The achievement of human purposes is possible only because we recognise the world we live in as orderly. This order manifests itself in our ability to learn, from the (spatial or temporal) parts of the world we know, rules which enable us to form expectations about other parts. And we anticipate that these rules stand a good chance of being borne out by events. Without the knowledge of such an order of the world in which we live, purposive action would be impossible.
This applies as much to the social as to the physical environment. But while the order of the physical environment is given to us independently of human will, the order of our social environment is partly, but only partly, the result of human design. The temptation to regard it all as the intended product of human action is one of the main sources of error. The insight that not all order that results from the interplay of human actions is the result of design is indeed the beginning of social theory. Yet the anthropomorphic connotations of the term 'order' are apt to conceal the fundamental truth that all deliberate efforts to bring about a social order by arrangement or organisation (i.e. by assigning to particular elements specified functions or tasks) take place within a more comprehensive spontaneous order which is not the result of such design.
F. A. Hayek, "The Confusion of Language in Political Thought," 1967
So, I have a subjective belief about what will happen when a coin is tossed; now, how can I adjust this belief in light of evidence (say, after I've flipped the coin 100 times)?
When we discuss probability, we often do so conditionally. For example, we claim "the probability that the coin will come up heads is 1/2, given that the coin is fair." We write the probability that A is true given that B is true as P(A|B). A basic fact of the probability calculus relates the probability of A&B to the probability of B conditional on A:
P(A)P(B|A) = P(A&B)
But "and" is a symmetric relation, i.e. A&B if and only if B&A, so
P(A)P(B|A) = P(A&B) = P(B&A) = P(B)P(A|B)
and after dividing both sides by P(A), we get Bayes' Rule:
P(B|A) = P(B)P(A|B)/P(A)
OK, but what does this mean? Bayes' Rule tells us how to update our subjective belief state in light of new evidence. To see this, replace B by H for "hypothesis" and A by E for "evidence":
P(H|E) = P(H)P(E|H)/P(E)
What Bayes' Rule now tells us is that our probability that a hypothesis H is true given that we receive evidence E is just equal to our prior probability that H is true times the probability that we would receive evidence E if hypothesis H were true, divided by the probability of E (usually found by summing over the weighted conditional possibilities given all potential hypotheses).
Updating by Bayes' Rule ensures that one's probability distribution is always consistent. It is important to note, however, that one's conclusion about the probability of hypothesis H given evidence E depends upon one's prior assignment of probabilities. Of course, your belief state will eventually converge to the "actual" probability: so, if you believe the coin to be fair, but it is flipped 100 times and every toss comes up heads, your belief in the probability that the coin is fair will be very low in light of this evidence.
To illustrate how belief update occurs, consider a contrived example. A stubborn, but rational, man, Smith, thinks it is extremely unlikely that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. For Smith, say, P(cigs cause cancer) = 0.2. Instead, he licenses only one alternative hypothesis: that severe allergies cause cancer. Since these hypotheses are exhaustive, on pain of inconsistency, Smith must believe P(allergies cause cancer) = 0.8.
Now, suppose Smith's Aunt Liz dies of lung cancer. Furthermore, suppose Aunt Liz has been a heavy smoker her entire life, then P(Liz gets cancer | cigs cause cancer) = 1 (certainty). Suppose, also, that Liz has had minor allergies for most of her life; since these allergies are only minor, let's say the probability she gets cancer under the hypothesis that severe allergies cause cancer is only 0.5.
Briefly, how should we calculate P(E) here? We sum over the weighted possibilities:
So, now we can use Bayes' Rule to calculate Smith's (only consistent) subjective degree of belief in the hypothesis that cigarettes cause cancer given the evidence that Aunt Liz has died of cancer.
