Prospects for a Historical Poetics of Cinema: David Bordwell, Kristin Thompson, and Neoformalism

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Prospects for a Historical Poetics of Cinema: David Bordwell, Kristin Thompson, and Neoformalism Prospects for a Historical Poetics of Cinema: David Bordwell, Kristin Thompson, and Neoformalism BY GREG LINNELL SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS IN AESTHETICS SUPERVISOR: DR. CALVIN SEERVELD INSTITUTE FOR CHRISTIAN STUDIES TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA SEPTEMBER 1993 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROSPECTS (INTRODUCTION) .......................................................................................1 CHAPTER 1 : THE FORMALIST LEGACY introduction .............................................................................................................5 historical overview ..................................................................................................6 key concepts and scientific-historical poetics ...................................................... ..12 neoformalist appropriation .....................................................................................22 critique and summary .............................................................................................30 CHAPTER 2: A NEOFORMALIST HISTORIOGRAPHY introduction .............................................................................................................36 Formalism, neoformalism, critics ...........................................................................37 Dreyer and Ozu .......................................................................................................41 classical Hollywood cinema ................................................................................. ..56 contending histories .............................................................................................. ..68 CHAPTER 3: INTERPRETATION/ANALYSIS introduction ........................................................................................................... ..76 making meaning.......................................................................................................78 breaking the glass armor ...................................................................................... ..102 summary ..................................................................................................................121 CHAPTER 4: HISTORICAL POETICS (CONCLUSION) introduction .............................................................................................................124 the “Bordateliregime” ............................................................................................125 irreconcilable differences .......................................................................................134 BIBLIOGRAPHY 139 PROSPECTS T h is t h e s i s ADDRESSES several aspects of David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson’s film scholar­ ship, particularly their advocacy of neoformalism and a historical poetics of cinema as evident in their history of the classical Hollywood cinema, Bordwell’s monographs on film directors Carl- Theodor Dreyer and Yasujiro Ozu, Thompson’s analysis of an individual film (Otto Preminger’s Laura), and Bordwell’s anatomy of academic film interpretation. Such a study can, at the outset, presume, and during its course demonstrate, a unity operative within the work of these authors Because they both appropriate many of their key ideas from Russian Formalism and deploy those ideas in a similar fashion.1 Between the two of them a suBstantial Body of film scholarship has seen puBlication and its ongoing significance warrants investigation. Of all the possiBle inquiries to mount, however, I have chosen to focus on their appropriation of Russian Formalism, their film historiography, critique of current interpretive practice, and the predominant features of neofor­ malist film analysis. Consequently, I have not included a consideration of their theories of narra­ tion or cognitive psychology (except where the immediate context warranted) which also comprise important contributions to film studies Because, at the moment, these areas lie outside of my competency to assess properly (drawing as they do upon research with which I have insuffi­ cient familiarity, that is, narrative theory and cognitive science). As chapter one makes clear the literary criticism developed By the Russian Formalists provides the basis for Bordwell and Thompson’s work But it is important to realize that it is a selective ap­ propriation of the tenets of Russian Formalism that is operative within neoformalism. It is, there­ fore, inaccurate and preemptive to assign the proBlems of early Russian Formalism (or, for that matter, Anglo-American New Criticism) to neoformalism. This chapter, nevertheless, concludes By assemBling the suBstantial Body of critique directed against neoformalism and a historical poet­ ics into four distinct areas; this critical agenda provides the structure for the features of neofor­ malism to Be examined in the rest of the thesis. 