 |
 |
ok, i'll take the curse away from here, and, in a relative deframing, try to address the issue sent by JMC in this paragraph, in my own terms, if possible: yesterday, JMC wrote: >To address Gary Norris, who claims 'The value of a product remains the >same, its >meaning remains >unchanged, its contents coherent and concrete. >It is the appearance that >changes, its spectacle. I will always argue >that there are films that have >nothing new or unique to offer, films that >are "worthless." In fact these >films refuse to participate in the new due >to attachment/reliance upon nostalgia >and to dependence on audience response/marketing research,' is then rather >easy >in terms of this physical model: No, it is being which is the >illusion, the >statistical composite. Appearance is all that the world of >becoming allows us. Don't you find it slightly denegatious to, once the two opposite terms of being and becoming have just been constructed, to attribute them with such a power of framing the way you see and express the world that you see and know and want to describe? 'Becoming' is somewhat a generic term with too great an extension as to become able fit in any prospection of what it expresses. There are different degrees of reality, which, meanwhile crosscutting with the statistical composite you talk about, have also plenty to offer the artist or cinematographer, in the measure of what is interesting for her. In this measure, a work of art interested by the problematic of time as you expressed it, and which so belongs more to Thought than to SlumberLand, and the Appearence of Being, will in some cases feel the need to approach Appearences from the side of the degrees of Reality embed in the Becoming. It will consider a serie of characters differently according to the value each sets to one or the other part of Apperence. Once you accept this formula, it becomes clear that for this kind of cinema, the World of Appearence looses all of Universality which it had in certain system of relationships between humans. It prolongates itself in the way of an archipelago of affects, which are relative to this or that character. At the same that this is begining to become clearer to the spectator, it appears that an Absolute remains always possible outside, in the quality of the varying of size/intensity, in a continuum of degrees in reality, without any necessity to find a term to their interplay in a higher dimension to which all the other affects and or characters should relate univocally. It is only that, when the film ends, either for economical-social, or plot-related reasons, the film can be said to have raised to it's higher power of reality. I see this as a formal necessity for the work of art: both the mediation between the different statistical compounds you talk about, and the later interplay with intensities that are yet unkown to the different compounds, and can only be attained, approached via Thought. Unfortunately, most of modern type of movie which are existing either shifts this interplay with intensities of the Thought Plane, and hope to find their intensities in the worlds of Dream (fascination for graphical experimentation, obsession with what easily suggests the imagination, special effects, density of the network of adversity to some characters, etc.), or, when more subtle film try to present characters coping with the Plane of Thought and Becoming, their assertions and prospections into it seem to be already pre-modelised by Philosophies trying to cope with the world of Dream, such as phenomenology, existensialism, or, or with existentialities reterritorialised on alcohol or drugs. To use the word of Deleuze and Artaud, I have not yet seen many movies focusing on characters coping with a Body Without Organ. Jean Rouch movie on the Dogon semt a nice film in this direction though, but it can be said that there remains a good field of experimentation for directors and scriptwriters wanting to focus in this direction. May be this could be new, if the necessity to call something new makes itself manifest to anyone. more to come later I hope about Physical Modelisations. Bye. Fylya. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp