Between audience and community: exploring emergent questions of collective patrimony and cultural continuity at the 2021 Folk Film Gathering
Between audience and community: exploring emergent questions of collective patrimony and cultural continuity at the 2021 Folk Film Gathering
复制标题
观众与社区之间：2021年民间电影聚会探讨集体遗产和文化连续性的新兴问题
作者：
Chambers J
斯图尔特·霍尔（Stuart Hall）和帕迪·汉内尔（Paddy Whannon）在他们对“娱乐从“民间”艺术到“流行”艺术的演变”的描述中，指出了伴随着从相对本地化的社区文化形式向更全球化的大众文化形式过渡的非本地化、个性化和文化中断的相互关联的过程。他们认为，从以口头形式为基础的“接近”生活和“人”的民间文化的转移，首先是音乐厅的流行景象，然后是电影院，导致主流流行文化的日益工业化的形式，成为“本质上，表演者的艺术，而不是社区的艺术。社区已经成为一个“观众”：艺术已经个性化。[3]正如我之前在《银幕》一书中所讨论的那样，民间电影的和解概念在这样的框架中似乎是不协调的，而且可能是矛盾的。[4]这也许就是为什么，尽管在不同学者的作品中偶尔提到，[5]民间电影还没有在全球电影研究中得到充分的探讨。然而，正如研究开始揭示的那样，确实存在6种电影形式，它们体现了与以前的民间文化形式的重要连续性。这些可能与研究笔记的翻译有关
In their account of the ‘evolution of entertainment from “folk” art to “popular” art’, 1 Stuart Hall and Paddy Whannel identify the interlinked processes of delocalization, individualization and cultural discontinuity that accompanied the transition from relatively localized forms of community culture to more globalized forms of mass culture. They argue that the move away from a folk culture grounded in oral forms ‘close to “life” and “people”’, 2 within firstly the popular spectacle of the music hall and then later the cinema, led to increasingly industrialized forms of dominant popular culture that became ‘in essence, an art of the performer, rather than the art of a community. The community had become an “audience”: the art had been individualised.’3 As I have discussed previously in Screen, the conciliatory notion of a folk cinema therefore seems incongruous and potentially antimonic within such a framing. 4 This is perhaps why, despite sporadic mentions in the work of disparate scholars, 5 a folk cinema has yet to be fully explored within global film studies. And yet, as research is beginning to reveal, 6 forms of cinema do exist that embody significant continuities with previous forms of folk culture. These may relate to the translation of research note