1 Bordwell and Thompson are also married. PROSPECTS 2 Chapter two’s study of neoformalist historiography was prompted by the reception of Bord- well and Thompson’s study (together with Janet Staiger) of the classical Hollywood cinema. The study exerts an undeniaBle presence on the domain of American (and Canadian) film study and has Been suBject to Both extreme praise and critique. Moreover, it presents a challenge to those post-1968 influenced film histories which would posit that a film is merely the site of contending cultural codes and that the history of film is really the tracking of the socio-political predisposi­ tions and the ideological interventions of, for example, a dominant American ideology consisting of predatory capitalism and strident individualism. In recent years any formalist-inspired historiog­ raphy has Been seen as a scandalous enterprise and I Believe (and hope to demonstrate) that Bord- well, Staiger, and Thompson offer a rigorously developed, defended, and alternative paradigm for constructing the history of cinema. Similarly, chapter three’s examination of Bordwell's analysis of the inferential and rhetorical conventions operative within contemporary academic film interpretation is set up to demonstrate how Bordwell’s analysis constitutes a serious challenge for those critics who understand their in­ terpretive practice to follow directly from their theoretical position. In response to the dominating view that criticism is concerned solely with yielding a film’s meanings, the chapter also demon­ strates how Thompson’s neoformalist approach illuminates not just the meanings of Laura But also how point of view structures within the film operate at several different levels to comprise the film’s dominant. There is, in other words, more to do with an individual film than make it produce yet another “reading.” Chapter four concludes the thesis By citing and analyzing what may Be the most extensive cri­ tique of neoformalism’s foundational and guiding epistemic presuppositions yet offered: Robert Ray’s typology of two types of knowledge is examined for how it would position neoformalism and a historical poetics of cinema in relation to postmodern practices. I then attempt a Brief tran­ scendental critique of the key enaBling presuppositions to Be found in Ray and Bordwell’s epistemologies. PROSPECTS 3 Throughout the thesis I practice an immanent critique assuming that Bordwell and Thompson’s scholarship and claims are to Be consistent with their presuppositions. I freely alter­ nate between passages of describing the features of Bordwell and Thompson’s work and, on the other hand, pausing to consider the critiques which encourage reflection upon different features in the neoformalist enterprise. The sometimes extended descriptive passages are also necessitated by an undesiraBle yet pervasive feature of current film scholarship namely, the tendency to misrecog- nize what neoformalism is, for politically and institutionally useful ends. In other words, I remain convinced that it is important to discern between what constitutes a legitimate disagreement within the domain of film studies and what is merely a game of malicious one-upmanship. A cor­ rective to this situation is provided by my explications of key features of Bordwell and Thompson’s scholarship. Finally, the neoformalist prospects for a different type of knowledge about the cinema are re­ vealed not only in the arguments, concepts, and analyses of Bordwell and Thompson’s writings on film history, theory, and criticism but also in the widespread and diverse critical response to those writings. Although many opponents would desire to dismiss neoformalism as entirely out of step with contemporary film studies, it is apparent that Bordwell and Thompson’s work presents a knowledge of the cinema that calls for and demands a nuanced analysis. Why else would their work provoke such an extreme critical response if it were not for the fact that neoformalism truly represents a competing paradigm for film scholarship? My own response to neoformalism has been shaped by my curiousity regarding the determination aBout what is so compelling and capti­ vating about the cinematic experience and By my involvement with the Redeemer College Film Review Committee. I was led to examine the formal elements that comprise a film and I found the neoformalist writings to be extremely helpful in explicating systematically the variety of compo­ nents that are organized within a film. Such an analysis also functioned to anchor the interpretive process in a thorough familiarity with the film thereby serving as a corrective to those who would
Recommended publications
  • Historical Poetics of Cinema by David Bordwell from the Cinematic Text: Methods and Approaches, Ed
    Historical Poetics of Cinema by David Bordwell From The Cinematic Text: Methods and Approaches, ed. R. Barton Palmer (New York: AMS Press, 1989), pp. 369-398. 1. Introduction The volume you hold in your hands belongs to a genre that came into currency during the postwar boom in college literary criticism. In the late 1940s, two major works, Wellek and Warren's Theory of Literature and Stanley Edgar Hyman's The Armed Vision, set forth the premise that literary studies played host to distinct "methods." Intrinsic/ extrinsic; textual/ contextual; sociological/ psychological/ Marxist/ psychoanalytic/ archetypal/ formalist/ deconstructionist/ reader-responsiveness: as such categories have accumulated over the last forty years, the literary institution has believed itself moving beyond the doctrines of New Criticism. While the field was being carved up methodically, the "anthology of approaches" moved into the library and the classroom. The genre became a going concern in the 1950s and 1960s, and it continues to flourish. This volume reminds us that film studies has, as part of its entry into the academy, come to subscribe to critical Methodism--an affiliation testified to by the title of one of the most popular anthologies, Movies and Methods. A recent collection of approaches to television criticism may signal the legitimation of tv studies under the same auspices. There would be much to remark on in this process, not least the extent to which film and television studies may seek to establish their seriousness by asserting that, whatever the intrinsic importance of the object of study, a set of up-to-date approaches constitutes adequate credentials.
