SCREEN-L Archives

September 1995, Week 2

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:
lang thompson <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 7 Sep 1995 03:45:41 GMT
Comments:
Organization:
Netcom
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
>
>The question itself, though, raises the more problematic question of
what
>constitutes the film "
>narrator" in the first place.  Is it the implied organizing and
presenting
>consciousness?  Is it an anthropomorphization of the "camera" (which
usualy
>also means editing and sound)?  Is it the apparent focus of the main
character?
>Is it to be confined to the much rarer instance of a first-person
voiceover
>narrator?
 
 
******  Actually i'd used the phrase "film *equivalent* of unreliable
narrator" partly to avoid this question.  There really isn't a narrator
in film in the sense that a novel has a narrator; even film voiceovers
are the source of the images as a written narrator is the source of all
our information.  (With exceptions like, oh, John Fowles' The Collector
which alternates two different first-person narrations.)  A film like
Lady in the Lake might be unique in narrative film for feature-length
first-person.  LT
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2