typically, a convention becomes a cliché for
those who don't share it. But why is it still
somehow touching for the latter, and not just an
empty mechanism?
At 20:17 Uhr -0500 07.02.2009, Frank, Michael wrote:
>a very preliminary observation -- just to start the conversation:
>
>we call something a cliché when it's an attempt
>to be expressive but uses old and well
>recognized and perhaps tired ways of being
>expressive
>
>conventions, OTOH, can -- at least at times --
>have no expressive function at all . . . the
>fade to black to end a scene used to be a
>convention . . . putting credits at the start
>[before '78] or at the end [after '78] is a
>convention . . . the use of a dolly in to a
>close up followed by a dissolve can mean we're
>getting an internal view of a mind [thoughts,
>memories, or dreams] . . . all of these are
>simply visual road signs . . . the last of
>these, for example, may be nothing more than a
>visual trope signifying "she remembered . . ."
>
>i suspect what i'm suggesting is that when the
>device is intended to signal information with
>little or no expressive purpose it's a
>convention -- and there's no reason to object to
>them . . .we need conventions . . . words, after
>all, are purely conventional symbols . . . OTOH,
>when the device aims to be expressive and falls
>back on clichés it would seem that what's
>happening is that only worn out ideas are being
>expressed -- and in a way that suggests that the
>problem with clichés is not that of form but
>that of content
>
>just a start
>
>mike
>
>
>-----Original Message-----.AC.UK
>Subject: Cliché vs Convention
>
>There have been a couple of fun books published dealing specifically
>with 'movie clichés' (apart from various web sites devoted to the
>issue). Upon closer inspection, however, it strikes me that what is
>often listed as a cliché is probably best considered to be a
>convention. So my query is: what's the difference between the two? Can
>this distinction between convention and cliché be theorized somewhat
>in scholarly fashion? Any thoughts?
>
>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] 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]
**
|