HI everone
at risque of sounding obvious: "cinema is the truth 24 times a second." j-l. g
alan
>>> FILM-PHILOSOPHY automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]> 19/03/2009 00:57 >>>
There are 4 messages totalling 887 lines in this issue.
Topics in this special issue:
1. Truth (4)
*
*
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]
**
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:50:06 +1100
From: Ross Macleay <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Truth
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C9A86F.B3AAEF10
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm trying =
to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder for instance =
whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way we say that a =
sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual footage' or 'video =
evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever tried to formulate =
something like 'A shot is true if and only if......? Or is there no =
point?
Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the =
conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing that =
says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?=20
Ross
*
*
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]
**
------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C9A86F.B3AAEF10
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.5726" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In the context of writing about film, =
video and=20
history.....I'm trying to find material on film and the theory of =
truth.=20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I wonder for instance whether we ever =
say of a=20
shot that it is true, the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do we =
just talk=20
about 'actual footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone =
ever tried to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and =
only=20
if......? Or is there no point?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway is anyone aware of writing or =
films that=20
reflect on the conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or =
of=20
writing that says that truth is not a concept relevant to film? =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
*
*
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]
**
------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C9A86F.B3AAEF10--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:31:59 +0100
From: "Henry M. Taylor" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Truth
--Apple-Mail-1--737201903
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=US-ASCII;
format=flowed;
delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.
Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the
camera lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking,
outside of context, the camera never lies. However, in practice, there
is always some sort of context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the
camera - as we all know - may very well be lying. Realism is the wider
set of strategies and conventions which makes us believe in the truth
of an image. Even today, there are certain things of such phenomenal
richness which Hollywood could never convincingly produce in the
studio or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, for instance.
Those were 'true' images.
Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth.
Deleuze was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and
conventional) realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That
hurts (Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural
truths, not just one.
Henry
> In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm
> trying to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder
> for instance whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way
> we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual
> footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever
> tried to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and only
> if......? Or is there no point?
>
> Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the
> conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing
> that says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?
>
> Ross
> * * 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]
**
--Apple-Mail-1--737201903
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Film is not a language in =
the linguistic sense.</div><div><br></div><div>Therefore at first sight, =
this question boils down to a) can the camera lie, and b) realism. I =
would argue that strictly speaking, outside of context, the camera never =
lies. However, in practice, there is always some sort of context (filmic =
and extra-filmic), so that the camera - as we all know - may very well =
be lying. Realism is the wider set of strategies and conventions which =
makes us believe in the truth of an image. Even today, there are certain =
things of such phenomenal richness which Hollywood could never =
convincingly produce in the studio or computer. The collapsing twin =
towers of 9/11, for instance. Those were 'true' =
images.</div><div><br></div><div>Of course, I guess, you might be =
referring to a 'deeper' truth. Deleuze was dealing with that in the =
time-image. If (symbolic and conventional) realism doesn't suffice, try =
the Lacanian real. That hurts (Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). =
Hence, there are plural truths, not just =
one.</div><div><br></div><div>Henry</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><di=
v><br></div><br><div><div><br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: =
rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: =
normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: =
normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: =
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div =
bgcolor=3D"#ffffff"><div><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2">In the context =
of writing about film, video and history.....I'm trying to find =
material on film and the theory of truth.<span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span></font><font face=3D"Arial" =
size=3D"2">I wonder for instance whether we ever say of a shot that it =
is true, the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk =
about 'actual footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone =
ever tried to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and =
only if......? Or is there no point?</font></div><div><font face=3D"Arial"=
size=3D"2"></font> </div><div><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2">Anyway=
is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the conditions =
under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing that says that =
truth is not a concept relevant to film?</font></div><div><font =
face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2"></font> </div><div><font face=3D"Arial" =
size=3D"2">Ross</font></div>* * 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:<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>. Or =
visit:<span class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
href=3D"http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html">http://www.j=
iscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html</a><span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span>For help email:<span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>, not =
the salon. * Film-Philosophy online:<span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
href=3D"http://www.film-philosophy.com">http://www.film-philosophy.com</a>=
<span class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span>Contact:<span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span><a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><=
span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> </span>**</div></span></blockquote><=
/div><br></body></html>=
*
*
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]
**
--Apple-Mail-1--737201903--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:50:01 +1100
From: Ross Macleay <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Truth
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A878.1238E430
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks Henry, especially for your comments in the first paragraph, which =
are about 'the shallower' truth. Just for the record - I am interested =
in plumbing the depths of shallow truth - the truth a child should be =
able to understand the meaning of.
