What comes to mind first when you think of a landscape? Descriptions of what constitutes a landscape may entail questions of authenticity and ‘realness’ regarding visual representations of locations that encapsulate the natural environment or symbols of human development. Scholars of human geography (Escher 2006, Lukinbeal 2005, R. Singh & S. Singh 2019, Sommerlad 2022) explore the role of landscapes beyond the limiting understanding of them as merely backdrops or settings to some greater agent of culture, establishing instead the cultural and social activity represented and produced by such geographies. A closer look at cinematic landscapes specifically, offers a better understanding of how landscapes in film are not just consisting of place but also space, spectacle, metaphor and identity (Lukinbeal 2005, R. Singh & S. Singh 2019). This blog explores how these dynamic components of cinematic landscapes can give geographical locations a character in and of themselves in a film.
Diagram from “Routledge Handbook of Media Geographies”, ‘Chapter 9: Film Geography’ (Sommerlad 2022, 120)
Film Geography
First, an introduction to cinematic landscapes based in the greater context of film geography is necessary. Sommerlad (2022, 119) states that “film geographical studies approach an examination of film-related contents, aspects of film productions and the (inter-)effects of film and life-world contexts”, outlining the following six research areas of the field: “(1) geography in film, (2) geography of film, (3) screen tourism, (4) cinematic cartography, (5) didactics of geography and critical film geography, (6) film as a methodological instrument and medium of communication in research” (119). Cinematic landscapes falls under the second category, geography in film, which seeks to comprehend ‘cinematic space’ through “theoretical examinations of forms of cinematographic design and questions of how an audiovisual continuity emerges, providing the spectator with a cohesive spatial impression of what is seen” (Sommerlad 2022, 120 citing Escher 2006; Clark 2008). Therefore, cinematic landscapes from a geographical perspective are evaluated for the larger cultural context they contribute to.
Landscapes As...
Lukinbeal (2005) states that “cinematic landscapes are not mere representations but are working landscapes involved with cultural production and reproduction” (17). He goes on to outline four components to cinematic landscapes: landscape as space, place, spectacle and metaphor (Lukinbeal 2005). “As space, landscape provides an area in which the drama of the film can unfold. As such, landscape is constantly turned into a space of action” (Lukinbeal 2005, 6). This idea takes landscape from the background to the foreground as an actor in the development of the story being told on screen.
“Landscape as place is closely associated with the geographic expression ‘sense of place’ and refers to the location where the narrative is supposedly set” (Lukinbeal 2005, 6). Establishment of landscape as place offers structure to the narrative and mediates interpretation through visual cues achieved by cinematography that establishes a sense of place (Lukinbeal 2005). Landscape as a spectacle refers to showing “something beautiful and visually pleasant”; it “encodes power relations within the gaze. Determination of what constitutes beauty, who is gazing and what we are gazing upon” (Lukinbeal 2005, 11). The function of place is often combined with the spectacle of landscape, as certain images of place in and of themselves can be captivating enough to entertain an audience, thus transforming place into dynamic space. Lastly, landscape as metaphor also works to evolve place into space by appropriating meaning and ideology “into landscape, the most common example of which is the attribution of human or social characteristics to landscape” (Lukinbeal 2005, 13). The way in which landscapes can be used as symbolism for human experience and emotions further develops cinematic landscapes into dynamic, cultural examples of space.
While Lukinbeal (2005) addresses the four factors of space, place, spectacle and metaphor of cinematic landscapes, R. Singh and S. Singh (2019) explore the element of identity. They uncover how cinematic landscapes are rife with place, space and cultural identity representation and development. “Landscapes are treasures of the past, frame contemporary everyday life, and affect future environmental, economic and cultural processes. As material custodians of both historical memory and the sense of place, landscapes encapsulate our attachments, emotions, perceptions and knowledge, as well as our interests, decisions and actions. Modern societies are marked by identity crises which, all too often, involve major landscape disruptions” (Roca et al. 2016, as cited in Singh and Singh 2019, 91). Place identity specifically derives from landscape based on the attachment one makes with the region they grew up in or spent a significant amount of their development in (Singh and Singh 2019). Spatial identity echoes similar features to Lukinbeal’s (2005) ‘landscape as metaphor’, as it explores how film can “characterize the landscape”, thus offering the appropriate space for the narrative to unfold (Singh and Singh 2019, 92). Lastly, cultural identity refers to the “values, signs, symbols, associations which is attached to a particular landscape” and thus explores how humans interact with certain landscapes (Singh and Singh 2019, 42). These cultural components to landscape can be implied and signified upon in cinema to further develop a narrative using visual cues (Singh and Singh 2019).
