P. 1
9. remembering cinema elsewhere art gallery films.pdf

9. remembering cinema elsewhere art gallery films.pdf

|Views: 22|Likes:
Published by loloroloh
gallery films
gallery films

More info:

Published by: loloroloh on Nov 06, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Remembering Cinema "Elsewhere": From Retrospection to Introspection in the Gallery Film

by CATHERINE FOWLER Abstract: Since 1990 a body of gallery films has remade cinema's past using remembered rather than memorable images. This essay connects examples such as L'ellipse (Pierre Huyghe, 1998), Deadpan (Steve McQueen, 1997), and Zoo (Salla Tykkä, 2(X)6) to cinephilia and the ideas of Maya Deren, Stanley Cavell, and Victor Bürgin, so as to theorize introspective and circumspective tjses of cinema's past that challenge our understanding of "the image" in exciting ways.

t the Forty-ninth Venice Biennial in 2001, Chantai Akerman was one of six filmmakers who agreed to create an installation that reflected a coUaboradon between film and the visual arts.' The resuldng film. Woman Sitting after Killing, was a seven-minute short that played across seven monitors. Akerman afieionados will immediately recognize that Woman Sitting exhumes the ending of her three-hour-and-twenty-minute feature Jeanne LHelman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles, made in 1975. Woman Sitting therefore consdtutes a "replaying" of cinema's past, which, in its new form, is both de- and recontextualized, depending on the viewer's knowledge and memory of the original film. Akerman is not the first filmmaker to reframe work made for the cinema in the gallery space, but she is unique in revisidng her own past. As many writers have observed, cinema's past is finding new life in contemporary films made for exhibidon in the art gallery.^ Douglas Gordon, Les LeVeque, Christoph Girardet and Matthias Müller, Monica Bonvicini, Stan Douglas, Pierre Huyghe, Matthew Buckingham, Steve McQueen, Stan Douglas, Salla Tykkä, and Runa Islam are just
1 The others were Atom Egoyan (with Juliao Sarmiento). Yervant Gianikian (with Angela Ricci Lucchi). Abbas Kiarostami. David Lynch, and Edward Yang. 2 See Michael Rush. Video .Art (London: Thames and Hudson. 2003). 117-118; Catherine Elwes. '^ideo Art: A Guided Tour (London: I. B. Tauris, 2005). 170; and Michael Newman. "Moving Image in the Galiery since 1990." in Film and Video Art, ed. Stuart Comer (London: Täte Publishing, 2009), 88. It should be noted, however, that none of these commentators separate out different categories of the use of cinema's past as I do in this essay.


Catherine Fowler is a Sentar Lecturer in Fibn ai Otago University, New Zeoii"^. She is the editor of The European " Cinema Reader (Roultedge, 2002), coedxtor with Gillian HelfieU of the collection Representing the Rural: Space, ^ Place and Identity in Films about the Land (Wayne State Urnversity Press, 2006), and author of Sally Potter o (University of Illinois Press, 2008). She is currently wrikng a book about gallery ßlms. © 26 Winter 2012 51 | No. 2 www.cmstudies.org

