An Exchange Concerning an Ingmar Bergman Quote

"People ask what are my intentions with my films, my aims. It is a difficult and dangerous question, and I usually give an evasive answer: I try to tell the truth about the human condition, the truth as I see it. This answer seems to satisfy everyone, but it is not quite correct. I prefer to describe what I would like my aim to be.

There is an old story of how the cathedral of Chartres was struck by lightning and burned to the ground. Then thousands of people came from all points of the compass, like a giant procession of ants, and together they began to rebuild the cathedral on its old site. They worked until the building was completed — master builders, artists, labourers, clowns, noblemen, priests, burghers. But they all remained anonymous, and no one knows to this day who built the cathedral of Chartres.

Regardless of my own beliefs and my own doubts, which are unimportant in this connection, it is my opinion that art lost its basic creative drive the moment it was separated from worship.

It severed an umbilical cord and now lives its own sterile life, generating and degenerating itself. In former days the artist remained unknown and his work was to the glory of God. He lived and died without being more or less important than other artisans; 'eternal values,' 'immortality' and 'masterpiece' were terms not applicable in his case.

The ability to create was a gift. In such a world flourished invulnerable assurance and natural humility. Today the individual has become the highest form and the greatest bane of artistic creation."
-Ingmar Bergman

My friend and I proceeded to discuss the quote, as follows:

ABRAHAM PALOYA: It looks as though you have 5 separate quotes.

WILLIAM LINDBERG: But I don't!

AP: Very interesting quote.

WL: I don't know how true it is, but if nothing else it makes you think about what you're doing in a different light.

AP: Do you think he's saying that his intention with film is to revert himself as an artist back to one of worship?

WL: Personally, I think he's saying don't be bigger than your art.

AP: Yeah. Ok. I like it. I think Mel Gibson is bigger than his art. (laughter)

WL: YES! Thank you! Hollywood is bigger than its art because it values profit to an extent that dilutes the material.

AP: Yes, that's been true for decades. The billboards that read 'Mel Gibson's Apocalypto' were interesting if only because his name was nearly as big as the title of the film.

WL: I should say studios, because indie films can still be Hollywood. You could argue that the 60's were the change after the New Wave.

AP: The thing that shocked me the most from Death to the Tinman (Sundance Short Film from '07) was that the director's name was at the top of the credits list when it rolled, but his name was the same size as any other person involved in the production.

WL: That's true, but try and find a film that's not marketed with names.

AP: It's tough. Especially the bigger the name. And if your work is bigger than your name, then your past work is used to sell your new work, if that makes any sense. For example: From the Director of So-and-So.

WL: Even simpler than that: Starring... That alone did it in. People went to see I Am Legend for one reason alone: Will Smith was in it. Intentional or not, he is bigger than what he makes a living from.

AP: Yes. I'd say it's somewhat inevitable in that the movie-going public recognize their favorite actors... and if a director finds him or herself compatible with the actor, they simply won't refuse to use another just to keep their art grounded... but I see where youre coming from.

WL: I'm just oversimplifying it.

AP: The funny thing about Will Smith and any other famous actor (Johnny Depp has recently become a GREAT example) is that their celebrity is in no way due to their ego... its the studio's that boast names to this brobdingnagian proportion!

WL: Yes, agreed.

The conversation ended there... but I think we've finally wrapped our heads around the quote of Mr. Bergman. You can decide for yourself if you think the meaning of the quote differs from what we concluded.