Gilles Deleuze : CINEMA 1
1) Thesis on Movement
First Commentary on Bergson
Deleuze, commenting on the philosophy of Henri Bergson, dismisses the conception of cinema as a succession of still photographs. Instead, he argues that cinema immediately gives us movement-image. Figures are not described in motion; rather, the continuity of movement describes the figure (p5). In this respect, cinema embodies a modern conception of movement, “capable of thinking the production of the new” (p7), as opposed to the ancient conception of movement as a succession of separate elements, exemplified by Zeno’s arrow. The capacity for thinking the production of the new, being open to chance and accident, can be seen in the action-mime of Chaplin and the action dance of Fred Astaire (p7).
The spaces covered all beong to a single, identical, homogeneous space ,while the movements are heterogeneous, irreducible among themselves. p.1.
movement will always occur in a concrete duration; thus each movement will have its own qualitative duraion. Hence we oppose two irreducible formula; real movement – concrete duration, and immobile sections + abstract time.’
In 1907 in Creative Evolution, Bergson gives the incorrect formula a name: cinematographic illusion. Cimena infact, works with two complementary givens: instantaneous sections which are called imagesl and a movement or a time which is impersonal, uniform, abstract, invisible, or imperceptible, which is in the apparatus, and with which the images are made to pass consecutively. Cinema thus gives us a false movement. p.2.
– 베르그송의 견해에 의하면 cinema가 잘못된 움직임을 준다고 보는데, 들뢰즈는 이에 반대한다.
according to Deleuze, cinema does not give us an image to which movement is added, it immediately gives us a movement-image. p.2.
It is in the sense that the cinema is the system which reproduces movement as a function of any-instant-whatever that is, as a function of equidistant instants, selected so as to create an impression of continuity. p.5.
We have reached the very heart of cinema’s ambiguous position as industrial art: it was neither an art nor a science.p.7.
Contemporaries, however, might have been sensitive to a development at work ni the arts, which was changing the status of movement, even in painting.
모더니즘 시대상과 역시 연결해서 해석한다.
Bergson forcefully demonstrates that the cinema fully belongs to this modern conception of movement. p.7.
Bergson’s second thesis makes possible another way of looking at the cinema, a way in which it would no longer be just the perfected apparatus of the oldest illusion, but, on the contrary, the organ for perfecting the new reality. p.8.
MOvement is a mobile section of duration. p.8.
movement is a translation in space. p.8.
movement always relates to a change. p.9.
Bergson initially discovered duration as identical to consciousness. But further study of consciousness led him to demonstrate that it only existed in so far as it opened itself upon a whole. p.10.
Thus in a sense movement has two aspects. On one hand, that which happens between objects or parts; on the other hand that which expresses the duration or the whole. p.11.
Now we are equipped to understand the profoundthesis of the first chapter of Matter and Memory. (1)There are not only instantaneous images, that is, immobile sections of movement; (2) there are movement-images which are mobile sections of duration; (3) there are, finally, time-images, that is, duration-images. change-images, relation-images, volume-images, which are beyond movement itself.