19.12.05
the sound of silence
I've been getting really excited about film again lately. A was saying the other day that he believes that the heighest art is ambiguous, that is that it doesn't have any one clear, or direct meaning to it. This got me thinking about what this means for film. Given that most film is representational, i.e. it represents events in a 'realistic' way how can it be ambiguous? I think the most important thing about A's observation about ambiguity is that it is not ambiguity of the subject but ambiguity of the meaning. So, it doesn't matter if the story, or the characters are obvious or not it is the underlying meaning that is important. But where does ambiguity fit in? How can the meaning of film be ambiguous? I think one way (and this is something that I'm deeply interested in at the moment) is through silence. I was thinking back through some of my favourite films and most often they are films that have sparse dialogue. Most films rely upon dialogue to explain character motivation and action, and in some ways I think this becomes lazy film making. Where there is less dialogue events and motivations are more ambiguous and understanding whats going on takes time and thought. This lack of dialogue also seems to conincide with a reduced pace (usually with more time devoted to mundane details) and an increased focus on the visual rhythms of the film.
Anyway, these thoughts are all a bit of a shambles at the moment. I'm going to apply to do a 'reading program' next session at uni. This would mean that I could research and read on an area of interest under the supervision of a lecturer and it would still count as any normal class towards my film major. Hopefully I could look more closely into film sound with a focus on the use of silence and how that relates and contrasts with the use of film sound. Call me a geek, but I'm really excited!
8:19 p.m.