Philosophy of Art and Literature

Film & Philosophy

PHI 361

Autumn Semester 2012-2013

Lectures: Wednesdays 3 – 3.50 AT-LT1 & 5 – 5.50 HI-LT5
Seminars (starting in week 2): Fridays 10 – 10.50 JB-SR215 &11 – 11.50 JB-SR215—apart from in WEEK 3 (when the Friday 11 – 12 seminar has been rescheduled to Thursday 3 – 3.50, in room B23 in the Philosophy department, Victoria Street).
Film showings: TBA

Module convenor: Dominic Gregory [e-mail]
Office Hours: Friday 9 – 10, Friday 12 – 1
Other Lecturers: Chris Bennett (C.Bennett@shef)

George Botterill (G.S.Botterill@shef)

Chris Hookway (C.J.Hookway@shef)

Jessica Leech ([e-mail])

Yonatan Shemmer (Y.Shemmer@shef)
Course MOLE site:
Copies of the Powerpoints, this booklet – in fact a lot of what you need for the module – are available from the course MOLE site. Follow the links from your Muse page.

Outline of the Course
This module explores the relation between philosophy and film. It addresses a set of philosophical questions about the nature of film as an artistic medium: for instance, the senses in which film is visual, the ways it combines pictorial and narrative elements, whether film sustains some kind of illusion and the relationships between photography and realism. But it asks these questions in order to ask another—whether, as some have claimed, film can be a way of doing philosophy. An answer to this last question should draw on some of the general issues concerning film just cited. But it should also draw on discussion of particular movies. Thus some of the lectures will be devoted to discussing individual films, the philosophical questions they raise, and how far the film manages to address them. Finally, the question about film as philosophy also forces us to reflect on the nature of philosophy itself. What sort of activity would philosophy have to be, if it could be pursued in film?
Structure of the Semester

Week 1 (from 24/9) Week 2 (from 1/10) Week 3(from 8/10) Week 4 (from 15/10) Week 5 (from 22/10) Week 6 (from 29/10) Week 7 Writing week Week 8 (from 12/11) (deadline for approval of long essay titles = 4pm Wednesday 14th November) Week 9 (from 19/11) Week 10 (from 26/11) Week 11 (from 3/12) (coursework essay deadline = 4pm Wednesday, 4th December) Week 12 (from 10/12) Vacation

Exam period (3 weeks, 14th January to 2nd February; long essay deadline = 4pm, Wednesday 23rd January 23013

How the module will be taught
One of several unusual features of this module is that it will be taught by a team. Dominic Gregory will act as convenor. It is his job to make sure that the module runs smoothly and that it coheres as a whole. Dominic will also teach those topics on the module that concern the philosophy of film – the nature of film as a medium and the resources available to it for exploring philosophical issues. But when it comes to particular films and the philosophical questions they raise, Dominic will be joined by various other lecturers (see above for a list). They will run the showing of their film, give the lectures on it, and run the seminars accompanying those lectures.


The Films
The module focuses on seven films, from varying traditions and periods. Part of your job will be to acquire a suitable familiarity with them. DVDs of the movies will be available in the library, though you should remember that there are other ways to get hold of them (e.g. Blockbuster, LoveFilm, Netflix). Subject to suitable demand, we will also put on showings of the relevant films.

Lecture Timetable
Note that seminars start in week 2. Further details of the reading for them, where set below, can be found on the reading list later in this course outline.
Week 1 Lectures: Introduction: Philosophy of Film, Film as Philosophy (DG)

(Film for following week: Minority Report)

Week 2 Lectures: Minority Report (DG)

Seminar reading: Ch.6 of Mulhall On Film

(Film for following week: The Seventh Seal)
Week 3 Lectures: The Seventh Seal (GB)

Seminar reading: See the MOLE site for relevant materials. (Note that the Friday 11 – 12 seminar this week has been rescheduled to Thursday 3 – 4.)

Week 4 Lectures: Seeing-in, depiction & the visual nature of film (DG)

Seminar reading: Ch.1 of Currie, Image and Mind

Week 5 Lectures: Photography & realism (DG)

Seminar reading: Walton ‘Transparent Pictures’

(Film for following week: Rashomon)

Week 6 Lectures: Rashomon (CH)

Seminar reading: Coady ‘Experts and the law’

Week 7 Writing Week

Week 8 Lectures: Time in film (DG)

Seminar reading: Chapter 7 of Currie Image and Mind

(Film for following week: The Matrix)

Week 9 Lectures: The Matrix (YS) (NB preparatory reading is required: see reading list)

Seminar reading: As for lectures.

(Film for following week: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind)

Week 10 Lectures: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (CB)

Seminar reading: C. Grau ‘Eternal Sunshine & Morality of Memory’

(Film for following week: Memento)

Week 11 Lectures: Memento (JL)

Seminar reading: Wollheim ‘Experiential Memory, Introjection….’ §§1-7; 9-10 (RH)
Week 12 Discussion: Film as Philosophy? (DG to lead)

Seminar: TBA

Handouts and Powerpoints
Some of us lecture from Powerpoint slides while some of us may just use handouts instead. These help us remember what we want to say; make the structure of the lecture explicit; and make quotations, precise claims, and the like clearly visible to you. Those of us who do this are happy to make these overheads available to you. They will be posted on the course MOLE page (see above), usually before the lecture. Please note that these are not intended to be a substitutes for your own notes. The slides will make little sense if you read them without coming to the lecture, and will make little more if you have only them to read at exam time. It is up to you to find out what form of note-taking best suits you. We recommend experimenting. You might, for instance, try taking notes as we talk; or try listening carefully during the lecture, and only making notes immediately afterwards. The skills of listening to complex ideas, digesting them (both at the time and at greater leisure later), and recording your understanding of them, are amongst those you should be aiming to develop.

Assessment
Assessment is by one essay and one exam, or one Long Essay.
No topic will be the central subject of both an essay question and a question in the exam. It may nonetheless be possible to repeat essay work in the exam, but you should not do this.
Essay
You write one essay, of 3000 – 4000 words, using one of the questions to be provided in the pre-released exam.
The deadline is: 4pm, Wednesday 4th December.
The essay must be submitted both electronically and in paper form. Electronic submission is done through MOLE, which you can access through your MUSE web-page. Go to the Assignments link of the relevant module, and upload your essay there. Be sure to press the submit button.
The paper copy may be submitted in either of the following ways:

• 
  by handing them in to the Departmental Office (45 Victoria St)
  
• 
  by putting them in the Essay Deposit Box at reception, Dept of Philosophy, (45 Victoria St)
  

You each have the right to a half-hour essay tutorial. This will be with one of the staff teaching the module. Tutorials will take place in the weeks immediately preceding the essay deadline. They will be shared out amongst the lecturers for the module, and you may find that the person giving you your tutorial is not the person who taught the topic on which you are writing. Arrangements will be posted on MOLE later.

Exam

This is two hours long and will be pre-released. The paper will be divided into two sections, one concerning theoretical issues in the philosophy of film, the other concerning the philosophical content of particular films. You answer two questions, one from each section.

Long Essay

You have the option of writing a Long Essay in place of the essay and exam. (See the Department website for details.) This would be 4500 to 6000 words long. Note that students must have the formal approval of the module convenor, Dominic Gregory, before taking this option, and that the deadline for opting for the Long Essay is 4pm on Wednesday of week 8 (November 14^th). Approval will only be given to topics that involve both some general theoretical issue concerning the nature of film and some particular film (or films) which explore a given philosophical issue (or issues).
The deadline for the Long Essay is 4pm, Wednesday 23rd January 2013.

Plagiarism

The following are serious academic offences and may result in penalties that could have a lasting effect on your career, both at University and beyond.

Plagiarism (either intentional or unintentional) is the stealing of ideas or work of another person (including experts and fellow or former students) and is considered dishonest and unprofessional. Plagiarism may take the form of cutting and pasting, taking or closely paraphrasing ideas, passages, sections, sentences, paragraphs, drawings, graphs and other graphical material from books, articles, internet sites or any other source and submitting them for assessment without appropriate acknowledgement.

Submitting bought or commissioned work (for example from internet sites, essay “banks” or “mills”) is an extremely serious form of plagiarism. This may take the form of buying or commissioning either the whole assignment or part of it and implies a clear intention to deceive the examiners. The University also takes an extremely serious view of any student who sells, offers to sell or passes on their own assignments to other students.
Double submission (or self plagiarism) is resubmitting previously submitted work on one or more occasions (without proper acknowledgement). This may take the form of copying either the whole assignment or part of it. Normally credit will already have been given for this work.
Collusion is where two or more people work together to produce a piece of work, all or part of which is then submitted by each of them as their own individual work. This includes passing on work in any format to another student. Collusion does not occur where students involved in group work are encouraged to work together to produce a single piece of work as part of the assessment process.
More on plagiarism in particular:

In any essay or exam answer submitted for assessment, all passages taken from other people's work, either word for word, or with small changes, must be placed within quotation marks, with specific reference to author, title and page. No excuse can be accepted for any failure to do so, nor will inclusion of the source in a bibliography be considered an adequate acknowledgement.

