【作者】 赵曦；

【导师】 胡智锋；

【作者基本信息】 中国传媒大学 ， 广播电视艺术学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 纪录片边界问题是纪录片理论研究的元问题,有关这一问题的不断争议和讨论,始终伴随并深刻影响着纪录片的发展。鉴于纪录片创作实践对传统理论界定标准的不断突破从而使其边界日渐模糊的现状,本研究力图贴近纪录片创作发展的最新趋势,在分析大量作品和充分借鉴前人理论成果的基础之上,本着理论和实践相结合、逻辑和历史相统一、以及综合运用多学科理论进行多维透视的基本方法原则,从理论方面系统探讨纪录片边界问题:首先,对中外纪录片的理论和创作发展进行全面、细致的梳理,在此基础上进而深入讨论纪录片的本质内涵,并尝试提出新的纪录片标准尺度,希望由此对于纪录片理论研究和创作发展产生积极的意义。绪论部分首先提出纪录片边界面临重新界定的问题,并指出本文对这一问题的研究乃是在后现代思潮下的新旧观念冲突并置、泛文化思潮下的学科跨界融合、以及新技术发展带来的现实与超现实界限模糊等大背景下展开;随后从本体研究、文本研究和文化研究等角度对纪录片边界研究现状进行了回顾、综述;最后简要阐述了本选题的意义、难点和创新点、研究方法和基本思路。第一章对中西方纪录片边界理论进行全面梳理。首先分析了在西方电影理论框架内,在早期电影理论的造型倾向、经典电影理论的写实倾向、以及当代电影理论的表意倾向影响下,不同时期对纪录片边界的理论界定及其特点,指出西方纪录片边界理论始终是不断发展、变化的;随后回顾了国内对纪录片边界的研究,包括对对纪录片和专题片的界定;关于新纪录运动和专题片区别的论证以及新近对纪录片“虚构/非虚构”边界的探讨,最后指出,国外关于纪录片边界问题的理论研究大多倾向于纪录片和剧情片的区别与界定,国内的纪录片边界探讨则相对更集中于纪录片内部种类的边界探讨;中外纪录片学者的共同之处在于通过对固有理论模式某种程度的否定而为不断发展的纪录片边界开拓更为广阔的发展空间。第二、三章回顾并评述中西方纪录片创作发展的历史与现状。第二章主要考察西方纪录片边界发展。从纪录片历史来看,在影像诞生之初,纪录片和剧情片由共同发生到逐渐分野;从弗拉哈迪到直接电影,纪录片以真实为特质的内涵属性确立并得到发展,和剧情片相区别的外延边界逐渐明晰;从介于故事片和纪录片之间的“真理电影”到采取虚构策略达到真实的“新纪录电影”,纪录片边界逐渐模糊。从西方纪录片现状来看,纪录片与故事片进一步模糊,表现为故事片中渗入纪实因素、出现纪录剧情片和伪纪录片等杂交样式,等等。第三章主要考察中国纪录片历史与现状。首先回顾纪录片历史发展,随后从艺术手法上的突破和内容层面的探索两方面重点考察纪录片多元发展情势下初显的纪录片边界模糊的现状。通过第二、三章的回顾梳理,指出:从历史演进看,纪录片的发展是通过对既往形式的突破和超越而实现的,其历史走向就是一个边界不断扩大、发展的过程;从现实层面看,当今纪录片与剧情片相互借鉴、相互影响,纪录片和剧情片的边界呈现出一种交汇、模糊的状态并孕育催生了一些新兴片种,进一步模糊了真实和虚构的界限。第四章重点探讨作为纪录片本质内涵的真实问题。首先指出,纪录片从追求物理真实到社会真实乃至本质真实,确立了真实的权威地位;但随着影像真实、纪录真实、乃至本质真实的确定性都遭到质疑,“真实”成为问题。随后分别从哲学真实和艺术真实的维度对“真实”内涵进行辨析;继而对中西方艺术真实观的发展进行历史梳理;最后在辨析纪录片与哲学真实和艺术真实关系的基础上,指出在纪录片发展中存在着以追求真实为目的的明线,同时也存在着采取虚构手段的暗涌,对真实的追求构成纪录片的本质属性和稳定内涵,而包括虚构在内的各种艺术表现手法的运用则构成了纪录片的模糊外延。第五章探讨纪录片的标准问题。首先评析传统纪录片标准,肯定其价值和意义,同时指出其不能适应当代纪录片实践发展的局限之处;随后,在学理层面重点讨论传统标准相对忽略的艺术创作中的主体性问题;最后,在指出纪录片创作中的主体介入和纪录片中间性质的前提下,提出纪录片的界定标准应是建立在动机、文本、功能等多方面因素综合考察之上的复合标准,即纪录片的创作动机是力图再现和诠释某种客观存在或历史事实;其文本展示的是真实存在而非虚构的历史和世界,内容符合客观现实的事实基础和事实逻辑;其功能在于通过其所讲述内容唤起观众对影片所指涉的现实历史世界的认知和思索。通过前五章对历史现象的梳理和理论辨析,本文形成了关于纪录片边界开放的理论框架。在此基础上,第六章针对中国纪录片的创作实践,在摆脱束缚的开放的框架下,从主流价值、作品价值以及市场价值三个维度,探讨了未来纪录片创作发展的趋势,并尝试在主题内容、艺术表达以及生产模式等方面提出一些建议。本文的探讨基于为纪录片理论与实践搭建一个开放的平台,并提倡以历史的、发展的眼光看待纪录片领域的理论与实践问题,因此,本文也同样将自己的观点与标准置于一个开放的、发展的系统之下,期待着后来者的实践探索与理论研究不断补充并超越本文不可避免的某些历史局限和缺漏,共同推进中国纪录片的发展。更多还原

【Abstract】 The boundary of documentary is a meta question of theoretical studies according to this subject. Debates and arguments in this area have always been a highly influential aspect during the development of such genre. Whereas experiments in practice of documentary making are greatly impacting the defining criterions of documentary, the boundary became more and more blurred. This study tends to systematically explore the question of documentary boundary from a perspective coherent to the latest trend of documentary development. Based on the analysis of a great number of texts and references from previous works of theoretical studies; and in accordance with the principles of integrating theories with practices, and unifying logics and history; this study adapts knowledge’from various subjects to complete a multidimensional perspective research. First of all, it includes an exhaustive outline of global and Chinese documentary development in the fields of both theory and practice; based on the outline, there is an in-depth discussion of the essence of documentary; in the end, new criterions are brought forward. It is wished that this study will bring aspiring significance to the theoretical study and practice development of this genre.In the preface, the issue that documentary boundary currently needs to be redefined is brought out. It is also pointed out that, this study is based on the collisions of old and new ideas of a