PowerPoint Presentation - Eco and Pasolini by dfhdhdhdhjr

VIEWS: 18 PAGES: 16

									Pesaro festival of modern cinema (1965)
   The debate between Metz, Eco and Pasolini.
       Linguistics is the foundation of semiology.
       The image is not decomposable: there are no articulations
        "below" the level of the shot.
       Coding is a function of syntagmatic categories.
       Cinema semiology is on the level of poetics or rhetoric rather
        than a theory of the sign.
       A cinema semiology is best described in relation to narrative.


       Metz:     from the point of view of the text;
       Eco :     from the point of view of the interpreter or reader;
       Pasolini: from the point of view of the creator.
The two traditions:
semiology and semiotics
   Semiology: the study of signs based on
    linguistics
       Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913). Course
        on General Linguistics.
       Roland Barthes
       Christian Metz
   Semiotics: the study of signs based on
    logic
       Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914)
       Umberto Eco
       Gilles Deleuze
       The semiotic of Umberto Eco




   Charles Sanders Peirce: "A sign is
    something which stands for
    something else in some respect or
    capacity for someone.”
The semiotic of Umberto Eco
   Charles Sanders Peirce:
       "A sign is something which stands for something else
        to somebody in some respect or capacity for someone.”

       representamen or representer
       object or referent
       interpretant



                   1. representamen
                 (icon, index, symbol)
                             
             2. object     3. interpretant
Defining the sign: representation
   Peirce: icon, index, and symbol
       An icon signifies in virtue of its resemblance, or
        its analogical relation to what it wishes to
        represent.
       A symbol does not resemble what it refers to; it
        signifies through the force of convention.
       An index may but does not necessarily
        resemble its referent. It signifies in virtue of a
        relationship of contiguity with its referent. A
        causal or existential link is presumed.
       The representational character of signs can be,
        and often is, mixed or heterogeneous.
The semiotic of Umberto Eco
   Charles Sanders Peirce: "A sign is something which
    stands for something else to somebody in some
    respect or capacity for someone."
       We think only in signs.
       Interpretation is guided by context. This context may be
        cultural as well as a personal ideolect or ideolects.
       Signification and interpretation are essentially an open-
        ended process.

                                 1. representamen
                               (icon, index, symbol)
                                           
                           2. object        3. interpretant
The semiotic of Umberto Eco
1. A sign is a material representation (representamen).
2. A representation is recognized to be a sign through an act of
   interpretation (interpretant).
3. A sign is recognized as standing for its referent on the basis
   of a rule or convention.
4. The function of a sign is to correlate an expression and a
   content.
5. A code is a repertoire of these correlations of expression and
   content.
6. Expression and content are independent of one another. In
   other words, the meaning (content) of the expression
   changes with context.
7. Both expression and content have pertinent, articulated
   features.
The semiotic of Umberto Eco
8. The content of an expression can be described as independent
   of any "real" referent. In other words, an expression can refer
   to an imaginary or false world as well as a real and truthful
   one.
9. The rules of semiotics are not necessarily the rules of
   linguistics. There are many kinds of codes or correlations that
   are not those of verbal speech.
10. The content of an expression is both denotative and
   connotative.
11. Every act of signification is both complex and heterogeneous.
   It can encompass or combine:
       multiple modes of representation: iconic, indexical, symbolic;
       different kinds of articulation;
       both arbitrary and motivated correlation of expression and content;
       different kinds of interpretive labor: recognition, categorization,
        combination, invention.
          Complexity of sign-functions
                    connotation     connotation         connotation



CONTENT
                                    denotation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
            |
            |1st    "star"



EXPRESSION   |
             |2nd     /star/
             |
                     symbolic        iconic          indexical
The semiotic of Umberto Eco
   Eco’s critique of Barthes and Metz
       critique of analogy
       poverty vs. repleteness of photographic
        image
       the effect of context on interpretation
       codes of similitude vs. “impression of
        reality”
Pier Paolo Pasolini,
“The Cinema of Poetry”
Pier Paolo Pasolini,
“The Cinema of Poetry”
   "A specific language of images would seem
    to be a pure and artificial abstraction.” (167)
   Signals or signs:
       "...there is a complex world of meaningful--both gestural and
        environmental--that accompany the lin-signs, and those
        proper to memory or dreams, both and all sorts of signs
        coming from the environment, which prefigure and offer
        themselves as the 'instrumental' premise of cinematic
        communication.” (168)
   Im-signs. The instrumental basis of cinema is
    an "irrational" type.
Pasolini, “The Cinema of Poetry”
   Im-signs. The instrumental basis of cinema is
    an "irrational" type.
       Rational-linguistic/irrational-prelinguistic.
       Both the physiognomic "language" of reality and the
        imagistic reality of dreams are pre-grammatical and
        premorphological (unformed).
   The components of the im-sign:
       objective
                signals
                linguistic signs + body/gesture [“kinemes”]
                im-signs, "the world of memory and dreams
       subjective
The cinema of poetry and
free indirect discourse
   Types of cinematic discourse
       Naturalism.
       Indirect. Extracting images without quotation
        marks from a given historical and sociological
        milieu.
       Direct (subjective). Point of view shot.
The cinema of poetry and
free indirect discourse
   Free indirect style
       Author adopts language and psychology of protagonist;
        author's language can always be differentiated from that of
        protagonist.
       The style of the "first person" who sees the world according
        to an essentially irrational inspiration. Adopting the point of
        view of a protagonist with access to the irrational and oneiric.
       Not only the search for prelinguistic or pregrammatical style,
        but also "narrational" pretexts, or cultural and revolutionary
        sources suppressed by bourgeois history and culture.
       "Obsessive" framing: the felt presence of the camera
Pushkin’s Bronze Horseman
   “What were the thoughts he pondered then? That he was poor;
    that he perforce must labor to achieve respect, security; that
    God just might have granted him more brains and money. That
    goodness knows, there are those idle lucky dogs with little
    brains, those loungers, for whom life is just a lark! That he had
    been in service in all two years; his thoughts remarked as well
    that the weather wasn’t calming down; that the river kept on
    rising; that the bridges over the Neva were all most likely up and
    that he would be two days or three cut off from his Parasa.
    Thus went his pondering.”
       V.I. Volosinov, Marxism and the Philosophy of Language
         133.

								
To top