cinema, affect and vision

7/18/2019 Cinema, Affect and Vision

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cinema-affect-and-vision 1/9

Cinema, Affect and Vision

Lisa Åkervall

[1] "The question is no longer what we see behind an image but rather, how we can

endure what we see in it already" (eleu!e 1#a$ %&' writes eleu!e, considering the )assage *rom the cinema o* the +ovement-mage to the cinema o* the Time-mage. [1]This )assage *rom seeing behind to enduring what is seen already is an im)ortant movewithin eleu!e/s cinema books. -t is im)ortant *irstly as it stresses the )ers)ective o*e0)erience and thus allows *or the cinema books to be read as a theory o* cinematice0)erience. -t is im)ortant secondly, as it *oregrounds the notion o* enduring, and thusmarks cinematic e0)erience as an e0)erience at the limit, as an e0)erience in o* e0cesso* itsel*. ere the notion o* enduring is tightly bound to the cinema o* the Time-mage,indicating a change in the mode o* cinematic e0)erience *rom the cinema o* the+ovement-mage to the cinema o* the Time-mage. 2nduring thus designates anim)ortant moti* o* eleu!ian *ilm aesthetics in general and that o* the Time-mage in

)articular$ eleu!e thinks cinematic e0)erience, and es)ecially the cinema o* the Time-mage/s cinematic e0)erience as in solidarity with a delirious dimension, with adimension he terms "the unbearable" [%], "the outside", which e0ceeds any ordinarye0)erience and through this e0cess o* e0)erience *orces to think.

3**ect

[%] 4or the notion o* cinematic e0)erience as an e0)erience o* the beyond, as an e0cesso* e0)erience as well as an e0)erience o* e0cess, the conce)t o* a**ect is o* centralim)ortance. The notion o* a**ect, which eleu!e )ro)oses in his cinema books, is 5 as -will show 5 that o* an a**ect, which transcends ordinary e0)erience and )reci)itatesthought. -n 6hat is 7hiloso)hy8 eleu!e and 9uattari write$ "The a**ect transcendsa**ection no more that the )erce)t transcends )erce)tion" (eleu!e and 9uattari %'''$%':. 6hereas a**ections are thus to be understood as the actuali!ed )art o* e0)erience,as what we call *eelings, as that which is and can be e0)erienced in ordinary e0)erience,a**ects on the other hand are the nonactuali!able )art in e0)erience, the )art, whichtranscends any actuali!ability and ordinary e0)erienceability and thus always e0ists, or

better$ insists in a state o* virtuality, o* always unactuali!ed )otentiality. eleu!e and9uattari write in this conte0t$

The )erce)ts are not )erce)tions anymore, they are inde)endent o* the states o* those,

who e0)erience them; the a**ects are not *eelings or a**ections any more, they sur)assthe )owers o* those, through whom they )ass. The sensations, )erce)ts and a**ects, are beings, which stand *or themselves and transcend all e0)erienceability. (eleu!e and9uattari %'''$ 111%<irtuality

[&] -n conceiving o* a**ect as insistence, the virtual dimension o* a**ect is *oregrounded.This becomes most evident in the )assages where eleu!e contrasts the a**ectionimageto the actionimage, thereby em)hasi!ing the )ure )otentiality o* the a**ectionimage.6ith this distinction he maintains that )otentialqualities, to the degree that they mergein actuali!ation, lose their virtuality "inso*ar as they have been actuali!ed in a given

state and the corres)onding real relations" (eleu!e 1=$ 1:&1::. This *orm o* a**ectand its actuali!ation are reali!ed in the actionimage, that is the medium shot. owever,



the )otentialqualities, which are reali!ed in the a**ectionimage and its )aradigmaticshot the closeu), are to be understood com)letely di**erent, inso*ar as the a**ect ise0)ressed *or itsel* "outside o* )lacetime coordinates, as singularity in its uniquenessand in its virtual relations" (eleu!e 1=$ 1::. >egarding the event itsel*, thea**ective, he writes that "the e**ect transcends its cause and only )oints to other e**ects"

(eleu!e 1=$ 1:. -t is thus only the second set o* )otentialqualities 5 those, whichalways kee) a certain state o* )ure )otentiality 5, which eleu!e truly attributes to thea**ectionimage. e de*ines a**ect with +aurice ?lanchot as "that )art o* the eventwhich even through its incidence cannot be reali!ed" (eleu!e 1=$ 1:&. This onceagain *oregrounds the )otential dimension o* a**ect, which as nonintegrable and quasitraumatic always insists rather than e0ists and thus attributes to a**ect a state o* latency.This )otential dimension o* the a**ect and the a**ectionimage is o* great im)ortance *orthinking eleu!e/s notion o* cinematic e0)erience. -t is im)ortant *irstly as it o)ens u) a*urther s)ace, so to say, a s)ace which has been called "the unbearable." This is a s)aceo* the nonknowable, and thus always already connects us to the notion o* e0)erience asenduring. -t is im)ortant secondly as it designates the a**ectionimage/s structural

closeness to the *unctioning o* the Time-mage.

4rom 3**ect to Thought

[:] eleu!e writes that the a**ect is that, which can rather be *elt than understood andthus )uts it very close to what he in i**erence and >e)etition has called thesentiendum, the being o* the sensible. "6hat can only be *elt (the sentiendum or the

being o* the sensible makes the soul ")er)le0", which is to say that it *orces it to )ose a )roblem" (eleu!e 1#b$ 1=%. The sentiendum is that which cannot be *elt since italways e0ceeds the sensible and the e0)erienceable. ?ut at the same time it has to be*elt and can be nothing but *elt. -t undergoes a trans*ormation and becomes thecogitandum, that which e0ceeds the thinkable but has to be thought and can be nothing

but thought. "4rom the sentiendum to the cogitandum the )ower o* that which *orces tothink has develo)ed" (eleu!e 1#b$ 1=&. This )assage *rom the sentiendum to thecogitandum, *rom a**ect to thought is a central *igure within eleu!ian )hiloso)hy andcan be *ound *rom i**erence and >e)etition onwards, as a di**erential theory o* the*aculties. -n what *ollows the di**erential theory o* the *aculties as )assage *rom theem)irical to the transcendental use, as )ath to a higher use o* the *aculties shall be*oregrounded as central conce)t *or discussing eleu!e/s cinema books. 2ven i* links toit are *ound only im)licitly, - here want to em)hasi!e its latent )resence throughout thecinema books. >eading the cinema books through the di**erential theory o* the *aculties

is o* great im)ortance *irstly *or the understanding o* how the eleu!ian conce)t o*cinematic e0)erience as enduring is always already bound to the ethical im)erative o**orcing to think. The )otential o* this model o* a di**erential theory o* the *aculties is to

)rovide a genetic model o* )erce)tion and o* e0)erience, a model o* becomingother$every *aculty is driven to its limit to *orce another *aculty in its *unction, a )assage,during which the *aculties change their way, become other, take on their transcendentale0ercise. This way always leads, through a quasitraumatic encounter *rom thesentiendum to the cogitandum, *rom a**ect to thought. The transcendental e0ercise o*the *aculties also )resu))oses the emergence o* a new coherence among the *aculties nolonger de*ined as collaboration but rather as discordance. The conce)t o* a di**erentialtheory o* the *aculties is o* )articular im)ortance *or the cinema books secondly, as it

hel)s to avoid common misunderstandings o* the eleu!ian conce)t o* cinematice0)erience in general and his notion o* a**ect in )articular. -t is very im)ortant to



distinguish the notion o* a**ect *rom the immediacy o* a *eeling. The eleu!ian conce)to* a**ect does not relate to any idea o* a direct or )urely cor)oral a**ection, nor is it a*eeling in the usual sense. 3n a**ect is not to be understood as a starting )oint o* astimulusres)onsechain, but rather as an encounter, which in its insistent virtuality*orces to think. -t thus shortcircuits any idea o* a )hysiology o* sensation, o* a "visceral

immediacy o* cinematic e0)erience" by "raw contents o* sensation" (@haviro %'':$ &A.This does o* course not mean not to think the bodily as)ects o* cinematic e0)erience. -navoiding any conce)t o* visceral immediacy, the a**ect is rather to be understood as amode o* e0)erience that is at once cor)oreal and mental. 6hereas recent *ilm theorieso* the "cor)oreal turn" have 5 as negative reaction to the )sychoanalytically andsemiotically oriented *ilmstudies)aradigms o* the 1#'/s and 1='/s and their im)licitmarginali!ation o* the s)ectator/s body 5 tended to essentiali!e the s)ectator as body,and ignore questions concerning knowledge and the subBect, my a))roach *ollowingeleu!e seeks to try to esca)e this dichotomy between thinking and body. The notion o* cinematic e0)erience as enduring and *orcing to think shortcircuits any essentiali!inga))roach, as body and thinking are structurally bound together here. owever,

)sychoanalytic ideas should not be le*t aside com)letely. -n the descri)tion o* the a**ectas "the unbearable" a dimension emerges, which could be *urther e0)lored through theLacanian notion o* "the >eal", a notion, which could also link the notion o* a**ect to thequestion o* the subBect.

