Dominique Nasta. Meaning in Film: RelevantStructures in Soundtrack and Narrative.Regards sur l’image, Série IV, Esthétique et théories de l’image.Berne; Berlin: Peter Lang, 1991. [179 p. ISBN 3261044829. $31.80]

MELISSA URSULA DAWN GOLDSMITH

THE JOURNAL OF FILM MUSICVolume 1, Number 2/3, Pages 283-287ISSN 1087-7142 Copyright © 2003The International Film Music Society, Inc.

In this thought-provoking, demanding, and rewarding monograph, Dominique Nas-

ta pursues the meaning andrelevance of film sound tracks(including music, noise, andspeech) and narrative (film storiesand inserted micro-stories)through applications of linguistic,literary, and philosophical theo-ries. Readers knowledgeable incomparative literature will appre-ciate Nasta’s detailed approaches,sifting through many complexworks and finding precisely thetheoretical tools she wishes toexplain and use. Readers knowl-edgeable in film studies and filmmusic may find the monographdense but will enjoy Nasta’sperceptive observations on audio-visual discourses in film, the filmexamples analyzed, and the mono-graph’s pedagogic potential.

Meaning in Film: Relevant Struc-tures in Soundtrack and Narrative, atranslated revision of chaptersfrom Nasta’s doctoral dissertationin cinema studies at the UniversitéLibre de Bruxelles (the name ofthe translator is unascertainable),is divided into an intro- ductionand three chapters. The introduc-tory paragraph of her second

chapter offers an unassailable andaccessible basis for this mono-graph and reveals Nasta’s astuteunderstanding of sound versussilent film aesthetics:

If there is currently a debateon the uses of sound in film,this is because the generaltendency has been to considersound film a sequel to silentfilm. The causes of soundintroduction have been can-vassed interminably, whileneglecting the evolution ofimage before and after theemergence of sound. Howev-er, a few film theor[et]icianssensed the existence of twohighly different aesthetics inthe evolution of film: silentfilm aesthetics and sound filmaesthetics (43).

In the Introduction, Nastatakes as a starting point Noël Car-roll’s assertion that we are in needof theories about film instead offilm theory. She cites Carroll, fromhis monograph Mystifying Movies:Fads and Fallacies in ContemporaryFilm Theory (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1988), “‘if morecomprehensive and complexlarge-scale theories can be de-rived, they should be derived

from the comparison and scrutinyof what we regard to be successfulpiecemeal theories’” (9). The theo-ries about film Nasta advancesenable the study of relevance infilm ranging from brief occurrenc-es to the film as a whole. ForNasta, the three pillars of meaningare: relevance (code, intention,interpretation, and semantics),polyphony (the verbal “doublevoice-visual discourse”), and theconcept of mental spaces (dis-courses and idea, belief, image,and reality spaces).

Nasta explores these pillars inChapter 1, “Perspectives on Mean-ing in Film.” In the process, shefocuses on two approaches to film-ic meaning: structuralist-semioticsand pragmatic-enunciation. Struc-turalism and semiotics have manycommon goals, but one majordifference Nasta points out is thatstructuralists view the director orauthor as a mediator of manyvoices and cultural conventionsrather than as a creator or origina-tor. Semioticians view the directoror author as a creator, in contrastto structuralists, and they alsoaccept the notion that the directoror author may be simultaneouslycreator and mediator. According

284 THE JOURNAL OF FILM MUSIC

to Nasta, in semiotics, Peirce di-vides signs into icons, indexes, andsymbols, forming a triad that hasone dominant over the others infilm. This triad operates under twomodes that coexist in relation toone another: the signifier and thesignified. Nasta gives an exampleof a traffic sign (an icon) operatingas an index (calling for an action)and a symbol (a sign that is redand means both danger and stop).If there is a change in context, thecode modifications offer a trans-gressive result. An example of atransgressive result is when a carhorn sounds (an icon), operatingas an index (calling for an action)and a symbol (the car, driver, ornearby cars or pedestrians are indanger), is placed in a differentcontext, operating as an index (thelovers in the car lean against thehorn, but the horn is still callingfor an action) and a symbol (thelovers are having sex and ignoringtheir surroundings and presentsituation in traffic). Nasta does notdefine codes explicitly and shedoes not break down codes fur-ther, unlike Metz and others whoclassified codes. Metz distinguish-es between several kinds of codesin Language et Cinéma (Paris: Alba-tros, 1971) and The ImaginarySignifier (Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press, 1982). His cine-matographic codes are dividedinto general cinematographiccodes (cinematic aspects commonto all films, such as the screen) andparticular cinematographic codes(aspects belonging to certainclasses of film). His classes of filmare by author, country, genre, andschool. Metz calls these classes“sub-codes.” Other kinds of codesinclude non-cinematographiccodes and extra-cinematographiccodes. Nasta explains, “in the firstcategory he introduces political,religious or moral ideas, while the

second would contain an occur-rence such as accompanimentmusic.” (12).

In her discussion of the secondapproach to meaning, pragmaticsand enunciation, it appears thatNasta either assumes that herreaders already have some knowl-edge of pragmatics and enuncia-tion or that she avoids offeringdefinitions for two terms that areextremely difficult to define. Ageneral understanding is thatpragmatics can study a full gamutof idiosyncratic responses that thereader, viewer, or listener experi-ences when a message is received.Pragmatics can also study the in-terpretation of various semioticinferential paths and the fullgamut of presuppositions requiredby that message. Borrowing fromcognitive psychological researchon perception, pragmatics exploresfilmic inferences. Enunciation the-ories, which study the signifierand what is signified, is especiallyuseful for pragmatics who want tostudy filmic narrative and point ofview (15-18). Nasta explains Par-ret’s synthetic view of looking atpragmatic objects through thecontextualization of the object(image, shot, or sequence) andcontext (the whole film).

In film analysis, sometimes thestructuralist-semiotics approach ismore suitable than the pragmatics-enunciation approach or vice versa.The structuralist-semiotics ap-proach is especially useful in theanalysis of films that seem to pur-posely offer multiple inferentialpaths that weave in and out of theboundaries of expectation (forinstance, Hiroshima mon Amour, TheGold Rush, The Crying Game, Wal-lace and Gromit films, or The SpyWho Loved Me). The pragmatics-enunciation approach is especiallyuseful in the analysis of films thatrequire more attention to the emer-

gence of meaning and reconstruct-ing the interpretation of discoursein a film (for instance, ApocalypseNow, Masculine-Feminine, Potemkin,Rashomon, Amadeus, or The PurpleRose of Cairo). Nasta explains thatboth approaches also have prob-lems. According to her, thestructuralist-semiotics approach—though useful for discussingrelevance in film—is not usuallythe best approach for a compre-hensive study of filmic meaningand it cannot explain the passagefrom direct to indirect or derivedmeaning of an image by means ofinferences and recognition ofintentions (18-19). Moreover, theapproach can make an incidentalfilm event seem more importantthan it really is. The pragmatic-enunciation approach cannotspecifically relate meaning to rele-vance and thus focuses on theviewer’s ability to interpret film.

Nasta then presents Grice’slinguistic theory of natural mean-ing and non-natural meaning, atheory that is employed and com-bined with other theoriesthroughout and especially in hersecond chapter on music andsound:

The causal theory of meaningignores the fact that the mean-ing of any action needs to beexplained in the sense of whatthe user means by this actionon a particular occasion. Whilenatural meaning (meaningN)does not need a pre-estab-lished convention (e.g.,“clouds” mean “rain”), thenon-natural meaning (mean-ingNN) bound to an utterancepresupposes an intention toproduce belief and a recogni-tion of this intention from thepart of the audience. For in-stance, I might present youwith the head of John the Bap-tist, intending to show youthat he is dead, or I might

REVIEWS 285

throw a bucket of water overyou, intending to suggest thatyou leave (19).

