Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 9 – uploaded by Philippe Gauthier

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Image 4.8 Shots 70 and 71. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.

Figure 9 Image 4.8 Shots 70 and 71. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.

Related Figures (10)

Table 4.1 Spatial articulation between two shots.
Table 4.1 Spatial articulation between two shots.
Image 4.1 Shots 106 and 107. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.1 Shots 106 and 107. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.2 Shot 108. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.2 Shot 108. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.3 Shots 29 to 32. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.3 Shots 29 to 32. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.4 Shots 61 and 62. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.4 Shots 61 and 62. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.5 Shots 13 and 14. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.5 Shots 13 and 14. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.6 Shots 35 and 36. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.6 Shots 35 and 36. Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.7 Shots 8 and 9 Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Image 4.7 Shots 8 and 9 Source: The Lonedale Operator, 1911.
Table 4.2 Typology of cuts between shots of a sequence presenting a form of alternation (obtained by applying our hypothesis on actorial cuts and narratorial cuts to our theory of the articulations of spatial language). need to examine the typology of cuts between two shots in our lable 4.2 1n order to succeed in identifying the types of cuts applicable to a crosscutting sequence. According to the definition of crosscutting we formulated previously, we must exclude the two categories involving spatial identity. Naturally, one can find sequences of shots that alternate or interweave, on the basis of either acto- identity or narrato-identity, but such sequences are not examples of crosscut- ting, in that they do not set in motion a true doubling of the action. Let’s take, first of all, a case of acto-identity (a series of cuts connecting two spatial seg- ments in a relation of identity motivated by the action of one of the actors present in the events depicted): Grandma’s Reading Glass (Smith, 1900) alter- nates between a young boy who has got hold of his grandmother’s magnifying glass and the objects he looks at with it (a newspaper/a watch/a bird in a cage/ his grandmother's eye/a kitten). The cuts in this film are actorial in nature, because the justification for switching from one shot to another is directly tied to a character’s action. Despite a form of editing that alternates between shots of the young boy to those showing what he is looking at, the film contains no crosscutting, in particular because the series of things seen is not a unified series. Instead, it is a disparate series, made up of elements that do not form a single series “B.” In our view, for crosscutting to exist, there must, we repeat, be system- atic alternation between a series A and a series B, in keeping with the following minimal arrangement (of four terms): A-B-A-B. The narrative action in this film, rather, is an example of a configuration in the form A-B-A-C-A-D-A-E, and so on. In other words, there is no doubling (we would say that this is instead a case of “multiplying”). Cesc PV wm me ee em peewee Nace DB cee we cee le eee =e wee 2 Teese ic ce ees: eee es pipe oi
Table 4.2 Typology of cuts between shots of a sequence presenting a form of alternation (obtained by applying our hypothesis on actorial cuts and narratorial cuts to our theory of the articulations of spatial language). need to examine the typology of cuts between two shots in our lable 4.2 1n order to succeed in identifying the types of cuts applicable to a crosscutting sequence. According to the definition of crosscutting we formulated previously, we must exclude the two categories involving spatial identity. Naturally, one can find sequences of shots that alternate or interweave, on the basis of either acto- identity or narrato-identity, but such sequences are not examples of crosscut- ting, in that they do not set in motion a true doubling of the action. Let’s take, first of all, a case of acto-identity (a series of cuts connecting two spatial seg- ments in a relation of identity motivated by the action of one of the actors present in the events depicted): Grandma’s Reading Glass (Smith, 1900) alter- nates between a young boy who has got hold of his grandmother’s magnifying glass and the objects he looks at with it (a newspaper/a watch/a bird in a cage/ his grandmother's eye/a kitten). The cuts in this film are actorial in nature, because the justification for switching from one shot to another is directly tied to a character’s action. Despite a form of editing that alternates between shots of the young boy to those showing what he is looking at, the film contains no crosscutting, in particular because the series of things seen is not a unified series. Instead, it is a disparate series, made up of elements that do not form a single series “B.” In our view, for crosscutting to exist, there must, we repeat, be system- atic alternation between a series A and a series B, in keeping with the following minimal arrangement (of four terms): A-B-A-B. The narrative action in this film, rather, is an example of a configuration in the form A-B-A-C-A-D-A-E, and so on. In other words, there is no doubling (we would say that this is instead a case of “multiplying”). Cesc PV wm me ee em peewee Nace DB cee we cee le eee =e wee 2 Teese ic ce ees: eee es pipe oi
Table 4.3 Typology of cuts connecting shots in a crosscutting sequence. proximalily, and narrato-distalily (sce LaDle 4.5). Of the films we identified for our 2008 study, twenty-eight included a cross- cutting sequence (ten of these films were made before Griffith began working as a director and eighteen were made by Griffith during the first eleven months of his filmmaking career). The theoretical framework we have developed here demonstrates that crosscutting has different “intensities” with respect to t underlying narrator's presence, as we saw previously. In fact, one can employ our “typology of cuts connecting the shots in a crosscutting sequence” to eval- uate the involvement of the underlying narrator (the mega-narrator or t great image-maker) in assembling and juxtaposing shots. The more a sequen tends toward assemblage of shots (and the less the underlying narrator is involved). Conversely, t more it is the acto-contiguity (no. 2), the more the profilmic motivates t ne ne ce ne he more the sequence tends toward narrato-distality (no. 7), t ne narrator who does the “speaking.” In other words, in a crosscut- ting sequence with narrato-distal cuts, one undoubtedly detects the enhanced presence of t he underlying narrator.
Table 4.3 Typology of cuts connecting shots in a crosscutting sequence. proximalily, and narrato-distalily (sce LaDle 4.5). Of the films we identified for our 2008 study, twenty-eight included a cross- cutting sequence (ten of these films were made before Griffith began working as a director and eighteen were made by Griffith during the first eleven months of his filmmaking career). The theoretical framework we have developed here demonstrates that crosscutting has different “intensities” with respect to t underlying narrator's presence, as we saw previously. In fact, one can employ our “typology of cuts connecting the shots in a crosscutting sequence” to eval- uate the involvement of the underlying narrator (the mega-narrator or t great image-maker) in assembling and juxtaposing shots. The more a sequen tends toward assemblage of shots (and the less the underlying narrator is involved). Conversely, t more it is the acto-contiguity (no. 2), the more the profilmic motivates t ne ne ce ne he more the sequence tends toward narrato-distality (no. 7), t ne narrator who does the “speaking.” In other words, in a crosscut- ting sequence with narrato-distal cuts, one undoubtedly detects the enhanced presence of t he underlying narrator.
Related topics:
Film StudiesFilm TheoryEarly CinemaFilm HistoryFilm EditingSpace in FilmTheories of Film EditingD.W. GriffithHistory of Film EditingTheory of Film Editing
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved