Yeni ‘Film’ veya ‘Sinema’ Tarihi: Sinema Tarihi Yazımında Yeni Gelişen İlkeler, Kuramlar ve Metodolojiler Üzerine Düşünceler

Yıl 2024, Sayı: 14, 351 - 355, 28.10.2024

Enes Akdağ

https://doi.org/10.32739/etkilesim.2024.7.14.276

Öz

Film as an artefact has long been the subject of study by “film historians,” whether in terms of stylistic authenticity, genre specificity, or “high theory” analysis. Conversely, film history has been written as if films had no audiences (Biltereyst et al, 2012, p. 693). This kind of filmic-textual research tendency lies at the heart of the legacy of film studies discipline. In 1973, Jean Mitry
proposed an ideal of film history as simultaneously, a history of its industry, its technologies, its systems of expression (or, more precisely, its systems of signification), and aesthetic structures, all bound together by the forces of the economic, psychosocial and cultural order (Maltby, 2006, p. 80). Humanities-based film studies were first re-conceptualized by the initiatives of International
Federation of Film Archives (FIAF), during its 1974 and 1978 conferences. Drawing on the methodological stance of the French Annales school’s histoire totale, participants at the 1974 FIAF conference agreed on new historiographical methodologies for all rather than linear national cinema histories. In 1990, American historian Robert Sklar brought forward three types of “cinema historians” in which only second sub-type might be labeled as ‘film historian’ which has been emerged from one of the following disciplines: art history, philosophy, literary studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sinema Tarihi, Film, Sinema

New ‘Film’ or ‘Cinema’ History: Reflections on Emerging Principles, Theories and Methodologies in Cinema Historiography

Öz

Film as an artefact has long been the subject of study by “film historians,” whether in terms of stylistic authenticity, genre specificity, or “high theory” analysis. Conversely, film history has been written as if films had no audiences (Biltereyst et al, 2012, p. 693). This kind of filmic-textual research tendency lies at the heart of the legacy of film studies discipline. In 1973, Jean Mitry
proposed an ideal of film history as simultaneously, a history of its industry, its technologies, its systems of expression (or, more precisely, its systems of signification), and aesthetic structures, all bound together by the forces of the economic, psychosocial and cultural order (Maltby, 2006, p. 80). Humanities-based film studies were first re-conceptualized by the initiatives of International
Federation of Film Archives (FIAF), during its 1974 and 1978 conferences. Drawing on the methodological stance of the French Annales school’s histoire totale, participants at the 1974 FIAF conference agreed on new historiographical methodologies for all rather than linear national cinema histories. In 1990, American historian Robert Sklar brought forward three types of “cinema historians” in which only second sub-type might be labeled as ‘film historian’ which has been emerged from one of the following disciplines: art history, philosophy, literary studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Cinema History, Film, Cinema

Kaynakça

• Allen, R. (2011). Reimagining the history of the experience of cinema in a post-moviegoing age. R. Maltby, D. Biltereyst, & P. Meers (Eds.), Explorations in new cinema history: Approaches and case studies (pp. 41-58). Wiley-Blackwell.
• Biltereyst, D., & Meers, P. (2016). New cinema history and the comparative mode: Reflections on comparing historical cinema cultures. Journal of Film and Screen Media, 11, 13-32.
• Biltereyst, D., Lotze, K., & Meers, P. (2012). Triangulation in historical audience research: Reflections and experiences from a multi-methodological research project on cinema audiences in Flanders. Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 9(2), 690-715.
• Elsaesser, T. (2016). Film history as media archaeology. T. Elsaesser (Ed.), Film history as media archaeology: Tracking digital cinema (pp. 71-101). Amsterdam University Press.
• Kuhn, A. (2011). What to do with Cinema Memory? R. Maltby, D. Biltereyst, & P. Meers (Eds.), Explorations in new cinema history: Approaches and case studies (pp.85-99). Wiley-Blackwell.
• Maltby, R. (2006). On the prospect of writing cinema history from below. Journal of Media History, 9(2), 74-96.
• ------------------------ (2011). New cinema histories. R. Maltby, D. Biltereyst, & P. Meers (Eds.), Explorations in new cinema history: Approaches and case studies (pp. 3-41). Wiley-Blackwell.