The Ideology of Chinese Film Art

Film, as a medium of communication, is a product of the invention of modern Western science and technology; but film art, as a conceptual form, is also subject to the constraints of a specific cultural background. Therefore, film theory, both in terms of its object of study and in terms of itself as a conceptual form, is associated with a specific cultural background, which has led to the formation of a Chinese film theory with its own tradition and history. This tradition and history are characterized by the following three features:

1) China is a practical-oriented nation, and the Chinese way of thinking has been characterized by the spirit of pragmatic rationality. The influence of the spirit of pragmatic rationality makes Chinese film theory not develop into a set of abstract discursive aesthetics, but form a kind of practical aesthetics that combines the practice of criticism and skillful summarization of theory.

②The ethical cultural spirit of the Chinese people has led to the formation of the ideological tradition of "writing as the way of the world" in literature and art. This has made Chinese film theory pay more attention to the study of the function of the movie, and it does not stop at the abstract function of carrying the way of the world, but combines it with the concrete social-historical conditions, and has become a kind of film ontology with the social function as the core. And it evolved into the study of a series of relationships between film and the times, film and society, film and people, film and politics, and so on.

3) The traditional Chinese theoretical way of thinking focuses on the way of grasping the whole intuitively, so the Chinese film theory focuses on the study of the basic structure of the film at the level of the plot - the play - rather than at the level of the image - the lens. The play is the basic starting point for the ontology of Chinese film theory. It is at this level that traditional Chinese film theory puts forward its core concept of "shadow play". This concept emphasizes the dramatic nature of film, and sees "shadow" as a means of completing the "drama".

Early Chinese Film TheoryThe emergence of early Chinese film theory can be marked by the founding of the first film publication, Shadow Theater Magazine, in 1920, in which many influential film creators expressed their views on film. Xu Zhuozhu's Film and Theater (1924) and Hou Yao's Film and Theater Script Method (1926) were the first monographs published in China with a certain theoretical color. Because of the close relationship between early film writing and civilized drama, people also emphasized the connection between film and drama in theory. Zhou Jianyun said, "Shadow play is the play that does not open its mouth, the play that is colored and silent, the play that is photographed with a camera." Hou Yao said, "Shadow play is a kind of drama, where all the values of drama it has." Some people, even though they recognize the uniqueness of the art of cinema in its form, still believe that by its very nature it is drama. Xu Zhuozhu said: "Although the movie theater is a kind of independent Xing Xing thing, but from the point of view of the art of expression, in any case, it is always a drama."

Early Chinese theories of shadow play did not emphasize the function of film as a record and reproduction of reality, but emphasized the subjective expression of the author's attitude towards life through the story of the film and its edifying effect on society. Zheng Zhengqiu's idea that "the theater is the experimental field of social education, and the actors and actresses are the teachers of social education", and Hong Shen's statement that the movie and theater should "popularize the education and express the national culture" were the most representative ones at that time. Secondly, the theory of movie theater focused on the study of movie plot - the level of playwriting. It was believed that "the script of a movie is the soul of the movie". On this premise, people carried out theoretical explorations on the selection of materials, structure, conflict, climax, language and other aspects of movie plays, demanding interesting and intriguing plot twists, and ensuring the "harmony" and "fluency" of the narrative. Compared with the plot factor, the modeling factor is mainly regarded as a "supporting" component.

In the film theory discussions in the 1920s, besides the dominant theory of "movie and theater", there were some other ideas. For example, Shi Dongshan and others focused on the connection between cinema and fine arts, emphasizing the "visual beauty" and "formal beauty" of cinema, while Tian Han believed that cinema should be "a means of venting the deep bitterness of the people through film in an attitude of innocence". Tian Han, on the other hand, believed that the movie should be "made in an innocent manner, using film to vent the deep bitterness of our people. But the influence of these theories was not as far-reaching as the theory of "movie theater".

