李刚存. “合分论”引申的两条轨迹 ——浅谈纪录片与专题片的界定[J]. 云南农业大学学报(社会科学), 2008, 2(5): 55-58.
引用本文: 李刚存. “合分论”引申的两条轨迹 ——浅谈纪录片与专题片的界定[J]. 云南农业大学学报(社会科学), 2008, 2(5): 55-58.
LI Gang-cun. Two Paths Expanded from the Theory of IntegrationDisintegration:Brief Discussion about the Limits between Documentary and Special Piece[J]. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University (Social Science), 2008, 2(5): 55-58.
Citation: LI Gang-cun. Two Paths Expanded from the Theory of IntegrationDisintegration:Brief Discussion about the Limits between Documentary and Special Piece[J]. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University (Social Science), 2008, 2(5): 55-58.

“合分论”引申的两条轨迹 ——浅谈纪录片与专题片的界定

Two Paths Expanded from the Theory of IntegrationDisintegration:Brief Discussion about the Limits between Documentary and Special Piece

  • 摘要: 对纪录片和专题片的分辨,学界和业界的争论由来已久。从“合分论”出发,提出界定的根本问题——“专题片是不是纪录片”,并探讨有关史著、实践操作及理论探讨中对这一根本问题的回答,进而认为“合论”更多地代表着一条学术路径,而“分论”更多地代表着实践路径。在此基础上,倾向于用“合论”将“合分论”合流,即将专题片归类于纪录片。

     

    Abstract: About the discrimination between the documentary and the special piece, the argument between the academia and the field is longstanding. This article embarked from the thory of integrationdisintegration and advanced the basic question to the limit: Is the special piece a documentary? The answers given by the history literature, the practice operation and the academic papers had been discussed. The viewpoint was subsequently proposed that the integration theory was representing an academic way while the disintegration theory was representing the practice way. Depending on this foundation, this article inclined to uphold the integration theory, that is to admit the special piece is a documentary.

     

/

返回文章
返回