蒙骗

在日本電影人自從一九一O年代中期開始產生「日本電影」的自覺後,經常發現在海外、尤其是欧美電影中並未正確地描寫日本。 例加早在日本出現真正女演員之前就以好萊塢女星身分出道的青木鶴子,她在托馬斯·因斯執導的《火之海》( The Wrath of the Gods )(一九一四)中與早川雪洲同合,但在試映室中觀賞的日本人無不滿心困惑。《火之海》是因為櫻島火山爆發受到全世界骐體囑目而企畫的電影。雪洲飾演的沒落貴族和女兒一起在櫻島過著與世隔絕的生活。一場暴風雨過後,一名美國青年被沖上岸·跟雪州之女墜入愛河。島上傳説,如果島上的女人跟外國人相戀火山便會喷發:實際上也真的發生了。島民在災害中紛紛喪生,但劇中这對戀人幸運逃出,被美國的船艦所救。這部電影在日本禁止上映。隔年一九一五年,西席•地密爾又起用雪洲拍攝〈矇騙)（ The Cheat),让日本人的愤怒达到高峰。劇中殘酷無比的日本人用烙鐵在白人女子雪白肩上烧出烙印，后来恶行败露，在法院遭受私刑，这个冲击性十足的故事不只在美国，在欧洲也大受欢迎，但在日本却被贴上【国耻电影】的标签，时至今日仍未公开上映。 《矇騙》帶來的衝擊促進了日本電影圈的電影改革運動。排除過去由女形和辯士構成的新派電影,起用西式女演員,確立起運用字幕、不需要辯士的電影型態。同時,除了日本國內,也積極將電影廣泛輸出至歐美市場;宣傳真正的日本樣貌。電影圈中國族主義的拾頭,跟他們迅速導入好萊塢技術與製作方式的態度密切相關。不、如果仿效傅柯所謂知識考古學的說法,前述對「日本電影」自覺、對歐美上映的日本題材之憤慨,還有對日本電影輸出海外的要求等等,就在無法確定嚴格因果關係的情形下同時成立了。而這一連串動向的主軸,就是归山教正在一九一七年左右提倡的「純電影劇運動」。 目前我們無法詳細得知最早在海外發行的日本電影為何。如果不看朝鮮、台湾等殖民地,早在一九 O O年代前半,已有日本的片商在曼谷及馬來半島等地上映搭配辯士的電影。根據紀錄,歸山的第三部執導作品、以電影藝術協會之名發表的<白菊物語》(一九二O),是應義大利委託而製作的作品。在這之後衣笠貞之助的《十字路》(一九二八)以《吉原之影》(ョシワラの影)之片名在欧洲引起熱烈討論,算是例外。但是管這些取材於王朝時代或江戶時代的悲戲碼因其異國情調獲得好評,也完全稱不上能正確描繪同時代的日本現代社會。 川喜多長政在一九二八年創立東和商事時,他腦中想的並非要將歐洲電影輪入日本,而是要把日本電影廣泛輸出到歐美。他創業隔年帶著灣口健二的《狂戀的女師父》(狂恋の女師匠)(一九二六)等三部無聲電影來到柏林尋求上映機會,不過這個計畫慘然受挫。又過了四年,德國片商將這三部電影重新剪接為一部 加上诡異的日文配音,冠上《日本》這個片名上映。當然,結果只招來嘲笑式的批評。不過有長期海外經驗的川喜多依然執著於電影中日本形象的問題,靜心等待下一次機會。 而憂心這些問題的不只是走在時代尖端的電影人。一九三三年,納粹掌控了德國政權,此時日本眾議院通過了「國策電影建議案」。在提案理由書中提到「外國公司制作之日本介經電影偏重描寫虚構奇異的風俗,恐損及本國格調,引來意料之外的误解」因此「无庸置疑，必须制作纯粹高雅的日本介绍电影供给海外。」根据这项决议，国策电影的出现受到极大期待 摘自《李香兰与原节子》

从dropbox里翻出来的大一时候写的文章，凑活着看吧，主要讲了早川雪洲（好莱坞第一位亚裔明星）在这部电影里演的那个角色Hara Arakau，本应该是一个威胁到美国白人中产家庭价值观的反派角色是如何引起观众迷恋的。（主要就是通过对反派实施重要暴力镜头的cut off 还有distancing，让观众得以在一个舒适的区间进行“欣赏”不至于“恐惧”和“反感”，并且通过服化道极尽表现人物身上异域文化的“神秘性”和“欣赏价值”）

Light shines on a Japanese man in his kimono, gradually illuminating his face, his chest and his hands, which remain crossed in front of him, distancing him a bit from the viewers. He sits at his desk slightly tilted against a completely black backdrop, stares with a serious look for a short while, turns his head and starts working with those strangely shaped but finitely carved objects on the desk. Removing the lid of a brass brazier by one hand, holding a long, stick shaped wooden object in the other, he blows slightly over the brazier, and smoke swirls ominously over his face. He then puts the object inside the brazier, lift it out, and stamps his mark onto the base of an ivory statue. A rapid cut to a close up of his mark: a few strokes that constitute a shape that resembles a temple. He seems satisfied with his work and turns off the lights, leaving us with complete darkness with only a glow coming from the brazier. He stands up a little and the glow lands on half of his face. He puts back the lid of the burner and shadow of cross stripes casts over his face, mystifying his facial expressions.

Accompanied by the beautifully written exotic score played by violin, piano and flute, this scene, the very first scene of the 1915 film The Cheat, introduces us to Hara Arakau, a mysterious, wealthy Japanese art dealer who lives among white middle-class Americans in Long Island. Upon release, The Cheat achieved big box office success. However, instead of being impressed by the leading actress Fannie Ward, the audience became more fascinated with the supporting Japanese actor, Sessue Hayakawa, who played the role of Arakau. This fascination opened a gate for him to become a “full-fledged star” and to achieve superstardom eventually. (Miyao 21) In this essay, I will try to explain this fascination with Arakau through a close analysis of film techniques such as medium shots, extremely extravagant props and costumes in the scene where Arakau assaults Edith Hardy and brutally brands his mark on her shoulder --- the culmination of Arakau as an evil outsider.

The Cheat tells the story of Arakau, the rich Japanese art dealer, offers his money to Edith Hardy, a white middle class woman who has extravagant tastes, after she lost the money from the Red Cross Fund in a failed investment. In exchange, he asks for “the cheat”. Mrs. Hardy tries to return the money after her husband’s success in stock market but gets turned down and violently assaulted by Arakau. During the fight, she shots Arakau. Knowing everything, Mr. Hardy attempts to take the charges to save her name, but Mrs. Hardy confesses the truth during the trial, Arakau gets attacked by the court audience and the couple gets reunited eventually.

First, the film utilizes almost solely medium shots to safely distance the viewers from Arakau when he demonstrates violence and avoids close up shots on his face to relieve them of the burden of getting emotionally attached. The “branding” scene which demonstrates the most physical violence in the entire film consists of mainly three shots: a medium shot of Arakau dragging Mrs. Hardy from the wall and forcing her to lay on his working desk with her faces down, a medium close up shot of Arakau brands his mark onto the the back of her shoulder despite of her fierce struggle, and a medium shot of Arakau pulls her up from the desk, shoves her heavily and she falls down to the floor. Throughout this entire sequence of shots which obviously involves intense physical conflicts and emotions, there is a strong presence of “distance” from the camera to Arakau created by the extensive usage of medium shots and a clear absence of details on the face of Arakau caused by lack of close up shots.

In the medium close up shot of when Arakau conducts the “branding”, which is an extreme form of violence as it exerts great pain, the actual “branding” is cut out of sight. The audience could not see how the scaldingly hot marking tool directly touches the skin of Mrs. Hardy’s shoulder. They could only infer that the “branding” happens through the swirling smoke that rises and the fidgeting arms of Mrs. Hardy. By leaving this extreme violence out of sight, the audience could experience the thrill of “being in danger” without having to bear the pain or feeling unsafe and unsettled. When other forms of slightly lighter violence such as pulling hair, shoving and dragging are displayed in the same scene, the film utilizes a similar strategy --- medium shot. A medium shot automatically creates distance between the object being filmed and the camera. In this case, the distance created would buffer the intensity of the violence for the audience and safely protect them from the “threat” or “danger” that Arakau signifies, leaving them a safe and comfortable space for spectatorship. In other words, when Arakau demonstrates violence on screen, he is a symbol of threat, but this threat is carefully contained in the film through either cutting it completely out of the frame or a medium shot that distance the viewers from it, creating a shield of protection. Therefore, the audience could experience the excitement and thrill one one hand, but also feel safe and comfortable on the other as the “violence” experienced by the female protagonist does not exert on themselves directly. This “thrill but safe” viewing experience provides a foundation for the fascination towards the character Arakau.

It is also worth noting that there is an absence of close up shots featuring the facial expressions of Arakau. Even in the medium-close up shot of the “branding”, he faces slightly downwards towards the desk, with shadows of Mrs. Hardy’s struggling arms keep crossing his face from time to time, making his facial expressions barely discernible to the audience. The audience could only observe his deep frowns, nasolabial folds, indicating he is putting in great effort, but no other information regarding his mental state is being disclosed or revealed. Thus, unable to observe the subtle changes of minute details on Arakau’s face in this critical scene, the audience would fail to connect with the character, to actually understand his feelings and thoughts when he displays these violent behavior, not to mention to empathize or identify with him. This disconnection with the character forces Arakau to stay at the stereotypical image of a Japanese sinister rather than being treated as a unique individual. In other words, since questions like “why does he do this”, “what does he feel when he is doing this” remain unanswered, the viewers could attribute his violent behavior of assaulting Mrs. Hardy to something “evil” or “sinful” innate within him, or worse to some “nature” of his race, culture, or ethnic group. This result might be undesirable in terms of removing racial stereotypes, but it is desirable to the audience as the film provides them with a simple reductive approach to a huge, complicated racial problem. Since Arakau is pictured nothing more than the stereotypical Japanese sinister in the film, the viewers could naturally treat him as one, relieving them of the responsibility to discuss more deeply involved racial issues. Without this agonizing psychology burden of discussing racial stereotypes, the viewers could immerse themselves more in the spectatorship of the character Hara Arakau.

Apart from strategically selecting shot types to create a safe and comfortable space for spectatorship, The Cheat tooks advantage of mise-en-scene elements such as extravagant costumes and props to highlight the mysteriousness and exoticness of Arakau as an “outsider” of white middle-class Americans in New York city. The spectatorship of racial difference itself provides great aesthetic pleasure and joy for the audience which is at the core of the fascination with Hara Arakau.

The “branding” took place inside Arakau’s shoji room rather than his modernized, western style living room that holds the Red Cross Ball, hinting his unassimilable Japanese identity. In the scene where fierce physical conflicts occurred, we could see how Mrs. Hardy is encompassed by the proliferation of Japanese object when she tries to escape the shoji room. When Arakau tries to grab her the first time, she retreats back to a corner in front of a wall with eerie dark paintings and curls up beside a brass buddha statue. The fake sakura flower that she played curiously with earlier is placed to her left and a wisp of smoke rises ominously from the brass brazier on Arakau’s desk. When he drags her from the wall to the table, he has to swept off a bunch of small-piece art objects off his wooden table with intricate carvings and shallow thin notches on the side to clear some space. On the right side, a dimly lighted lantern projects a glow. The costume of Araku in the scene is also worth noting. He wears parts of the classic three-piece suit ---- white short, bow-tie and vest on the inside. On the outside, he wears a kimono, a traditional Japanese costume, with fine white geometric pattern on the outside. The mixture of two kinds of costume tells his identity precisely --- a well-established Japanese man in the western world, someone who is Americanized on the surface, but could not truly assimilate with the culture due to his deep-down Japanese identity.

All of these props and costume, from sakura flower, kimino, buddha statue and lanterns are all representative symbols of Japanese culture. They are considered both “primitive” and “spiritual” in the eyes of middle-class Americans and are accepted favorably in accordance with the middle-class discourse on arts and the home from the late 1870s. (Miyao 31) Lanterns are object for illumination and lighting during pre-modern times, which is completely outdated for a modern urban life, signifying its “primitiveness”. Buddha statue and Sakura flower, on the other hand, possess a sense of spirituality or moral purity. Buddha statue is a symbol for Buddhism, a widespread belief and religion in Japan, focusing on personal spiritual development. Sakura, or cherry blossom, under Japanese culture context, is a metaphor for the the ephemeral nature of life. For the audience, the spectatorship of these objects within Arakau’s shoji room not only provides them with satisfaction of their curiosity for an unknown, mysterious and different culture but also great aesthetic pleasure and appreciation of the “primitive” and “spiritual”.

The fascination for the character Hara Arakau in The Cheat among the audience arises mainly due to four different reasons. First, the extensive usage of medium shots distances the viewers from the violence displayed by the character, providing them with a safe and comfortable space for spectatorship. Second, the lack of close up shots on the facial expressions of Arakau disconnects the character with the audience, forcing him to stay exactly like the stereotypical villain and thus relieving them of the burden to engage in deeper and more complicated racial questions. After establishing a burden-free, safe and sound viewing environment, the film provides extravagant props and costumes that not only satisfies their curiosity for an exotic culture, but also provides them with aesthetic pleasure for spectatorship.