Ingmar Bergman

Research output: Book Chapters | Papers in Conference ProceedingsBook ChapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Although Ingmar Bergman (1918–2007) figures on everyone’s list of philosophical filmmakers, attempts to specify the philosophical implications of his films have yielded highly divergent results. One reason why this is the case is that interpreters disagree over how the philosophical content of a cinematic oeuvre is to be identified. Some interpreters clearly believe it best to work with their own philosophical views when interpreting a film’s story and themes, while others contend that the content of a work is at least partly constituted by the filmmaker’s own ideas and background, which the interpreter should try to reconstruct on the basis of the available evidence. This entry focuses on claims made by interpreters who share the latter premise. Such interpreters often disagree about the content of a given film because they do not have the same evidence about its context, or because they reason about the evidence differently. I survey such disagreements among Bergman’s interpreters and then shed new light on his actual philosophical sources and ideas.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Routledge companion to philosophy and film
PublisherRoutledge
Pages560-568
Number of pages9
ISBN (Print)9780415771665
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2008

Fingerprint

Interpreter
Ingmar Bergman
Filmmaker

Cite this

LIVINGSTON, P. N. (2008). Ingmar Bergman. In The Routledge companion to philosophy and film (pp. 560-568). Routledge.
LIVINGSTON, Paisley Nathan. / Ingmar Bergman. The Routledge companion to philosophy and film. Routledge, 2008. pp. 560-568
@inbook{c008fa874ca94bc28933c7ceff886dfd,
title = "Ingmar Bergman",
abstract = "Although Ingmar Bergman (1918–2007) figures on everyone’s list of philosophical filmmakers, attempts to specify the philosophical implications of his films have yielded highly divergent results. One reason why this is the case is that interpreters disagree over how the philosophical content of a cinematic oeuvre is to be identified. Some interpreters clearly believe it best to work with their own philosophical views when interpreting a film’s story and themes, while others contend that the content of a work is at least partly constituted by the filmmaker’s own ideas and background, which the interpreter should try to reconstruct on the basis of the available evidence. This entry focuses on claims made by interpreters who share the latter premise. Such interpreters often disagree about the content of a given film because they do not have the same evidence about its context, or because they reason about the evidence differently. I survey such disagreements among Bergman’s interpreters and then shed new light on his actual philosophical sources and ideas.",
author = "LIVINGSTON, {Paisley Nathan}",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English",
isbn = "9780415771665",
pages = "560--568",
booktitle = "The Routledge companion to philosophy and film",
publisher = "Routledge",
address = "United Kingdom",

}

LIVINGSTON, PN 2008, Ingmar Bergman. in The Routledge companion to philosophy and film. Routledge, pp. 560-568.

Ingmar Bergman. / LIVINGSTON, Paisley Nathan.

The Routledge companion to philosophy and film. Routledge, 2008. p. 560-568.

Research output: Book Chapters | Papers in Conference ProceedingsBook ChapterResearchpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Ingmar Bergman

AU - LIVINGSTON, Paisley Nathan

PY - 2008/1/1

Y1 - 2008/1/1

N2 - Although Ingmar Bergman (1918–2007) figures on everyone’s list of philosophical filmmakers, attempts to specify the philosophical implications of his films have yielded highly divergent results. One reason why this is the case is that interpreters disagree over how the philosophical content of a cinematic oeuvre is to be identified. Some interpreters clearly believe it best to work with their own philosophical views when interpreting a film’s story and themes, while others contend that the content of a work is at least partly constituted by the filmmaker’s own ideas and background, which the interpreter should try to reconstruct on the basis of the available evidence. This entry focuses on claims made by interpreters who share the latter premise. Such interpreters often disagree about the content of a given film because they do not have the same evidence about its context, or because they reason about the evidence differently. I survey such disagreements among Bergman’s interpreters and then shed new light on his actual philosophical sources and ideas.

AB - Although Ingmar Bergman (1918–2007) figures on everyone’s list of philosophical filmmakers, attempts to specify the philosophical implications of his films have yielded highly divergent results. One reason why this is the case is that interpreters disagree over how the philosophical content of a cinematic oeuvre is to be identified. Some interpreters clearly believe it best to work with their own philosophical views when interpreting a film’s story and themes, while others contend that the content of a work is at least partly constituted by the filmmaker’s own ideas and background, which the interpreter should try to reconstruct on the basis of the available evidence. This entry focuses on claims made by interpreters who share the latter premise. Such interpreters often disagree about the content of a given film because they do not have the same evidence about its context, or because they reason about the evidence differently. I survey such disagreements among Bergman’s interpreters and then shed new light on his actual philosophical sources and ideas.

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/4246

M3 - Book Chapter

SN - 9780415771665

SP - 560

EP - 568

BT - The Routledge companion to philosophy and film

PB - Routledge

ER -

LIVINGSTON PN. Ingmar Bergman. In The Routledge companion to philosophy and film. Routledge. 2008. p. 560-568