By Chuck Stephens

A snippet of nature footage depicts crickets pitching chittering woo; smash cut to a newsreel shot of a wrecking ball demolishing a tower. A hapless Foley artist ooks and grunts an approximation of a spasmodic chimp; a blonde in black stockings canoodles with her canine in a glade in a public park. The male gaze intrudes…wait, is that Taylor Meade? (No.) A shabby cymbal-and-bass stroll slinks across the soundtrack, less stripteasical than pallid pink panther. People get naked, lips are smacked, groping ensues; macroscopic pondlife lick and suck, bomber pilots release their loads. In ten neurotic minutes, the movie climaxes again and again. Come-on, or plain comedy? Evocative of Ovid, or an altogether obvious joke? Take it off! Take it all off! Take my associative montage…please

In order to make any real sense of pop-culture sexologists, erotic art connoisseurs, and horny highbrows Eberhard and Phyllis Kronhausen’s 1963 curio Psychomontage No. 1, one probably needs to give late-’50s/early-’60s culture a slight whack upside its head—just enough to displace the cosmic lineup such that Bruce Conner is re-rendered as the naughty nightclub-chanteuse, party-record poetess, and sexual revolutionary Rusty Warren (RIP), and Conner’s 1958 found-footage masterpiece A Movie is summarily chopped and screwed into Warren’s classic 1960 dirty-talk album, Knockers Up! 

A mild turn-on for 1963 audiences, Psychomontage was meant as a Rorschach blot for the loosened libidos of swinging couples, but it seems at the time to have been just a minor diversion for the German-born Eberhard and the American Phyllis: they’d met at the University of Minnesota in 1954, married, and pursued parallel degrees and careers in education and psychology. They specialized in sex: as academics, studying human sexual behaviour in the Kinsey era, and as collectors of erotica, which they exhibited internationally and compiled into the two-volume Erotic Art (Grove Press). They were ubiquitous during the ’60s sexual revolution. Frank Zappa even thanked Eberhard in the liner notes to Freak Out!

Not exactly “experimental”—more an arty, adults-only gag reel, and once upon a time sold by mail, like an 8mm stag film, by Grove Press’ film division—Psychomontage No. 1 is a sort of silly one-off, even as it interfaces with the couple’s wide-ranging fascination with erotic pop art and prefaces the next phase of the Kronhausen’s extraordinary set of careers: as pioneering sex-filmmakers during the Danish proto-porn explosion of the early ’70s. What had been an apparently passing interest in purely formal cinema on Psychomontage No. 1 morphed, quite lucratively, into the kinds of erotic Mondo movies Travis Bickle might have found appropriate to take a date to: half heartfelt documentaries and pleas for sexual diversity, half delirious pandering, with titles like Freedom to Love (1968), Why Do They Do It? (1971), and Sex-cirkusse a.k.a. The Hottest Show in Town (1974). Though there was no Psychomontage No. 2, every film the Kronhausens touched after making that first one was a kind of sequel to its underground success. 

Amos Vogel, who screened and made the film available through Cinema 16, was typically lucid (in Film as a Subversive Art) in describing Psychomontage No. 1 as an “attempt to induce erotic response in the audience by carefully chosen visual stimuli and juxtapositions (aimed at both conscious and unconscious). Phallic symbols and open orifices, a tongue licking an orange, an unexpected finger entering the frame: almost any object or act, no matter how innocuous, the Kronhausens show, can be made to appear erotic, and reveals our predisposition towards ‘shaping’ visual evidence for purposes of erotic gratification.” An IMDb commenter with some apparently deep-crate knowledge about ’60s smut suggests that the bits with the dog-walking blonde and her peeper come from a stag reel called La petite mort. What role William Burroughs collaborator Antony Balch may have played in Psychomontage No. 1’s “special photography,” one can today only guess. A furry chestnut from the past, Psychomontage No. 1 remains enigmatically blot-like: a celluloid stain that somehow refuses to fade.


Friend me on FacebookFollow me on TwitterRSS Feed

From the Magazine

  • Issue 87: Table of contents

    Alexandre Koberidze, Dasha Nekrasova,Radu Jude, Amalia Ulman, Monte Hellman, TV or not TV, Eberhard and Phyllis Kronhausen, Azor, New Order, Siberia More →

  • Remembering Women: Claudia von Alemann’s Blind Spot

    Cherchez la femme, they say. It sounds nice, but what this expression actually means is that woman is the root of all (male) problems, always to blame. Claudia von Alemann’s extraordinary Blind Spot (Die Reise nach Lyon, 1980), recently restored by the Deutsche Kinemathek in cooperation with the Institut Lumière, is a rare film that puts the pursuit of a woman at its heart—not so that she can be punished, not so that a man’s troubles can be explained, but so that her achievements might be rescued from oblivion and might, in the process, change another woman’s life. More →

  • Common Sense Connoisseur: The Critical Legacy of Bertrand Tavernier

    The two most cherished film books in the pile on my bedside table are in a language my command of which is rudimentary at best. But since both Jacques Lourcelles’ Dictionnaire du Cinéma – Les Films as well as Jean-Pierre Coursodon and Bertrand Tavernier’s 50 ans de cinéma américain have never been translated from French into either English or German, I gladly make do, filling the gaps with a mixture of autodidactic guesswork and occasional dictionary consultation, which for all its drawbacks has proved to be a viable method. More →

  • “I prefer, where truth is important, to write fiction:” On Radu Jude

    In the name of the popular, delighting in reduction and obviousness, a boring assertion: the common ground of every film movement christened a “new wave” over the last 70 years has tended toward revision, a self-conscious desire to provide a true image of the people in opposition to the distorted picture given by whatever relevant iterations of official culture. The banality of this claim can be measured by the volume of cant and platitude produced in support of it, often by the artists themselves. There is, I hope, little need to rehearse these arguments regarding realism, myth, and so on. Who today can help but squirm when faced with the phrase “true image of the people?” More →

  • Siberia (Abel Ferrara, Italy/Germany/Mexico/Greece/UK)

    Abel Ferrara is a changed man. While the evidence suggests that this is very good news for Ferrara himself and his immediate family, it could result in a minor schism in the manner in which his films are received. For most of his career Ferrara has been the subject of a Romantic cult that glorified his legendarily self-destructive behaviour, and often read this (literal) lawlessness as an integral part of his renegade creative vision. More →