پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,225 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,685 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 114,991,754 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,660,753 |
بسط ادراکات فضایی تماشاگر از طریق امپاتی با کالبدهای فیلمی | ||
| نشریه هنرهای زیبا: هنرهای نمایشی و موسیقی | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 23، شماره 3، مهر 1397، صفحه 49-58 اصل مقاله (1.29 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jfadram.2018.67251 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| محمدباقر قهرمانی* 1؛ مرضیه پیراوی ونک2؛ حامد مظاهریان3؛ علیرضا صیاد4 | ||
| 1دانشیار دانشکده هنرهای نمایشی و موسیقی، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران | ||
| 2دانشیار دانشکده هنرها و ادیان، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان، اصفهان | ||
| 3دانشیار دانشکده معماری، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران | ||
| 4استادیار دانشکده سینما و تئاتر، دانشگاه هنر | ||
| چکیده | ||
| مطالعه در روند شکل‌گیری و تکامل سینما، نمایانگر علاقه به تشریح حالت بدن انسانی و تسخیر حرکت جسمانی است. مرکزیت بدن در گسترش سینمای اولیه، نکته‌ای است که با توجه به «چرخش جسمانی» در تئوری‌های معاصر فیلم، مورد توجه نظریه‌پردازان قرار گرفته است. تحلیل و بررسی تلاش‌های پیشگامان اولیه سینما همچون ماری، مایبریج و ملیس، نمایانگر این مهم است که تبارشناسی تصویر متحرک را به جای الگوهای اپتیکی مرسوم در تئوری‌های روانکاوانه، می‌توان در آزمایش‌های فیزیولوژیکی انتهای قرن نوزدهم ریشه‌یابی نمود. مقاله حاضر می‌کوشد با مورد تاکید قرار دادن این ماهیتِ ذاتاً «بدن‌مندِ» مدیوم سینما، با بهره‌گیری و بازخوانی مفهوم امپاتی، رابطه فضایی و کالبدی تماشاگر با فیلم را مورد بررسی قرار دهد. امپاتی، عمل «احساس کردن در درون دیگری» است که نخستین بار توسط ویشر مطرح شد و بعدها توسط نظریه‌پردازانی چون لیپز، اشمارسو و ولفلین بسط داده شد. مبتنی بر خوانش پدیدارشناسانه از امپاتی، تماشاگر از طریق بیرون‌افکنی بدن خود به کالبدهای فیلمیک، می‌تواند تجربه فضایی آنها را تجربه کند و از این طریق خود را در موقعیت‌های فضایی متفاوتی قرار دهد. از این‌رو می‌توان فیلم‌ها را به مثابه منابع غنی و ارزشمندی در نظر گرفت که برای مخاطبان، امکان تجربه‌های غریب و ناممکن فضایی را فراهم می‌آورند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| فیزیولوژی؛ امپاتی؛ تماشاگر فیلم؛ ادراک فضایی؛ بدن‌های فیلمی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Expansion of the Spatial Perceptions of the Audience Through Empathic Relationship with Filmic Bodies | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mohammad Bagher Ghahramani1؛ Marzieh Piravi Vanak2؛ Hamed Mazaherian3؛ Alireza Sayyad4 | ||
| 1Associate Professor, School of Performing Arts and Music, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Faculty of Art, Art University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran | ||
| 3Associate Professor, School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 4Assistant Professor, Faculty of Cinema and Theatre, Art University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Studying about formation and evolution of cinema reflects an intense desire for analyzing and dissecting the human body, and also an aspiration for capturing the corporeal movements. Concentration on the Centrality of human body in the development of the early cinema, is a point that has been noticed by film theoreticians, especially those affected by "the corporeal turn" in contemporary film studies. It is noteworthy that some of the early film theoreticians also emphasized on the significance of the corporeal aesthetic in relation to the moving images of film, and believed that the cinematic experience is defined in relation with its corporeal immediacy characteristic. In the first decade of the emergence of the medium, films had been generally based on form, Figure and dynamic of human's moving body. It has been argued that the only asset of cinema in its early days of formation was the form of human body. The Most part of the works of Pioneers such as Muybridge, Marey and Méliès, were explorations about the physiology of human body, And the human's animated body was the constitutive component of their works. Analyzing the efforts of these pioneers' efforts and achievements, provide a path to genealogically trace back the root of cinema in the physiological laboratories of the end of the nineteenth century, instead of the conventional optical paradigms underlines by psychoanalytic film theories. The present article attempts to highlight this inherently corporeal nature of the medium, and by employing and rereading of the concept of empathy, to examine and investigate about the audience's spatial and corporeal relationship with filmic bodies and spaces. Empathy is the act of "felling in" and shaped the central concept of the German psychological approach to aesthetic in the 19th century. The notion was initially raised by Vischer and thereafter had been developed by Lipps, Schmarsow and Wölfflin. These authors believed that the sense of physical involvement in a piece of artworks (including painting, sculpture and architecture) leads to the formation of emotional reactions in the observer, and as much extent that the artist be more skillful at transferring the bodily knowledge, the viewer more effectively could establish relationship with the art work. As Edith Stein, in her phenomenological approach to empathy points out when one person empathically throw himself into another thing, he gains a new consciousness about the space and his own navigation center, and this literally implies to dwelling in another space and place. In the case of cinema, Empathy causes the viewer to form a kind of corporeal relationship with the filmic bodies. In the process of watching the film, the spectator projects himself into the character's situation, and due to temporal and spatial nature of empathy, he involves in the time and space that characters have occupied, therefore he can also experience their physical and spatial circumstances. Therefore, films can be considered as valuable resources that provide the possibility of strange and impossible spatial experiences for their audiences, and in this way expand their corporal and spatial consciousness. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Physiology, empathy, the Film Spectator, Spatial Perception, Filmic Bodies | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
آرنهایم رودولف (1386)، پویهشناسی صور معماری، ترجمه مهرداد قیومی بیدهندی، انتشارات سمت، تهران.. استراتن، رابین(1387)، ادیت اشتاین: جست و جوی حقیقت از طریق ایمان و عقل، ترجمه محمد حیدرپور، هفت آسمان، شماره 39، صص 274-237. استم، رابرت(1389)، مقدمهای بر نظریه فیلم، ترجمه: گروه مترجمان به کوشش احسان نوروزی، شرکت انتشارات سوره مهر، تهران. بروتون، داوید لو(1392)، جامعهشناسی بدن، ترجمه ناصر فکوهی، ثالث، تهران. بنیامین، والتر (1390)، اثر هنری در عصر تولید مکانیکی، در اکران اندیشه: فصل هایی در فلسفه سینما، ترجمه پیام یزدانجو، نشر مرکز، تهران. کولبروک، کلر(1387)، ژیل دلوز، ترجمه رضا سیروان، نشر مرکز، تهران. گوت، بریس(1385)، همذاتپنداری و احساسات در سینمای روایی، ترجمه بابک تبرایی، فارابی، شماره 61، صص 48-31. Armstrong, Tim (1998), Modernism, Technology, and the Body, A Cultural Study, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Auerbach, J (2007), Body Shots: Early Cinema’s Incarnations, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Barasch, Moshe (1998), Modern Theories of Art 2: From Impressionism to Kandinsky, NYU Press, New York.
Barker, Jennifer M (2009) The Tactile Eye: Touch and the Cinematic Experience, University of California Press, California.
Benson, C (2002), The Cultural Psychology of Self: Place, Morality and Art in Human Worlds, Taylor & Francis, London and New York.
Bonitzer, Pascal (1981), It's only a film/ou la face du neant, Framework(14), 22?????????.
Bruno, G (1993), Streetwalking on a Ruined Map: Cultural Theory and the City Films of Elvira Notari, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Burch, Noel (1990), Life to Those Shadows, Translated by Ben Brewster, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Cartwright, L. (1995). Screening the Body: Tracing Medicine's Visual Culture: University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Coplan, Amy & Goldie, Peter (2011), Empathy: Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Crary, Jonathan (1992), Techniques of the Observer: On Vision and Modernity in the Nineteenth Century: MIT Press, Cambridge.
D'Aloia, Andriano(2012), Cinematic emphaty: spectator involvement in the film experience, in the Kinesthetic emphaty in creative and cultural practices, Edited by Dee Reynolds & Matthew Reason, Intellect, University of Chicago press, Chicago.
Dagognet, F (1992), Etienne-Jules Marey: a passion for the trace,?????, New York.
Deleuze, G (2005), Cinema II, Bloomsbury Academic, London.
Densos, Robert (2000), Eroticism, in the Shadow and Its Shadow: Surrealist Writing on the Cinema, City Lights Books, San Francisco.
Doane, Mary Ann (1991), Misrecognition and Identity, in Exploration in Film Theory: Selected Essays from Cine-tracts, Edited by Ron Brunett, Indiana university press, Indiana.
Doane, Mary Ann (2002), the Emergence of Cinematic Time: Modernity, Contingency, the Archive, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Eisenberg, Nancy & Strayer, Janet (1990), Empathy and Its Development, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Fischer, Lucy (1979), the Lady Vanishes: Women, Magic and the Movies, Film Quarterly, pp: 30-40.
Freedberg, David, & Gallese, Vittorio (2007), Motion, Emotion and Empathy in Esthetic Experience, Trends in cognitive sciences, 11(5), pp.197-203.
Garrington, Abbie (2013), Haptic Modernism: Touch and the Tactile in Modernist Writing, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh .
Gazetas, Aristides (2008), An Introduction to World Cinema, 2d ed, McFarland, ??????.
Hansen, M. (1999), the mass production of the senses: classical cinema as vernacular modernism. Modernism/modernity, 6(2), pp.59-77.
Holt-Damant, Kathi (2005), Celebration: architectonic constructs of space in the 1920s, in Leach, Andrew & Matthewson, Gill (Eds), the 22th annual conference of the society of architectural historians Australia and New Zealand, pp: 173-178.
Keen, Suzanne (2006), A Theory of narrative Empathy, Narrative 14, No. 3, pp.207-236.
Kracauer, S (1995), the Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays, translated by Thomas Levin, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Lamposlki, Mikhail (1998), The Memory of Tiresias: Intertextuality and Film, University of California Press, Berkeley.
McCabe, Susan (2001), Delight in Dislocation: The Cinematic Modernism of Stein, Chaplin, and Man Ray, Modernism/Modernity, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp.429-452.
Müntz, Eugene (2010), Raphael, Parkstone International, New York.
Muybridge, Eadweard (2012), the Human Figure in Motion, Dover Publications, New York.
Rodowick, D.N. (2014). Elegy for Theory, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Schmarsow, August (1994), the Essence of Architectural Creation, In Empathy, Form, and Space: Problems in German Aesthetics, 1873-1893, Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities, Los Angeles.
Shaviro, S (1993), The Cinematic Body, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Sobchack, Vivian Carol (1992), The Address of the Eye : A Phenomenology of Film Experience, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Sobchack, Vivian Carol (2004), Carnal Thoughts : Embodiment and Moving Image Culture, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Stein, Edith (1989), On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington.
Väliaho, Pasi (2010), Mapping the Moving Image: Gesture, Thought and Cinema Circa 1900, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.
Vischer, Robert (1994), On Optical Sense of Form: A Contribution to Aesthetics, inEmpathy, Form, and Space: Problems in German Aesthetics, 1873-1893, Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities, Los Angeles.
Williams, Linda (1991), Film Body: An Implantation of Perversions,inExplorations in Film Theory: Selected Essays from Ciné-tracts, Indiana University Press, ??????.
Wölfflin, Heinrich (1976), Prolegomena to a Psychology of Architecture, M.I.T Press, Cambridge.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 600 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 760 |
||