If the marker decides that plagiarism has occurred, it becomes a matter of report to a University Committee.  The student may be judged to have failed the essay and/or exam and/or module (depending on the degree of severity). The plagiarism will also be recorded on the student's record.

Plagiarism from handouts and related material: There has in the past been some scope for confusion on this issue, since many staff offer the advice that ideas deriving from the lecturer do not need to be cited when used. But the department has agreed that a distinction needs to be drawn between use of ideas or arguments expounded in lectures, on the one hand (which is legitimate without citation), and verbatim or near-verbatim reproduction of material from lecture handouts or lecture notes/transcripts, on the other hand (which is not).

Any essay that is judged to rely too heavily on course handouts and the like— even when it is considered to fall short of plagiarism — will be penalised.

Reading for the Course: General Introduction
Getting hold of the material can, as with any heavily subscribed course, be a problem. Here are six tips to help avoid disappointment:
(1) If you need a book, reserve it. The library is now running a system that adjusts the time for which a volume can be borrowed to the number of people who’ve put in a reservation.
(2) The library keeps some photocopies of hard-to-get papers. Increasingly, these are being replaced by e-offprints. See ‘My Resource Lists’ under ‘Library’ in MUSE (where the reading lists to follow are available online).
(3) Remember that more and more journals are available electronically. Always check whether this is so before giving up in despair because the hard copy is on loan.
(4) Plan ahead. If you leave researching your essay to the last minute, you are more likely not to get the reading you need in time.
(5) Be resourceful. Perhaps the paper you want is in an anthology. Have a look. (Google Scholar can sometimes help with such matters.)
(6) Be prepared to share resources. Perhaps someone in your seminar group, or next to you in a lecture, has what you need, or needs what you have.
Reading by Topic
Key:

We have used italics for the names of books and journals, and quotation marks for the names of articles that appear in them.

An asterisk indicates that an entry is particularly useful.

Film & philosophy

• 
  Thomas Wartenberg ‘Film as Philosophy’ in The Routledge Companion to Film and Philosophy
  
• 
  Stephen Mulhall, On Film second edition, chapters 1-5
  
• 
  Various reviews of Mulhall’s book have been published in the internet journal Film-Philosophy. Mulhall replies to some of them in ch.5 of On Film.
  
• 
  Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 64:1 (2006) Special Issue on Film as Philosophy, especially the articles by Livingstone, Wartenberg and Smith.
  
• 
  Smuts, Aaron ‘Film as Philosophy: In Defense of a Bold Thesis’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 67:4 (2009)
  

Minority Report

• 
  Chapter 6 of Mulhall’s On Film (second edition).
  
• 
  ‘Minority Report: A Dystopian Vision’, Lester D. Freeman, in the online journal Senses of Cinema, viewable at:
  

http://www.sensesofcinema.com/2003/27/steven-spielberg/minority_report/

• 
  See any of the various editions of Punishment: The Supposed Justifications by Ted Honderich for an overview of some of the different approaches to punishment.
  
• 
  There are very many books which can provide you with an overview of some of the issues involved in debates over free will. Exercise—find one!
  

Seeing-in, depiction & the visual nature of film

• 
  Dominic Lopes Sight and Sensibility ch.1 (‘The Puzzle of Mimesis’) (e-book available)
  
• 
  Allen, Richard ‘Representation, Illusion and the Cinema’ Cinema Journal 33:2 (1993)
  
• 
  Noel Carroll ‘Address to the Heathen’ October 23 (1982) (NB only pp.103-9)
  
• 
  Gregory Currie Image and Mind ch.1 (‘The Myth of Illusion’) (e-offprint available) Gregory Currie Image and Mind ch.6 (‘Imagination, Personal and Impersonal’) or ‘Visual Fictions’ Philosophical Quarterly 1991
  
• 
  Dominic Lopes, Imagination, Illusion and Experience in Film, Philosophical Studies 89 (1998)
  
• 
  Hugo Munsterberg The Photoplay: A Psychological Study in Allen Langdale ed. Hugo Munsterberg on Film
  
• 
  Mark Wicclair ‘Film Theory and Hugo Münsterberg's "The Film: A Psychological Study"’ Journal of Aesthetic Education 12:3 (1978)
  
• 
  Noel Carroll ‘Film/Mind Analogies: The Case of Hugo Munsterberg’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 46:4 (1988)
  
• 
  Don Fredericksen ‘Hugo Munsterberg’ in P.Livingston & C.Plantinga, eds. Routledge Companion to Film and Philosophy – this is useful on the broader background to Munsterberg’s thinking.
  

