Referencing our in class discussion of Classic Hollywood narration in comparison to Art Cinema I would agree that most art cinema can be seen as a reaction to more classic narrative lines with some reservation.  What was troubling me during discussion was the idea the art cinema some how sought ambiguity as a reaction to the clear narrative lines drawn in classic narration.  Because the average viewer remains much more familiar with classic Hollywood narration by virtue of the proliferation of these texts within the market anything that strays from this norm would naturally seem more ambiguous simply because the viewer is not acclimated to this style of telling a story. With this vein, I don’t necessarily agree that art cinema narrations have to be obtuse to be certified within the movement.  Alternatively, I believe the best art cinema productions use different styles of telling, that in and of themselves are clear and concise methods of story telling, just not part of the main stream. I would agree that art cinema has a different set of objectives in mind concerned less with entertaining the audience and more with provoking them… and thus the narrative style must change to achieve this.  This change is not concerned with being ambiguous for the sake of confusion, but for the sake of creating mental activity in the mind of the viewer…Something that rarely happens in a Hollywood narrative.  Ultimately I think we can all agree that while good art cinema may be more confusing to the average viewer this confusion may stem from the viewers own library of experience which is, in most cases heavily dominated by  classic Hollywood forms of narration.