Overview[ edit ] Apparatus theory maintains that cinema is by nature ideological because its mechanics of representation are ideological, and because the films are created to represent reality. Its mechanics of representation include the camera and editing. The central position of the spectator within the perspective of the composition is also ideological. In the simplest instance the cinematic apparatus purports to set before the eye and ear realistic images and sounds.
|Published (Last):||5 June 2005|
|PDF File Size:||9.53 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.9 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The projection process is a way of creating meaning and it denies the difference between adjacent images. And the two conditions are repeated during cinematographic projection. They would first identify with the character, then identify with the camera. Unmask the potentialities implied in present states of consciousness: In order not to be controlled by the ideological role of cinema, the critical awareness of the ideological cinematic apparatus should be emphasized. He points out the ideological effects of the seemingly inviolate and neutral technical base and challenges previous idea of Bazin who thinks that the film screen is just an unmediated window to the world.
And his warning that we need to be aware of the ideological effect inherent in cinematic apparatus is quite profound. In some degree, it has overlooked their empirical experience and psychological process: do they utilize their individualized experience when they are watching? But when we are watching films online with our PC or pad, will this apparatus lose its ideological function?
Or will the ideological function still work without projection in a dark space? If the spectators always identify with the camera and are subject to ideological effects no matter what the cinematographic apparatus is, then, how do we know if the effects are produced by content or apparatus?
And to what degree do these two variables affect the audience respectively? Still photographs are shown at first, including images of two women, a street full of people, an old lady, a young boy and so forth. Then the still photographs turn into moving image, showing the two women talking, the crowds of people walking and the young boy laughing.
Normally, narrative films tend to hide the apparatus in order to create a mirror illusion for spectators to identify with characters or the camera. However, in this experimental and reflexive film, the camera, the projector, the editing machine are exposed, and also, the ideological effects of cinematographic apparatus are exposed.
Jean-Louis Baudry “Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus” – A Review
How the cinematic apparatus is actually more important for transcendentalism in the subject than the film itself. This, he claims, is what distinguishes cinema as an art form. Its inscription, its manifestation as such, on the other hand, would produce a knowledge effect, as actualization of the work process, as denunciation of ideology, and as a critique of idealism. Sociologically, idealism emphasizes how human ideas — especially beliefs and values — shape society. Philosophically it asserts that reality, or reality as we can know it, is fundamentally mental, mentally constructed, or otherwise immaterial. Baudry then discusses the necessity of transcendence which he will touch upon more later in his essay.
"Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus"
Baudry: “Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus”