{"word_count": 830, "character_count": 5882}
 Zabriskie Point, Michelangelo Antonioni (1970) For the past twenty years, a seminar entitled "Cultural History of Cinema" has taken place monthly in Paris. The seminar encourages exchanges between film specialists of different backgrounds as well as researchers from other fields who work on related subjects (press, theatre, exhibitions, other media...) in various branches of social science across multiple geographical areas. It has never been the organizers’ intention to found a school or a discipline, but rather to encourage a renewal of historical approaches to cinema in the French academic space via a bi-annual conferences. In this context, questions fundamental to the history of cinematographic phenomena have been raised, in order to characterize the place of cinema in its social, political and cultural contexts. We have privileged in particular the study of filmic objects within a historiographical project that pushes beyond their construction process.If cultural history can be defined as "a social history ofrepresentations" in Pascal Ory's words, then the cultural history ofcinema can be understood as a social history of representations &#160;created by cinema. &#160;But the notion of representation goes beyondthat of the image stricto sensu and encompassesthe discourses and practices through which these representations can also beexpressed. From that perspective, the field of cinema goes beyond that of film,so that it encompasses the activities and social imagery related to it, whetherit is to examine the contours of a cultural industry, spectator practices andtheir ideological determining factors, cinephilic and critical discourses, orthe mythologies conveyed by a mass art.Our twentieth anniversary isan opportunity to host a symposium aimed at questioning the epistemologicalissues between history and cinema and re-interrogating their scientificpractices. Several lines of reflection willbe considered during the conference. 1. Borders and territories of the culturalhistory of cinemaFirst, we will enquire intothe epistemological boundaries and territories of the cultural history ofcinema. Questions have arisen aboutits contours, objectives and foundations: what are its ultimate interests? Doesits specificity lie in its objects, its methodologies or in the way it looks atthe “cinematographic fact”? To what extent does it contribute to redefining thelatter? How does it dialogue with other forms of history and other approachesto culture, in particular those resulting from different types of studies (fromcultural to media studies, including gender or star studies)? In short, howdoes it fit into the international historiographic landscape? Particularattention will be paid to possible crossroads or convergences with otherapproaches, including New Cinema History.2. Transnational approachesAnother set of questionsconcerns the relationship of cinema to national and transnational issues, thusjoining the abundant historiography on these observation scales. If cinema iscaught up in the fabric of local practices and national issues, it is also theobject of global transfers and circulation from the end of the 19th century. In the age of a transnational turn of film studies ashistorical studies, how can we adapt the historicalapproach to this methodological challenge? How can/should we circumscribe theterritory of a cultural approach and consider its intertwining, from local toregional and then global? Does cinema provide cultural history with a textbookcase on this issue?3. Social history, history of cinematic apparatusCultural history is a form ofsocial history and, as such, particular attention will be paid to studies onthe women and men who, from film workers to ordinary spectators and more famouspersonalities, make cinema. For example, we could look upstream at filmprofessions, professional organizations, speeches and their social representations.Special emphasis will also be paid to the case of the screening context (attractioncinema, ordinary commercial cinema screenings, film clubs, heritage screenings,festivals, etc.). More broadly, the question arises as to what it means toattend a collective screening. How is the film performance experience organizedmaterially and socially? Shouldn't a cultural history of cinema take on thetask of examining the multiple variations of the spectators’ experience? But with which tools (quantitative, qualitative), which methods?4. Is a cultural history of forms possible?We would also like toreexamine a criticism sometimes levelled at the cultural history of cinema. Ifit is a history that goes beyond that of films, is there not a risk that itwill not make room, or not enough room, for cinematic forms? Unlike classical arthistory, which considered the analysis of the work almost as a compulsory exercise,the cultural history of cinema sometimes seems to approach the cinematographicfact without studying its form. This choice actually depends on the subjectsbeing studied. The question of the place devoted to film as an object ofcultural history nevertheless arises: can there be a cultural history of filmforms?The conference will take placein Paris, at the Condorcet Campus, the Institut national d'histoire de l'artand the École nationale des Chartes, on 28-29 May 2020. Proposals - in French or English,maximum 2000 characters with a bio-bibliographic presentation of 400 characters- must be sent before 15 December 2019. Write to: hcc2020@chartes.psl.euNotifications will be sent atthe beginning of 2020.Scientific and Organizing Committee : Christophe Gauthier (École Nationale des Chartes), Myriam Juan (Université de Caen Normandie), Anne Kerlan (CNRS, UMR Chine Corée Japon), Mélisande Leventopoulos (Université Paris 8), Stéphanie Louis (École Nationale des Chartes; IHTP), Dimitri Vezyroglou (Université Paris 1)Download the call for papersTélécharger