Pasolini, Decameron's writer and director, played the part of the painter hired to paint a fresco in a Franciscan church. (The painter is described as being one of Giotto's disciples.)
At the end of the film, he has one last cryptic statement. In your opinion, was the statement about creativity and art in general, or was it a specific reference to the film he just finished shooting?
What aspects of the film, in your opinion, reach the level of "art"?
Write your COMMENT and keep it original. This means do not repeat the same thing others have already mentioned.
REPLY to the comment posted immediately AFTER yours.
[GIOTTO is credited with having brought back into Western art, the device of PERSPECTIVE. His most famous masterpieces are the frescos in the basilica of Saint Francis in Assisi, representing the salient moments of S. Francis's life.]
I think the statement "Fine" which means "end" in Italian may have just referenced the film being finished. I think the aspect of the film that reached a level of art was the fact that the movie was composed of multiple different stories. I thought that was very different and something I've never seen before, but it really made me appreciate the film and set it apart from any other films that I've seen, which to me indicated that it reached a level of art.
ReplyDeleteThe last statement was: "Why realize a work of art, when it is better to dream of it only." I think Pasolini leaves this statement for the end of the film to have the audience reflect on his film as a work of art. This film is a reflection of the life of people in the country side. After listening to the lecture on Decameron, I realized how the film was portraying human nature in spite of the ideals that human nature is sinful. This can be seen through the parts with the nuns having sex, or the ways people tried to get out of poverty. An aspect of the film I think reaches the level of art would be the that the naked human body is not something shameful. It remained me of the art and sculptures that Michael Angelo created. They were meant to express humans in their natural form. I think the naked body symbolizes the opposition that Pasolini may have taken against rules of the church. The last story talks a lot about sin and salvation, but at the end the guy is relieved to find out that sex with the midwife is not sin. This movie shows the reality of actions and that can be considered art itself.
ReplyDeleteNirvana,
DeleteI guess I must have misinterpreted what the final cryptic message of the film was, but thank you for clarifying for me! I also like how you pointed out that perhaps the human body was meant to be portrayed as a work of art rather than shameful.
Art is defined as "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination". Pasolini,the writer and director of Decameron took this film from a movie to art in the way the stories are told. This film is art because it is Pasolini's own interpretation and showcases his creativity and imagination of the times and the events that took place, rather than having someone just telling a story.
ReplyDeleteI think it is both a statement about art in general and about the film itself (which is art. duh). I agree with Nirvana. I think it is left for the end so that the audience could reflect on it. The entire film itself is art. Therefore, the entire film reaches the level of art.
ReplyDeleteWhy realize a work of art, when it is better to dream of it only?
ReplyDeleteI think the reason Pasolini ends his film with this statement is to show that even what is viewed as sinful can be viewed as art. Also, the common theme of the film is sexual affairs between humans and I think Pasolini is trying to show that this is caused by passion and passion is art. When he says “better to dream of it only”, I think he’s trying to show that his film in general is so beautiful that it is like a dream, and he was able to put into film mode. I think the quote all in all means that he was able to make a dream become a reality through film.
Raneen, I definitely agree that he is trying to show that sexuality in itself is art and art is passion. I think he was trying to capture the passions of life through sex, because sex would be the most primal action of humans. If sexuality is banned then so is passion and he pushes against that notion through the entire film.
DeleteI think that the last line of the film was to make the audience think about art in general. I don't think any director, or artist, would make such a vague statement about art to reference a specific creation of theirs, such as this film. I think the part of the film that reached the level of "art" were the several different stories that were weaved together by, what seemed like, one over-arching story in each of the two halves; the sinful debt collector in the first part and the artist in the second. There was no immediate explanation that I could come up with for this structure of story-telling but I know that there has to be a deeper connection. I look forward to coming up with my personal interpretation while thinking about this film over the next few days.
ReplyDeleteI agree that its hard to know exactly what Pasolini meant by that statement at the end of his film, however, I feel like he was trying talk about not only his film, but films in general and how they are an art and how its an author's dream to put it in visual form. I don't think its conceded of him to call his work an art, it can just be about how proud he is of it and how he felt that each scene was a story of art happening.
DeleteThe final line of the film, "why produce a work of art, when it is better to just dream of it?," spoken by Pasolini before the film ended abruptly, is meant to make the viewer think and still be left thinking after the film is over. I think that the director of the film purposely gave himself this line and that it could be referring to his personal life -- perhaps breaking the fourth wall and referencing something outside of the film or the film itself in his own personal statement. Maybe even a hint of doubt. I interpreted the line as him saying that dreams are better than actual reality. When you dream, you can imagine anything you want to but to make something real it takes a lot of work and is it worth it? He is saying that it isn't. It is important to dream to escape from a world that is full of sin. I took the line as a reference to both art and creativity in general as well as the film itself. The intertwining of different story lines and connection through the painter, played by the director himself, was artistic and the stories of how people got out of tricky situations were both creative and sometimes humorous. This film was different than what I am used to, however, I still enjoyed it and appreciated the art and the message from the last line.
ReplyDeleteI found a similar interpretation of the quote, wondering whether it is worth creating something since it will never be as great as you dream. Unlike you, I did not consider the aspect of the film that focuses on sin. The Decameron depicts individuals committing everyday sins, doing what they can to survive, and none of it is taken very seriously at all, because it is so common. The film focuses on the average lives of ordinary people, and the artistic aspects of it attempt to capture the raw realities of relationships, bodies, etc. I disagree that Pasolini believes it is "important to dream to escape from a world that is full of sin" because this film cherishes such a world full of ugliness. It is this harsh reality that Pasolini finds so artistic and seeks to encapsulate.
DeleteI enjoy the way you see the film and the last line of it. I never considered that Pasolini may have been talking about something in his personal life. That is a very interesting concept, because, after all, he is an artist, too. I also agree with your belief that he is trying to tell us that dreams are better than reality, in some respects.
DeleteWhen Pasolini states "Why produce a work of art when it is better to just dream of it?" he alludes to the theme of The Decameron and his experience as an artist in the film's development. The statement itself suggests that all art is better in the imagination’s original conception, because the real life manifestation of the art is negatively affected by the raw realities of life. Within an artist’s imagination, he is unlimited in envisioning perfection in what he seeks to create, but reality, where he will bring the thought to the physical world, is full of limitations, whether this be finite art supplies, lack of money and time, or social pushback from one’s community. Thanks to this, the physical work of art will never compare to the intangible dream.
ReplyDeleteThis is a statement about art in general that Pasolini may have employed to reference his own creative process while filming The Decameron. It is possible that Pasolini envisioned an entirely different film than what finally resulted, but the difficulties of props, actors, weather, finances, etc. compromised his original concept. The abrupt ending of the film after this line is delivered implies that the artist (writer-director, in this case) realizes mid-development that the final product will not be as wonderful as he imagined, and so he gives up, asking “What is the point?”
On the other hand, it is feasible to consider this line as an intentional artistic choice by Pasolini. The Decameron itself is a work of art that questions the relationship between the ideal and the real. It showcases the raw realness of life of Italian country people, as opposed to the affluent emperors, kings, or nobility that are most often cherished in art. Within short vignettes, the film depicts poverty, sexuality, crime, and friendship using humor. It directly counters conservative depictions that might be preferred by a puritan populace, especially Rome. In particular, Pasolini displays sexual encounters that showcase naked bodies with little censorship. The bodies are far from perfect and the cinematography captures the various positions and abilities of the muscles, as the ancient Greeks and Romans did in their art. The Decameron is thus art itself that comments on art as a whole, and the final line delivered by the director asserts the overall premise of the film
I think Pasolini was referring to art in general, including his film. When artists create they start with an image, a feeling, a song… anything that inspires them. Often times you have this idea of how your art will turn out or what feeling you want to convey with it but many times the end result does not meet what you were expecting. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing as art is a journey where you don’t always know where you will end up, but it’s hard to shake the feeling of failure when what you envisioned and worked hard towards does not come true. That’s what makes artists brave. They have to be willing to fail sometimes to create. If no one ever put pen to paper, brush to canvas etc. there would be no art for people to love and admire.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of filmmaking, I don’t think I can relate much of what we saw to art. I admired the stories and how we saw everyday people living in this very specific time in history, but I didn’t enjoy it very much. The acting and camera work left much to be desired and until the entire film was done much of the standalone stories didn’t illicit much feeling from me. Putting the stories together as a whole and reflecting on the film in its entirety adds more clarity and sense as to what Pasolini was trying to convey.
"Why realize a work of art when it is better to dream of it only"
ReplyDeleteI feel as if this last line can almost both be referring to art in general, and to the fact that his piece was finished. Meaning, that the film was an art, and that he was the artist. In this sense, I believe that the line applies to both aspects equally.
I believe he looked at this play or film as his art piece, and he was saying that it was finally over and done, and that he was relieved that it went over smoothly.
Pasolini ends the film with the line, "Why realize a work of art when it is better to just dream of it?" I feel as though this statement was made on both the film and art in general. Unlike most films, Pasolini incorporated numerous narratives and storylines within a single film. To Pasolini and audience members, the film itself is a work of art.
ReplyDeleteI also think the statement can be applied when speaking of art in regards to the human body. Pasolini chose to show the human body and sexual content within the film quite a bit and in my perspective, the statement could've been made to say that the human body and sex is art in a way.
The vague quote of "Why realize a work of art, when it is better to dream of it only" is as vague as art itself. It's true that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder;" art is personal and different for everyone. I think everyone can relate to a time they have tried to execute something, and it did not turn out as they had envisioned in their head. Perhaps Pasolini wants those to keep their visions safe in their heads rather than risking alteration during the execution. Conversely, I think a case can be made for the other half of my interpretation. Maybe something can be created and turn out greater than one had ever imagined.
ReplyDelete