Cinema Journal 51

No. 2 I Winter 2012

a few of the many artist filmmíikers whose contemporary practice references the visible image-bank of cinema's past. The reuse of cinema's past by artists is not a new phenomenon, but the notion that this might be undertaken in a spirit of "collaboration" is. While the canvases of Edward Hopper and the photographs of Cindy Sherman and Jeff Wall evince a fascination with cinema and its past, artists' film- and videomaking has typically operated at a critical distance from the cinema; consequently, any reuse of cinema's past was carried out in a spirit of destruction—of its glamour, its linearity, and its iUusionism. Equally, at those previous moments when artist film- and videomakers stepped into the gallery space, they explicidy turned their back on all things to do with cinema; hence, Tanya Leighton observes that "early video art and, to a degree, the practices of expanded cinema in the 60s and 70s can be understood as attempts to articulate the aesthetics of the moving image outside or against the specifically cinematic."^ Film and Art: A Collaboration? The "dialogue between art and film" is the subject of an extensive essay by Kerry Brougher.'* In "Hall of Mirrors," published to accompany the 1996 exhibition of the same name, Brougher sketches a chronology of the myriad exchanges and engagements that have arisen between the film and art worlds. From Brougher's study we can extract common themes in the attitude of artists toward the cinema. First, there is the desire to look back at moments that have now passed. Second, there is the sense of loss (of potential, of an ideal, and of wonder) once one does look back. And third, there is the need to break film down as if to reduce it "to its most fundamental component."^ Some brief examples illustrate these three themes. Retrospection and mourning can be identified as an attitude in Joseph Cornell's Rose Hobart (1936), in which Cornell extends into film the nostalgic homage to silent movie stars foimd in his collages. Similarly, John Baldessari's work in the 1970s returns to some of the techniques found in the precinema practice of chronophotography. The sense that a golden age of cinema has passed forms the context for more irreverent works, such as photographer Weegee's exposure of the antics of cinemagoers and the cinema industry in Naked Hollywood and the "subversive use of Hollywood iconography" in Bruce Conner's and Kenneth Anger's films and Anger's book Hollywood Babylon.^ The ambivalence of Warhol's pop-art screen prints and underground films bridges the filmart exchange. Warhol's work is both accompanied and followed by the anti-illusionist bent of structuralist materialist film and expanded cinema events. The emphasis in both was on taking apart the cinematic experience and destroying our attachment to narrative and suturing iUusionism. Cinema's past, when used in these films, was typically destroyed by interventions on the celluloid (Ken Jacobs's Tbm, Tom, the ñper's Son
3 Tanya Leighton, introduction to Art and the Moving Image: A Critical Reader, ed. Leighton (London: Täte / Afterall, 2008). 33. Kerry Brougher. "Hall of Mirrors," in Art and Film since 1945: Hall of Mirrors, ed. Brougher (Los Angeles: Museum of Contemporary Art, 1996), 23-24. Ibid., 86. Weegee. Naked Hollywood{HeN York: Pellegrini and Cudahy, 1953); Brougher. "Hall of Mirrors." 43; Kenneth Anger, Hollywood Babylon: The Legendary Underground Classic of Hollywood's Darkest and Best Kept Secrets (Phoenix, AZ: Associated Professional Services, 1965).


5 6


This tendency to look back through gallery films not with regret but with pleasure distinguishes these revisitations of cinema's past from their pre-1990 manifestations. clans and believers. but first it is necessary to introduce the retrospective view as the conventional way of looking back into cinema's past. "Room for Experiment: Gallery Films and Vertical Time from Maya Deren to Eija Liisa Ahtila." with the original footage.Cinema Journal 51 ." Screen 45.'' Rather than merely providing an addendum to Brougher's study. On the one hand. No. and unfixed. See Godard's Histoire(s) du cinéma (1988-1998) for further discussion of whether cinema is ready to be killed off. ambivalence. by montage and collage (Bruce Conner's^! Movie [1958]). the purpose of the look back is to remind us of the ways in which cinema has taken and continues to take hold of us." How do we look back to cinema's past without feeling its loss? How do we recall cinema's past without proclaiming its end? The difficulty inherent in making the look back an act that keeps cinema's past alive is evident in the recurrence of the word "death" in discussions of its lifespan. 4 (2004): 324-343. 1998). and dismantling that exemplify the relationship of artists to the cinema up to the 1990s. 206. or by the expansion of projection (Helio Oiticica's total environments). "Because of its undead nature. Steve Neale and Murray Smith (London: Routledge. no. since it incorporates our own personal engagement with the cinema. It can only have fans. loss. parody. I will explain and explore this trajectory from "there" to "elsewhere" later in my essay. the replacement of retrospection with introspection and circumspection is accomplished through a shift in our understanding of cinema's past as being not "there. modes). my aim is to show how the gallery films I discuss radically challenge the discursive patterns of retrospection. at an end. Not surprisingly. film language was further examined in the combinations of painting and cinema found in the work of Victor Bürgin and then in the dispersal of cinematic elements across space in Peter Greenaway's project to turn the city of Geneva into a film in Stairs I Geneva (1994)." see Catherine Fowler. a memory and an anticipation. these gallery films offer a look backward that remembers cinema's past as "undead." in Contemporary Hollywood Cinema. It follows. The interest of gallery films for Film Studies lies in the fact that they offer a new way of looking backward that is alive with personal rewards. we might observe that the retrospection and mourning that informs some of the first 7 On "gallery films" in relation to "cinema films. forever gathering to revive a fantasm or a trauma. Once broken down.* On the other hand. that they accomplish the replacement of a retrospective view on cinema's past with introspective and even circumspective views. "Specularity and Engulfment: Francis Ford Coppola and Bram Stoker's Dracula. the cinema perhaps does not have a history (of periods. who writes." with the viewer." unfinished. this tendency became more pronounced after analog cinema was threatened by digital media. 8 I take the term "undead" from Thomas Elsaesser. and hostility that characterize the previous rapprochements outlined by Brougher. critique. ed. The Look Backward 1: Cinema's Past Was "There" and Is "Delayed" and "Returned." Elsaesser. consequently. 28 . In this essay I examine films made for the gallery since 1990 that reference cinema's past yet are hardly mentioned in Brougher's essay. styles. and part of history. 2 Winter 2012 [1969]). the work I discuss exhibits a fundamental re-enchantment with cinema's past. In contrast to the attitudes of nostalgia. then. Instead. Thus. the look backward should no longer be associated with discourses of cinema as dead. however. but "elsewhere.

