Philosophy of Film and Motion Pictures

Philosophy of Film and Motion Pictures

BLACKWELL PHILOSOPHY ANTHOLOGIES Each volume in this outstanding series provides an authoritative and comprehensive collection of the essential primary readings from philosophy s main fields of study. Designed to complement the Blackwell Companions to Philosophy series, each volume represents an unparalleled resource in its own right, and will provide the ideal platform for course use. 1 Cottingham: Western Philosophy: An Anthology 2 Cahoone: From Modernism to Postmodernism: An Anthology (expanded second edition) 3 LaFollette: Ethics in Practice: An Anthology (second edition) 4 Goodin and Pettit: Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Anthology 5 Eze: African Philosophy: An Anthology 6 McNeill and Feldman: Continental Philosophy: An Anthology 7 Kim and Sosa: Metaphysics: An Anthology 8 Lycan: Mind and Cognition: An Anthology (second edition) 9 Kuhse and Singer: Bioethics: An Anthology 10 Cummins and Cummins: Minds, Brains, and Computers The Foundations of Cognitive Science: An Anthology 11 Sosa and Kim: Epistemology: An Anthology 12 Kearney and Rasmussen: Continental Aesthetics Romanticism to Postmodernism: An Anthology 13 Martinich and Sosa: Analytic Philosophy: An Anthology 14 Jacquette: Philosophy of Logic: An Anthology 15 Jacquette: Philosophy of Mathematics: An Anthology 16 Harris, Pratt, and Waters: American Philosophies: An Anthology 17 Emmanuel and Goold: Modern Philosophy From Descartes to Nietzsche: An Anthology 18 Scharff and Dusek: Philosophy of Technology The Technological Condition: An Anthology 19 Light and Rolston: Environmental Ethics: An Anthology 20 Taliaferro and Griffiths: Philosophy of Religion: An Anthology 21 Lamarque and Olsen: Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art The Analytic Tradition: An Anthology 22 John and Lopes: Philosophy of Literature Contemporary and Classic Readings: An Anthology 23 Cudd and Andreasen: Feminist Theory: A Philosophical Anthology 24 Carroll and Choi: Philosophy of Film and Motion Pictures: An Anthology

Philosophy of Film and Motion Pictures An Anthology Edited by Noël Carroll and Jinhee Choi

ß 2006 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd BLACKWELL PUBLISHING 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148 5020, USA 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK 550 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia The right of Noël Carroll and Jinhee Choi to be identified as the Authors of the Editorial Material in this Work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. First published 2006 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1 2006 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Philosophy of film and motion pictures: an anthology / edited by Noël Carroll and Jinhee Choi. p. cm. (Blackwell philosophy anthologies) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-1-4051-2026-5 (hard cover: alk. paper) ISBN-10: 1-4051-2026-6 (hard cover: alk. paper) ISBN-13: 978-1-4051-2027-2 (pbk.: alk. paper) ISBN-10: 1-4051-2027-4 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Motion pictures. I. Carroll, Noël (Noël E.) II. Choi, Jinhee. III. Series. PN1994.P575 2006 791.43 01 dc22 2004030884 A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. Set in 9 on 11pt Ehrhardt by SPI Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India Printed and bound in the United Kingdom by TJ International, Padstow, Cornwall The publisher s policy is to use permanent paper from mills that operate a sustainable forestry policy, and which has been manufactured from pulp processed using acid-free and elementary chlorine-free practices. Furthermore, the publisher ensures that the text paper and cover board used have met acceptable environmental accreditation standards. For further information on Blackwell Publishing, visit our website: www.blackwellpublishing.com

Contents Acknowledgments viii General Introduction 1 Part I Film as Art 5 Introduction 7 1 Photography and Representation 19 roger scruton 2 The Aesthetics of Photographic Transparency 35 dominic mciver lopes 3 Everybody Gets a Cut: DVDs Give Viewers Dozens of Choices and that s the Problem 44 terrence rafferty Part II What Is Film? 49 Introduction 51 4 The World Viewed 67 stanley cavell 5 A Note on the Film 79 susanne k. langer 6 Vision and Dream in the Cinema 82 f. e. sparshott 7 The Long Goodbye: The Imaginary Language of Film 91 gregory currie 8 Moving Pictures 100 arthur c. danto v

