Seeing Yourself in the Past: The Role of Situational (Dis)continuity and Conceptual Metaphor in the Understanding of Complex Cases of Character Perception

Coëgnarts, Maarten; Kiss, Miklós; Kravanja, Peter; Willemsen, Steven

doi:10.3167/proj.2016.100110

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(38 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, it is the conviction of this article that one first has to consider the analytic and embodied structure of these modest examples before one can clearly look into the underlying structure of more complex cases of meaningmaking in cinema, as encountered, for example, in European modernist cinema (Kovács, 2007) or puzzle films . Especially, as the latter complex cases are more than often build upon the impediment of the former simpler cases (see also Coëgnarts et al, 2016). Third and last, one could make a similar point of criticism with regard to the paper's lack of interest in the aural dimension of meaning-making in cinema, which, for lack of space, was excluded from this study.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Our previous work (Coëgnarts and Kravanja, 2012, 2014b, 2015b, 2016aCoëgnarts et al, 2016) can be seen as a series of attempts to explore and illustrate this line of reasoning with respect to various target domains of character subjectivity. Two such case-studies (character perception and character emotions) will be presented in the second application part below of this article.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in order for the viewer to anchor additional higher-order meaning to the perception of characters, often further contextual information is needed. This is especially the case with flashbacks that are introduced through the perception of characters (see, for example, Coëgnarts and Kravanja, 2015b;Coëgnarts et al, 2016). To judge whether or not the perceived event by the character is temporally discontinuous (for example, to map O onto the past), one has to have perceived the content of the event before (equally through a prior filmed event or, differently, through textually channelled information).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cinema and the embodied mind: metaphor and simulation in understanding meaning in films

Coëgnarts

2017

Palgrave Commun

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Only recently, the broad research program of embodied cognition has fuelled a substantial and ongoing body of research at the crossroads of cognitive science and film studies. Two influential theories of embodiment that have received considerable attention among film scholars are: Conceptual Metaphor Theory (originated in the field of cognitive linguistics) and Embodied Simulation Theory (originated in the field of neuroscience). Despite their intimate relationship, both theories have been rarely addressed together in the context of film studies. This article takes on the challenge of combining both perspectives into a unified embodied model for understanding conceptual meaning in cinema. The study is driven by two key assumptions, namely: (1) that meaning in film is metaphorically mapped within our sensory-motor system and (2) that embodied simulation processes in the brain allow for the viewer to infer this meaning from the evidence provided by the film. To clarify both assumptions, the article will present a discussion of the theme of embodiment at three levels of analysis: the conceptual level (how is meaning embodied in the human mind?), the formal level (how is this meaning structured in the visual mode of expression?) and the receptive level (how is the viewer able to infer this meaning on the basis of the evidence provided by the form?). The grounding problem of fictional subjectivity in cinema (that is, how are viewers able to attribute mental states to fictional characters in films?) will be used to test the validity of both claims.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cinema and the embodied mind: metaphor and simulation in understanding meaning in films

Coëgnarts

2017

Palgrave Commun

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, to open up the discussion and disclose further perspectives, we will devote this contribution to contemplating the possible attractiveness of complexity, inspired and informed by the observations we have made in our earlier studies on cinematic narrative complexity (Willemsen 2018;Ros and Kiss 2018;Kiss and Willemsen 2017;Willemsen and Kiss 2017;Coëgnarts et al 2016;Kiss 2012Kiss , 2013. It is an attempt to look beyond our usual theoretical frameworks, loosening the scientific rigor, and taking a stance that is, admittedly, a speculative one.…”

Section: Miklós Kiss and Steven Willemsenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Storytelling and Mainstream Television Today – A Dialogue

Ellis¹,

Oever²

2018

Stories

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The original aim of the Key Debates series was to revisit the concepts, and indeed controversies, that have shaped the field of film studies. Our intention was twofold: to clarify what was initially at stake in the founding texts, and to shed light on lines of transmission and reinterpretation in what remains a hybrid field of study, which has "appropriated" and thus modified much of what it uses. The six volumes published to date take different approaches to this central mission, reviewing how early film theory adopted and developed literary theories of "strangeness" (ostrannennie); shifting concepts of subjectivity engendered by film; the variety of ways in which film audiences have been conceived; the persistence of debate around film as a technology; the newly energized debate regarding feminist approaches to film and television; and an up-to-date discussion of display technologies and screen use in the digital era.We are delighted to announce that the coeditor of the volume on Screens, José Moure, has become a Key Debates series editor from Volume 7 onward. When we launched this book series in 2010, after a phase of preparation which began in 2006, we felt that as scholarship in the history of film theory developed, there was a need to revisit many long-standing assumptions, particularly in light of the changes in media devices and viewing practices. Further volumes are now in preparation, as we recognize that pervasive digital media have not made the concepts and debates to which film initially gave rise, redundant. On the contrary, there seems to be a greater need than ever to clarify and refocus fundamental issues, such as stories and storytelling in the present volume, in the context of our contemporary media environment.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, these caveats do not make the question irrelevant -on the contrary, understanding what draws some people to complex stories is a fundamental part of understanding these films themselves, both in terms of the viewing experiences of those who watch them, and as a phenomenon in contemporary audiovisual culture. Therefore, to open up the discussion and disclose further perspectives, we will devote this contribution to contemplating the possible attractiveness of complexity, inspired and informed by the observations we have made in our earlier studies on cinematic narrative complexity (Willemsen 2018;Ros and Kiss 2018;Kiss and Willemsen 2017;Willemsen and Kiss 2017;Coëgnarts et al 2016;Kiss 2012Kiss , 2013. It is an attempt to look beyond our usual theoretical frameworks, loosening the scientific rigor, and taking a stance that is, admittedly, a speculative one.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%