the look backward into cinema's past of film scholarship did not really occur in detail until the late 1980s. Beta Batázs: Early Film Theory: Visible Man and the Spirit of Film. Film as Art (Berkeley: University of California Press. 1957). Godard is accompanied by Raymond Bellour and Serge Daney. 2 Winter 2012 reuses of cinema's past by artist filmmakers is not found in film scholarship until the "apparatus" of cinema is threatened: its material basis. political. which has for Godard. plays them alongside literary texts. its exhibition context. L'Fntre-images: Photo. hence. . Bêla Belázs. Bellour alleges that the singularity of cinema can no longer be assured. Equally. 2010). Bellour's work could be said to examine what Godard would later characterize as cinema's fourth death. 3 (1999): 335. Therefore. montage. Hence. wtíeo (Paris: Éditions de la Différence. in later articles. each representing missed opportunities. For Rudolf Arnheim. In his grand history/story of cinema. yet rather than mourning. 1 1 . Significandy. In-between images are meant to describe the permeation of cinema's boundaries.' Those who followed. Godard is a useful starting point for this essay because gallery films that "replay" seem to share with him the sense that all of cinema's past is there for the (re)taking. . and the norms of spectatorship that both entail. trans. 1990). André Bazin. and a strong sense of loss is by now fully manifested. Rodney Livingstone (Oxford. even before the 9 See Rudolf Arnheim. he creatively invents the term l'entre-images (in-between images) to encompass this new stage in the history of the cinematic image. cinema was simply too young and present to be yearned for. he does not seem to believe that cinema ever ends. 1957). no. and academic terms. and many other writers. and creates unlikely juxtapositions. caused the "insidious degradation of visual culture. even as he periodizes its deaths he is captured again by its past. Jean-Luc Godard tells of not one but four deaths of cinema. he makes it clear that once its perimeters are compromised cinema escapes. Bêla Balàzs. is such a strong experience. according to Michael Witt. 29 . Raymond Bellour." Screen 40. Godard isolates single images from whole films. slows them down. Hugh Gray (Berkeley: University of California Press. from the writers of Cahiers du cinéma to the founders of Movie and Saeen. He argues that "if stopping the image . Histoire(s) du cinéma (1988-1998). What Is Cinema?yo\. 10 11 Michael Witt. to be found elsewhere. some of his techniques in Histoire(s) can be found in the gallery films I discuss. One significant preoccupation for Bellour is the slowing and stilling of the filmed image that video makes possible. "The Death(s) of Cinema according to Godard. Moreover. the assemblage of images into an indistinct blur by television. However. and the transformation of images by video."" His articulation of the still(ed) image as the death of cinema is the only place where we find Bellour marrying cinema with death. superimposes them on each other. At times the collage. and André Bazin.Cinema Journal 51 No. also seemed relatively absorbed in the battle over defining the territory of Film Studies in artistic. and recontextualizing techniques of Histoire(s) recall some of the artists discussed by Brougher. as scholars began to take into account the damage wrought by television and video. Instead. trans."'" In L'Entre images I. UK: Berghahn Books. two other long-term commentators on cinema at its limits. there has been a significant shift in emphasis as digital video has developed. it is largely because it plays with the stoppage of death. brought about by the influence of television. In France. Godard shares wath the gallery filmmakers I discuss a love of cinema. cinema. 1.

