影视音乐美学与文化语境中英文对照外文翻译文献.docx

影视音乐美学与文化语境中英文对照外文翻译文献.docx

《影视音乐美学与文化语境中英文对照外文翻译文献.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《影视音乐美学与文化语境中英文对照外文翻译文献.docx（11页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

影视音乐美学与文化语境中英文对照外文翻译文献

中英文对照外文翻译文献

（文档含英文原文和中文翻译）

ExperiencingMusicVideo:

AestheticsandCulturalContext

Thelasttimeacollectionofscreenmusic-relatedbookswasthesubjectofaScreenreview,thereviewerSimonFrithwasmovedtonoteeachwork's‘self-defeating…needtodrawattentiontotheirsubject'sneglect’aswellastheverylimitedmannerinwhichtheauthorsseemed‘tobeengagedwitheachother’.1Judgingbythebooksgroupedtogetherinthepresentreview,thescholarshipintheareaisnowmuchmorecollegiate,andtherequirementontheauthorstoself-diagnoseacademicisolationseemstohavebecomeunnecessary.AnnetteDavison,K.J.DonnellyandCarolVernallisshareaplethoraofcriticalreferencesonmusic–imagerelationships,fromTheodorAdornotoPhilipTaggandmanypointsinbetween.

Asubstantialcanonofacademicwritingonmusicinnarrativefilmnowexists,anditcannolongerbeclaimedthatmusicvideoisascholarlyblindspot（asVernallisadmits）.Ofthevariousmediaformatsdiscussedinthebooksunderreview,onlytelevisionmusicremainsrelativelyunder-representedacademically（thoughDonnelly'stwochaptersonthesubjectbegintheprocessofaddressingthisabsence）.

Inthiscontext,theauthors'taskwouldappeartobetopresentalternativestoexistingwork,ortobringnewobjectsofstudytocriticallight.Allthreestudiesmakeclaimsfortheirownoriginalitybyreferencingamodelof‘classical’narrativefilmmusicpractices:

aconceptualizationofthesoundtrack'sroleasfittinginwithclassicalcinema'sperceivedstorytellingpriorities.Forallthebooks'individualmerits,theregularrecoursetonotionsoftheclassical,evenintheserviceofitsrefutation,raisesinterestingquestionsaboutthepossibility（orimpossibility）ofdoingwithoutsuchaconceptentirely.Thus,theseworksrevealthe‘classical’tobeacategoryasproblematicyetinsistentinwritingonmusic–imagerelationsasitisinotherareasofscreenstudiesenquiry.

Asitstitlesuggests,Davison'sHollywoodTheory,Non-HollywoodPractice:

CinemaSoundtracksinthe1980sand1990sengageswithclassicalfilmmusictheorymostexplicitly.Indeed,aboutaquarterofthebookisdevotedtotheexplicationof,first,ClassicalHollywoodCinemaasithasbeenconceivedacademically,andsecond,theclassicalscoringpracticeassociatedwithit（whichDavisonseesrevivedintheso-called‘post-classical’Hollywoodofthemid1970sonwards）.ThisprovidesthegroundonwhichDavisonmakesherkeyclaim:

Thecentralargumentofthisbookisthat,byoperatingasasignifierofclassical–and,indeed,NewHollywoodcinema–theclassicalHollywoodscoreofferedthosemakingfilmsoutsideandonthemarginsofHollywoodcinemainthe1980sand1990safurthermeansbywhichtheycoulddifferentiatetheircinemasfromHollywood's,throughtheproductionofscoresandsoundtrackswhichcritiqueorrefertothispracticeinparticularways（p.59）.Therefollowcloseanalysesoffourfilmswhosesoundtracks,accordingtoDavison,refertotheclassicalmodelatthesametimeastheyofferanalternative.Throughhersequencingofthecasestudies,Davisonoutlinespossibilitiesofalternativepracticethatrangefromatotaldeconstructionoftheclassicalsoundtrack'sconventionalstorytellingfunctions（aswitnessedinJean-LucGodard'sPrenom:

Carmen[1983]）totheidentificationofascoringpracticethatmimicscertainaspectsoftheclassicalinitscollaborativenature,yetprovidesautopianalternativetoit（asseenthroughDavidLynch'sWildatHeart[1990]）.Inbetween,sheexploresthenotionofthesoundtrackasa‘liberating’force（DerekJarman'sTheGarden[1990]）,andthepotentialforacompromisetobefoundbetweenclassicalandalternativemodels（WimWenders'WingsofDesire[1987]）.

Davison'sreadingofeachfilmisimaginativeandverywelldetailed.Shedemonstratesaparticularfacilityforidentifying,andascribingasignificanceto,differenttypesofsoundonthesamesoundtrack.ThisisdonewithparticularsuccessinherreadingsofTheGardenandWingsofDesire.Heranalysisdoesnotseektohideherevidentmusicaltraining,but,innearlyallcases,remainsintelligibleandpersuasivetonon-musicologistssuchasmyself（whowilljusthavetoaccepttheoccasionaluseofmusicalnotationasprettypictures）.

Itisquestionablehowmuchoftheextremelycomprehensivescene-settingundertakenbyDavisoninthebook'searlysectionsisnecessaryforanappreciationoftheindividualfilmanalyses.Nevertheless,hersummariesofdiscussionsaboutclassicalandpost-classicalHollywoodcinemaandtheclassicalfilmscoreareexemplary,andtheyareconductedwithathoroughnesswhichisunderstandable,perhaps,inabookwhichtakesitsplaceinthepublisher'sPopularandFolkMusicseriesratherthaninascreenstudiescollection.

