in response:
cinema is a lie 24 times a second. (haneke)
Am 20.03.2009 um 14:29 schrieb Alan Fair:
> HI everone
> at risque of sounding obvious: "cinema is the truth 24 times a
> second." j-l. g
> alan
>>>> FILM-PHILOSOPHY automatic digest system
>>>> <[log in to unmask]> 19/03/2009 00:57 >>>
> There are 4 messages totalling 887 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics in this special issue:
>
> 1. Truth (4)
>
> *
> *
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:50:06 +1100
> From: Ross Macleay <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Truth
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C9A86F.B3AAEF10
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm
> trying =
> to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder for
> instance =
> whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way we say that a =
> sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual footage' or
> 'video =
> evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever tried to formulate =
> something like 'A shot is true if and only if......? Or is there no =
> point?
>
> Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the =
> conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing
> that =
> says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?=20
>
> Ross
>
> *
> *
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C9A86F.B3AAEF10
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.5726" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In the context of writing about
> film, =
> video and=20
> history.....I'm trying to find material on film and the theory
> of =
> truth.=20
> </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I wonder for instance whether we
> ever =
> say of a=20
> shot that it is true, the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do
> we =
> just talk=20
> about 'actual footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has
> anyone =
>
> ever tried to formulate something like 'A shot is true if
> and =
> only=20
> if......? Or is there no point?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway is anyone aware of writing
> or =
> films that=20
> reflect on the conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'?
> Or =
> of=20
> writing that says that truth is not a concept relevant to film? =
> </FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
> *
> *
> 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]
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C9A86F.B3AAEF10--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:31:59 +0100
> From: "Henry M. Taylor" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Truth
>
> --Apple-Mail-1--737201903
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset=US-ASCII;
> format=flowed;
> delsp=yes
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.
>
> Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the
> camera lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking,
> outside of context, the camera never lies. However, in practice, there
> is always some sort of context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the
> camera - as we all know - may very well be lying. Realism is the wider
> set of strategies and conventions which makes us believe in the truth
> of an image. Even today, there are certain things of such phenomenal
> richness which Hollywood could never convincingly produce in the
> studio or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, for instance.
> Those were 'true' images.
>
> Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth.
> Deleuze was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and
> conventional) realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That
> hurts (Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural
> truths, not just one.
>
> Henry
>
>
>
>
>
>> In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm
>> trying to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder
>> for instance whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way
>> we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual
>> footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever
>> tried to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and only
>> if......? Or is there no point?
>>
>> Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the
>> conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing
>> that says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?
>>
>> Ross
>> * * 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]
>> . 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]
>> **
>
>
> *
> *
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
>
> --Apple-Mail-1--737201903
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <html><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode:
> space; =
> -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Film is not a
> language in =
> the linguistic sense.</div><div><br></div><div>Therefore at first
> sight, =
> this question boils down to a) can the camera lie, and b) realism. I =
> would argue that strictly speaking, outside of context, the camera
> never =
> lies. However, in practice, there is always some sort of context
> (filmic =
> and extra-filmic), so that the camera - as we all know - may very
> well =
> be lying. Realism is the wider set of strategies and conventions
> which =
> makes us believe in the truth of an image. Even today, there are
> certain =
> things of such phenomenal richness which Hollywood could never =
> convincingly produce in the studio or computer. The collapsing twin =
> towers of 9/11, for instance. Those were 'true' =
> images.</div><div><br></div><div>Of course, I guess, you might be =
> referring to a 'deeper' truth. Deleuze was dealing with that in the =
> time-image. If (symbolic and conventional) realism doesn't suffice,
> try =
> the Lacanian real. That hurts (Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). =
> Hence, there are plural truths, not just =
> one.</div><div><br></div><div>Henry</div><div><br></div><div><br></
> div><di=
> v><br></div><br><div><div><br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><span =
> class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate;
> color: =
> rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: =
> normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: =
> normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-
> indent: =
> 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-
> spacing: =
> 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
> -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
> -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
> auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div =
> bgcolor=3D"#ffffff"><div><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2">In the
> context =
> of writing about film, video and history.....I'm trying to find =
> material on film and the theory of truth.<span =
> class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span></font><font
> face=3D"Arial" =
> size=3D"2">I wonder for instance whether we ever say of a shot that
> it =
> is true, the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk =
> about 'actual footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has
> anyone =
> ever tried to formulate something like 'A shot is true if
> and =
> only if......? Or is there no point?</font></div><div><font
> face=3D"Arial"=
> size=3D"2"></font> </div><div><font face=3D"Arial"
> size=3D"2">Anyway=
> is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the conditions =
> under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing that says
> that =
> truth is not a concept relevant to film?</font></div><div><font =
> face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2"></font> </div><div><font
> face=3D"Arial" =
> size=3D"2">Ross</font></div>* * 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:<a =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</
> a>. Or =
> visit:<span class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
> href=3D"http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-
> philosophy.html">http://www.j=
> iscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html</a><span =
> class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span>For help email:<span =
> class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</
> a>, not =
> the salon. * Film-Philosophy online:<span =
> class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
> href=3D"http://www.film-philosophy.com">http://www.film-
> philosophy.com</a>=
> <span class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span>Contact:<span =
> class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">editor@film-
> philosophy.com</a><=
> span =
> class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span>**</div></span></
> blockquote><=
> /div><br></body></html>=
> *
> *
> 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]
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
>
> --Apple-Mail-1--737201903--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:50:01 +1100
> From: Ross Macleay <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Truth
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A878.1238E430
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Thanks Henry, especially for your comments in the first paragraph,
> which =
> are about 'the shallower' truth. Just for the record - I am
> interested =
> in plumbing the depths of shallow truth - the truth a child should
> be =
> able to understand the meaning of.
>
> Ross
> ----- Original Message -----=20
> From: Henry M. Taylor=20
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:31 AM
> Subject: Re: Truth
>
>
> Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.
>
>
> Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the =
> camera lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking, =
> outside of context, the camera never lies. However, in practice,
> there =
> is always some sort of context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that
> the =
> camera - as we all know - may very well be lying. Realism is the
> wider =
> set of strategies and conventions which makes us believe in the
> truth of =
> an image. Even today, there are certain things of such phenomenal =
> richness which Hollywood could never convincingly produce in the
> studio =
> or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, for instance. Those =
> were 'true' images.
>
>
> Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth. =
> Deleuze was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
> conventional) realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That
> hurts =
> (Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural
> truths, not =
> just one.
>
>
> Henry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm =
> trying to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder
> for =
> instance whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way we
> say =
> that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual footage'
> or =
> 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever tried to
> formulate =
> something like 'A shot is true if and only if......? Or is there no =
> point?
>
> Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the =
> conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing
> that =
> says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?
>
> Ross
> * * 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] 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] **
>
> * * 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] 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]
> **=20
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---=
> -----
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com=20
> Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.18/2008 - Release Date: =
> 03/17/09 16:25:00
>
> *
> *
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A878.1238E430
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.5726" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY=20
> style=3D"WORD-WRAP: break-word; webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
> webkit-line-break: after-white-space"=20
> bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks Henry, especially for your =
> comments in the=20
> first paragraph, which are about 'the shallower' truth. Just for the =
> record - I=20
> am interested in plumbing the depths of shallow truth - the truth a =
> child should=20
> be able to understand the meaning of.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
> BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
> <DIV=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
> black"><B>From:</B>=20
> <A [log in to unmask] =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">Henry M.=20
> Taylor</A> </DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
> [log in to unmask]
> =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">FILM-
> [log in to unmask]
> C.UK</A>=20
> </DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, March 19,
> 2009 =
> 9:31=20
> AM</DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Truth</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can
> the =
> camera=20
> lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking,
> outside of =
> context,=20
> the camera never lies. However, in practice, there is always some
> sort =
> of=20
> context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the camera - as we all
> know =
> - may=20
> very well be lying. Realism is the wider set of strategies and =
> conventions=20
> which makes us believe in the truth of an image. Even today,
> there are =
> certain=20
> things of such phenomenal richness which Hollywood could never =
> convincingly=20
> produce in the studio or computer. The collapsing twin towers of
> 9/11, =
> for=20
> instance. Those were 'true' images.</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper'
> truth. =
> Deleuze=20
> was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
> conventional)=20
> realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That hurts
> (Barthes' =
> punctum=20
> in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural truths, not just one.</
> DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Henry</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV><BR>
> <DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><SPAN class=3DApple-style-span=20
> style=3D"WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; TEXT-
> TRANSFORM: =
> none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; =
> LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; orphans: 2;
> widows: =
> 2; webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
> webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; webkit-text-decorations-in-
> effect: =
> none; webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">
> <DIV bgcolor=3D"#ffffff">
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In the context of writing about =
> film, video and=20
> history.....I'm trying to find material on film and the
> theory =
> of=20
> truth.<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN></
> FONT><FONT =
> face=3DArial=20
> size=3D2>I wonder for instance whether we ever say of a shot
> that it =
> is true,=20
> the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about =
> 'actual=20
> footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone =
> ever tried=20
