“At the moment in which we finish with this critical bio-filmography, the final entry in Orson Welles’ body of work, we have only to mention his involvement in television. It is with this new art, a synthesis of cinema, journalism, theater and radio, that we would like to conclude our study even if the circumstance isn’t impending.
In fact, Orson Welles, abandoned by the cinema, found the expressive possibility in television that Hollywood refused to give him.
‘The poverty of television is a marvelous thing. The great classic film evidently doesn’t fit on the small screen; television may be the nemesis of classic cinematographic values, but not of cinema itself. It is a marvelous form of expression, in which the spectator finds himself just a meter and a half from the screen, and although it is not a dramatic form, it is a form of narrative: television is the ideal medium of the storyteller. On television one is able to say ten times more in ten times less than the cinema because it addresses only two or three people. And overall, television addresses the ear. For the first time, in relation to television, the cinema defined its real value, found its true function, for the fact that it speaks, given that the most important thing is that which one says, and not that which one shows. The spoken word, therefore, is no longer the nemesis of film: given that television is nothing more than an illustrated radio, film itself does nothing more than reinforce the spoken word.
Overall, T.V. is a way to satisfy my tendency to tell tales, like the Arabic narrators in their markets and public squares. I personally have a passion for this thing; I never tire of story-telling, you know, so I end up making the mistake of believing that everyone has the same enthusiasm! I prefer short stories to drama, plays and novels, which is an important characteristic of my tastes. I find ‘great’ novels with tiring: short stories are pleasing to me’”. (André Bazin, Orson Welles, Editions du cerf, I like1972).