Contents 9 Defining the Moving Image 113 noël carroll Part III Documentary 135 Introduction 137 10 Visible Traces: Documentary and the Contents of Photographs 141 gregory currie 11 Fiction, Non-Fiction, and the Film of Presumptive Assertion: A Conceptual Analysis 154 noël carroll Part IV Film Narrative/Narration 173 Introduction 175 12 Le Grand Imagier Steps Out: The Primitive Basis of Film Narration 185 george m. wilson 13 Unreliability Refigured: Narrative in Literature and Film 200 gregory currie Part V Film and Emotion 211 Introduction 213 14 Film, Emotion, and Genre 217 noël carroll 15 Fearing Fictions 234 kendall walton 16 Empathy and (Film) Fiction 247 alex neill 17 Identification and Emotion in Narrative Film 260 berys gaut 18 In Fictional Shoes: Mental Simulation and Fiction 271 deborah knight Part VI Topics in Film Criticism 281 Introduction 283 19 Morals for Method 287 george m. wilson 20 Cinematic Authorship 299 paisley livingston 21 National Cinema, the Very Idea 310 jinhee choi vi

Contents Part VII Film and Ethics 321 Introduction 323 22 Film Criticism and Virtue Theory 335 joseph h. kupfer 23 Beauty and Evil: The Case of Leni Riefenstahl s Triumph of the Will 347 mary devereaux 24 A First Look at the Pornography/Civil Rights Ordinance: Could Pornography Be the Subordination of Women? 362 melinda vadas Part VIII Film and Knowledge 379 Introduction 381 25 The Philosophical Limits of Film 387 bruce russell 26 Minerva in the Movies: Relations Between Philosophy and Film 391 karen hanson 27 Motion Pictures as a Philosophical Resource 397 lester h. hunt Select Bibliography by Jinhee Choi 407 Index 415 vii

Acknowledgments The editor and publisher gratefully acknowledge the permission granted to reproduce the copyright material in this book: 1 Roger Scruton, Photography and Representation, The Aesthetic Understanding (London: Methuen, 1983, reprinted 1998 by St Augustine s Press, South Ben, IN): 119 48 (from reprint). ß 1983 by Roger Scruton. Reprinted with permission of Curtis Brown Ltd, London on behalf of Roger Scruton. 2 Dominic McIver Lopes, The Aesthetics of Photographic Transparency, Mind, 112, July 2003: 1 16. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press Journals. 3 Terrence Rafferty, Everybody Gets a Cut, The New York Times Magazine, May 4, 2003: 58, 60 1. 4 Stanley Cavell, excerpts from The World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Film (New York: Viking Press, 1971): 16 41. Reprinted by permission of Stanley Cavell. 5 Susanne K. Langer, A Note on the Film, Feeling and Form: A Theory of Art Developed from Philosophy in a New Key (New York: Charles Scribner s Sons, 1953), 411 15. 6 F. E. Sparshott, Vision and Dream in the Cinema, Philosophical Exchange, Summer 1971: 111 22. Reprinted by permission of F. E. Sparshott. 7 Gregory Currie, The Long Goodbye: The Imaginary Language of Film, British Journal of Aesthetics 33(3), July 1993: 207 19. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press Journals. 8 Arthur C. Danto, Moving Pictures, Quarterly Review of Film Studies 4(1), Winter 1979: 1 21. 9 Noël Carroll, Defining the Moving Image, Theorizing The Moving Image (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996): 49 74. Reprinted by permission of Cambridge University Press. 10 Gregory Currie, Visible Traces: Documentary and the Contents of Photographs, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 57(3), Summer 1999: 285 97. Reprinted by permission of Blackwell Publishing. 11 Noël Carroll, Fiction, Non-Fiction, and the Film of Presumptive Assertion: A Conceptual Analysis, Film Theory and Philosophy, eds. Richard Allen and Murray Smith (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997): 173 202. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press. 12 George M. Wilson, Le Grand Imagier Steps Out: The Primitive Basis of Film Narration, Philosophical Topics 25(1), 1997: 295 318. Reprinted by permission of George M. Wilson. 13 Gregory Currie, Unreliability Refigured: Narrative in Literature and Film, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 53(1), 1995: 19 29. Reprinted by permission of Blackwell Publishing. 14 Noël Carroll, Film, Emotion, and Genre, Passionate Views, eds. Carl Plantinga and viii