"Of an Other Cinema. Art and the Moving Image. "It seems time for a new inventory . Bellour had noted. 4. Cultural Memory and the Digital Dark Age (London: British Film Institute. 407. As a "self-proclaimed melancholic critic. The centenary of cinema in 1995-1996 can partly be blamed for accelerating the sense that something we once knew and loved has slipped away. Serge Daney."'^ Cinema is inevitably flanked by television for Daney as well. (Daney died in 1992. "Is cinema the bloated and vaguely senile moving-image ancestor. Clare Stewart. Daney.sensesof cinema. "'Remembered By': From Nostalgia to Total Recall." in Leighton." Sight and Sound 2. "The Time of Re-departure: After Cinema. since although the digital tools provided by the video and now the DVD player may allow viewers to go back and look again at moments 12 13 Raymond Bellour. 2001). internet and digital media?"'® Someone who answers Stewart's question in the affirmative is archivist and critic Paolo Cherchi Usai. for whom cinema has always been a lost object. the occasion for which has already been provided by the richness of installations of every kind at the 1999 Venice Biennial. Grant (Oxford. games. the Cinema of the Subject.Cinema Journal 51 No. 14-16.) Like Godard. then. . in conjunction with the exhibition Remembrance + the Moving Image at the Australian Gentre for the Moving Image in 2003.com/2004/feature-artic les/kapo_daney/. Jean-Christophe Royoux. "The Tracking Shot in Kapo" (1992). and Daney we find an urge to follow the ends of cinema's past as they disperse into other incarnations of the image. and DVDs is another culprit." and Jean-Ghristophe Royoux suggests that "early on Serge Daney asked himself questions about the ends of cinema. but in addition he noted missing images where reality had not been filmed. 2007). Glare Stewart asks. but he adds advertising to Bellour's scenario as a further culprit responsible for the loss of a certain kind of image.'® In the largely predigital work of Godard." in Leighton. 14 Paul Douglas Grant. for it was celebrated as much as an acknowledgment of cinema's death as an anniversary of its birth. http://v™w. The Death of Cinema: History. UK: Berg. Postcards from the Cinema. when Daney looked back into cinema's past he found missed opportunities. The onset of digital video production tools. Art and the Moving Image. we can credit him as a writer who conceptualized a kind of "postcinema" before the digital put the analog image in question. ready for the retirement home and to be remembered only on birth-days by its profligate offspring—television. 17 Paolo Cherchi Usai. influenced increasingly by the rise of the digital. Cherchi Usai gives his contemplation of "history. Hence." in Remembrance + the Moving Image." in Paul Douglas Grant's words. Bellour. no. 15 16 See Serge Daney. video. Daney fully admits to one of the foundations of his writing being "the sublimation of necrophilia. 2 Winter 2012 2001 Venice Biennial created its project for collaboration between film and the visual arts. cultural memory and the digital dark age" the title The Death of Cinema. Senses of Cinema 30 (January 2004). digital projection. ed. since for him."'^ Not surprisingly. he argues that the films that we study as part of film history are forever lost. "[c]inema is an art of the present. 12. and thus his thesis was largely formed before the digital onslaught. 340. Ross Gibson (Melbourne: Australian Center for the Moving Image. 3(1992). The theory that succeeds these three.^^ In this book. "The Tracking Shot in Kapo". 2003). seems less concerned with following and refinding cinema."'" Equally. DVD. "Falling out of Love. . trans. Daney wanted cinema to conneet with its time. introduction to Serge Daney. 30 .

