SCREEN-L Archives

January 1995, Week 3


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Sun, 15 Jan 1995 17:16:45 CST
text/plain (21 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I have a question for those involved with experimental cinema.
Frequently experimental cinema reaches a level of imagistic complexity
-figuration, abstraction- not found elsewhere.  For me this is one of the
most rewarding parts of experimental cinema.  Unfortunately this aspect of
the work appears to be frequently ignored by viewers and by those individuals
writing about the work.  I wonder about the idea of visual competence.  As I
think we will agree cinema study has been dominated by narrative and thematic
forms of analysis such as psychoanalysis, semeiotics, feminist theory, autre,
genre,  and cultural theory etc.  It appears to me that methods of analyzing
the cinema that emphasize visual competence, over narrative competence and
that work on the level of the image, specifically the abstract image, do not
exist.  Is there a mode of analysis that I am not aware of?  If so please
suggest references.  Further, for those who teach how do you present filmic
abstraction to your students,  what modes of analysis do you think are proper
or useful?
any thoughts?
-Douglas Hunter