Acknowledgments Greg M. Smith (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999): 21 47, 260 2 (notes). Reprinted by permission of The Johns Hopkins University Press. 15 Kendall Walton, Fearing Fictions, Journal of Philosophy 75(1), January 1978: 5 27. Reprinted by permission of the Journal of Philosophy, Columbia University. 16 Alex Neill, Empathy and (Film) Fiction, Post Theory, eds. Noël Carroll and David Bordwell (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996): 175 94. 17 Berys Gaut, Identification and Emotion in Narrative Film, Passionate Views, eds. Carl Plantinga and Greg M. Smith (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999): 200 16. Reprinted by permission of The Johns Hopkins University Press. 18 Deborah Knight, In Fictional Shoes: Mental Simulation and Fiction, first published in this volume. ß 2006 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 19 George M. Wilson, Morals for Method, Philosophy and Film, eds. Cynthia A. Freeland, and Thomas E. Wartenberg (New York: Routledge, 1995): 49 67. This is a revised version of Chapter 10 in Wilson s Narration in Light: Studies in Cinematic Point of View (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986): 191 207. Reprinted by permission of The Johns Hopkins University Press. 20 Paisley Livingston, Cinematic Authorship, Film Theory and Philosophy, eds. Richard Allen and Murray Smith (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997): 132 48. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press. 21 Jinhee Choi, National Cinema, the Very Idea, first published in this volume. ß 2006 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 22 Joseph H. Kupfer, Film Criticism and Virtue Theory, Visions of Virtue in Popular Film (Boulder: Westview, 1999): 13 34. 23 Mary Devereaux, Beauty and Evil: The Case of Leni Riefenstahl s Triumph of the Will, Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection, ed. Jerrold Levinson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998): 227 56. 24 Melinda Vadas, A First Look at the Pornography/Civil Rights Ordinance: Could Pornography Be the Subordination of Women? The Journal of Philosophy 84(9), 1987: 487 511. 25 Bruce Russell, The Philosophical Limits of Film, Film and Philosophy (Special Edition, 2000): 163 7. Reprinted by permission of the Society for the Philosophic Study of the Contemporary Visual Arts. 26 Karen Hanson, Minerva in the Movies: Relations Between Philosophy and Film, Persistence of Vision 5, 1987: 5 11. Reprinted by permission of Karen Hanson. 27 Lester H. Hunt, Motion Pictures as a Philosophical Resource, first published in this volume. ß 2006 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Every effort has been made to trace copyright holders and to obtain their permission for the use of copyright material. The publisher apologizes for any errors or omissions in the above list and would be grateful if notified of any corrections that should be incorporated in future reprints or editions of this book. ix

General Introduction In the eighteenth century, only the wealthiest and most privileged persons could have had a theater in their own homes. But today in virtue of television, video cassette recorders, and DVD players, most citizens of the industrialized world have something very like a theater and often two or more in their households. These theaters, of course, do not feature live dramas, but rather motion pictures pictures stored on some sort of template like film and shown in a way that imparts the impression of movement. And from that impression, moving images are born, vistas are opened, and stories are told. Though many of us today might yearn for the delicate and quaintly imaginative stagecraft of an antique era, surely Vattel the creator of spectacles for the Bourbon court would envy the magic-making capacities of the contemporary motion picture artist. The display of fireworks and explosions, and the armies of clones and whatever on view nightly in our living rooms and dens would have staggered Vattel s comprehension. Perhaps his master would have given his kingdom for one of our TVs. The development of the motion picture has been an awesome step in the democratization of culture, providing the many with access to spectacles of the type that heretofore were the normal fare of the exceptionally few or of the many only on special occasions. Motion pictures have become a fixture of everyday life in the modern world. They have been integrated into a wide variety of cultural processes involving education and the communication of information, and they have spawned their own practices of art-making, entertainment, and documentary recording with their own traditions. It would be surprising if a social enterprise as substantial as the motion picture did not attract philosophical attention. Thus predictably, the philosophical literature pertaining to it, especially in recent years, has grown exponentially. This anthology, in part, is an acknowledgment of that trend. But what does philosophical attention to the motion picture comprise? In contrast to empirical research, philosophy is the discipline that is primarily preoccupied with the logic or conceptual frameworks of our practices. 1 So a philosophical perspective on the motion picture involves attending to the conceptual frameworks of our motion picture practices. This includes: (1) the analysis of the concepts and categories that organize our practices (for example, asking what is film or what is a documentary?); (2) the clarification of the relations between those organizing concepts and categories (for example, can what falls under the category of film also fall under the category of art, or is there some reason that precludes the former from being an instance of the latter?); (3) the resolution of the conceptual paradoxes, tensions, and contradictions that the relevant practices appear to provoke (for example, how is it possible for us to fear fiction films?); (4) the elucidation of the forms of reasoning the modes of connecting concepts appropriate to our practices (for example, what techniques of interpretation are suitable or valid with respect to classic Hollywood movies?); and (5) the discovery of the metaphysical presuppositions and entailments of the conceptual frameworks of the relevant practices (for example, what kind of narrators, ontologically speaking, do fiction films presuppose?) 1

