Description
The film theories of Jean Epstein, Dziga Vertov, Bela Balazs, and Siegfried Kracauer have long been studied separately from each other. In Doubting Vision , film scholar Malcolm Turvey argues that their work constitutes a distinct, hitherto neglected tradition, which he calls revelationism, and which differs in important ways from modernism and realism. For these four theorists and filmmakers, the cinema is an art of mass enlightenment because it escapes the limits of human sight and reveals the true nature of reality. Turvey provides a detailed exegesis of this tradition, pointing to its sources in Romanticism, the philosophy of Henri Bergson, modern science, and other intellectual currents. He also shows how profoundly it has influenced contemporary film theory by examining the work of psychoanalytical-semiotic theorists of the 1970s, Stanley Cavell, the modern-day followers of Kracauer and Walter Benjamin, and Gilles Deleuze.
Throughout, Turvey offers a trenchant critique of revelationism and its descendants. Combining the close analysis of theoretical texts with the philosophical method of conceptual clarification pioneered by the later Wittgenstein, he shows how the arguments theorists and filmmakers have made about human vision and the cinema's revelatory powers often traffic in conceptual confusion. Having identified and extricated these confusions, Turvey builds on the work of Epstein, Vertov, Balazs, and Kracauer as well as contemporary philosophers of film to clarify some legitimate senses in which the cinema is a revelatory art using examples from the films of filmmakers such as Alfred Hitchcock and Jacques Tati.
Malcolm Turvey is Professor of Film History and Chair of Visual Culture Department, Sarah Lawrence College. He is also editor and writer for October and co-editor of Wittgenstein, Theory and the Arts (Routledgem, 2001)
發表於2024-11-23
Doubting Vision 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載
圖書標籤: Cinema 英文 analytics Cinematic-Perception #
無可置疑的是,視覺懷疑主義在整個早期電影理論研究之中都潛隱著或者“昭然若揭”。但就本文,我不認為采用分析路徑直接打掉一些基本視覺至上主義的“結論”就閤法正當。畢竟,很多“結論”背後的理論基礎並非如作者所言的現代主體性,而是比如一元論和自然主義。
評分無可置疑的是,視覺懷疑主義在整個早期電影理論研究之中都潛隱著或者“昭然若揭”。但就本文,我不認為采用分析路徑直接打掉一些基本視覺至上主義的“結論”就閤法正當。畢竟,很多“結論”背後的理論基礎並非如作者所言的現代主體性,而是比如一元論和自然主義。
評分無可置疑的是,視覺懷疑主義在整個早期電影理論研究之中都潛隱著或者“昭然若揭”。但就本文,我不認為采用分析路徑直接打掉一些基本視覺至上主義的“結論”就閤法正當。畢竟,很多“結論”背後的理論基礎並非如作者所言的現代主體性,而是比如一元論和自然主義。
評分無可置疑的是,視覺懷疑主義在整個早期電影理論研究之中都潛隱著或者“昭然若揭”。但就本文,我不認為采用分析路徑直接打掉一些基本視覺至上主義的“結論”就閤法正當。畢竟,很多“結論”背後的理論基礎並非如作者所言的現代主體性,而是比如一元論和自然主義。
評分無可置疑的是,視覺懷疑主義在整個早期電影理論研究之中都潛隱著或者“昭然若揭”。但就本文,我不認為采用分析路徑直接打掉一些基本視覺至上主義的“結論”就閤法正當。畢竟,很多“結論”背後的理論基礎並非如作者所言的現代主體性,而是比如一元論和自然主義。
Doubting Vision 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載