Ross
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Henry M. Taylor=20
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: Truth
Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.
Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the =
camera lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking, =
outside of context, the camera never lies. However, in practice, there =
is always some sort of context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the =
camera - as we all know - may very well be lying. Realism is the wider =
set of strategies and conventions which makes us believe in the truth of =
an image. Even today, there are certain things of such phenomenal =
richness which Hollywood could never convincingly produce in the studio =
or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, for instance. Those =
were 'true' images.
Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth. =
Deleuze was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
conventional) realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That hurts =
(Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural truths, not =
just one.
Henry
In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm =
trying to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder for =
instance whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way we say =
that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual footage' or =
'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever tried to formulate =
something like 'A shot is true if and only if......? Or is there no =
point?
Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the =
conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing that =
says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?
Ross
* * 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 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] **=20
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com=20
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.18/2008 - Release Date: =
03/17/09 16:25:00
*
*
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]
**
------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A878.1238E430
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.5726" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY=20
style=3D"WORD-WRAP: break-word; webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
webkit-line-break: after-white-space"=20
bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks Henry, especially for your =
comments in the=20
first paragraph, which are about 'the shallower' truth. Just for the =
record - I=20
am interested in plumbing the depths of shallow truth - the truth a =
child should=20
be able to understand the meaning of.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A [log in to unmask] =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">Henry M.=20
Taylor</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
[log in to unmask]
=
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
C.UK</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, March 19, 2009 =
9:31=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Truth</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the =
camera=20
lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking, outside of =
context,=20
the camera never lies. However, in practice, there is always some sort =
of=20
context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the camera - as we all know =
- may=20
very well be lying. Realism is the wider set of strategies and =
conventions=20
which makes us believe in the truth of an image. Even today, there are =
certain=20
things of such phenomenal richness which Hollywood could never =
convincingly=20
produce in the studio or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, =
for=20
instance. Those were 'true' images.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth. =
Deleuze=20
was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
conventional)=20
realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That hurts (Barthes' =
punctum=20
in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural truths, not just one.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Henry</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><SPAN class=3DApple-style-span=20
style=3D"WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; TEXT-TRANSFORM: =
none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; =
LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; orphans: 2; widows: =
2; webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: =
none; webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">
<DIV bgcolor=3D"#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In the context of writing about =
film, video and=20
history.....I'm trying to find material on film and the theory =
of=20
truth.<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN></FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>I wonder for instance whether we ever say of a shot that it =
is true,=20
the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about =
'actual=20
footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone =
ever tried=20
to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and only =
if......? Or is=20
there no point?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway is anyone aware of writing =
or films that=20
reflect on the conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? =
Or of=20
writing that says that truth is not a concept relevant to =
film?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV>* * =
Film-Philosophy Email=20
Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always delete the =
text of the=20
message you are replying to. To leave, send the message: leave=20
film-philosophy to:<A=20
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>. =
Or=20
visit:<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html">http://www.=
jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html</A><SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>For help email:<SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>, =
not the=20
salon. * Film-Philosophy online:<SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.film-philosophy.com">http://www.film-philosophy.com</A=
><SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>Contact:<SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>=
<SPAN=20
=
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>**</DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE></=
DIV><BR>*=20
* Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please =
always=20
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:=20
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html For help email:=20
[log in to unmask], not the salon. * Film-Philosophy online:=20
http://www.film-philosophy.com Contact: [log in to unmask] **=20
<P>
<HR>
<P></P><BR>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG =
-=20
www.avg.com <BR>Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.18/2008 - =
Release=20
Date: 03/17/09 16:25:00<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
*
*
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]
**
------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A878.1238E430--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:53:50 -0500
From: bill harris <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Truth
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A80B.A4998180
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Of course, in the Wittgensteinian sense, language is not 'language', =
either. Moreover, we might use a rough analogy from Quine: If truth =
resides within the sentence, and visual shots might correspond to words, =
then what constitutes a visual sentence?
