The Matter of Vision. Peter Wyeth

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ opinion is that both sides of the brain deal with the full range of problem-solving, but the left side brings a narrow, focussed and goal-oriented approach, whereas the right side brings a broader, more holistic and innovative approach. The inclusion of Emotion within the citadel of scientific method is as though science has been able in some way to embrace the complementary biological value of a ‘right-side’ approach, in an appreciation of the value of elaboration of a fuller picture than had been possible hitherto when focussing strictly on a ‘left-side’ rationality. The scepticism that remains among many scientists to consideration of Emotion indicates that would be over optimistic, if arguably worthwhile as an aim. There remains significant resistance to the inclusion of Emotion and other subjectivisms within the ranks of scientists, so it would be misleading to represent what is effectively a shift in epistemology as universally accepted. Even researchers in the area are reluctant to make too much of the development, perhaps partly because of the barely-concealed scepticism emanating from their more conservative colleagues. However, this project does not hesitate to come out unequivocally in favour of the development, and to the extent of hailing it as a revolution in scientific method.

       The Anti-Science tradition

A further characteristic of the thinkers behind Film Theory was what seemed rather like a distaste for and disinterest in science. Christian Metz put it that ‘Science is a big word’.⁴⁴ The contention here is that Language, in contrast, is a small word. It seems quite extraordinary that a whole intellectual tradition could ignore the advances in science, and particularly in neuroscience, as though they did not exist. It is as though Kant gave a license to philosophy, in his declaration of its independence, to turn decisively away from science in the firm belief that the autonomy of philosophical truth was a sufficient protection. While a certain autonomy is reasonable, as the discourse of philosophy and that of science are not coterminous, the result in many cases has been that tumbling ground for whimsies William James described, the ‘Fantastical learning’ decried by Bacon. The failure to engage with science would seem to be a significant intellectual failure, virtually a dereliction of duty, and hardly credible seen from the outside. The contrary fact is that most scientists appear to regard ‘post-modern’ varieties of philosophy at best as utterly ineffectual, at worst as a downright fake, as in Richard Dawkins view of Lacan,⁴⁵ the psycho-analyst.

As one educated in the Humanities and working in the Arts, broadly defined, I shared that guilt. It was only in realising how helpless Film Theory was at providing a fundamental account of Vision that I turned to science. Over the course of this project I have developed enormous respect for the scientists whose patient and rigorous work suggested certain parallels with my own instincts about Cinema, and that amplified my reservations about Film Theory to the point where it appears to me to be essentially idealist rhetoric, serving no purpose external to itself, academic in the worst sense of the term, and quite unwilling and unable to answer questions of any wider relevance than its internal concerns. As I recall Colin McCabe once asked ‘A theory of what, exactly?’.⁴⁶

      Viewed from my perspective on science, it seems a terrible waste of intellectual effort to see so much scholarship spent in the fruitless pursuit of the Castles in the Air that Film Theory has left as its inheritance. If that effort had instead been turned towards the formulation of ideas capable of being tested and with the goal, for example, of contributing to knowledge about how the brain works, using Cinema as a concrete cultural instance, a remarkable archive with which to further our understanding of the relationship between Vision, the brain and Cinema, that would seem to be far more worthwhile, a substantial contrast to the culture and achievements of what has gone before.

      The advances in the areas into which I have delved, namely neuroscience and evolutionary biology, seem to hold out not just a real understanding of Vision and with it Cinema, and the potential for making a constructive contribution to greater understanding of how the brain works, but also the possibility of a proper basis for a Science of Culture, that would finally bring back together Art & Science through a depth of analysis quite simply unthinkable with Language-based analysis.

       Vision, Emotion, Cinema: Summary

       Vision:

      Of the trinity of Language, Consciousness and Reason, the most grievous effects can be laid at the door of the Word, and the most deleterious of those is the reduction of Vision.

      Vision is King, as everything we really know we see. Up to three-quarters of words describe Vision or sound. The wisdom of Vision is our only wisdom. We see so much more than we are aware of. The Tragedy of Vision is that we do not realise the complexity and intelligence of what it tells us. This project aims to turn the tables upon the Word and to restore Vision to its pre-eminence.

      The opposition is also set between Consciousness and Reason on the one hand, and the Automatic and Emotion on the other. Consciousness is normally opposed in Language to the Un-Conscious, implicitly denying the latter its larger role in the workings of the brain. To remedy that sleight of hand, it is proposed to introduce the term The Automatic to denote those areas of operation of the brain that are beyond the resources of Consciousness. Likewise, Man’s noble aspiration to Reason has a tendency to both obscure his subjectivity and deny the importance of Emotion in the workings of the brain. The Matter of Vision is Emotion.

       Emotion:

      Emotion is the heart of the matter. The importance of Emotion is such that the proposition put forward is that the brain is Emotion. Emotion is created as a response to the body/brain system sensing a threat to Survival (however distant or indirect, it is always linked). Survival is the prime engine of Evolution. Vision evolved as the most efficient medium for the identification of threats to survival. Emotion is a matter of survival.

      Emotion has entered the paradigm of scientific method, a change so substantial as to constitute a New Scientific Method with Reason finally holding hands with Emotion. In neuroscience and evolutionary biology, Emotion has come to the fore, and together these three elements constitute the approach outlined here: Affective Neurobiology.

In contrast to the emphasis on the affective, cognitive approaches are in thrall to the word. Cognition is predicated upon thought. Thought is conceived as occurring mainly within Language. The proposition here is that thought does not occur in Language, but in Vision, and indeed only in Vision.⁴⁷ Apprehension of the Matter of Vision is only possible through Emotion – the affective. Affective Neurobiology starts from the perspective of Emotion and traces its operations through neuroscience and biology, through the operations of the brain and evolution, seen as inextricably linked, working hand-in-hand.⁴⁸

       Cinema:

      Cinema is, in a word, Emotion. Since its inception, analysis of Cinema has been reduced to the word. The restoration of Vision is necessary for a proper understanding of Cinema. Cinema is a Matter of Vision.

      Vision, the Automatic and Emotion complement our understanding of the world as they enhance our understanding of the brain, and can transcend the limitations that the ideologies of Language, Consciousness and Reason have imposed. The laboratory in which these conceptions can be tested is a complex cultural artefact whose paths to nature can be traced – Cinema.

      In bringing science to bear upon art a route may be glimpsed that overcomes the gap between Art and Science. The two cultures become one. Art can only be fully understood through science.

Where the word inevitably reduces art, science has the potential to reveal its real complexity. For example, neuroscientists have found parallels between brain function and expressive techniques like metaphor СКАЧАТЬ