- DELEUZE AND FILM’S PHILOSOPHICAL VALUE
- Gilles Deleuze: Relationship between Philosophy and Cinema
- An encyclopedia of philosophy articles written by professional philosophers.
- Film Philosophy and Skepticism Films
In , David N.
Both fields should keep neighbouring territories, not only because of the extrinsic and intrinsic interferences between them, but also to guarantee those types of interferences that are not localized. Our aim is to encourage the metaphilosophical debate on these themes with a scrutiny on the direct and indirect interferences between both philosophy and film, and philosophy and non- philosophy as a logic of sensation: of percepts and affects.
DELEUZE AND FILM’S PHILOSOPHICAL VALUE
Deleuze declares that he never wanted to create a philosophy of cinema taken in one sense: as thinking about cinema, by applying a pre-established philosophy to this artistic field mate- rial. He did want to create a philosophy of cinema, but one that would be based on conceptual philosophical practice or conceptual philosophical crea- tion.
At the beginning of The Movement-Image, he says that he wanted to create a philosophy able to reveal that it was cinema itself requiring and imposing a new way to think images. To think with moving images, not to think on them.
Gilles Deleuze: Relationship between Philosophy and Cinema
The measure for the temporal transition from morning to evening and from one day to another, raises ques- tions regarding the frame of reversible elements. It lacks precision concerning its beginning and ending. Nevertheless, this indiscernible element also seems to characterize the relationship between cinema and philosophy — we can easily go from one to another and the reverse, without losing any sensations or any conceptual work. Their boundaries are slippery. As an event, precarious, contingent, ephemeral, we feel obligated to think it — in-between.
Who was in control of that mechanism? The spiritual automatism means autonomy and the af- firmation of the power to think, but also means its privation, the lack of a spirit, the impower of thinking. Thus, diverse types of dangers haunt cinema 9 — the massification of an art form such as cinema can have a utilitarian use by serving a politicization of art, but also can be used by totalitarian states that aestheticize politics.
They think with movement-images and time-images instead of concepts. Between the interchanging movement from cinema to philosophy and back, all share the effort to think this complex relationship and to clarify thought-images, the conceptual thinking of images, as well as thinking with the moving im- ages.
An encyclopedia of philosophy articles written by professional philosophers.
Cinema 1 and Cinema 2 are still philosophi- cal milestones to re discover and time a central topic of his philosophy. Think, for instance, of David N. Thus, Mirjam Schaub develops the Deleuzian concept of the interval, the in- between two images, in its immeasurable and imageless features.
Thus, avoiding the more common discussions on the aesthetics of digital images, the author is driven by a phenomenology of the act of compositing through its technological origin, which was ignored by Deleuze. Therefore, Lampert explains how digital editing manipulates natural images as they are registered, but can also create original perceptions. It poetically shows the historicity of film itself, that it is a fragile temporary material, by nature subject to deterioration and mortality. Herzogenrath writes an essay of time, decay, and materiality: in Decasia, the complexity of representing time in film is explained by its own filmic material and not by the projected film, nor by narration time, neither by narrated time.
By focusing mainly on time, film, and its materiality the author ends by concluding that the representation of time in film is weaker when compared to the effects of time on film.
Film Philosophy and Skepticism Films
According to the author, the crystal-image is key to understanding the genetic element of the time-image. I do hope that readers, beginners or not, enjoy this issue and find some practical value for their own personal work. Paola Marrati. In recent years, the recognition of Gilles Deleuze as one of the major philosophers of the twentieth century has heightened attention to his brilliant and complex writings on film.
What is the place of Cinema 1 and Cinema 2 in the corpus of his philosophy? How and why does Deleuze consider cinema as a singular object of philosophical attention, a specific mode of thought? How does his philosophy of film combine and further his approaches to time, movement, and perception, and how does it produce an escape from subjectivity and a plunge into the immanence of images?
What does it tell us about perceiving a world in images -- indeed about our relation to the world?