Change Of Chinese Theory
Western film theory is generally subdivided into classical theory and
contemporary theory. Contemporary theory consists of a theoretical system, which
employs psychoanalysis, ideological critique and feminism to interpret cinematic
forms. It originated in the mid-sixties and flourished in the 1970s. It was
first introduced to China in the early 1980s and brought in as a complete
theoretical system a few years later. Peaking in the late 1980s, it should have
taken up an important position in the development of China's film theory.
Classical film theory had developed very slowly in China, and by the end of the
1970s it had acquired the following features: “It was a theory about social
politics, not about art or cinema, and frequently used as a tool in political
struggle, directly serving the politics of the day.” (Ke 66) Mikroulis 2 “Its
artistic theory was insipid, simple and ossified, consisting merely of theories
about production transplanted from philosophical dogmas. China had been closed
for a long time, and there had been little international exchange, borrowing or
debate. Therefore, widespread assimilation of the scholarly achievements of
foreign film theory had been impossible and numerous lacunae and defects
existed.”(Ke 66) Toward the end of the 1970s China chose reform and opening to
the outside world. Major changes in film theory were inevitable in order to
adapt to the needs of social reform and cinematic innovation and to enrich and
improve theory itself. Importing foreign film theory and changing Chinese
cinematic concepts were also inevitable. The adoption of any film theory by
society is not random but socially and historically determined. A society
invariably adopts theories suitable for social development independent of any
individual's will. Mikroulis 3 As contemporary film theory was being given a
cold reception, making up for what had been missed in classical theory proceeded
on a grand scale and along the following lines: · Establishing cinematic
concepts by exploring the specificity of the cinema, making cinema an art form
independent from others, and distinguishing film theory from general art theory
to turn it into an independent field. ·
Beginning to focus on cinematic forms of
expression and artistic techniques in an attempt to break away from outdated
methods centered on the Soviet montage theory, and beginning to use original
forms to express fresh contents and feelings. Almost all these efforts to catch
up on classical film theory provoked heated debates within the Chinese film
world. There were both conflicts and compromises with the old theoretical
system. Both sides attempted to devise an authoritative and socially accepted
theory that would direct film production and criticism. In the absence of Mikroulis 4 common ground, struggles both open and covert broke out between the
left and right. The gap between traditional Chinese film theory and classical
foreign film theory was considerably narrowed as a result of these efforts to
catch up. However, different social conditions mean that no Western theory can
be brought in unchanged, and because of the speed of their introduction, the
essence of many theories was not fully understood. Superficial understandings,
out-of-context interpretations, misreading and even misrepresentations were
unavoidable. Practice had yet to show whether these theories suited Chinese
circumstances, and whether they could become a part of a dominant theory. But as
the pace of China's reforms and opening to the world increased, classical
Western theory found itself unable to satisfy the intellectual needs of China's
film theorists. The film theorists were already casting their gaze toward the
outside world again. In the summer of 1984, contemporary Western film theory
entered China again, this time through the unusual Mikroulis 5 method of
inviting American film scholars to Beijing to run a summer session on film
theory. Although unprecedented anywhere in the world, such a method of
disseminating contemporary film theory suited the organization of the Chinese
cinema studies world. The two Chinese scholars responsible for this event were
Cheng Jihua and Chen Mei. Cheng and Chen had been invited to give a course on
Chinese films in 1983 by UCLA. It was well-received. In the course of extensive
contacts with American scholars, they came to feel deeply that Chinese film
theory was so “narrow, ossified and monolithic that it precluded academic
dialogue with foreign countries.” A number of American film scholars also wished
to see for themselves the enormous changes taking place in China. Thus a daring
program for academic exchanges began to take shape. When Cheng Jihua and Chen
Mei returned to China, they successfully applied to the Ministry of Culture,
then in charge of film, for the China Film Association to run a summer session
on film theory and invite American scholars to lecture. The two main criteria
for the invitees were academic expertise Mikroulis 6 and friendliness toward the
Chinese people. Lecture topics were fixed through negotiations between the China
Film Association and the American scholars.
Bibliography
Ke, Hu. “Contemporary Film Theory in Film.” 1995: Dangdai Dianying, (65-73).
Words: 820