In connection to the GriceanmeaningN and meaningNN, there isNasta’s central idea that films con-tain truth and truth variants. Shepoints out that Wittgenstein ques-tions the correspondencerelationship between reality andone’s view of it (a view with bothvisual and linguistic limitations)and the coherence theory of truth.For Wittgenstein, the coherencetheory of truth is achieved onlywhen a world divulges the possi-bility of truth variants that areacceptable as long as they are co-herent. Film discloses the world’struth variants, but the viewer cangrasp true meaning only if s/heidentifies the manifest intentionbehind the onscreen images (21).Nasta returns to Wittgenstein’s “I-world” while analyzing point ofview in Kurosawa’s film Rashomonand many other times later on.

Chapter 2, “Music and Sound:The Code and Its Transgression,”will be the most interesting chap-ter to those studying film music. Init, Nasta explores musical andnon-musical sound structures.These structures include the rela-tionship between sounds andimages, time theories, aural andlinguistic limitations, discoursespaces, code and non-code music,subception, synchronization, andfilm music and song classification.Music is capable of natural meaningand non-natural meaning. Fore-grounded music in film is musicthat is intended to be heard by theaudience for it exists on the ex-pressive surface of the film andhas an immediate connection tothe mise-en-scéne. It is capable ofnon-natural meaning if it can infersomething from the image withoutmerely accompanying it (47).

Nasta suggests that film musicobliges the viewer to follow dou-ble paths that are both visual andaural. Using Jean-Rémy Julien’sconcepts and classifications ofsynchronous film music, Nastaidentifies the main functions ofmusic as illustrative (not imitative)and implicative (code music that isused as an interlude to dramatictension, to emphasize human emo-tion—by using music such asschmaltz—or as credit music). Theillustrative function is brokendown further into three subfunc-tions: decorative (code music usedfor filling “the visual sphere withepoch elements that fit the screen-play” (56), employing musicalstyles and performance forces toevoke a historical period), connec-tive (code music that createsnarrative continuity), and emblem-atic (non-code music thatsymbolizes a different idea fromthe one presented visually). Filmmusic with a decorative subfunc-tion can be found in Ben Hur orZeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet; filmmusic with a connective subfunc-tion can be found in The Lonelinessof a Long Distance Runner; and filmmusic with an emblematic sub-function can be found in The Trial(I will return to non-code musiclater). Analyzing several film ex-amples, Nasta explains how soundtracks lie or act similarly to para-bles and interprets the music asoccupying idea or belief spacesthat may or may not share thesame reality spaces as their visualcounterparts. Nasta also dealswith filmic counterpoint or therelationships between music ornonmusical sounds and images.Her examination of songs in filmsreveals why analyzing them is a“border problem.” These songscan be employed to tell or con-tinue to tell a story; they can makeit difficult to tell if the film is based

on songs or if the songs are occur-rences in the film. If the song inthe film also exists separately as asound recording, the reception ofthat song will be affected. I imag-ine songs in The Bodyguard orMoulin Rouge. Whitney Houston’srecording of Dolly Parton’s “I WillAlways Love You” in The Body-guard and various performances offragments of Elton John’s “YourSong” as well as Nicole Kidman’sperformance of “Diamonds are aGirl’s Best Friend”/“Material Girl”(the latter mentioned a nod toMarilyn Monroe and Madonna) inMoulin Rouge are good examples ofhow songs and recordings couldhelp market a film, ensuringaccessibility to wider audiencesthrough familiarity, and how filmcould recycle successful songs andadd to its own commercial andcritical success. They are also goodexamples of how a film can createan additional context for the song,affecting the reception of bothmusic and text (the listener andviewer must question how thesongs relate to the film and howthe film relates to the songs), andvice versa. Noise and speaking arediscussed at the end of thischapter.

Chapter 3, “The Filmic Narra-tive: Interpreting the Whole,”offers the most complex synthesesof theories explained in the previ-ous chapters. Nasta aims at aglobal model of interpretation foranalyzing the whole film. In thischapter, the author explores thefilm story versus the story inliterature, micro-stories or littlestories within the main story, film-ic actual worlds versus possible orrelative worlds, and narrativechanges. She analyzes narrative inseveral films including Antonio-ni’s The Eclipse, Greenaway’s TheDraughtsman’s Contract, andAllen’s Purple Rose of Cairo.

286 THE JOURNAL OF FILM MUSIC

Throughout the chapter Nastafocuses on both verbal and soundelements of filmic narrative.

Although this monograph ispromising for the new approachesto sound tracks it will inspire,there are several weaknesses. Ty-pographical errors, which do notobstruct comprehension, are sonumerous that they warrant men-tion here. The translation from theFrench needs to employ a tightereconomy of words (for instance,many definite articles should beomitted). Either Nasta or the trans-lator does not differentiateappropriately the words “score”and “music.” It is also unclear ifthere is supposed to be a play onthe English words “score” and“partition” (meaning division orseparation) and the French word“partition” (meaning score anddivision or separation) in relationto film and sound track editing.The word “engender” appears toofrequently in places in which thewords “generate” or “produce”would work better.

Nasta also makes a number ofcurious and dubious observationson music. She discusses Wagnerand leitmotivs without explainingthe impact of Wagner’s Gesamt-kunstwerk on filmmaking andcomposing film music. CarolineAbbate’s Unsung Voices (Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1991),was published the same year asNasta’s monograph; WilliamDarby and Jack Du Bois deal withfilm music and Wagner’s Gesamt-kunstwerk in American Film Music:Major Composers, Techniques, Trends,1915-1990, McFarland Classics(Jefferson, NC and London: Mc-Farland & Company, 1990). Itappears that Nasta has mistakenthe “Kane” motive or the openingmusic from the film Citizen Kanefor the “Rosebud” motive (shecalls the latter “gloomy” whereasthe former is more correctly

“gloomy”). During her discussionon the filmic counterpoint betweenmusic and image or visual narra-tive, Nasta remarks, “the mostchallenging and rewarding audio-visual counterpoint[s] are thoserecalling Baroque inventions(where instruments and voicesprogress simultaneously andcontradict each other) and thosefunctioning through superimpo-sures, as in the Gregorian chants”(69). It is not entirely clear whatthese “superimposures” might be:is she, for instance, referring to theemployment of the same cantusfirmus in later settings? Nastaexplains in great detail that musicin the film sound track can be fore-grounded or can be capable ofpossessing primary relevance tothe audience and filmmaker, butshe never addresses the role of thecomposer or the composer’s owninvolvement.

Sometimes it is not clear whoNasta’s “film theorists” are. This isespecially true when she refers to“older,” film theorists. A survey ofthe entire monograph, includingthe bibliography, reveals that Nas-ta’s film theorists are mostlyFrench and Russian and that her“older” film theorists are Eisen-stein, Metz, Adorno and Eisler,and Kracauer (Arnheim is cited inthe footnotes and one of his writ-ings is listed in the bibliography).She gives little attention toGerman, English, and Americanfilm theorists. For instance, BélaBalázs’s writings on montage (hecalls montage “optical music”) andcounterpoint would have been anespecially interesting addition toNasta’s discussion of montage andcounterpoint, in which she givesEisenstein’s perspective: forBalázs, montage was about imagesand cinematography (picture-driven) as well as psychologicalassociation and tempo; for Eisen-stein, who complained about

Balázs’s view that montage ispicture-driven, montage was aboutideas and tempo. (Balázs, who wasoriginally from Hungary andnamed Herbert Bauer, includedfilm music in his earliest mono-graphs, Der sichtbare Mensch (TheVisible Man, 1926) and Der Geist desFilms (The Spirit of Film, 1930). Bothmonographs were written whileBalázs was in Vienna).

