Scribd Logo
Unggah

Selamat datang di Scribd!

  • Toward Inhabited Space: The Semiotic Structure of Camera Movement in Cinema

    Diunggah oleh

    Miguel Alejandro Bohórquez Nates
    243 tayangan11 halaman
    El sentido del espacio natural en el cine y sus aportes en la instauración de un espacio antropológico definido por el carácter simbólico del movimiento de cámara.

    Judul Asli

    Toward inhabited space: The semiotic structure of camera movement in cinema

    Hak Cipta

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Format Tersedia

    PDF atau baca online dari Scribd

    Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

    Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

    Laporkan Dokumen Ini
    El sentido del espacio natural en el cine y sus aportes en la instauración de un espacio antropológico definido por el carácter simbólico del movimiento de cámara.

    Hak Cipta:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Unduh sebagai PDF atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    243 tayangan11 halaman

    Toward Inhabited Space: The Semiotic Structure of Camera Movement in Cinema

    Diunggah oleh

    Miguel Alejandro Bohórquez Nates
    El sentido del espacio natural en el cine y sus aportes en la instauración de un espacio antropológico definido por el carácter simbólico del movimiento de cámara.

    Hak Cipta:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Unduh sebagai PDF atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    dari 11
    SEOTICAcviuer te jonas nSamioer cn apgere ng 987 tbe neste sie sony wh sence The thre MY "0S" 7380 aCae St us Peto 80 2 pra caotaeantrsanon ty erton tr cone se ‘Socolaponara a innna vn oor penonl arma use spect {evond hat poses ty Stem 7 o 109 ette US. Capyren caw Tae 1982 Volume 41-1/4 SEMmIOTICA JOURNAL OF THE MTERKATIONAL Assocs eer Cuttns ecm! THOMAS A SEBEOK Acuna ce MARCIA, ERICKSON ema commons Hhimir CLAUDE BREMOND vuserTo to Henny He URI Loran senzy Pee NICOLAS RUWET MEYER ScHAPIRO HaNsséxO8 SEILER MOUTON PUBLISHERS AMSTERDAM. SERLIN- NEW YORK fecsgectivn work. Repreanccasn inten gt Caphive vagal UA yan W- fecbcce plana False ene Gia \womona. Toward inhabited space: ‘The semiotic structure of camera movement in the cinema vivian soscHack “here ate four bie Kinde of monement in motion pictur, cick | contnbatory tothe semioue structure of ay cinematic txt. The fr | sete, a mou ews in ene of ig bg a srihin the projected image commoniy if problematical. called suet ‘movement The second, most singled ov fr is pacin te consitaton of ‘nematic EINE, B the movement Between projected images called ‘tng Te thd ally eon na sone manetaton sch athe “Soom th optical or visa moverent ofthe camera en fom aed poston. The (uit, and perhaps the most dificult forthe viene 10 | ep camer een bly stim ofthe cnr ‘edsnced on the sresn bya mobi ame on silting patil pespectve 7 Useobe 197). Although possibly the Lind of movement most central ‘fo our primary understanding ofthe cinema as a semiotallyexpresive form of humas communication, camera movement has unfortunately seemed to elude the deseripive and interpretive grasp of waditioal and ‘contemporary modes of theoretical election. Recognizing camera mover ‘ment a6 significant and signifying, fm Scholars have not been able 19 ‘azcount Tor it a such, oF to deserbe it in teams that speak 10 ou ‘experience as viewers “The particular alm of my essay isto desrbe and account for the henowienon of camera movement oo the screen as it is originally fxperenend and understood by us as wewers porto the athe lame, objective and state refectionsupoa it found in most fim theory n that ‘orginal experience, suggest the motility ofthe camera is refi “understood as anys menningfuly-cteted, itetonat the unyine embodied acivity of a human consclousness a5 1 is situated in and fahabits the work. Further, Tsogeest that such understanding arises AN beeause camera movement echoes the eiential moulty of our own consciousnesr ait semble’ in the word and able o accomplish and expres the tsks and projects of living. The dcectedoes with which we actively, perspecvally, and fitely inhabit te natural space ofthe work joe a1-35 os -ooranatan7 $200 © Mow Paster, Aer era invisivle- niger jentzin) BIB Vivian Sobchack ad meaningfully shape it nto anthropological space neces ents iri. Dertednss, nevonshty — whee of ures Ot of the Chimera can nether be senile) aor make sone produc gts nd ‘meaning) wlan! the posibly of motion the exacty to move and Ima chang tod eho. As Maucce Mere Poy lt Conscious tears in theft place ot mater oF" tik at” but of" ean (1962137) What concen ws bre ur intimate and oral kool Of the ‘ea’ ofthe camera sve hough tents pce othe trove dnl iahabie and taaforme in anthopologeal spec, ati frecedes and prowdes the experiential ground forthe Iter tcctne aracion of think tat” those teoeal eetsons cf camer rover as motor locomotion through an ober gsr, some" Conside our expenence of camera movement ati appears onthe sere pit to ou conscious teesion about Mote often tha nak, that expences sate nae partalweaewed to viewing saratve rhe? ah enperimenal fe, Una we re ot onsibinty aware of camera moveneatas rik; ow oft ine es fora exeeatily ata precfccive and nofocal el? Indesd tents {or us muchas does ou own pha moveneat inthe worl 1 aken for granted and presupposed exept orfar a ie becomes problai cor we purposily directo have our anton dred tw ‘ewe Deome suey aware of as opaque, a someting to 05 oF ontempate forts (and our) own sake Geral then snera move Inet ved thro bat arenas pone wy — pale 0 car ovn — tat te camer unaeesGoily pos du te tk of frcehing and cxprening ell mand to the work The camer ‘ovement ans rps presence a the je! ofthat movement ar ally dreganded in favor of our tending athe caters ee oe) 9 iat whieh the camera moves toward or away from, er alonpade oe Sound, 10 the objet of i movement. We became sware of aera ‘movement as ovement andthe caers a annie b preset st (Geary not ourees, ut some anonymous sod beater) oly 08 hey emerge agaist 8 horizon of seaming ets, sslconous, and outward}-diected movement that ae meaningful vel and Sndetoed inthe ascomplishncat of wasousnaratne and xen to. “There is ue, then, to elaborate the“ cn’ of the caer, that ‘moment of exstnce hatin the fm experince fn 4 como eomintr in the earate and consis mossy of Both th ae fn the viewer, and thes prowdes the posbity Of an inersujatve Udetanding of actin) a mearingfly-rete, enol, eel Se Camere movement nthe coma 319 miotie. The camers and the viewer are linked through ther animate bovis in an nersensory and ved unity within the word a i Kniessly provides the ges (or objets) and grounds or spaces) of thes spec lind diced focus, sr horizoal experience. What Metleau-Pony says (thurman incr ation and movements algo appropriate to the irate fonement ofthe camera at peeved om the sere=n In so acas Lave ody through which cine world pan i508, For iteseatecuon oct pt or ae he mies rae felons fauhszl by ny conoane and nto whch deans my body. lam no ‘Jae ang tre tor oI conc space tnd tne, omg to the my ody Cone nh tical them The scope of halon he mest thet of ay ete, be any cx can never be alleen The space hl time nh Toba are eae ntl diftecnwaysineterminsthorcos ch conain ter pt fiw, The yates of ot tie and peak That lve ast be pfoned atesh, (982120 Generally, homener, camera movement inthe cinema has been objec tively and analytically eonatved. as precisely ‘a bmiles number of felasons syntheed by mechanical rather than spontaneous movement from ‘a colkcion of adjeest point’, or a set of placemen's and Alaplacements on two-dimensional pla. Time and space are not en fsa task that spontaneous movement always ‘performs’ and freshly ‘apreses a8 embodied, stented, and fie existence. Rather, tie and Space are regarded a8 the ground ageltt which locomotion can be Imeaured, objectified, and eategorzed info dierete and determinate rotor activites tht funtion in speci, repeatable ways o crea certain Sr o> specific and repeatable effects. Such descriptions proceed to point to the 2 eee, ES SE cel mene, ink hoe fection oman asin Ths « 3h Be das rparclar lation ofthe camera on veal axis Few s saionary point that fens for example, 10 cabs the 6° cent of tec pus and leads the ever to understand and fe "frome expen te “orecp and scope of Mocument Vale? Ss nl the feng winery ofthe tapeoach crosig How thos afermatioeof the orsinally mechanical into the secondarily Thuman, of Ueletmiate locomotion into response and mening? ‘movement occrs or how team be argued and used is hardly tooced ttpon Thus the scometting Ursatisyingardiaappropeatc about such | descriptions of camera movement in he dscipine’s base works. Not only ‘do they lack suficent grounds upon whic to cam s semiotic basi for | mera movant, Buty alto em o Rave nothing to do mth oot ‘xperence of camera movement om the sercen as meaning? Cprnaod Sicgcrend Goan) rt hen iieaieseasmetaialy cone las\d did lapis 320. Vivien Sobchack Mo canes movement is expensed and undenood efor by the viewer and does not experientially communicate in the mechanical fragments and sgn sessed by pst nl coment Gicon vier, we hardy wr pu tthe mia ae theca a tngteaning Egy when scare in ou anarenss a an acti ot immedi tnetond its cco dod is 180 of nixon, camer movement b set pera mechanical 'meinngles loomoton i rome spac