10/20 Post

First, referring back to our first few reading assignments (Plato, Vasari, Nietzsche, "Schematic Structure"), what are some ways in which "Belly of an Architect" constructs a narrative about artists and artistic creation?
Next, elaborate on how the film connects gender with creativity. You had some really great insights on that subject in class.

I think that "Belly of an Architect" constructed a narrative about artists in a very unusual way. To begin, we as viewers don't see into Kracklite's childhood. The movie opens with him on a train with a woman, which suggests he is older and already deep into his life. The movie didn't really follow the Schematic Structure we studied earlier in class. We don't see a look into Kracklite's childhood or youth. The look that we see in his "maturity" stage is the focal point of the movie, since he is supervising an exhibition of Boullee. We also know that his wife is pregnant with his child. LIke the other movies we have watched in class, the director portrays Kracklite's death in the film. It is ironic where his death takes place. It is at the opening of his exhibit. Not only is it at the opening of his exhibit (the beginning of the movie also had to deal with Boullee), but his wife is going into labor. As he is falling out of the window, we can hear a child crying, signifying the loss of one life, but the birth of another. The movie doesn't depict a funeral or any sort of "after death" rituals of Kracklite's body. The movie cuts off after his jumps to his death.

The movie suggests that there is a turning moment in an artist's life that pushes them over the edge and they appear different the rest of the movie. That is also the case in "Belly of an Architect." When Kracklite thinks his wife is trying to poison him, he becomes obsessed with the idea that he could die that way. The movie also shows that artists have that authoritative figure or predecessor that they look up to. Kracklite writes letters to Boullee-but for what? He knew Boullee was dead. The movie constructs the narrative that just because artists have a way of releasing their thoughts onto canvas/photograph/sculpture, doesn't mean they are releasing their emotions. Some of the first emotion we see Kracklite express is when he catches his wife cheating on him and he is crying in the hallway.

I think the film played with gender and creativity a lot. Obviously the central character was male. But the interesting thing was Kracklite was a supervisor of an exhibition. There weren't any moments in the film where we noticed any outstanding works of art that he did himself. All we see are sketches upon sketches he has done of the building. The creative element that Kracklite brings is his obsession with bellies. This strange obsession (thanks to his stomach cancer) plays into what he focuses on in paintings, sculptures and photographs throughout the movie. He relied on other people's greatness (i.e. Boullee) to become a known name himself. To me, that seems like a lack of artistic creativity.

The other dominant woman in the movie (besides Louisa) was a photographer and she utilized her creative talents. She used Kracklite as inspiration and also depicted images of bellies. She is the only woman in the film that is portrayed as being an artist or having any artistic abilities at all. The movie is male dominated. The other women that are portrayed in the film seem passive and submissive to the men. I feel like women's artistic talents were somewhat hidden in this film.

I enjoyed the film but at times I was confused as to why some parts were included into the movie. I thought some parts were drawn out (such as Kracklite finding Louisa cheating on him). I thought it was interesting when the little boy was climbing on the door when Louisa was having sex with Caspasian, he looked like he was Jesus being crucified on the cross. Kracklite also wore all white to his suicide, perhaps suggesting some divine reference.