First, we explored the social influence of film on individuals' perception via face-to-face interactions with space and time. Now, we take a closer look at the outcome of such interaction
Part 1 of this article explored the possibility of film to have a social influence on individuals' perceptions through a close face-to-face interaction with transformation of space and time. In part 2, we take a closer look at the output of such interaction. As a modernist observer, experiencing the city offers a movable experience, a contemporary collection of life images that define everyday scenes. Cinema embodies the role of the observer, a medium that exposes a variety of realities to a wide range of the public immersing them into a fragmented time and space.
Whole images, still and dynamic, are mentally reconstructed to unfold the city's hidden aspects; ones that cannot be fully comprehended due to their distant indirect affiliation with out mental perceptions. Their position within space reinforces within them a spatial characteristic that transcends their shallow exterior image, transforming them into a dominant symbolic feature subjugating the existing scenery. Film is a medium that reinforces such characteristic through the visual portrayal of urban space - where space becomes foregrounded to a degree that it renders the structural level of the film - hence, reconstructing space and inducing objects that serve the symbolic level of reality.
The term 'cine-spatial' best describes such portrayal; it is mainly the theoretical framework that bounds the exterior dimensions of narrative space, where its projection on screen conveys a new level of spatial representation, thus 'cine-spatial representation'. To best comprehend the term, the following 3-part section illustrates the inner ingredients depicting: 1) Narrative space, 2) Image representation, and 3) Representational space.
Narrative Space
Since French philosopher Michel Foucault acknowledged the fact that space centralizes our juxtaposed daily concerns, individuals are, politically and culturally, confined within space from a narrative point of view; stemming out of our daily flanerie movement within space. Each day, we encounter physicality and meta-physicality - both of which shape our perceptions.
Stephen Heath first coined the term narrative space in his book 'Questions of Cinema' (1981), describing it as the viewers' perspective of movement throughout the story. His main conclusion was that events occurring in a movie create 'space of reality' where spectators observe, interpret, and move within.
On a counter level, Mark Cooper attempts to fill some of the theoretical holes in Heath's speculation putting forward the idea that narrative space is associated with what is not shown directly on screen, what is talked about and referred to, and not just what appears inside the frame. A simple justification would be the dissimilar frames in each scene taken, thus different vantage points.
Image Representation
Images are composed of elements held together unconsciously, and are manipulated in order to appeal to the wider audience and correspond to universal codes, languages, and values. Thus, what we are dealing with here is a two-aspect process: the composition and the structure of an image, and the technique with which this image is produced eventually affecting public opinion.
Ludwig Wittgenstein argues in his book 'Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus' (1921) that the elements of a picture are representatives of objects, and an image's pictorial form is the main spine that determines its level of resemblance with reality. In other words, the structure of a picture is identical with the structure of the fact.
Charles Sanders Peirce, known as the father of pragmatism, claims that an image is a composition of signs that represent specific objects in reality, where such relationship is usually interpreted and comprehended by observers. Signs consist of three inter-related elements: a sign - the signifier, an object - anything that is being signified, and an interpretant - the understanding that we have of the sign-object relationship. Therefore, an interpretation of a sign generates new meaning to the sign; one that is discovered by the observer as a result of formal experiences.
The second part of this process is the methods and techniques used to transmit visually stimulating images to the public, thus controlling individuals' biological perspectives. An article entitled 'Mediated Images' (2004) by Sue Chapman asserts that media attempts to daily reproduce visually appealing images to illuminate larger-than-life representations of reality. Media uses signs and symbols recognized in our daily lives, fits them within a socio-norm framework and channels them to our subconscious producing certain judgmental meanings, e.g. stereotypes.
Representational Space
Urban theorists Henri Lefebvre and Edward Soja had a common feature; the third space, i.e. the social field. The place where all aspects of spatiality exists, i.e. abstract & concrete, subjectivity & objectivity, and real & imagined. Lefebvre's 1974 fugue-like piece 'The Production of Space' illustrates space as a reservoir of mental and social activities that are considered to be re-representations of reality, i.e. symbols, signs, and thoughts and discourses of text and literature.
According to Lefebvre's theory, social relations are projected upon space creating a spatial existential framework - they are caught in a continuous loop of production and reproduction. Representational space contain no characters of cohesiveness or consistency, in addition to being spaces for the emergence of bottom-up ideals and social movements.
"FILM CORRESPONDS TO PROFOUND CHANGES IN THE PERCEPTIVE APPARATUS - CHANGES THAT ARE EXPERIENCED ON AN INDIVIDUAL SCALE BY THE MAN IN THE STREET IN BIG-CITY TRAFFIC" - WALTER BENJAMIN
In Conclusion
Film proposes symbolic spatial aspects whose images - composed of metaphorical signs and symbols - are observed and interpreted by the public, and, in response, compose new meanings and typologies. The elements of the film have a direct connection with the flaneurie characters, stretching to off-screen elements, e,g, background narration; ones that set the basic parameters for the notion of symbolic representation of reality.
Here ends Part 2. I hope I have covered enough approaches to clarify the idea of understanding our context, physically and socially, using film images and cinematic art. However, I would like to know more about your opinion, and if you have any other interesting insights about this topic. Please share your comments, ideas, thoughts, criticism, and/or any sort of information and/or interesting facts.