> to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and only =
> if......? Or is=20
> there no point?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway is anyone aware of
> writing =
> or films that=20
> reflect on the conditions under which a shot (or a film) is
> 'true'? =
> Or of=20
> writing that says that truth is not a concept relevant to =
> film?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV>* * =
> Film-Philosophy Email=20
> Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always delete the =
> text of the=20
> message you are replying to. To leave, send the message: leave=20
> film-philosophy to:<A=20
>
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>. =
> Or=20
> visit:<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
> =
> href=3D"http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-
> philosophy.html">http://www.=
> jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html</A><SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>For help email:<SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
>
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>, =
> not the=20
> salon. * Film-Philosophy online:<SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
> =
> href=3D"http://www.film-philosophy.com">http://www.film-
> philosophy.com</A=
>> <SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>Contact:<SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
> =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">editor@film-
> philosophy.com</A>=
> <SPAN=20
> =
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>**</DIV></SPAN></
> BLOCKQUOTE></=
> DIV><BR>*=20
> * Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply'
> please =
> always=20
> 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:=20
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html For help
> email:=20
> [log in to unmask], not the salon. * Film-Philosophy online:=20
> http://www.film-philosophy.com Contact: editor@film-
> philosophy.com **=20
> <P>
> <HR>
>
> <P></P><BR>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by
> AVG =
> -=20
> www.avg.com <BR>Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.18/2008
> - =
> Release=20
> Date: 03/17/09 16:25:00<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
> *
> *
> 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]
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A878.1238E430--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:53:50 -0500
> From: bill harris <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Truth
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A80B.A4998180
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Of course, in the Wittgensteinian sense, language is not 'language', =
> either. Moreover, we might use a rough analogy from Quine: If truth =
> resides within the sentence, and visual shots might correspond to
> words, =
> then what constitutes a visual sentence?
>
> I would also challenge anyone to find a context-free camera shot. =
> Indeed, Nine-Eleven images seem to import a special truth only
> because =
> of the uniqueness of two commercial jets being filmed hitting
> occupied =
> skyscrapers. Yet this can easily be rigged up by computer imaging. =
> Everything else is emotive commentary that Americans have attached
> to =
> the event in ways that make it appear to be unique; hence,
> objectively =
> real.
>
> There is nothing that screams out "downtown Manhattan" from the =
> photos...at least that might not have been manipulated.
> Alternatively, =
> the images might be, in reality, a doctored film of downtown
> Santiago, =
> Chile on 9/11/73. The CIA--in lieu of storming Allende's offices--
> has =
> drugged the pilot of a commercial airline and told him to fly into
> the =
> Presidential Palace.
> The rough, grainy documents of jets bombing The Palace are fakes.=20
>
> As for perspective, it goes without saying that from a bird's eye
> pov =
> the events are similar...
>
> BH
>
> ----- Original Message -----=20
> From: Henry M. Taylor<mailto:[log in to unmask]>=20
> To: =
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:FILM-
> [log in to unmask]>=20
> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 17:31
> Subject: Re: Truth
>
>
> Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.
>
>
> Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the =
> camera lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking, =
> outside of context, the camera never lies. However, in practice,
> there =
> is always some sort of context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that
> the =
> camera - as we all know - may very well be lying. Realism is the
> wider =
> set of strategies and conventions which makes us believe in the
> truth of =
> an image. Even today, there are certain things of such phenomenal =
> richness which Hollywood could never convincingly produce in the
> studio =
> or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, for instance. Those =
> were 'true' images.
>
>
> Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth. =
> Deleuze was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
> conventional) realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That
> hurts =
> (Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural
> truths, not =
> just one.
>
>
> Henry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm =
> trying to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder
> for =
> instance whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way we
> say =
> that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual footage'
> or =
> 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever tried to
> formulate =
> something like 'A shot is true if and only if......? Or is there no =
> point?
>
> Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the =
> conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing
> that =
> says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?
