel work, I was mesmerised by the beauty of this woman whose bottom is perched perfectly on the bath tub. The way the thigh hangs over the bath rim and the gentle shades of the muscle in action to support the weight. The shadow cast along the woman’s back and her pert left breast standing to attention as she dries the back of her neck – a drying action you would rarely see anyone perform today in the quick towel drying, get changed and out the door rapid culture of today. It’s sensuous, sexy, erotic in emotion yet it is drawn with such beauty that its startling to realise this is a pastel only drawing. For 1895 this would’ve been considered obscene. In 2010 it is sheer beauty.

Van Gogh painted this whilst he was at the Saint-Remy asylum. Like his Sunflower paintings, the yellows give off a sense of tranquility. What is also evident are the vigorous brushwork. Again, there are thick layers of paint which have been carved by the brush which could indicate the speed at which this painting was made.

As I looked around at the different paintings I began to see a parallel with writing. Some painters like to paint naked women, the backs of women, plants, people, low-class people and scenic action. These are illustrated on small, medium, large and colossal canvases. Much like painting, the writer is also an artist. They need to carefully select the subject (i.e. story), decide the scale onto which the subject will be depicted (i.e. short, film, tv etc) and ensure the subject / story is large enough to fit onto the canvas. The choice of the subject / story is important but also bear in mind that not everyone maybe interested. I lost count the number of bare-breasted women, naked women and one close up painting of a female hirsute genitalia – that after a while becomes rather boring to view. I’m still processing all the paintings that I viewed but regardless whether I can intellectualise what I’ve seen, I know that all the artists have had the confidence to paint what they believed in. That is something that I will take away from my trip to Musée d’Orsay which has uplifted my artistic education.

The Prestige

I saw this film for the first time two weeks ago. The ending of this film completely took me by surprise which led to a big argument between my wife and I. The only resolution was to download the screenplay. Ok, she won the argument but I found a true gem of screenplay writing.

The Prestige is about two talented magicians Borden (Christian Bale) and Angier (Hugh Jackman) who are torn apart when a water tank escape-artist illusion goes terribly wrong resulting in the drowning of Angier’s wife. Tormented by his loss, Angier begins a deadly escalation of revenge between the two men believing that Borden’s incompetent knot tieing led to her death. Borden who is also distraught, tries to let matters lie until Angier begins to sabbotage Borden’s act, which results in Borden losing a finger. From this moment, all bets are off, as both men battle to out do one another on and off stage. The battle of rivalry is so fierce that both exact plans so deadly and conspiratorially that the viewer is one the who is constantly missing the trick.

The film is a dream to watch and most of this is down to Christopher Nolan’s apt direction and the screenplay deftly written by his brother Jonathan Nolan based on the novel by Christopher Priest. With a great supporting cast of Michael Caine (Cutter) and Scarlat Johannson (Olivia) they give the film a naturalistic and balanced perspective during the sparring of the magicians.

The screenplay is told through the journal of Robert Angier, which is being read by Borden who was convicted of murdering Angier – by drowning him in a watertank. The story is well plotted (there are some loop holes in the logic!) and it is the tricks that the screenplay / film play on the viewer that is most satisfying once you realise that what you’ve been watching is actually some great trick  – this is punctuated by the opening page:

The story will flit seamlessly between the events taking place to Borden (i.e. him being in Jail, the trial) and the reading of the journal and Tangier’s quest to unlock the secret of Borden’s illusion “The Transported Man”

The other great example of this is while Borden is readuing Angier’s journal in Jail, Angier is actually reading Borden’s journal which he writes about. This confusion all becomes apparant later when we learn that during their battles, Angier actually stole Borden’s journal and he is deciphering it with a codeword – again that we wil learn later about. There is a very good use of foreshadowing as the audience is forced to ask inner questions and maintain the different threads – or keep the spinning plates spinning!

How would we describe magic tricks in a screenplay? Read this and tell me whether you visually see what is going on. I think it’s been done very well.

I thoroughly enjoyed the screenplay and there were some nice mechanics on the efficient use of screenwriting that I’ve certainly learnt.

For those that are interested I’ve attached the screenplay – note that Jonathan Nolan forgot to spell check this draft, which is very satisfying to know that not of all us writers are perfect!

Prestige

National Gallery

After a tough day working on all sorts of different problems for work, my wife asked if I wanted to meet her at the National Gallery. Of course I said ‘Yes’ as I know it stays open late until 9pm – and it’s free!

I only had one mission in mind, after saying hello to the missus, once I got there. I wanted to spend the next 2 hours bathing myself in front of all the Impressionistic masters.

Rooms 45, 44 & 43 were to be my research focussing on 18th – early 20th century paintings. Let me start off with Van Gogh’s Sunflowers – information about the painting and picture can be found at: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/vincent-van-gogh-sunflowers

I’ve most probably seen this painting a few times but today I was admiring this from the perspective of a writer/artist. Its difficult to discern if this was actually a painting, or whether it had been carved out of oil. On closer inspection you can see the thickness in the oils giving different parts of the sunflower its gloss and matte look. Looking at the dying flowers, it actually looked like real seed heads that had been pushed into the painting. I admired this painting from close up, focussing on the brush strokes. Then, pulling back and looking at the picture as a whole.  Those tiny brush strokes, intimate and precise represent the words that we carefully chose to express a scene. Then by pulling back and viewing the picture as a whole, I began to think about how sentances are read from an objective viewpoin. The choice of words, the order of words to construct succinct sentences.