P(H=cigs cause cancer) = 0.2 P(E=Liz gets cancer | H=cigs cause cancer) = 1 P(E=Liz gets cancer) = 0.6
Plugging these values into Bayes' Rule we get:
P(H|E) = P(H)P(E|H)/P(E) = 0.2(1) / 0.6 = 1/3
So, in light of this evidence, Smith's belief in the hypothesis that cigarettes cause cancer has increased from 1/5 to 1/3. Two important points to note here: i) The probability calculus only tells us how to update prior beliefs consistently, it does not tell us what belief state to start from; given sufficiently different prior probability distributions, two agents may draw dramatically different conclusions from the same data. ii) Notice that our calculation of P(E) depended upon the space of hypotheses we were considering. If an agent has failed to consider the actual cause of a piece of evidence E as a potential cause, he may perceive E as increasing the probability of a spurious hypothesis. (Suppose, for example, that it is actually a particular gene which causes both a tendency to smoke and a tendency to succumb to cancer, then cigarettes will be a decent predictor of cancer (supposing sufficiently few non-gene-carriers smoke), but not the cause of cancer - nevertheless, the hypothesis that cigarettes cause cancer will be supported by the data in this alternate scenario if the agent does not license this additional possibility.)
Given these caveats, however, we can see how a sufficiently large number of pieces of evidence that are not adequately supported by alternate hypotheses will eventually push an agent's belief state toward the "true" conclusion: if Smith sees enough people get cancer who don't experience severe allergies, he will come to assign a high probability to the possibility that cigarettes cause cancer.
Subjective Bayes is the view that probabilistic statements reflect our state of uncertainty; as such, they are subjective, a mere reflection of a particular human's internal state of belief.
for example: Consider a hypothetical "fair coin": what does it mean to say this coin is "fair"? As it turns out, if we know the precise conditions under which a coin is flipped, we can confidently predict the outcome of a coin toss. The physics itself is relatively simple (comparatively), and if one knows the initial conditions one can predict the outcome (i.e. if one knows the physical properties of the coin and the details of the force which set it spinning (as well as air resistence, wind velocity, etc.), one can calculate precisely which side will land face up).
Consider briefly a simplified model where we assume that air resistance and wind play no role and that the mass of the coin is uniformly distributed. We can graph the outcome of a coin toss against the upward velocity at the time of release (V, in feet per second) and the angular velocity (ω, in revolutions per second). Assuming the coin starts heads up, we can treat grey as heads and white as tails:
Persi Diaconis, "A Place for Philosophy? The Rise of Modeling in Statistical Science," 1998.
The above analysis is from work by Persi Diaconis. He discusses where in the above graph the "typical" coin toss falls:
For a typical one-foot toss, experiments show that coins go up at about 5 m.p.h. and turn over 35-40 revolutions per second. In the units of the picture the velocity is concentrated at about 0.2 on the velocity scale. This is close to zero in the picture. Fortunately, the spin is concentrated at about 40 units up on the ω axis.
The point here is just that the "probability," or fairness, in a coin toss is not a property of the physical setup, but rather of the observer's belief state about the outcome. Once we are privy to the initial conditions of the coin toss, there is no more uncertainty and thus no more "probability" or "chance" in the event.
If probability is just a measure of one's uncertainty, how can we use it to interact with the world? To put it another way: how can I get my subjective probability assignments to match up with the "actual" proportion of outcomes due to the underlying mechanism at work? Or, if the coin isn't "fair, if I'm being cheated, how do I figure that out? The answers to these questions in our next installment.
So, science which rests upon statistical analysis is qualitatively different from that which does not (in that the conclusions it returns are indexed by a particular philosophical view), and thus our treatment of its conclusions as evidence should, likewise, be qualitatively different from that of evidence from other sources. In particular, we should be careful to consider our own philosophical position on probability and how it accords with the analysis of the data presented to us. Finally, evidence suggests that our innate sense on this question is very poor and subject to manipulation through framing effects.
