Relationship between Aesthetics of Image and Ecological Awareness among Theorists of Ecocinema

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph. D. Scholar in Art studies, Faculty of Art & Architecture, Tarbiat Modares Univsersity

2 Associate professor, Tarbiat Modares university

3 member of faculty

Abstract

Nowadays, the concept of sustainable development is progressively considered in all contemporary activities, including art and has been featured in the cinema since2004 with introduction of the term "Ecocinema" as a field of study. Earlier, film criticism and analysis of the ecological issues was limited to the scattered studies of critics such as Wilson, Armstrong, Seibert, Mitman, and Bousé with the focus on wildlife documentaries. But from this year, and within a short time, all kinds of cinematic genres, from fictional to documentary and experimental films have attracted the attention of critics. Similarly, many researchers from the humanities and social sciences have focused on ecological issues in cinema studies. As we see nowadays the expansion of ecofeminist studies, representation of gender, ethnic, racial issues, along with local and global action within the context of environmental and biological justice and ecosystems.
Besides considering the effects of cinema as an industry on the environment, part of these subjects is about the social and cognitive effects of cinema in promotion of ecological awareness.
In this regard, the aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between aesthetics of cinematic image and environmental awareness of the audience. For this purpose, the relationship between sustainable development and aesthetics is explained first, and then, an attempt is made to classify different ecosystems from a thematic and a range of studies so that later on, the relation between image aesthetics and ecological awareness can be compared. Therefore, the following are clearly divided into two general categories by the experts, and finally a critical analysis of their views. This paper addresses the written views of the experts in this field by using descriptive-analytical and critical approaches.
The results of the paper indicate that while all critics agree on the central idea that cinema is capable of portraying environmental issues and A closer analysis of films from an ecological perspective can reveal fascinating perspectives on the relationship of cinema with the world around us, but in terms of the relationship between aesthetics and ecological awareness, there are profound theoretical and intellectual differences that go back to how ecological issues are represented.
While some experts such as Mitman, Brereton and Ingram believe in explicitly loading of the ecological message into films based on common patterns and forms of filmmaking,
Bousé, McDonald, Vivanco, and Ladino find commercial cinema lacking the power to influence environmental awareness and the avant-garde empirical cinema, which uses different aesthetic forms than commercial cinema to express its subject matter, is the perfect vehicle for projecting ecological issues.
Also, the critical examination of the two groups' views reflects three serious challenges in their analysis: 1) In many analyses, the relationship between aesthetics and environmental perception is not based on a theoretical basis, 2) In many works, serious attention is not paid to the main texts of research which are films in this case, 3) In many of these works that emphasize on audience behavior analysis, field research does not perform.

