Lost in Transition
(July 11, 2018)
Representations in films have an expiry date. What I mean by this is that it is rare to find a film whose topic and representation transcends time and conditions that allows for it to resonate with the audience, unless that particular topic is already considered far into the past. This is to say, what is already established as a representation of the past may have become fixed, and the representation of the present (or any recent past) is still subject to change and interpretation.
The image of Tokyo, and Japan in general, in Sofia Coppola’s 2003 film “Lost in Translation” may be considered an iconic imagery of the hypermodern city of Tokyo situated in the Asian region during the heyday, or what could be the remnants of the economic bubble. As such, the representation through the imagery of the bustling city of skyscrapers, a concrete jungle and overwhelming presence of people and commercialization makes it distinctively Tokyo. But only of that time. When comparing the representation with the experience and the economic growth of other Asian countries of today, however, the imagery becomes lost as there are more places nowadays that could replicate the same hypermodern imagery that the movie showcases, and what is left in the representation of Japan, Tokyo specifically, is the representation of the people. Here, Koichi Iwabuchi then notes of what at first may be considered as transnational indifference may best be called transnational dislocation as portrayed by the main characters in the film as they deal with the everyday life in Tokyo. However personal circumstances would hinder any intercultural understanding as each have a baggage of their own burden to overcome. This dislocation arises from the fact that Tokyo as a hypermodern city resembles much of the modern cities in the USA sans the people, the accent, and the mannerism or gestures. It is this, that at first, dislocates the characters of the film from performing accordingly and when situated in an environment that was meant to be familiar and yet finding one’s self alienated because of the difference masked by the facade of the hypermodern city, there arises the dislocations. Furthermore, according to Roland Barthes’s Empire of Signs, the very notion that there are multiple centers in Tokyo, already creates a sort of dislocation of any one-center that is supposed to be fixed. The city, then becomes a text, because of the relational signification of the various city centers to the populace, and that each space that a person occupies creates a new definition of its relation to the individual. We see the ambivalence of such spaces as we follow Scarlett Johansson’s character Charlotte tackle the space of their hotel suite, the bustling city of Tokyo, the almost out of this world serenity of the buddhist temple, the quiet gathering of the ikebana class, the traditional locations of Kyoto and even the spaces where she and Bill Murray’s character Bob occupy together. The reactions from the characters differ from the place where they are set, and even if the said location is part of the grand whole of Tokyo, the specific spaces they occupy creates their own narrative that is intertwined to their own relationship and circumstances, which makes it seem as though they are always caged-in. This is much more prominent in the case of Bob as the working environment and his hotel bedroom seems entirely alienating to him that he is portrayed to lose any sense of vitality until he begins to spend time with Charlotte and explore the cityscape of Tokyo with her.
Strangely enough, when thinking of the representations, the concept of the hypermodern city in the film becomes so entangled with many aspects of western culture that it becomes defamiliarizing even to people from the western hemisphere. This is often portrayed by the bustling and rush hour movement of people, of business establishments, of subway stations, and of the dazzling lights during the night. However, in contrast to this hypermodern city imagery, there is the essentializing (and perhaps exoticising) imagery of the traditional values and structures of Japan. As portrayed in the scenes of the traditional marriage, of the ikebana class, the buddhist temple, and the scenic avenue of Kyoto, there is the lack of the daily rush and there is a certain peace that which the character of Charlotte somehow finds, gets bewildered of, and then attains a form of realisation. In the contrasting imagery (ergo relational experience of the characters and the location) of the bustling Tokyo and the slow-paced traditional activities and places of Japan, Coppola’s vision of a country that is both hypermodern and traditional comes into place, and most of these representations are based on her own experiences. So while the film may be about two people who are at the point in their lives where they feel they have lost directions, and somehow find a strange peace and love for each other, may also be about the director’s own fascination about the country – a personal love letter to Japan, and that any so-called mistranslation or misrepresentation comes from a personal experience of the real and is being transmitted into the film. And to this reason, I call it Lost in Transition – for it speaks of the ordeals of the characters experiencing a transition in their lives, for the changes when transitioning scenes of worlds between hypermodern cities and the traditional locations, and for the transition of the experience of the director into a film.
Word Count: 915
References:
1. Barthes, Roland. The Empire of Signs. 1970.
2. Iwabuchi, Koichi. 2008. “Lost in TransNation: Tokyo and the urban imaginary in the era of globalization”, Inter‐Asia Cultural Studies, 9:4, 543-556, DOI: 10.1080/14649370802386446
3. Lost in Translation. Directed by Sofia Coppola. Performed by Scarlett Johansson and Bill Murray. USA, 2003.
Comments
Post a Comment