General Introduction Pursuing these lines of inquiry composes the largest part of the philosophy of the moving picture. However, as the articles in this anthology frequently attest, there is also a part of the enterprise that, like the philosophy of mind, segues with cognitive science and evolutionary psychology. For the philosophy of motion pictures involves thinking about things like attention, emotion, recognition, inference, and so forth and, therefore, needs to be at least informed by scientific psychology, a feature of the philosophy of the motion pictures evinced amply in many of the essays in this volume. Given the ever-growing importance of motion pictures to our culture, such questions about the logic and/or conceptual frameworks of our motion picture practices have come increasingly to the fore. The purpose of this anthology is to air a selection of some of the most pertinent recent writing on these philosophical topics. With the exception of S. K. Langer s A Note on the Film, the writing in this volume has all been published since 1970 by philosophers who have grown up in the epoch of the motion picture. That is, they were born after the invention and popularization of the motion picture, and, as a result, movies have been an unexceptional feature of their cultural landscape. For the philosophers born before World War II, a visit to the movie theater was an ordinary pleasure, while for those born after World War II, in addition to a trip to the cinema, the repertoire of film history has also been continuously available on TV and then video cassettes and DVDs. Because of their everexpanding familiarity with motion pictures, more philosophers are asking more questions about moving pictures than ever before, and they are posing their inquiries with heightened sophistication, precision, and refinement. Thus, the last three and a half decades have benefited from an unparalleled philosophical scrutiny of a diversity showcased in this collection. But though the philosophy of the motion picture is flourishing, particularly at present, it would be an error to think that it is only a concern of recent vintage. For the philosophy of the motion picture arrived on the scene very soon after those inaugural moving pictures namely, films became ensconced as a significant cultural force. Early on, film was enmeshed in an intense philosophical debate. Because of its photographic provenance, many argued that film could not be an artform. For, it was assumed, photography was nothing but the mechanical reproduction of whatever stood before the camera lens. Just as a mirror reflection of a table full of decoratively arranged viands is not an artwork, no matter how much it might resemble some still life, so it was argued, neither is a photograph whether still or moving an artwork. It is merely a slavish recording with no art to it. As mechanical processes, photography and cinematography allegedly afford no space for expression, imaginative elaboration, and/or creativity and, therefore, are artless. Though early film theorists, like Rudolf Arnheim, vigorously disputed the case against film art, the prejudice has lingered into the present and been advanced in a philosophically adept fashion by Roger Scruton. Since the issue of whether film can be art was historically the first philosophical challenge leveled at the motion picture, we begin this anthology in honor of it leading off the first section with Scruton s brief against the possibility of film art and then following that with Dominic McIver Lopes s case in favor of an art of motion pictures. The debate over whether films or motion pictures can be art hinges on certain presuppositions about what kind of thing a film is. Those who deny it art status presume that it is essentially photographic, and, furthermore, presuppose that photography, by definition, is mechanical in a way that is categorically inhospitable to art making. But is this true? What is film? To what category does it belong? In Part II, a gamut of answers to this question is interrogated by various philosophers. Suggestions canvassed include not only that film is essentially a photographic instrument, but also that it is a language, that it is a form of dream, and finally that it is a moving picture or image. As indicated, the first moving pictures were the products of photographic film. Many of these images were documentary in nature, such as the famous actualités of the Lumière Brothers. Moreover, inasmuch as the film camera was designed to be first and foremost a recording device, there has long been an association between film and documentation to the extent that one of the most enduring genres of the moving image has been the documentary or nonfiction film. Part III of this anthology takes up the question of the nature of such filmmaking, with two philosophers setting out contrasting conceptions of the nonfiction film. Though the nonfiction film represents one of the oldest traditions of motion picture making, it is probably not the sort of endeavor that first comes 2

General Introduction to mind when people think of cinema. In all likelihood, at the mention of movies the majority of us start thinking about narrative fictions, surely the most popular type of motion pictures to date. So in Part IV of this volume, we turn to the issue of the narration of fiction films and the special problems and complexities that contemporary philosophers imagine it to involve. Motion pictures are intimately bound up with the emotions. When it comes to fiction films, one might be tempted to call them E-motion pictures. Films not only move; they move us (emotionally). Many film genres take their very labels from the emotions they are typically designed to engender, such as horror films, suspense films and tearjerkers. Part V of this text is focused on the relation of motion pictures to the emotions. It opens with a discussion of the way in which movies engage the garden-variety emotions and then goes on to grapple with certain apparent anomalies pertaining to our emotional responses to fiction namely, how is it possible to be moved by cinematic fictions, since we know the events they depict do not exist? How can we, for example, recoil in fear at the onset of the Green Slime when we know that there is no such thing? Much of our affective engagement with filmed fictions centers upon our relations with characters. But what is the nature of that emotional relation? In the fifth section, several philosophers explore different conceptions of it, including identification, empathy, and simulation. We not only respond to films emotionally in the moment. We also talk about them afterwards with each other and analyze and assess them. Film criticism pursued by professional critics and ordinary viewers alike is a part of the practice of cinema along with filmmaking and film viewing. Just as philosophers reflect upon the conceptual frameworks that organize the latter activities, they also examine the concepts and modes of thinking the categories and procedures that facilitate the practice of film criticism. Sometimes called metacriticism, the philosophy of film criticism epistemically weighs the appropriateness of alternative interpretive protocols and attempts to reconstruct rationally the categories that inform the conduct of criticism. In Part VI, George M. Wilson rejects a dominant style of contemporary academic film interpretation and offers a series of more nuanced critical concepts in its stead. Then in subsequent essays, different philosophers attempt to distill the saving remnant of and to defend for critical discourse respectively the organizing concept of cinematic authorship and the very idea of a national cinema. If only because of the connection between motion pictures and the emotions, movies inevitably come in contact with morality. How do films stand in relation to right and wrong? Are some motion pictures morally salutary, and, if so, how? Can some films contribute to the cultivation of virtue? But aren t other films morally pernicious and even harmful such as pornographic films? Yet how is it possible for a film to be harmful and what should we do about it? Can we censor such films? And how are we to respond to motion pictures that appear to be artistically accomplished but also evil? In what way do moral factors and artistic ones come into play in an all-things-considered judgment of a film? These are the sorts of issues that vex Part VII of this anthology. The final section, Part VIII, is preoccupied with the relation of motion pictures to knowledge in general and to philosophical knowledge in particular. Obviously not all films add to our fund of knowledge and perhaps even fewer can lay claim to the title of philosophy. But might it be the case that at least some motion pictures can satisfy the criteria required to count as genuine knowledge, philosophical or otherwise? Skeptics argue no, for genuine knowledge claims, they assert, demand to be backed by evidence and, especially in the case of philosophy, by argument. Yet fiction films are bereft of evidence and argument; so even if they convey truths, those truths do not amount to knowledge, since they have not been justified by means of evidence and argument. Nevertheless, this species of skepticism is liable to attack from at least two different directions. On the one hand, it may be countered that the view of knowledge, and particularly the view of philosophical knowledge, countenanced by the skeptic is too narrow. Or, alternatively, it may be demonstrated that narrative fictions possess structural resources that enable them to mount what may be reasonably described as arguments. Both strategies are deployed against the skeptic in the closing section of this volume. Perhaps needless to say, the topics selected for discussion herein are but a sampling of the issues that intrigue and engage contemporary philosophers of the moving image. Another anthology might propose an entirely different agenda, emphasizing, for example, the relation of motion pictures to the preoccupations of political philosophy. 3

General Introduction We would never suggest that the itinerary through the field offered between these covers is the only way of introducing beginning students to the philosophy of the motion picture. It is a fairly representative overview of the kind of work produced by so-called analytic philosophers of film. But one might enter the conversation by a different route. What is important is simply to begin somewhere. So we invite you to start here and now. N.C. Note 1 For a fuller account of this view of philosophy, see the introduction to Noël Carroll, Philosophy of Art: A Contemporary Introduction (London: Routledge, 2000). 4

PART I Film as Art