In a message dated 6/16/1999 2:50:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
> >> I wondered if folks would be kind enough to share with me
> >> their intuitions on an issue that has been discussed on this list
before,
> >> namely the idea of "imagined seeing". I have been thinking about the
> >> possibility of imagined seeing for some time, and although I am pretty
> sure that our filmgoing experiences probably do not involve anything that
can
> be adequately described by this term, I remain curious over an issue that
> was well brought out in Samuel Guttenplan's review of _Film Theory and
> >> Philosophy_ and which figures prominently in contemporary debates in
> >> analytic philosophy of film: can we imagine that we see x without
> imagining anything about ourselves and our relation to x? (e.g. does
imagining
> seeing Mt. Rushmore involve imagining that "I see Mt. Rushmore" or that "
I am
> in South Dakota" or, more simply, that "The sculpture is seen
> >> from the foot of the mountain?")
> >>
> >> Should we perhaps coin another term such as "visual
> >> imaginings" that can refer the imagination of the physical appearance of
> >> something without any reference at all to an observer? Would such an act
> of imagination be possible?
> >>
Just some untutored thoughts. It seems to me that it must be possible for
there to be imaginings without visual images or blind people (those blind
from birth) wood be unable to imagine. However, for those with
sight...visual images are such a large part of how we conceptualize (I was
about to say visualize!) our world and our position in it that I don't think
that imagining happens very often without visualizing (perhaps on a very deep
theoretical or spiritual level where another way of knowing might be more
present). But even in our own internal imaginings which are visual I think
we orient ourselves as either subject or object.
Another point that I think may be relevant to this issue (or maybe not) is
that when discussing how we imagine ourselves in relation to the visual
images we are observing on the screen we have to take into account what we
bring internally to the screen. I'm sure everyone has had the experience of
believing wholeheartedly that they saw a particular shot in a film and on
reviewing find that it is not there..or not how they remember it.. Or seen a
dilm with another person and upon discussing it have the feeling that they
saw two different films. I think watching a film is much like having a story
read to you. You take the information that is given (in a story it is
strictly aural with some descriptions of visual while in a film you are given
more visual cues) and internalize it (almost instantly) to create your own
personal experience which is unique because it is the external stimulus
combined with your own internal elements. Having worked with children who
were poor readers one of the recurring conditions that I discovered was that
children who didn't like to read did not visualize what they were reading
while they read while children who enjoy reading did (I had one child refer
to it as "their own movie in their head)
Some thoughts.
Andre Campbell
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|