>Clearly, then, Lynch is psychologically interesting, and cathartic
>of our deepest repressed desires and fears. But is his work
>interesting philosophically? If so, how?
> Daniel Shaw
>website: www.lhup.edu/dshaw
>
>I don't know Fire Walk With Me, but it strikes me that Mulholland
>Drive and Lost Highway could be addressed fruitfully through
>Deleuze's film philosophy. Deleuze enables thinking on film as
>not-representation, not-narrative, not-text, not-symbolic,
>not-structure. Intriguing, without denigrating any of the former
>pursuits. By dropping these so-often foregrounded concerns, other
>formings, other dynamics, may come to the fore. Deleuze's cinema is
>often a philosophy of the dynamic, of how film-as-cosmos is put
>together and made to operate. Then, indeed, film as a world unto and
>in itself. This is Lynch's forte in Mulholland Drive and Lost
>Highway. No less, of course, his Straight Story, which is the
>apposite Deleuzian comparison to Mulholland Drive. Film, then, as a
>practice of philosophy concerned with practice, which is what
>Deleuze does.
Don
>________________________________
>
>
>*
>*
>Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
>After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message
>you are replying to.
>To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
>For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
>**
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|