    [Show full text]
  • Author Functions, Auteur Fictions Understanding Authorship in Conglomerate Hollywood Commerce, Culture, and Narrative
    Author Functions, Auteur Fictions Understanding Authorship in Conglomerate Hollywood Commerce, Culture, and Narrative VOLUME I: ARGUMENTS Thomas James Wardak A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Sheffield Faculty of Arts and Humanities School of English Literature March 2017 i Abstract In 1990, Timothy Corrigan identified a rising trend in Hollywood film marketing wherein the director, or auteur, had become commercially galvanised as a brand icon. This thesis updates Corrigan’s treatise on the ‘commerce of auteurism’ to a specific 2017 perspective in order to dismantle the discursive mechanisms by which commodified author-brands create meaning and value in Conglomerate Hollywood’s promotional superstructure. By adopting a tripartite theoretical/industrial/textual analytical framework distinct from the humanistic and subjectivist excesses of traditional auteurism, by which conceptions of film authorship have typically been circumscribed, this thesis seeks to answer the oft- neglected question how does authorship work as it relates to the contemporary blockbuster narrative. Naturally, this necessitates a corresponding understanding of how texts work, which leads to the construction of a spectator-centric cognitive narratorial heuristic that conceptualises ‘the author’ as a hermeneutic code which may be activated when presented with sufficient ‘authorial’ signals. Of course, authorial signals do not only emanate from films but also promotional paratexts such
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitivism and Film Theory Edward S. Small
    Spring 1992 165 Introduction: Cognitivism and Film Theory Edward S. Small This supplement is designed as an introduction to a movement which I believe is not yet well-known to scholars in either theatre or film. I myself first heard the term "cognitivism" less than three years ago. For me it is still in the process of definition. Each time I set about researching and writing something on cognitivism, I find that I learn a great deal more about the subject and, as a result, wind up refashioning my previous definitions. I do not expect that this process will greatly diminish; in fact, I expect it will greatly increase. Extant publications-books and articles-which fall under the aegis of "cognitive science" constitute a bibliography which is already vast and (perhaps monthly) grows vaster. Much of it deals with matters that have commanded my academic curiosity and concern for many years: issues of mentation and perception coupled with such philosophic mainstays as epistemological and ontological questions. Thus I have the feeling that cognitivism will continue to influence my scholarship and my teaching, at least throughout this current capstone decade. This is not to say that I presently call myself a "cognitivist." As a film theorist, I have spent the past several years studying Derrida's deconstruction and, when asked about disciplinary specializations, tend to characterize myself as a film/video semiotician (devoted to the continental school of Ferdinand de Saussure). Yet the following papers will show that the flourish and fashion enjoyed by, first, semiotics and structuralism, and later by postmodern analytic strategies are often implicitly countered by cognitive science.
    [Show full text]
  • Cinephilia and Online Communities Copyright 2013
    CINEPHILIA AND ONLINE COMMUNITIES A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty by Stuart Collier In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Science, Technology and Culture in the School of Literature, Media, and Communication Georgia Institute of Technology August 2013 COPYRIGHT 2013 BY STUART COLLIER Collier 2 CINEPHILIA AND ONLINE COMMUNITIES Approved by: Dr. JC Reilly, Advisor School of Literature, Media, and Communications Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Vinicius Navarro School of Literature, Media, and Communications Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Angela Dalle Vacche School of Literature, Media, and Communications Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: May 5, 2013 Collier 3 INTRODUCTION Cinephilia, broadly defined, means ‘love for cinema.’ Many people love movies, and for a variety of reasons, but for cinephiles that love runs far deeper than the desire to be entertained. Cinephiles are marked by a passion for cinema, one often defined in terms of aesthetic appreciation, consumption of film criticism, and a tendency to seek out what is marginalized or undervalued in filmmaking. On the surface, cinephilia seems to refer to a specialized fan enterprise with no larger significance. However, cinephilia has been integral to the historical evolution of cinema, spurring on new artistic traditions and modes of critical thought, and keying in on larger paradigmatic issues of information circulation and media consumption. The 1960s surge in cinematic modernism and auteur theory, the proliferation of underground video trading and cult film enthusiasm in the 70s and 80s, and the globalism of contemporary film culture are all directly tied to cinephilic activism. While cinephilia has led to well-documented reverberations within film culture since the beginning of the twentieth century, the steady rise of digital media over the past two decades has radically transformed the nature of its productivity into something with readily observable implications for all forms of media consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Film Theory After Copjec Anthony Ballas
