Diplomarbeit
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DIPLOMARBEIT Titel der Diplomarbeit „Media-Specific Metareference in Film“ A Case Study of Three Films by Woody Allen Verfasserin Hanna Huber angestrebter akademischer Grad Magistra der Philosophie (Mag.phil.) Wien, 2012 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 343 Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt: Anglistik und Amerikanistik Betreuerin: Ao. Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr. Eva Zettelmann Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr. Eva Zettelmann for sparking my interest in metareference, for her openness and enthusiasm in new academic fields, and for her continuous support. I would also like to thank Vita Salna for her helpful advice during the completion of my thesis. I want to express my heartfelt gratitude to my mother, Helga Huber, who gave me so much loving support, care and encouragement, and who has always helped me wherever she could. I would like to thank my father, Hermann Huber, for the way he influenced my intellectual development by being a good role model and by encouraging me to go for the studies I am interested in. Moreover, I am grateful to my brother, Michael Huber, who has been a pillar of strength for me and always makes my day brighter. I would also like to thank my dear friends Miriam, Birgit, Renuka, Katharina, Nicolas, Stefan, Peter and Benjamin for all the emotional support, understanding, entertainment, and care they provided. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 2. Metareference – The Medium is the Message ....................................................................... 5 3. Story vs. Discourse................................................................................................................. 7 4. The Semiotic System “Film” – The Language of Cinematography..................................... 11 4.1. Making Meaning through Signs – Different Sign Theories.......................................... 12 4.2. Symbol, Icon, Index ...................................................................................................... 13 4.3. Filmic Signs................................................................................................................... 17 5. Deconstructing Classical Hollywood Cinema...................................................................... 21 5.1. Annie Hall ..................................................................................................................... 24 5.2. Play It Again, Sam......................................................................................................... 28 5.3. The Purple Rose of Cairo.............................................................................................. 33 6. Explicit vs. Implicit Metareference...................................................................................... 37 6.1. Metalepsis between Intradiegetic and Extradiegetic World.......................................... 43 6.1.1. Explicit Discussions of Intradiegetic Characters about Film................................. 47 6.1.2. Gazing at the Camera and Talking with the Audience........................................... 48 6.1.3. Fictive Character vs. Real-Life Actor .................................................................... 54 6.2. Deconstructing Filmic Devices ..................................................................................... 56 6.2.1. Subtitles.................................................................................................................. 57 6.2.2. Split-Screen ............................................................................................................ 59 6.3. Film in Comparison with other Media – Intermediality ............................................... 61 6.3.1. Theatre.................................................................................................................... 63 6.3.2. Cabaret ................................................................................................................... 67 6.3.3. Photography ........................................................................................................... 69 6.3.4. Television............................................................................................................... 72 6.4. Film in Comparison with Different Genres – Intramediality 1..................................... 74 6.4.1. Romantic Picture.................................................................................................... 79 6.4.2. Adventure Picture................................................................................................... 80 6.4.3. Serious Drama (Great Britain) ............................................................................... 82 6.4.4. Serious Drama (Hollywood) .................................................................................. 84 6.4.5. Serious Drama (Italy)............................................................................................. 86 6.4.6. Gangster Picture ..................................................................................................... 87 6.4.7. Serious Drama à la Casablanca ............................................................................. 89 6.5. Film in Comparison with Previous Films – Intramediality 2........................................ 91 6.5.1. Casablanca............................................................................................................. 91 6.5.2. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs......................................................................... 95 6.6. Metalepsis within the Intradiegetic Frame.................................................................... 97 6.6.1. Film within a Film.................................................................................................. 98 6.6.2. Actor Encountering his Creation.......................................................................... 109 6.6.3. Flashbacks ............................................................................................................ 113 6.6.4. The Imagination of Intradiegetic Characters........................................................ 115 7. Conclusion.......................................................................................................................... 119 8. References .......................................................................................................................... 124 Appendix I – List of Films ..................................................................................................... 127 Appendix II – Table of Figures.............................................................................................. 128 Abstract (German).................................................................................................................. 130 Curriculum Vitae.................................................................................................................... 133 1. Introduction The more I went into depth with my research, the more I discovered the diversity and complexity of metareference. The concept originally derived from literature and describes an artwork’s self-conscious act of laying bare its own artificiality. Thereby, the artwork lifts itself on a meta-level in order to gain an objective glance on its medial constructiveness. The specific characteristic of metareference consists in the fact that the analysed medium is used for its own analysis. As a consequence, the medium does not merely transmit information, but is itself turned into the message. As the term metafiction was first used in the field of literature and is often considered a literary device, Werner Wolf introduced metareference as an umbrella term and revised the original concept by adapting it to all kinds of media. Metareferential devices can be referred to as doubly encoded signs: They carry a heteroreferential meaning and relate to the extratextual world as well as a metareferential meaning and signal an awareness of their own artificiality. Roland Barthes introduced the concept of a secondary sign system, which allows a simultaneous reading of the original and the secondary meaning of a sign. Based on this principle of doubly encoded signs, a metareferential narration presents a hetereoreferential story and simultaneously draws attention to the medium itself. A narrative device gains a metareferential meaning but still functions in its primary encoding. Consequently, the perception of the recipient oscillates between these two possible readings of the newly created metareferential device. I will explore how Ludwig Wittgenstein’s concept of a reversible figure, i.e. the phenomenon of spontaneously changing interpretations, is applicable to the act of decoding metareferential signs. One can distinguish between three variants of metareference which apply to any narrative medium. This distinction is based on the well-known opposition of story and discourse. Metareferential devices on the story level draw attention to the artwork’s constructedness and examine the relationship between reality and fiction. In case the devices are situated on the level of discourse 1, which concerns purely narrative decisions regardless of the chosen medium, they reflect on the manner of narrating a story. The third variant of metareferential devices comments on discourse 2, which refers to the way how narrative information is channelled