Iconographic-Iconological Method in Film Research

This content is available through online browsing (free) program dependent on page scan. Screen readers can not currently scan, so please contact JSTOR user support for access. We will provide PDF copy of your screen reader

The terms "icon theory" and "image theory" are often confused and never give definitions acceptable to all iconists and iconists. In 1955, Panofsky (cited in the review) defined "image" as a study of the subject of visual art and "Iconology" trying to analyze the importance of the theme in the culture in which it was produced . Many art historians called "imager" before Erwin Panafski, but I participated in what Panafsky had called "icon science". Another cause of semantic differences is the overinterpretation of Panofsky and Panofsky. His school made several art historians reject the word "Iconology". However, maintaining the distinction between imaging and imaging seems to be useful as raising concerns about the fundamental difference between word research and image research.

In the early work, Warburg used the term "image studies" and in 1908 replaced it as "image" with a special visual interpretation method called "critical imaging". Cultural and visual form of tracking pattern. In 1932, Panofsky introduced a breakthrough essay introducing a three-step visual interpretation approach including (1) primary or natural themes, (2) secondary or traditional themes, images, (3) 3 Announced. Level and essential meaning and content, ie icon theory. Image studies analyze world images, stories and fables, understand literary resource knowledge, understanding of type history, and how things and events under different historical conditions express themes and concepts I will. Contents and symbolic value of the world using "total intuition"