2002-12-24 13:13:47尚未設定
Out of The Field (10)-On Mulholland Drive
*** After reading my series of articles, you may have a clear idea about how to deconstruct postmodern films.
*** I will help you and myself to avoid a mind-crash on David Lynch ' s Mulholland Drive and unfold the mystery in Memento.
The out-of-field is a presence that can not be represented. Although it is impossible to create a presentation of the out-of-field, its presence will be sensed in a way that depends upon one ' s angle of framing.
Deleuze makes a distinction between two kinds of framing :
# pictorial frame
* representative : Hitchcock
* stytle : construction of reality
* the world in a nutshell : the frame confines all components
# mobil frame
* representative : Renoir
* style : deconstruction of reality
* a nutshell in the world : the unframed reality contains the frame
The distinction is very subtle, and perhaps more philosophical than cinematic, but it is here that " consciousness " is to be introduced as a part of cinematic analysis.
If the pictorial frame succeeds to confine all components, including a philosophical worldview, there is a temptation to say the out-of-field is successfully framed within the final frame. This temptation is inherent to a limited consciousness, which is classically
described by Plato in his allegory of the cave. Outside the cave is another reality, still unknown. The temptation is to say that the unknown does not exist. Outside the frame of our knowledge is an unknown universe. Each frame, which is part again of another frame etc. The final system turns out to be a subsystem, which means that we never can reach the existence. The " all containing system " ( which Deleuze calls: the Whole ) does not exist as a system. Since we can not say that it does exist, another word for the existence of the Whole has to be used : it subsists, insists, outsists. It defies description. So Deleuze concludes that the Whole is Open, beyond the empirical world, beyond discourse and representation, beyond content and space; the Open is extending to the dimension of time and spirt.
*** I will help you and myself to avoid a mind-crash on David Lynch ' s Mulholland Drive and unfold the mystery in Memento.
The out-of-field is a presence that can not be represented. Although it is impossible to create a presentation of the out-of-field, its presence will be sensed in a way that depends upon one ' s angle of framing.
Deleuze makes a distinction between two kinds of framing :
# pictorial frame
* representative : Hitchcock
* stytle : construction of reality
* the world in a nutshell : the frame confines all components
# mobil frame
* representative : Renoir
* style : deconstruction of reality
* a nutshell in the world : the unframed reality contains the frame
The distinction is very subtle, and perhaps more philosophical than cinematic, but it is here that " consciousness " is to be introduced as a part of cinematic analysis.
If the pictorial frame succeeds to confine all components, including a philosophical worldview, there is a temptation to say the out-of-field is successfully framed within the final frame. This temptation is inherent to a limited consciousness, which is classically
described by Plato in his allegory of the cave. Outside the cave is another reality, still unknown. The temptation is to say that the unknown does not exist. Outside the frame of our knowledge is an unknown universe. Each frame, which is part again of another frame etc. The final system turns out to be a subsystem, which means that we never can reach the existence. The " all containing system " ( which Deleuze calls: the Whole ) does not exist as a system. Since we can not say that it does exist, another word for the existence of the Whole has to be used : it subsists, insists, outsists. It defies description. So Deleuze concludes that the Whole is Open, beyond the empirical world, beyond discourse and representation, beyond content and space; the Open is extending to the dimension of time and spirt.