A Spectrum Of Cinematic Meaning
Thoughts On: Meaning in Cinema
An exploration of the instant, meaning, truth and cinema.
Meaning, reduce to a mere linguistic phenomenon, is very simple. Hence the cliche. A cliche is not merely a statement that re-hashes a trite simplification of the world and way of things. A cliche can be at once a platitude and truism; something obviously true and something thoughtlessly evident. Therefore, the cliche was, at one point, substantial; time and use has worn it out. At the heart of all profundity is a cliche for it is the manipulation of platitude and truism that formulates the art of all expression. That is to say that the re-articulation of that which has become inane within the cliche is the central work of artists. Such produces profundity. But, more than profound is meaning, as this is what all expression ultimately intends to attain. Profundity re-situates the mind about the heart of a cliche; meaning - potentially at least - moves the body beyond that which can be captured linguistically and consciously.
'Meaning' is indeed a nebulous term - likely one less specific than 'profundity' or even 'cliche'. I am attempting to use it to express something more than simple. Truth, in turn meaning, is much like an instant. An instant is not made of much, but everything can be captured within it. An instant is... that. We can think of it as a slice of temporality that is conceivably indivisible. It is nothing more than a fraction of a tick of a clock. All is unified by a spatial temporality; everything that is - therefore everything that has been and can be - is part of an instant. But, despite the fact that forever exists in all moments, the instant has no direct relationship with reality. The instant is an aspect in the order of reality. The instant then coexists with materiality as neither requires the another to exist. Space and time exist in relation to one another, but instants arise at a collapsed intersection of the two. Instants see time stopped, therefore they cannot capture space. 'That' is always an instant. It is immaterial, it cannot be memorised spatially or physically. The instant is a sense of timelessness; a sense of phenomena. The instant cannot be seen or known, one feels it to exist abstractly. Genuine truth, facts beyond the semantic, can only be propagated via the senses: a bodily attachment to a transcendent or immanent aspect of reality, something characteristic of an instant. Numbers do not prove little. Heat can be measured, voices can be recorded, but, truth is secured beyond trust only when one's hand feels something to be hot or when ones ears hear words spoken. Bodily perception, here, binds one to an instant. This instant sees sense transformed into belief. Truths do not require this belief as the materiality that can generate their evidence is a constant - therefore an aspect of reality. For instance, what happened doesn't have to be seen to have happened: it happened, reality knows this. It is merely the belief in the happening that can be manipulated. Nonetheless, whilst belief does not dictate what is true, truth is completed by belief, or more specifically, sense and perception. It is when truth becomes completed in this sense that meaning arises. Meaning is the activation of truth in the body and mind.
What is important about this definition is that it posits that there are orders of meaning distinguished by an intensity or character of affect. That is to say that the depth and shape of meaning is dictated by the way in which truth is felt. Here we return to the cliche: truth lacking impact, also known as, meaningless truth. Truths, on one level, may be practical and impractical. They can aid a situation or complicate it. On another level, truths can be dormant and vital. In such they can either passively present themselves to the senses or actively awaken them. These four characteristics conjure different kinds of meaning; impractical, vital meaning; practical, vital meaning; practical, dormant meaning; impractical, dormant meaning. Such forms a spectrum of meaning on a scale of affect:
Unaffective meaning utilises impractical truths that are dormant; the truth is irrelevant to a certain situation and does not inspire any affect or change. Empirical meaning may inspire minor change and affect as its truth is relevant and practical - but with that said, it does not activate the senses, rather, sensibility. Moral meaning activates the senses as the body is required to do more than unleash logic; the truth in moral meaning may be impractical, but it appears essential and so can transform a situation. Instantaneous meaning is, to borrow an allegory from Taoist philosophy, like an ugly, twisted tree. The tree is impractical, it cannot be cut down for wood. Therefore it grows old and develops deep roots. It eventually cannot be cut down without unnecessary and tremendous effort. Its only real use becomes aesthetic - maybe one can also lay under it in shade from the sun. The tree, in such a state, can never be used up. A truth like this is beyond profound; it is close to Tao. When such an impractical truth is sensed as vital, it moves us, too, closer to Tao. Such meaning moves one into an instant, elevating the spirit to a plane of the transcendent or immanent (I care not to debate an either or).
Let us find some examples of these different kinds of meaning. 'Time heals all wounds' is a cliche; it is more a phrase than a genuine expression of thought or emotion. It is true that pain dissipates with time, but how irrelevant and meaningless would this appear to someone trapped in a specific tragedy. The truth, presented as such, does not transform the situation via an activation of the senses as it is rather irrelevant.