3**ection-mages

[C] eleu!e describes the )erce)tionimage, the actionimage and the a**ectionimage asthe three mayor ty)es o* images o* the cinema o* the +ovement-mage, the cinema

be*ore the @econd 6orld 6ar, which he and others label as its classical )eriod. Thosethree ty)es o* images usually a))ear in the *ollowing order$ *irst )erce)tionimage, thena**ectionimage, and then actionimage. The overall structure always entails the )assage*rom the )erce)tionimage to the actionimage, with the a**ectionimage occu)ying thega) between the two. eleu!e thus links the a**ectionimage initially to the cinema o*the +ovement-mage. -n his two cha)ters on the a**ectionimage eleu!e mentions twoty)es o* a**ectionimages$ the closeu) as the )aradigmatic shot and the *ace as its

)aradigmatic obBect on the one side, and the anys)acewhatever with its )re*erence o*em)tied s)aces on the other side. -n the course o* the *irst cha)ter on the a**ectionimage he makes an im)ortant move, which is o* interest to clari*y the s)ecial )lace o*the a**ectionimage within the cinema books in general, and within the structure o*cinematic e0)erience in )articular. eleu!e *irst agrees on the deterritoriali!ing *orce o*

the *ace, which ?Dla ?alE!s has )ointed out in his writing on the s)eci*icity o* thehuman *ace in cinema (?alE!s %''1a; %''1b. eleu!e then goes one ste) *urther$6hereas ?alE!s insists on the )ossibility o* reading the micro)sychology within themicro)hysiognomy o* the human *ace, eleu!e/s aim is rather to leave this notion o*interiority aside and describe the closeu), the *ace as essentially desubBectivi!ing anddehumani!ing. 6hereas ?alE!s is still overwhelmed by a cinema, which *or him is thenew language o* humanity, o* which the closeu) o* the human *ace is the basicelement, eleu!e devoids the *ace o** all its humanity by *oregrounding its haunting anduncanny character, )utting it even closer to the cinema o* the Time-mage. This move*rom ?alE!s to eleu!e, which is basically a move *rom interiority to e0teriority, canalso be linked to the move *rom the cinema o* the +ovement-mage to the cinema o*

the Time-mage. -n this, it is also closely related to the )assage *rom seeing to enduringthe seen and thus to a change in cinematic e0)erience as such.



[A] eleu!e/s cinema o* the +ovement-mage *ollows an "organic regime", which is based on the schema o* action and reaction. 6hen this classical schema, the "organicregime" breaks down, a new kind o* situation emerges that eleu!e calls o)tical andacoustical and that corres)ond to a "crystalline regime". This substitution o* sensory

motor situations through o)tical and sound situations leads rational links between shotsand sequences to be re)laced by irrational, incommensurable connections in em)tied ordisconnected s)aces. These changes also have an im)ortant im)act on the time o* theimage. 6hereas in the cinema o* the +ovement-mage time is subordinated tomovement, always being movement in s)ace, this subordination, too, is overturned. -nthe cinema o* the Time-mage it is movement that is subordinated to time, thus makingan e0)erience o* time emerge that is no longer tied to its re)resentation as movement ins)ace. The cinema o* the +ovement-mage can be said to be the cinema o* the actual,and its structuring )rinci)le can also be described as actuali!ation or evenactuali!ability, which relates to its "organic" regime. The cinema o* the Time-mage onthe other hand corres)onds to the notion o* the virtual, its structuring )rinci)le thus

being virtuality or )otentiality, which relates to its "crystalline" regime. The a**ectionimage 5 even i* )art o* the cinema o* the +ovement-mage 5 always already )oints inthe direction o* the cinema o* the Time-mage. -n its inherent virtuality or )otentiality itcan but need not o)en u) the order o* the Time-mage. 6hat is im)ortant here is thestructural )lace o* the a**ectionimage occu)ies within the two orders o* images. -n thecinema o* the +ovement-mage the )lace eleu!e attributes to the a**ectionimage 5inde)endently o* the *orm, in which it occurs 5 is that o* the interval between a

)erce)tion and a reaction, a )erce)tionimage and an actionimage. -ts *unction is tooccu)y the interval "without *illing it" (eleu!e 1=$ A. The notion o* the intervalcan be said to be the most im)ortant conce)t *or, on the one hand linking the cinema o*the +ovement-mage to that o* the Time-mage and, on the other hand to o))osing thetwo. Fn the one hand it is their common conce)t, on the other hand this commonconce)t, the interval changes its *unction substantially *rom the cinema o* the+ovement-mage to the cinema o* the Time-mage. -n the cinema o* the +ovement-mage the interval is an inbetween between action and reaction, a short sus)ension

between a )erce)tionimage and an actionimage, but in the cinema o* the Time-mageits *unction changes substantially. The interval widens and claims its own right; itenchains action *rom reaction. The )erce)tionimage is no longer *ollowed by an actionimage. 3s the sensorymotor schema o* action and reaction 5 the sensorymotor way o*connection 5 breaks down, o)tical and sound situations emerge. These are situationsthat are no longer directly trans*ormed into action, but rather e0tend the interval/s state

o* sus)ension and latency and thus o)en u) a s)ace *or thought and an e0)erience o*time no longer tied to movement. The widening o* the interval is the moment, where thea**ectionimage we encountered in the cinema o* the +ovement-mage is trans*ormedand gives )lace to a**ectionimages, which trigger o)tical and sound situations,decelerated movements and em)tied )laces. The interval is thus the structural )lace,which in the interstice between the cinema o* the +ovement-mage and the cinema o*the Time-mage, o)ens u) the s)ace *or the notion o* cinematic e0)erience as"enduring" and its relation to thought.

-* all the movementimages, )erce)tions, actions and a**ects underwent such a change,was this not *irst o* all because a new element came onto the scene which was to

)revent )erce)tion *rom being e0tended into action to )ut it in contact with thought8(eleu!e 1#a$ 1&



3**ectionimages o* the cinema o* the +ovement-mage can be said to mark asus)ension, but not a break in the sensorymotor chain, thus still allowing *or a reaction,even i* it is a belated one. 3**ectionimages o* the cinema o* the Time-mage on theother hand work di**erently, as they induce a com)lete break o* the sensorymotorchain. Their corres)onding o)tical and sound situations do not e0tend into action

anymore, nor are they motivated by it$ the sus)ension o* the sensorymotor chain becomes a break in the connection o* action and reaction and brings *orth another ty)eo* connection. 3 new ty)e o* connection emerges, which is not sensorymotor anylonger, but rather o)tical and acoustical, )utting the senses in a direct relation to thoughtand time as an e0)erience. This is e0actly the )oint where the question, which de*inesthe change in cinematic e0)erience in the )assage *rom the cinema o* the +ovement-mage to the cinema o* the Time-mage emerges$ "The question is no longer what wesee behind an image but rather, how we can endure what we see in it already" (eleu!e1#a$ %&'.

Thought and <ision

[#] 3 signi*icant shi*t in the mode o* cinematic e0)erience in general and a**ect in )articular has thus taken )lace *rom the cinema o* the +ovement-mage to cinema o*the Time-mage$ -n o)tical and sound situations something, which is too )ower*ul, andwhich e0ceeds any sensorymotor ca)acities, )ersists and thereby makes any reactionim)ossible. The notion o* cinematic e0)erience as enduring thus becomes central in thecinema o* the Time-mage. F)tical and sound situations make something gras)able, and

5 as eleu!e s)eci*ies 5 "it is generally assumed that they make something unbearablegras)able." (eleu!e 1#a$ &% Gharacters become )assive, and in lacking the