>
> Ross
> * * 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]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. Or
> visit: =
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html<http://
> www.jiscmail.=
> ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html> For help email: =
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>, not the
> salon. =
> * Film-Philosophy online: =
> http://www.film-philosophy.com<http://www.film-philosophy.com/>
> Contact: =
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> **
>
> * * 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] 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] **
>
> *
> *
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A80B.A4998180
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type =
> content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
>
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16735" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3DMailContainerBody=20
> style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; =
> COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-
> STYLE: =
> normal; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; =
> BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; WORD-WRAP: break-
> word; =
> BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-
> break: =
> after-white-space"=20
> leftMargin=3D0 topMargin=3D0 acc_role=3D"text"
> CanvasTabStop=3D"true"=20
> name=3D"Compose message area"><!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace =
> prefix=3D"v" /><?xml:namespace prefix=3D"o" /><![endif]-->
> <DIV>
> <DIV>Of course, in the Wittgensteinian sense, language is not =
> 'language',=20
> either. Moreover, we might use a rough analogy from Quine: If
> truth =
> resides=20
> within the sentence, and visual shots might correspond to words,
> then =
> what=20
> constitutes a visual sentence?</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>I would also challenge anyone to find a context-free =
> camera=20
> shot. Indeed, Nine-Eleven images seem to import =
> a special truth only=20
> because of the uniqueness of two commercial jets being filmed
> hitting =
> occupied=20
> skyscrapers. Yet this can easily be rigged up by computer imaging. =
> Everything=20
> else is emotive commentary that Americans have attached to the
> event in =
> ways=20
> that make it appear to be unique; hence, objectively real.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>There is nothing that screams out "downtown Manhattan"
> from =
> the=20
> photos...at least that might not have been=20
> manipulated. Alternatively, the images might be, in =
> reality, a=20
> doctored film of downtown Santiago, Chile on 9/11/73. The CIA--
> in =
> lieu of=20
> storming Allende's offices--has drugged the pilot of a =
> commercial=20
> airline and told him to fly into the Presidential =
> Palace.</DIV>
> <DIV>The rough, grainy documents of jets bombing The Palace are
> fakes. =
> </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>As for perspective, it goes without saying that from a bird's
> eye =
> pov the=20
> events are similar...</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>BH</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
> BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A=20
> title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask] =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">Henry M.=20
> Taylor</A> </DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
> title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
> =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">FILM-
> [log in to unmask]
> C.UK</A>=20
> </DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, March 18,
> 2009 =
>
> 17:31</DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Truth</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can
> the =
> camera=20
> lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking,
> outside of =
> context,=20
> the camera never lies. However, in practice, there is always some
> sort =
> of=20
> context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the camera - as we all
> know =
> - may=20
> very well be lying. Realism is the wider set of strategies and =
> conventions=20
> which makes us believe in the truth of an image. Even today,
> there are =
> certain=20
> things of such phenomenal richness which Hollywood could never =
> convincingly=20
> produce in the studio or computer. The collapsing twin towers of
> 9/11, =
> for=20
> instance. Those were 'true' images.</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper'
> truth. =
> Deleuze=20
> was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
> conventional)=20
> realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That hurts
> (Barthes' =
> punctum=20
> in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural truths, not just one.</
> DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV>Henry</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV><BR>
> <DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><SPAN class=3DApple-style-span=20
> style=3D"WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; TEXT-
> TRANSFORM: =
> none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; =
> LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; orphans: 2;
> widows: =
> 2; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
> -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
> -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
> auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">
> <DIV bgcolor=3D"#ffffff">
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In the context of writing about =
> film, video and=20
> history.....I'm trying to find material on film and the
> theory =
> of=20
> truth.<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN></
> FONT><FONT =
> face=3DArial=20
> size=3D2>I wonder for instance whether we ever say of a shot
> that it =
> is true,=20
> the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about =
> 'actual=20
> footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone =
> ever tried=20
> to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and only =
> if......? Or is=20
> there no point?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway is anyone aware of
> writing =
> or films that=20
> reflect on the conditions under which a shot (or a film) is
> 'true'? =
> Or of=20
> writing that says that truth is not a concept relevant to =
> film?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV>* * =
> Film-Philosophy Email=20
> Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always delete the =
> text of the=20
> message you are replying to. To leave, send the message: leave=20
> film-philosophy to:<A title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
>
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>. =
> Or=20
> visit:<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
> title=3Dhttp://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html=20
> =
> href=3D"http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-
> philosophy.html">http://www.=
> jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html</A><SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>For help email:<SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
> title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
>
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>, =
> not the=20
> salon. * Film-Philosophy online:<SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
> title=3Dhttp://www.film-philosophy.com/=20
> =
> href=3D"http://www.film-philosophy.com">http://www.film-
> philosophy.com</A=
>> <SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>Contact:<SPAN=20
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
> title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
> =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">editor@film-
> philosophy.com</A>=
> <SPAN=20
> =
> class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>**</DIV></SPAN></
> BLOCKQUOTE></=
> DIV><BR>*=20
> * Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply'
> please =
> always=20
> 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:=20
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html For help
> email:=20
> [log in to unmask], not the salon. * Film-Philosophy online:=20
> http://www.film-philosophy.com Contact: editor@film-
> philosophy.com **=20
> </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BODY></HTML>
> *
> *
> 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]
> 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]
> **
>
>
>
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A80B.A4998180--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of FILM-PHILOSOPHY Digest - 18 Mar 2009 to 19 Mar 2009 -
> Special issue (#2009-113)
> **********************************************************************
> ****************
>
> A. Fair
> IDS
>
> Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you
> should read the Manchester Metropolitan University's email
> disclaimer available on its website
> http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer
>
> *
> *
> 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]
> **
>
*
*
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]
**
|