Why Film Studies Needs More Fine-Grained Emotion Terms …and Why Phenomenology Might Help
Dr Julian Hanich (University of Groningen)
Monday 15th October 2018, at 5pm in the Lupino Screening Room, Grimond Building, University of Kent
In this talk I will make a threefold proposal: I claim that (a) film studies, due to an overly strong focus on a few standard emotions, lacks a fine-grained lexicon of emotions spectators experience when watching films, that (b) it would be beneficial for research conducted in the field to introduce more granular and well-defined emotion terms and that (c) the specific subfield of ‘phenomenology of emotions’ might help. Drawing on my previous studies on different forms of fear, disgust and being moved, I will try to elucidate why the phenomenology of emotions has specific resources to contribute.
Dr Julian Hanich is an Assistant Professor of Film Studies in the Department of Arts, Culture and Media at the University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
The Norms of Realism and the Case of Non-Traditional Casting
Dr Catharine Abell (University of Manchester)
Wednesday 3rd October 2018, at 5pm in Grimond Lecture Theatre 3, University of Kent
Realism is a property that representational artworks can exhibit. This paper is concerned with realism in perceptual narratives: narrative representations that convey their contents at least partly perceptually. It addresses the conditions under which realism constitutes an artistic merit in a perceptual narrative by identifying the artistic norms of realism that govern them. By providing accounts of these norms, it enables the identification of errors in our evaluations of realism. To demonstrate the evaluative errors to which we are prone, it focuses on the practice of non-traditional casting, cases of which are often claimed to violate norms of realism. It identifies a variety of errors in judgements of instances of non-traditional casting’s conformity to the norms of realism. It explains the source of these errors, some of which are relatively systematic and widespread. It then provides a general specification of the resources and skills required correctly to evaluate perceptual narratives according to their realism.
Tuesday 13th February 2018, at 6pm in Keynes Seminar Room 11, University of Kent
According to the causal theory of photography (CTP), photographs acquire their depictive content from the world, whereas paintings and drawings acquire their depictive content from their maker. CTP is widely affirmed, by philosophers, film-theorists and early pioneers of the photographic medium. A persistent worry about CTP is that it leaves no interesting role for the photographer in the production of their pictures and, as a corollary, is incompatible with an aesthetics of photography. In this talk, I do three things. First, I amend CTP with Fred Dretske’s distinction between triggering and structuring causes. Second, I argue that CTP so amended is far from incompatible with an aesthetics of photography, but illuminates two aesthetic interests we may take in such pictures, focussing on photographic portraiture and street photography. Third, I show how reflection on the aesthetics of photography serves to support aesthetic anti-empiricism: the view that the aesthetic value of artworks consists, either wholly or partially, in achievement rather than sensory pleasure.
Dan Cavedon-Taylor is currently a lecturer in philosophy at the University of Southampton. His research focuses on philosophy of mind and aesthetics. Some of his most recent publications include: ‘Reasoned and Unreasoned Judgment’ (British Journal of Aesthetics 2017) and ‘Photographic Phenomenology as Cognitive Phenomenology’ (British Journal of Aesthetics 2015).
‘On Sensible and Intelligible Beauty’
Keynote by Elisabeth Schellekens at Interact – British Society for Aesthetics Postgraduate Conference, 7-8 February 2015
Aesthetic Experts, Guides to Value
Keynote by Dominic McIver Lopes at Interact (British Society for Aesthetics) at the INTERACT Postgraduate Conference, 7-8 February 2015
Chair: Shelby Moser
19 March 2016
• Professor Peter Kivy (Rutgers)
• Professor Emily Brady (Edinburgh)
• Assoc. Professor Eileen John (Warwick)
• Professor Peter Lamarque (York)
With the support of:
The Aesthetics Research Centre
The British Society of Aesthetics
This one-day symposium focuses on (and takes its title from) Peter Kivy’s new book De Gustibus: Arguing About Taste and Why We Do It (Oct 2015, OUP). Kivy will be joined by Emily Brady, Eileen John, and Peter Lamarque, who will respond to Kivy’s book in an ‘author meets critics’ format.
Peter Kivy is a pre-eminent figure in Anglo-American philosophy of art. His numerous monographs and essays constitute a sustained and significant contribution to aesthetics, and in particular to the fields of aesthetics of music and literature. Kivy’s new book, De Gustibus, turns to meta-aesthetic issues about the assumptions and purposes underlying disputes about matters of taste.
In it he casts light on a new problem in aesthetics: who do we dispute about taste when there are no ’actions’ we wish to motivate? He asks, “whether I think Bach is greater than Beethoven and you think the opposite, why should it matter to either of us to convince the other?” Kivy’s claim is that we argue over taste because we think, mistakenly or not, that we are arguing over matters of fact.
Autism and Comedy: A Peg for Some Thoughts
Wednesday 1st March, 5pm – 7pm, Keynes Lecture Theatre 2, University of Kent
An Aesthetics Research Centre (ARC) seminar with: Dr Shaun May, University of Kent, UK
In this presentation Shaun will outline the key conceptual, ethical and philosophical questions that he hopes to address in his next book, Autism and Comedy. As the title suggests, the central focus of the book will be on autism spectrum conditions and the way that they are represented in contemporary comedy. Perhaps the most obvious ethical question that arises from this topic is the ethics of jokes about autism, for which the material of comedian Frankie Boyle is particularly ripe for exploration. However, there are other, more fundamental, philosophical questions: First, in the case of fictional characters, on what grounds are we justified in claiming that a certain character is autistic? Second, what role (if any) does authorial intention play in this? Third, given that diagnostic criteria have changed markedly in recent decades, is it conceptually valid to ‘retrospectively diagnose’ a character?
The purpose of this mapping of the conceptual terrain is not to provide firm answers to these questions, as this would not be possible given the early stages the book is in, but rather to stimulate discussion that might push thinking further. Addressing these questions is necessary groundwork for the central project of the book – engaging with what we might call the aesthetics of comedy on the spectrum.
Shaun is Lecturer in Drama and Theatre at the University of Kent and author of two books, A Philosophy of Comedy on Stage and Screen (Bloomsbury) and Rethinking Practice as Research and the Cognitive Turn (Palgrave). Prior to joining the University of Kent, he was a post-doc in the philosophy department of the University of Liverpool and he taught at Royal Central School of Speech and Drama and the Royal College of Art. He was the primary investigator of the BA/Leverhulme funded project Comedy on the Spectrum, and he is organising a festival of arts by and for autistic people in April 2017 funded by Arts Council England. (www.autismartsfestival.org)