Bruss, "Eye for I: Making and Unmaking Autobiography in Film"

Bruss introduces the idea that with advancements in technology such as film there has been a subtle disappearance of the genre of autobiography. It seems that we cannot leave Benjamin behind, for he is the one who acknowledged the changes that came along with the shift from literature and painting to photography and cinema. Bruss focuses specifically on the genre of autobiography and compares literature and film as media. She focuses on several ideas. One of them is that in film, there is an almost always mutually exclusive relationship between the person filmed and the person being filmed. This is problematic as it relates to autobiography.

In literature, the author who writes about himself/herself is writing about "I" and there is no real mediation between the person and his/her words. However, in film, one is not able to film himself/herself while also playing himself/herself, so there is mediation. There are multiple people involved: the director, the producer, and the actor or actress are only a few mentioned. Bruss believes that the only way that film could produce a real autobiography would be if the auteur were to be the actor and the director, to be the person filmed and the person filming (which is clearly an impossibility). Even then, many other elements could come into play that influences the autobiography.

While Bruss brings up many good points, I think Benjamin's idea of the camera introducing viewers to the unconscious optics has some validity here. While film may not portray a person in a truly autobiographical way (as Bruss defines the genre), what if the film version of autobiography brings us to a deeper understanding of the person? What is more important? Perhaps with film we are developing a new form of autobiography.