Like Pierre Schaeffer, Einstürzende Neubauten wanted to "perform" found sounds. Rather than sample them as Schaeffer did, however, Neubauten chose to modify the found objects themselves, turning them into instruments upon which the same pieces could be repeatedly performed. At the start, these modified instruments (including everything from pots and pans to jackhammers and buildings themselves) were usedly primarily as percussion instruments, as can be seen in this early clip:
In their present incarnation, Neubauten not only makes use of much more delicate sounds, as in their use of styrofoam peanuts as a percussion instrument, but has also found ways to perform within the Western tonal system on found objects. In several of the songs off Perpetuum Mobile, 2004, for example, Neubauten uses different lengths of piping as a pitched instrument. They also make use of pitched arrangements of metal sheets and springs and a custom built spinning device with an array of different sized metal brushes on it which can be used to perform delicate melodies.
The point here is that Neubauten looked for new timbres in found objects, but then explored ways to fit these found sounds into the Western tonal system. Here are some amusing comments on the practical difficulties of performing on such "instruments":
The second strategy we can see in the work of Einstürzende Neubauten is that of guiding composition via randomly generated constraints. This procedure is at the intersection of two distinct techniques. The first is from Western academic music where some composers of 12-tone or serial music generated the sequence of tones (or whatever) which would provide the basis for their manipulations via random methods. This procedure was developed in the latter half of the 20th century to the extent that some composers (for example, Iannis Xenakis) used chance procedures to generate entire scores. The second technique arrives via musical games in improvised music. "Free" improvisors such as John Zorn and Keith Rowe have "composed" pieces that are really a sequence of constraints defining a kind of game for the performers: a loose structure within which they can "freely" improvise.
Neubauten recently completed their "Jewels" project which involved composing a song a month for 15 consecutive months. When composing a "jewel," each member of Neubauten selected a number of cards at random from a set of 500 initially generated by Blixa Bargeld. On these cards were written phrases which might constrain the song as a whole or the individual's performance within that song in a variety of ways (which instruments to use, what style to play in, who should guide the composition of which song elements, etc.). Then, Neubauten would go into the studio and compose a song, each member constrained by the contents of his cards, though only communicating these to others when they concerned the structure of the song as a whole. This procedure left Neubauten to compose as they ordinarily would, but constrained by game-like "rules" (à la Zorn or Rowe) generated by a stochastic process (à la Xenakis).
Of course, this procedure need not be limited to found sounds; however, it does constitute a method for constraining the arrangment of sounds which is independent of any particular tonal system, and as such is particularly suited for application in the realm of musique concrète.
[above] At the bottom, a standard 3-layer neural net; these neural nets provide a toy model of neural activity during object recognition tasks. On the left is depicted the net's progress through the space of possible weight values during training (several dimensions have been suppressed). On the right we can see how the two prototypes on which the network was trained partition the space of hidden unit activation. (Typo in original diagram: one point should be labeled "Prototype B")
[below] Such a trained neural network can perform pattern completion on a partial input (say, when only part of a nearby animal is in view) and categorize the partially perceived object with respect to one of the learned prototypes (say, as a rat).
From Churchland and Sejnowski, The Computational Brain, 1992.
[caveat: this discussion is based on analysis of Inoue's work, not on any knowledge of his actual methods or thought processes.]
Tetsu Inoue is perhaps most famous for his ambient work, especially the albums Ambient Otaku, 1994 and World Receiver, 1996. This work (in particular World Receiver) often has a musique concrète flavor as it incorporates field recordings and other found sounds. Here, however, we will focus on Inoue's "sound sculpture" period, stretching roughly from 1998 - 2001, a period characterized by Inoue's move from the analog to the digital realm. The representative albums of this period are:
Psycho-Acoustic (May, 1998) Waterloo Terminal (October, 1998) Fragment Dots (May, 2000) Active / Freeze (with Taylor Deupree) (July, 2000) Object & Organic Code (June, 2001)
During this period, Inoue focussed more on short "sculptural" constructions, almost reminiscent of recent developments in free improv, than on the long, morphing textures of his previous ambient period (later work would combine aspects of both). The palette of sounds is quite divers, and it is often difficult to tell if a particular sound is generated digitally or is a digital manipulation of a found sound. Inoue clearly uses many different organizational principles; for example, Waterloo Terminal used the building (i.e. "Waterloo Terminal") itself as an organizational principle, inspiring Inoue to combine field recordings from within the space with sounds generated via a digital transformation of the terminal's blueprints into audio. Here, however, we consider Inoue's technique for importing the classical "theme and variations" structure into the realm of musique concrète, a task which seemed promising but problematic in our discussion of Pierre Schaeffer.
