Thursday, April 9, 2009

Final Project Proposal

For my final project I plan on focusing on the idea of “credibility” that’s present in many ways throughout House of Leaves. This topic was greatly inspired by the following statement: “Ironically, the very technology that instructs us to mistrust the image also creates the means by which to accredit it”, stated by Zampano. I want to do extensive research on the development of this idea, which I believe ultimately begins with the emergence of technology. In short, I’m trying to argue that while it has provided the world of film and photography with methods of enhancing their images, technology has become the ultimate reason that images can no longer be trusted or held as truthful. I plan on obtaining this information through books written on photography/film and the psychology of these as well.

I also want to relate the main argument to the supposed differences between Hollywood films and documentaries (which was talked about in the book), and link that to why the Navidson Record is so intensely critiqued for being fabricated (which in reality, it is completely nonexistent). Basically I’m interested in how the entire novel is built around the question of credibility, including a blind man who critiques a made-up film and Johnny who is openly dishonest. I obviously have quite a few ideas, but in the end I hope to narrow it down and thoroughly investigate the fabrication that is continuously seen and discussed in House of Leaves.

1 comment:

Adam Johns said...

Hmm. Here's the problem as I see it: you assert (correctly) that the whole novel is built around the question of credibility, and end on the desire to "thoroughly investigate the fabrication that is continuously seen and discussed in House of Leaves." This is one of those topics where one could, quite literally, write a book on it (setting aside the question of whether it is desirable to do so, one *could* do so). The some different danger in what appears to be the more specific first paragraph - "technology has become the ultimate reason that images can no longer be trusted or held as truthful" - is that it is quite possibly just obvious - is this an interesting finding? Or is this basically equivalent to proving that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen?

How, then, to deal with an overly obvious argument and an overly broad area of inquiry? Combining the two is at least a start: beginning with the threat to authenticity posed by technology (in film) you might make an argument (arguing, perhaps, that all authenticity is gone, or that some form of authenticity remains) which addresses the ways in which the book (the physical object, as we talked about in class) operates like a film or like a set of a photographs. You might, for instance, start out by dealing with the (blank) image of Delial...

That suggestion is obviously not the only or the the best way to focus your topic(s) - it's meant strictly as an example.