Nasta’s treatment of non-codemusic is a bit puzzling: as manywriters on music or film imply(Adorno, Agawu, Arnheim,Balázs, Barthes, Cone, Deleuze,Eco, Eisler, Gorbman, Kalinak,Kivy, London, Metz, Nattiez,Rotha, among others), there is nonon-code music and therefore allmusic contains codes on variouslevels of textual interpretation.Nasta defines code and non-codefilm music (“scores”):

code scores are selected forpurely descriptive or imitativeaims (sad scenes=sad score)and are bound to obey therules of synchronism. Con-versely, non-code scores arecombined in different ways soas to enhance an expressiveact, not necessarily a synchro-nous one, since in most of thecases asynchronous scoresprove more rewarding andoriginal.

The above-mentioned re-marks do not imply that therelationship image/music isabolished when talking aboutnon-code scores. What changesis only the final effect which isno longer one of similitude,but rather a dialectic one, oscil-lating between affirmation andnegation, essence and appear-ance, question and answer(61-62).

She adds, “non-code scores canbe analyzed independently andcan express and signify by them-selves, thus triggering a secondaryinterpretation.” (61). She does not

imply that non-code music meansnon-leitmotivic music. Instead, shefocuses on the dialectic relation-ship between the non-code musicand the visible act or non-visibleexpression onscreen. PerhapsClaudia Gorbman’s “pure musicalcodes,” “cultural musical codes,”and “cinematic musical codes,” inUnheard Melodies: Narrative FilmMusic (Bloomington: Indiana Uni-versity Press, 1987), would havebeen helpful here for Nasta’s ex-planation of the oscillatingdialectic effect does not seem en-tirely satisfactory. Eco offers apossible definition of undercoding:

the operation by means ofwhich in the absence of re-liable pre-established rules,certain macroscopic portionsof certain texts are provisional-ly assumed to be pertinent unitof a code in formation, eventhough the combinationalrules governing the more basiccompositional items of theexpressions along with thecorresponding content-unitsremain unknown (Eco, 135-36).

Nasta’s use of Grice’s meaningN

and meaningNN does not solve the

problem of identifying non-codemusic:

It is precisely this dialecticalfeature that brings us back toGricean distinction betweennatural versus non-naturalmeaning, and to the problemof relevance. Being dialecticallyrelated to image, music is fore-grounded and it implicitlybrings forth relevant informa-tion.

Natural meaning applied tothe musical sphere equals thedecoding of what is heard inaccordance with what isshown, while non-naturalmeaning equals the interpreta-tion of a musical piece throughinference. The inferentialpotential of music rendersinterpretation possible even inthe absence of code (62)

Umberto Eco’s discussion ofundercoding—he uses music forintroducing the section—in hismonograph A Theory of Semiotics(Bloomington: Indiana UniversityPress, 1979) would have been use-ful for tackling this can of worms.My final criticism is that there areso many theories presented herethat an index would be extremely

helpful for sorting out the theoriesand those responsible for or associ-ated with them.

The best aspects of this mono-graph, however, outweigh itsshortcomings. It offers new waysto listen to film sound tracks andfocus on filmic narrative and itwill be a welcome complement toother studies of film music andfilm theory. Nasta’s use of filmexamples is outstanding. Not onlydoes she make use of canonicalfilms analyzed in film studiescourses, she includes many Euro-pean films that also deserveattention. She provides a brilliant-ly straightforward explanation ofthe problems of structuralist-semi-otics and pragmatic-enunciationapproaches. The discussion of howsongs function in film is the mostsensible and useful one offeredthus far, surpassing the Louis-JeanCalvet and Jean-Claude Klein’ssong classifications and discus-sions of songs in films. With thebest aspects of this monograph inmind, one hopes that Meaning inFilm: Relevant Structures inSoundtrack and Narrative will soonreturn in a revised edition.