The Daney citation is from
Serge Daney 1998, Cine Journal, vol. 11, 74-75, published by Cahiers du
cinema. the article is entitled 'Fenetre sur cour: Alfred Hitchcock'
This little two volume set of some of Daney's articles from Liberation in
the 80s is, as far as I know, not in English translation. Sadly, little of
Daney's writing is.
If Stromboli was released with the implication that she returns to the
village, then I think the film, once released, must have left behind these
intentions of its releasers. As is the nature of artworks. They live lives
of their own in the times of their interpretation. I dont know what she'll
do. We are only shown the passing moment. In the introduction to the Daney
books, Gilles Deleuze cites a question of Daney's, What is there to see
behind the image? and answers it by saying, Whatever there is to see will
only be presented in the following images. However there is no sequel in
Stromboli. Still, beside if not behind the sight-image is the sound-image,
the words and the music. These too seem only to suggest the moment of
sublime transcendence. Incidentally it is the sublime in the good old
Kantian sense as an allegory of inner ethical transcendence. Rossellini's
not showing the sequel is consistent with his hard eye and its own sublime
apprehension of the ambiguous character of a Bergman. the dialectic of the
sublime is played out at this level too.
|