I would also challenge anyone to find a context-free camera shot. =
Indeed, Nine-Eleven images seem to import a special truth only because =
of the uniqueness of two commercial jets being filmed hitting occupied =
skyscrapers. Yet this can easily be rigged up by computer imaging. =
Everything else is emotive commentary that Americans have attached to =
the event in ways that make it appear to be unique; hence, objectively =
real.
There is nothing that screams out "downtown Manhattan" from the =
photos...at least that might not have been manipulated. Alternatively, =
the images might be, in reality, a doctored film of downtown Santiago, =
Chile on 9/11/73. The CIA--in lieu of storming Allende's offices--has =
drugged the pilot of a commercial airline and told him to fly into the =
Presidential Palace.
The rough, grainy documents of jets bombing The Palace are fakes.=20
As for perspective, it goes without saying that from a bird's eye pov =
the events are similar...
BH
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Henry M. Taylor<mailto:[log in to unmask]>=20
To: =
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>=20
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 17:31
Subject: Re: Truth
Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.
Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the =
camera lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking, =
outside of context, the camera never lies. However, in practice, there =
is always some sort of context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the =
camera - as we all know - may very well be lying. Realism is the wider =
set of strategies and conventions which makes us believe in the truth of =
an image. Even today, there are certain things of such phenomenal =
richness which Hollywood could never convincingly produce in the studio =
or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, for instance. Those =
were 'true' images.
Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth. =
Deleuze was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
conventional) realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That hurts =
(Barthes' punctum in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural truths, not =
just one.
Henry
In the context of writing about film, video and history.....I'm =
trying to find material on film and the theory of truth. I wonder for =
instance whether we ever say of a shot that it is true, the way we say =
that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about 'actual footage' or =
'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone ever tried to formulate =
something like 'A shot is true if and only if......? Or is there no =
point?
Anyway is anyone aware of writing or films that reflect on the =
conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? Or of writing that =
says that truth is not a concept relevant to film?
Ross
* * 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]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. Or visit: =
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html<http://www.jiscmail.=
ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html> For help email: =
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>, not the salon. =
* Film-Philosophy online: =
http://www.film-philosophy.com<http://www.film-philosophy.com/> Contact: =
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> **
* * 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]
**
------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A80B.A4998180
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type =
content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16735" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3DMailContainerBody=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; =
COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-STYLE: =
normal; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; =
BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; WORD-WRAP: break-word; =
BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: =
after-white-space"=20
leftMargin=3D0 topMargin=3D0 acc_role=3D"text" CanvasTabStop=3D"true"=20
name=3D"Compose message area"><!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace =
prefix=3D"v" /><?xml:namespace prefix=3D"o" /><![endif]-->
<DIV>
<DIV>Of course, in the Wittgensteinian sense, language is not =
'language',=20
either. Moreover, we might use a rough analogy from Quine: If truth =
resides=20
within the sentence, and visual shots might correspond to words, then =
what=20
constitutes a visual sentence?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I would also challenge anyone to find a context-free =
camera=20
shot. Indeed, Nine-Eleven images seem to import =
a special truth only=20
because of the uniqueness of two commercial jets being filmed hitting =
occupied=20
skyscrapers. Yet this can easily be rigged up by computer imaging. =
Everything=20
else is emotive commentary that Americans have attached to the event in =
ways=20
that make it appear to be unique; hence, objectively real.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There is nothing that screams out "downtown Manhattan" from =
the=20
photos...at least that might not have been=20
manipulated. Alternatively, the images might be, in =
reality, a=20
doctored film of downtown Santiago, Chile on 9/11/73. The CIA--in =
lieu of=20
storming Allende's offices--has drugged the pilot of a =
commercial=20
airline and told him to fly into the Presidential =
