--- On Fri, 8/29/08, John Matturri <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Maybe the distinction sometimes made between personal and
> subpersonal
> cognitive processes can do some work here. Various ways of
> drawing that
> distinction,
It might be much simpler (at least when trying to understand the given quote, not coming up with a binary distinction of your own:
"Walking into and out of the spectacle: China's earliest film scene"
http://screen.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/47/1/66
"Many film scholars have reminded us of the active nature of early western audiences, which should be understood as different from the contemporary passive and spellbound film audience absorbed by the narrative. Jean Châteauvert and André Gaudreault have pointed out that the tremendous amount of uncontrolled noise created in the screening environment was one of the most obvious features that distinguished the earliest silent cinema from its second phase, when the sound environment was regulated by the presence of lecturer, music and various filmic mechanisms.55
Miriam Hansen celebrates audience participation in early cinema as active, vocal and resembling participation in the public sphere instead of in consumer culture"
(I have only briefly skipped through it, but it highlights the role of space, mobility vs. immobility of the audience, the cinematic apparatus - like using telescopes.)
*
*
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]
**
|