Free Paper Sample on Critical Analysis of Structuralist Theory

Introduction

To understand best the structuralist theory, it is essential first to determine the history of film theory in general. The film stood out as a new form of art at the beginning of the twentieth century. There were many attempts at defining its form or function owing to its inferiority complex to other forms of art that had been in existence for a longer time. The definitions were mostly centred on the elements of the medium through which film was expressed.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

In the mid-twentieth century, film theory began to be incorporated in academia and integrated concepts of more established disciplines such as psychoanalysis, the study of gender, anthropology, literary theory, semiotics and linguistics. It is from its incorporation into academia that different theories of the film were born and nurtured by theorists such as Colin MacCabe, Stephen Heath, Laura Mulvey, Serdei Eisenstein, etc. Some of the theories include structuralist film theory, Marxist film theory, screen theory, formalist film theory, feminist film theory, auteur theory, apparatus theory, psychoanalytical film theory, etc.

Structuralist Film Theory

Structuralist film theory, also regarded as structuralism, lays emphasis on the conveyance of a film’s meaning, by use of codes and conventions. Such codes and conventions are utilized in a similar manner as languages in communication. However, structuralism is different from the theory of linguistics in the sense that it is based on a more temporary framework. Film is constantly on the move and barely remains the same.

It is based on the comprehension of how different shots’ combination could result in the creation of a new idea. For instance, when one’s face is captured having a blank expression, then a different shot of an appetizing meal is captured, after that, the photo of the face is captured after one has interacted with the appetizing meal. Whereas nothing from the three different shots literally expresses hunger, when creatively put together, the images give the audience that particular perception.

It elaborates more deeply on the manner in which a given film’s major highlights and their given intentions combine rather astonishingly to bring out a particular picture or message, that aids in the understanding of the audience. It is through the tiniest or most minute of details that the audience ought to pay attention to, as they bear significant meanings. Structuralism captures the fantasies and real-life happenings of people. It utilizes them in film, such that not only are the viewers able to understand the message being put across by the film, but also relate with every single detail. It utilizes familiar emotions, sounds, themes, scenes, as well as character-portrayal by the actor, to bring out crucial details in the film.

Its main aim is to present movie-goers an ideal experience regarding the film’s genre. Through the use of various structural techniques, it helps the viewers adapt to the nature of the film, arouse their curiosity and expectation. By experiencing the film, they get to see it, not only through their imagination but that of the film producer as well. At its very core, it emphasizes on the fact that a fil is not simply flickering images on a screen. Rather it entails much more. It elaborates on the life struggles of persons of various ages, races, genders, etc. It exposes and is a reflection of what life truly is.

Framework

Structuralism presents an ideal framework for the analysis of prose literature. It views film as being a collection of patterns, relationships, as well as structures. That it is through the identification of these structures that one is truly able to understand that which is happening in the film, relate and consequently enjoy it. The meaning that a film bears does not intricately come from the particular meanings of the elements utilized in its making. Instead, the meaning is drawn from the nature of the viewers’ interaction with its structure or system. For instance, structuralism insists on the essence of having narrative theories, as well as re-emerging patterns that aid the viewers in comprehending that which is going on (Chion, 1992). Recognizable structures such as genre films ease the understanding of the audience with regard to the meaning. While genre is a major scope of structure, plot structures for re-emerging story patterns that give meaning to the various genre characteristics.

Some of the major structuralist theorists include Barthes, Levi-Strauss, and Todorov. Most of their works are centred on the analysis of plot patterns with regard to fairy tales, as well as traditional narratives. They analyze all these in accordance with how they are featured in contemporary films.

Structuralism took centre stage in the 1950s and opposed both the theory of New Criticism, as well as the theory of existentialism, which was fronted by Sartre. Existentialism revolved around radical human behavior. Structuralism dwelt on the manner in which human behavior is reliant on cultural, social and psychological structures.

Criticism of Structuralism

The criticism of structuralism points towards comprehending the larger structures that contain individual literary interpretations. For instance, the structuralist analysis of the “Good Morrow” by Donne focuses on the relevant genre, the theme of love, etc., at the expense of the formal elements of the reading.

