Rewriting the City: Mythology and Films of the Flneur in London

The grid plan emanates from our weaknesses... it is puritan, it is homogenising. In a city where there is no homogenisation available; [where] there is only total existence, total cacophony, a total flowing of human ethnicities and tribes and beings and gradations of awareness and consciousness and cruising.

And this woman turns to me and she goes: Well I never even thought of that, I cant imagine it; everyone likes the grid plan!" (39:10)

Timothy Speed Levitch

Speed Levitch is a New York tour guide; he delivers eloquent, often transcendental monologues and pithy improvised observations to an unwitting audience atop a double-decker sightseeing bus. His aim is to awaken the crowd to their relationship with the city, which he believes is not merely materialistic and practical but symbiotic and reciprocal, as with a living, ever-changing organism. Levitchs tours were the subject of the 1998 documentary film The Cruise (dir. Miller); the film reveals the majority of his customers to be somewhat bewildered by his narration of the city, but also shows gasps of epiphany from some as he evokes the spirit of Thomas Paine, revolutionary and founding father, dying in disgrace in Greenwich Village (04:06), and the secret egalitarian philosophy and engineering ingenuity of Frederick Law Olmsted that went into creating the worlds most famous supposedly natural park in the heart of the city (15:30).

J. Zammit

Nottingham Trent University

Page 1

Through his poetic ironies and juxtapositions Levitch succeeds in breaking some of the myths of the city. Myth is a complex term, myth can be good or bad; myth is not material objects, but a process of communication according to Roland Barthes author of Mythologies, and also the type of speech chosen by history. (2009, p. 132) By this he means myth is the supporting structure of human society, it is a social cohesion cemented by progressive discourses and a common understanding of things.

In the beginnings of his ascent from hunter-gatherer, man broke from the repetitive cycle of nature, to leave his instinctual animal habitus and develop a basic civilisation based around a communicative society (because originally communication allowed weak humans to hunt bigger prey), myths were constructed to fill the gaps in their rationality. These original myths were superstitions rooted in ignorance and fear as Graeme Gilloch describes, that would later become the Gods when hegemonic control was first imposed in primitive tribal theocracies. Gilloch, in Myth & Metropolis refers to Walter Benjamins fourfold interpretation of myth as: fallacious thought, as compulsion, as tyranny and as a metaphorical device. (1997, p. 9)

Myth may not seem to apply to the modern world; we now understand that lightning does not originate from the fingertips of Zeus for instance. Our science and technology have closed the gaps in our rationality, removing us further and further from those early men to whom every inexplicable phenomenon was a mysterious fallacy. But, for Benjamin, Gilloch continues, the modern epoch has brought neither the furtherance of enlightened thought nor the realization of reason; instead, J. Zammit Nottingham Trent University Page 2

modernity is characterised by a... continuing domination of mythic forms. (p. 10) Benjamin believed that we have become more reliant on myth as we have further detached ourselves from the natural cycle, and while religion is beginning to waver in the modern age, the myths of the Godless ideologies continue to proliferate. One ubiquitous myth is that of currency, on which, the entire modern world depends. Paper money itself is intrinsically worthless, but it has an abstract value based on the quantity of goods it can redeem.

Benjamin began to apply his mythical interpretation with a process of observation known as flneurism; to flne was to stroll through the urban setting while absorbing the minutiae and marginalia of the space. Benjamin sees cities in a similar way to Speed Levitch (who uses an ostensibly synonymous term for flneurcruising) when he discusses how New Yorkers, in their acceptance of a city planning system born from the zeal of industrialised standardisers, consign future generations to propagate the same dysfunctionalities in their children that they themselves faced growing up in a regimentally organised society, epitomised by its straight roads and right angles. He refers to this unnatural spatial logic as a: Real estate brokers wet dream from 1807... Spreading neurosis throughout the landscape. (41:03)

In this scene painted by Levitch, the utility of the high-rise planning grid has conquered the formerly natural space, but this utility is false and cannot stand alone without the myths that support it, those of consumer capitalism as a driver of individual well-being and the American dream (a myth so well-known as to be clich). This point is emphasised by the director Bennet Miller as the monologue J. Zammit Nottingham Trent University Page 3

begins with two contrasting shots firstly of Levitch gazing in awe up at the spire of the Empire State Building, before cutting to the image of a homeless man sleeping under a filthy duvet in a nearby doorway. The irony is obviously that once, long ago, all men and women slept under the stars. As Walter Benjamin said in his flneur study of Paris the Arcades Project: as long as there is still one beggar, there will still be myth. (Benjamin, 1999)

London doesnt have a grid plan system, a concrete structure which links New York inextricably to its artificial roots. But it is possible there is similar metaphorical grid of interwoven myths that are as Benjamin describes tyrannical or fallacious, and which act to compel a state of suspended disbelief through generations of Londoners and the provincial British who look to the capital as their centre of culture and identity. The remainder of this essay will seek to examine how filmmakers explode these mythic discourses surrounding London by rewriting their own version of the city through adaptations of the flneurs perspective.

Michelangelo Antonionis Blow-Up (1966) follows a dandy fashion photographer throughout London as he tries to escape the superficiality of his occupation and delve deeper into the underlying apparatus of myth. For this reason Antonioni chooses to use anonymous locations, actively avoiding what Charlotte Brunsdon describes as the landmark iconography of London (2007, p. 22), a collection somewhat hackneyed location shots featuring St Pauls, Trafalgar Square et al. Instead, subtle hints to the site/s of the film are dropped, but these are aptly subversive; a traditional guard dressed in red and bearskin is mobbed by a group of students at 3:22 demonstrating the impotence of mythical tradition in the face of J. Zammit Nottingham Trent University Page 4

carnivalesque resistance. At 3:00, a street sign in an obscure industrial area near the doss-house is concealed by the standing actors, who then disperse to reveal the name Consort Road; this scene is directed very self-consciously by Antonioni, it seems as though he is questioning the audiences knowledge of its own cityaway from the stylised monuments and historical architecture of its epicentre.

As the photographer drives to the junk shop (20:24) he passes rows of distinctive red and white, shop fronts, with the company name Pride & Clarke clearly visible, internet research shows this to have been (and still is) Stockwell Road, quite popular with the mods at the time as Pride & Clarke were a motorbike and scooter retailer (Wood, 2011). The vibrant colour lends itself to distinguish this relatively unknown part of London. Here Antonioni presents us with the simple ideals of tradition, small family business and a local London recognisable to many, but not to all. However he challenges the durability of such ideals by directing a wonderful tracking shot (20:40) following the photographers Rolls-Royce to the end of a colourful terrace and panning to show the rubble and development of a large, brutalist estate. The colour of pride and tradition is being washed away in the greyscale development of this new London. It is hard to believe that the visual pun on pride is unintentional.

Blow-Up represents the sexual revolution, fashions and the excesses of Sixties London as a Carnival as Mikhail Bahktin used the word; to describe a revolt against hierarchical norms through debauchery and revelry. In the mediaeval period, carnivals were holidays and festivals in which all levels of society were considered equal and engaged in grotesque acts which reduced the mythically civilised back J. Zammit Nottingham Trent University Page 5

down to their natural animal states (Bakhtin, 1984). Carnival is implicit in the scenes containing the parade of student mimes ragging for charity money; the naked romp with the two young models amongst the photography set (1:09:00); and in the smoky rooms of the cannabis party, set in the large Georgian townhouse with the imposing institutional faade (1:33:35).

Antonionis photographer has a complicated relationship with this historical period of resistance; he enjoys the new freedoms of the Sixties, but maintains a cynical edge, he finds his day job tiresome, referring to his models with disdain. His confused contempt for the era is apparent in the highly sexualised photo shoot with the model Veruschka (6:30), or in the discarding of Jeff Becks guitar neck after the frenzy of the scrum during the Yardbirds performance (1:33:20), these actions symbolise the lust and the hedonism of the age, but also its hollow sentiments, its meaninglessness. He says to the audience, there is no love in the Swinging Sixties, just the advent of a new image-based commercialism in the post war economic boom. To quote Danny the Dealer from Bruce Robinsons retrospective of Sixties London Withnail & I (1986) Theyre selling hippy wigs in Woolworths man... (1:40:29)