DSP provides a tool for manipulating subtle aspects of a sound: one can i) adjust the envelope (the rate at which the sound fades in and out, a manipulation powerful enough to turn a trumpet into a violin), ii) adjust the pitch ("Alvin and the Chipmunks" being a well known example (though most likely not achieved digitally)), iii) adjust the timbre (by selectively (d)emphasizing isolated frequencies, components of the overall sound, one can change it's character, turning a crowded room into a bubbling brook or a passing airplane into a pesky gnat), etc.
Of course, analog electronics could produce all these effects as well. What DSP offered was greatly increased organization, control, and memory of these parameters. At last composers could precisely specify the pitch to be filtered rather than find it by ear, they could store and "undo" manipulations, tweaking them until the desired effect was received.
In the Western tradition, a theme and variations consists of a melody and variations on that melody which tend to add or adjust the specific notes and rhythm played while maintaining the same basic chord progression. DSP opened the possibility of transposing this structure to the realm of musique concrète by taking a particular found sound (or sequence of sounds) as the "theme" and manipulations of its timbre as the "variations." This timbral "theme and variations" could then provide an underlying unity to the piece's organizational structure.
Consider this excerpt from "Cut and Clicks," the first track on Fragment Dots:
At 0:45-8 we can hear a sample of a running shower (presumably). This apparently unaltered sample is foreshadowed by a manipulation of the shower sound which integrates more closely with the surrounding bleeps and clicks at 0:05-0:07, and by brief spurts of a shower and a shower door preceeding the main sample at 0:43-5. At 1:11-2 we briefly hear the white noise of the shower again and from 1:35-end we can hear a succession of versions of the shower sound, each filtered in a slightly different manner (other segments may originate in this same sample, but have been manipulated too much to allow certain identification). For more local examples of variation via timbral manipulation, consider the patterns at 0:38-43, where the same fast vibration occurs at several different pitches and timbres, and 1:17-26, where the same rhythm is heard with three different timbres.
Of course, we have not by any means exhausted the organizational principles at work here. DSP also allows the composer to adjust a variety of source sounds such that they share a timbre, for example, and to closely control various permutations and arrangments of a predetermined set of sounds. "Cut and Clicks" surely evinces a variety of such techniques in addition to that of timbral variation.
Our final case study will examine an entirely different approach to the conceptual problem posed by musique concrète
Travelling with a friend on towering 4 storey buses through a wasteland of sprawling labyrinthian malls and massive hotel / dormitories, we are subpoenad to testify at a trial. The matter is so urgent, we are pulled away from the rest of our tour group before dinner arrives. We travel through the sprawling landscape via long, mostly vertical shafts, clutching onto loose harnesses as we shoot along suspension wires. Arriving at court the proceedings are slow and convoluted. The matter of our expertise is unclear, but seems to lie at the intersection of Kantian metaphysics and WWII biplane studies - the relevance to a legal trial of such urgency is never explained. Our hunger increases, but an attempt to order Chinese leads to naught when the restaurant inexplicably hangs up halfway through our address - their haste ultimately preventing them from finding our room (despite locating our building) within the vast hotel landscape. Upon hearing the Chinese delivery men are searching for us, we desparately flee the courtroom, sliding for miles through the vast complex clinging to our flimsy harnesses in a desperate race to find the delivery men before they give up. I awake confused, uninterested in Chinese food, but plagued with anxiety about the state of biplane metaphysics.
. . . that meaningful discourse can proceed on issues which do not admit of empirical investigation and the resolution of which would have no pragmatic consequences for the lives of human beings.
Schaeffer founded musique concrete with this effort and his study of the sounds of trains, Étude aux chemins de fer, is widely recognized as the first piece of musique concrète.
In the '40s, Schaeffer worked as a technician for Radiodiffusion Française, and developed there a lab for using the new technology to experiment with sounds. In many ways, Schaeffer was more an engineer than an artist, and his experimentation was driven more by the possibilities opened up by the new technology than an aesthetic vision. It is fitting that here, at its inception, the conceptual problem of musique concrète is already at the forefront of its practioners' thoughts. As Michel Chion wrote in 1982 (as reprinted in the liner notes to the definitive CD release of Pierre Schaeffer's works):
Even at that time, [Pierre Schaeffer] was occupied with finding a basis for understanding and defining what was both an empirical and rigorous method for proceeding, even when the incongruity of that approach to music fascinated and horrified him at the same time. His own deeply felt ambivalence for the music that he invented became one of the dominant characteristics of his creativity and thought.
Schaeffer's solution to the conceptual problem in the Étude aux chemins de fer was a combination of method and principle. The method was Schaeffer's construction of the first sampler. He recorded a number of various sounds produced by trains and pressed them onto records, some in "closed grooves" such that the sound would loop indefinitely. Record players were arranged such that they could be triggered by different switches or keys. The composer (or performer), then could "play" the various sounds by pressing keys in the desired pattern (+ holding for the desired length of time, adjusting speed, etc.). The principles were twofold: improvisation and theme and variations. The former was a necessity in this uncharted musical territory, while the latter was one of the old standbys of Western music, but one sufficiently abstract that it could be applied in the new domain.
Nevertheless, the question of how presents itself: if a variation on a theme within the traditional Western framework constitutes a modulation to a different key, an insertion of additional notes within the chord progression, or a varying of the rhythmic structure, how should one vary the parameters of sounds with no key, chord progression, or rhythmic structure in the traditional sense? Doubtless, it was this dilemma that underlay the frustration and ambivalence of Schaeffer himself. We investigate some subtle solutions to this problem in our next case study.
For crimes may be more severely punished when they are crimes of "hate" ~ though surely it is the dispassionate crimes which are more fearsome?
For one can be imprisoned for one's writing (music, art, etc.) if this art "inspires hate" or "promotes terrorism" ~ but is not a state which condemns its youth for their poetry deserved of destruction?
The transmutation of the West into the image of its enemy has begun: how long until we stare into the face of fundamentalist society and see but a cloudy reflection of ourselves?
Before the age of notated music, composition meant production of a melodic, harmonic, and / or lyrical pattern compelling enough it could be transmitted in person to other musicians. Here all that is passed on is an idea, an essence of the tune, indifferent to instrument, setting, or interpretation.
Before the age of recorded sound, composition meant the production of written instructions which could be followed by anyone who understood the relevant code. In particular, a specific array of timbres (i.e. different instruments) was assumed, as well as a particular tonal system (the Western scale).
In the age of audio recording, the composer is no longer constrained by the limitations of a system of transmission, he can produce the definitive version of a piece of music himself, adjusting all relevant parameters. In particular, he is no longer constrained to one particular set of timbres or scales.
Musique Concrète is a form of composition which could only arise in the age of audio recording. The concept behind musique concrète is that the composer begins with a set of "concrete" sounds and arranges them into a piece of music. In practice, this means the composer is not limited to the timbres available via standard instrumentation; instead, he can collect any sounds which appeal to him (of a car passing, a bird chirping, the slam of a door, a cough, running water, etc.) and arrange them into a structure constituting the finished piece of music.
Once one has decided to use "found" sounds as one's timbral palette, however, one faces a dilemma, for the theoretical structure which has developed within the western musical tradition is no longer relevant (at least not obviously so). Since this theoretical apparatus provided a structure which constrained the arrangement of sounds, some new principles must be found by which to arrange the found sounds one has chosen to work with.
(For without some principle guiding their arrangment, what is to separate the arranged sounds from their place within a natural context? ~ what will separate "music" from "noise"?)
Next: three case studies, each examining a different solution to the conceptual problem posed by musique concrète.
European totalitarianism is an upshot of bureaucracy's preeminence in the field of education. The universities paved the way for the dictators.