The meaning found in cleaning ones kitchen is a rather empirical one. It is true that an orderly, sanitised kitchen is a practical one; one that can be used to good effect. The sight and experience of a clean kitchen, however, is not necessarily a profound one. You may be at ease in a clean kitchen, and may use it to express and do much of substance, but it is rare to be reduced to tears having put the dishes away. That said, we can all appreciate a clean kitchen.
Hollywood loves moral meaning. The Dark Knight perfectly captures it. What is moral may not be practical and simple. The Joker sees chaos, disorder and violence to be a simple state of truth. This is why he puts two bombs on two boats and places the triggers in the hands of the people on them; he believes people to be simple and predictable. Logic would then have one boat blow the other up as it is true that we all want to live and preserve our own selves. But, evoking the higher sanctity of life, morality is produced when the two boats trust the other to make, not the practical choice, but the impractical one that transforms their situation. This complexity moves the mind and body as a seemingly irrelevant truth becomes crucial; all lives are held as equal as opposed to an other's life being conceived as lower or separate from that of the self. Alas, whilst the body and mind are moved (within the diegesis or audience), such is a characteristic of the impracticality of the presented truth. There is a predictability and melodrama about this scene and aspect of The Dark Knight's meaning as it is built upon a platitude. Such a moment merely re-articulates a common idea of 'the right thing to do'. Christopher Nolan's cinema does well to consistently and predictably embody this rather dormant kind of meaning - hence I do not care too much for it. That said, Nolan's cinema is a moral one that appeals to the body and, more so, the mind.
Instantaneous meaning escapes proper articulation. One cannot use its truth, they cannot conceive of its truth, but they can come to coexist with it in a realm of pure sensation. Instantaneous meaning sees morality become essential through pure transformation. It'd take an extensive technical discussion to characterise it - which can be staged at another time - so I will simply defer to an example in Parasite. This is a moral film, one that exhibits a social awareness, but does not satisfy itself with merely this. Parasite moves into its moral subject as to find an inarticulable essence of the foolish and the unjust. Instantaneous meaning like this is incredibly powerful.
With a spectrum of meaning, or types of meaning, outlined briefly, further work must be done to situate this within a specifically cinematic context. Meaning, as suggested, is not like truth. Meaning is contingent and therefore synchronistic. In such, meaning must be understood as not just an evocation of the truth, but a chance intersection of separate worlds. In addition to this meaning is presented, via the cinematic space, as a contextualised statement, and so types of meaning must be understood accordingly. This further work can be done in due time, but for now, we have established four types of cinematic meaning: the clichéd, empirical, moral and instantaneous.
An exploration of the instant, meaning, truth and cinema.
Meaning, reduce to a mere linguistic phenomenon, is very simple. Hence the cliche. A cliche is not merely a statement that re-hashes a trite simplification of the world and way of things. A cliche can be at once a platitude and truism; something obviously true and something thoughtlessly evident. Therefore, the cliche was, at one point, substantial; time and use has worn it out. At the heart of all profundity is a cliche for it is the manipulation of platitude and truism that formulates the art of all expression. That is to say that the re-articulation of that which has become inane within the cliche is the central work of artists. Such produces profundity. But, more than profound is meaning, as this is what all expression ultimately intends to attain. Profundity re-situates the mind about the heart of a cliche; meaning - potentially at least - moves the body beyond that which can be captured linguistically and consciously.
'Meaning' is indeed a nebulous term - likely one less specific than 'profundity' or even 'cliche'. I am attempting to use it to express something more than simple. Truth, in turn meaning, is much like an instant. An instant is not made of much, but everything can be captured within it. An instant is... that. We can think of it as a slice of temporality that is conceivably indivisible. It is nothing more than a fraction of a tick of a clock. All is unified by a spatial temporality; everything that is - therefore everything that has been and can be - is part of an instant. But, despite the fact that forever exists in all moments, the instant has no direct relationship with reality. The instant is an aspect in the order of reality. The instant then coexists with materiality as neither requires the another to exist. Space and time exist in relation to one another, but instants arise at a collapsed intersection of the two. Instants see time stopped, therefore they cannot capture space. 'That' is always an instant. It is immaterial, it cannot be memorised spatially or physically. The instant is a sense of timelessness; a sense of phenomena. The instant cannot be seen or known, one feels it to exist abstractly. Genuine truth, facts beyond the semantic, can only be propagated via the senses: a bodily attachment to a transcendent or immanent aspect of reality, something characteristic of an instant. Numbers do not prove little. Heat can be measured, voices can be recorded, but, truth is secured beyond trust only when one's hand feels something to be hot or when ones ears hear words spoken. Bodily perception, here, binds one to an instant. This instant sees sense transformed into belief. Truths do not require this belief as the materiality that can generate their evidence is a constant - therefore an aspect of reality. For instance, what happened doesn't have to be seen to have happened: it happened, reality knows this. It is merely the belief in the happening that can be manipulated. Nonetheless, whilst belief does not dictate what is true, truth is completed by belief, or more specifically, sense and perception. It is when truth becomes completed in this sense that meaning arises. Meaning is the activation of truth in the body and mind.
