A-non Aristotelian approach in cinema: Brecht's aesthetic

The art of cinema, with its 125 year history, has formed a "film language" and created its own "tradition" by combining drama which was initiated and principalised by Aristotle 2000 years ago, in harmony with the technical structure of the camera, and the way the camera creates an illusion by taking the exact picture of what we see around us; and the mimesis, story, characters of drama, and the identification with the character that comes with the atmosphere created by a charge of intense feelings, and what is seen as the aim: catharsism, by therefore taking on drama.The most reasonable and systematic reaction against the principles and concepts of Aristotle, was theorised and put into action by Brecht. Moreover, Brecht not only identified and critisized points and structures in Aristotelian drama, he also laid down his own concepts, instead of Aristotle's. Brecht's aesthetic, which is known as epic-dialectical theatre, became a mediator of a historical, social, vital truth fit for a new age, and of a moving, transforming reality that changes as it develops, by swapping identification with alienation, and catharsism with consciousness.Brecht must have seen the freedom and uniqueness of cinema in terms of place, time and extent, as he not only worked in theatre, but also attempted to adapt and apply his institutionalised art to cinema, within his own frame of aesthetic. The apparent failure of Brecht's attempts, is due not to the unapplicability and non-adaptability of his art to cinema -as his form of art can be and has been applied to cinema- but to the industrialised structure of cinema. Although there are very few directors since Brecht, it has been proven that Brecht's aesthetic can be reflected on and adapted to cinema. However reflective and adaptive Brecht's aesthetic is to cinema, the applications are insufficient; maybe not in terms of quality, but quantity.Key Words: Cinema, Aristotle, Brecht, Catharsis, Alienation effect