Having bachelor of philosophy degree, I think that the concept of philosophy is easily vulgarized in any topic that “thinkers” talk. This is same when “philosophy” integrates/engages in the film. Thus, as regards to film-philosophy issues, philosophy can be seen as if it is a medium to analyze a film or it is seen that some films are illustrations of philosophical themes and also film can be seen as philosophy, namely, “philosophy in action”. Although this topic requires further analysis, I’ll give you some key points in order to make you be familiar with the issue of film-philosophy.
I think that, especially after new path of Deleuze, film and philosophy penetrate each other but how this intimacy should be considered becomes argumentative issue. Thus, in my last response, I’d like to briefly re-speculate the issue or the argument “film as philosophy”, which Falzon and Mulhall, who has adapted and extended opinions of Cavell (influenced by Bazin’s conception of film as an imprint of the world itself), have argued, in terms of Wartenberg’s opposition to them.
According to Falzon, films are capable of genuine philosophical insight. He seriously distinguishes the use of films to illustrate philosophical positions from films own philosophical content. For Falzon, rather than illuminating philosophical themes, films having philosophical issues such as time, God, identity are forms of philosophy. So let’s consider one of the philosophical films that can be philosophy for Falzon. Nolan’s Memento with its complex narrative and its presentation of perception of time can be “philosophy in action” for both Falzon and Mulhall. Yet as you are also aware that this “philosophy in action” is ambiguous, and it does not really make sense. However, what creates intimacy between them is Memento’s narration and visualization of issue of time in it. So this movie can be interpreted or criticized in terms of Bergsonian understanding of time but this cannot make it philosophy. As regards to Mulhall, by referring Alien films, he argues that “I do not look to these films as handy or popular illustration of views and arguments properly developed by philosophers; I see them rather as themselves reflecting on evaluating such views and arguments, as thinking seriously and systematically about them in just the way that philosophers do, … They [the films] are philosophical exercises, philosophy in action – film as philosophizing.”[1]
Conversely, Wartenberg argues against them and emphasis on fruitfulness of philosophical interpretations of film. Philosophy can be in/on/through film but film cannot be philosophy. For instance, I can say that film can reveal itself as if it is Heideggerian notion of world. Moreover, when I engage in film or when I experience the film, by means of film itself, I can make the world around me. That means my filmic experience can show itself as if it is my way of existence (way of being). May be it can be speculated as film reveals (nature) of philosophy. Or, simply, like Frampton argues, we can say that film can show complexity of things through simple images.
Also, in my opinion, films can be categorized in terms of their narration by considering which issue that they deal with. They can be grouped as films that argue personal identity, existentialism etc. However, film cannot be philosophy itself. Like philosophers sometimes use thought experiments or analogies in order to make themselves clear (or maybe to escape from difficulty of their dealings) such as Cave allegory of Plato, Evil Demon of Descartes, brain in a vat of Putnam, films can contribute to understand philosophical issues by means of visualization – roles of images – and their narratives.
Mullhall, S., On Film (2004) London: Routledge
Frampton, D., (2006) Filmosophy, London: Wallflower Press.
Smith, M., Wartenberg, E., T. (eds) (2006) Thinking Through Cinema: Film as Philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
Wartenberg, E., T. & Curran, A. (Eds) (2006) The Philosophy of film, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Falzon, C (2007) Philosophy Goes to the Movies: An Introduction to Philosophy. New York and London: Routledge
A Philosophical Film List.
[1] Mullhall, On Film, p.2
Sinem Aydınlı
0 yorum:
Yorum Gönder
Not: Yalnızca bu blogun üyesi yorum gönderebilir.