viva questions Flashcards
(31 cards)
What are the most recent major developments in your area?
Alive field of research: Maggie Hennefeld
What were the crucial research decisions you made?
1) Archive/ primary resources: open ended approach. to closely view and review a plethora of early films rather than departing from a film historic texts (view see afresh)/ Holden
2) letting practice lead even if crisis of written project question: adjustments in process e.g.. understanding that making objects and feminist debates are not mutually exclusive but entangled
What are the most recent major developments in your area?
alive x3
1) in terms of new films being uncovered and shown for the first time to audiences in il cinema ritrovato or pordenone which need to be contextualised and understood
2) show the gaps in the research fabric sites like the Women Film Pioneers Project (WFPP) at Columbia University by listing names and countries
3) Digitisation
4) audience, there is an interest as women are looking increasingly at taking up positions in power also in the film industry
How did your research questions emerge?
journey through slapstick led by practice, short performances interventions in public, performing myself, increasing interest in objects which brought about a shift in writing also.
painful tension I thought I had to make a decision between either dealing with human body or with inanimate objects
What are the strongest/weakest parts of your work?
strength are also its weaknesses:
comprehensiveness, could have focussed one or two female comediennes - greater film historical contribution
given the material rather than argument and theory more space/ added more examples over working a theoretical position into the text, ultimately the images that drive the practice.
What are the strongest/weakest parts of your work?
strength are also its weaknesses:
comprehensiveness, could have focussed one or two female comediennes - (detective appeal) greater film historical contribution (future funding gaiety girls)
given the material rather than argument and theory more space/ added more examples over working a theoretical position into the text, ultimately the images that drive the practice.
What would have improved your work?
more time and funding in archives (torn practice)
And, finally… What have you done that merits a PhD?
new body work
contribution to knowledge
You propose future research. How would you start this?
What would be the difficulties?
eye, moore, strand, depending on geolocation gaiety girls or european comediennes
What advice would you give to a research student entering this area?
funding, time plan
What have you learned from the process of doing your Ph
apart from the new knowledge in film history and theory the main takeaway perhaps is that not only the future is mobile but also history is moving construct in which the dominant or surviving discourses rarely the only ones worth remembering
I have generated a new processes of working and interlacing theory with practice:
inviting other voices, creating lists and taxonomies as a strategy
to not be afraid to stake a claim, to position myself and feel confident in that position (not dogmatic manner)
What are the contributions to knowledge of your thesis?
1) demonstrated how human subjects are decentered in slapstick film and challenge anthropocentric viewpoint. Boundaries between human bodies and inanimate matter are under constant attack and objects are shown as powerful agents that have the capacity and will kick back. Slapstick shows our bodies to be porous to be in an ecosystem with many powerful agents is relevant to a reassessment of our place in the world today from ecological point of view.
2) Furthermore I have given space to previously narratives of women and europeans in silent comedy. shown them to be a part of a continuum that not just american as if often claimed but a wider phenomenon.
3) I have created a new body of art work that works through these findings / unruly or extracting movement, etc.
How do your findings relate to literature in your field?
there are various discourses this thesis draws on and engages with.
Feminist Film Historiography:
Further the work of Heide Schüppmann, Preschl, Hennefeld
Film comedy:
Think beyond the sight gag
operational aesthetics as proposed by gunning
Early film:
slapstick directly engages cinema of attractions by using attractions, Donald crafton’s Pie and Chase idea of narrative by thinking about how directionality is used in film
Feminism:
posits against refusal of laughter Mary Ann Doane
Philosophy:
endorses (Bataille) discourses on laughter
How have you evaluated your work?
practice /written?
practice: might sound banal but I haven’t just made a body of new work I have exhibited it. Through continuous output in exhibitions and conversations and writings about the work (blogs, newspaper articles) I have created feedback loops
written:
How has your view of your research topic changed?
see above
How did you deal with the ethical implications of your work?
consolidate
Now, can you summarise it in one sentence?
silent slapstick decanter human agency
What is the idea that binds your thesis together?
the fluidity between objects and subjects / Enlightenment concept
What are the main issues and debates in Posthumanism
xxxx
What are the main issues and debates in OOO
In metaphysics, object-oriented ontology (OOO) is a 21st-century Heidegger-influenced school of thought that rejects the privileging of human existence over the existence of nonhuman objects.[1] This is in contrast to what it calls the “anthropocentrism” of Kant’s Copernican Revolution, as accepted by most other current metaphysics, in which phenomenal objects are said to conform to the mind of the subject and, in turn, become products of human cognition.[2] Object-oriented ontology maintains that objects exist independently (as Kantian noumena) of human perception and are not ontologically exhausted by their relations with humans or other objects.[3] Thus, for object-oriented ontologists, all relations, including those between nonhumans, distort their related objects in the same basic manner as human consciousness and exist on an equal footing with one another.[4]
Object-oriented ontology is often viewed as a subset of speculative realism, a contemporary school of thought that criticizes the post-Kantian reduction of philosophical enquiry to a correlation between thought and being, such that the reality of anything outside of this correlation is unknowable.[5] Object-oriented ontology predates speculative realism, however, and makes distinct claims about the nature and equality of object relations to which not all speculative realists agree. The term “object-oriented philosophy” was coined by Graham Harman, the movement’s founder, in his 1999 doctoral dissertation “Tool-Being: Elements in a Theory of Objects”.[6][7] In 2009, Levi Bryant rephrased Harman’s original designation as “object-oriented ontology”, giving the movement its current name.
Why did you use this research methodology? What did you gain from it?
What were the alternatives to this methodology?
xxxx
What were the alternatives to this methodology?
attempting a quantitative study is out of question because of the amount of material missing.
Narrow field in depth study of only 5 films or comediennes
commonwealth
- a political community founded for common good
-independent state or community; especially a democratic republic.
a state in which supreme power is vested in the people - (here in all things
republic
is a form of government in which the country is considered a “public matter”, not the private concern or property of the rulers.
The primary positions of power within a republic are not inherited. ( very much case in slapstick where power relations shift)
- separation of powers into branches ( a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary, which is the trias politica model
