Page 316
Friedrich:
I started editing in November 1989 and worked pretty steadily until April. I had some breaks of a week or two here and there, but I pretty much kept to it that whole time. It took a tremendous amount of juggling decide what the order of the stories would be and what the overall visual theme of each section would be, and how to make the images move. As I've said before to you, when you're working with voiceover, you have to be extraordinarily careful about how your images work so you don't lose your audience. I think we tend to see more than we hear; I think we favor the sensual experience of images. I realized I had written a dense narration, and felt it would be drowned out by he barrage of images if I didn't work really carefully to keep the two elements informing each other.
Some people who have seen
Sink or Swim
have said that sometimes they spaced out, that they couldn't follow every word of every story. I understand that because I don't think I'd be able to either: the film presumes a second or third viewing. but that was something I really struggled with. I also didn't want the film to work just on asymbolic level, or to be completely literal, so I go back and forth between the two. For example, there's a story about going over to the neighbors' and making ice cream sundaes and then watching a circus on TV, which is synched with circus imagery; and the story of the chess game, which is illustrated by a chess game. But other stories are accompanied by more symbolic imagery, like the story about the poem my father wrote about going to Mexico, which you hear as you see a glass vase being filled with water and three roses. And there are stories that are somewhere between the two poles, which I like. I most prefer when something is both symbolic and literal, though it's hard to do.
MacDonald:
I think probably the dimension that gets lost most easily in your films is the intricate network of connections between sound and image. In both The
Ties That Bind
and
Sink or Swim
the subject is so compelling that the subtleties of your presentation can easily be overlooked.
Friedrich:
I think people might not be so articulate about that level of the films because, not being familiar with the field of avant-garde film, they might not have the language with which to describe those effects. But I do think there's an unconscious recognition of that level; that's why the film is working. If I wasn't editing well, if I was putting stupid images up against those stories, the stories might have a certain impact, but the images I use produce so many more meanings, and
that's
what people are really responding to, even if they think it's primarily the stories that are affecting them. If they come up afterward and say, "That was really powerful," I think, "Well, it's powerful because it's the right shape, the right texture, and the right rhythmall those things."
There was a period when I thought it was important to deny myself