entire material and written the introduction, maps out the contours of a possible discourse, raising a number of problems familiar from other areas which are here particularly virulent. One of these concerns the widespread attempt to locate authenticity of art production in its "rootedness55, "ethnicity". The political implication of such an attitude lies in fetishising the uniqueness of local experience precisely in order to dislocate its relation to universal laws. And because of the enormous ideological significance of film it is here that the false identity of regionalism is held up as an artistic virtue.
The development of a position in film is—as in other areas— connected with an attempt to identify and appropriate a heritage. The discussion on Eisenstein and Tarkovsky are signals of the direction in which international traditions are critically examined for their productive relevance, and these are complimented by discussing the works of two Indian film makers Ritwik Ghatak and Ketan Mehta.
Colour, sound, movement—inherent elements in the cinematic experience are themselves subject matters of centuries of scientific enterprise. How and on the basis of what scientific understanding are they utilised in film making? The papers in this section note the theoretical problem of defining experience from the presence of a phenomena considering the status of the absence of it—here, darkness and light, single and multiple perspective, silence and sound.
It is inevitable that an endeavour such as this issue, enters into controversial areas, and we call upon our readers to enter into a debate. Moreover, this, the fifth issue of Journal of Arts & Ideas, is also the first of a series oftheme.issues in which a concentration of papers on an art form or a problem will, we hope, provide a forum for discussion. As in the case of film, where other arts are immediately involved, the next issues on literature should also bring into focus the various inter-related elements of aesthetic productions.
Journal of Arts and Ideas 3