【作者】 任明；

【导师】 马以鑫；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 文学与传媒， 2010， 博士

【副题名】以1949-2009上海城市电影的生产与消费为中心

【摘要】 电影与公共性的关系是一直存在又一直被人们所忽略的一个领域。在哈贝马斯文学公共领域的概念中,他强调的是文学、报纸、杂志等纸质媒体,影像与广播因其不给人们“回嘴”的机会这一特质而被忽略了。与哈贝马斯的“文字精英主义”相对,内格特与克鲁格认为电影提供了一个“社会经验”的公共领域,这一领域是开放的、民主的。汉森沿着“经验的公共领域”这一路径出发,认为电影提供的是一个现代性的“感官反应场”,是人们对“现代性”进行观望、反驳、自我反思的公共空间。就阿伦特所言的公共领域中的两种人类活动——言语与行动——而言,电影是对它们进行展示,供大家讨论、交流的现代空间,是古希腊公共领域的媒体形式。城市作为人类历史上第一次以“专门化、职业性的,集体的形式”解决人类各种需求的生存空间,可以说是人类公共性的集中载体；城市作为文明的载体,是人类历史、文化公共性的体现；城市作为人类的居所,与人类共同的命运、处境紧密相关；城市作为交往的空间,促成了“公共领域”的形成、发展。城市不仅代表着我们的过去,也决定着我们的未来。城市的公共性,意味着城市人命运的公共性。从上海城市电影60年的发展变化中考察中国60年公共性的变化,是一种试图将文化机制与文化内容作为互动的内容进行考察的努力。电影作为一种文化产业,其公共性不仅体现在电影内容中,还体现在电影的生产与消费机制上。对曾经以“人民电影”相号召的中国电影来说,生产与消费机制上的变化,导致电影的公共性发生极大变化,从而对电影的生产、消费与文本都产生了影响。上海城市电影前30年被全国统一的政治公共性所控制,后30年在市场的冲击下趋于多元,但在电影票价高企的情况下,观众对电影的消费形成一种以消费主义为本质的“大片主义”；反映现实生活的人文影片渐渐无法从影院中获得票房。目前中国电影的影院消费已经不是“大众”,而是“小众”,这一点,使它与西方、东方的很多国家都区别开来。电影内容是考察社会公共性变迁的重要渠道。电影不仅表达人物的情感与行为,还表达与这一切有关的物质环境。对物质环境的考察是一种社会学与历史学的考察；电影中所传达的人性与情感,才是电影公共性的真正本质所在。正是在这一意义上,电影呼应了哈贝马斯对文学公共领域的期待,即通过对个体经验的交流,塑造人的主体性及对人性的认识,通过公开交流培养理性的健全发展与公共性的进步。因此,电影评论作为电影公共领域中不可缺少的一员,需要担负起对电影的公共性价值进行挖掘、阐释乃至文化比较的工作。更多还原

【Abstract】 The dynamic between cinema and publicity has been ignored although it has always existed. In Habermas’ ’literary public sphere’ concept, what he emphasized is literature, the newspaper, the magazine and other press media. Film and broadcasting were ignored because their ’liquid’ characteristic has denied the public’s right to ’answer back’. Protesting Habermas’’literary elitism’, Negt and Kluge argue that the cinema provides a public sphere of experience, which is open and democratic. Hansen, following Negt and Kluge’s direction, describes cinema as a ’sensory reflexive horizon’, providing a public space for the public to observe, reflect and reject the trauma of modernity. As to the only two human activities in Arendt’s’public realm’, that is, speech and action, cinema provides a ’show’ space for them in a media term, so that the public can watch, talk and comment on their presence and performance. Hence cinema can be regarded as the media form of the ancient Greek’s public square or marketplace.The city, as the first place tried to solve human’s needs in a’specialized, professional and collective form’, can be regarded as the vessel of human’s publicity. As the vessel of civilization, the city represents the publicity of human’s history and culture. As the space for residence, the city is closely connected with human’s common condition and fate. As the space for socialization, the city simulated the formation and development of Habermas’public sphere. The city not only represents our past, but also decides our future. The publicity of the city represents the publicity of people’s fate living in the city.Describing the change of China’s publicity in the past 60 years through the production and consumption of Shanghai Studio’s urban films-films produced by the Shanghai Film Studio and centered on urban life-is an effort to include the interactivity between cultural mechanisms and cultural texts in observation. As a cultural industry, cinema’s publicity is not only embodied in its content, but also the mechanism of its production and consumption. As to the Chinese cinema, which has been developing under the flag of ’People’s Cinema’, the change in the mechanism of production and consumption has caused a crucial change in the publicity of the cinema, so as to affect film’s content, production and consumption. Shanghai Film Studio’s urban film production has been controlled by political publicity during the first 30 years, and has been liberated and diversified by the market economy during the second 30 years. However, due to the high ticket price, Chinese film audiences have developed ’Blockbusterism’ in cinema-going, parallel to ’consumerism’ in other fields. Films reflecting real life can hardly make a profit or get listed in the box office. Going to the cinema in China is no longer a ’public’ activity but rather ’elitist’, which has made China distinct from the rest of the world.The content of a film is an important channel to observe social publicity. Film not only presents its character’s emotions and activities, but also the material environment around them. Studying the material environment in a film is the subject of sociological or historical studies and the humanity and emotion circulated in films is the essence for film’s publicity. That’s how film responded to Habermas’expectations for the literary public sphere, that is, through communication with personal experience, to build the subjectivity of the public and their understanding of humanity, and through open discussion, to cultivate the development of reasonability and publicity.As an important instrument in the public sphere of cinema, film reviewing needs to uphold the job of interpreting, explaining and comparing the publicity of films, as well as cinema, to the film industry and its audiences.更多还原