Quarterly Scientific Journal of Audio-Visual Media

Quarterly Scientific Journal of Audio-Visual Media

Pilosophical Pre-structures of the Montage/Mise-en-scene Conflict and Classical Paradigm Approaches

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Ahmadreza Motamedi 1
Shima Mohamadi 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Television, Radio and Television Production Faculty, IRIB University, Tehran, Iran.(Corresponding Author).
2 M.A. Student in Dramatic Department of Dramatic Art Tehran University, Tehran, Iran
10.22085/javm.2019.183002.1284
Abstract
The theory of montage in cinema is based on formalism, and the theory of mise-en-scene is derived from the author's view and from realism. It seems that the philosophical pre-structures of the two theories, one based on holism and structuralism, and the other on particularism and phenomenology, have deep roots in a classical historical philosophical conflict. In the montage view, cinema reaches a meaningful whole through the assembly of the components, and in the mise-en-scene view, the shot (plan) alone both makes sense and also phenomenonize the reality. The traces of this conflict have been lost in contemporary theories in the fields of semiotics, semantics and linguistics. This paper tries to show that despite the preservation of the paradigms of traditional and classical philosophy, approximation of the mise-en-scene and montage theories is possible by searching the lane of the parties to the dispute. The research is based on the library method and has been carried out with the descriptive-analytical method. 
Keywords
Mise-en-scene
Montage
Formalism
Structuralism
Phenomenology
 استیس، و.ت (1375). فلسفۀ هگل، (مترجم: حمید عنایت)، چ5، تهران: شرکت سهامی کتاب‌های جیبی.
رولن، پیتر (1363). نشانه‌ها و معنا در سینما، (مترجم: عبدالله تربیت، بهمن طاهری)، تهران: سروش.
معتمدی، احمدرضا (1393). فلسفۀ فیلم، ج1، بررسی تحلیلی و انتقادی نظریه‌های فیلم دوران کلاسیک، تهران: پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشۀ اسلامی.
 
Andrew, Dudley, The Majar Film Theories, Oxford university Presss, 1976.
Aristotle, Poetics, tr.by Ingram Bywater, in: The Basic Works of Aristotle, ed. by Richard McKeon, New York: Radom House. 1941.
Bazin, André , What Is Cinema, Vol I. tr. by Hugh Gray, University of California Press, 2005a.
Bazin, André , What Is Cinema, Vol II. tr. by Hugh Gray, University of California Press, 2005b.
Balazs, Bela, Theory of the Film: Character and Growth of a New Art, tr. by Edith
Bone, London:
Dennis Dobson Ltd, 1952.
Eisenstein, Sergei, Film Form,
tr. by Jay Leyda, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. 1941.
Eisenstein, Sergei, The Film Sense,
tr. by Jay Leyda, London: Faber & Faber Limited, 1970.
Heidegger, Martin, The Origins of the Work of Art, in: Poetry, Language, Thought, tr. by Albert Hofstadter. New York: Harper & Row. 1971.
 Hegel, G. W. F. Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, tr. by T. M. Knox. Oxford University Press, 1975.
Hegel, G. W. F. Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics, tr. by B. Bosanguet, London: Penguin, 1993.
Sartre, Jean Paul, Existensialism Is a Humanism, tr. by Carol Macamber, Yale University Press, 2007.
Veveaux, Roger, Hestorie de la phelosophie Contemporaine, Beavehene Paris, 1960
Pasolini, Pier poolo, the Written Language of Reality. Hereticul Emprieism Tr.ben Lawton, louse K. Barent. Washington, New Aeadenic Publishing, 2005.