)ossibility *or reaction, they become s)ectators o* their own quasiaction. This )rocesso* becomings)ectator is always linked to a new way o* seeing. "The )urely o)tical andsound situation" writes eleu!e "evokes a *unction o* clairvoyance, which is at thesame time critique and sym)athy, *antasy and observation." (eleu!e 1#a$ && Thisclairvoyant way o* seeing makes a new kind o* cinema, a visionary cinema emerge. "6eare dealing with a cinema o* vision [cinDma de voyant] and no longer with a cinema o*action," (eleu!e 1#a$ 1& writes eleu!e. -t is this cinema o* vision, which returnsus to the question o* we "how we can endure what we see in an image already." TheTime-mage/s notion o* cinematic e0)erience as enduring is thus bound to a new way o* seeing, that goes beyond ordinary vision. This new way o* seeing is tightly bound to anew constellation o* the *aculties. -n this changed constellation o* the *aculties in thecinema o* the Time-mage it is central that a s)ecial im)ortance is given to the *aculty

o* vision. -n the cinema o* the Time-mage a new kind o* use is attributed to vision, atranscendental use$ in going through "the unbearable" and enduring the seen vision becomes visionary. The term vision is o* central im)ortance in this conte0t and meansmore than mere seeing. <isionary vision di**ers *rom ordinary vision inso*ar as it meansseeing more than in ordinary vision, including hallucinatory )erce)tion, and is thus to

be understood as an e0cess o* )erce)tion, and o* e0)erience. -n this, visionary vision isalso always already linked to the ghostly dimension o* the notion o* enduring. The way*rom a**ect to vision, *rom "the unbearable" to visionary vision, which constitutes thistrans*ormation, always leads 5 through a di**erential trans*ormation o* the *aculties 5*rom the a**ect as a quasitraumatic encounter to a visionary way o* seeing. To driveordinary vision to the *unction o* the visionary, means to raise the *aculty o* vision to a

higher e0ercise, which no longer corres)onds to the model o* recognition 5 as the modelo* ordinary vision 5 but rather to "cognition" as visionary vision, where vision itsel*



becomes other, where vision becomes visionary. The aim is not to react to the encounter, but rather to see in the encounter. @eeing in the encounter is always linked to the ethicalim)erative o* making a new connection between humans and world emerge.

<isionaries

[=] eleu!e develo)s this conce)t o* a visionary cinema mainly in relation to the *ilmso* -talian Heorealism. This is o))osed to more classical accounts o* -talian Heorealism,such as that o* 3ndrD ?a!in (?a!in %'':$ %C&%A. 6hereas ?a!in *ocuses on a realistaesthetic, eleu!e trans)oses the *ocus *rom the real to the mental. 6hat mainly*ascinates eleu!e in -talian Heorealism is not a more realist way o* *ilmmaking, but 5as - would say 5 a more visionary one. This di**erence between the real and the mentalis o* s)ecial im)ortance, as it allows *or the shi*t *rom an ordinary use o* the *aculties toa transcendental one, thus introducing the )assage *rom enduring to a visionary vision.-n the *ilms eleu!e writes about the )rotagonists are con*ronted with unbearableo)tical and sound situations, onto which no reaction seems adequate anymore and

which thus lead them to their visionary vision. These characters 5 - will in the *ollowingcall them the visionaries 5 are ca)able o* inducing the )assage *rom an ordinary way o*seeing to a transcendental one. 3t the same time they announce and )er*orm a change inthe modes o* e0)erience and )erce)tion. -n this, they are closely related to the Time-mage/s notion o* cinematic e0)erience as "enduring". The way the )assage *rom a**ectto vision occurs in the *ilms as eleu!e describes it can more or less be summed u) bythe *ollowing schema$ the )rotagonists o* the *ilms have seen or been con*ronted tosomething unbearable, which on the one hand kee)s them *rom acting in the sense o*reacting, and on the other hand makes them acquire their visionary vision. The cinemao* the Time-mage 5 as discussed be*ore 5 makes any reaction in a sensorymotor senseim)ossible, and thus con*ronts its characters with their inca)acity to react. Fn the otherhand, this very inca)acity to react brings *orth another ty)e o* image, the o)tical orsound image. The con*rontation with the inca)acity to react is thus not only to beunderstood as the )rotagonists/ )rivation o* their ca)acity to (react, but also as theenabling cause *or a new way o* seeing, which consequently leads the *ilms )rotagoniststo their visionary visions. The interesting )oint seems to be, that the inca)acity is herealways already inherently linked to another ca)acity, to see. The notion o* enduring theseen is thus tightly bound to the notion o* )reci)itating thought and thus a visionaryvision. "The unbearable" writes eleu!e, "is inse)arable *rom a revelation or anillumination, which we can only see through a third eye" (eleu!e 1#a$ &&.eleu!e/s insistent recurrence to *igures o* inca)acity, such as children, mad )eo)le or

