How do you think the discourse communities of law and science shaped the literacy, thinking, and imaginations of audiences watching Birth of a Nation?
I think at this time law and science were very false, or very different from what we know today. At the time, scientists, writers and film creators believed African Americans were inferior, diseased in some cases and a false evolution of the race. However, we know now that it is really just a gene pigment of a difference. I think Mirabelli and Swales would say this fits into the film creators’ discourse community for the time period. It wasn’t hard for these writers and film makers, politicians and Northern families to put this image of the blacks out there for the public because they already had their same belief. Then, this film further advocated for that thought process on blacks and their role in our society.
Foucault- studied the courts and prison, hypothesized discourse is broadcast from these discourse comm and reinforce traditional values, or even reshaped those values in hopes of maintaining an overly status quo. “Episteme” right, wrong, good and bad
Saphir- Wolf hypothesis- the structure of language determines a native speaker’s perception and categorization of experience “It paints the world”
Mise-en-scence https://filmanalysis.yale.edu/mise-en-scene/
- Griffith relies on typage heavily
- physical and dress say about how character will be and the idea broadcasts how we should be thinking about them
- cross cutting and parallel editing, two diff people doing two diff activities but things are happening at the same time and audience knows that
- iris reveals something “iris in”, jump cuts common in early films like Birth of a Nation but since new ways have come about since of course
- concepts in first 47 -48.50 clip:
- iris- clipping from family to people walking in field
- parallel editing- knowing family in distress as war is going on
- typage- white family not used to such hard times
- decor- blue lighting and sad music
- costume- old aged look
- Griffith wants viewers to know the hard times this woman and her family are going through and what its like, at the same time to be right in front of it and surrounded by it
- second clip 19-21:42:
- Griffith with language structuring perception from his discourse community. Griffith wants the viewers to know “milatto” not being pure and seducing a white man. At the level of the visual, we are being told this relationship is wrong and they should be ashamed of it, these two people don’t belong together
- the lady is shy and flirty
- action: the actor does on the screen, not ad-libing with screaming, spitting?, crying and throws herself on the floor, looks intrigued and in love after the man leaves, witty smile, eyes big, crying, martyr role, he cannot touch, breaks fourth wall
- Griffith wants us to believe about Lydia- that she knows the relationship is wrong but she is attracted regardless, to this strong, white man. Details above of cues to give me this answer.
- third clip-Silas Lynch:
- after Lincoln assassinated, Stoneman seen
- lydia not loking like a maid, or being treaetd by one
- Silas Lynch and her alone in room, her continuing to break foruth wall
- two things happening, him in room alone waiting for her, her going out to talk to guy sitting down, then him to follow with her back in the room
- lots of cross cutting to show seriousness on screen
- lydia listening in on conversation outside door, while we can see both her and Silas
- griffith wants us to know there is a corruption in Silas and logical facilities
- lydia has come up in the world, Congressman Stoneman’s lover at the time
- behind Silas Lynch being introduced to Stoneman, theory that they are all together
I feel Griffith made the audience feel like they were watching something bad. Griffith made me feel and recognize how much time he spent into working the characters parts and emotional language before putting anything out into his discourse community
Alexis' Blog 