Knowledge organization and film production: interdisciplinary dialogues on film indexing under a socio-cultural perspective
Abstract
This study proposes to discuss the sociocultural approach in KO with focus on interdisciplinary relations, within the scope of film indexing in cinema collections, considering two perspectives: the process of film making and the documents generated during this journey; and the design of aspects utilized to analyze and represent films for an information service. For this, film production is considered as a long and complex process that goes through multiple stages, ultimately forming an extensive chain until the film is finalized. In this sense, even after completion, the filmic object still undergoes several phases in the exhibition stage. As a consequence, a proposal for the organic organization of a film's documentation, should consider its pre-production, production and post-production processes, in order to ensure, among other aspects, the context in which the records were created, as well as the discourses that permeate this process. Thus, the proposal for the organic organization of this knowledge must take into account the dynamic context in which it is produced, interpreted and used and some possible facets can be drawn up to lead to access points resulting from the film indexing process are proposed: Cast, Characters; Conflict Matrix; Film Story Summary; Space and Time; and Film Setting as well as the source documents that subsyde the analytic process.
Downloads
References
Aumont, J. & Marie, M. (2011). A análise do filme. Rio de Janeiro: Saraiva.
Aumont, J. & Marie, M. (2003). Dicionário teórico e crítico de cinema. Campinas, SP: Papirus.
Beghtol, Clare. A. (2002). A proposed ethical warrant for global knowledge representation and organization systems. Journal of Documentation, 58(5), 507-532.
Beghtol, Clare. A. (2005). Ethical decision-making for knowledge representation and organization systems for global use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(9), 903-912.
Bordwell, D. & Thompson, K. (2013). A arte do cinema: uma introdução. Campinas, SP, Unicamp: São Paulo: Edusp.
Bordwell, D. & Thompson, K. (2010). Film art: an introduction. New York: McGraw- Hill.
Burch, N. (2020). Práxis do cinema. São Paulo: Perspectiva.
Campbell, D. G. (2000). Queer theory and the creation of contextualized subject access tools for gay and lesbian communities. Knowledge Organization, 47(3), 122-131.
Cordeiro, R. I. de N. & Tunico A. (2005). Análise e representação de filmes em unidades de informação. Ciência da Informação, 34(1), 89- 94.
Cordeiro, R. I. de N. (2000). Imagem e movimento. Rio de Janeiro: UFF: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência da Arte.
Cousins, M. (2004). Historia del Cine. Barcelona: Blume.
Edmonds, B. (1999). The Pragmatic Roots of Context. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context. Berlin; Heidelberg; New York, v. 1688, 1999. pp. 119-132.
Evangelista, I. V.; Grácio, M. C. C. & Guimarães, J. A. C. (2022). The concepts of domain, discourse community and epistemic community affinities and specificities. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: Research Trends, 16, e02138.
Foster, A. & Rafferty, P. (Eds.). (2016). Managing digital cultural objects: analysis, discovery and retrieval. London: Facet Publishing.
Guimarães, J.A.C. (2017). Slanted knowledge organization as a new ethical perspective. In: Andersen, J.; Skouvig, L. (org.). The organization of knowledge: caught between global structures and local meaning.. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 87-102
Garcia-Gutierrez, A. L. (2002). Knowledge organization from a culture of the border: towards a transcultural ethics of mediation. In M. J. López-Huertas (Ed.) Challenges in Knowledge Representation and Organization for the 21st Century: Integration of Knowledge Across Boundaries (pp. 516-22). Würzburg: Ergon.
Hjørland, B. & Albrechtsen, H. (1995). Toward a new horizon in information science: domain analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6), 400-425.
Hjorland, B. (1997). Information seeking and subject representation. Westport: Greenwood Press.
Hjørland, B. (2002a). Epistemology and the socio-cognitive perspective in information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(4), 257-270.
Hjørland, Birger. (2002b). Domain analysis in information science: eleven approaches- traditional as well as innovative. Journal of Documentation, 58(4), 422- 462.
Hjørland, Birger. (2004). Domain analysis: a socio-cognitive orientation for information science research. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 30(3), 17-21.
Hjørland, Birger. (2008). Deliberate bias in knowledge organization? In C Arsenault & J. T. Tennis (Eds.). Culture and identity in knowledge organization (pp. 256-61). Würzburg: Ergon.
Hjørland, Birger. (2009). Concept Theory. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1519-1536.
Hjørland, Birger. (2017). Domain analysis. In Birger Hjørland & Claudio Gnoli (Eds). ISKO encyclopedia of knowledge organization, https://www.isko.org/cyclo/domain_analysis
Ingwersen, P. (1996). Cognitive perspectives of information retrieval, interaction: elements of a cognitive IR theory. Journal of Documentation, 52(1), 3-50.
La Barre, Kathryn & Cordeiro, Rosa Inês de Novais. (2016). Film Retrieval on the Web: Sharing, Naming, Access and Discovery. In Allan Foster & Pauline Rafferty (Eds.). Managing Digital Cultural Objects: Analysis, Discovery and Retrieval (pp. 199-217). London: Facet Publishing.
La Barre, Kathryn & Cordeiro, Rosa Inês Novais de. (2012). That obscure object desire: facets for film access and discovery. In Diane Rasmussen Neal (Ed.). Indexing and Retrieval of Non-Text Information (pp. 234-62). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Latour, Bruno. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lemay, Yvon (2014). Archives et création: nouvelles perspectives sur l’archivistique In Yvon Lemay & Anne Klein (Eds.). Archives et création: nouvelles perspectives sur l'archivistique, (Cahier 1, pp. 7-19). Université de Montréal. Faculté des Arts et des Sciences. École de Bibliothéconomie et des Sciences de l’Information.
López-Huertas, Maria José. (2008). Some current research questions in the field of knowledge organization. Knowledge Organization, 35(2/3), 113-136.
López-Huertas, Maria José. (2015). Domain analysis for interdisciplinary knowledge domains. Knowledge Organization, 42(8), 570-580.
Olson, Hope A. (2002). The power to name. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Pinho, Fábio Assis & José Augusto Chaves Guimarães. (2012). Male homosexuality in brazilian indexing languages: some ethical questions. Knowledge Organization, 39(5), 363-369.
Santaella, Lucia & Tarcísio Cardoso. (2020). Mediação segundo Pierce e Latour. Lumina, 14(3), p. 5-21.
Smiraglia, R. P. (2012). Epistemology of domain analysis. In Smiraglia, R.P. & Lee, H.-L. (Eds.) Cultural Frames of Knowledge, 111-124. Wurzburg: Ergon.
Stam, R. (2003). Introdução à teoria do cinema. Campinas, SP: Papirus.
The Los Angeles Film School. The world of film production: how to make a movie, https://www.lafilm.edu/blog/the-world-of-film-production.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Text and Context. London: Longman.
Vanoye, F. & Anne Goliot- Lété (1994). Ensaio sobre a análise fílmica. Campinas, SP: Papirus.
Copyright (c) 2025 Rosa Inês Novais Cordeiro, José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Fernando Paes de Oliveira Chaves Guimarães
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
.png)