It is when the photographer wanders, flneur-like, through the streets that his cynicism is able to cut through the myths of the counterculture. He comes to realise that this carnival, like Bahktins, is not sustainable. His flneuristic photography is passionately driven by the need to confirm this, especially after he makes the discovery of a highly intriguing murder. He sees the murder as a final way to conclude his masterpiece study of the workings of the city; a serendipitous J. Zammit Nottingham Trent University Page 6

moment, after strolling into the park on a spontaneous whim (Antonioni draws his interest with an alluring mise-en-scne 23:35: four trees positioned conspicuously as columns, the violation of nature in this image jerks at the viewers curiosity), of discovering one hidden narrative within the hundreds of thousands reverberating around London (embodied in the study of photos he shows his publisher at 35:20) that is full of mystery and espionage, and likely its own myth; yet is infinitely more real and natural than any of the photos taken in his studio.

Another film which chooses to show an alternative, re-written capital is Patrick Keillers film London which takes the flneur as its central theme:

Robinson believed that, if he looked at it hard enough, he could cause the surface of the city to reveal to him the molecular basis of historical events; and in this way he hoped to see into the future. (19:14)

Unlike Blow-Up, the city is not explored through the actions of characters; but instead uses an unusual combination of narration, in first person perspective, of a series of walked journeys dubbed over static video of London. The video is documentary and the story is fictional, although it focuses on real events. The effect is to create a museum piece of the city, selectively curated by Keillers alter-ego and his associate Robinson (or possibly Robinson is the alter-ego), a wistful and free-spirited intellectual. The voice of the narration is provided by actor Paul Scofield.

J. Zammit

Nottingham Trent University

Page 7

Scofields soft melancholic tones complement the footage in a rhythmic way. The atmosphere within the film can be described as hypnotic; this is true to the flneurpoet Edward Hirschs sentiment when he explains: my pace provokes my thoughts (Hirsch, 2011). The disembodied narrator is essential, in [tackling] the problem of London, as Robinson puts it. Because one must be outside of the citys workings, unconstrained by time and space, or practical matters, such as holding down a job (Robinson works for a fictional university where it is made quite clear that he has few obligations and nobody to oversee him) to truly disentangle the city from the myth.

The film deems the average Londoner to be caught up in the process of merely surviving, and therefore too busy to be concerned with the mythic; the mythic is what is because it seemingly always has been, and people live relatively short lives. Consequently, individuals caught in the filming are voiceless, usually walking between As and presumably Bs, or functioning in a secret and drone-like way; the polling station at 23:03 puts one in mind of an exterior orifice of a bee colony. People pile in and out, wander around the entrance, hesitating, a policeman guards the door like a soldier bee. The polling station symbolises a kind of selfdetermination, but in this scene, the authority of the political system appears to be very subtly questioned. Especially when followed by the lines: It seemed there was no longer anything a Conservative government could do to cause it to be voted out of office... We were living in a one party state.

While Antonioni was more concerned with exposing the myths of the counterculture, in London Keillers main target is authority, particularly that of the J. Zammit Nottingham Trent University Page 8

institutions of monarchy and imperialism. The two myths are woven into military tradition and expressed in the Trooping the Colour ceremony (41:20). The celebration of the sovereigns birthday led by the regiments originally formed to protect the exiled English king who restored the monarchy and ended Britains faltering republic. Keiller emphasises the pretences of the ceremony, an officer uses a measuring stick to place the guards precisely, and whole lines of guards shuffle inelegantly to make fine adjustments to their position. The visible presence of anti-terrorist security personnel (42:50) undermines the traditional guards and confirms their status as mythic operators; communicating a message, but not serving an actual defensive purpose.

The threat of terrorism in 1992 comes from the bombs of the IRA. The devastation of the Bishopsgate bombing, shot strikingly from the perspective of the on looking crowd at 26:44, is a terrible reminder of the violence of such atrocities. Yet Keiller represents the bomb as a physical object with abstract connotations, and as a signifier of institutional hypocrisy. We lament and are angered by the bombs of the Irish Republicans, yet at the same time feel it necessary to celebrate and immortalise Sir Arthur Bomber Harris, his statue draped in the Union Jack and unveiled by the Queen Mother (34:54), herself a blitz survivor. This is done despite protests from the mayor of Cologne whose people died needlessly in their thousands upon Harris command. The bomb is, therefore, an object loaded with ideology; its use is validated by the taxpaying public whose conviction is affirmed by the discourses of patriotism, monarchy and, inevitably, fear of the other. These myths can serve to override any notions of a collective humanity.

