Inside the Zone

2021 ◽  
pp. 43-64
Author(s):  
Jon Hoel

This is the largest chapter in the book and takes a closer look at the mysterious ineffable Zone that exists at the center of the film’s narrative. What is the Zone, and are we in it, is the central question posed by the chapter, and brings into conversation a larger framework of film theory, including analyses from thinkers like Gilles Deleuze, Søren Kierkegaard, and Slavoj Žižek among others. The film examines the speculative space of the Room, and what the prospect of its power: the ability to grant the greatest inner desire of its occupants. Is this power real? The film plays with this question, along with imagery of potential speculative radiation consequences of the nuclear age, with careful allusions to Soviet nuclear disasters of the time.

rth | ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 246-272
Author(s):  
Danilo De Ávila

Este estudo objetiva propor uma abertura da psicanálise à história por meio da noção de paranoia. Uma categoria tradicional da clínica, sua construção remonta ao círculo freudiano e o célebre caso do presidente Schreber para se espraiar no século XX-XXI nas obras de Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Gilles Deleuze e Slavoj Zizek. Percorrendo os usos da noção para estes filósofos, psicanalistas e sociólogos, podemos retrabalhar o acúmulo gerado pelos usos da noção para na historiografia. Richard Hofstadter, cunhador do estilo paranoico durante os anos 1960, começou este trabalho do lado da História e trouxe ganhos políticos, evidentes aos olhos de hoje. Cabe a este artigo, desenvolvê-lo, mas não para projetá-lo – expediente próximo a paranoia – em outras formações históricas, mas para repensar outros modelos críticos para a historiografia na tensão entre patologia e verdade, antinomia da noção de paranoia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 39-52
Author(s):  
Cicero Cunha Bezerra ◽  
Ricardo Itaboraí Andrade de Oliveira

A presença dos acontecimentos enquanto fenômeno, e seu contraponto, o hábito, ecoam numa inter-relação contínua ao longo de todo o enredo do romance A Peste (1947) de Albert Camus. O presente artigo consiste na investigação do conceito de acontecimento e suas relações com a noção mediadora de linguagem - do mesmo modo que a ideia de resistência - à luz de uma leitura das reflexões de Gilles Deleuze, Slavoj Zizek e John Caputo acerca desse tema. Para tanto, estarão expostas correlações possíveis entre construção ficcional e filosofia na análise desta obra que é considerada uma das mais simbólicas do século XX.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Flisfeder

The following dissertation examines film theory' s contribution to the Marxian theory of ideology. I argue that while early film theorists sought to develop a theory of film, film theory better serves the study and critique of ideology. I claim that the study of film and spectatorship can add to knowledge of ideology and subjectivity. To this end, I examine the relevance of the Slovenian philosopher and psychoanalyst, Slavoj Žižek, for contemporary film studies. I locate Žižek's place within film studies through a debate between himself and the prominent American film scholar, David Bordwell. Bordwell is well known for his advocacy of cognitive and middle-level research in film studies, and for his criticism of film theory (or, 'Theory'). He is one of the leaders of a movement in film studies known as post-Theory. I take up the debate between Žižek and Bordwell, and argue that the post-Theory rejection of Theory is an ideological effect of the class struggle. After carving out a place for Žižek in film studies, I examine the relevance of his psychoanalytic interpretations of cinema for a critique of ideology. Žižek is known for using examples from films as tools of exegesis for an interpretation of Lacanian psychoanalysis. However, I argue that while this is true for some of his writing on film, Žižek also practices a psychoanalytic interpretation of cinema that reveals something about the function of ideology. Referring to Žižek, I also argue against early film theorists who thought it possible to interpellate political subjectivities through alternative or avant-garde cinema. In contrast, I argue that the work itself in not powerful enough to interpellate political subjectivity. It is, rather, the interpretation that politicizes the work. I claim that films do not create subject-positions, as early film theorists argued; rather, they reproduce the already existing subject-positions of the spectators by reproducing pleasure or desire. However, without rejecting the efforts of early film theory, I conclude, against Bordwell and other post-Theorists, that Theory is still important in film studies, particularly in the area of political critique, and that Žižek's work is exemplary of the kind of political criticism needed in film studies.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Jūratė Baranova

Bruce Russell argues, that cinema cannot create the philosophical knowledge for the reason that the answers to philosophical questions are contradictory and not obvious, the explicit argumentation is needed if the person is inclined to give justified answers to philosophical questions. Given examples are not satisfactory for philosophizing. On the other hand Slavoj Žižek, Stanley Cavell and Gilles Deleuze seems do not see this obvious gap between cinema and philosophy. They discuss the cinema as philosophy. What presumptions are needed for this approach? How this approach could be adapted in the philosophy education?


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Flisfeder

The following dissertation examines film theory' s contribution to the Marxian theory of ideology. I argue that while early film theorists sought to develop a theory of film, film theory better serves the study and critique of ideology. I claim that the study of film and spectatorship can add to knowledge of ideology and subjectivity. To this end, I examine the relevance of the Slovenian philosopher and psychoanalyst, Slavoj Žižek, for contemporary film studies. I locate Žižek's place within film studies through a debate between himself and the prominent American film scholar, David Bordwell. Bordwell is well known for his advocacy of cognitive and middle-level research in film studies, and for his criticism of film theory (or, 'Theory'). He is one of the leaders of a movement in film studies known as post-Theory. I take up the debate between Žižek and Bordwell, and argue that the post-Theory rejection of Theory is an ideological effect of the class struggle. After carving out a place for Žižek in film studies, I examine the relevance of his psychoanalytic interpretations of cinema for a critique of ideology. Žižek is known for using examples from films as tools of exegesis for an interpretation of Lacanian psychoanalysis. However, I argue that while this is true for some of his writing on film, Žižek also practices a psychoanalytic interpretation of cinema that reveals something about the function of ideology. Referring to Žižek, I also argue against early film theorists who thought it possible to interpellate political subjectivities through alternative or avant-garde cinema. In contrast, I argue that the work itself in not powerful enough to interpellate political subjectivity. It is, rather, the interpretation that politicizes the work. I claim that films do not create subject-positions, as early film theorists argued; rather, they reproduce the already existing subject-positions of the spectators by reproducing pleasure or desire. However, without rejecting the efforts of early film theory, I conclude, against Bordwell and other post-Theorists, that Theory is still important in film studies, particularly in the area of political critique, and that Žižek's work is exemplary of the kind of political criticism needed in film studies.


Author(s):  
Robert Pfaller

Starting from a passage from Slavoj Žižek`s brilliant book The Sublime Object of Ideology, the very passage on canned laughter that gave such precious support for the development of the theory of interpassivity, this chapter examines a question that has proved indispensable for the study of interpassivity: namely, what does it mean for a theory to proceed by examples? What is the specific role of the example in certain example-friendly theories, for example in Žižek’s philosophy?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document