What happens when mystical writing is translated into a different semiotic system, such as cinema? To answer this question, we will analyse an interesting TV movie: Padre Pio da Pietrelcina, directed by Alberto Rondalli and distributed by the Italian public network RAI in 1998. For comparative purposes, we will also refer to a second TV movie from the same period, Padre Pio, directed by Carlo Carlei and distributed by Mediaset in 2000. we will first define alterity in relation to the semiotic functions implied by the natural world of experience and common sense, understood as a component of a specific culture whose form is produced by a projection on the basis of language and other semiotic systems. Second, we will investigate Rondalli’s movie about Padre Pio by focusing on the stylistic choices made in rep- resenting the mystic’s relationship with God. Third, we will analyse Carlei’s movie and compare the two different tactics, aimed at ellipsis and emphasis respectively. Finally, we will draw some conclusions about the different effects the two contrasting choices have on the production of the experienced world, and propose an interpretation of the semiotic function of the irrepresentability of the mystical union between creature and creator.
Representing the Mystical Otherness. Padre Pio’s Mystical Experience in Words and Images
Francesco Galofaro
2022-01-01
Abstract
What happens when mystical writing is translated into a different semiotic system, such as cinema? To answer this question, we will analyse an interesting TV movie: Padre Pio da Pietrelcina, directed by Alberto Rondalli and distributed by the Italian public network RAI in 1998. For comparative purposes, we will also refer to a second TV movie from the same period, Padre Pio, directed by Carlo Carlei and distributed by Mediaset in 2000. we will first define alterity in relation to the semiotic functions implied by the natural world of experience and common sense, understood as a component of a specific culture whose form is produced by a projection on the basis of language and other semiotic systems. Second, we will investigate Rondalli’s movie about Padre Pio by focusing on the stylistic choices made in rep- resenting the mystic’s relationship with God. Third, we will analyse Carlei’s movie and compare the two different tactics, aimed at ellipsis and emphasis respectively. Finally, we will draw some conclusions about the different effects the two contrasting choices have on the production of the experienced world, and propose an interpretation of the semiotic function of the irrepresentability of the mystical union between creature and creator.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
estratto_Galofaro_Alterita.pdf
Open Access dal 01/06/2023
Descrizione: Articolo principale
Tipo di file:
PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione
1.18 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.18 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.