SCREEN-L Archives

January 1995, Week 3

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

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

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

Print Reply
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Corey Creekmur <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 21 Jan 1995 11:00:44 CST
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
Original comment:
 
>Consider:  What are the implications of people saying "This is my
>mother" when displaying a snapshot of a woman?  Clearly the small piece
>of paper is not literally "mother."  But for the purposes at hand
>one can elide the middle words in the sentence "This is a picture of
>my mother."
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Cal Pryluck, Radio-Television-Film, Temple University, Philadelphia
><[log in to unmask]>  <[log in to unmask]>
 
Not that this doesn't remain a good question, but haven't the implications
of this elision been discussed at length for years, by Bazin, Sontag,
Barthes, and more recently John Tagg, Joel Snyder, and Norman Bryson?  This
is the question at the heart of every realist/resemblance debate in
photography criticism.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2