In 1933, the movie group of the Chinese ****production party was founded by Xia Yan and others. While participating in screenwriting, they also set out to establish a new film theory and criticism. Starting from the utilitarian purpose of the revolution, they demanded that the movie become a tool of revolutionary public opinion against imperialism and feudalism. They elaborated on the relationship between cinema and the times, the stages of cinema and other issues, as well as a wide range of literary and artistic theories, such as theme and subject, form and content, authenticity and tendency, etc. These ideas transcended the abstraction of cinema. These ideas went beyond the abstract "for the sake of life" and "for the edification of society" and put cinema into a broader and more severe social reality, laying the foundation of the realist ideological tradition for the advancement of Chinese film theory. In addition, the introduction of Soviet film theory also brought fresh blood to Chinese film theory. This introduction began with Hong Shen's translation in 1928 of С.□. In 1930, Liu Naou wrote an article introducing the theories of the Soviet Montage School and the Cinema Eye School, and the European Vanguard School, etc. Among these theories, the most important ones were the theories of the Chinese cinema. Among these theories, the one that Chinese filmmakers are most familiar with and happy to accept is V. I. Pudovkin's theory of narrative montage. His Theory of Movie Scripts, Theory of Movie Directing, Theory of Movie Acting, etc. were translated by Xia Yan, Zheng Boqi, Chen Li Ting, etc., and had a wide influence. At this time, Hong Shen wrote "Dictionary of Film Terminology", "Methods of Screenwriting in Film and Drama", "Film and Drama Acting" and other monographs and essays, while others also published "Theory of Film Directing", "Theory of Cinematography" and so on.

After the outbreak of the war of resistance, the theoretical active situation gradually became silent, and the most important harvest of the film theory in the 1940s was the "Film Track" (1941) edited by Chen Li Ting, which was the first theoretical translation in the 1930s. It was a relatively systematic theoretical monograph on the art forms and techniques of cinema that emerged on the basis of the theoretical translations and explorations of the 1930s. For the first time, it gradually transitioned from the bottom-up approach to a comprehensive grasp of cinema from the specific elements of images and lenses, providing a new point of view for the study of Chinese film theory. He pointed out that the movie "technically has the characteristic of resembling nature" and artistically strives to transcend the state of natural "portraits", "it is in this place of transcending the natural 'truth' that there exists the 'truth' of nature". It is in this 'true' place beyond nature that the expressive methods and art of the movie artist exist. Starting from the difference between natural objects and screen images, he analyzes the performance and application of film expression.

The Evolution of Chinese Film TheoryAfter 1949, the study of how films could carry out the general policy of literature and art of serving politics and workers, peasants and soldiers became an important task for the film theory circles of the People's Republic of China*** and the country. In the midst of this, there was a tendency to pay no attention to the laws of art and to overemphasize the direct service of films to the political movement of the time. In this regard, many comrades put forward different opinions.

Despite this, Chinese film theory has made outstanding progress in many aspects. In the study of the theory of film characteristics and techniques, the most valuable achievements of this period were Shi Dongshan's "Several Characteristics of Film Art in Expression" (1954) and Zhang Junxiang's "On the Special Means of Expression in Film" (1959). Starting from an analysis of the similarities and differences between novels, plays and films, Shi Dongshan emphasized on the one hand that "one should pay attention to the structural form of the whole scene and the whole scene in the development of the storyline of a film, as well as the structural form of the scene and the scene and the scene and the scene, and not to be fascinated by the form of the sub-transmission", and on the other hand, he contrasted the image of the cinematic image with the relative abstraction of the novel's depiction, emphasizing the "direct and intuitive feeling" of the film. On the one hand, it contrasts the figurative nature of cinematic images with the relative abstraction of fictional depictions, and emphasizes the visual art nature of cinema's "intuition". On the other hand, Zhang Junxiang contrasted the figurative nature of movie images with the relative abstractness of novels, emphasizing the visual art nature of movie "intuition". Zhang Junxiang, in response to the lack of attention to and familiarity with the characteristics of film that existed in film creation at that time, summarized and discussed the artistic characteristics of film from the perspective of artistic techniques. He elaborated the advantages of the movie in terms of figurative image and time and space jumping, and the disadvantages of "once and for all" and limitations of the picture field, pointing out that it is precisely these advantages and disadvantages that are opposite to each other and mutually constraining, which constitute the characteristics of its art form, i.e., "distinctive action", It was pointed out that these strengths and weaknesses, in contrast to each other, constituted the characteristics of the art form, namely, a series of principles such as "distinctive action", "structural simplicity and distinctiveness", "reliance on visual images and stylized expressiveness", and "the requirement to follow the logic of montage in addition to the logic of life", and so on. In addition, Ruan Qian's A Brief Introduction to Film Choreography and Direction (1949) and Gu Zhongxu's An Introduction to Film Art (1950) published in the early period of liberation are also monographs in this regard.