Whether a painting is small or large, I always wonder where is the starting point for a such a painting? Whilst I was wondering around I came across this beautiful lady staring across at me. She had a slight sadness to her as she stood transfixed looking at me. A gentlemen to her right was holding an umbrella over her but she seemed only interested in me. To her left stood a little girl of around 5 years old with streaks of blond protruding from her bouffant style hat. An innocence captured so beautifully. What I descibe could be reality but it was Pierre-Auguste Renoir’s painting of ‘The Umbrella’. Never have I been so swept off my feet by looking at such majestical beauty of a painting. To look at this woman staring wherever you walk is so intense. Her head slightly cocked to one side, she’s almost enticing you to stop and look at her. Sitting on her arm is a basket and both hands appear to be slightly holding up her long dress. Was she looking at me, or in fact was I looking at her? Who was the painting and who was the observer?

I stood in rapture watching not being able to take my eyes of this painting. There are bowler hatted men walking in the background armed with their umbrella’s, the scene is illustrated like that of a photograph with the ends of the painting clipped – to depict real like in motion.

I saw many paintings by Monet, Van Gogh, Pissaro, Degas but it was Renoir’s painting of ‘The Umbrella’ which was breathtaking. I’ve never stopped to look at a painting and realise that I’m so calm and into what I’m looking at that my breathing comes so slow and very shallow. It’s almost as if in my mind I’m trying to find that door into the painting. I can hear the rain falling and the bustling of people, yet it is that woman who looks at me with a hint of sadness who is the only one not covered. Her red hair reflecting the intensity of what ever little light is left on that cloudy day.

An incredible painting. Even more inredible is that it is a painting that depicts an everyday occurance that we would never think twice about – people going about their way in rain.

No matter what we chose to write about, the choice of words and their construction to create the illusion of reality will be the difficult task that awaits me for the observational research.

If anyone is interested here is the painting, but it’s so much better in the flesh.

http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/pierre-auguste-renoir-the-umbrellas

The Dark Knight – Screenplay

After reading and making notes on two classic British screenplays, I decided to turn my attention Christopher & Jonathan Nolan’s screenplay of ‘The Dark Knight.’ The film is famed for breaking box office records – 3 days US domestic pulling in over $155m, and the unfortunate death of Heath Ledger who went on to win a posthumous Oscar for his portrayal as the Joker.

I chose to read this script for two key reasons: It has a great story and the dialogue is terrific for an action-comic movie.  The script reads at a clip and you find yourself very quickly chomping through the high octane set-pieces.  The dialogue is never on the nose and the actions are sparsely written yet give clear indication what the characters’ motives are.

How the Dark Knight is going to help me in my Arsenal script is yet to be determined, but I felt compelled to read this because the relationships between all the characters are twisted. For example, Alfred warning Bruce that his actions have forced the criminals to seek solace in the Joker; Bruce and Rachel are like two flies dancing around a fire – never destined to be together; Dent who is willing to make a stand against the criminals and be the shining knight that batman can never be, and then we have the ongoing friendship between Gordon and Batman.

These individual binary relationships are not long lasting and at some point they will begin fracture. In this scene, Bruce has to be reminded of his own limitations after the Joker gatecrashed his fundraiser:

WAYNE
Targeting me won’t get their money back. I knew the mob wouldn’t go down without a fight, but this is different. They’ve crossed a line.

ALFRED
You crossed it first, sir. You’ve hammered them, squeezed them to the
point of desperation. And now, in their desperation they’ve turned to a
man they don’t fully understand.

Wayne gets up from his monitors, raises the bat-cabinet.

WAYNE
Criminals aren’t complicated, Alfred. We just have to figure out what he’s
after.

ALFRED
Respectfully, Master Wayne, perhaps this is a man you don’t fully understand, either.

Another really good example about the dichotomy of relationships is clearly shown towards the end after Batman has strung up the Joker :

THE JOKER
Just couldn’t let me go, could you? I guess this is what happens when an
unstoppable force meets an immovable object. You truly are incorruptible,
aren’t you?

Batman secures the Joker UPSIDE DOWN. The Joker is LAUGHING.

THE JOKER
You won’t kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness… and I won’t kill you because you’re too much fun. We’re going to do this forever.

The script / film contains some memorable scenes which I also think are very important, as the reader / viewer should always be left with some imprint of great scenes.  For me this is important because as a viewer / reader this is the first question I will always ask: What was your favourite scene? In the Dark Knight we have the prologue – the bank scene, Joker and the vanishing pencil, Batman abducting Lau from Hong Kong etc. One of my favourite scenes is when he kills Gambol (who has ordered a hit on Joker- dead or alive) and opens a position for Gambol’s men to join him:

The Joker FLICKS his wrist- the Body Guards flinch as Gambol goes down.  The Joker turns to them.

