I just wanted to clear a few things up, if at all possible. I'm not trying
to set the defintion of film down in stone, for all people, in all
situations, across the ages. Words, of neccesity, alter in context, and I
recognize that fact.
However, what we have established here is a context in which to discuss
something, and I'm merely trying to formulate some sort of general
definition of what that something is... a foundation, if you will, upon
which to further discuss its various aspects.
If you open the dictionary, you might note that many words have multiple
definitions, and that the context in which the definition applies is
occasionally noted in the dictionary. The Thesaurus, which many argue is a
superior type of resource, you will find the same phenomena. Of course,
this is not new information, but I bring it up to make a point.
Film IS a celluloid material, coated with grains of metal, that reacts to
light in various interesting ways. That is what some people mean when they
say "film."
Film can also mean a narrative story projected on screen and recorded on
film as defined above. When some people say "film" that is what they mean.
Film (says the photo-booth operator) is a small cylindrical object that I
put into this machine in order to produce photographs.
Film, (says the cook) is a layer of grease that covers a kitchen at the end
of the night.
I'm not arguing that these definitions are wrong, or that they are somehow
inaccurate or inadequate, I'm simply saying that they don't accurately
describe the word "film" as it has come to be used in this context.
Words evolve with language, definitions drift over time; and I won't argue
that they don't. What I will argue is that the existence of a dynamic
language makes its words impossible to define... becuase that would be
saying that a definition must encompass the entire aspect of a word, that
it must describe all the other words that surround that word, that it must
trace with precision not only the words entire being, but in fact also
describe all of the real world issues that surround it. That would just be
silly.
All I want to do with my much maligned definition is provide a solid base
upon which to discuss film, by describing those elements which I feel are
necessary for "film" as a type of media... to define what is meant by the
word "film" or "movie" within the context of the film-philosophy mailing
list. This may be hubris on my part, to define this term for everyone, and
if so, I apologize.
I do not apologize for stating that it is possible to define the term.
There is no magic, no indescribable quality, no paranormal phenomena, no
existential dimension of the word "film" that somehow makes it any more
difficult to define than the word "positron."
j. daigle
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|