First published in 1969, Signs and Meaning in the Cinema transformed the emerging discipline of film studies. Remarkably eclectic and informed, Peter Wollen's highly influential and groundbreaking work remains a brilliant and accessible theorisation of film as an art form and as a sign system. The book is divided into three main sections. The first explores the work of Sergei Eisenstein as film-maker, designer and aesthetician. The second, which contains a celebrated comparison of the films of John Ford and Howard Hawks, is an exposition and defence of the auteur theory. The third formulates a semiology of the cinema, invoking cinema as an exemplary test-case for comparative aesthetics and general theories of signification. Wollen's Conclusion argues for an avant-garde cinema, bringing post-structuralist ideas into his discussion of Godard and other contemporaries. Published as part of the BFI Silver series, this fifth edition features a new foreword by film theorist David Rodowick and brings together material from the four previous editions, inviting the reader to trace the development of Wollen's thinking, and the unfolding of the discourse of cinema.
1 有用 彼得潘耶夫斯基 2021-11-22 19:05:32
表面上沃伦是站在批评麦茨的阵营,但实际上他的研究构成对麦茨的对话、质询和补充。麦茨的电影符号学基本上建立在语言学的基础上,但是又超出了语言学。他和沃伦的分歧,也许可以理解为二人对索绪尔在《教程》的结尾展望的符号学的“未来”的两个岔路口。在罗兰·巴特那里,这个岔路口的张力以及达到了最大值,尽管他把符号学用于研究服饰、日本文化、快餐等,但他得出的结论是(至少是按照沃伦的理解),符号学最好被看作语言学的... 表面上沃伦是站在批评麦茨的阵营,但实际上他的研究构成对麦茨的对话、质询和补充。麦茨的电影符号学基本上建立在语言学的基础上,但是又超出了语言学。他和沃伦的分歧,也许可以理解为二人对索绪尔在《教程》的结尾展望的符号学的“未来”的两个岔路口。在罗兰·巴特那里,这个岔路口的张力以及达到了最大值,尽管他把符号学用于研究服饰、日本文化、快餐等,但他得出的结论是(至少是按照沃伦的理解),符号学最好被看作语言学的一个分支,这是比认为“语言学是符号学的一个特殊的、主导性的领域”更加强化和极端的观点。相反,沃伦认为,语言学是符号学的一个特殊领域,甚至是并不占据主导地位的领域。但准确地说,沃伦的符号学是建立在皮尔士的符号学和列维-施特劳斯的结构主义人类学的基础上。 (展开)
0 有用 椎名果园 2020-11-05 23:28:20
个人蛮喜欢conclusion那部分
0 有用 nobody💫 2020-04-02 22:49:32
就三章快速翻完 主要为了复习第二章auteur-structuralism原文 用Howard Hawks和John Fordd的例子 客观回应了浪漫主义作者论和”作者之死“。 写书目的其实是为了呼唤电影的美学价值 反复提及aesthetics 符号学的部分看之前就知道过时了毕竟第一版是1969年。