One thing I like to remind myself about the sublime is the concept that it is often referred to as something not attainable for commercial reasons. To reiterate: this is not how "sublime" is commonly used, but IMO it should be. Torture porn like the Saw franchise is not sublime, but a film like 2001: A Space Odyssey might be. So, a beautiful sunset is not sublime, but a helicopter ride over the Grand Canyon might be. And by this definition, there does need to be a largeness about it - coming from nature, or god, or human historical forces if grand enough - and an element of fear or threat too. So I'd say the "cinematic sublime" occurs whenever a viewer experiences something of grandeur or awe-inspiring largeness, and feels somehow transported by it. You might say art is the ideal way to experience various situations and feelings with a buffer zone of safety. Or, if you're reading about epic ancient battles from the safety of millennia in the future. But if you're watching that same storm from a safe, warm, cozy house on the shore, you might experience it as sublime. I think it was Edmund Burke who defined the sublime as that quality where feelings of fear or awe or grandeur are generated but turn pleasurable through the safety of distance, whether spatial, temporal or artistic.įor example, if you're in a tiny boat on the ocean when a massive storm hits, it's terrifying. "Sublime" gets defined in different ways, but if it's basically just a synonym for "beautiful" or "transcendent" or "awesome", it doesn't do much for us. Concepts being tools, I prefer to use ones that are useful.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |