Lars Grabbe MA Und Dr. Patrick Kruse © Kiel 2008 1 Empathic Cues
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Lars Grabbe M.A. und Dr. Patrick Kruse © Kiel 2008 Empathic cues: Affect-language and philosophical theory of film Eine inhaltlich veränderte und in deutscher Sprache verfasste Version dieses Artikels erschien in: Kodikas/Code. Ars Semeiotica. An International Journal of Semiotics, Volume 31 (2008), No. 3-4, Gunter Narr Verlag, Tübingen, S. 289-298. Abstract: The recipient of film operates with the structure of film in an active way. This operation is the empathic work of the recipient that takes place on figures and objects in film. This empathic work serves as the basal comprehension of film – it’s the film experience. Film experience and the semiologic process of empathy are based on the principle of data processing. The recipient extracts the relevant information from the screen representation and constructs an overall picture of narration and the structure of figures. This extraction proceeds in the structure of the empathic field (the dialectic generation of all perspectives and intentions of figures, animals or objects being part of the narration process) and with the decoding of the empathic cues (cues which organize the mental simulation of perspectives and intentions). The empathic cues generate impact and contain significant indication character of signs – they are located in the code of the film. They are a textual method/process: The analysis of their structure helps us to understand the conditions which generate the understanding of the recipient and helps us to analyse the potential of the structure of comprehension. The successful decoding of signs in the film-system - particularly with regard to the empathic cues - implies the understanding of the affect-language of film: empathic work decodes signs of film and generates impacts that lead to comprehension. 1 Lars Grabbe M.A. und Dr. Patrick Kruse © Kiel 2008 Overview 1. Introduction..............................................................................................................3 2. The term empathy....................................................................................................4 3. Empathy and simulation .........................................................................................5 4. The potential of empathic cues ...............................................................................6 4.1 Empathic cues and the filmic image.........................................................7 4.1.1 ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING.........................................8 4.1.2 ONE HOUR PHOTO .................................................................9 4.1.3 THE CELL ................................................................................10 4.2 Empathic cues and structure of sound...................................................13 4.2.1 REQUIEM FOR A DREAM....................................................14 5. Affect-language and theory of film.......................................................................17 Bibliography...............................................................................................................18 Filmography ...............................................................................................................20 2 Lars Grabbe M.A. und Dr. Patrick Kruse © Kiel 2008 1. Introduction The audience is like a giant organ that you and me are playing. At one moment we play this note on them and get this reaction, and then we play that chord and they react that way. (Spoto 1983: 406) The text at issue works on implied structures in movies, which have to be realized and decoded by the recipient. This is a kind of recipient-work that led to film/movie- understanding. The midpoint of our considerations is based in the constructs of empathic cues and empathy as a mode of understanding. Naturally empathic cues are structured in TV-movies, series, commercials or radio songs too, but in our following arguments we specify >movie< as a cinematographic construct. Our first thesis implys that the empathic processes in movies are structured and controlled by cues. These cues – we call them empathic cues – could be located on different code-sections (sign systems) of the movie. In the process of reception, the empathic cues will be decoded and offer the emotional participation at the movie- experience. Empathic cues are the contingency for active reception: That leds to our second thesis, that comprehension of film is not a hieratic and passive behavior. The recipient has to generate a process of communication with the inner filmic processes (recipient interaction) and simulate an empathic field of different perspectives, which could surround the narrative world of characters, animals and objects. The semantic content of diegesis and narration is generated and controlled by empathic cues and the decoding of inner filmic sign systems permits the active comprehension – the recipient work of understanding is a way of ‘signing in’ into the film. Our theses will be developed with central aspects of empathic cues on the level of filmic image and filmic sound with the following examples: ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING (USA 1987, Chris Columbus), THE CELL (USA 2000, Tarsem Singh), ONE HOUR PHOTO (USA 2002, Mark Romanek) and REQUIEM FOR A DREAM (USA 2000, Darren Aronofski). 3 Lars Grabbe M.A. und Dr. Patrick Kruse © Kiel 2008 2. The term empathy For years Psychologists, psychoanalysts, philosophers, media scientists and many more are using the term Einfühlung or empathy and often do not mean the same thing. That makes a scientific use of the term difficult and leaves many unanswered questions surrounding this concept: Is empathy rational or irrational? Is it regressive or mature? Does it involve only affect, affect and cognition, cognition alone, or is the differentiation between affect and cognition false? Is empathy a form of projection or a mode of observation? Is it imitative or creative? Is empathy to be equated with intuition or are these two different processes? […] Is empathy an end result, a tool, a skill, a kind of communication, a listed stance, a type of introspection, a capacity, a power, a form of perception or observation, a disposition, an activity or feeling? (Basch 1983: 102) Current european research finally defines empathy as the cognitive ability to recognize and understand the thoughts, perspectives and emotions of another person (Song 2001: 102). Related to film it is important to underline that empathic reactions are not only related to emotions, but also to intentions of actions of the filmic character. The empathic processes in reception of films must be understood as mechanisms of construction of the fictional social world or diegesis. Empathic activity makes the various goals of the actors and the structure of their complementary perceptions, their definitions of relationship and their cognitive and emotional reactions to another and to the events equally accessible (Wulff 2003: 136). The fictional experience of a film rests on the interaction of various characters in a social field. Several figures step into social interaction with each other, in which the viewer reproduces their intentional horizons - he tries to understand the characters. Through the inner filmic interactions between the screen characters the viewer is able to reproduces the emotional and intentional horizons of the figures. The described intentional structures Wulff calls empathic field, and he understands it as a symbolic context of the social life, the genre and the particular dramatic conflict (Wulff 2003: 110). The empathic processes of the audience are related to this empathic field and consist of a simulation process1 - a reproduction of the intentional 1 Gordon specifies it as „putting themselves in the other’s shoes“(Gordon 1987: 139). 4 Lars Grabbe M.A. und Dr. Patrick Kruse © Kiel 2008 horizons of the represented characters (Gordon 1987: 113). Therefore empathy must be understood as an analytical movement of the recipient on to the film, which includes both, the characters and their actions. The recipient is located in a process of mental simulation: the »mode of you« (Kurt 2004: 205). 3. Empathy and simulation The concept of empathy is not only related to the inner filmic characters, but on the whole world if objects of the Diegesis. Empathy - as the term hereinafter will be used - also extends to the simulation of hypothetical and factual processes of action that generates importance. It also defines itself as imaginative and construct of interaction. Empathy as a simulation process not only enables the sharing of emotional, but also to affective neutral characters (i.e. a face without any expression), which causes the viewer to simulate emotions or initials of action into the character. The recipient will not only be able to understand or charge emotions of the characters, but also their intentional horizons. This means that the concept of empathy that empathic processes are also processes of understanding. The so-called simulative empathy generates hypothetical and/or actual intentionality of the focused object, which rests on the basis of mental states and dispositions (see Wollheim 2001, 15f.) of the viewer. So the object comes to his importance and its possibility of being an agent. The simulative empathy due to the hypotheses of action initials, which do noit need to be fulfilled within the narrative. This kind of empathy will be possible if animate and inanimate objects be understood as intentional systems - in the sense Daniel Dennett: Intentional systems are - with