Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Critique of Judgment in Film and TelevisionCinematic Judgment and Universal Communicability: On Benjamin and Kant with Metz

A Critique of Judgment in Film and Television: Cinematic Judgment and Universal Communicability:... [What does Christian Metz mean when he writes, in The Imaginary Signifier, that “the spectator identifies with himself, with himself as a pure act of perception (as wakefulness, alertness): as the condition of possibility of the perceived and hence as a kind of transcendental subject, which comes before every there is” (1982, 49)? What does Metz mean, first of all, by declaring that the spectator identities with himself? What is a “pure act of perception”? What, furthermore, is a “condition of possibility” that opens up or grounds (“comes before”) this perception? What is a “transcendental subject,” and why or how does such a subject come before every “there is”? There is a great deal contained in this sentence that comes as a culmination of a number of observations Metz makes in his famous essay.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

A Critique of Judgment in Film and TelevisionCinematic Judgment and Universal Communicability: On Benjamin and Kant with Metz

Editors: Panse, Silke; Rothermel, Dennis
Rushton, Richard
Springer Journals — Nov 11, 2015
Download PDF
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/a-critique-of-judgment-in-film-and-television-cinematic-judgment-and-Tvi8R5TXjH
Publisher
Palgrave Macmillan UK
Copyright
© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2014
ISBN
978-1-349-43679-8
Pages
202 –218
DOI
10.1057/9781137014184_10
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[What does Christian Metz mean when he writes, in The Imaginary Signifier, that “the spectator identifies with himself, with himself as a pure act of perception (as wakefulness, alertness): as the condition of possibility of the perceived and hence as a kind of transcendental subject, which comes before every there is” (1982, 49)? What does Metz mean, first of all, by declaring that the spectator identities with himself? What is a “pure act of perception”? What, furthermore, is a “condition of possibility” that opens up or grounds (“comes before”) this perception? What is a “transcendental subject,” and why or how does such a subject come before every “there is”? There is a great deal contained in this sentence that comes as a culmination of a number of observations Metz makes in his famous essay.]

Published: Nov 11, 2015

Keywords: Aesthetic Judgment; Good Taste; Explicit Awareness; Traditional Work; Aesthetic Pleasure

There are no references for this article.