The study of the theory of film dramaturgy is a highly valued and accomplished area of Chinese film theory. The first of these was Xia Yan's A Few Problems in Writing Movie Scripts, published in 1959. Based on his rich experience in film writing, Xia Yan elaborated his understanding of the laws of film dramatization. He particularly emphasized the popularization and visualization of film writing. He demanded that movies be "accurate, distinctive and vivid" and "appeal to the audience's intuition and association". He attached great importance to the revolutionary and utilitarian purpose of film creation, suggesting that "purpose determines genre and structure", and believed that "films, like plays, need drama and distinctive characters". Therefore, he especially emphasized the importance of drama or plot, and based on this, he elaborated on the structure and techniques of film dramaturgy, enriching his theories of dramaturgy with the traditional literary concepts such as "cutting the head and thread" and "tightening the needle and thread". In addition, Chen Aoi's Characteristics of Film Literature Scripts (1956), Ke Ling's Creative Problems of Film Scripts - The Creation of Visual Image (1955) and Three Lectures on Film Literature (1958), Yuan Wenshu's Character and Plot in Film, Yu Min's The End and the End of Literary Creation*** (1955), and Yuan Wenshu's Characters and Plot in Film (1958), and Yu Min's The End and the End of Literary Creation*** (1955) are some of his theories on the structure and technique of film scripts. --The ****similarity of Literary Creation and the Peculiarities of Film Literature, and other essays and monographs have also positively and valuably summarized the artistic laws in this field.

In the early 1960s, the new subject of exploring the path of cinema with Chinese national characteristics drew theoretical attention. Yuan Wenshu and Luo Yijun, in their article "Theme, Authenticity, and Tradition" (1962), put forward the idea of "learning from tradition" as an important theoretical topic. They elaborated that the art of cinema "has an extremely broad possibility of learning from national traditions" and considered it "one of the keys to further improving the quality of the art of cinema". They advocated that "the art of film should learn from the national tradition, mainly from the traditional sister arts", and believed that such learning included different levels of creative methods and specific artistic techniques. Xu Changlin's "Exploring and Seeking Treasures from Traditional Arts - Study Notes on the Problem of National Forms in Cinema" and Han Shangyi's "Environment. Situation. Situation," and Jiang Jin's "On Formal Beauty," discuss how to draw on traditional narrative art (especially the art of rap), traditional fine art, and the experience of painting theory in the creation of films from different aspects of narrative and modeling, respectively.

In 1963, Cheng Jihua, Li Shaobai, and Xing Zuwen edited and published A History of the Development of Chinese Cinema (Volumes I and II), which was a pioneering work in the study of the history of Chinese cinema, and which also helped the study of cinema theories from one side.

All in all, the study of film theory in new China has made great achievements. However, due to the influence of historical conditions, there also existed serious metaphysical tendencies, the narrowness of the path of creation and the phenomenon of formulaic conceptualization of ideas. In 1959 and 1961, Comrade Zhou Enlai spoke twice on film work, emphasizing emancipation of the mind and respect for the laws of art, and in 1962, Qu Baiyin published his Monologue on Film Innovation, putting forward the propositions of "removing stereotypes" and "creating a new generation". In 1962, Qu Baiyin published "Monologue on Film Innovation", which put forward the ideas of "removing stereotypes" and "creating a new generation. This article not only called for a declaration of breaking through the forbidden zone in terms of ideological content, but also put forward the idea of innovation in artistic thought. He attributed the "stereotypes" to the "three gods" of theme, structure, and conflict, believing that they should be eliminated, and advocated the creation of "three new" ideas, images, and artistic concepts.

But with the gradual development of the leftist error, the study of movie theory came to a halt and regressed. "During the Cultural Revolution, Lin Biao and the Gang of Four rejected the historical traditions of Chinese cinema, and forced the experience of the "Three Outstanding" model operas on the movies. These theories ignored the characteristics of the art of cinema and stifled the creative individuality of the artists, causing Chinese cinema to suffer a great retrogression both ideologically and artistically.

Chinese Film Theory in the New Period After the Cultural Revolution, China resumed the construction of film theory. Especially after the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), a brand-new situation emerged in the study of Chinese film theory. What marked the basic outlook and major achievements of film theory in this period was the exploration of the nature of film.

Since the establishment of the concept of "movie and theater" in the 1920s, the study of dramatic film concepts and playwrighting theories has been dominant in Chinese film theory. 1979, Bai Jingsheng firstly published an article entitled "Throwing Away the Dramatic Cane", which challenged the traditional concept of dramatic film. He argued: "It is undeniable that in the process of its formation, the art of cinema did draw a lot of useful things from the theater, and cinema relied on the theater to take the first step. However, when the movie grows into an independent art, does it still have to rely on the crutch of drama forever?" The author answers this in the negative. He emphasizes that "the most obvious difference between cinema and drama is in the form of time and space", and discusses this specifically in the article. Then, Zhang Nuanxin, Li Tu and Zhong Yunxu published articles successively, putting forward slogans such as "Modernization of Film Language" and "Divorce between Film and Drama". After the publication of these articles, the question of the status of "drama" in film art soon attracted widespread attention. Shao Mujun and others disagreed with these views. After elaborating that dramatization is a broad concept, Shao Mujun proposed: "Dramatization is not equal to typecasting, but typecasting must be dramatized." In response to the above two opinions, Zhang Junxiang put forward the idea of "polygamy", he said: "Film literature should be inclusive of narrative, dramatic and lyrical literature, so it is called 'polygamy. "

A little later in the debate on the issue of film drama, another debate broke out on the issue of film literacy. The formulation of the proposition of the literary nature of film was not only a new effort to explore the ontology of film when the concept of drama and film was challenged, but also a critique of the bias of creative practice in that period to pursue too many new forms and techniques. In a director's summary meeting held in early 1980, Zhang Junxiang put forward the idea of "literary value". Zhang Junxiang said: "In response to the bias of some one-sidedly emphasizing the form, we have to cry out: don't neglect the literary value of the movie". Literary value" firstly refers to "the ideological content of the work"; secondly, "the shaping of typical images"; thirdly, "the means of literary expression"; fourthly, "the way of literary expression"; and fourthly, "the way of literary expression". The fourth is "rhythm, atmosphere, style, and manner". These are the "literary values" that should be "provided" and "determined" by the script, and "embodied" and "accomplished" by the director through cinematic means. These are the "literary values" that should be "provided" and "determined" by the script, and "embodied" and "completed" by the director through the means of movie. Zhang Junxiang's speech aroused widespread attention and reaction in the film industry, with many publications discussing the relationship between "literature" and "literary value" and film. Chen Zhaocai wrote an article on "Don't Forget Literature", and many articles emphasized the literary nature of film from different angles. In contrast to the above opinions, Shelley Cheng published an article entitled "Film Literature and the Problem of Film Characteristics", which questioned the "literary value" theory. He said, "I doubt whether 'film literary value' exists as a strictly literary concept, or whether it can be defined as such." "If the word 'value' must be used, then what the various arts are meant to embody can be said to be 'aesthetic value' and not necessarily 'literary value '." "In my opinion, it is not possible to talk about the essence of the movie in isolation from the aesthetic characteristics of the movie and the special means of expression of the movie." Zhong Yunxu also put forward the idea that "all kinds of art must develop themselves" in his article "Film Literature to Change Course".

