Starting from some passages of the Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s Treatise of Argumentation and Aristotle’s Rhetoric, the essay examines the role of the emotional component (defined ‘pathic’) in the filmic experience. The discussion is divided into three levels: 1) by recalling the added signification of the cinema, as observed by Kulesov and Canudo, 2) by showing in situ, with reference to the film Doubt (J.P. Shanley, 2008), the action of such a signification, with the consequent analysis of the concept of ‘haptic’; 3) trying, with the analytical tools of husserlian phenomenology, to delineate the origin of the pathic dimension. In conclusion, the analysis indicates the action of a new concept of rationality, defined as “pathic reason”.
The Pathic/Haptic Relationship in Philosophy of Cinema.The Case of Doubt (John Patrick Shanley, 2008)
SCARAFILE, Giovanni
2011-01-01
Abstract
Starting from some passages of the Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s Treatise of Argumentation and Aristotle’s Rhetoric, the essay examines the role of the emotional component (defined ‘pathic’) in the filmic experience. The discussion is divided into three levels: 1) by recalling the added signification of the cinema, as observed by Kulesov and Canudo, 2) by showing in situ, with reference to the film Doubt (J.P. Shanley, 2008), the action of such a signification, with the consequent analysis of the concept of ‘haptic’; 3) trying, with the analytical tools of husserlian phenomenology, to delineate the origin of the pathic dimension. In conclusion, the analysis indicates the action of a new concept of rationality, defined as “pathic reason”.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
