Re: unreliable narrators
Tue, 5 Nov 1996 20:28:59 -0600
At 11:25 AM 11/5/96 -0400, Mike Frank wrote:
> . . . for if in fact we NEED some
>"logocentric" clues to help us make sense of the flux of images that is the
>visual world, why do we keep on privileging those images? . . . is it merely
>on the basis of the convention of "mechanical reproduction" (as opposed to
>human interpretation mediated by human will)? . . . or is there something
>more going on here??
Offhand, this sounds like the "ideological undermining of the aural
dimension" that C.Metz writes about ("Aural Objects", in _Film Sound_, ed.
E.Weis & J.Belton), and that K.Silverman (among many others) discusses in
_The Acoustic Mirror_, this long-standing axiology which pits the acoustic
realm against the visual realm:
IMAGE SOUND
--------------------
Male Female
Looking Listening
Active Passive
Reason Emotion
Public Private
etc...
There are psychoanalytical theories which seek to explain this, but
it has always seemed to me that they merely serve to confirm the dominant
ideology rather than truly *explain* how it might have come about, in the
"history of consciousness". I'd love to hear others elaborate on this...
Philippe Mather
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
---------------------\ /----------------------------------\ /--------------
he End | | The End | | T
| | | |
ather Productions | | (c) 1996 P.Mather Productions | | (c) 1996 P.M
oy.cc.uregina.ca | | [log in to unmask] | | matherp@ler
| | | |
---------------------/ \----------------------------------/ \--------------
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]