What is important about this definition is that it posits that there are orders of meaning distinguished by an intensity or character of affect. That is to say that the depth and shape of meaning is dictated by the way in which truth is felt. Here we return to the cliche: truth lacking impact, also known as, meaningless truth. Truths, on one level, may be practical and impractical. They can aid a situation or complicate it. On another level, truths can be dormant and vital. In such they can either passively present themselves to the senses or actively awaken them. These four characteristics conjure different kinds of meaning; impractical, vital meaning; practical, vital meaning; practical, dormant meaning; impractical, dormant meaning. Such forms a spectrum of meaning on a scale of affect:
Let us find some examples of these different kinds of meaning. 'Time heals all wounds' is a cliche; it is more a phrase than a genuine expression of thought or emotion. It is true that pain dissipates with time, but how irrelevant and meaningless would this appear to someone trapped in a specific tragedy. The truth, presented as such, does not transform the situation via an activation of the senses as it is rather irrelevant.
The meaning found in cleaning ones kitchen is a rather empirical one. It is true that an orderly, sanitised kitchen is a practical one; one that can be used to good effect. The sight and experience of a clean kitchen, however, is not necessarily a profound one. You may be at ease in a clean kitchen, and may use it to express and do much of substance, but it is rare to be reduced to tears having put the dishes away. That said, we can all appreciate a clean kitchen.
Hollywood loves moral meaning. The Dark Knight perfectly captures it. What is moral may not be practical and simple. The Joker sees chaos, disorder and violence to be a simple state of truth. This is why he puts two bombs on two boats and places the triggers in the hands of the people on them; he believes people to be simple and predictable. Logic would then have one boat blow the other up as it is true that we all want to live and preserve our own selves. But, evoking the higher sanctity of life, morality is produced when the two boats trust the other to make, not the practical choice, but the impractical one that transforms their situation. This complexity moves the mind and body as a seemingly irrelevant truth becomes crucial; all lives are held as equal as opposed to an other's life being conceived as lower or separate from that of the self. Alas, whilst the body and mind are moved (within the diegesis or audience), such is a characteristic of the impracticality of the presented truth. There is a predictability and melodrama about this scene and aspect of The Dark Knight's meaning as it is built upon a platitude. Such a moment merely re-articulates a common idea of 'the right thing to do'. Christopher Nolan's cinema does well to consistently and predictably embody this rather dormant kind of meaning - hence I do not care too much for it. That said, Nolan's cinema is a moral one that appeals to the body and, more so, the mind.
Instantaneous meaning escapes proper articulation. One cannot use its truth, they cannot conceive of its truth, but they can come to coexist with it in a realm of pure sensation. Instantaneous meaning sees morality become essential through pure transformation. It'd take an extensive technical discussion to characterise it - which can be staged at another time - so I will simply defer to an example in Parasite. This is a moral film, one that exhibits a social awareness, but does not satisfy itself with merely this. Parasite moves into its moral subject as to find an inarticulable essence of the foolish and the unjust. Instantaneous meaning like this is incredibly powerful.
With a spectrum of meaning, or types of meaning, outlined briefly, further work must be done to situate this within a specifically cinematic context. Meaning, as suggested, is not like truth. Meaning is contingent and therefore synchronistic. In such, meaning must be understood as not just an evocation of the truth, but a chance intersection of separate worlds. In addition to this meaning is presented, via the cinematic space, as a contextualised statement, and so types of meaning must be understood accordingly. This further work can be done in due time, but for now, we have established four types of cinematic meaning: the clichéd, empirical, moral and instantaneous.
