This article summarizes the periods of “historical avant-gardes” in film history. Specifically, it discusses modernism as having three “coordinates”: official art of aristocratic regimes, new technology and industrial revolution’s impact on film, and the hope of social revolution. He then goes on to claim that the film theory of such movements was expressed in both written and filmic manifestos, the latter of which he offers “Zéro de Conduite” as an example.  He describes how avant-garde films were labeled such not only because of their unconventional aesthetics, but also their independent modes of production. He then divides up avant garde into three distinct movements: Impressionism, Pure Cinema, and Surrealism.  However, within the avant garde there were two distinct tendencies to achieve either a high autotelic form, or a low form that attacked art establishment. He goes on to describe surrealism as a way to link moving images with metaphorical process of automatism, the actual functioning of thought. He also mentions the Surrealist’s praise of the subversive, anarchic undercurrents in slapstick films. Finally, he discusses the potential to liberate the repressed by combining dichotomous elements of fantasy and mundane reality. By using certain cinematic techniques, Surrealists not only represented dream but also mimicked its internal structuration. Surrealists had faith in the ability of film to unleash the “liberating energies of the Unconscious.” He then discusses the Surrealist opinion of cinema as close to a dream itself, and goes on to mention many post-modernist theorists of the “dream state.”
    This article is a valuable addition to my thesis, because it provides more background on the artistic movements surrounding Vigo’s film, and how exactly he belonged to some and distinguished himself from many others. It is interesting that the author sees “Zéro” as a filmic manifesto, as its surreal opposition to and victory over the “establishment” adults in the film, and the historical context of it’s controversy and prohibition by the government would certainly support that qualification. The article’s description of the pure energy and creative force of slapstick-like humor as a threat to the establishment is very relevant to Vigo’s film, as the children’s activities and the film’s techniques exude a kind of creative, imaginative energy that eventually topples the authority of the school. The humorous, mischievous tendencies of the children are directly paralleled to the unimaginative, boring, stuffy old teachers who hardly ever smile (save Huguet). It is important to note, however, while discussing slapstick as a threat to the establishment that in the film, a “renegade” teacher named Huguet (who wears a different color coat than the rest of the teachers) plays a part in inciting this student rebellion by indulging and encouraging their silliness with imitations of Charlie Chaplin playing the Tramp in the schoolyard, or classes where he teaches standing on his head. Slapstick plays a large role in fomenting the student revolt, and it is this humor that laughed in the face of such contemporary serious crises in authority around the world, such as the Great Depression, which anarchists saw as a crisis in capitalism, one they were all-too-willing to poke fun at. There is more to discuss about Surrealism, in a later post.

Stam, Robert. "The Historical Avant-Gardes." Film Theory. New York University: New York. Blackwell Publishing, 2000. 55-58.
.

This article, written by a painter and film producer, discusses the presence of avant-garde techniques within the film industry.  The author argues that, in addition to documentary and fictional entertainment, a third category of film should be formally added: experimental film.  The article describes the nature of the avant-garde, outlining its history from cubism to surrealism, and posits that it is not necessarily technique that defines the style, but rather disinhibition of the artist.  For the author, technique without creative energy is not justified as avant-garde, a style that is dedicated to the freedom of the artist.  The article mentions Fantasia as one of two examples of mainstream films that the author deems avant-garde.  This qualification is given to the film because of its focus on abstract movement, a visual

The fact that this article was written almost a decade after the initial release of Fantasia supports my thesis because the 9-year period in between substantiates a retrospective analysis.  The author is able to describe Disney's work as avant-garde because of the priveleged position to look back and compare it to other films of its time and to view it in the context of the artistic movement of surrealism.  However, the time elapsed between the release of the film and the publication of this article is relatively short, and thus the article could also be analyzed as a "late contemporary" of Fantasia.

Richter, Hans. "The Avant-Garde Film Seen from within." Hollywood Quarterly autumn 4 (1949): 34-41. JSTOR. University of Pennsylvania Library, Philadelphia. 27 Nov. 2008 .

Unseen Cinema: Early American Avant-Garde Film 1894–1941, and: Unseen Cinema: Early American Avant-Garde Film 1893-1941

    Chapter 13 of volume 8 “‘What Went Wrong?’ American Avant-Garde Cinema of the 1960’s” begins with a concern about the meaning of authorship and uses the films of Kenneth Anger, all beginning with the phrase “a film by Anger” as a starting point of analysis. The expression “by Anger” envelops two important aspects of Avant-Garde filmmaking of the 1960’s. It represents both the individual vision, as films were often the product of a single author, and the aggressive style inherent in the movies, which confronted expectations of film and addressed relevant social issues. Anger and his work are not mentioned much after the beginning of the chapter. Instead, a broad and thorough analysis of the Avant-Garde movement of the 1960’s is presented in terms of its emergence and the response of filmmakers to the social context of the 1960’s concerning politics, sexuality, and race.
The changes in American cinema were marked by the failure of Hollywood studios. Therefore, there was a strong influence of European cinema particularly the French New Wave. The new American Avant-Garde was also closely associated with the formation of social bonds. Hence the initial geographic isolation of the movement was principally centered in New York City and San Francisco Bay. However, the text does not fix a narrow concrete definition on the complex movement acknowledging the exception of Stan Brakhage working out of Colorado.
    The chapter contends intertextuality, addressing issues that were larger than those portrayed explicitly in the film itself, connected the experimental films of the 1960’s together, as well as linking some experimental films to the Hollywood’s genre. Parody and rethinking of Hollywood conventions were a recurrent motif of Avant-garde filmmakers, and helped shape the identity of experimental film as a contrast to the repression that lurked in Hollywood.
    While the chapter examines several distinctive directors and their major works, it conscientiously groups them into social and ideological categories. Thus, it bridges the gap between individual vision and universal resonance. Films of the movement were distinguished by individual authorship and a resentment of racial and sexual oppression, which the Avant-Garde filmmakers collectively combated against.

Based on the short story by Daphne du Maurier, Directed by Nicolas Roeg, Screenplay by Chris Bryant and Allan Scott, Music by Pino Donnagio, Starring Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie