Dissertations

Knowledge and Perception :: Demystifying Paradigmatic Orientation in Visual Anthropology and its Effect on Ethnographic Film

Read the book Cite this book Share this book

Authors

CORREIA DA VEIGA, Eduardo Jorge
stagiaire
DOI: https://doi.org/10.57054/codesria.pub.774

Keywords:

Films, visual arts, cinema film industry, anthropology, ethnography social sciences, Industry, visual anthropology, ethnographic film

Synopsis

Ethnographic film theories, like the social sciences, are divided between positivist theories and interpretive theories. The literature of ethnographic filmmaking only implies this distinction, with the assumption that a certain theory of filmmaking will lead to a certain type of film. However, there are no explicit distinctions in the contemporary literature of what makes a
theory, and thereby a film, either positivist or interpretivist. This dissertation makes an explicit distinction between these types of theories in ethnographic film theory, and then makes use of a semiotic film analysis of each type of film in order to assess if the distinction holds, both theoretically and practically.

Statistics

views
39
Downloads
6

Citations

Google Scholar

References

  1. Asch, T., Marshall, J. & Spier, P. (1973). ‘Ethnographic Film: Structure and
  2. Function.’ Annual Review of Anthropology, 1973, pp. 179-187.
  3. Banks, M. & Morphy, H. (eds) (1997) Rethinking Visual Anthropology. New Haven: Yale University
  4. Press
  5. Benton, T. & Craib, I. (2001). Philosophy of Social Science. Hampshire: Palgrave.
  6. Bohr, N. (1987). Volume III - Essays 1958-1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. Woodbridge:
  7. Ox Bow Press.
  8. Blumer, H. (1969) Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
  9. Prentice-Hall.
  10. Crawford, P. (1992). Film as Discourse: The Invention of Anthropological Realities Crawford, P. &
  11. Turton, D. (eds.): Film as Ethnography. Manchester: Manchester
  12. university press.
  13. Crang, M. (2005). ‘Qualitative Methods: There Is Nothing Outside the Text?’
  14. Progress in Human Geography, 29, 2: 225-233
  15. Crotty, M. (2003). The Foundations of Social Research. London: Sage.
  16. Davies, C. (1999). Reflexive Ethnography. London: Routledge.
  17. De Brigard, E. (1995), ‘The History of Ethnographic film’, In P. Hockings (ed.),
  18. Principles of Visual Anthropology, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter , pp. 13-43.
  19. Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2000). ‘Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative
  20. Research.’ In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln. The Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd Ed.), Thousand
  21. Oaks: Sage, pp. 1-25.
  22. Dilthey, W. (1989). Introduction to the Human Sciences: An Attempt to Lay a Foundation for the
  23. Study of Society and History. USA: Wayne State University Press.
  24. Eco, U. (1976). A Theory of Semiotics, London: Indiana University Press.
  25. Fabien, J. (1971). Language, History, and Anthropology. Journal of the Philosophy of the Social
  26. Sciences 1, 19-47.
  27. Feyerabend, P.K. (1988). Against Method (rev. edn.) London: Verso.
  28. Gonzalez, N. (1993). ‘An Argument About Film.’ Ruby, J. (ed.) The Cinema of John Marshall.
  29. Switzerland: Harwood.
  30. Grimshaw, A. (2001) The Ethnographer’s Eye. Ways of Seeing in Modern Anthropology. Cambridge:
  31. Cambridge University Press.
  32. Harris, S. (2006) ‘Social Constructionism and Social Inequality: An Introduction to a Special Issue
  33. of JCE Journal of Contemporary Ethnography’, Journal of
  34. Contemporary Ethnography, 35, 3: 223-235.
  35. Hastrup, K. (1992). ‘Anthropological Visions: Some Notes on Visual and Textual
  36. Authority’, In P.I. Crawford and D. Turton (eds.), Film as Ethnography, Manchester: Manchester
  37. university press, pp. 8-25.
  38. Heider, K. (1976). Ethnographic film. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press
  39. Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd Ed.). Chicago: University of
  40. Chicago Press.
  41. Loizos, P. (1992). “Admissible Evidence: Film in Anthropology’, In P.I. Crawford and D. Turton
  42. (eds.), Film as Ethnography, Manchester: Manchester university press,
  43. pp. 50-65.
  44. Loizos, P. (1997). ‘First Exits From Observational Realism: Narrative Experiments in