26. N. Instead. he does admit that the passing of the apparatus of cinema studied by earlier writers means that we might revisit "the main quesdons of classical film theory. 2 1 Winter 2012 from films already seen. but rather just how long ago it ceased to b e . D. ibid.'^ Given his role as a film archivist. so that we could then preserve films in that state of origin. Ibid. therefore. He invents the term "model image" to account for the variability of the apparatus of both projecdon and spectatorship. 2007). In contrast to Rodowick and Cherchi Usai. Whereas Daney argued that to some extent television inaugurated the era of "zappers. Bellour." and we might possess model images by being present at their first screening. economics and technology. N. for example. material state as a form that cannot be resurrected. revidnd." who would constandy "zap" through channels with their remote 18 19 20 21 22 Ibid. to pause and make a gesture to delay the eombined forces of polidcs. For Cherchi Usai. Model images would be images and films "in their intended state. While some of this resignadon extends across other scholarship. 28.. this act of going back can never recover the original screening context.. What is notable. Laura Mulvey. Rodowick.^" While Rodowick is quick to dismiss any suggesdon that a sense of loss is necessarily produced by this recognidon that the cinema we study has gone. as an object to be studied. Cherchi Usai's look back into the past is part of his vocadon. 31 . D. the repeddon granted by DVD technologies means that "the cinema. The Virtual Life of Film (Cambridge. the memory of the model image is forever lost. 24. in looking "again" both crides also conceive of "a gain" in the films that they study. 21. is his convicdon that preservadon is an impossible task and that instead we should get used to thinking of cinema in its original. cinema's past. This is reflected in the fact that he is bold enough to dedicate a whole chapter to the quesdon "What was cinema?" He opens his chapter by asserdng that "the quesdon is not whether cinema will die.. No. rather than simply reaching the end of its era. when comparing his retrospecdve view to that of Godard. film history studies a lost object. Instead."^^ Mulvey is pardcularly interested in how our sense of the past is affected by our ability to now pause. and Daney. and it might be said that the "look back" is the customary look of film scholars. MA: Harvard University Press. In Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the Moving Image. there has also been a concurrent argument for the power of the return of the past. this is because no screening of a fihn is ever the same as the first "virgin" projecdon. Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the f^oving Image (London: Reaktion Books. then. 3 1 . Rodowick seems to endorse Cherchi Usai's sendments. or fastforward at will. has always unwound in the past tense. In 77!^ Virtual Life of Film. Laura Mulvey is interested in post-DVD spectatorship. " " By poindng out that the rise of Film Studies has taken place amid the decline of cinema.Cinema Journal 51 . the act of looking back is not characterized by its acquiescence to the past being lost. 2006). In the work of Laura Mulvey and Vera Dika. can come to embody a new compulsion to look backwards. Rodowick seems to suggest that we are only able to make sense of cinema as it disappears. for Mulvey cinema is not dead."^' For Rodowick.

75. looking back and reinterpreting the past in the light of later events. she notes her intention to "examine works of film and art that use past images and genres in oppositional ways. and the less known. 1974]. Cindy Sherman. since the ability to pause. 2003). while the latter lies in the "image . Someone else who uses the idea of "return" to express a look backward into cinema's past is Vera Dika." Ibid. producing "a cinema of deferral. delay operates as an effect of both narrative cinema and spectatorship. The former relies on the DVD control. the fundamental need for closure that drives narrative cinema relies on delay as a structuring presence. given her past work.. the look back of the DVD pauser is obsessive. 8. such as the Hollywood "nostalgia film" examined by Frcdric Jameson [American Grqfitti [George Lucas. when Mulvey herself returns to moments that she had previously studied or remembered.'"^' However. 20. Given this innate difference. He or she is driven by a compulsion to return and repeat. While Mulvey is interested in the new interpretations that are produced by delay. initiating modes of inattention and distraction. such as experimental work made in New York City in the late 1970s by Jack Goldstein. discovering the cinema's complex relation to time."^"* Kiarostami is her main example of this alternative. . significantly. seen as 'returned' from the past" and "frequently composed of material referencing old movies. and." with inattention being replaced by overattention (producing for her the possessive spectator) and distraction replaced by pensiveness (hence the pensive spectator). delaying its progress. delay brings about transformations in her interpretation of them. However. 1973].^^ Mulvey argues that what is ultimately produced by this compulsion is a "delaying cinema. First. . for Mulvey. revkind. Recycled Culture in Contemporary Art and Film: The Uses of Nostalgia {Cambr'idgß: Cambridge University Press. 1975]). The Rocky Horror ñcture Show [Jim Sharman. Chinatown [Roman Polanski. 32 . In Recycled Culture in Contemporary Art and Film. 144. Mulvey's book becomes most pertinent for my work through her development of the notion of the look backward. The desire that is attached to delay is also applied by Mulvey to DVD spectatorship. through which one might return to a film seen in one's past and analyze its images closely It should be of no surprise. we might argue that Mulvey's attention to the slowing of the image brings about the era of the "pauser. these gallery films inevitably differ from Mulvey's DVD fragments."^® Her examples include the well known. According to Mulvey. that Mulvey connects delay to Freud's description of the death drive "as the desire to return to an 'old state of things. both overattentiveness and pensiveness are attitudes that can be adopted in relation to the gallery films I discuss here. In some films this desire is evacuated. As we will see... Ibid. because it is facilitated by the pause and rewind buttons. 2 i Winter 2012 controls. Ibid." Essentially. 26 Vera Dika." Dika observes that "the 23 24 25 "Return and repetition necessarily involve interrupting the flow of film. and Amos Poe. in the process. then. and fast-forward—the opportunity for private spectatorship—is denied by the simple fact that it is the artist filmmakers who control the selection of images and the structure of the experience. Dika is interested in new interpretations produced by return.Cinema Journal 51 I No. Robert Longo.