    Film Theory after Copjec Anthony Ballas Canadian Review of American Studies, Advance Online, (Article) Published by University of Toronto Press This is a preprint article. When the final version of this article launches, this URL will be automatically redirected. For additional information about this preprint article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/760435/summary [ Access provided at 18 Feb 2021 01:07 GMT from Auraria Library (UC Denver, Metro State, CCD) ] Film Theory after Copjec Anthony Ballas Abstract: The importation of Lacanian psychoanalysis into film theory in the 1970s and 1980s ushered in a new era of cinema scholarship and criticism. Figures including Raymond Bellour, Laura Mulvey, and Christian Metz are often considered the pioneers of applying Lacanian psy- choanalysis in the context of film theory, most notably through their writings inScreen Journal. However, where French and British scholarship on Lacan and film reached its limits, American Lacanianism flourished. When Joan Copjec’s now classic essay “The Orthopsychic Subject: Film Theory and the Reception of Lacan” was published in 1989, the trajectory of Lacanian film theory would become radically altered; as Todd McGowan recently put it, the “butchered operation” on Lacan committed by Mulvey and (quoting Copjec) the “Foucaultianization” of Lacan under the auspices of Screen Journal were finally indicted in one gesture through Copjec’s critique. Copjec and McGowan’s unique American view of Lacan marks a pivotal point in the convergence of psychoanalytic theory and cinema studies; by seeking to wrest Lacan from his- torist/deconstructionist theories of the subject, and by revisiting Lacan beyond the mirror stage, Copjec and McGowan can be said to have instantiated a resuscitation or even a renaissance of Lacanian theory in film studies in particular and in American scholarship more generally.
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Film Theory : an Insider’S Appraisal Carl Plantinga
    Document generated on 09/27/2021 1:34 p.m. Cinémas Revue d'études cinématographiques Journal of Film Studies Cognitive Film Theory : An Insider’s Appraisal Carl Plantinga Cinéma et cognition Article abstract Volume 12, Number 2, hiver 2002 This article appraises the contributions of what has been called cognitivism or the cognitive approach to film studies, and suggests the means by which the URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/024878ar cognitive approach can become more central to film studies than it has been so DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/024878ar far. The author first shows that much of what has been called "cognitivist" film studies is only cognitivist in a broad sense, and could just as well be called See table of contents "analytic." He then argues that the cognitive approach would be most useful when it is thus broadly applied, becoming then more a commitment to the rationality of discourse and human thought than a narrow project within psychology. The article then goes on to appraise the utility of the cognitive Publisher(s) approach in our understanding of the psychological power of film and film Cinémas aesthetics. ISSN 1181-6945 (print) 1705-6500 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this article Plantinga, C. (2002). Cognitive Film Theory : An Insider’s Appraisal. Cinémas, 12(2), 15–37. https://doi.org/10.7202/024878ar Tous droits réservés © Cinémas, 2002 This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/ This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cognitive Semiotics of Film
    The Cognitive Semiotics of Film WARREN BUCKLAND Liverpool John Moores University PUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA http://www.cup.org 10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia Ruiz de AlarcoÂn 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain q Warren Buckland 2000 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2000 Printed in the United States of America Typeface Palatino 10/13 pt. System DeskTopPro/UX [BV] A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Buckland, Warren. The cognitive semiotics of ®lm / Warren Buckland. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-521-78005-5 1. Motion pictures ± Semiotics. I. Title. PN1995 .B796 2000 791.43©01©4 ± dc21 00-026227 ISBN 0 521 78005 5 hardback Contents Preface and Acknowledgements page ix 1 The Cognitive Turn in Film Theory 1 2 The Body on Screen and in Frame: Film and Cognitive Semantics 26 3 Not What Is Seen through the Window but the Window Itself: Re¯exivity, Enunciation, and Film 52 4 The Institutional Context: A Semio-pragmatic Approach to Fiction and Documentary Film 77 5 All in the Mind? The Cognitive Status of Film Grammar 109 Conclusion 141 Notes 145 Bibliography of Works Cited 163 Index 171 vii CHAPTER ONE The Cognitive Turn in Film Theory We have witnessed a number of attempts to by-pass [®lm theory's] most dif®cult conceptual problems by replacing it with something else.
    [Show full text]
  • James Buhler, Theories of the Soundtrack
    Journal of Film Music 7.2 (2014) 47-50 ISSN (print) 1087-7142 https://doi.org/10.1558/jfm.38909 ISSN (online) 1758-860X James Buhler, Theories of the Soundtrack New York: Oxford University Press, 2019 [xiv, 318 pp. ISBN: 9780199371082. $35.00 (trade paper)]. Oxford Music/Media Series. Illustration, figures, and index. JEFF SMITH University of Wisconsin-Madison [email protected] ike proverbial showbiz stories of overnight consider perspectives more broadly associated with success, the sudden rise of “sound studies” contemporary film theory. Buhler begins with theories L within academia is a development several that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s under the decades in the making. The past fifteen years have influence of semiotics, psychoanalysis, and Marxism. seen the appearance of new journals, new scholarly He then turns his attention to several approaches interest groups, new professional organizations, that emerged as a response to this continental strain, and several new compendia of published research. including neoformalism, cognitivism, feminist film Contributions to this field represent a wide range theory, post-colonial theory, and queer studies. of different approaches drawn from a vast array of The sheer breadth of Buhler’s compass indicates more established disciplines: linguistics, semiotics, the richness of film music and sound studies in psychology, musicology, narratology, and media its current constellation. Yet it also illustrates the studies. Its main areas of inquiry also run the gamut, immense challenge that Buhler has set himself. In displaying a concern with aesthetics, technology, and seeking to summarize such a large swath of academic culture. The result of this intellectual ferment is an literature, Buhler attempts to place these theoretical arena ever more difficult to navigate.
    [Show full text]
  • BORDWELL, David. Making Meaning: Inference and Rhetoric in the Interpretation of Cinema
    Document généré le 30 sept. 2021 21:08 Cinémas Revue d'études cinématographiques Journal of Film Studies BORDWELL, David. Making Meaning: Inference and Rhetoric in the Interpretation of Cinema. Cambridge, Massachusetts : Havard University Press, 1989. xvi + 334 p. Peter Rist Américanité et cinéma Volume 1, numéro 1-2, automne 1990 URI : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1000999ar DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/1000999ar Aller au sommaire du numéro Éditeur(s) Cinémas ISSN 1181-6945 (imprimé) 1705-6500 (numérique) Découvrir la revue Citer ce compte rendu Rist, P. (1990). Compte rendu de [BORDWELL, David. Making Meaning: Inference and Rhetoric in the Interpretation of Cinema. Cambridge, Massachusetts : Havard University Press, 1989. xvi + 334 p.] Cinémas, 1(1-2), 164–169. https://doi.org/10.7202/1000999ar Tous droits réservés © Cinémas, 1990 Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d’auteur. L’utilisation des services d’Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d’utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit. Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l’Université de Montréal, l’Université Laval et l’Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. https://www.erudit.org/fr/ He defines the former as "a system of propositions that claims to explain the nature ami functions of cinema, " and ultimately finds that film criticism — "interpretive writing "—differs from theoretical tenting in that the critic ordinarily fails to both interrogate his/her "presuppositions" and leave "empirical claims (...) open to counter example".
