Research Report: Tarkovsky Interruptus

1. Abstract

“Tarkovsky Interruptus” was an event hosted at the New York Institute for the Humanities on March 10^th, 2012. The event consisted of a public screening of Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalkerwhich was “interrupted” at predetermined moments to give a panel of experts time for discussion. The panel was hosted by Geoff Dyer, author of Zona: A Book About a Film About a Journey to a Room. The YouTube video included in this citation only shows the panel discussions, not the film itself.

2. Commentary

“Tarkovsky Interruptus” offers many rich insights into Stalker, owing in part to the diverse perspectives of its panelists. Throughout the event, Michael Benson refers back to his many years living in Russia and other Soviet Bloc nations, which allows him to expose some of the film's critically under-examined historical context. To begin with, he notes that the Writer is a “dead-on” depiction of writers in the intelligentsia during the 1970s, almost to the point of “caricature.” He adds that both the character and his counterparts in reality face a particular anxiety about searching for the truth and “finding out that it's shit.” Benson also corrects the film's subtitles at one point: when the Scientist tells the Writer “don't go back,” the more accurate translation would be “it is not allowed”. Benson emphasizes that this phrase is ubiquitous in Russia. Later, he describes a little-known nuclear accident – one that produced its own mushroom cloud and radiation zone – near the city of Chelyabinsk in 1957. He explains that Soviet citizens at the time were well aware of the event but only spoke of it in private, not wanting to risk humiliating their country by letting the story spread. Even before the disaster the area was a kind of “zone” in that it was filled with researchers and forbade all foreign visitors. Benson himself knows someone born near the disaster site one year later – a man afflicted with gigantism who jokes that he is a “zone child” like Monkey is in the film.

Walter Murch draws on his experience as a master sound editor to critique the film's technical prowess and comment on its production history. He notes that while Tarkovsky was filming Stalker, he was working with Coppola on Apocalypse Now. Both productions suffered major setbacks which allowed their respective directors to drastically redesign key elements of the films. When Typhoon Olga destroyed his set, Coppola had time to recast the lead role with Martin Sheen instead of Harvey Keitel. When the original stock for Stalker was accidentally destroyed, Tarkovsky had time to completely redesign the Stalker, who originally bore much more resemblance to protagonist Red from Roadside Picnic. As Dyer describes, Tarkovsky saw the original Stalker as a “criminal” and so converted him into “an apostle of the Zone.” Murch later notes that all of the film's sound is dubbed in, including dialogue. He thus describes the sound design as “imaginative” but technically crude. He also explains that contemporary audiences likely were not surprised by the film having an intermission, since even into the 70s it was still part of the “grammar” of long films to include an intermission.

Geoff Dyer, of course, brings in the perspective of a devotee, which opens up some fascinating discussions of how the film affects viewers. After a particularly lengthy debate between the characters, Phillip Lopate argues that some of the film's writing is very weak and it leaves the viewer feeling “pummeled”. Dyer concedes that the writing is weak but tries to argue that the cinematography makes up for it, a tactic which does not seem to convince Lopate or Murch. The latter finds the film underwhelming, but speculates that when Dyer first saw the film – at age 22 – he was “primed for a revelation of some kind” and Stalker just happened to activate him, though if not for Stalker another film would have done the same. Benson counters this argument with a personal account: when his son was seven years old he described to him the plot of Stalker. His son asked if he could see the film, so Benson set it up on his laptop for him to watch. He expected the experiment to last ten minutes before having to switch to Cartoon Network, especially since his son could not read the subtitles and did not know Russian. However, the boy watched the entire film, and was so fascinated by it that he later invited his seven year old friend to watch it with him a second time.

Overall impressions of the film aside, the panelists differ on what specifically makes the film worthwhile. At one point, Dyer claims that the shot of Monkey being carried on her father's shoulders is one of the most profound moments in all of art. When Dana Stevens asks him to explain why, he struggles to articulate his reasoning and ultimately explains that he simply feels that the moment is important. Stevens herself seems impressed by the film as a whole, but finds the entire Coda (including that shot of Monkey) “baffling,” and she wonders why it was included. She also describes how, on first viewing, she found the Zone very ominous, only to realize by the end that it's only “ontologically dangerous.” Francine Prose theorizes that the final scene has such a powerful affect on her specifically because it taps into two of her personal obsessions: Russian icon paintings and telekinesis. She extrapolates that all artistic obsessions (such as Dyer's) may have a similar basis.

3. Relevance

Into the Zone explores how the novel Roadside Picnichas been adapted across media forms, and seeks to understand both the unique and congruent ways that each object affects its audience. “Tarkovsky Interruptus” provides an invaluable bridge between the project's creative and analytical portions. The central conceit of “Interruptus” is the act of interruption, an act which effectively creates a new critical object that is intertwined with the original work of art yet still open to independent appreciation. That the YouTube video includes only the panel discussions and not the film itself proves to be both a limitation and a blessing. Although our team cannot experience the full event in same way its original audience did, we can still look to the panel discussions and realize that they make perfect sense even without context, much in the same way a piece of literary criticism can make sense to readers unfamiliar with its primary text. Into the Zone builds off of this momentum to create an art object which is wholly independent from the three works that inspired it. Though this art object includes critical insights into Roadside Picnic, Stalker, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl, it can also be understood and appreciated without any prior experience with its ancestry. Essentially, Into the Zone takes the same liberties with the aforementioned works that Tarkovsky took with Roadside Picnic –the same liberties that GSC Game World took with Stalker.

On a more critical level, the panel discussions provide Into the Zone project members with a vital lens for understanding the film. On first viewing, our designated film watchers found the film irritatingly slow. Thus, the project benefits from Dyer's advice to “give yourself to the time of the film totally” and from Lopate's explanation of the stylistic intent behind “long duration takes.” He explains that such takes were a way for Tarkovsky and his contemporaries to escape the confines of socialist realism and seek out allegory and spirituality. He also explains how this style of film does not “guide” the viewer in same way the quick editing and obvious soundtracks do; Tarkovsky wants his viewers to rely on their own resources.

Such discussions help Into the Zone form an understanding of Tarkovsky's process of adaptation, but they do not override the personal, individual experiences of our team members. In fact, “Tarkovsky Interrupted” opens up a wide range of valid responses to the film: the panel demonstrates everything from awe to boredom, and from close analysis to mere experience. At its core, Into the Zone embraces this sense of plurality. Team members were happy to see each other disagree over the texts studied, and the new object is absolutely intended to provoke debate and conversation.

4. Resources for Further Study

Dyer, Geoff. Zona: A Book about a Film about a Journey to a Room. New York: Vintage, 2012. Print.

Dyer, Geoff, Walter Murch, Phillip Lopate, Francine Prose, Michael Benson, and Dana Stevens. Tarkovsky Interruptus. The New York Institute for the Humanities. The New York Institute for the Humanities & Parsons The New School for Design Illustration Department, 2012. Web. 06 Nov. 2013.

Stevens, Dana. "In the Zone." Slate Magazine. Slate Magazine, 3 Mar. 2012. Web. 20 Nov. 2013.