3. Dika describes how the interpretation of this image was transformed at the time of its gallery exhibition by the leaked information that it was an image taken from Leni Riefenstahl's Olympia (1938). although recontextualized. toward the "elsewhere. 28."^® In rainbow colors this decontextualized image performs the same jumping action again and again. a "rotoscoped image of a human figure set against an elided black background. Dika sees the effect of The Jump as one of confrontation. structuralist and materialist practices. one now highly coded with pastness.'"^^ Therefore. cinema's past is reenacted hy films in which original footage is played in combination with and as the contrast to or basis for new footage. What these gallery films return to are key moments from cinema's past. Alfred Hitchcock's work predominates in this category and can be found in the work of artists such as Les LeVeque. as a copy of copies whose original has been lost. Dika argues that there is a gain to be had in the return of an image from cinema's past. cinema's past is replayed by films in which footage from an original film is displayed unaltered. I argue. accomplished . but as simulacral. 28 Ibid. 23. She specifically discusses Jack Goldstein's The Jump (1978). Akin to previous uses of cinema's past discussed by Brougher. through collage and montage. "[P]ast images and genres. forces a reinterpretation of how we might understand "the image. Second. What should be evident in these three different attitudes is the movement away from the visible image track of cinema's past and toward new footage. Obviously. and artists have examined cinema's past by looking back at its visible image track.Cinema Journal 51 No.. who "repeat" Vertigo 27 Ibid. . and expanded cinema.. not all gallery films base their content on images from cinema's past.. there exists a growing body of films in which three different attitudes toward cinema's past can be discerned. archivists."^° In the examples discu. alleging that "die confrontation with the image is ." There is some of Mulvey's compulsion to "return and repeat" in the gallery films that fall into the first of my three layers of reference: replaying cinema's past. Third. video viewers. Yet she also argues for this work to be seen in distinction from these predecessors."^' Following Brougher's study. and in repeating them they also invite us to reexperience them. and Douglas Gordon. First. 2 | Winter 2012 image returns not as representational of the natural real. Interestingly." This movement. . Dika's discussion of experimental work provides a further reminder that cinema's past has already been repeated by ardst filmmakers.ssed so far. through its 'return. . theorists. A play of references is thus engendered. About The Jump she concludes. What Dika adds to Brougher is a more considered examination of how this might operate following the era of postmodernism. many have other interests entirely. However. cinema's past is remade by films in which new footage refers to our memory of an original film. I now turn to my objects of study in this essay: films made for the gallery since 1990. like Mulvey. 29 Ibid. 33 . . 27. as examples of worked-over cinematic languages. This in turn reflects the movement away from the "there" of cinema's past.. will be seen as sign systems capable of being reconstructed in oppositional ways to speak critically new texts. Christoph Girardet and Matthias Müller. 30 Ibid.