contemporary postmodernism discourse; subjects boundary blurring and unifying under pan-culture thoughts; and the blurring boundary between reality and simulacrum caused by the fast developing technologies today. Then there is retrospection and summarization of documentary boundary studies from the perspectives of noumenon study, text analysis and culture study. At last, the significances, difficulties, creativities, research methods and fundamental thoughts of this subject are broadly elucidated.The first chapter exhaustively outlines the development of global and Chinese documentary boundary theories. It firstly analyses the different theoretical definitions of documentary boundary in different discourses of Western film theories, such as the sculpting tendency of the early period, the realistic tendency of the classical period, and the notional tendency of the contemporary period. The conclusion of this analysis would be that, the theories of documentary boundary in the West have always been developing, and therefore changing. Following the analysis of Western theories, there is a review of Chinese documentary boundary theories development. It includes the differentiation of documentary and newsreel, the arguments associated with the“New Documentary Movement”and its differences with newsreel, and the recent“fiction/non-fiction”boundary discussion. At last, it points out that, the studies of documentary boundary theories in the West pays more attentions on the boundary between documentary and feature film; whereas discussions in China focus more on the boundary of internal sub-genres of documentary. The common aspects of Western and Chinese theorists are that, they all at some level deny the pre-existed theoretical patterns, and thereby extend the developmental space of documentary boundary.The second and third chapters review and comment on history and current conditions of both Chinese and Western documentary production.The second chapter mainly reviews the development of Western documentary boundary theory. From a historical perspective, at the very beginning when film was invented, documentary and feature film were actually born together, and later on went into different paths. From Robert Flaherty to‘Direct cinema’,the essence of reality documenting was established, and starts to earn its fame for documentary. During this era, the boundary between documentary and feature film is gradually clarified. However, from the Cinéma- vérité, which crosses the boundary of documentary and feature film, to the“New Documentary”, which employs fictional aspects to achieve authentic results; Boundary of documentary starts to be blurred. From a contemporary Western perspective, the next steps of furthermore blurring the boundary are the adaptation of documentary styled aspects into feature film. For instance the appearances of mixed style such as‘docudrama’and‘mockumentary’and so on.Chapter three is a study of the history and current status of Chinese documentary. Firstly it reviews the history and development of Chinese documentary, and discusses the blurring boundary status under a pluralistic developmental trend from the aspects of technical breakthrough and content exploring.From the reviews of the second and third chapters, a standpoint is established: from a historical perspective, the development of the documentary genre is accomplished through the breakthrough of previous formations. Its historical trail follows a process of boundary expanding and developing. From a realistic perspective, documentary and feature film are in the positions of