J. Zammit

Nottingham Trent University

Page 9

The significance of films that go to such lengths to explore our well known citiesand here our belongs to everyone, not merely British or European ones; all nations, tribes and languages have their own mythologies- is that they force us to reassess the status quo. The opening monologue of London begins: Dirty old Blighty, and is subtitled a catalogue of modern miseries, it lists a great many discourses commonly associated with the nation: its fake traditions, its Irish war, its militarism and secrecy, its silly-old judges, its hatred of intellectuals, its ill health and bad food... (01:30) this passage overlays footage of Tower Bridge opening painfully slow, to allow a glamorous cruise ship entry into the dreary predicament. One of the many ironic juxtapositions that mark Keillers London as one of fallacy. The words seem to have a significance that transcends 1992, and speaks against Britains historical grounding in mythical prejudice.

Some scenes certainly warrant a prophetic label, the Labour rallies in London (1:09:50) are reminiscent of more recent demonstrations, and the IRA threat has been replaced by an Islamic fundamentalist one. Keillers film reminds us of the longevity of these kinds of discourse. The film possibly suggests that since Britain has been unable to release itself from the imperial ideologies of its glorious past, it clings to vain military pretensions in its wars in Ireland, and would continue to do so later in Iraq and Afghanistan. Imperialism clings on, just as the nation was unable to shed the mythology of the monarchy, the very notion of which dictates that no child may be born in Britain without falling into an inherent hierarchy that positions certain children as socially superior to others.

J. Zammit

Nottingham Trent University

Page 10

Antonionis photographer, like Keiller, also realises the sham behind the myths of his age; especially after having seen glimpses of the possibility of hidden narratives in his pictures. By blowing up a small frame of the city and discovering the hand holding the gun (1:16:05), he in fact replicates what Antonioni himself is doing on a larger scale within London. His film is a blow-up of a city, a short, low resolution capture of a whirlwind of flowing narratives, observed and appreciated by the flneur. The grandest of which we recognise: pop culture, spy-games, commercialism; but Antonioni provides an anti-climatic ending and holds back many of the smaller stories, what is the behind the relationship between the protagonist and the painters girlfriend for instance? We can only speculate, and this is what Antonioni wants us to do, like his photographer, to keep looking.

J. Zammit

Nottingham Trent University

Page 11

Works Cited
Antonioni, M. (Director). (1966). Blow-Up [Motion Picture]. Bakhtin, M. (1984). Rabelais and His World. (H. Iswolsky, Trans.) Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Barthes, R. (2009). Mythologies. London: Vintage. BBC. (2011). What is Money and How does the Bank of England Manage It? Retrieved May 6, 2011, from BBC Learning Zone: http://www.bbc.co.uk/learningzone/clips/what-is-money-and-how-does-the-bank-of-englandmanage-it/11156.html Benjamin, W. (1999). The Arcades Project. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Brunsdon, C. (2007). London in Cinema: The Cinematic City since 1945. London: BFI. Ellis, S. (2009). On The Trail Of Sherlock Holmes. British Heritage , 30 (4), 40-45. Gilloch, G. (1997). Myth & Metropolis. Cambridge: Blackwell. Hirsch, E. (2011). My Pace Provokes My Thoughts. American Poetry Review , 5-11. Keiller, P. (Director). (1994). London [Motion Picture]. Paine, T. (1985). Rights of Man. London: Penguin Classics. Penguin. (2001). Dictionary of Critical Theory. London: Penguin. Robinson, B. (Director). (1986). Withnail & I [Motion Picture]. Miller, B. (Director). (1998) The Cruise [Motion Picture]. Willis, C. (1986). Zoning and "Zeitgeist": The Skyscraper City in the 1920s. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians , 45 (1), 47-59. Wood, P. (2011). Opinion - Pride & Clarke. Retrieved May 7, 2011, from RealClassics.co.uk: http://www.realclassic.co.uk/opinionfiles/opinion07053100.html

J. Zammit

Nottingham Trent University

Page 12