such as the extraction of only a fragment of the whole or slowing down or speeding up the image. On the level of content nothing has changed: these are still Hitchcock's. 1943) and The Exorcist (William Friedkin. The large installation screens that he uses encourage us to walk around and be overwhelmed by the greatness of such canonical moments. (Dead on Arrival) (Rudolph Maté. both playing the "Are you talking to me?" sequence from Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese. In Through a Looking Glass (1999)." with the former being "visually striking and narratively important. only every nvo seconds of the original have been captured. Gordon projects D. Friedkin's. 2006). 34 . and the viewer can walk between them. 31 Christian Keathley. each of which runs at a different projection speed. In Gordon's infamous 24 Hour Psycho (1993). Between Darkness operates through juxtaposition and Through a Looking Gkss through fragmentation. such as the use of more than one screen and the physical arrangement of screens in space to create an embodied experience. Finally. in painful slow motion. or the Wind in the Trees (Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 33. Importantly. 32 Ibid. hence they show. the unwinding film. Les LeVeque runs time-compressed versions of Vertigo on a four-part screen. Among other things. 2 I Winter 2012 (1958). In 4 Vertigo (2000). Keathley distinguishes "film moments" from "cinephiliac moments. pause and delay. for through it we can distinguish the replaying of cinema's past from its reenacting and remaking. we find similar Mulveyian techniques in play Hence. Having noted the techniques Gordon uses to replay films. respectively Original footage is recontextualized through both in-frame techniques. addressed by Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro) on both sides." while the impact of the latter is highly subjective. and Mate's images.Cinema Journal 51 I No.A. Girardet and Müller edit together numerous fragments from Hitchcock's films. and P^cho (1960). Turning to Gordon's other two films. both operations are brought about by the ability to stop and start. Cinephilia and History. the artists are interested in the representation of mothers and the moment of raw emotion.O. Under Capricorn (1949). Both examples operate through the fragmentation of the whole and can be read through the critical lens of Mulvey's and Dika's work. we might suggest that Gordon replays those moments from cinema's past that have already been celebrated as classic and thereby assured a place in the cinematic canon. looking from one to the other. Yet Gordon operates as might one of Laura Mulvey's DVD pausers: he "delays" Psycho and "repeats" D. A more sustained engagement with replaying is offered in Douglas Gordon's work. and out-of-frame techniques. 1976). 1973). I want to turn next to his choice of content. 1950) on three screens. In The Phoenix 7â/)M (1999). In Between Darkness and Light (qfler William Blake) (1997). the formation and then shedding of a tear in Ingrid Berçman's eye in Under Capricorn. Gordon has chosen what Christian Keathley calls "memorable" films and "film moments. Gordon uses two screens facing each other. Scorsese's. Hitchcock's masterpiece of suspense is hung in the center of the gallery on a huge double-sided screen and slowed down so that it takes a full twenty-four hours to project. OA. King's.^^ One way of mapping the trajectory from the "there" to the "elsewhere" of cinema's past is through the slippage from memorable to remembered moments and films."^' In his study of cinephilia. in Déjà-vu (2000). a double-sided screen plays The Song of Bernadette (Henry King. Therefore.

33 34 Jean-Luc Godard. in an interview in Ubération. James S. More than thirty years ago.e Vrai coupable. May 22. thereby embracing introspection. Is it the visible image itself or the invisible. UK: Berg. 2006). but one remembers a rosary. 35 .. then a second is to remember cinema's past in fragments. "^" Similarly. actually denies them their power) and the recombination of these images with others which dramatically change their intrinsic qualities. Jonathan Rosenbaum cites the concrete examples given by Godard: "[O] ne forgets the circumstances of why Janet Leigh is going to the Bates Hotel . ."^^ Given the invitation these gallery films send out to enjoy cinema as. For James S.^' I will return to Godard. and his work in Histoire(s) du cinéma later. 172-175. Emiliano Battista (Oxford.. As we have seen from the examples of cinema's past replayed." I bring Godard back to this discussion as a self-confessed cinéphile and a collector of cinema's many deaths. 35 36 37 Ibid. Williams.. "The death of Hitchcock marks the passage from one era to another. it may seem odd to juxtapose them with Godard's doom-laden assertion of the "suspension of the visual. Film Fables. the separation of Hitchcock's images from the films to which they belong. it moves away from the image track of cinema's past to instead reconnect with memories of film viewing. a visual experience."^® Where critics such as Williams and Rosenbaum see Godard employing one technique. Libération.. among other things."^® A further interpreter of Godard's Histoire(s). interviewed by Serge July. Rancière sees two. and hence over how cinema takes hold of us. I believe we are entering an era defined by the suspension of the visual. Here. I don't think we'll have the strength to make cinema much longer. "Godard's appreciation of Hitchcock as the greatest creator of forms this century rests on the fact that what one remembers of his films are not the narratives but the visual details— objects at their most concrete because suddenly thrown into the light. 3 (1999): 317. no. while "exhibiting" their power. 1980. Jacques Rancière. . . . Two Kinds of Criticism in Godard's Work. while for Godard the way that Hitchcock filmed objects made them jump off the screen into our memory bank of unforgettable images.Cinema Journal 51 I No. jean-Luc Godard declared. I argue that the way that cinema is "remembered" in gallery films produces an alternative sense of "the visual" and hence "the image. a certain kind of cinema is being celebrated in Gordon's replayings. a glass of milk. Following his lament in the Libération interview. 172. The second attitude of the look back rejects retrospection. he returns to Hitchcock in Histoire(s) du ánéma because of the director's centrality to a certain kind of visual practice. it is enough to take note of the debates over the "power" of images. Jacques Rancière. Williams. his thoughts on Hitchcock. Jonathan Rosenbaum. gallery films can also extract fragments from cinema's past—yet this is not all they do. For Mulvey the DVD player allows an extraction of favorite fragments from the whole." Screen 40." However. "í." Screen 40 no 3 (1999)313. trans. imaginative associations it carries that capture us? If one emphasis of this first look backward is to mourn the death of cinema. both this separation (which. "The Signs amongst Us: Jean-Luc Godard's Histoire(s) du cinéma. 2 I Winter 2012 To be sure. . extends this discussion of Hitchcock's images: "We don't remember the bottles of Pommard in Motonous because of their pictorial qualities but because of the emotional charge that the narrative situation has invested in them.