~ Ludwig von Mises, 1944
Since authoritarian society reproduces itself in the individual structures of the masses with the help of the authoritarian family, it follows that political reaction has to regard and defend the authoritarian family as the basis of the "state, culture, and civilization." In this propaganda it can count on deep irrational factors in the masses.
~ Wilhelm Reich, 1946
The multitudes remained plunged in ignorance of the simplest economic facts, and their leaders, seeking their votes, did not dare to undeceive them. The newspapers, after their fashion, reflected and emphasised the prevailing opinions.
"I remembered Cliff Wainwright saying once that women were like the Russians - if you did exactly what they wanted all the time you were being realistic and constructive and promoting the cause of peace, and if you ever stood up to them you were resorting to cold-war tactics and pursuing imperialistic designs and interfering in their internal affairs. And by the way of course peace was more peaceful, but if you went on promoting its cause long enough you ended up Finlandized at best."
"For the sake of authenticity some sequences have been retained in their entirety."
In 1966, Gualtiero Jacopetti and Franco Prosperi released their follow up to '62's trend-starting Mondo Cane, Africa Addio. Africa Addio unflinchingly documents the end of colonialism in Africa with imagery both disturbing and profound. The filmmakers travel both with poachers and game wardens as the African animal reserves lose their "white-mandated" protection, and the graphic slaughter and corpses of (yes, literally) hundreds of animals are depicted on screen. Even more shocking, the film provides the only documentation of the slaughter of 5 - 20,000 Arabs during the '64 Zanzibar Revolution with footage shot from a circling helicopter. Most controversial upon the film's release, however, were several scenes of human executions, and, in particular, a scene in which a white soldier with a handgun executes a black at point blank range in a well framed close up. The filmmakers were accused of complicity, of staging this execution in order to get a "good shot" - they claim it just happened in front of them; due to the language barrier, they were totally confused and had no idea the execution was about to occur. A final controversy: the filmmakers were also accused of racism, of depicting blacks as barbaric animals unfit to govern themselves. This accusation has been widely discredited as an artifact of the bastardized versions of the film which showed in many countries. The original, intended edit is quite even-handed in its assignment of blame.
Flash forward to 1980: Ruggero Deodato releases Cannibal Holocaust, a fictional homage to / critique of Africa Addio, in particular, and exploitation ("shock") filmmaking in general. In the first half of the film, we follow an anthropologist's journey into the cannibal territory of the deepest Amazon on a search for a missing film crew. The crew is dead, but he manages to recover their footage. In the second half we see the story of the film crew revealed in their unedited footage, and the reactions of the anthropologist and the documentary's producers as they watch it. The film crew themselves are clearly modeled on (public perception of) Jacopetti and Prosperi. Before viewing the Amazon footage, the producers show the anthropologist some footage of executions from the film crew's earlier African movie, scenes clearly modeled after those in Africa Addio. When the anthropologist emits a grunt of shock, the producer says:
"Pretty powerful stuff, huh? Well, just to give you an idea how Alan and the others worked, everything you just saw was a put on. That was no enemy army approach, Alan paid those soldiers to do a bit of acting for him."
But what exactly is being criticized here ~ Jacopetti and Prosperi themselves, or some hypothetical demon created by public perception? And where does Cannibal Holocaust itself fit in? The film features numerous scenes of animal murder and mutilation - and unlike those in Africa Addio, there is no question that these acts were performed solely for the benefit of the camera. Conversely, the footage of African executions in Cannibal Holocaustis purportedly real, captured in Nigeria or East Africa. Is there a second issue here? Do we demean the memory of those who were executed even more by trivializing the circumstances of their death when we claim it is a mere "put on"? Did those who accused Jacopetti and Prosperi of complicity in the executions they captured on film efface and pervert - exploit - the memory of those who died even more than the filmmakers themselves? But if that's the case, then isn't Cannibal Holocaust, again, the most guilty party?
