영화비평과 영상미학-영화비평의 문제를 중심으로 : On the relation of the film criticism and the aesthetics of the cinema

Cited 0 time in Web of Science Cited 0 time in Scopus Download Rank14


Issue Date
서울대학교 인문대학 인문학연구원
인문논총, Vol.58, pp. 205-227
영화비평영상미학세르주 다네앙드레 바쟁프랑스 미술비평의 전통
Born almost at the same time as the cinema itself, the discourse on the
cinema has been developed, according to its interested object and its
purpose, in two different directions: the film criticism is interested in
concrete film, while the aesthetics of the cinema, of which the interest lies
in the total vision of the cinema, constitutes the other direction. If the film
critics such as André Bazin, Youssef Ishaghpour, Barthélemy Amengual,
Serge Daney etc, devote themselves to clarify the senses subtlely embodied
in film, the theoretical works of Rudolf Arnheim, Bela Balazs, Siegfried
Kracauer, Jean Mitry, Christian Metz, Giles Deleuze etc, aim to clarify the
nature of the cinema itself.
These two discourses on the cinema dont have very favorable relation
with each other, but they dont work without each other. The film
criticism, which works in Europe as fields of competition of the big
intellectuals for a long time, provides the aesthetics of the cinema with the
list of films qualified to be examined and basic concepts to reflect on the
nature of the cinema, such as frame, off-screen, montage, mise en scène
etc., while the aesthetics of the cinema opens sometimes an unexpected
perspective, born with the potency of abstract thought and reasoning.
However, there is in France since the seventeenth century a big tradition
of art criticism, constructed by Diderot, Baudelaire, Valéry, etc., which
does not separate the criticism of a concrete art work from the total
perspective of art. The film critics such as André Bazin and Serge Daney,
who knew how to unify these two different visions, succeed as critic this
tradition, which allows them to open a new horizon of the cinema by
examining concrete films. Thus we can say that certain film criticism
implicates the total vision of the cinema. But the application of "meta
discourse" such as psychoanalysis, Marxism, semiotics, etc., to concrete films
harms especially the film criticism, the vocation of which consists above all
in explaining, analyzing, and interpreting a work with its own logic.
Files in This Item:
Appears in Collections:
College of Humanities (인문대학)Institute of Humanities (인문학연구원)Journal of humanities (인문논총)Journal of Humanities vol.58 (2007) (인문논총)
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.