ghostly characters is es)ecially striking in this conte0t. -rene, the heroine o* 2I>F72/C1, )asses through all states o* an inner vision, until her committal to a )sychiatricclinic. The whole *ilm 2I>F72 /C1 can be )laced under the sign o* the unbearable, anunbearable, which cannot be su**iciently e0)lained through the suicide o* her son+ichael at the beginning o* the *ilm. @omething unknown seems to haunt the *ilm, leads-rene to loose her way and become mad, and, lets her at the same time acquire hervisionary )owers. "- thought - was seeing convicts," says -rene in 2I>F72 /C1, as shedescribes seeing the *actory workers. eleu!e writes about her$ "@he is seeing, she haslearned to see" (eleu!e 1#a$ 1&.

2thics o* a <isionary 3esthetics



[] ?ecomingvisionary is tightly bound to the changes taking )lace *rom the cinema o*the +ovement-mage to the cinema o* the Time-mage. These relate to broaderhistorical circumstances as well as to interimagereasons. Fne o* these changes has todo with the altered relationshi) between human beings and world and as such it alsoa**ects the )ossibility o* believing in the world. -n the cinema o* the +ovement-mage

the relation between humans and world is largely intact, and there e0ists a bond betweenhumans and world. -n the cinema o* the Time-mage the situation changes signi*icantly$The bond between humans and world breaks, making belie* a more com)licatedenter)rise. The notion o* becomingvisionary is tightly bound to an ethics, which ineleu!e is signi*icant *or the changed situation. @ince the bond is broken, anotherconnection has to be made. eleu!e writes$

6e do no longer ask, whether or not cinema is able to give us the illusion o* the world, but rather how cinema is able to restore our belie* in the world. [...] -t is necessary *orcinema to *ilm not the world, as it is, but the belie* in the world, our only bond. Torestore our *aith in the world, this is the )ower o* modern cinema. (eleu!e 1#a$ %%:

To *ilm "not the world, as it is, but the belie* in the world" corres)onds to eleu!e/scinematic ethics and relates to his view on -talian Heorealism. This is not *oregroundingthe notion o* the real but rather that o* the mental. The im)ortant thing here is that belie* is not linked to the )hotogra)hic, that is the )hotochemical a**irmation o* what is seen,as *or e0am)le in @ieg*ried Jracauer/s Theory o* 4ilm. 4or eleu!e, the task o* cinemais not the redem)tion o* )hysical reality. The *unction o* cinema is not to re*lect reality,

but rather to bring *orth a vision o* it. eleu!e thus terms the )ower and challenge o*modern cinema to restore our belie* in the world by *ilming it 5 "as the im)ossible,which can only return as belie*."

Hot believing in another world, but in the bond between human beings and world, inlove or li*e, and this in the sense o* an im)ossible, an unthinkable, which neverthelesscan be nothing but thought$ /something )ossible, or - su**ocate./ (eleu!e 1#a$ %%%eleu!e/s aim is to *ormulate an ethics, which is grounded in a )ositive and )roductivecritique o* the current situation. ?elieving in the bond between humans and world inthis means believing in the )ossibility o* trans*ormation. The eleu!ian enter)rise isneither to write the story o* success o* the cinema o* the Time-mage as coming to itsel**rom the +ovement -mage to the Time-mage in a teleological manner, nor amelancholic attestation o* an irretrievable loss, the mourning o* the broken bond

between human beings and world, as Kacques >ancire has read it. [&] eleu!e does notwrite the history o* cinema/s redem)tion as a modernistic narrative o* coming to itsel*.

4or eleu!e the break in the bond between human and world is not the cause *or anykind o* melancholy. The eleu!ian a))roach is a very di**erent one in this res)ect. Theeleu!ian task is to restore belie* in this world is to be understood as an active kind o*ethics, which does not *all back in melancholia, but rather tries to a**irm that somethingelse is still )ossible. Thus to restore belie* is this world does not re*er to any idea o*recovering any lost obBect, but should rather be understood as im)erative to *ace asituation and ask, what has to be done ne0t. -n this way the ethical im)erative related tothe notion o* "enduring" in the cinema o* the Time-mage always already im)lies theim)erative to trace lines o* *light *rom the current situation. "To *ilm the belie* in theworld," always already means to convey a new way o* seeing, a visionary seeing. 3central criterion *or this new way o* seeing, this visionary aesthetics, this new cinema is

the way identi*ication itsel* is turned around$ The )rotagonist him or hersel* becomes as)ectator. This turningaround as a )aralleli!ation o* )rotagonist and s)ectator is o*



s)ecial signi*icance inso*ar, as it allows *or the shi*t between an imageaesthetics to ane0)erienceaesthetics. 6hat is im)ortant here is the )aralleli!ation o* s)ectator and

)rotagonist. eleu!e writes$ "The im)ortant thing is, that the )rotagonist or thes)ectator, or both together become visionary." The eleu!ian conce)tion o* cinematice0)erience and a**ect can thus be thought o* as the starting )oint o* an ethics o* cinema,

to make us believe in this world, a way, which leads *rom the a**ect to visionary vision.-n the visionary vision the )ossibility o* another relation to the world a))ears. Theeleu!ian cinema books are in this sense to be understood as )edagogy o* vision.Ginema is *or eleu!e a school o* )erce)tion, o* learning to see, o* becoming visionary.The eleu!ian cinema is a visionary cinema.

3cknowledgement$ +any s)ecial thanks to avid >odowick *or his care*ul reading andhel)*ul comments u)on an earlier dra*t o* this )a)er.

Hotes

[1] 3ll translations are my own and are based u)on the 9erman language editions.

[%] -t is im)ortant to note here that "the unbearable" a))ears outside o* the o))osition o* ordinary and e0traordinary, and that it can be both.

[&] @ee >ancire, Kacques. "4rom one -mage to 3nother8 eleu!e and the 3ges o*Ginema", in >ancire, 4ilm 4ables, and$ >ancire, Kacques. "20istetil une esthDtiquedeleu!ienne8", in$ 3llie!, 2ric (2d., 9illes eleu!e. Ine vie )hiloso)hique, 7aris,1=.

?ibliogra)hy

3ndrD ?a!in. 6as ist 4ilm8 es)ecially Gha)ter MM. "er *ilmische >ealismus und dieitalienische @chule nach der ?e*reiung", 3le0ander <erlag ?erlin, %'': [1#C].

?alE!s, ?Dla. er 9eist des 4ilms, 4rank*urt a. +ain. @uhrkam), %''1 [1&'].

?alE!s, ?Dla. er sichtbare +ensch oder die Jultur des 4ilms, 4rank*urt a. +ain,@uhrkam), %''1 [1%:].

eleu!e, 9illes. as ?ewegungs?ild. Jino 1, es)ecially Gha)ter @i0 "as 3**ektbild$

9esicht und 9roNau*nahme" and Gha)ter @even "as 3**ektbild$ OualitPten, 7otentiale, beliebige >Pume", 4rank*urt a. +ain, @uhrkam), 1= [1=&].

eleu!e, 9illes. as Qeit?ild. Jino %, es)ecially Gha)ter Fne "Kenseits des?ewegungs?ildes" and Gha)ter @even "as enken und das Jino" 4rank*urt a. +ain,@uhrkam), 1#a [1=C].

eleu!e, 9illes. i**eren! und 6iederholung, es)ecially Gha)ter Three$ "as ?ild desenkens", 4ink <erlag, 1#b [1A=].

eleu!e, 9illes R 9uattari, 4Dli0. 6as ist 7hiloso)hie8, es)ecially Gha)ter @even$

"7er!e)t, 3**ekt und ?egri**", 4rank*urt a. +ain, @uhrkam), %''' [11].



Jracauer, @ieg*ried. Theorie des 4ilms. Qur 2rrettung der PuNeren 6irklichkeit,es)ecially Gha)er 1A "2)ilog. 4ilm in unserer Qeit", 4rank*urt a. +ain, @uhrkam), 1&[1A'].

>ancire, Kacques. "20istetil une esthDtique deleu!ienne8", in$ 3llie!, 2ric (2d.,

9illes eleu!e. Ine vie )hiloso)hique, 7aris, 1=.

>ancire, Kacques. "4rom one -mage to 3nother8 eleu!e and the 3ges o* Ginema", in$>ancire, 4ilm 4ables, ?erg 7ublishers, %''A.

>ossellini, >oberto, dir. 2I>F72 /C1. 7er*s. -ngrid ?ergman, 3le0ander Jno0, 2ttore9iannini, 7ontie Laurentiis Ginematogra*ica, 1C%.

@haviro, @teven. The Ginematic ?ody, Iniversity o* +innesota 7ress, %'':.

cinema, affect and vision

Documents