What Novels Can Do That Films Can't

Critical Inquiry 7 (1):121-140 (1980)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The key word in amy account of the different ways that visual details are presented by novels and films is "assert." I wish to communicate by that word the force it has in ordinary rhetoric: an "assertion" is a statement, usually an independent sentence or clause, that something is in fact the case, that it is a certain sort of thing, that it does in fact have certain properties or enter into certain relations, namely, those listed. Opposed to asserting there is mere "naming." When I say, "The cart was tiny; it came onto the bridge," I am asserting that certain property of the cart of being small in size and that certain relation of arriving at the bridge. However, when I say "The green cart came onto the bridge," I am asserting nothing more than its arrival at the bridge; the greenness of the cart is not asserted but slipped in without syntactic fuss. It is only named. Textually, it emerges by the way. Now, most film narratives seem to be of the latter textual order: it requires special effort for films to assert a property or relation. The dominant mode is presentational, not assertive. A film doesn't say, "This is the state of affairs," it merely shows you that state of affairs. Of course, there could be a character or a voice-over commentator asserting a property or relation; but then the film would be using its sound track in much the same way as fiction uses assertive syntax. It is not cinematic description but merely description by literary assertion transferred to film. Filmmakers and critics traditionally show disdain for verbal commentary because it explicates what, they feel, should be implicated visually. So in its essential visual mode, film does not describe at all but merely presents; or better, it depicts, in the original etymological sense of that word: renders in pictorial form. I don't think that this is mere purism or a die-hard adherence to silent films. Film attracts that component of our perceptual apparatus which we tend to favor over the other senses. Seeing, after all, is believing. Seymour Chatman, professor in the department of rhetoric at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author of The Later Style of Henry James and Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. His contribution to Critical Inquiry, "Reply to Barbara Herrnstein Smith" appeared in the Summer 1981 issue

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Consciousness and the Nonexistence of God.Greg Janzen - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Research 38:1-25.
Vice versa'.Edgar Morscher - 1977 - Logique Et Analyse 77:129.
Psychobiology and vice versa.Roger W. Sperry - 1968 - Engineering and Science Magazine, November 1968.
Do we “acquire” culture or vice versa?Jerome Bruner - 1993 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (3):515-516.
Do men grow to resemble their wives, or vice versa?G. S. Sutton - 1993 - Journal of Biosocial Science 25:25-25.
Reality the Measure of Logic and Not Vice Versa.Stephen Theron - 1988 - International Philosophical Quarterly 28 (2):185-192.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-17

Downloads
110 (#157,174)

6 months
27 (#107,707)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Can a Single Still Picture Tell a Story? Definitions of Narrative and the Alleged Problem of Time with Single Still Pictures.Klaus Speidel - 2013 - Diegesis. Interdisciplinary E-Journal for Narrative Research / Interdisziplinäres E-Journal Für Er-Zählforschung 2 (1):173--194.
Philosophy, literature, and the death of art.Stephanie Ross - 1989 - Philosophical Papers 18 (1):95-115.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references