Thereremainsamismatch,however,betweentheconcentrationonHollywoodasaninstitutional,industrialandideologicalforceintheearlychaptersofthebook,andtheauteuristbentoftheanalysisthatfollowsinlaterchapters.Forexample,thechapteron‘NewHollywoodcinemaand（post-?

）classicalscoring’concludeswithstatisticalinformationaboutUScinema'sgrowthintheoverseasmarketduringthe1980s.Yetthisdetailseemsunnecessaryinthelightofthesubsequentinterpretationofthevariousnon-Hollywoodsoundtracksasimaginativeresponsestomainstreampracticesonthepartofindividualfilmmakers.ThedivisionbetweendescriptionsofHollywoodasintransigentlyinstitutional,andtheimplicitunderstandingofart-housecinemaasaspaceforthefreeexpressionoftheauteur（madeexplicitinthecelebrationofLynchinthefinalcasestudy）ismadetoocomplacentlyandmeansthatDavisondoesnotfulfilherpromisetoengage‘withinstitutionalissuesinrelationtofilmsoundtracksandscores’（p.6）ineverycase.Inthisrespect,thebookdoesnotfullyrealizethepotentialofitsmanyexcellentparts.

ThecriticaltoneofDonnelly'sTheSpectreofSound:

MusicinFilmandTelevisionalsofluctuatessomewhatfromsectiontosection,althoughthereaderispreparedforthisbytheauthor'searlyclaimthatthebookis‘arumination,aninvestigationofsomeoftheelusiveandfascinatingaspectsofscreenmusic’（p.3）ratherthanamorestrictlyhypothesis-basedaccount.

Nevertheless,moreconcretejustificationisgivenforthebook'sattentiontoapleasinglyeclecticrangeofmaterial,whichincludestheworkofcanonizedauteurssuchasDavidLynchandStanleyKubrick,butalsomakesroomforadiscussionofthesoundtracksofSpace:

1999,awholerangeofhorrormovies,andtheroleofmusicintelevisioncontinuitysegments.Donnellycharacterizesscreenmusicassomethingmoreintangiblethanisclaimedinthemoreclassicalaccountsfocusingonthescore'sovertstorytellingfunctions.Inspired,inparticular,bytheincreasinglycomplexsounddesignoffilmsproducedforreleaseincinemas,Donnellyargues:

Whilefilmmusictraditionallyhasbeenconceivedaspartofnarration,workingforfilmnarrative,insomewaysitwouldbebettertoseeitaspartofthefilm'srepositoryofspecialeffects（p.2）.

Determinedtoexplorescreenmusic'smore‘unruly’qualities（atleastwhensetagainstanarrativeyardstick）,Donnellyriffsaroundnotionsofmusic's‘ghostliness’inanimaginativemanner.Particularlyinrelationtocinema,heseesthehauntingactivitiesofthesoundtrackasconstitutingakindofsensuouspossessionoftheviewer.Donnelly（somewhatcontentiouslygiventhemedium'stechnologicaladvances）islesswillingtoadmittothepossessingcapabilitiesoftelevisionsoundtracks,butconcentratesinsteadonanotherkindof‘haunting’:

thehabitualuseoffamiliarmusicintelevisionthatevokesthespectreofits‘lives’elsewhereasmuchasitappliesitselftoaparticulartelevisualcontext.

ItisthenotionofscreenmusicasalwaysindicatinganotherplacethatmostusefullytiesthedifferentstrandsofDonnelly'seclecticstudytogether.Throughthisinterestinthe‘elsewhere’ofscreenmusic,Donnellysuccessfullyprobesareasoutsidethereachofclassicalnarrativefilmmusictheory,whichattendstothehereandnowofthesoundtrack'sinvolvementinaparticularfictionalscenario.However,thevalueoftheinsightswhichensuefromthissuccessfulescapefromamoreclassicalapproachissometimestakenforgranted.Donnelly'sanalysesasawholelacktheattentiontodetailwhichisoneofthevirtuesofDavison'scasestudies.Theauthoranticipatesthiscriticismearlyonbyacknowledgingthatthebook‘providesa“longshot”,allowingthesortofsynopticviewunavailabletodetailedanalysis,ratherthanthepredominant“close-up”ofmanyprecedingfilmmusicstudies’（p.3）.

Theloss,intermsofanalyticaldepth,thatthiscriticalstrategynecessitates,isnotalwayscompensatedforbythebook'scommendablebreadth.Forexample,arelativelysustainedanalysisofLynch'sLostHighway（1996）isnotasconvincingasitmightbeduetoanunwillingnesstoprovidesufficientevidenceforitsclaims.Onthefilm'sheavyuseofpre-existingpopsongs,Donnellycomments:

Arethesesongappearancessimple‘commentsontheaction’?

Idon'tthinkso.Itismoreasiftheactionemanatesfromthesongsthemselves,particularlyfromtheirgrainofsoundandrhythmicaspects（p.28）.Thisassertionisallowedtofendforitself,intheabsenceofmoreparticularcommentaryabouttheinteractionbetweentheactionandsongineachspecificcase.Thevalueofinvestigatingscreenmusic'sless‘submissive’qualitiesinrelationtonarrativeprincipleswouldbebetteradvocatedthroughadetailedinterpretationthatalsoengage