New cinema history and the comparative mode

Author:

Biltereyst Daniel1ORCID,Meers Philippe2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Ghent University

2. University of Antwerp

Abstract

Within the new cinema history perspective, the call for more systematic comparative research has been high on the agenda for some time. The recent proliferation of studies on various aspects of film exhibition and cinemagoing creates an enormous potential for data to be integrated and compared, larger patterns to be discovered, and hypotheses to be tested. This article maintains that the work done so far is largely monocentric in the sense that most studies focus on very specific local practices and experiences, often concentrating on film exhibition and audience experiences in particular cities, neighbourhoods or venues. The contribution argues that, similarly to what happened in other disciplines, a comparative perspective might be helpful in trying to understand larger trends, factors or conditions explaining differences and similarities in cinema cultures. After a discussion on the (underdeveloped) comparative mode within film studies in general, this methodological and partly self-reflective essay will go into some of the challenges of doing comparative research on film exhibition and moviegoing. Concentrating on these issues, different levels and modes of comparative research are discussed and illustrated by using data and insights from various historical studies on cinema cultures.

Publisher

University College Cork

Reference65 articles.

1. Allen, Robert C., and Douglas Gomery. Film History: Theory and Practice. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1985. Print.

2. Aveyard, Karina. “The Place of Cinema and Film in Contemporary Rural Australia.” Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 8.2 (2011): 294–307. Web. 21 June 2016. http://www.participations.org/Volume%208/Issue%202/3a%20 Aveyard.pdf.

3. Aveyard, Karina, and Albert Moran, eds. Watching Films: New Perspectives on Movie-Going, Exhibition and Reception. Bristol and Chicago: Intellect Books / U of Chicago P, 2013. Print.

4. Baldwin, Peter. “Comparing and Generalizing.” Comparison and History: Europe in Cross-National Perspective. Eds. Deborah Cohen and Maura O’Connor. New York: Routledge, 2004. 1–22. Print.

5. Berger, Stefan. “Comparative History.” Writing History: Theory and Practice. Eds. Stefan Berger, Heiko Feldner, and Kevin Passmore. London: Hodder Arnold, 2003. 161–79. Print.

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3