We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
158 II. AREAS AND ELEMENTS
Impact on the senses
Different kinds of pictures call forth different reactions; some address themselves directly to the intellect, some function merely as symbols or such. Let us assume that, unlike the other types of pictures, film images affect primarily the spectator's senses, engaging him physiologically before he is in a position to respond intellectually. This assumption finds support in the following arguments:
First, film records physical reality for its own sake. Struck by the reality character of the resultant images, the spectator cannot help reacting to them as he would to the material aspects of nature in the raw which these photographic images reproduce. Hence their appeal to his sensitivity. It is as if they urged him through their sheer presence unthinkingly to assimilate their indeterminate and often amorphous patterns.
Second, in keeping with its recording obligations, film renders the world in motion. Take any film you can think of: by dint of its very nature it is a succession of ever-changing images which altogether give the impression of a flow, a constant movement. And there is of course no film that would not represent— or, rather, feature— things moving. Movement is the alpha and omega of the medium. Now the sight of it seems to have a "resonance effect," provoking in the spectator such kinesthetic responses as muscular reflexes, motor impulses, or the like. In any case, objective movement acts as a physiological stimulus. Henri Wallon describes the kind of fascination it exerts on us: "We cannot turn our eyes away from the film whose images supersede each other— not only because we would then drop the thread of the story and no longer understand what will follow but also because there is in the flow of the successive images a sort of attraction, a sort of inducement [induction] enjoining us, our attention, our senses, our vision, not to lose anything [of that flow]. The movement, then, is in itself something attractive and captivating/'4 And how can we explain its compulsory attractiveness? Copei, for instance, traces it to our biological heritage by saying that many animals do not notice an object of interest to them— their prey, their enemy— unless it is moving about.5 Be this as it may, the effect itself appears to be well-established: representations of movement do cause a stir in deep bodily layers. It is our sense organs which are called into play.
Third, film not only records physical reality but reveals otherwise hidden provinces of it, including such spatial and temporal configurations as may be derived from the given data with the aid of cinematic techniques and devices. The salient point here is that these discoveries (which have been