Cinematic value derives from subjective experience, not from technique.

Evidence

Experts in cinematographic techniques refer to the fact that Chaplin was either unaware of or purposely ignored these techniques, being content with the photographic rendering of sketches, slapstick routines or other performances. This in no way lowers Chaplin’s status and one can hardly doubt that he was ‘filmic’. Nowhere but on the screen could this enigmatic figure - reminiscent of old-fashioned photographs right from the start - have developed its concept. As a consequence, it appears impossible to derive norms of criticism from cinematographic technique as such. … Whatever is ‘uncinematic’ in this film gives it the power to express, as if with hollow eyes, the emptiness of time. Irrespective of the technological origins of the cinema, the aesthetics of film will do better to base itself on a subjective mode of experience which film resembles and which constitutes its artistic character. — Theodor W. Adorno, The Culture Industry, 247

Categorization

Category: Contrarian or Surprising Claims

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s standing interest in medium-specificity claims and to the earlier reading purpose around Adorno’s analytical toolkit.