Keywords

References

Bousé, Derek (1998), Are wildlife films really Nature documentaries?, Critical studies in mass communication, 15, 116-140.
Bousé, Derek (2000), Wildlife Films, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Bousé, Derek (2003), False intimacy: close-ups and viewer involvement in wildlife films, in Visual Studies, 18 (2), 123-132.
Brereton, Pat (2005), Hollywood Utopia: Ecology in Contemporary American Cinema, Intellect Books, Bristol.
Brereton, Pat (2013), Appreciating the views: filming nature in into the wild, grizzly man, and into the west, in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.), Ecocinema Theory and Practice,Routledge, New York, 213- 232.
Buell, Lawrence (2005), The Future of Environmental Criticism: Environmental Crisis and Literary Imagination, Malden, Blackwell, Massachusete.
Burt, Jonathan (2004), Animals in Film, Reaktion Books, London.
Cubitt, Sean (2005), EcoMedia, Rodopi, Amsterdam.
Cubitt, Sean (2013), Everybody knows this is nowhere: data visualization and ecocriticism, in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.), Ecocinema Theory and Practice, Routledge, New York, 179-196.
Dietz, Rob and O'Neill, Dan (2013), Enough Is Enough: Building a Sustainable Economy in a World of Finite Resources, Berrett Koehler, San Fransisco.
 Dorbin, Sidney, Morrey, Sean (2009), Ecosee: Image, Rhetoric, nature, Albany State University of New York Press, New York.
Finn, Donovan (2009), Our Uncertain Future: Can Good Planning Create Sustainable Communities?, University of Illinois, Illinois.
Ingram, David (2010), Green Screen: Environmentalism and Hollywood Cinema, University of Exeter Press, Exeter.
Ingram, David (2013), The aesthetics and ethics of eco-film criticism, in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.) Ecocinema Theory and Practice,Routledge, New York, 43- 61.
Ingram, David (2014), Rethinking Eco-film Studies” in Garrard, G. (ed.) the Oxford Handbook of Ecocriticism. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 459 - 474. 
Ivakhiv, Adrian (2007), Green Film Criticism and Its Futures, Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 15(2), 1-28.
Ivakhiv, Adrian (2013 a), “An ecophilosophy of the moving image: cinema as anthrobiogeomorphic machine”, in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.) Ecocinema Theory and Practice,Routledge, New York, 87-106. 
Ivakhiv, Adrian (2013 b), Ecologies of the Moving Image: Cinema, Affect, Nature, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Waterloo.
Ladino, Jenifer (2009), For the Love of Nature: Documenting Life, Death, and Animality in Grizzly Man and March of the Penguins, Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 16(1), 53- 90.
Ladino, Jenifer (2013), Working with Animals: Regarding Companion Species in Documentary Film, in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.) Ecocinema Theory and Practice,Routledge, New York, 129-148. 
Manning, Stephan, Boons, Frank, von Hagen, Oliver & Reinecke, Juliane (2011), National Contexts Matter: The Co-Evolution of Sustainability Standards in Global Value Chains, Ecological Economics, Vol. 83, pp. 197-209.
McDonald, Scott (2004), Toward an Eco-Cinema., ISLE 11 (2), 107-32.
McDonald, Scott (2013), The ecocinema experience, in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.), Ecocinema Theory and Practice,Routledge, New York, 17-42. 
Mitman, Gregg (2009), Reel Nature: America’s Romance with Wildlife on Film, University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Mitman, Gregg, Wilder, Kelley (2016), Documenting the World: Film, Photography, and the Scientific Record, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Murphy, Kevin (2012), “The social pillar of sustainable development: a literature review and framework for policy analysis”, Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, 8(1), 15-29.
Murray, Robin L., Heumann, Joseph K. (2009), Ecology and Popular Film, Suny Press, Albany.
Næss, Arne (1973), "The shallow and the deep, long‐range ecology movement. A summary", Inquiry. 16 (1–4): 95–100.
Næss, Arne (1989), Ecology, community and lifestyle: Outline of an Ecosophy, translated and edited by David Rothenberg, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Rothenberg, David (1987), ‘‘A Platform of Deep Ecology’’, The Environmentalist 7(3): 185–190.
Rust, Stephen, Monani, Salma (2013), Introduction: cuts to dissolves –defining and situating ecocinema studies, in in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.) Ecocinema Theory and Practice, Routledge, New York, 1- 13. 
United Nations (1972), Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, A/CONF.48/14, UNCED, Stockholm.
United Nations (1987), Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future, A/RES/42/187, UNCED, New York.
United Nations (1992), United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit), A/CONF.151/26, UNCED, Rio de Janeiro.
United Nations (1993), Agena 21, UNCED, New York.
United Nations (2005), 2005 World Summit Outcome, A/RES/60/1, UNCED, New York.
United Nations (2012), The future we want, A/RES/66/288, UNCED, New York.
Vifell, Åsa Casula, & Soneryd, Linda (2012), Organizing matters: how the social dimension gets lost in sustainability projects, Sustainable Development, 20(1), 18-27.
Vivanco, Luis (2013), Penguins are good to think with: wildlife films, the imaginary shaping of nature, and environmental politics, in Rust, S., Monani, S. and Cubitt, S. (eds.) Ecocinema Theory and Practice, Routledge, New York, 109-132. 
Willoquet-Maricondi, Paula, ed. (2010), Framing the World: Explorations in Ecocriticism and Film, University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville.
 
 
Journal of Fine Arts: Performing Arts & Music
Volume 25, Issue 3
September 2021
Pages 15-24

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics