www.efis.ee<\/a>) for\ninterpreting the networks of films and their makers in Estonian post-war film\nhistory. For making sense of the \u2018creative units\u2019 in film history we used the\n\u2018deme\u2019 concept of Hartley and Potts (2014). A \u2018deme\u2019, originally coined in\nAncient Attica, is for Hartley and Potts a population group that does\nstorytelling together and in that creates a shared understanding of identity –\n\u2018us-ness\u2019. That is, it is a group that works auto-communicatively, at least to\nan extent, in terms of of Juri Lotman (1990). In this broad conceptual context\na \u2018deme\u2019 for us was a group of filmmakers that perhaps shared an interest in\nsimilar forms of storytelling, or in represented objects or themes. These\ngroups evolved together, by learning and motivating each other and they may\nhave even articulated their shared position – i.e. they worked\nautocommunicatively in order to codify their group.<\/p>\n\n\n\nWe\nhypothesised that the relatively rich dataset in EFIS would enable to study the\nevolution of such demes in Estonian film history. EFIS includes rich\ndescriptions of each film ever produced in Estonia – on their makers, their\ncontents, their screenings, their awards and their reception. As such they also\nconstitute \u2018nodes\u2019 of networks – descriptions of \u2018meetings\u2019 of different\nfilmmakers and other artists and what topics did they work on and what did they\nchoose to represent in their films. In our study we, thus, used these\ndescriptions to analyse the films exactly as such nodes of networks of people\nand the topics these people chose to do their storytelling about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In terms of\na more concrete analytic method we carried out what is conventionally known as\n\u2018link analysis\u2019 – we studied the links between makers and\nthemes\/representations. We focused on links where one counterpart was always a\nleading member of the creative team – either a director, producer or\nscriptwriter of the film. We also left out all animations and many other\nsubtypes (educational films, newsreels, etc) as their inclusion would have\nundermined the analysis in various ways. We created also a clear division\nbetween documentaries and fiction films as their maker communities are quite\ndifferentiated. In our paper presentation we focus on the networks between\ndocumentary makers and themes\/representations of the films. We demonstrate how\nthe method can, indeed, reveal significant changes in maker demes and in their\nartistic choices. Yet, we discuss also how data quality may undermine such\nanalytic endeavours.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
References<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nHartley, J. & Potts, J. (2014).\u00a0Cultural Science: A Natural History of Stories, Demes, Knowledge and Innovation<\/em>. London: Bloomsbury.
Lotman, Yuri. (1990).\u00a0Universe of the mind: a semiotic theory of culture<\/em>. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Demes of Estonian Film History: Analysing the Networks of Films and Their Makers This paper discusses the results of of a study that used the relational databases of the Estonian Film Information System (EFIS, www.efis.ee) for interpreting the networks of films and their makers in Estonian post-war film history. For making sense of the \u2018creative … <\/p>\n
Continue reading “Indrek Ibrus (Tallinn University), Maarja Ojamaa (Tallinn University, Tartu University), Jaagup Kippar (Tallinn University)”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"parent":2616,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3327","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3327","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3327"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3327\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2616"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.org.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3327"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}