Mythic Language: Cultural Agitations in Breathless
Nathaniel Pope
November 2007

Things American have a mythical element which creates their own existence.
                                -Jean-Luc Godard

    Foreign language dialogue plays an important role as mythical cultural object and embodiment of American ideology in Jean-Luc Godard’s New Wave authorial classic, A Bout De Souffle (1960). While traditionally viewed in terms of reinforcing editing discontinuities, an interrupting agent paradoxically aiding a seamless flow of fragmentary montage, a dynamic mix of English and French underlie Godard’s political power as auteur: an ability to impose his expert will by projecting American superiority in the face of a complicated cultural climate. Yet the answer as to where this commentary originates cannot be as simple as from the auteur. Rather, the employment of language articulates the troubled cultural relationship between France and America in a globalizing post war environment. In this essay I examine the way this tension manifests itself as fearful excitement through conversation shortly after the start of the film as Michel Poiccard (Jean-Paul Belmondo) encounters Patricia Franchini (Jean Serberg) vending the New York Herald Tribune along the Champs Elysées. I will restrict this analysis to an explanation of mythic language and subsequent function as a cultural agitation that glorifies globalization.
  
    In order to explore the film’s linguistic ideology, it is first useful to briefly define mythic language in terms of Roland Barthes idea of “depolitised speech.” According to Barthes, “myth” functions on an ideological level by converting complex political values and beliefs to simple common sense meanings. It is Patricia that embodies a similar oral process of American myth making, one that begins to occur even prior to her first appearance on screen. As Michel arrives on the Champs Elysées he greets a paper girl that directs the way to Patricia, responding in English to an inaudible request, “Yes, she’s over there.” At this point a cut reveals an American car and Patricia, who although hidden behind it invitingly calls out “NEW YORK HAROLD TRIBUNE.” slowly revealing herself. It is here that English begins to substitute complex American political values and capitalist beliefs for common sense French meanings of fear and excitement. Whereas the French language served as the international language of diplomacy prior to the war, the ensuing conversation between Patricia and Michel reveals an underlying cultural agitation: a deep seated uneasiness concerning language. 

    Mythic language functions as cultural agitation by flowing through a constant manifestation of America’s growth as global power. While evident throughout the flirtatious conversation by Patricia’s marked accent, her questions a continuously seductive affront to French linguistic purity, “C’est quoi les Champs?,” the political statement is explicitly accentuated by the interrupting nature of her solicitations as she and Michel discuss l’horoscope. After buying a copy of the New York Harold Tribune and convincing Patricia to amont (“climb”) rather than descend (descend) the Champs Elysées, Michel returns the paper expressing disappointment, unable to find a horoscope. Patricia’s increasingly predictable curiosity, “C’est quoi l’horoscope?” and Michel’s response as authoritative demand “l’avenir: j’invite savoir l’avenir, pas toi?”  function merely as a means to Patricia’s answer: the “NEW YORK HAROLD TRIBUNE,” pointing the way to the film’s political critique for the growing coarseness of her cries (one heard just prior to and the other immediately following the exchange) work to frame the episode, declaring America the inevitable future of Western society.

    These linguistic cultural agitations work to glorify globalization by converting deep-seated fears of cultural imperialism to cineophelia that maintains a sense of French cultural interest. The mythic quality of the language is very important in this sense, its mere presence working to desensitize viewers to the vary process by which economic, cultural, and political systems become integrated, encouraging atypical ideas of acculturation (mixing) as a part of French culture while maintaining strong principles of assimilation deep-seated in the French way of thinking. The use of language is very propagandistic in this sense, particularly evident in the ease with which Patricia and Michel converse. Again her questions are important. Although Patricia has much to learn about France, we do not see the difficulty, confusion, and underlying disconnect normally characteristic of international exchanges. For example, Patricia always tries to understand the French culture by asking questions, a traditionally American approach to cultural immersion.  After the horoscope exchange she asks Michel what he is doing (“Qu’est-ce qu’il y a?”). When Michel responds that he is looking at her, Patricia calmly asks if he is mad at her. This seemingly innocuous response embodies the way Godard uses language to glorify an American sense of communication. Question and answer. Arguably the most important glorification of globalization is the encouragement to embrace America as hospitable host, the French role as tour guide in post war era of cultural agitation. Via Godard, fears of cultural imperialism melt away as Patricia’s accented, yet “très jolie voix” lulls Michel into a sense of comfort, which although seemingly overturned through her betrayal later in the film works, at the very least, to reinforce the idea that it is best to have America as an ally to prevent the death of culture.

    In conclusion, it is ultimately Godard’s construction of persuasive language politics that creates a mythical element of American globalization and points the way towards a progressive acceptance of the Hollywood tradition while maintaining firm roots in a linguistic culture of quality. The function of language as cultural agitation serves both to reveal and overcome an underlying French sense of uneasiness in post war Europe. And although Hollywood films had commodified Parisian culture prior to the New Wave and had incorporated similar linguistic combinations, it is the propagandistic excitement and commdification of New York, America and English accents that Godard brings to the fore as facilitator of cultural critique if not absolute auteur

Bibliography

Barthes, Roland (1957). Mythologies. London: Vintage 1993

Turner, Denis. “Breathless: Mirror Stage of the Nouvelle Vague .” Substance 12.4 (1983): 50-63.

A Bout De Souffle. DVD. Dir. Jean-luc Godard. Studio Canal. 1959.

Schatz, Thomas. Hollywood Genres. Boston: McGraw Hill, 1981.
       
Thompson, Kristin  and David Bordwell, Film Art: An Introduction. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2004   

Thompson, Kristin  and David Bordwell, Film History: An Introduction. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2002.