interactively reflecting and influencing, the boundary between documentary and feature film appears in a form of mutually blurring and crossings over to each other. It spontaneously established a number of fresh genres, and blurred the boundary between fiction and nonfiction texts furthermore.Chapter four discusses the very essential issue of documentary authenticity. Firstly it is pointed out that, documentary’s authoritative status of being real and authentic is accomplished from being physically real to socially and essentially real. However, whereas the reality of image, documents, and even hypostatizes gradually starts to be questioned, the issue of authenticity becomes a problem. It then analyses and differentiates the essence of reality from the dimensions of philosophical reality and artistic reality. Then it reviews the points of reality from both Chinese and Western artistic perspectives. At last, by analyzing the interactive relationships between documentary and philosophical and artistic realities, it points out that there is a distinct developmental line of tracing reality and authenticity of documentary. However, simultaneously there is also a hidden line of adopting fictional methods to construct reality, which together constitutes the essential identity and stable connotations of documentary. Therefore, the blurring boundary appears as a consequent of the adoption of fictional methods and other artistic techniques.Chapter five discusses the defining criterions of documentary. It firstly analyses the criterions of traditional documentary. After affirming its value and significance, it points out that they cannot be adapted into contemporary documentary development. Then, on a doctrinal level, it discusses the subjective issues of artistic creation, which is very much neglected by the traditional criterions. Atlast, the precondition of subjective interposition and interspaces quality is pointed out. Based on such precondition, it is presented that, documentary criterions should be integrative and established upon multi-conditions include motivations, texts, functions and so on. That is, the motivations of documentary production is to document and interact with external subsistence’s or historical events; its texts are externally subsistent reality rather than fictional stories; its contents are consistent with factual elements and logics of external subsistence; its functions are to enlighten perceives and thoughts towards narrated external or historical events.Throughout the reviews of historical phenomenon’s and theoretical analysis from the first five chapters, this study constructs a framework of an open boundary theory of documentary. Based on this framework, chapter six, in accordance with contemporary Chinese documentary production practices, discusses the trend of future developments from dimensions of mainstream values, production values and marketing values. It also proposes in areas such as thematic contents, artistic expressions, and production models in an open framework.The discussion of this study tends to establish an open medium of documentary theories and practices, and would like to view theoretical and practical issues of documentary from historical and developmental perspectives. Thus, this study spontaneously posits its standpoints and criterions in an open and developmental system. It is expected for the future explorers to theoretically and practically enrich and exceed some inevitable historical limits and neglects of this study, and together advance the development of Chinese documentary industry.更多还原