Palace.</DIV>
<DIV>The rough, grainy documents of jets bombing The Palace are fakes. =
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for perspective, it goes without saying that from a bird's eye =
pov the=20
events are similar...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>BH</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask] =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">Henry M.=20
Taylor</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
=
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
C.UK</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, March 18, 2009 =
17:31</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Truth</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Film is not a language in the linguistic sense.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Therefore at first sight, this question boils down to a) can the =
camera=20
lie, and b) realism. I would argue that strictly speaking, outside of =
context,=20
the camera never lies. However, in practice, there is always some sort =
of=20
context (filmic and extra-filmic), so that the camera - as we all know =
- may=20
very well be lying. Realism is the wider set of strategies and =
conventions=20
which makes us believe in the truth of an image. Even today, there are =
certain=20
things of such phenomenal richness which Hollywood could never =
convincingly=20
produce in the studio or computer. The collapsing twin towers of 9/11, =
for=20
instance. Those were 'true' images.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Of course, I guess, you might be referring to a 'deeper' truth. =
Deleuze=20
was dealing with that in the time-image. If (symbolic and =
conventional)=20
realism doesn't suffice, try the Lacanian real. That hurts (Barthes' =
punctum=20
in Camera Lucida). Hence, there are plural truths, not just one.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Henry</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><SPAN class=3DApple-style-span=20
style=3D"WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; TEXT-TRANSFORM: =
none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; =
LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; orphans: 2; widows: =
2; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">
<DIV bgcolor=3D"#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In the context of writing about =
film, video and=20
history.....I'm trying to find material on film and the theory =
of=20
truth.<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN></FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>I wonder for instance whether we ever say of a shot that it =
is true,=20
the way we say that a sentence is true. Or do we just talk about =
'actual=20
footage' or 'video evidence' or something else. Has anyone =
ever tried=20
to formulate something like 'A shot is true if and only =
if......? Or is=20
there no point?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway is anyone aware of writing =
or films that=20
reflect on the conditions under which a shot (or a film) is 'true'? =
Or of=20
writing that says that truth is not a concept relevant to =
film?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ross</FONT></DIV>* * =
Film-Philosophy Email=20
Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always delete the =
text of the=20
message you are replying to. To leave, send the message: leave=20
film-philosophy to:<A title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>. =
Or=20
visit:<SPAN class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
title=3Dhttp://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html=20
=
href=3D"http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html">http://www.=
jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html</A><SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>For help email:<SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>, =
not the=20
salon. * Film-Philosophy online:<SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
title=3Dhttp://www.film-philosophy.com/=20
=
href=3D"http://www.film-philosophy.com">http://www.film-philosophy.com</A=
><SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>Contact:<SPAN=20
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN><A=20
title=3Dmailto:[log in to unmask]
=
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A>=
<SPAN=20
=
class=3DApple-converted-space> </SPAN>**</DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE></=
DIV><BR>*=20
* Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please =
always=20
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:=20
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html For help email:=20
[log in to unmask], not the salon. * Film-Philosophy online:=20
http://www.film-philosophy.com Contact: [log in to unmask] **=20
</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BODY></HTML>
*
*
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]
**
------=_NextPart_000_0042_01C9A80B.A4998180--
------------------------------
End of FILM-PHILOSOPHY Digest - 18 Mar 2009 to 19 Mar 2009 - Special issue (#2009-113)
**************************************************************************************
A. Fair
IDS
Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you
should read the Manchester Metropolitan University's email
disclaimer available on its website
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer
*
*
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]
**
|
