Must We Mean What We Say? A Book of World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Senses of Mothersill & Stanley Cavell. The World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Film · Stanley Cavell. Harvard Stanley Cavell – – State University of New York Press. Film Theory and. Abstract. Stanley Cavell’s The World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology Film ( ) is patient with the ways in which common sense is threatened by our.
|Published (Last):||26 September 2013|
|PDF File Size:||4.76 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.95 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Cavell does use plain language. Stanley Cavell was an American philosopher. Anna rated it really liked it Feb 09, Blizek – – Modern Schoolman 50 4: Stanley Cavell is Walter M. Even so, what I took away from this was minimal. One can have dreams and have hallucinations. More of The World Viewed.
Cavell perhaps makes all of this safe-sounding by putting it in the language of ordinary language philosophy, talking about “what we say” and finding interesting insights in that.
The reflections call out little commonalities we see worlf films, often with just a single reference to a famous scene. Sign in to use this feature. There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Jan 07, Tim rated it really liked it.
Cavell stretches himself across philosophical traditions instead of allowing one to inform another. Forty years after the book’s initial publication date, it cavdll as relevant and as current as ever. References to this book Seeing is believing: This “terror of ourselves in isolation” is a pretty manufactured terror, a self-inflicted disease.
The Medium and Media of Film. However, I cannot place as much emphasis as Cavell does on the automatism of photography or on the idea that the human agent is entirely absent in photography. Wittgenstein and the Social. For example, we can say that a record “reproduces a sound” but it is not clear what a photograph reproduces, if anything.
Cavell says “The route to conviction in reality was through the word of that endless presence of self” and I think this is giving too much credit to the cogito. To ask other readers questions about The World Viewedplease sign up. But, perhaps unlike Cavell, I do not see Descartes as providing any positive contribution to this.
Yaron Ezrahi – – Inquiry: First, however, Cavell discusses another familiar point, that photographs present us with the things themselves, or even that photographs have “an aura or history of magic surrounding them. Sandra Laugier – – Philosophical Investigations 41 2: Honestly, I think it’s more my thin philosophical background that’s gave me a hard time here, and I blame that, not Cavell. Thursday, October 19, Cavell: Reflections on the Ontology of Film 4.
I give it 4 stars because what I have understood is compelling, and because what I haven’t yet understood I feel like is worthy of trying to understand. Read, highlight, and take notes, across web, tablet, and phone.
From the Publisher via CrossRef no proxy jstor. The study of film needed to found itself, intellectually, upon a philosophical investigation of the conditions of the medium and art of film.
Stanley Cavell, The World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Film – PhilPapers
We are unsure how the physical laws of our world apply to the cartoon world: Stanley Cavell on the Ontology of Film. I have to emphatically staanley with the Amazon reviewer who called this an “easy read. But the second slow digestion is also present in photography. Daniele Rugo – – Palgrave.
Science Logic and Mathematics. Henrique Romoff rated it it was amazing May 21, Of course the question, as Cavell puts it, is somewhat new viz. Gary Norris rated it it was amazing Dec 19, Find it on Scholar. How to Do Things with Film and Philosophy.
The World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Film
Then the essay takes some interesting and surprising turns. Robert Sinnerbrink – – Film-Philosophy 18 1: According to Cavell, the “material basis of the media of movies” is “a succession of automatic wrold projections”.
Dec 02, Nat added it. Lisa Downing – – Routledge. Cartoon terror is absolute because the body is indestructible, and so any threat is a threat to the soul itself Reflections on the Ontology of Film by Stanley Cavell.