Draft:Cinematic Taxonomy

  • Comment: Has anyone with subject matter expertise that isn't Alireza Kaveh critically applied or discussed this concept at length? One unaffiliated anonymous paper on Academia.edu is not a strong indicator that this concept has broader significant coverage from secondary sources unaffiliated with Kaveh to substantiate an article. VRXCES (talk) 04:51, 27 August 2025 (UTC)


Cinematic Taxonomy

edit

Cinematic taxonomy is a proposed framework for film classification that distinguishes between five categories: medium, style, genre, format, and tradition. [1] The model has been discussed in Persian-language scholarship on film theory, and aims to clarify overlaps between style, genre, and cultural traditions in cinema.

The framework reflects recent changes in moving-image media, where new platforms such as mobile video, streaming, and video games challenge older approaches to genre and style. In this model:[2]

  • Medium: The physical or technological basis of the film, such as celluloid, Television, Video Game, or virtual reality.
  • Genre: A narrative-based category, Genre is defined narratively and through tone, encompassing forms such as comedy, musical, noir, or war films. In this taxonomy, genre is defined independently of style or format.
  • Tradition: A culturally rooted category referring to long-term cinematic practices shaped by local values, history, and audience expectations, such as Bollywood,Hollywood, Art Cinema (European Film).

Theoretical Context

edit

The idea of a cinematic taxonomy has been previously addressed by several theorists. Gilles Deleuze, in Cinema 1: The Movement-Image (1983) and Cinema 2: The Time-Image (1985), spoke of a "taxonomy of images" in order to classify movement-images and time-images.[3] Rick Altman also referred to the "problem of taxonomy" in his book Film/Genre (1999), where he discussed whether films should be classified by narrative, iconography, or audience expectations.[4] The taxonomy aligns with genre theory debates that question the limits of narrative-based definitions. It is comparable in scope to models such as Rick Altman’s semantic/syntactic approach but expands the analytic scope to include non-narrative criteria. The distinction between tradition and genre, for example, challenges Hollywood-centric frameworks that treat non-Western cinemas as mere genre variants. Genre is defined narratively and through tone, rather than being conflated with style or tradition. Recent scholarship has also emphasized the role of tone in genre analysis.[5] More recently, Iranian theorist Alireza Kaveh systematized the expression into a five-part framework in his book Cinematic Taxonomy.[6]

Usage and Reception

edit

The model is discussed in works such as Film Genre: Tone and Ideology and in lectures and essays published in Persian. While not widely cited in English-language literature, it has been referenced in emerging discussions of cross-cultural genre theory, particularly in relation to Iranian and South Asian cinema.

See also

edit
edit

References

edit
  1. ^ Substack. "Beyond Western Classifications: Sasan Golfar's Critical Reading of Alireza Kaveh's Genre Theory". substack.com. Retrieved 2025-08-16.
  2. ^ Kaveh, Alireza. Film Genre: Tone and Ideology.
  3. ^ Deleuze, Gilles (1992). Cinema 1 : the movement-image. Internet Archive. London : Athlone Press. ISBN 978-0-485-12081-3.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher ___location (link)
  4. ^ Rick Altman (1999). Film/genre. Internet Archive. BFI Publishing. ISBN 978-0-85170-717-4.
  5. ^ Stark, Julian (2025-07-04). "Genre as Structure, Genre as Feeling: A Dual-Theory Analysis of Barbie 2023". Independent Publication.
  6. ^ Kaveh, Alireza (2025). alireza-kaveh-cinematic-taxonomy-summary.

References

edit