Tee ot thouh cate of phyacal fet of ison aad movenent bee te Spabliy af hinan an bay. cams songs ihe and aoreing yah) rar hn, Te pesivalexkenal end expertly body pecepon ways Son 383 og a een the wrk nnd tos ae or toward it own ct af ing aad becoming, Camere ae fer to ws asthe ange and ening acy) of an tag ee invisible ~ embodied fet who tner space aa Uw and vaya tuted and fron! with he banal psy snd tae Je undead the ee’ and ope’ ts nde othe ate alent of purielr ob nt beats echailsnot oe as somehow ban trpsermednt copie end smotal een ales undesand the moverest rely becuse ene ee i a8 meshancal in the fist place The theca antonio at cers maveent nto mere or lactone nec ad See inate moverents in rometne space, scondary an sunt of an orginal experince thls en en 8 probcnaicin ad toe ‘uaa meting I coneys Canert movanantssexperoues Monee imc prem, We anderen and proceed aceon ne nderian ourcives in spontaneous mation abd tesponsi acy a ‘the world. aa * “Thos argu ois ewan and ruc exited : an edule exe nature ac foci, cles ovneat sadhana pve toed short patie tht would ew, tly and ec ste ois, objstne cain oF sts of motor flere anda oi Sorting no orgr movement and no longer rena tsur eee of enema Cat a arate moe of tpoig te Penosnce Sal or xii pesomeroloy promi sch an alersanee’ ee Palcopy of eres, gowns ur atemp omc ep te Peon of camera movement ash oto us a someones Ear than ogi wanted from cur engagement io ie ‘cee nd inthe word. Ava mnner of invetigaton elvan toseote Of retections within ‘which e. qesion and clay Wat wack oe intel know, but whic has een font tvs ithe sanction Comera movement inthe imma 321 ‘preconcrived thera eons ind in he elatons wroueht by our owmal use of predictive language “Tno phenomenologeal eacept alluded to previously are cent to te dsclonus ofthe cemiotie trace of camert movements enone and inetonaly Embodiments characterized by eunentil phenome ‘ology asthe satan of sossiousnes, ts mode of existence in the ‘word its acces othe worl. Embodiment can also be seen o character Hee the camera and ie beingsnetierworld. It's our immediate and preefecive body Knoles 4 wewers that resogizes the Bite and erspactval focus of the camera, is slutedness in tbe world as an Imply embod! and funcional subject a the presence and move: rent of consciousness rather thin @ machine Intentional is chars ‘erzed by phenomenclgy 2 the invariant suture of eonssiowsest fonmonadic ature, ite etental satan of almaye being i relation of bing directed toward an obec of conseiousnesInentionaity con 0 be sen to characerae camera movement. Ie our recognition ofcamera loveten a intentionally sructired that allows ws to understand 138 sinays meaningful and directed, ond to identify it with consciousness, with an animate — sf soonymous — ‘other rather than with the inanimate existence and motor locomotion of machine (OF particular relevance to the elaboration of both embodiment snd {intentionally is the work of Mecenu-Ponty, which esis on he “primacy ‘of perception” as a mode of access to the real (Olaion 1967 280), and which emphasis the lived-body’spereptual encounter with a tasee: ‘dent world as the original nexus of conscious experience and semiosis” ‘Merleuu Ponty’ exploration of the incarnate and extents ratre of consciousness fs presence im and othe world a9 Ine dods, and of te Slvays finite end perspecivat situation of eonstousness a the lous of Ses, significance, and signification, suggests 2 simular exploration ofthe ‘cameras relation to is world, The camer, fst ofa, I arate ond Dpereptv, Ty ses the world in an encounter dependent upon is beng lated na body that gives it acces to and makes preset in the word ‘Thus sitste, its present to the word ina specteally dict ge ite ‘manner that — inthe inescapable choees governed by it station ad Finite ad demonstrated by movement constitutes from sense both ‘sgnicance and signification, a ics a Body inthe worl, even what we ‘all the omniscient camera not transcendent in its sion and masks perepive senses through diction and perspective. Embodied in the Souss, th camer sll has access to the world only ftom te Here from Shichi aes si the Now am ich itis, It 9 the world tht & tanscendent in existence — and R0% vison, movement, oF embodied S21 Vision Sobohack {ison shisbass chat Mereau-Pomty rejected tranecendental phenome nology’s bracketing or suspending bei in existence asic attempted to Find the “osenec" of the plenomena of conscnusess. and That he modified the Huiserian concent of intentionality the wndelying Strucure of human consciousness and the source ofall meening. For Huser intentionality deserved the inaran avectedhess of comet sea, ts lays eoreltinal character. All ennscouines