Category Archives: Henri Bergson
DeleuzeCinema.com Needs You!
Film Studies For Free is delighted to be able to introduce its readers to DeleuzeCinema.com, a valuable, new, free, online resource for students, scholars and researchers .
It is a database designed to facilitate ease of access to international networking and collaboration amongst people interested in Gilles Deleuze and cinema. The site contains a database of people and resources related to Deleuze and cinema (including TV, new media and visual culture). It enables discussion of topics of interest to its members, and disseminates announcements and news items.
The site is open access and its content available to everyone. Registered users can contribute content, build a profile for themselves, enter discussion, or post news items. We welcome participation from people all over the world in any language.
The updating of content relies on registered contributors adding information about ongoing work on Deleuze and cinema (their own work, or the work of others). We hope that those who are interested will join us! [site co-editor, David Martin-Jones]
So, Deleuzians (and Deleuzo-Guattarians) please join the fabulous, scholarly Crowd Sourcerors at DeleuzeCinema.com! And also please feel free to enter, or revisit, all of the manifold Deleuze links that FSFF has gathered over the ages: one dedicated list of resources, numerous other Deleuze-filled postings, and even its latest link to philosopher Tom McDonald‘s brilliant video above.
>Deleuzian film studies in memory of David Vilaseca
>
For [French philosopher Henri] Bergson, the brain does not produce a representation of what it perceives. Perception is the mutual influence of images upon one another, of which the brain is only another image—it does not “produce” anything, but filters impulses into actions or non-actions. The implications for film are two-fold. By addressing the perceiving subject as one image among the world of images, Bergson steps outside models that locate perception and memory within the mind of the subject. I would further suggest, following [Gilles] Deleuze, that Bergson’s theory of matter allows us to see film not as a fixed representation, a concrete image of a “real” object, but as an image in its own right, with its own duration and axes of movement. What we might call the film-image thus occurs in the gap between subject and object, through the collision of affective images.
Deleuze’s formulation of the film-image as a mobile assemblage (sometimes a frame, sometimes a shot, a sound, or the film as a whole) lends itself to this reading. It refuses to reduce the physical image on the screen to a mere reproduction of an assumed “real” object it represents. Such a formulation similarly reevaluates the relationship between the concrete optical and sonic images that comprise the film. Rather than conceiving of each component as a “building block,” it allows for the shifting conglomerations of elements which are themselves dynamic and mobile. A film cannot be distilled to a structure that originates from outside itself. Instead, each film-image is contingent, particular, and evolving.
The distinction between the time- and movement-images becomes more clear in this context. Rather than a question of either content or form, the difference lies in their affective power, whether they are bent toward action, in the case of the movement image, or if they open into different temporal modalities. It is in this second case that the time-image falls, and it is here that Deleuze locates the creative potential of film. This potential does not exist solely within the physical image itself, however, but is contained as well in the modes of perception and thinking that it triggers. Much like the time-image, the mental faculty most attuned to the openness of time, according to Bergson, is that of intuition.
- Immanence (Adrian Ivakhiv) (see especially the entries on ‘Why Deleuze?’ and ‘ecology, Deleuze/Tarkovsky, and the time-image’)
- D.H. Fleming , ‘Review: Patricia Pisters (2003) The Matrix of Visual Culture: Working with Deleuze in Film Theory Stanford: Stanford University Press’, Film-Philosophy, 13:1, April 2009
- Michael Goddard, ‘Beauty Lies in the Eye (So Why Can’t I Touch It?) [on ‘Deleuze, Guattari and the Philosophy of Expression’, special issue of the Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue Canadienne de Littérature Comparée, guest edited by Brian Massumi ]‘, Film-Philosophy, No. 25, September 1998
- Kara Keeling, ‘Deleuze and Cinema’, Critical Commons, 2010 (“The following selection of film clips from films discussed by French philosopher Gilles Deleuze were compiled in the Fall of 2009 by the participants in Professor Kara Keeling’s Critical Studies graduate seminar on Deleuze and Culture at the University of Southern California”)
- Laura U. Marks, ‘Haptic Visuality: Touching with the Eyes’, Framework” the Finnish Art Review, No. 2, 2004 (large pdf – scroll down to p. 79)