Ironically, we find a criticism of the exploitation of humans for the purpose of filmmaking in a film that itself commits that crime (possibly), and furthermore (definitely) exploits animals for the same purpose. Cannibal Holocaust is truly postmodern, then, in its self-referential criticism. The film accuses itself and finds itself guilty. Consider this snippet of dialogue between the anthropologist and the producer after they have watched a scene in which the documentary crew terrorizes a small village, killing a pig, in their quest for powerful footage:
"Oooo, I'm drained. You must admit, it's exceptional footage. I - I didn't expect such impact, such authenticity!" "I don't know. I don't think exceptional is the right word." "You don't?" "No. I mean, what's exceptional about a primitive tribe, like the Yacumo, being ... terrorized, and forced into doing something they don't - they don't normally do." "Come on now, professor! Let's be realistic, who knows anything about the Yacumo? . . . today people want sensationalism! The more you rape their senses, the happier they are!" . . . . "The Yacumo indian is a primitive and he has to be respected as such. You know, did you ever think of the ... the Yacumo point of view, that we might be the ones who are savages?" "Well I've never thought of it that way, but it's an interesting idea." "Yes, let's say things were reversed, right? and the Yacumo attacked your house, defiled everything that you held holy. You know that pig that was killed? That was food for those people. Now, what'd happen if somebody came to your house, when you were hungry, and took the little bit of food you had in the refrigerator, and threw it down the toilet? . . . would you behave in a civilized way? . . . would you like people to make money off your misery?"
But of course, Deodato himself is a filmmaker who has just had a pig shot on screen (although he wasn't actually terrorizing any "primitives" . . . ). In fact, Deodato and many of the participants in the film regret having made it and, in particular, the decision to kill and mutilate animals for shock value. Despite their regret, though, several of them still acknowledge the genius of the film, a genius which transcends the ethical choices involved in its filming.
Whatever retrospective view we may take of Cannibal Holocaust, the response to the director's ethical choices upon its first release were unambiguous: Deodato was arrested and charged first with obscenity, then with murder. He had convinced the actors who played the documentary crew to go into hiding for a year, but after the accusations were leveled against him, he was forced to track them down to prove his innocence. After the charge of murder was dropped, Deodato was charged with animal cruelty and the film was banned in Italy (it is purportedly the most banned film of all time).
Cannibal Holocaust has had a profound influence on exploitation cinema and spawned many immitators, though none with the subtlety and depth of the original. In addition to at least 6 unofficial sequels, the film was being remade (with animal mutilation and all) as early as 1981's Cannibal Ferox. 1999's The Blair Witch Project, though thematically very different, borrowed heavily from both the filmmaking techniques and marketing strategy of Cannibal Holocaust.
the trailer for Cannibal Holocaust:
memorable editing moment: Rather than any particular scene, it is the overall structure of Cannibal Holocaust's editing which is to be admired. Deodato uses 35mm for the real time narrative and 16mm for the film crew's footage, all of which is shot verite style (i.e. hand held, as if the filmmakers were "really" molesting primitives and interacting with cannibals). The complete consistency of this "verite" footage is what lends the film enough authenticity and power that it could be mistaken by authorites for a snuff film. It's potency is increased by placing it at the end of the film, after its recovery by our anthropologist. We see the interaction with each tribe first by our humanist anthropologist (whose job is made more difficult by their recent encounter with the exploitative film crew), then by the film crew ~ we see the aftermath of the damage before the damage itself. Add to this the profound beauty of the cinematography and Riz Ortolani (who also scored for Jacopetti and Prosperi)'s score, and the overall experience is far more powerful than the sum of its parts ~ the true mark of good editing.
"Keep rolling, we're going to get an Oscar for this!"
"I slept with Faith, and found a corpse in my arms on awaking; I drank and danced all night with Doubt, and found her a virgin in the morning."
~ Crowley
"We should not let ourselves be burnt for our opinions: we are not that sure of them. But perhaps for this: that we may have and change our opinions." ~ Nietzsche
The great black one descended from on high to devour civilization. Instead, however, he spat us out; our core had become too rotten even for the stomach of the destructor.