is contccusnes of something (een when itis consiousnes of elf and ts own ac) ‘Thus, the ilentor obsecty or phenomena of vr consciusorss are always conelated with the atontonal ae of our coneeousnes, with he ‘nose in which phenomena appear Its this coreation that diets our fxprienes, determines iis nature, and infuses it with meaning Ae Merlau-Ponty poims out in an explication of Huser's concept of intentionality cis quation of eogniing conssoutnas ue a pce of th nor for a worl whieh ithe omtracs noe posses bt tovares whch perptally ected — ard he werd he preobjective Indl mht ‘pei unity dere wat knowl shall tks ast pa Ths hy Hace agus boven intntonity af ac wien ths omit ‘howe ease when we vounarly ke yp 2 ponon + and. operate ‘nursonaity ofthe whic produce the oar an saepcatve ay of {he worl nd of ori being spparent ino desires revains oi [aisape we ee, moe car) than in objet kaw, an feet ‘set whieh or noses es ornate ito pce nae (KE For both Huss and Merieaw-Ponty, the intentional struct of cose fusnes mo may contr the word ubjectily the word is leads there for us and exceeds us, mies providing the horizons of ou? ‘contiows experince as subjects ‘Simla, as we experience the world of on (ven an anima ot atbsract fn) and the camera beholding it and moving witha I, that ‘wold is exraged in 2 mode of encounter rather than conse by that fxcounter® And i & particularly movement that afin the already preseniness, the givenness ofthe word for both consciousness and the famera. Directednss, coreation, comcournes of — all esentilly fmmpinte movement as that ration aerting and nding wera and conscious sujet in a intentional streture. Thos, for both the camera fad ourselves, moti isthe basic existential mane of ntexton- Aly (Merceu-Ponty 1962: 137). 1s the potential for and actual motlty ofthe camera that allows us to understand is presence inthe cineratic ‘Nord asthe manifest geste ofthe dzcte conasoumaese ofan implicit Sule an Lo understand that world as present and for (aot matey 2) Camera movement inthe cinema 323 that coniciows subject. 11 this understanding, whieh arises fom and ‘thin our own conscious experience ofthe word asitsalays present to ‘nd for us, that confers upon the careca is humanity and infses its ‘performance with meaning. We rognize de moving cumera as sn‘othe” ‘ntetionaly reed tothe world as we ae ‘Ass our movement inthe world, camera movement is thr creed toward an laentnal ober (tre figure sngis ovt wih te attention from the horional ground the word proves). or dread toward an fewtonal act (ie mode of atending toward the world). While the ‘ocelaon between the intentional object and the intentional activity of th camera itself invariant (hati, both are lays correlated), its the irecional nature ofthat eoraaton, its reversib, that endows that ‘omelation with everpreseat notion and meaning and gives tthe power fof emis. It isthe neceuity of directing is consis activity ether toward the world through ar act of perception and expression or toward ‘own ae of perception and expression inthe world tht makes cach ‘hf, each movement of consciousness a choice and therefor a semote ‘estrs, Sgnieation ‘Our expenence of camera movement, however, is sot of ne inteation. allystractured comeiournes ageing ts ation to the weld, bt of ‘vo: the ower’ meaningful relation vith the world on the screen is mediated bo, chaise of, bac rot nally detated bythe camera's, Tee aperence of eamers movetoent then ctals the potential for dicontis~ by oe rupture, for eoaflcing a wel ar sympatheie diecenes inthe tiaht correlational posites hat exit betwen te intensonal structure DU the camera's oveneat and the intentional siictre of the viewers Conssiounes. For example let us rtura to the stagecoach crossing ‘Monument Valley as it tevesled on the screen by the panoramic ‘snovenent ofthe camera. Thecamerssintenionlly cieted towards th Stagecoach asthe intemal fect of is percep in. Ion, may be ran 853 viewer snap the medation of the camer to the stagecoach; [am Tot conscousiy aware of the camers"s movement af SOc, Bu rater am, “rected toward ihe same intentional object asthe camera; {am perceling the caner's percepuon. However, given te same intentional eoreation between the camer and sgscoach, asa fmcritc Tay beiscriomally iaced toward the mode of the eamera’s perception of the stagecoach — that dwar the omer’ intentional ac of expreson att Mo TONE consciously peciving is pereption (he stagecoach), bu ater perce tng its expresion (the made ofits movement). Then again, a8 fl {Bcorist eat on understanding the way m which camer movement it understood by me, I may be intentionally crezod toward tae mode of foun biemonal act of percpton; that i, 