Nonetheless, some films are more strenuous to watch than others …
which would seem to require greater activity on the viewer's part …
Henry
> hello,
>
> the distinction between active and passive is something i also have
> been thinking about. lately, i started to believe that such a
> distinction is completely artificial and it is merely created for
> the purposes of studying other categories such as "art" and
> "mainstream" or "avant-garde" and "classical" cinema. the audience's
> situation while watching films is far more complex and it always
> involves both active and passive viewing. how can a person enjoy/
> understand/react/sit through a whole film without being active? or,
> conversely, i cannot think of any viewing experience where someone
> immerses himself in the filmic world, forgets he is watching a film
> and takes everything in without questioning. and since this is not
> something that is measured, but always speculated about (according
> to experience), i do not see how it can be useful.
>
> best,
>
> elif
>
>
*
*
Film-Philosophy 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]
Or visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
*
Film-Philosophy online: http://www.film-philosophy.com
Contact: [log in to unmask]
**
|