We label works of art in broad categories and vague terms that allow freedom in the processes of artistic creation and audience interpretation without any fixed limitations. We call these categories “genres.”
Literature and film share many genres in common, such as science-fiction, romance, mystery, biography, comedy, drama and horror. These categories each have loose criteria based on common conventions.
For example, Wikipedia states under characteristics of science fiction (science fiction) “Themes related to science, technology, space and the future, as well as characteristic plots or settings…”
So, there’s more to a genre than just proclaiming it the convergence of two art forms, like cinema and poetry. If “genre” is a loose set of criteria for categorization, then we must also identify the characteristics of or common conventions found in cinépoetry. If this has already been done, I cannot locate a list of these commonalities as I can for science-fiction or other genres.
Perhaps this has not yet been done because it requires a sufficient amount of data in the form of cinepoetry, which itself presents a couple of difficulties, including the predicament of identifying cinepoetry while in the process of trying to define it. You run risk of shaping a genre with a small sample that may not include key representational aesthetic components. Such research also requires an analytical coding system for cinepoetry’s common aesthetics and a dedicated group of research coders.
Because we are focusing on a converged genre, we must also decide from which parent art form the new genre will be approached – from the perspective of cinema or poetry? For my research, I approach the genre cinematically, particularly in its electronically mediated form on the Internet.
CONTINUE TO NEXT SECTION>>> DILEMMA