Source 5

Music is not only part of the narrative but also part of the space of the film, or its spacial reality. The journal article by James Batch, “The Sonic Lifeworld: A Phenomenological Exploration of the Imaginative Potential of Animation Sound” explores the role of music in films. Diegetic sound is physically present in the narrative, while non-diegetic is in the exterior, but we could think of it as specially present. The author says that music should not just legitimize the narrative, but also connect the character to the setting, thus connecting the audience to the character. This article, since it is talking about animated films, speaks mostly to sound effects of footsteps for example, but these ideas can also be used while talking about live action films. In my previous research the studies have said that music helps the audience connect to the character, meaning that the normal every day sounds like footsteps can legitimize the narrative but are just as important for making the story more relatable as non-diegetic music. 

This article has made me think more about the “space” of the film, the space it is in and the space different elements can create. Hopefully by exploring this idea more it will add another dimension to my paper and show that music can transcend all: the reality of the audience and the fiction of what is on screen, connecting them both. this article is credible because it is in a professional journal and sites and quotes other outside, credible sources.

Source #4

To continue with my research on sound I chose the article “The Non-Diegetic Fallacy: Film, Music, and Narrative Space” by Ben Winters in order to argue the true importance and great role music has in film. The article begins just like my research paper thus far, stating that certain movies like “Indiana Jones” would not exist without the music that accompanies it. The author, though, does not want to categorize the non-diegetic sound that is so characteristic of the movie to be seen as non-diegetic because it plays such a big role in the movie. By calling it non-diegetic, it “threatens to separate [the music] from the space of the narrative, denying it an active role in shaping the course of the onscreen events.” By categorizing music as non-diegetic is like categorizing it in the same way as a narrator, who is external. Music is every way part of the narrative as the mis-en-scene. The author also mentions that non-diegetic sound is a sort of indicator to the audience that was is going on on screen is part of its own universe, that it is fictional. This could also mean that diegetic sound is part of the movie’s universe, while non-diegetic sound is more so part of the audience’s universe. This makes me want to explore the interesting use of the same melody throughout the movie “The Great Lie” both as diegetic and non-diegetic sound.

This source is extremely credible because it sites many known film theorists, books, and articles on the subject, citing them accordingly. This source opens even further the door to discussing not only how different melodies but also different types of sound effect the movie and audience together and separately. This is a very strong source for my argument that the melodrama would not exist without music. 

Source #3

For my research I am now exploring different types of sound, mainly diegetic and non-diegetic and their effect on the film and audience. I found the article "Fundamental Aesthetics of Sound in Cinema" which Bordwell co-wrote with Kristin Thompson. This article summarizes all of the techniques used to improve a movie's sound and message through music, including loudness, timbre, pitch, rhythm, the actual selection and combination of sounds, fidelity, space, and time. Two of which interested me the most is diegetic and non-diegetic sound. Diegetic sound is sound that both the audience and people on screen hear, while non-diegetic sound is sound which only the audience hears. The article states that displaced diegetic sound recalls an earlier scene by repeating the same sounds in that scene but still staying in the present scene. This type of repetition is seen a couple times in the movie "The Great Lie" which I am analyzing in my essay. I have never thought of the repeating of music as a way to recall earlier scenes, but now because of this article I will explore that. Sound can also either clarify, contradict, or render scenes ambiguous, but it always has an active relationship with the images. This is interesting because in one scene the diegetic sound directly contradicts to a tense scene between two characters, and of course the director chose that music on purpose. 

This is a new type of article for me in my external research because it is not a scientific study, but it is very reliable because Bordwell co-wrote it, and he has written many articles and books on movies and the melodrama. This source is a helpful introduction to researching more about different types of sound and what that does for the film, not just the audience, and how it enhances it. 

Finding My Research Question

The newest study I have read is "Viewers' Interpretations of Film Characters' Emotions: Effects of Presenting Film Music Before or After a Character is Shown". This study adds another layer to how music affects us by seeing how we interpret an ambiguous scene if we hear music before or after it. When music was played before, the emotions were perceived as more intense and the mood of the music matched how the viewers interpreted the mood of the scene and character. This is because by priming the viewer with music, he or she would look for clues in an ambiguous facial expression that matched the mood of the music. When music was listened to after a neutral scene, the viewer can still continue to process the previous action using the new information provided by that music, and it provided the best emotional cue for interpreting emotions, since the scene's emotions were ambiguous. What was also found is that positive music led to a positive interpretation of the outcome or a character and negative music would create negative interpretations, like an outcome involving aggression or a character wanting to harm someone in the future.

This source is very reliable as it is a scientific study that also mentions many other studies that have been done on the same topic. This source adds more information to the other studies I have read thus far and is making me think on a deeper level about how much music really affects us as viewers.

This research made me start thinking about the idea that what really defines a movie's genre? The critics usually define it or tell us what the genre is, but the critics have to watch the movie in order to know, so it is the movie that is dictating the genre. But, what influences the viewer throughout the movie? Yes, the scenes played out on the screen and the plot line do influence how a movie is categorized, but if you think about it if a romantic movie or crime movie did not have any music in it, the categorization into a genre would be a little more ambiguous. It would take more time to categorize. Imagine the movie has a cut and dry plot of boy meets girl, they fall in love, a problem that breaks them apart follows the honeymoon phase of the relationship but then in the end they get back together. If that plot was accompanied by action music or dramatic music instead of the typical romantic music throughout, would it still be categorized as a romantic movie? There are many elements that go into categorizing a movie but I believe that music is the most important part. It determines a characters' likability, what we think will happen next, how well we remember the scene, and how we feel ourselves in congruence with the characters throughout.