1,352 research outputs found

    Agencement et cinéma : la pertinence du modÚle discursif en question

    Get PDF
    Le prĂ©sent article vise Ă  rouvrir, aprĂšs Metz, la question de la discursivitĂ© filmique, dans la perspective des Ă©tudes intermĂ©diatiques, en retraçant les pistes anti-discursives que propose Deleuze pour aborder la question de l'image pensante. Il s'est agi de dĂ©gager un mode de pensĂ©e qui ne relĂšverait pas du discours, mais des agencements que Deleuze repĂšre dans toute production de sens. À la lumiĂšre de cette approche, l'intermĂ©dialitĂ© a Ă©tĂ© comprise comme travail des matiĂšres d'expression entre elles, dans les termes d'une pensĂ©e du devenir, telle que la privilĂ©gie 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 fraternitĂ©. À propos des groupes Medvedkine

    Get PDF
    Comment les films abordent-ils l’expĂ©rience fraternelle et comment en rendent-ils compte ? À partir des rĂ©alisations des groupes Medvedkine (1967-1974), le prĂ©sent article Ă©tudie les modes d’expression d’une sensibilitĂ© partagĂ©e par les principaux acteurs et rĂ©alisateurs des films, ainsi que par leurs publics critiques : du geste d’accueil cinĂ©matographique, en l’occurrence celui de Chris Marker envers Georges Beauregard dans À bientĂŽt j’espĂšre, Ă  la forme rĂ©flexive des films, qui renvoie Ă  la possibilitĂ© d’une expĂ©rience fraternelle Ă  partir de l’expĂ©rience originaire de leur fabrication. Il s’agira de distinguer deux opĂ©rations filmiques : l’esthĂ©tisation de l’expĂ©rience d’une part, et sa « mythologisation » (Barthes) d’autre part. L’esthĂ©tisation dĂ©signe ici — en Ă©cho aux propositions de Dewey — une manifestation du geste artistique dans son produit. Les qualitĂ©s par lesquelles une expĂ©rience se distingue d’un enchaĂźnement d’évĂ©nements ordinaires — par exemple l’expĂ©rience de faire une oeuvre — se manifestent dans la trace ou le produit de cette expĂ©rience, c’est-Ă -dire dans l’oeuvre. Si les films des groupes Medvedkine rĂ©activent le motif de la fraternitĂ©, c’est 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 l’esthĂ©tisation de l’expĂ©rience originaire sert moins un discours de la fraternitĂ© qu’une praxis de solidaritĂ© qui affecte, par-delĂ  les films, les praxis de perpĂ©tuation — d’un groupe Medvedkine Ă  l’autre ou d’un film de Chris Marker Ă  l’autre — 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 group’s main actors and filmmakers and their audiences: from the welcoming gesture, in this case that of Chris Marker to Georges Beauregard in À bientĂŽt j’espĂšre, to the films’ reflexive form, which suggests the possibility of a fraternal experience within the experience of the films’ production. This article will identify two filmic operations: aestheticizing experience and its “mythologization” (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 events—such as those involved in making a film, for example—is 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 “fraternity” 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

    Get PDF
    Qu’est-ce qu’un espace de mitoyenneté ? Ce n’est pas tout Ă  fait un espace public, au sens oĂč on l’entend habituellement ; c’est plutĂŽt le lieu d’une expĂ©rience de sociabilitĂ© Ă  la fois continuelle et prĂ©caire. Ce moment oĂč le contact s’éprouve dans la perspective de sa rupture, cette distance entre nous qui nous fait pourtant tenir ensemble. C’est l’espace 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. D’Amsterdam Ă  Groszny, Johan van der Keuken est l’un 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 l’attention au lien et promouvoir le souci de sa perte.What is a “common bordering space” (espace de mitoyennetĂ©) ? It’s not exactly a public space per se, it’s 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 Keuken’s 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

    Get PDF
    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

    Towards anode with low indium content as effective anode in organic solar cells

    Get PDF
    In2O3 thin films (100 nm thick) have been deposited by reactive evaporation of indium, in an oxygen partial atmosphere. Conductive (σ = 3.5×103 S/cm) and transparent films are obtained using the following experimental conditions: oxygen partial pressure = 1×10−1 Pa, substrate temperature = 300 ◩C 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

    Aires protégées : espaces durables ?

    Get PDF
    • 

    corecore