  45. Recent Ethnographic Films.’ In M Banks and H Morphy. (eds.), Rethinking Visual Anthropology, New
  46. Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 81-103.
  47. MacDougall, D. (1998a). Transcultural Cinema. West Sussex: Princeton University
  48. Press.
  49. MacDougall, D. (1998b).’Visual Anthropology and the Ways of Knowing’. In D.
  50. MacDougall Transcultural Cinema. West Sussex: Princeton University Press, pp. 61-
  51. MacDougall, D. (1998c).’Beyond Observational Cinema.’ MacDougall Transcultural
  52. Cinema. West Sussex: Princeton University Press, pp. 125-138.
  53. MacDougall, D. (1998d).’Transcultural Cinema’. In D. MacDougall Transcultural
  54. Cinema. West Sussex: Princeton University Press, pp. 245-274
  55. Marshall, J. (1993). ‘Filming and Learning.’ J, Ruby (ed.). The Cinema of John
  56. Marshall. Switzerland: Harwood.
  57. Mead, G.H. (1964). Selected Writings. (ed.) by A. J. Reck.Chicago: University
  58. Chicago Press.
  59. Mead, M. (1995). ‘Visual Anthropology in a Discipline of Words’, In P. Hockings
  60. (ed.), Principles of Visual Anthropology, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 3-12.
  61. Martínez, W. (1992). ‘Who Constructs Anthropological Knowledge? Toward a Theory of Ethnographic
  62. Film Spectatorship’, Crawford, P.I. and Turton, D. (eds.), Film as Ethnography, Manchester:
  63. Manchester university press, pp. 131-161.
  64. Misak, C. (ed.) (2004). The Cambridge Companion to Peirce. Cambridge: Cambridge
  65. University Press
  66. Moran, D. (2001). Introduction to Phenomenology. London: Routledge
  67. Nichols, B. (1991) Representing Reality. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
  68. Prosser, J. (1998). ‘The Status of Image-based Research.’ In J. Prosser (Ed), Image- based
  69. Research, London: Falmer Press, pp. 97-112.
  70. Popper, K. (2002). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.
  71. Peirce, C.S. (1998). The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings( vol. 2), Bloomington:
  72. Indiana University Press.
  73. Peirce, C.S. (1965). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Pierce (vols I & II). C.
  74. Hartshorne & P. Weiss. (Eds.), Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  75. Pink, S. (2001). Doing Visual Ethnography. London: Sage publications.
  76. Prins, H. (1997). ‘Visual or Virtual Anthropology? In the Wilderness of a Troubled Genre.’ Reviews
  77. in Anthropology, 26: 279-294
  78. Rabinow, P. & Sullivan, W.M. (1979). ‘The Interpretive Turn: Emergence of an Approach’. In P.
  79. Rabinow & W.M. Sullivan (Eds.). Interpretive Social Science: A Reader. Los Angeles: University of
  80. California Press, pp. 1-21
  81. Ratner, Carl (2002). ‘Subjectivity and Objectivity in Qualitative Methodology’. Forum Qualitative
  82. Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 3(3). Available at:
  83. http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-eng.htm [06, 2006].
  84. Ruby, J. (2000). Picturing Culture: Explorations of Film and Anthropology. Chicago: University of
  85. Chicago Press.
  86. Ruby, J (1996) ‘Visual Anthropology.’ In Encyclopaedia of Cultural Anthropology, David Levinson and
  87. Melvin Ember, editors. New York: Henry Holt and Company, vol. 4:1345-1351.
  88. Ruby, J. (1980). ‘Exposing Yourself, Reflexivity, Film, and Anthropology.’
  89. Semiotica, 3, 153-179.
  90. Ruby, J. (1977). The Image Mirrored: Reflexivity and the Documentary Film,
  91. Journal of University Film Association, 29(1), pp. 3-18.
  92. Said, E. (1979). Orientalism, New York: Penguin.
  93. Stoller, P. (1992). The Cinematic Griot: The Ethnography of Jean Rouch. London:
  94. University of Chicago Press.

Downloads

Dissertation complet

Published

July 5, 2023

Language

English

Series

Dissertations
Copyright (c) 2023 CODESRIA Books Publication System

Details about this monograph

Physical Dimensions

Cite this book

APA CORREIA DA VEIGA, Eduardo Jorge (2023). Knowledge and Perception :: Demystifying Paradigmatic Orientation in Visual Anthropology and its Effect on Ethnographic Film. CODESRIA. https://doi.org/10.57054/codesria.pub.774

For LaTeX, JabRef For Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote

Share this book

Send by email WhatsApp LinkedIn X Facebook

More in this series

See all