Japanese Avant-Garde and Experimental Film

Even though, on the wave of increasing interest in Japanese film culture among the researchers, the topic of Japanese experiment is almost absent in general publications on the expanded cinema, avant-garde or experimental film. The exception can be the works of Julian Ross, who gets especially involved in describing Japanese expanded practice.¹ However, the mentioned author focuses mostly on the 1960–1970s period and keeps returning to the artists from those times. According to that, not only the newest wave of the experimenting filmmakers deserve recognition but also the connections between the 1950–1980s avant-garde and post-2000 experimental films should be analyzed.

Moreover, as Ryszard Kluszczyński observes, there are two reasons why the discourse about the avant-garde is still actual in the 21st century. Firstly, he mentions that since the beginning of the 1990s there appeared several publications stating that the postmodern epoch was proclaimed too soon and the ideas of modernity (or the new modernity) are still vividly alive. If the academic and artistic discourses, which were the critical parts of shaping the perception of the “modern,” state that the modernity did not end, giving the space to postmodernity, then the position of the avant-garde, discussing the concept of modernity, is ←13 | 14→still strong.² The second argument underlining the relevance of researching on the avant-garde in the 21st century is that the progressive character of the new media art manifests many features typical to the avant-garde movements – for example, anti-traditional character or political and social engagement.³ According to that, the new media art, among which the new Japanese experiments can be situated, may be perceived as the new avant-garde – what the contemporary Japanese authors often underline. Kluszczyński also points out on the importance of the Internet, as the platform crucial in the process of shaping the “avant-garde of the digital era,” “cyber avant-garde” or “the avant-garde of the future” – as he calls it.⁴ Subsequently, the Internet became the field of the extensive activity of the new generation of Japanese experimental artists – almost as important as screenings and performances. Summarizing the points provided by Kluszczyński, it can be observed that developing research on the historical avant-garde opens the possibility of creating comparisons between the origins of the movement and the achievements of the new generation of the artists. Consequently, searching for the correlations between old and new allows showing the constant evolution: the metamorphosis of the tendencies of the independent artists, groups, and collectives.⁵ According to the above, the main research problem that kept returning in my publication revolved around the extent to which the new Japanese avant-garde artists fulfill the postulates, aesthetics, and objectives of the previous generations of the filmmakers.

Japanese avant-garde film, closely connected to street theatre and performative activities, can be described both as a conglomerate of the Western audiovisual influences and the example of the unique aesthetic quality. The style of the Japanese filmmakers was born through a combination of the inspirations taken from the Western artists with the search for the meaning of the post-war socio-political changes. Moreover, the variety of forms and themes provided by the artists allows looking at Japanese avant-garde as on the phenomena expanding the activities of the Western fathers of the avant-garde movement.

The main point of interest depicted in this book – the avant-garde film on the Japanese ground – emerged not only from the combination of the influences of ←14 | 15→the Japanese and Western art but also as the final (artistic) result of the eventful atmosphere of the 1960s. It was the time, when the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, known as ANPO, was signed by the Japanese government. The ratification of the treaty on May 20, 1960, led to the protests – uniting students, artists, workers, and other groups within Japanese society.⁶ Moreover, under the influence of such events as 1970 World Exposition in Osaka (Expo’ 70) and the activities of the various groups, collectives or art centers, the Japanese avant-garde movement evolved. Its aesthetics changed through time, meeting with such phenomena as the New Wave cinema (nūberu bāgu), the body transgressions of the pink films (pinku eiga),⁷ as well as the technological novelties appearing throughout the time.

Writing about the post-war Japanese avant-garde artists, Isolde Standish mentions that “A generational consciousness based on political opposition was intimately linked to the student movements of the 1950s and 1960s. Also, they shared experiences as Japan’s first generation of post-war filmmakers who were artistically stifled by a monopolistic and hierarchal commercial studio system […].”⁸ Following Standish’s observation, it should be emphasized that the artistic pursuits of the first Japanese avant-garde directors can be perceived as opposed to commercialism and classical Japanese cinema. The new counter-cinema also addressed a different audience: politically conscious and interested in novelty offered by perception-challenging visual forms.⁹

To situate the listed influences, changes, metamorphoses, and development of Japanese avant-garde and experimental film, I start my deduction from the brief description of the parameters of avant-garde film activity. The basis of theoretical research, conceptions, and definitions provided by the Western researchers will further allow creating comparisons and recognize the distinctive features of the Japanese movement. In the first part of the chapter dedicated to the theoretical approach, I also present the critique, comments, and relations of the avant-garde and mainstream cinema, as well as take into consideration the position of the viewer encountering experimental or non-narrative films. Furthermore, ←15 | 16→I emphasize the role of a collective and group in avant-garde practice – what will also be the basis of Japanese avant-garde movement.