The core of structuralism- activities of persons, are constructed, and not established naturally- forms an important element of its seminal works. In this regard, structuralists believe that the basis of the organization of rules and units into systems that bear meaning, are reliant on the human mind and not how the senses are perceived. Thus, it narrows down varying human experiences into universal underlying structures, which form the basis of life and can be related to by all.

Structuralism has linguistic roots in the sense that it comes from the theories of language and linguistics. Further, it seeks to identify the elements that form the basis of culture and literature. After that, it seeks to utilize these elements to form a conclusion regarding different individual works and the structures that guide their operations. Richter avers that “practically everything one does that is specifically human, is exposed in language and literature.” As such, structuralists hold on to the idea that the symbols in language stretch beyond written and verbal communication.

For instance, various codes are indicative of the things that human beings do. In performing music, there is a need to have a sophisticated notation. When compared to the economic aspect of life, trade is often made in exchange for cash, or other materials, i.e., symbols. Equally, the social aspect of life needs gestures that bear meaning to obtain different favors such as a drink, or additional food.

Patterns

All human experiences can be observed via patterns. This is similar to the manner in which literature and language exist. For instance, if one were to make an observation of the manner in which buildings in America during the 1850s had been built or set up, he is bound to arrive at a conclusive pattern in regards to their outlook, or the type of material that had been used in their construction. Such observation is said to have been made through a structuralist lens.

With regards to literature, should one observe the structure of several short stories to establish how they were composed, or if any similarities exist amongst them, he is bound to expose some of the principles that were used to advance certain narratives, as well as characterization. Northrop Frye brings out four elements of structural analysis: theory of modes, which uses tragic, comic and different themes to criticize on history; theory of symbols, which analysis the formality, mythical and descriptive form of the literature to criticize its ethical angle; theory of myths, which relies on romance, tragedy, satire to espouse archetypal criticism; and theory of genres, which utilizes epos, drama and lyrics to criticize the rhetoric aspect of the literature.

The two most important theorists who advanced the theory of structuralism are Charles Sanders Peirce and Ferdinand de Saussure. They both gave structuralism the following main ideas to be used in the analysis of sign systems that are integrated into people’s experiences; 1) iconic signs that have a closer resemblance with an item or person; 2) indexes that generally signify the presence of something; 3) true symbols, wherein the signals are completely arbitrary and conventional.

Contributions of Semiotics to the Study of Film

Semiotics plays a crucial role in structuralism. It is the science that analyzes signs and the meaning that can be derived from them. Those that subscribe to this concept utilize the insights of structuralists in the analysis of sign systems, non-linguistic objects and behavior, and attempt to examine them the same way they would analyze a language. They observe the message that non-linguistic objects and behaviors put across.

For instance, the image of a beautiful lady in a black dress put up on a billboard advertising whiskey sends the message that those clients who partake on the drink, particularly males, shall attract such beautiful women.

Various features in music offer access to the different elements in the music, without necessarily relying on the process involving the metaphor. Situations in which the ideas in music clearly bring out that which they stand for, they can be referred to as semiotic constructs, i.e., signs. While metaphors may rely on signs for them to be understood, signs do not rely on metaphors for similar understanding.

In as far as there is no particular element that alters their meaning, signs are often analyzed under semiotics. Signs can still align with various cultures. In this regard, many signs, i.e., language, are affiliated to particular cultures and enhance communication amongst them. The application of semiotics has been witnessed in film, theatre, material culture, zoology, etc. all such categories have presented different results. They are all concerned with the manner in which communication is made and how information is transferred.

Semiotics helps answer the question of what the relationship between individuals and society is. There are people who hold the belief that individuals exist and society is just but an abstraction. Jeremy Bentham holds this belief and avers that “society is a fictitious body, the sum of several members who compose it.” However, Saussure, Durkheim and Freud hold a different opinion and believe that society is not simply a compilation of individual activities. Rather, it primary and central to the reality one experiences. As such, should one be interested in studying and understanding the behavior of human beings, his starting point must be the acceptance of social reality. With regards to literature, linguistics and psychoanalytic psychology, all share a common possibility under the condition that the descriptions attached to various items and activities in society as being the primary reality.

Conclusion

In its broader spectrum, psychology views the world in regards to structures. Claude Levi-Strauss and Roland Barthes both believed that “things cannot be understood in isolation; they have to be seen in the context of larger structures they are part of.” Larger structures do not exist independently. Rather, they are formed and realized through one perception of the world.