The Seventh Seal
The Seventh Seal in particular :

• 
  Bergman, I. Images: My Life in Film. Faber and Faber: London, 1995. pp.231-242.
  

• 
  Donner, J. ‘The Seventh Seal: A Director’s View’. In S.M. Kaminsky ed., Ingmar Bergman: Essays in Criticism, Oxford University Press: Oxford and New York, 1975, pp.148-162.
  

[Jörn Donner is a Finnish film director and politician, and like Bergman at one time a partner of Harriet Andersson, the bad-girl star of Bergman’s 1953 film Summer with Monika. He was the Producer of Bergman’s last major film, Fanny and Alexander (1982).

Donner takes the view that the central contrast in The Seventh Seal is between the knight and his squire, and that the squire Jöns is the most interesting figure in the film, ultimately the most sympathetic:

‘Jöns’ actions are practical. The Knight performs his actions as if there were another task beyond that of living. Jöns is prepared to enjoy life as long as possible. He curses his fate. Jöns is no philosopher: to live is to live is to live. Viewed in this perspective, the foolishness is not found in Jof and Mia (“the golden virgin and her idiot husband”) but in the Knight, because he went on a crusade, and because he is still asking his meaningless questions.’ p.154]

• 
  Stubbs, J.C. ‘The Seventh Seal’. Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 9, No. 2, Special Issue: Film IV: Eight Study Guides (Apr., 1975), pp. 62-76.
  

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3331735
Further Reading on Bergman’s Films

• 
  Archer, E. ‘The Rack of Life’ Film Quarterly 12, 1959, pp. 3-16.
  
• 
  Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3185998
  

• 
  Kawin, B.F. Mindscreen: Begman, Godard, and First-Person Film. Princeton University Press: Princeton, New Jersey. 1978.
  

See especially:

• 
  Ch.1 ‘The Mind’s Eye’: Kawin discusses the question of the narrative perspective of a film. By ‘mindscreen’ he means the presentation of the subjective experience of one of the characters in a film (as in a dream-sequence). Pp. 14-18 discusses Bergman’s Cries and Whispers.
  
• 
  Ch.6 ‘Bergman: An Introduction’, pp.91-101;
  
• 
  and Chs. 7 and 8, on Persona and Shame (respectively)
  

• 
  Singer, I. Ingmar Bergman, Cinematic Philosopher: reflections on his creativity. 2007.
  

• 
  Livingston, P. Cinema, Philosophy, Bergman: On Film as Philosophy. Clarendon Press: Oxford, 2009.
  

Photography & realism

• 
  Andre Bazin ‘The ontology of the photographic image’ Film Quarterly 13:4 (1960)
  
• 
  *K.Walton ‘Transparent Pictures: On the Nature of Photographic Realism’ Critical Inquiry 11 (1984). See also the postscripts to the reprint and ‘On Pictures and Photographs: Objections Answered’ (part 2: ‘Photographs’), both in Walton’s Marvelous Images.
  
• 
  Gregory Currie ‘Painting, Photography and Perception’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 1991 OR Image and Mind ch.2 (‘The Imprint of Nature’)
  
• 
  Noel Carroll ‘Towards an Ontology of the Moving Image’ in C.Freeland and T. Wartenberg Philosophy and Film
  
• 
  Aaron Meskin & Jonathan Cohen ‘On the Epistemic Value of Photographs’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 2004
  
• 
  Robert Hopkins ‘What do we see in film?’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 66:2 (2008)
  

Rashomon

• 
  Ryunosuke Akutagawa. Rashomon and other Stories. (There are many editions of these short stories. The relevant ones, on which the film is based, are ‘In a grove’ and ‘Rashomon’.)
  
• 
  David Richie, Akiri Kurasawa, 1998. 70-80.
  
• 
  David Richie (ed) Focus on Rashomon. Prentice Hall: 1972
  

• 
  ‘Experts and the law’, in Coady Testimony, a Philosophical Study. Chapter 12: 277-301 (e-book available)
  
• 
  C.A. Coady, Testimony: a Philosophical Study, Oxford University Press, section V. 1992
  
• 
  J. Adler, Epistemological Problems of Testimony, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  
• 
  Berys Gaut, A Philosophy of Cinematic Art, CUP, 2010: 84-88. (This is part of a chapter on ‘Understanding film’, and in particular a discussion of the ‘patchwork theory’.)
  

