1,352 research outputs found
Agencement et cinéma : la pertinence du modÚle discursif en question
Le présent article vise à rouvrir, aprÚs Metz, la question de la discursivité filmique, dans la perspective des études intermédiatiques, en retraçant les pistes anti-discursives que propose Deleuze pour aborder la question de l'image pensante. Il s'est agi de dégager un mode de pensée qui ne relÚverait pas du discours, mais des agencements que Deleuze repÚre dans toute production de sens. à la lumiÚre de cette approche, l'intermédialité a été comprise comme travail des matiÚres d'expression entre elles, dans les termes d'une pensée du devenir, telle que la privilégie Deleuze.This article attempts to reopen, after Metz, the question of filmic discursivity, from the perspective of intermedial studies, by retracing the anti-discursive trajectories proposed by Deleuze in his approach to the question of the thinking image. This approach derived a mode of thinking that would not fall within the province of discourse, but of agencies that Deleuze locates in all production of meaning. In light of this approach, intermediality has been understood as a working of materials of expression onto themselves, in terms of an idea of becoming, as was privileged by Deleuze
De la fraternité. à propos des groupes Medvedkine
Comment les films abordent-ils lâexpĂ©rience fraternelle et comment en rendent-ils compte ? Ă partir des rĂ©alisations des groupes Medvedkine (1967-1974), le prĂ©sent article Ă©tudie les modes dâexpression dâune sensibilitĂ© partagĂ©e par les principaux acteurs et rĂ©alisateurs des films, ainsi que par leurs publics critiques : du geste dâaccueil cinĂ©matographique, en lâoccurrence celui de Chris Marker envers Georges Beauregard dans Ă bientĂŽt jâespĂšre, Ă la forme rĂ©flexive des films, qui renvoie Ă la possibilitĂ© dâune expĂ©rience fraternelle Ă partir de lâexpĂ©rience originaire de leur fabrication. Il sâagira de distinguer deux opĂ©rations filmiques : lâesthĂ©tisation de lâexpĂ©rience dâune part, et sa « mythologisation » (Barthes) dâautre part. LâesthĂ©tisation dĂ©signe ici â en Ă©cho aux propositions de Dewey â une manifestation du geste artistique dans son produit. Les qualitĂ©s par lesquelles une expĂ©rience se distingue dâun enchaĂźnement dâĂ©vĂ©nements ordinaires â par exemple lâexpĂ©rience de faire une oeuvre â se manifestent dans la trace ou le produit de cette expĂ©rience, câest-Ă -dire dans lâoeuvre. Si les films des groupes Medvedkine rĂ©activent le motif de la fraternitĂ©, câest donc grĂące Ă des indices relationnels et Ă des formes de mise en abĂźme qui renvoient le spectateur non pas Ă la reprĂ©sentation directe de la « fraternité », mais aux liens de complicitĂ© qui se sont nouĂ©s entre les intervenants. On montrera finalement que lâesthĂ©tisation de lâexpĂ©rience originaire sert moins un discours de la fraternitĂ© quâune praxis de solidaritĂ© qui affecte, par-delĂ les films, les praxis de perpĂ©tuation â dâun groupe Medvedkine Ă lâautre ou dâun film de Chris Marker Ă lâautre â aussi bien que les praxis de rĂ©ception critique.How do films address fraternity and how do they express it? The present article will discuss the films of the Medvedkin group (1967-74) to examine the ways of expressing a sensibility shared by the groupâs main actors and filmmakers and their audiences: from the welcoming gesture, in this case that of Chris Marker to Georges Beauregard in Ă bientĂŽt jâespĂšre, to the filmsâ reflexive form, which suggests the possibility of a fraternal experience within the experience of the filmsâ production. This article will identify two filmic operations: aestheticizing experience and its âmythologizationâ (Barthes). Here aestheticizing, echoing Dewey, is the manifestation of an artistic gesture in its product. The qualities through which an experience is distinguished from a sequence of eventsâsuch as those involved in making a film, for exampleâis evident in the trace or product of this experience: in the film itself. The Medvedkin groups revived the fraternity motif through relational marks and forms of mise en abĂźme which do not directly represent âfraternityâ but rather the bonds that are formed between those who made it. Finally, the article will discuss how aestheticizing the original experience serves not so much a discourse of fraternity as a praxis of solidarity which, beyond the films themselves, affects the praxis of perpetuation, from one Medvedkin group and Chris Marker film to another, and the praxis of critical reception
Mitoyenneté dans le cinéma urbain de Johan van der Keuken
Quâest-ce quâun espace de mitoyennetĂ©Â ? Ce nâest pas tout Ă fait un espace public, au sens oĂč on lâentend habituellement ; câest plutĂŽt le lieu dâune expĂ©rience de sociabilitĂ© Ă la fois continuelle et prĂ©caire. Ce moment oĂč le contact sâĂ©prouve dans la perspective de sa rupture, cette distance entre nous qui nous fait pourtant tenir ensemble. Câest lâespace fondamental de la socialisation, pour un Isaac Joseph dont nous reprendrons les analyses afin de dĂ©crire le cinĂ©ma dit cosmopolite de Johan van der Keuken. DâAmsterdam Ă Groszny, Johan van der Keuken est lâun des rares cinĂ©astes Ă filmer les villes en paix comme les villes en guerre, et Ă pouvoir ainsi montrer le coeur fragile de nos expĂ©riences sociales. Un des rares cinĂ©astes Ă faire des films pour prĂ©server lâattention au lien et promouvoir le souci de sa perte.What is a âcommon bordering spaceâ (espace de mitoyennetĂ©) ? Itâs not exactly a public space per se, itâs rather that which harbours a continuous and precarious experience of sociability. It is that moment where the contact is felt within the perspective of its rupture, that distance between us that nonetheless binds us together. For Isaac Joseph, whose analyses will provide us the means to describe Johan van der Keukenâs so-called cosmopolitan cinema, it is the fundamental space of socialization. From Amsterdam to Grozny, Johan van der Keuken is one of the very few filmmakers to film cities in times of peace as well as war, this showing the essential fragility of our social experiences. He is of the rare filmmakers whose films sought to preserve an awareness of this bond and the painful risk of its loss
Deleuze et la question de la narration
L'objet de cet article est une mise au point sur les principaux concepts que Deleuze utilise pour explorer le champ ordinairement investi par la narratologie filmique. On entend ici dresser la carte d'un parcours singulier oĂč Gilles Deleuze commence par se dĂ©barrasser du bagage linguistique lĂ©guĂ© par Metz et la critique littĂ©raire, pour revenir aux sources du rĂ©cit filmique, Ă ces sortes de mouvements qui le font naĂźtre et qui lui dĂ©ploient un monde oĂč, incidemment, il lui arrive de se suspendre, de se dĂ©tourner, de se perdre. Il sera question de la diffĂ©rence entre « histoire » et « devenir », de la distinction entre deux sortes de rĂ©cits, rĂ©cit et narration falsifiants, rĂ©cit et narration vĂ©ridiques, et de l'indiscernabilitĂ© comme principe d'une image-cristal nĂ©e du cinĂ©ma moderne, qui change les modalitĂ©s de la rĂ©ception, ainsi que les outils et mĂ©thode, de l'analyse.This article has as its object a clarification of the main concepts used by Deleuze to explore the field which has usually been the domain of film narratology. What we aim to do here is to map out a singular itinerary, from the moment when Deleuze steers away from the linguistics inherited from Metz and literary criticism in order to return to the sources of film narrative : the sort of movements which create film narrative and give it a world where it may sometimes, incidentally, suspend itself make detours, or lose itself. At stake is the difference between "history" and "evolution." This is also the distinction between two types of narratives and narration, the falsifying and the truthful, as well as indiscernibility as the principle of an image-crystal born of modern cinema, which changes both the modalities of reception and the tools and method of analysis
Caroline ZĂ©au, LâOffice national du film et le cinĂ©ma canadien (1939-2003). Ăloge de la frugalitĂ©, Bruxelles, Peter Lang, 2006, 463 p.
Towards anode with low indium content as effective anode in organic solar cells
In2O3 thin films (100 nm thick) have been deposited by reactive evaporation of indium, in an oxygen partial atmosphere. Conductive (Ï = 3.5Ă103 S/cm) and transparent films are obtained using the following experimental conditions: oxygen partial pressure = 1Ă10â1 Pa, substrate temperature = 300 âŠC and deposition rate = 0.02 nm/s. Layers of this In2O3 thick of 5 nm have been introduced in AZO/In2O3 and FTO/In2O3 multilayer anode structures. The performances of organic photovoltaic cells, based on the couple CuPc/C60, are studied using the anode as parameter. In addition to these bilayers, other structures have been used as anode: AZO, FTO, AZO/In2O3/MoO3, FTO/In2O3/MoO3 and FTO/MoO3. It is shown that the use of the In2O3 film in the bilayer structures improves significantly the cell performances. However the open circuit voltage is quite small while better efficiencies are achieved when MoO3 is present. These results are discussed in the light of surface roughness and surface work function of the different anodes
Un-doped and aluminum doped Zn1-xMgxO thin films deposited by infrared assisted spray-CVD for solar cells application
Date du colloque : 10/2012</p
- âŠ