Echo and Narcissus: Visita ou memórias e confissões by Manoel de Oliveira

If the­re was ever a film that was Echo and Nar­cis­sus in one and the same ges­tu­re it is Visi­ta ou memóri­as e con­fis­sões by Man­oel de Oli­vei­ra. A film so pre­cious that it had to be a secret. Film­ed in 1981 right after the direc­tor, then 73, had com­ple­ted his tetra­lo­gy of frus­tra­ted loves with a heart that is no dan­ger any­mo­re becau­se it has stop­ped, Oli­vei­ra had allo­wed scree­nings of the film only on two occa­si­ons during his life­time. The first was a scree­ning for the crew and cast and the second was during a retro­s­pec­ti­ve held in Lis­bon. Now the film has been freed due to a death, Oliveira‘s death at the age of 106 (every year in pri­son for the film was a year of life for its direc­tor). Rather than a memo­ry or a con­fes­si­on, it is a tes­tim­o­ny of a man who we can feel as much in the sen­si­bi­li­ty of his sounds, images and cuts as in his sto­ry. After all, this is a work of fic­tion, a fic­tion of the eter­nal we all can touch. But can we be sure of that?

Why Echo and Nar­cis­sus? Well, as the film is lar­ge­ly con­cer­ned with its direc­tor (who even doubts if it is a good idea to make a film about hims­elf while spea­king the cre­dits out loud in a way that could make Godard jea­lous) it acts like the eter­nal beau­ty of the mir­ror Nar­cis­sus is in love with. The film is like an album of sel­fies of Angé­li­ca whe­re every image beco­mes a saved memo­ry of things other­wi­se for­got­ten. Visi­ta ou memóri­as e con­fis­sões is a mother who gives birth to hers­elf (after she has died). While one might find this obses­si­on with images and their immor­ta­li­ty beau­tiful, one might encoun­ter some dif­fi­cul­ties with app­ly­ing it to a self-por­trait. But we can relax becau­se first­ly, this is not real­ly a film about Oli­vei­ra. It is a fic­tion made of memo­ries and con­fes­si­ons of the direc­tor, cer­tain­ly per­so­nal, auto­bio­gra­phi­cal but still made with the colours of num­e­rous flowers and the smi­le of Mona Lisa, who is loo­king at us in almost every shot in which Oli­vei­ra hims­elf appears as well as with a sen­se of time that brings this Nar­cis­sus clo­ser to Echo. Anti­ci­pa­ting his own self-importance, the direc­tor deci­ded for the film to beco­me some­thing else, to not-be Nar­cis­sus but to be the Echo of his own Nar­cis­sus. He locked it away and ope­ned a time in-bet­ween the mir­ror and the pro­jec­tion of the mir­ror. In this time he didn‘t give birth to his own life after his death, but to cine­ma, the fic­tion, the time its­elf. We can also speak of a time-image of tim­e­l­ess­ness or this first tear we all would have loved to save in a tiny box to remind us fore­ver of wha­te­ver we think about. Yes, the film is the love sto­ry of Echo and Nar­cis­sus, past and pre­sent, images and voices and the­r­e­fo­re it is a again a sto­ry of frus­tra­ted loves. It has to end in dis­ap­pearance like the sto­ry of Echo and Nar­cis­sus. But the­re is some­thing else here. Oli­vei­ra has tri­cked this dis­ap­pearance when he locked the film away. We have heard about detail­ed notes some direc­tors gave pro­jec­tion­ists, but never befo­re have the acts of dis­tri­bu­ti­on and pro­jec­tion been as much an artis­tic choice as in the case of Visi­ta ou memóri­as e con­fis­sões. For tho­se belie­ving in mira­cles cine­ma is final­ly a magic lan­tern again. Oli­vei­ra will dis­ap­pear for ever. As we know, the who­le idea of Echo‘s love is also buried in repe­ti­ti­on. Jac­ques Der­ri­da has writ­ten a gre­at deal about it. While repea­ting Echo mana­ges to find her own voice. The same is true for the film. It gets its own life until it is not about what it is show­ing or who­se time-image we are see­ing but about the pre­sence of cine­ma as such. It‘s a miracle.

Visits

Lar­ge parts of the film are not only con­cer­ned with Oli­vei­ra but also with the house he has been living in for 40 years, a house which he calls a laby­rinth in ano­ther film, Por­to da Min­ha Infân­cia. It is visi­ted by a shy came­ra move­ment and two voices (Tere­sa Madru­ga and Dio­go Dória), images and voices. They enter the see­mingly emp­ty place and look at uns­po­ken memo­ries and con­fes­si­ons. It beco­mes quite clear that the house is as much the soul of Oli­vei­ra as it is the film. Not only does the lover of archi­tec­tu­re pro­ject images of the past on the walls of the house later in the film and show us pho­to­graphs that watch from silent cup­boards, he also gives the film its struc­tu­re by means of archi­tec­tu­re. The ques­ti­on is always what is behind the next cor­ner, what is abo­ve and under, what is the time of this room? The struc­tu­re of the house is that of a film. Archi­tec­tu­re is Nar­cis­sus, Cine­ma is Echo. A frame is an object, a shot is a memo­ry of what has hap­pen­ed the­re and what is the made­lei­ne (call it plot-point if you are one of tho­se Hol­ly­wood dudes…) the­re. Rai­ner Wer­ner Fass­bin­der once sta­ted that he wan­ted to build a house with his films. Oli­vei­ra build­ed a film with his hou­ses. Not only does he save the histo­ry of this spe­cial house that was desi­gned by José Por­to, he saves his own sto­ry in the house as if it was a museum.

The­re are three figu­res of time in Visi­ta ou memóri­as e con­fis­sões. The first is the time of the house (its histo­ry). We can see it in the mate­ria­li­ty while the two voices slow­ly pass through it and we can hear and see it when the direc­tor tells us about it and screens litt­le sce­nes play­ing around the house. Moments of re-enact­ments switch with found foo­ta­ge, the shy came­ra moving through the house and Oli­vei­ra tal­king about his life. The second time is the fic­tion of the visit and the truth of the memo­ries and con­fes­si­ons which we can call the sto­ry. The sto­ry cir­cles around Oliveira‘s life and films. The­re are more places to visit than just the house whe­re the voices catch glim­p­ses of the past. For exam­p­le, the­re is the house of his wife Maria Isa­bel, about whom the direc­tor talks with deep respect (not with pas­si­on) and the­re is Portugal‘s last film stu­dio. All the­se places are full of vanis­hing life but the only thing that tells us about it is their emp­tin­ess (one may be remin­ded of Elia Kazan‘s The Last Tycoon). The third time is, as we alre­a­dy poin­ted out, the time the film was in the shadows of the heart­beat of the direc­tor. Then, it couldn‘t do any dama­ge. Now that the heart stop­ped bea­ting, the film beg­ins again, it hurts, it enriches.

visita2

May­be this is real­ly one of the first rea­li­stic sci­ence-fic­tion films in which time tra­vel­ling is made pos­si­ble not as a mat­ter of sto­ry but as a mat­ter of fact. So, is Visi­ta ou memóri­as e con­fis­sões real­ly a work of fic­tion? As always this is not real­ly a ques­ti­on. It is a film at the core of cine­ma and, like cine­ma, it was hid­den in order to be born again in the pre­sence of every look in the mir­ror, of every voice we fall in love with and of every frus­tra­ti­on about not being able to love, to kill, to live and to die. But the film seems more simp­le than that.