THE JOKER
Now, our organization is small, but we’ve got a lot of potential for aggressive expansion… so which of you fine gentlemen would like to join our team?

The three bodyguards all nod. The Joker SNAPS a pool cue.

THE JOKER
Only one slot open right now- so we’re going to have try-outs.

The Joker drops the broken cue in the middle of the men.

THE JOKER
Make it fast.

The men stare at each other. Then at the jagged pool cue.

The main reason why I wanted to read and briefly blog about this script is the difference in script styles. Whilst the observational research module is very focussed on creating characters/stories from our chosen arena, I can’t help but think about dialogue. Because for me, whilst I’m aware that writing visually is so important I don’t want to get too sucked into the whole art nonsense where I forego dialogue. As a writer, I want to write visually but not at the expense of the story. What I mean by this, is that I don’t want to labour the reader / viewer with too much visual and constantly make them figure out the story because it’s mentally draining for me and not my cup of tea!

Dangerous Liaisons – Christopher Hampton

I decided last night that I would sit down and read Dangerous Liaisons in its entirety in one sitting. An hour and 20 minutes later I can only say that Christopher Hampton truly deserved to win the Oscar for best adapted screenplay – based on his play ‘Les liaisons dangereuses’. In this blog I will refer to excerpts from Christopher’s script – therefore the assumption is that you have either seen the film, or read the script. These excerpts are areas that I myself want to learn and improve upon in my own writing.

The screenplay has all the elements which appeal to me:  The world and its setting is introduced in the first 2 pages; the characterization and dialogue are aptly written; the scenes move effortlessly and the visual description is succinct.

The first 3 pages introduce us to the world and in particular Madame de Merteuil (Glenn Close) and Vicomte de Valmont (John Malkovich).

One of the things I love about this script is the dangerous and witty dialogue that Christopher has injected. In one scene, Merteuil is entertaining Volanges and her beautiful but naive daughter, Cecile, when Valmont is announced. Volanges is alarmed to hear this news:

The script is littered with sexual references and more so as this is a film about the power of sex and its salacious grip upon women – who are not so subjugated as we are meant to believe during this period.

The threading of the scenes between characters who are at different locations is expertly handled. As a writer, how would we handle scenes in which our main character writes letters to his supposed loved one? Do we see him writing, sending the letter off, and it arrives all done within a montage – something I personally detest in screenplays? Or do we simply merge the scenes into a seamless thread. In this scene, Valmont is in post coital and is writing a letter to Madam Tourvel (the pious woman who we must seduce):

Notice how elegantly we move from Valmont writing the letter to Tourvel who is reading the letter aloud. It’s great method to demonstrate the spatial difference without having to slow the story down.

Another great example of impressionistic writing, is how to deal with people looking at one another and to describe externally how they are feeling.  This excerpt is full of feeling and betrayal when Valmont who is seated next to Merteuil at the Opera is caught looking at Madam Tourvel:

This section is elegantly written and you can feel the swathes of emotion that are exhibited by all three characters in synchronicity with the emotional peaks and troughs of the ensuing Opera.

This is another great example of British Writing that exhibits Impressionistic writing that I want to develop in my own writing.

Impressionism – Screenplays

I recently saw ‘Girl with a Pearl Earring’ and ‘Dangerous Liaisons’. Both films exemplify the greatness of British writing (scripts by Olivia Hetreed and Christopher Hampton).

Whilst I’ve yet to read Dangerous Liaisons (and before Christopher Hampton takes the stage at the BFI Screenwriting Lectures which I want to attend) I was just blown away by Olivia’s screenplay.

I had been looking for a great example of Impressionistic writing and I truly believe hers is an oustanding piece of writing. Immediately from page, you get a sense of Delft in the 1660’s; the subjugation of the masses as they strive to earn a living. For me, I loved the way Olivia delicately painted sounds in the background which we then cut to. Or the way she described someone’s posture or look which externalised their  inner thinking.

This script will certainly be my baseline that I want to realise in my own writing.

Impressionism – My basic introduction

Ever since attending John Foster’s lecture where he discussed Impressionistic Writing,  I’ve been trying to get hold of examples of such writing.

During my basic research, it seems such writings are focussed on the individual expressing their feelings and thoughts which doesn’t help me because I want to get examples of describing landscapes and mood in an external manner than going inside someone’s mind.

My wife was clearing out her old bedroom at her parent’s house and she stumbled across a small book titled ‘The Magna Book of Impressionists”. It’s a collection of famous paintings by Manet, Renoir, Van Gogh, Gauguin and Lautrec. It took me no more than 15 minutes to read it but I felt it gave me a brief overview of what exactly Impressionism was, which is simply how those artists at the time rendered the modern world around them. Up to that point, paintings were all about religious symbology or military might but this movement wanted to pain subjects that were entirely representative of modern life – eating, dancing, bathing, a whole spectrum of human activity.

I’m quite thrilled to see that all these paintings are available at the Musee d’Orsay, Paris.  As I travel to Paris for work quite often I shall definitely pop into the museum to view these paintings at first hand.