On the other hand, a kind of more in-depth and concrete research on film theory, which is not in the form of controversy, has also made great progress, that is, the research on the structural characteristics of images (including sound). They can be divided into two levels. One level starts from the structure of the image itself, that is, the specific means of the movie. Ni Zhen, in his article "Movie Styling," suggests that "a play that is filmed, and a 'movie' that has elements of a play are two different things in nature. Therefore, when a movie is first conceived, it should be composed of visual (or audio-visual) elements to form its flesh and bones." Starting from this basic understanding, the author elaborates the importance of the stylistic elements and how they work in the article, taking into account the various aspects of playwriting, directing, acting, cinematography, and artwork in the creation of a movie. In his article "Sound in the Time Structure of Cinema," Zhou Chuanji emphasizes the importance of sound in cinema. First of all, "sound brings a richer inner movement to the movie; the movie adds an inner movement of rational thought, speech, and an inner movement of feeling, music. Thus the movie can form a more complex spatio-temporal structure" . Secondly, "a sound space emerges"; and "a tension emerges between the sound and the visual frame". In addition, Zhou Chuanji also studied the history of film from silent to sound, and the various constituents and modes of operation of film sound. Another level of research on the structural characteristics of images started from the classical theory of montage and long shot, and in 1980, Zhou Chuanji and Li Tao published an article entitled "A School of Film Aesthetics Worthy of Attention", which systematically introduced A. Bazan's theory of the long shot and put forward their own viewpoints. They think: "China has always attached great importance to montage, which is of course indisputable. But today, can we take the best of both worlds and not necessarily keep it one-sided? For example, compared with the theory of the long shot, the theory of montage pays insufficient attention to the internal structure of the shot and the expressive power of a single shot." Shelley Cheng and Yu Hong expressed another viewpoint on the montage and long shot debate, emphasizing that "the montage theory based on dialectical thinking is not outdated" while showing a more critical intention towards the documentary theory. Since then, there have been many articles that have examined these two levels of image theory in greater depth.

The research on the nationalization of cinema has been newly developed on the basis of the 1960s, which is manifested in the concrete and in-depth elaboration of this idea on the one hand, and the reflection on the slogan itself on the other. Among them, Luo Yijun was the one who insisted on the slogan of nationalization of cinema and made a more systematic exposition of its connotation. In 1981, he published "An Initial Exploration of the National Style of Cinema" and other related articles, in which he proposed that the national style of cinema is a dialectical unity of content and form, which is manifested not only in the grasp of the national characteristics of social life (the national temperament of the characters, the national style of the social environment and the natural environment), but also in the pursuit of the national aesthetic experience and the aesthetic habits. This is not a raw exploitation of certain techniques and programs of classical literature, opera and Chinese painting, but an absorption of the spirit of traditional aesthetics in accordance with the characteristics of film art. Shao Mujun, who disagreed with the slogan of nationalization of the cinema and made a strong statement of his own viewpoint, wrote in his article ""In the midst of differences, there are differences"". He argued in his article "The Debate on "Different in the Same"" and some other articles that "nationalization" is a slogan for foreign cultures, which requires that the influence of foreign cultures be placed under the jurisdiction of national cultural traditions. Advocating the path of "nationalization" in cultural issues inevitably implies that the present follows the ancient system and reveres the national essence, which is out of step with the pace of modernization.

The development of film theory in the new period, a **** the same tendency is to reflect on the traditional propositions, creating an era of unprecedented activity in the history of Chinese film theory.