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Authorship and the Films of David Lynch
    1 Authorship and the Films of David Lynch: Aesthetic Receptions in Contemporary Hollywood. Antony Todd. London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2012 (224 pages). ISBN: 9781848855809. A Review by Deborah Mellamphy, University College Cork The death of Andrew Sarris in 2012 resurrected debates surrounding the importance and role of authorship in contemporary film theory and, despite the growth of industry studies and the dominance of poststructuralism and postmodern theory in recent years, the popularity of auteur studies continues to grow. The inherent reductionism of the auteur approach has justifiably led to the rejection of the strictly romantic ideal of the author genius and a revision of the auteur’s image and role, yet the auteur continues to be relevant within contemporary film production and culture. Recent studies including Lucy Fischer’s Body Double: The Author Incarnate in the Cinema (2012), Arved Ashby’s Popular Music and the New Auteur: Visionary Filmmakers After MTV (2013), and Cecilia Sayad’s Performing Authorship: Self- Inscription and Corporeality in the Cinema (2013) illustrate the continuing scholarly significance of auteur debates within contemporary cinema and media. Discussions on David Lynch as auteur are not new. Since the release of Eraserhead (1976), scholars have considered his highly idiosyncratic cinema in terms of auteur theories. Erica Sheen and Annette Davison’s The Cinema of David Lynch: American Dreams, Nightmare Visions (2004), Todd McGowan’s The Impossible David Lynch (2007), and Justus Nieland’s David Lynch (2012) have all focused on the director’s personal vision. Antony Todd locates his study, Authorship and the Films of David Lynch: Aesthetic Receptions in Contemporary Hollywood, within a paradigm that acknowledges the limitations of the romanticised view both of the auteur, and of Lynch, whilst simultaneously acknowledging the importance of the figure.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Theory Is Always for Someone and for Some Purpose': Thinking Through
    ‘Theory is always for someone and for some purpose’: Thinking through post-structuralism and cognitivism Robert Geal University of Wolverhampton [email protected] ABSTRACT: This essay explores the historical socio-cultural contexts that determine the contending epistemologies of post-structuralism and cognitivism. Debates between these paradigms have focused on a-priori philosophical premises. Synthesis between these premises has not materialised because each paradigm valorises a form of knowledge which its rival cannot match. This essay attempts to position these contested premises within a diachronic background in which theoretical claims can be tested, not merely against fixed deductive positions, but against specific socio-cultural contexts that manifest themselves in epistemology. Post-structuralism and cognitivism can then be thought of as aggregates of thought reflecting broad political, social, philosophical and cultural contexts. KEYWORDS: Ideology, epistemology, discourse analysis, post-structuralism, cognitivism. 1 To say that film studies‟ methodological protocols are highly contested would be an understatement. Reasons given for the lack of consensus range from John Mullarkey‟s assertion that „[a]s a consequence of its infancy no doubt, film-philosophy has been unable to avoid being highly partisan thus far: [...] film being understood entirely through one paradigm, cognitive science, cultural studies, Freudian psychodynamics, rhizomatic materialism, and so on‟ (2009, 6), to Casey Haskin‟s contextualisation of film theory‟s contested „meta-orthodoxy [as] hardly unique to film theory. Its bipolar pattern is a staple of endless histories of intellectual conflict, in philosophy, religion, and elsewhere‟ (2009, 36). These divisions are most starkly delineated between both the a-priori philosophical foundations, and the interpretative conclusions derived therefrom, within two of the discipline‟s leading paradigms, post-structuralism and cognitivism.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Essay: Cognitivism Goes to the Movies
    s6_PROJ-040106 4/5/10 4:27 PM Page 83 Review Essay: Cognitivism Goes to the Movies Robert Sinnerbrink Paisley Livingston and Carl Plantinga, eds., The Routledge Companion to Philos- ophy and Film (London and New York: Routledge, 2009), xix + 672 pp., $152.00 (cloth). Carl Plantinga, Moving Viewers: American Film and the Spectator’s Experience (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2009), xii + 280 pp., $21.33 (paperback). Torben Grodal, Embodied Visions: Evolution, Emotion, Culture, and Film (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), viii + 324 pp., $30.78 (paperback). In just under twenty five years, analytic philosophy of film and cognitivist film theory have joined forces in a formidable research paradigm, one that has moved from keen rival to would-be victor in the battle for the “arts and minds” (to quote Gregory Currie) of film theorists and students of the moving image. David Bordwell’s Narration in the Fiction Film (1985), Noël Carroll’s “The Power of Movies” (1985), and Bordwell’s “A Case for Cognitivism” (1989), pioneered the wave of film theory during the 1990s that based itself, not on Lacanian psychoanalysis or various maîtres à penser, but rather on analytic philosophy and cognitive psychology. Noël Carroll’s Mystifying Movies (1988) famously at- tacked what he and Bordwell later dubbed “grand theory” (psychoanalytic, semiotic, and ideologico-critical film theory of the 1970s and 1980s). Bordwell and Carroll followed up with their jointly edited landmark volume Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies (1996), which advocated the kind of empirical mid- dle-level theorizing—shaped by analytic and cognitivist approaches—that aimed to define the future of the discipline.
    [Show full text]