On Eric Rohmer and his Antitheticism

"I should be much more frightened of being wrong and finding out that the Christian religion was true than of being wrong in believing it to be true." - Pascal, Pensees

If the films of Claude Charbol are considered less New Wave because of the downright nastiness and unsentimental presentation of his characters, then the work of Eric Rohmer might also be considered less New Wave because of the serious crisises of consciousness, spirit and intellect through which he presents his characters. To put it succinctly, Charbol is that unsentimental antithesis of the sentimental Truffaut as Rohmer is the less humorous antithesis of the humorous Godard. One could be tempted to pursue this contrast between Rohmer and Godard further if one were to note that both filmmakers have quoted the work of Blaise Pascal. Rohmer quotes Pascal in Ma Nuit Chez Maud (My Night at Mauds- 1969) and Godard quotes him much later in his controversial Je Vous Salute Marie (Hail Mary -1985). But where Godard places the discussion of Pascal's wager over shots of a character struggling with a Rubic's Cube, Rohmer emphatically demonstrates a real life crisis that is aided and abetted by Pascal's wager. In My Night at Maud's Rohmer gives us the character of Jean-Louis (Jean-Louis Trintignant) who believes that his destiny is predetermined but nonetheless finds chance distracting him at every turn. This overtly religious work was perhaps too pious to be considered "new wave" and featured none of the "pop" cinematic tricks associated with the movements two most popular directors, Godard and Truffaut. For instance, there are no jump cuts, no direct addresses to the camera, no blurring the distinction between diegetic and non-diegetic music (in fact there is no non-diegetic music at all in Maud's). But there are some important similarities. For instance there is a magnificent use of location shooting and natural light in My Night at Maud's. The cinematography is by the great Nestor Almendros and it should be no surprise that both he and Rohmer take advantage of the winter setting by placing one of the films most emotional scenes outside in the snow at the top of a hill overlooking the town below. What may account for Rohmer's informal separation from the New Wave is that he was critically at odds with Godard and Truffaut since his days has editor-in-chief of Cahiers du Cinema after Andre Bazin passed away. "Rohmer's role at Cahiers began to deteriorate as Rivette, Doniol-Valcroze, and Truffaut in particular began to pressure him to open up the critical range of the journal. His refusals surprised them... at one point while trying to stop his inevitable ouster, he actually began sleeping in his office at Cahiers to defend his position by physically occupying the premises." ( 251, Neupert) In the end, Rohmer was forced out. His lack of critical innovation can be found in the almost Bressonian presentation of his films, but his mature thematic vision (he was much older than Truffaut and the others) is what actually sets him apart from the New Wave. His concerns were of a much more mature nature; a nature that had Truffaut had lived longer might've have also become his own. Thus, we might say that Rohmer was New Wave for an older generation of moviegoers. His thematic concerns of religion, morality, conscience and chance were certainly thematic preoccupations that would not become of interest to Truffaut or Godard until their later years. His style is not one of faddish acceptance of what might superficially be defined as New Wave. The lack of the use of jump cuts should not be our only defining criteria for whether or not a filmmaker was New Wave. Our judgment has to reside in the fact that these critics turned auteurs each established a discernible style and thematic preoccupation that prior to Cahiers du Cinema had not been thought of as artistic expression.