You're jumping the gun, Damian (no pun intended). Whether intentional or not
seems to be beside the point. I still don't see where what you're saying
differs from my mainly technichical-aesthetic explanation of the phenomenon.
Sure the (political etc.) theory of the jump cut came after the fact. And
so?

Henry



on 21.2.2006 18:15 Uhr, Sutton - Damian Peter at [log in to unmask] wrote:

> Yes, sorry, maybe I should clarify.
> 
> I think the jump cut *is* a violation of continuity editing. However that is
> not the same thing as saying that 'jump cuts' were originally *intended* as
> disruptions to a practice of continuity, and certainly not an open disavowal
> of the continuity system. I was under the impression that the term 'jump cut'
> has a fairly precise meaning developed from criticism and writing surrounding
> la nouvelle vague, writings which are not entirely in agreement about its
> practical origins. The intellectual origins of the jump cut in la nouvelle
> vague are contested, but I find the serendipity story much more satisfying as
> a foundation of filmmaking practice that led to something that could later be
> used for intellectual effect. Also, my example of the jump cut was not a
> violation of continuity editing, in the sense that it is the one shot with a
> big whole in it. So I'm arguing that jump cuts *can* be a violation of
> continuity, but that does not mean that the jump cut is a violation of
> continuity editing and only that.
> 
> best
> Damian
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: Film-Philosophy Salon on behalf of Mike Frank
> Sent: Tue 21/02/2006 17:04
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Intellectual Montage in Modern Cinema[Scanned]
> 
> 
> 
> to me, at least, damian's post is VERY puzzling . . . that is, i think i
> agree with virtually all he says, but am startled by the claim that
> it has nothing to do with continuity editing, since it seems to me
> that what he has just described is precisely a violation of continuity
> editing  . . .  what else possible could he mean when he calls a jump cut
> " an irrational edit between shots (or even the same shot) where
> otherwise a sense of continuity might be expected"   . . . .??? * *
> Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always
> delete the text of the message you are replying to. To leave, send the
> message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask] For help email:
> [log in to unmask], not the salon. **
> 
> *
> *
> Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
> After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are
> replying to.
> To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
> For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
> **

*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**