Time & narrative
Moving pictures:

• 
  Gregory Currie Image and Mind ch.3 (‘Realism’) sections 3-4
  
• 
  Noel Carroll ‘Defining the Moving Image’ in Theorising the Moving Image CUP 1996 pp.49-74
  

Cinematic time:

• 
  Currie ch.7 (‘Travels in narrative time’) OR ‘McTaggart at the Movies’ Philosophy 1992
  

The Matrix I & II
Reading for lectures:
First lecture
Required reading

1. 
   Plato, Republic, (Book 7) 514a-519e
   
2. 
   Aritstotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book three, Sections 1 and 5
   
3. 
   Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I-II, q. 6 a. 8 on ignorance and involuntariness
   
4. 
   Summa Theologiae q. 111: on the way good and bad angels can influence will and cognition
   
5. 
   A Contemporary Defense of Free Will, Richard Taylor
   
6. 
   Excerpts from Religion and the Modern Mind, W. T. Stace.
   

Second lecture
Required reading:

1. 
   David Velleman, The Possibility of Practical Reason, The Introduction, p.1-4 (until Making Things Happen) and p.20 (from The Constitutive Aim of Action) till the end, Oxford University Press 2000.
   
2. 
   Christine Korsgaard, The Sources of Normativity, Chapter 3 up to and including section 3.3.2, Cambridge University Press 1996.
   
3. 
   J. P. Sartre, Being and Nothingness, Chapter 2, section 2 (Patterns of Bad Faith), Washington Square Press, 1956.
   

General material about philosophy in the matrix
Online

1. 
   http://onwardoverland.com/matrix/philosophy.html
   

http://whatisthematrix.warnerbros.com/rl_cmp/new_phil_fr_chalmers.html –( same as above and some more, not in a single page.)

2. 
   http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_matrix.htm – some short commentary on religious themes in the movie
   

Books

1. 
   The "Matrix" and Philosophy: Welcome to the Desert of the Real (Popular Culture and Philosophy) (Paperback), by William Irwin (Editor), Carus Publishing 2002.
   
2. 
   More Matrix and Philosophy (Popular Culture and Philosophy) (Paperback), by William Irwin (Editor), Carus Publishing 2005.
   
3. 
   Like a Splinter in Your Mind: The Philosophy Behind the "Matrix" Trilogy, by Matt Lawrence, Blackwell Publishing 2004.
   

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

• 
  *C. Grau, ‘Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and the Morality of Memory’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 64 (2006)
  
• 
  T. Jollimore, ‘Miserably Ever After: Forgetting, Repeating and Affirming Love in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind’ in C. Grau (ed.), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Routledge)
  
• 
  V. Tiberius, ‘Bad Memories, Good Decisions and the Three Joels’ in Grau (ed.), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  
• 
  J. Driver, ‘Memory, Desire and Value in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind’ in Grau (ed.), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  
• 
  A. Margalit, The Ethics of Memory, pp. 18-40, 84-94, Ch. 4
  
• 
  M. Nussbaum, ‘Form and Content, Philosophy and Literature’ in her Love’s Knowledge
  
• 
  Elisa A. Hurley, "Combat Trauma and the Moral Risks of Memory Manipulating Drugs", Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (2010)
  
• 
  Erik Parens, "The Ethics of Memory Blunting and the Narcissism of Small Differences", Neuroethics 3 (2010)
  
  
  

Memento

• 
  Andrew Kania ‘Memento’ in The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Film
  
• 
  Joseph Levine ‘Leonard’s system: why doesn’t it work?’ in Andrew Kania ed. Memento
  
• 
  Raymond Martin ‘The Value of Memory: Reflections on Memento’ in Andrew Kania ed. Memento
  
• 
  John Sutton ‘The feel of the world: exograms, habits and the confusion of types of memory’ in Andrew Kania ed. Memento
  

• 
  A.J.Ayer ‘Memory’ ch.IV (esp.§§1-4) in The Problem of Knowledge Penguin: Harmondsworth 1956
  
• 
  Richard Wollheim The Thread of Life lectures II (‘Iconicity, Imagination & Desire’) and III (‘Experiential Memory, Introjection & the Inner World’) sections 1-10. (Lec.III is available as an e-offprint)
  

/
Film & Philosophy PHI361