エイゼンシュテインとディドロ
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
This article is an attempt to compare aesthetic ideas of Diderot and Eisenstein in broader context. In his monograph Eisenstein noted the conception of three historical stages in the evolution of cinema: 1) film of the stationary camera, 2) film of the non-stationary camera, 3) sound film. Reconsidering Diderot's descriptions of paintings accoding to this trichotomy, we can find germs of films of the 1st and 2nd stages there. But it is more surprising that Diderot's account of Fragonald's picture prophesied sound film, too. Though Eisenstein didn't refer to this esssay, it corresponds to his fascination with Diderot as a forerunner of the synthesis of all the arts. Their projects of the total artwork partly issued from their common interest in synaethesia. Eisenstein pointed out the possiblity of real interchange between the logical and the illogical such as synaethesia. This view should be appreciated because it was decades ahead of Madness and Civilization, where Foucault cites Diderot's Rameau's Nephew as an illustration of a simbiotic relation between art and madness. But we should not overlook the negative aspect of film which was foreseen in the account on Fragonald's picture, which makes us to reconsider a problem in Eisenstein's theory. He thought that sound film can engage the senses to a great degree. There is no doubt that he tend to impose his own intention on spectators by hypnotic effects. Does indeed Eisenstein enslave a spectator? This serious question is not to easy to answer, but we should refrain from a simplistic conclusion.
- 日本スラヴ・東欧学会の論文
- 1999-03-31