You are here:

Scenes from Under Childhood, Section Two

Name: Scenes from Under Childhood, Section Two
Director: Stan Brakhage
Released: 1969
Duration: 40 min

Representation Score

1.6/10

Minimal

1969

Director

Stan Brakhage

Runtime

40 minutes

Average Rating

No ratings yet

New Showbiz Analysis

Stan Brakhage’s work is a formalist exercise in visual phenomenology. It prioritizes the deconstruction of the cinematic medium over social commentary, focusing instead on light, texture, and the unmediated eye. Because the film operates through impressionistic sequences of children playing and eating, it lacks the narrative framework required to explore identity. It does not engage with the socio-political vectors of race, gender, or sexuality. Ultimately, the film is a study of perception. It disrupts traditional storytelling norms but does not aim to deconstruct social hierarchies or represent specific human identities.

Watch this, not that →

Category Breakdown

Does Scenes from Under Childhood, Section Two have LGBTQ+ representation?

Minimal

The film lacks character-driven dialogue or interpersonal plots. Therefore, there is no indication of LGBTQ+ identities or stories.

How does Scenes from Under Childhood, Section Two portray gender?

Fair

By focusing on the raw sensory experiences of children, the film avoids traditional gender hierarchies. It bypasses masculine or feminine clichés through a lack of character development.

How racially and ethnically diverse is Scenes from Under Childhood, Section Two?

Minimal

The footage relies on abstract imagery and rapid montage. There is no discernible evidence of a diverse cast or specific racial narratives presented.

How does Scenes from Under Childhood, Section Two represent religion and culture?

Fair

The work rejects the rationalized adult gaze in favor of a primal visual state. This approach implicitly critiques the structured ways of seeing promoted by mainstream culture.

Does Scenes from Under Childhood, Section Two include disability representation?

Minimal

The film does not feature characters with visible or invisible disabilities. It functions as an abstract study of perception rather than a social narrative.

Present on Screen

Disrupts traditional Western storytelling by rejecting the rationalized adult perspective.
Avoids reinforcing traditional gender hierarchies through its focus on unmediated sensory experiences.
Challenges formalist constraints of mainstream filmmaking through radical visual experimentation.

Limited or Absent

Lacks engagement with specific socio-political identities such as race or disability.
Provides no evidence of LGBTQ+ narratives due to the absence of character-driven dialogue.
Does not offer explicit subversion or intentional critique regarding gender roles.

Official Synopsis

In Section II we see a series of discrete sequences showing the children, now somewhat older, in different types of play. They manipulate tiny objects, doll furniture and miniature figures, dress up in costume, play outdoors, watch TV. We see them eating, sleeping, crying . . . A repeated image in this section, used both alone and in superimposition, is a moving, glittery golden dazzle which resembles tinselly pinpoints of light. There are golden dazzle images that look more like small bubbles than pinpoints. These glitter images, along with the occasional solid color frames, are recurrent threads connecting the separate sequences of this section. (Artforum)

How are these scores produced? →