The aforementioned theories contextualizing cinematic landscapes in the greater context of film geography will be explored further in the following posts of this blog. Deeper analysis of these dynamic components to cinematic landscapes has led me to wonder if geographical locations can take on the role of a character in a cinematic narrative much like a human actor does.
Today my teacher confessed to me that she remembers my name because of my handwriting 😂📝 and I know I haven’t been active lately (most of the posts are coming from Liz), so here are my AP Human Geography Notes!
When we think of characters in a film we often think of the living actors portrayed on screen who play a scripted role in the narrative. Characteristics are defined as “a feature or quality belonging typically to a person, place, or thing and serving to identify them” (Oxford University Press 2022). If a place can have characteristics then it ought to also be considered a character in films. Certain developments in the cinematic world confirm this notion such as the well known global curated film streaming platform, production company and film distributor, MUBI, having an entire selection of 102 films categorized under the heading, ‘Landscape as Character’, where the “landscape/environment plays a central role” (MUBI 2022). A closer look at the way in which film geography scholars discuss cinematic landscapes also speak to a strongly emerging theme of places having their own personality on the screen, echoing many of the themes outlined in the previous post.
Screenshot of ‘Landscape as Character’ movie list on MUBI (https://mubi.com/lists/landscape-as-character)
Landscape as an Actor
The first way in which landscape acts as a character is in its function as an agent of story development. “Location is a character, not just a backdrop for the characters. The environment makes the story possible” (Prichard 2006, 1). Prichard (2006) discusses how there are entire genres of film that are landscape-driven, such as the American Western. This notion echoes Lukinbeal’s (2005) concept of landscape as space. “As space, landscape provides an area in which the drama of the film can unfold. As such, landscape is constantly turned into a space of action. Put another way, social space de-centers the importance of locational place allowing narratives to unfold'' (Lukinbeal 2005, 6). Characters in a film function as actors of change and development. Perhaps that is why the profession is called acting. If action is what constitutes a character, then landscape exhibiting properties of action gives it similar properties to human characters (Sharman 2020). “Landscape as place becomes a central component of the narrative in that it acts upon social space” (Lukinbeal 2005, 7).
Landscape as Metaphor
With landscape established as an agent of narration development, another way in which it acts as a character is by functioning as a vehicle of emotion, echoing Lukinbeal’s (2005) landscape as metaphor. “Small metaphors are rhetoric devices or literary tropes, for instance, a character is sad and it begins to rain” (Lukinbeal 2005, 13); or further “various physiographic features of earth is used for expressing human emotion such as green vegetation, snowy mountains and hills for romance, rain for sadness, love and sometimes to depict joyous atmosphere, rugged topography of desert to depict loneliness, breakups etc. (Singh and Singh 2019, 93). Filmmakers use landscape as metaphor to evoke emotion in much the same way they use plot or character development to achieve an emotive response. These landscape metaphors work as cues that “invented communities evolve with regard to cinematically transported symbols that are to be read and felt in a certain way and which are used to show us how we are supposed to feel, think and react” (Escher 2006, 310). A key component to this role of landscape in emotive response is the way in which it can evolve and develop throughout the narrative. Prichard (2006) describes the landscape of his own film, Where it Once Was: “The Delta, like many imagine it, is first presented as a harmless, if not charming, location, arid, yet quaint. It develops into something a bit more sinister as the film progresses'' (8). Landscape can evoke the process of character development much in the same way that a human character might (Sharman 2020).
Spatial Identity
The emotional function of landscape as metaphor also touches on R. Singh and S. Singh’s (2019) notion of spatial identity. The metaphors and symbols of landscape can evoke or confirm a sense of development either for the actors on screen or the viewers. “Each piece of land that the characters inhabit directly and intentionally reflect their demeanor and motives. One could draw the conclusion that they are merely extensions of the land” (Prichard 2006, 14). This idea implies that the landscape not only reflects but becomes a part of the character's identity. It is through this relationship between the protagonist and their environment that a sense of identity for both the person and the place is revealed (Prichard 2006). Prichard (2006) even speaks to the inverse of this relationship by suggesting “that artists in similar environments might produce art that would invoke similar feelings”, implying that landscapes influence the identity of an artist and their potential portrayal of that landscape in their art (Prichard 2006, 4).
Landscape as Spectacle
Lastly, beyond being an agent of emotions and action, landscape can function specifically as a main character due to its spectacular nature. Landscape as spectacle is developed through cinematography. Certain camera angles or tactics such as establishing shots and panning paired with choice editing of such footage can give landscape the main stage by captivating the attention of the viewer (Lukinbeal 2005). “For instance, both landscape and cinema are defined through the act of viewing and therefore all cinematic landscapes at some level function as spectacles” (Lukinbeal 2005, 15). This function can give landscape the limelight over other characters such as the case with Where it Once Was, as “the human characters are secondary to the landscape. The story development comes in terms of the landscape and not the characters”; “the film strives to use the landscape and camera as characters of their own” (Prichard 2006, 8-9). Making landscapes the main character of a film is a cinematic device that has existed for quite some time. Take well known director of American Westerns, John Ford, for example. “Ford used the landscape as a dramatic device for thrusting his Westerns into the realm of legend. ‘I think you can say that the real star of my Westerns has always been the land,’ he said” (Ford 1997, 102 cited in Prichard 2006, 10). As Prichard (2006) puts it in regard to his film: “Ultimately the landscapes take on a presence of their own and transcend from “set” to “lead”; “place” into “character” (19). After researching how filmmakers achieve this transformation of landscape from set to character, I wondered if I could achieve the same.
I worked for my phd in the bib for the first time since covid hit th planet! Nice to be back 😃 I love the acadameic library at our #CamusMainz for its perfect working environment. I am always the most concentrated in the library 🤓 #bergdoktorarbeit @uni_mainz #humangeography @geo_unimainz (at Georg Forster-Gebäude) https://www.instagram.com/p/Cl9Ma1gMoZK/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
"Yet the power to invoke a sense of 'being there' was also culturally constructed, animated by the faith in the medium's superior realism. 📸Photography seems to be a means of transcribing reality. Photographs appear to be not statements about the world but pieces of it, even miniature slices of reality, without revealing its constructed nature or its ideological content. It seems that the camera does not lie. The realism of photographs made such travelling real and seductive. Visiting places through photographs was sometimes more or less as good as embodied gazing." 💻Citation from John Urrys book "The tourist gaze 3.0" #bergdoktorarbeit #touristgaze #photography #humangeography (at Hamburg Speicherstadt + Hafencity) https://www.instagram.com/p/CloPv-rMWmh/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
"Many photographs portray joyful moments and familial togetherness with traces of unhappiness or friction being absent. People are keen to photograph, for it is in the space of the photograph that they enjoy longed-for family happiness. People gaze at the holiday image- and the imaginary family or friendship of their holiday gazes back. The perfect social relationship and the perfect holiday may be a figment of the public imagination, but it stands for something that ought to exist. Tourist photography is not characterised by the suspension of norms but, like the everyday, is culturally informed by particular notions about what constitutes a loving social life." Quote from John Urry and his book "The tourist gaze 3.0" #bergdoktorarbeit #touristgaze #tourist #humangeography @unimainz & @geounimainz (at Tourist Club Area) https://www.instagram.com/p/CkX1B2WsCRu/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
To the history within us all, but especially, Ruth 🐂🏙🌳, and that badass ol’ monument of a car that never moves - may it, and all the spirits of our past have their haunting pleasure. Resist at your peril #givein #dallastx #cedarsdallas #humangeography #trammellcrow #cityscapes #streetphotography https://www.instagram.com/p/CidNeHopfmY/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
The ski trip to the Wilder Kaiser was great but how long will it last: the snow ❄️ , the fun 🤩 , the memory 🎞? With all the texts I read and after all the understanding I compiled with my studies I really started to have a differentiated view of traveling and tourism. I always knew that (mass) tourism is bad for the environment and I stoped flying after my trip to croatia for my master thesis. Under the umbrella term ‘over tourism’ a lot of these negative phenomena are already described and researched. But actually there is a lot more! Traveling is living your dream at least 2 weeks every summer but I started to disbelieve this promise. A promise provided by the industry but also from ourselfs as tourists when we post edited photos in social media. #humangeography #valentingroebner #bergdoktorarbeit (at SkiWelt Wilder Kaiser - Brixental) https://www.instagram.com/p/CgWxzLXMVGX/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
