93 research outputs found

    Choisir de choisir — croire en ce monde

    Get PDF
    In the philosophy of Pascal and Kierkegaard and the cinema of Bresson and Dreyer, Deleuze finds “a strange thought,” an “extreme moralism that opposes the moral,” and a “faith that opposes religion.” This thought may be described as an immanent ethics of “choosing to choose,” such that one may thereby “believe in this world.” Pascal’s wager and Kierkegaard’s leap of faith are usually treated as exclusively theological concepts, but Deleuze—by way of a Nietzschean adaptation of Pascal and Kierkegaard—sees these concepts as a means of understanding a specific mode of existence, in which one “chooses to choose,” and thereby commits oneself to the perpetual responsibility of choosing. In the work of Dreyer and Bresson, Deleuze discovers a cinematic counterpart of this philosophy of “choosing to choose,” a cinema in which apparently religious concerns actually manifest an immanent ethics of modes of existence. This cinema highlights the fundamental vocation of modern cinema, which is to make possible a “belief in this world.” The problem facing modern directors is that the world seems nothing but a bad film, a collection of predictable and empty clichĂ©s devoid of any possibility of genuine creativity. Modern cinema’s answer to this challenge is to disrupt conventional ways of seeing and disclose already present alternatives to those conventions, such that new possibilities of existence are suggested. In this way, modern cinema allows a revived “belief in this world.” No longer a world of clichĂ©s, the world as transformed through modern cinema is one in which new modes of existence are envisioned, modes based on an ethics of perpetually “choosing to choose.” This cinematic ethics finally provides a means of understanding the proper relationship between cinema and philosophy, both of which have a common purpose, even if they have separate spheres of activity.Dans la philosophie de Pascal et Kierkegaard aussi bien que dans le cinĂ©ma de Bresson et Dreyer, Deleuze dĂ©cĂšle une « pensĂ©e Ă©trange », un « moralisme extrĂȘme qui s’oppose Ă  la morale » et une « foi qui s’oppose Ă  la religion ». Cette pensĂ©e peut ĂȘtre dĂ©crite comme une Ă©thique immanente exigeant que l’on « choisisse de choisir » et permettant Ă  celui qui l’adopte de « croire en ce monde ». Le pari de Pascal et l’acte de foi de Kierkegaard sont habituellement traitĂ©s comme des concepts exclusivement thĂ©ologiques, mais Deleuze — en adoptant une perspective nietzschĂ©enne — voit ces concepts comme des moyens permettant de mieux connaĂźtre un mode particulier d’existence, oĂč l’individu « choisit de choisir » et, dĂšs lors, endosse la responsabilitĂ© perpĂ©tuelle de ses choix. Dans les oeuvres de Dreyer et Bresson, Deleuze dĂ©couvre une contrepartie cinĂ©matographique Ă  cette philosophie du « choisir de choisir », un cinĂ©ma dans lequel les prĂ©occupations apparemment religieuses tĂ©moignent en fait d’une Ă©thique immanente des modes d’existence. Ce cinĂ©ma met en lumiĂšre la vocation fondamentale du cinĂ©ma moderne : rendre possible une « croyance en ce monde ». Le problĂšme auquel doivent faire face les rĂ©alisateurs modernes est que le monde ne semble ĂȘtre rien d’autre qu’un mauvais film, une collection de clichĂ©s prĂ©visibles et vides excluant toute possibilitĂ© de vĂ©ritable crĂ©ativitĂ©. La rĂ©ponse du cinĂ©ma moderne Ă  ce dĂ©fi consiste Ă  remettre en question les façons de voir traditionnelles et Ă  proposer des solutions de rechange aux conventions, afin que de nouvelles possibilitĂ©s d’existence soient proposĂ©es. En ce sens, le cinĂ©ma moderne permet de faire renaĂźtre une « croyance en ce monde ». N’étant dĂ©sormais plus un monde de clichĂ©s, le monde tel que le transforme le cinĂ©ma moderne en est un dans lequel de nouveaux modes d’existence sont envisagĂ©s, des modes d’existence qui reposent sur une Ă©thique exigeant que, perpĂ©tuellement, l’on « choisisse de choisir ». Cette Ă©thique cinĂ©matographique offre en fin de compte un moyen de comprendre la vĂ©ritable relation unissant le cinĂ©ma et la philosophie, qui partagent un mĂȘme objectif bien que leurs sphĂšres d’activitĂ© soient distinctes

    Book Review: Rockwell F. Clancy, Towards a Political Anthropology in the Work of Gilles Deleuze: Psychoanalysis and Anglo-American Literature (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2015).

    Get PDF
    A review of Rockwell F. Clancy, Towards a Political Anthropology in the Work of Gilles Deleuze: Psychoanalysis and Anglo-American Literature (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2015)

    Comparative genomics reveals 104 candidate structured RNAs from bacteria, archaea, and their metagenomes

    Get PDF
    Novel motifs identified in a comparative genomic analysis of bacterial, archaeal and metagenomic data reveals over 100 candidate structured RNAs

    Painting the Body: Feminist Musings on Visual Autographies

    Get PDF
    In this paper I look at autographical depictions of the body in the work of Mato Ioannidou, a Greek woman artist, who participated in a wider narrative-based project on visual and textual entanglements between life and art. The paper unfolds in three parts: first, I give an overview of Ioannidou’s artwork, making connections with significant events in her life; then I discuss feminist theorizations of embodiment and visual auto/biography; and finally I draw on insights from Spinozist feminist philosophers to discuss the artist’s portrayal of women’s bodies in three cycles of her work. What I argue is that the body becomes a centerpiece in the attempt to perceive connections between life and art through expressionism rather than representation

    Gilles Deleuze: Postmodern Philosopher?

    No full text
    • 

    corecore