Abstract
The goal of this article is to offer a new model for the study of ocularization in film grounded in the semiotic pragmatism of Charles Sanders Peirce. We first present a literature overview addressing the state of research regarding the theorization of ocularization in film studies. Second, we discuss Peirce’s three universal categories (Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness) on which our model will be based. Third, we argue how the theme of ocularization in film, as outlined in the first part, can be theorized anew through these categories. This will result in the introduction of a nine-field matrix that will allow us to systemize all kinds of instances of subjectivity in cinema. Lastly, we will demonstrate the empirical usefulness of this model by illustrating each of the matrix’ nine categories through a discussion of Steven Soderbergh’s film Kimi (2022).
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank John Bateman for his insightful comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this paper.
References
Bateman, John. 2018. Peircean semiotics and multimodality: Towards a new synthesis. Multimodal Communication 7(1). 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1515/mc-2017-0021.Search in Google Scholar
Bateman, John. 2019. Transmediality and the end of disembodied semiotics. International Journal of Semiotics and Visual Rhetoric 3(2). 1–23. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsvr.2019070101.Search in Google Scholar
Bekaert, Marc. 2015. Naar een narrato-semiotische poëtica van de film. PhD dissertation. University of Antwerp.Search in Google Scholar
Bekaert, Marc. 2018. Beeld/taal: Theorie van de visuele communicatie. Antwerp: University Press Antwerp.Search in Google Scholar
Bordwell, David. 1985. Narration in the fiction film. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Search in Google Scholar
Branigan, Edward. 1984. Point of view in the cinema: A theory of narration and subjectivity in classical film. Berlin: Mouton.10.1515/9783110817591Search in Google Scholar
Branigan, Edward. 1992. Narrative comprehension and film. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Chandler, David. 2007. Semiotics: The basics, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203014936Search in Google Scholar
Chatman, Seymour. 1990. Coming to terms: The rhetoric of narrative in fiction and film. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Coëgnarts, Maarten. 2019. Film as embodied art: Bodily meaning in the cinema of Stanley Kubrick. Boston: Academic Studies Press.10.1515/9781644691137Search in Google Scholar
Deleuze, Gilles. 1986. Cinema I: The movement image. London: Bloomsbury.10.5040/9781350251977Search in Google Scholar
Dewell, Robert. 2005. Dynamic patterns of containment. In Beate Hampe (ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, 369–394. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.1515/9783110197532.5.369Search in Google Scholar
Ehrat, Johannes. 2005. Cinema and semiotic: Peirce and film aesthetics, narration, and representation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781442672956Search in Google Scholar
Gaudreault, André. 2009. From Plato to Lumière: Narration and monstration in literature and cinema. Toronto: Toronto University Press.10.3138/9781442688148Search in Google Scholar
Gaudreault, André & François Jost. 1990. Le récit cinématographique. Paris: Armand Colin.Search in Google Scholar
Genette, Gérard. 1980. Narrative discourse: An essay in method. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gordejuela, Adriana. 2021. Flashbacks in film: A cognitive and multimodal analysis. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781003153573Search in Google Scholar
Hanich, Julian. 2022. Suggestive verbalizations in film: On character speech and sensory imagination. New Review of Film and Television Studies 20(2). 145–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/17400309.2022.2033067.Search in Google Scholar
Johansen, Jørgen Dines. 1993. Dialogic semiosis: An essay on signs and meaning. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 2007. The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226026992.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 2015. The aesthetics of embodied life. In Alfonsina Scarinzi (ed.), Aesthetics and the embodied mind: Beyond art theory and the Cartesian mind-body dichotomy, 23–38. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-94-017-9379-7_2Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 2018. The aesthetics of meaning and thought: The bodily roots of philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226539133.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Jost, François. 1983. Narration(s): en deçà et au-delà. Communications 38. 192–212. https://doi.org/10.3406/comm.1983.1573.Search in Google Scholar
Klauk, Tobias & Tilmann Köppe. 2013. Telling vs. showing. In Peter, Hühn, Jan Christoph Meister, John Pier & Wolf Schmid (eds.), The living handbook of narratology. Hamburg: Hamburg University. https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/84.html (accessed 27 December 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Kozloff, Sarah. 1989. Invisible storytellers: Voice-over narration in American fiction film. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520909663Search in Google Scholar
Kuhn, Markus. 2009. Film narratology: Who tells? Who shows? Who focalizes? Narrative mediation in self-reflexive fiction films. In Peter Hühn, Wolf Schmid & Jörg Schönert (eds.), Point of view, perspective, and focalization: Modeling mediation in narrative (Narratologia 17), 259–278. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110218916.3.259Search in Google Scholar
Kuhn, Markus & Johann N. Schmidt. 2014. Narration in film. In Peter Hühn, Jan Christoph Meister, John Pier & Wolf Schmid (eds.), Handbook of narratology, 384–405. Hamburg: Hamburg University Press.10.1515/9783110316469.384Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic.Search in Google Scholar
Merrell, Floyd. 1997. Peirce, signs, and meaning. Toronto: The University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781442678330Search in Google Scholar
Metz, Christian. 1971. Langage et cinéma. Paris: Larousse.Search in Google Scholar
Mittelberg, Irene. 2019. Peirce’s universal categories: On their potential for gesture theory and multimodal analysis. Semiotica 228(1/4). 193–222. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2018-0090.Search in Google Scholar
Ogden, Charles Kay & Ivor Armstrong Richards. 1923. The meaning of meaning. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Pasolini, Pier Paolo. 1972. Empirismo eretico. Milano: Garzanti.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1931–1966. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, 8 vols., Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss & Arthur W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Reference to Peirce’s papers will be designated CP followed by volume and paragraph number.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1998, (1893–1913). Essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings, 2 vols., Peirce Edition Project (ed.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [Reference to vol. 2 of Essential Peirce will be designated EP 2.]Search in Google Scholar
Schlickers, Sabine. 2009. Focalization, ocularization, and auricularization in film and literature. In Peter Hühn, Jan Christoph Meister, John Pier & Wolf Schmid (eds.), Handbook of narratology, 243–258. Hamburg: Hamburg University Press.10.1515/9783110218916.3.243Search in Google Scholar
Slugan, Mario. 2019. The film narrator and the early American screenwriting manuals. Early Popular Visual Culture 17(2). 192–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/17460654.2019.1623058.Search in Google Scholar
Stam, Robert, Robert Burgoyne & Sandy Flitterman-Lewis. 1992. New vocabularies in film semiotics: Structuralism, post-structuralism and beyond. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Van Driel, Hans. 1993. De semiosis: De semiotiek van C.S. Peirce in verband gebracht met het verschijnsel “film”. PhD dissertation. Tilburg University.Search in Google Scholar
Yu, Ning. 2004. The eyes for sight and mind. Journal of Pragmatics 36(4). 663–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(03)00053-5.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
