IMHO:
Such attempt would be, to post-theory point-of-view, not serious at
all. Screen theories and cognivist-neoformalist approaches assume
quite opposite methods: the former requires that one proposes testable
hipotheses to solve questions, and weight them agains evidences. The
latter seems to assume a group of abstract theories and to use the
movies as illustrations of that theories (see BORDWELL, "Historical
poetics of cinema").
Of course, an alternative is possible: to convert Screen premises to
testable hipotheses and see how they go against empirical evidence,
and if other testable hipotheses are better or not as explanaitions to
those evidences. Perhaps that would be considered, by post-theory
standards, a serious attempt. But maybe that kind of attempt is simply
accepting the modus operandi of post-theory, and not an attempt of
reconciliation.
I don't know well enough the Screen point-of-view to understand its
criteria of seriousness, but I imagine it has its own criteria (which
may be, or may not be, compatible with post-theory criteria).
Short conclusion: I think that would be an interesting, but very
difficult, attempt.
Sincerely,
Cristiano Canguçu
Brazil
>
> Have there been any serious attempts (in English-language film/media
> studies) to try to "reconcile" the now-classical SCREEN theory (in
> Bordwell's terms, the SLAM gang - Saussure-Lacan-Althusser-Marx) with the
> POST-THEORY (cognitivist-neoformalist) approach? And where would one posit
> absolute aporias between the two?
>
> Henry
*
*
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.
**
|