1mm teDeively engaged in 324 Vivian Sabehack Camera movement in he cnena 323 expresang my owa perception. Thee are other corrations posible when the camera f discted toward iy own tieinonal tot, when iis _espesing perception rather than perecving perception (Itbearemetion {nat the emera snot ale o perceive expresion aaa the ewer, whose conseous experience nctader the camer’ movement of percepion and txprestion, am inlusion that not reversible the earners eat, however, Sotin the smote system of enema narrative gn tha its peresving the expreation ofa character wikia the nartaive), These correlations are ierated in igure 1, which alo indieates the correlitions betwen the Intensonaldrectedres of camera nnd viewer (.¢ whether hey share the fie intentional covernen toward an intended obiees or toward an intending act and subjen, the corelaions between the sinrity ot Aerence oftheir intentional destination n an intention jest or set and the daleetiea! acd dynamic posibiies for siting and reversing {aveationldietion and dessration. (Given these coreletional dynamics, however, the question remains bow & it dat we understand the moving camera as an intending ‘onecowsness inthe fist place? These coreatons andthe stucices they ‘consti are only descriptively meaningful as they are fom the premise thatthe moving camer is originally peeved by ws inexperience as an “other who is aimate, conscious, and experiences and intends twat the ‘word or toward ts on consious actity as we do. AMROVEh i Contary to our expense, one could theoretical argue tha he mobile frame i elayrtramparent ikea window oF aluays opaque ike 3 canvas mediating or proventng acces to the referential world we nat ba ‘sl always intumeota, nether seaeat nor spostanousl ative IF as sich were the case, however, the problematic confts of intentional ‘iaction an destination beliteen the eames an the newer should not occur The vewer, of couse, woul! sl be intentionally dected toward imentional obje's and towatd his or er own intestional acts of ‘onsiousness, but the problematic of understanding the diectedness — {he mening — of camera movement would not are Tt at moments of disjunction that the moving camers reveal itself maAt obviously as an ‘thers intentional conisiowsmess For if the cinematic experience of ‘camera movement seve tenionllyont-sied, there would be 90 se05¢ of digoncture at all no moments of continuity and eupturs, no ned Torhermeneui activity ~ he conscious seeking to slo that which ‘understood us meant But whore meuning ells us. Test here tht the enodied nature of consciousness comes ental. In ‘onder 19 ecounze the moving camara a3 an the’ and to experience the Galeaical movement of intentional confit — as well at the more "avi of transparent one of intentional agrecment the cers must | ‘came (Canoe tov aap oS atl One i i } i 4 nil eas ee praenne f omn oet Taney in) ae i rina @) PecvingFasoin (Posing Eapreton (© Pein eon Fe 326 Vivian Sobchack make that other's intending comciousnes exisentially manifest thoush the gestures ofa ved-body inhabiting the world as Io mlb other than T do myself. is through the perspectval and fit simaiednee of intentionality a ts embed that we come to Know the moving camera {5 inhabiting the world as we do and yet inhabiting it fom a Here and Now not our own. As well the incompleteness of our own embodied ensence makes comprehensible both the camera's movement anit eed to move im a world that excerd it ited and immediate horizons As Erwin Straus cays (Only ene whic in sts empora existence ncompetcan wil sive move Ital Te teng core nthe parclriy ofthe acl momeen @ he Clolgeal ground a he posibiy f rnaen rom «Hee a Them fone partic o another. This bing incomplete dead makes spontaneous ‘moon pose, that, i makes posible ce searching of a8 arr od the (oestoning of man (9822), Indeed. iis this existential and ongoing incompleteness. an this nec of| ‘oth vewer and camera to sereh and question reaaed in spontaneous otity net strives from Here to There that allows the viwerto ety the camera as another ated inthe wort. ‘Emphasizing eribodiment, Meseau-Ponty amends Huse ranscen ental phenomenology and insists that existence the always unfinished and mobile character of intentionality. As our consciousness is incarnate, 5 we are situated inthe world, as we ae physically and historically fae, fur embodiet existence & always singularly directed ad we are ever ‘condemned to meaning’ (Mereau-Ponty 1962: xi), That is. we are ‘bodily spite, interested in the world and with it We ae always in ‘the process of completing and discosig it meanings as our own. Thus 45 our movement, camera movement i ot orginally percived 3b

    Anda mungkin juga menyukai