Nietzsche on Film

This is the final version of the article. Available from Edinburgh University Press via the DOI in this record.This article tracks the many appearances of Friedrich Nietzsche throughout the history of cinema. It asks how cinema can do Nietzschean philosophy in ways that are unique to the medium. It also asks why the cinematic medium might be so pertinent to Nietzschean philosophy. Adhering to the implicit premise that, as Jacques Derrida once put it, ‘there is no totality to Nietzsche's text, not even a fragmentary or aphoristic one,’ the essay's mode of argument avoids reductive totalization and instead comprises a playful sampling of variously Nietzschean manifestations across dissimilar films. It begins with an extended account of Baby Face, a 1933 drama from which the abundant references to Nietzsche were either altered or expunged ahead of theatrical release. It then maps some of the philosophical consistencies across two genres in which characters read Nietzsche with apparent frequency: the comedy and the thriller. While comedies and thrillers both treat Nietzsche and his readers with suspicion, and do so for perceptive historical reasons, the essay then asks what an affirmatively Nietzschean film might look like. It explores this possibility through a discussion of cinematic animation in general and then more specifically via several critically familiar films that self-consciously evolve their aesthetic through Nietzsche's philosophy. The essay concludes by affirming Béla Tarr's final film as one of the medium's greatest realizations of a Nietzschean film-philosophy. The Turin Horse, released in 2011, is exemplary because it takes Nietzsche as a narrative premise only to sublate that premise into a unique visual style

Dynamic Landscapes, Emerging Territories

As a result of the pressing environmental and technological conditions dominant today, new frontiers for architectural production are emerging. Fueled by accelerated change and increased connectivity, these trajectories operate across multiple scales and domains. The evolving relationship between place, technology, and occupancy formulates a complex active structure that tends to have fluctuating levels of activity and impact. These conditions are giving way to hybridized settings where the interdependence of digital and analog is altering the very politics of place and identity. In response to the prevalence of amalgamated settings, the paradigm of “Dynamic Landscapes, Emerging Territories” is presented. Dynamic Landscapes have definitions and presence in multiple locations simultaneously, requiring new methods of documentation and assessment in order to conceive appropriate design responses. The paper uses the Syrian Refugee Crisis as a case study for deciphering the implications inherent in displacement in the context of dynamic landscapes. Furthermore, it presents an opportunity to think of new architectural trajectories rooted and driven by the animation of such sites. Inherently dynamic, forced displacement presents rich emerging territories where design carries significant impact and facilitates a tangible reassessment of a refugee’s narrative. Supported by robust information networks and active feedback loops, displaced landscapes as such can learn from their residents and inform their imminent futures specifically, as well as our collective human occupancy at large. Within constantly changing milieus, architecture’s premises and processes are being challenged to respond to fluctuating contexts and provide for transient occupancies. While some may see this as a loss of spatial agency when it comes to design, these conditions present an opportunity to think of new architectural trajectories that are rooted and driven by the dynamism of multilayered landscapes and new approaches towards practice

Passions and Actions : Deleuze's Cinematographic Cogito.

When writing about cinema does Deleuze have a conception of cinema spectatorship? In New Philosophy for New Media, Mark Hansen argues that Deleuze does have a conception of cinema spectatorship but that the subjectivity central to that spectatorship is weak and impoverished. This article argues against Hansen's reductive interpretation of Deleuze. In doing so, it relies on the three syntheses of time developed in Difference and Repetition alongside an elaboration of Deleuze's notion of a ‘cinematographic Cogito’. In this way, the article offers a way of understanding the processes of cinema spectatorship from a Deleuzian perspective