观察的政治:纪录片与激进精神病学

IF 0.4 Q3 CULTURAL STUDIES Journal of Aesthetics & Culture Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20004214.2019.1568791
Des O’Rawe
{"title":"观察的政治:纪录片与激进精神病学","authors":"Des O’Rawe","doi":"10.1080/20004214.2019.1568791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The post-war counter-culture encouraged alternative ways of articulating the language of documentary film, contributing to a wider critique of social institutions and the complicity of the mass media in constructing perceptions of authority. In relation to the politics of madness, this era also gave rise to a heightened awareness of psychiatric institutions as sites of symbolic power rather than therapeutic care, informing a growing scepticism towards both traditionally assumed causes and categories of mental illness as well as the everyday concept of rationality itself. This article offers a comparative analysis of different observational filmmaking styles in relation to their respective portrayals of various methods, personalities, and institutions associated with forms of radical psychiatry. It explores the impact and legacy of these cultural developments on films such as: Warrendale (Allan King, 1967); Asylum (Peter Robinson, 1972); San Clemente (Raymond Depardon and Sophie Ristelhueber, 1980); and Every Little Thing/La Moindre des choses (Nicolas Philibert, 1996). Despite their cultural and formal differences, these films are similarly involved in negotiating not only problematic distinctions between observation and intrusion, fiction and documentary, but also constructions of madness and sanity.","PeriodicalId":43229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aesthetics & Culture","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20004214.2019.1568791","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The politics of observation: documentary film and radical psychiatry\",\"authors\":\"Des O’Rawe\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20004214.2019.1568791\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The post-war counter-culture encouraged alternative ways of articulating the language of documentary film, contributing to a wider critique of social institutions and the complicity of the mass media in constructing perceptions of authority. In relation to the politics of madness, this era also gave rise to a heightened awareness of psychiatric institutions as sites of symbolic power rather than therapeutic care, informing a growing scepticism towards both traditionally assumed causes and categories of mental illness as well as the everyday concept of rationality itself. This article offers a comparative analysis of different observational filmmaking styles in relation to their respective portrayals of various methods, personalities, and institutions associated with forms of radical psychiatry. It explores the impact and legacy of these cultural developments on films such as: Warrendale (Allan King, 1967); Asylum (Peter Robinson, 1972); San Clemente (Raymond Depardon and Sophie Ristelhueber, 1980); and Every Little Thing/La Moindre des choses (Nicolas Philibert, 1996). Despite their cultural and formal differences, these films are similarly involved in negotiating not only problematic distinctions between observation and intrusion, fiction and documentary, but also constructions of madness and sanity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43229,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Aesthetics & Culture\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20004214.2019.1568791\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Aesthetics & Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2019.1568791\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aesthetics & Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2019.1568791","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

战后的反主流文化鼓励了纪录片语言的其他表达方式,有助于对社会制度和大众媒体在构建权威观念方面的共谋进行更广泛的批评。关于疯狂的政治,这个时代也引起了人们对精神病院作为象征性权力场所的高度认识,而不是治疗性护理,对传统上假定的精神疾病的原因和类别以及理性本身的日常概念都提出了越来越多的怀疑。本文对不同的观察性电影制作风格进行了比较分析,分析了它们各自对与激进精神病学形式相关的各种方法、个性和制度的描述。它探讨了这些文化发展对电影的影响和遗产,如:沃伦代尔(艾伦·金,1967);收容所(彼得·罗宾逊,1972);圣克莱门特(Raymond Depardon and Sophie Ristelhueber, 1980);以及《每一件小事》/《梦中人》(Nicolas Philibert, 1996)。尽管这些电影在文化和形式上存在差异,但它们都同样涉及讨论,不仅是观察与侵入、虚构与纪录片之间存在问题的区别,还包括对疯狂与理智的建构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The politics of observation: documentary film and radical psychiatry
ABSTRACT The post-war counter-culture encouraged alternative ways of articulating the language of documentary film, contributing to a wider critique of social institutions and the complicity of the mass media in constructing perceptions of authority. In relation to the politics of madness, this era also gave rise to a heightened awareness of psychiatric institutions as sites of symbolic power rather than therapeutic care, informing a growing scepticism towards both traditionally assumed causes and categories of mental illness as well as the everyday concept of rationality itself. This article offers a comparative analysis of different observational filmmaking styles in relation to their respective portrayals of various methods, personalities, and institutions associated with forms of radical psychiatry. It explores the impact and legacy of these cultural developments on films such as: Warrendale (Allan King, 1967); Asylum (Peter Robinson, 1972); San Clemente (Raymond Depardon and Sophie Ristelhueber, 1980); and Every Little Thing/La Moindre des choses (Nicolas Philibert, 1996). Despite their cultural and formal differences, these films are similarly involved in negotiating not only problematic distinctions between observation and intrusion, fiction and documentary, but also constructions of madness and sanity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
33.30%
发文量
15
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
What AI “art” can teach us about art The standardized, mechanized, and annotated body. Fragmentation as cultural technique in recent video works by Kajsa Dahlberg, Kalle Brolin, and Hanni Kamaly The unbearable lightness of objects: Günter Figal’s spatial aesthetics The vertical axis and the agôn between theatre and philosophy “Whose roar is it, anyway? Localization and ideological communication with respect to the toho Godzilla franchise”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1