Hi Julien
I think it make sense.
in fact Tarkowsky write a chapter about that realtionship in the book i 
meation to you-"Sculpting Time".
I fyou want some kind of help please don't be affraid and say it!
Good Luck
André
[log in to unmask]

>From: julien guillemet <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Film-Philosophy Salon <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: RE : Bibliography on contemplation
>Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:02:44 +0200
>
>First of all, thanks to the people (at least the 3 of you) who answered.  I 
>did not know all the books you advised me. So, I’m feeling a bit less 
>lonely in my lake of materials.
>(But for me the Lumiere Brothers' Arrivee d'un train a La Ciotat does not 
>involve a contemplative attitude at all (even though it’s a still shot) 
>since there is a lot of movement in it, a lot of action, the frame is 
>almost saturated. Also, I think that in its context, this film plays on the 
>spectacular side of the film apparatus, on the spectacle of the cinematic 
>event itself (see the theory of the “attractions” in the early cinema 
>elaborated by Tom Gunning (for instance: GUNNING, Tom, “The cinema of 
>attraction: early film, its spectator and the avant-garde”, in Wide Angle, 
>vol 8, n° 3 & 4, sept 1986, pp. 63-70.) , see also the commentaries of the 
>early watchers who where really afraid when the train comes to a close-up) 
>which for me is the opposite of any contemplative attitude since it 
>involves an aesthetic of visual shock that “snap” the spectator attention 
>“up”, likesay (sorry for the terms but I don’t know how to translate that 
>properly.).
>
>Anyway, 2 points come to mind from your answers:
>   - it seems that contemplation in the cinema has not been strongly 
>theorised in a large scale by scholars yet (so the field seems open) and 
>that it is more about filmmakers concerns
>   - it seems that the idea of contemplation or the contemplative attitude 
>generally aims to a kind of transcendence that induce a sort of ecstatic 
>(etym: “out of oneself”) way of seeing the film picture. So, in this 
>aesthetic tradition (the pattern must originate in the religious mystical 
>contemplation), the contemplation of a work of art, of a film, should lead 
>the spectator “beyond” the picture, “beyond” the sensitive world and 
>“beyond“ the self toward something exterior and superior to the world and 
>to the sensitive phenomena. So the contemplative spectator becomes a pure 
>spirit cut from his sensorial activity.
>
>But my idea would be that the contemplation attitude in film doesn’t aim to 
>a transcendental state of mind, but on the contrary helps to reveal to the 
>embodied spectator the primary and essential sensitive immanence of the 
>picture and of the (embodied) self. To contemplate is to feel (the picture, 
>the world, oneself) in a particular but intense way that only leads to 
>strongly feel the sensitive immanence of life itself. The contemplative 
>attitude does not aim to any beyond, to any transcendence but only reveals 
>to the spectator the very sensitive immanence of the picture, the world and 
>the self by proposing a particular kind of affect, the contemplative 
>affect.
>
>   Well, I don’t know if I’ve made myself clear on this point (I guess it’s 
>not even clear for me in my own language, so…) but I would like to dispute 
>the traditional aesthetic way of analysing the contemplation phenomenon.
>   So, if any idea about that comes to you and that you don’t mind wasting 
>time discussing it, don’t hesitate to answer.
>
>
>   Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>*
>*
>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.
>**
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions 
>! Demandez à ceux qui savent sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses.
>
>*
>*
>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.
>**

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Busca: fácil, rápido, direto ao ponto.  http://search.msn.com.br

*
*
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.
**