| This dissertation is a critical analysis of how scholars from two perspectives---Universalist and Relativist---have approached and answered the question: how universal or culturally-specific are visual communications in film and video ? This is a central question in the study of the relationship between culture and communication; it involves a range of important topics connected to cinema studies, visual anthropology, and the cultural characteristics of visual communication.; In order to examine how and why scholars from these two perspectives provide opposed responses to the problem of the universality or cultural-specificity of moving images, significant works from each perspective were analyzed: Universalist---Christian Metz, Film Language (1974/1971), Paul Messaris, Visual Literacy (1994); Relativist---Donald Richie, Japanese Cinema (1971), Noel Burch, To the Distant Observer (1979), Sol Worth and John Adair, Through Navajo Eyes (1972), Eric Michaels, The Aboriginal Invention of Television (1986). Each work was analyzed with regard to five elements of argument design: critical questions or concerns, assumptions, evidence, methods, and strategies of verification.; Findings from this research suggest that the major significant difference between Universalists and Relativists is the framing of their critical questions and concerns, and the assumptions implicit in those questions. Although Universalist and Relativist perspectives are typically characterized as being in opposition, findings indicate that they each focus on different elements of film and video form or content and are framed at different levels of abstraction. Universalist and Relativist perspectives could be made compatible. It is recommended that a new, inclusive theoretical framework be developed that treats Universalist and Relativist ideas as a duality, not as an either-or choice. |