The second part of the first chapter was focused on the parameters of Japanese avant-garde activity, which allows listing the similarities and differences between the development of the movement on Eastern and Western grounds. There, I present the theory of avant-garde from the perspective of the Japanese writers and researchers, such as Tarō Okamoto (1911–1996),¹⁰ Kiyoteru Hanada (1909–1979), Takahiko Iimura (b. 1937) and other significant personas. I also give a brief introduction into the complex history of continually emerging and vanishing avant-garde groups on the Japanese ground. I also briefly comment on their influence on avant-garde aesthetics as a concept. The historical outline serves to explain the origins of the differences in defining what is ‘avant-garde’ and ‘experimental’ on the Japanese ground. I conclude the chapter with some thoughts on the reception of counter-cinema in Japan.

The second chapter revolves around the presentation of the development of Japanese avant-garde and experimental film from its origins to the 1990s. I start from situating the Futurist, Dada and Surrealist inspirations in the broader context of the Japanese avant-garde. There I discuss the influences of The Futurist Art Association – the forerunner of Japanese avant-garde, and MAVO group on the further avant-garde practice. Moreover, I comment on the visual aesthetics of Surrealism that migrated from the West and was reconsidered by Japanese artists.¹¹ In the following sections, I focus on the themes, objectives, and aesthetics adopted by the Japanese filmmakers before the year 2000, especially paying attention to the controversies. Later on, the controversial themes were almost entirely rejected by the post-2000s generation of experimental artists, so the analysis is also centered on searching for the reasons of that state. Among the Japanese authors from between the 1950s and 1980s, I chose to focus on those providing the most significant inspirations to the newest generation of the experimental artists. Primarily, I paid attention to those mentioned by the young experimental filmmakers during the interviews. According to this, I provide some thoughts on Shūji Terayama’s (1935–1983) art, mainly focusing on the reception of his films and performances, as well as on his “cult” status among the ←16 | 17→Japanese creators of avant-garde pictures. Among the 1950s–1990s artists who focused on body transgressions, searching for new ways of establishing contact with the viewers and encouraging them to reconsider the social and political reality, I also comment on Donald Richie (1924–2013), Takahiko Iimura, Masao Adachi (b. 1939) and Takashi Itō (b. 1956) – the author between two epochs.

However, after the popularity boom of the multiplex cinemas in Japan in the 1990s,¹² the interest in avant-garde and experimental forms of expression faded away. Even though during that period Mako Idemitsu and Takahiko Iimura released some of their less-known works, the overall shape of the Japanese cinema was far from the experimental techniques, transgressive issues and political engagement cultivated by the previous generations of the avant-garde artists. In that case, the period between 1990 and 2000 can be perceived as a gap between old avant-garde forms and a new dynamic movement.

After the year 2000, there appeared the new generation of independent filmmakers, who consider themselves as the founders of “the new avant-garde movement.” What is significant, they focus on expanding the technological and thematic areas set by the anti-mainstream artists from between the 1950s and 1980s. Observing the unique works of the Collective Plus [+]; group and other recognizable authors, the viewer can experience a wide range of themes, including the spiritual contemplation, ecological issues and problems with rapid urban development. However, among the works of the new generation of the avant-garde and experimental filmmakers, it is almost impossible to find the ←17 | 18→controversial issues, such as studies of sexual intercourses and political (or anti-political) agitation. Comparing the new experimental visual art to the topics and the ways of presentation used by the “old masters” of Japanese avant-garde (such as Terayama or Iimura), it can be easily observed that the new generation avoids the subjects that might be labeled as controversial. Instead, they mostly encourage the viewer to contemplate the beauty of the abstract, technologically advanced visual compositions. According to that, the comparison of the thematic areas of two generations of the Japanese independent artists allows understanding the general tendencies of looking at the pre-2000s avant-gardes both by the young experimental filmmakers and the contemporary viewers.

The crucial element of my study of the phenomenon was to provide insight and definitions that would respect the Western film and media theories and correspond with the uniqueness of Japanese aesthetics. According to that, writing ←18 | 19→about Japanese cinema, it is inevitable to mention the changes in the aesthetic categories on the Eastern ground, as well as refer to Japanese sources. On the other hand, the connections between East and West, especially when it comes to the early 1920s avant-garde conceptions, cannot be overlooked. It is also essential to take into consideration the models of communication between the artists and the audience – both Western and Japanese. By comparing them, I was able to find out more about the role and influence of the avant-garde art on the general perception of the viewers encountering audiovisual experiment.

According to the above, I especially underline the role of the artistic manifestos, published or announced on the Japanese ground in different cinematic epochs. It is worth mentioning that the idea of the avant-garde manifesto, which came from France together with Breton’s famous papers,¹³ in Japan evolved under the influence the authors’ creative approach – from the postulates published in niche magazines, through the collages printed in the newspapers, such as Shūji Terayama’s one, to short films and presentations shared on YouTube.¹⁴ The emphasis on the role and content of the manifestoes allows comparing the artistic aims of the particular Japanese filmmakers with the reception of their works. The approach I introduced also helps in distinguishing the mechanisms of emergence of the controversies around the avant-garde or experimental films.

Moreover, while researching on the avant-garde film, I used the historical methods and analyzed the influence of such events as the protests against signing the ANPO treaty or the Hiroshima (and later Fukushima) nuclear disaster on Japanese independent films. Also, the anti-military movements and the emergence of counter-cultural practices were tightly connected to the artists’ attempts to comment on socio-political changes. Furthermore, trying to understand the connections between the history of Japan and the development of independent filmmaking, it is inevitable to take into account the globalizing trends that shaped the experimental film after 2000.

As Arnd Schneider underlines, the experimental film can also be analyzed while taking into consideration its practical value and perceive it as “the material process of visual perception.”¹⁵ Furthermore, in the monograph entitled ←19 | 20→Experimental Film and Anthropology, Schneider and Caterina Pasqualino observe that especially the 1960s and 1970s film experiments, being the reinterpretations of structuralist film, revolved around such issues as experiencing time and length of the film, narration, as well as the materiality of a film.¹⁶ The connection between audiovisual experiments with anthropology stems from the fact that the experimental film, considered as a material object, have a function of “doing something,” opposite to the narrative cinema, which is focused on the narration. The lack of narration in the experimental works provides that the viewer pays closer attention to experiencing the projection as a moment, closer to the performance than to the screening of a mainstream film.¹⁷ According to that, the observation of the viewer and the interest in the artists’ approach to the contact with the audience, as well as to their works, objectives, and inspirations, became the crucial part of my research on the experimental and avant-garde films.

In my research, I focused on the aesthetics and technical aspects of the chosen avant-garde and experimental films, however not deriving it from its political meaning and implications, where it was necessary to look at them through the lenses of socio-political changes afflicting Japan. The political issues were often the primary motive power for the artists. So that, describing the achievements of such figures as Masao Adachi or the members of MAVO collective, I drew the historical context of their pursuits.

I perceive the history of avant-garde film as the history of the people engaged in radical actions, striving for funding of their artistic activities and those, who always felt the need for transgressing the barriers of the social norms. Finally, it is the history of those who had great visions of changing the social order, and engaging the spectators, trying to build their utopian projects – often based on very vague plans and manifestoes. Those visions were, somehow, preserved and revived in the artistic pursuits of the new generation of the Japanese experimental filmmakers – even though they treated historical references selectively. However, by choosing their favorite components, the post-2000 filmmakers strive to continue and develop the aesthetic solutions that, if not for the sudden appearance of new experimental groups on the Japanese ground, could have been long gone. According to that, this book primarily aims at showing the connections between old and new, at the same time providing the insight into the history of Japanese ←20 | 21→avant-garde and experimental aesthetics, expanded in the achievements of the new generation.