it is helpful to introduce how this works in pracdce. and end. its recepdon is a subjecdve experience of producing meaning. and what ardst Pierre Huyghe ingeniously calls the "elsewhere. crosses first a bridge and then a street and. like L'Ellipse. ?" is uppermost. After this. It takes as its project Wim Wenders's The American Friend {Der amerikanische Freund. remembered films: "In a narradve. The look backward of the gallery films that reenact and remake goes beyond the visible image track of cinema's past because it is formed collectively from both the "there" of cinema. introduction to Cinéma Cinéma: Contemporary Art and the Cinematic Experience.'"*" In those gallery films that." or the reacdons to. Consequently. Mmg. In this way. 13. stands waidng for the lift in the corridor of another apartment building"^' (Figure 1). feelings from. 1977). 36 . and what we want from a visit to the cinema. ed. 1998) can be taken as a prime example. In between these scenes. uldmately. these films operate in more of a subjuncdve mood. J'ai parlé. Marente Bloemheuvel and Jaap Guidemond (Eindhoven. Annette Messager.screened images. and the next scene we see is in the caller's hotel. middle. and L'Ellipse (Huyghe.Cinema Journal 51 I No.G. walks. . reenact. whatever is not present (there). which Jaap Guldemond describes as consisting of "a Steadicam shot that lasts several minutes" in which "we see that the main character leaves his apartment. Netherlands: Stedelijk Van Abbemuseum. Most frequendy. 144. the nodon of cinema's past is extended from the "there" to include the "elsewhere" of the viewing process. Hou Hanru. Delvoye. reenacdng takes the form of a substitndon of new actors or new scenes for the original footage. Huyghe has described the effect of this juxtaposidon as creadng "an imaginary dme in the intersdces of ficdon. whatever refers to another dme or another space (over there). by mentally reconstrucdng this intervening moment. interviewed in Fabian Stech. filmed with Ganz twenty years later. J'ai parlé avec Lavier." When we watch a film in the cinema we should not forget that we are undergoing a mnemonic act which we will remember (be mindful of again) or re-member (piece back together) in a manner that goes beyond the linear experience of beginning. Hirschhorn. and remind us of how we felt. 145. the viewer acdvely occupies his or her dme and becomes the coauthor of the narradve. There is an ellipsis. Sylvie Fleury. 40 Huyghe. 1999). expand on a blink-of-an-eye moment. Before exploring the theoretical terrain of the elsewhere."^* Those gallery films that reenact and remake take images and imagery. Sophie Calle. In the first scene we see Jonathan Zimmerman (Bruno Ganz) in a hotel in Paris phoning his wife. and replays. two scenes from the film. is connected to the memory of the person receiving it.-E. Pierre Huyghe. who is at home in Hamburg. By momentarily inhabidng this elsewhere. what we thought. and desire for. then Huyghe 38 Pierre Huyghe. Rather than the "gain" of "again" that I suggested is part of the repeated or returned image. Sans et Bourriaud (Dijon: Presses du Réel). in which the quesdon "what if . arrives on the street. 39 Jaap Guldemond. 2 I Winter 2012 The Look Backward 2: Cinema's Past Found "Elsewhere. on two screens divided by a third. D. imaginary images and imagery are juxtaposed with the original images that are being referenced. Jonathan himself receives a call and agrees to walk to the hotel of the caller. to a previous real existence. or the real . interviewed in Stech. . If Gordon is the best-known replayer. Huyghe places his reenactment of the "elided" scene. spin out scripts and producdon contexts.

to form the invisible underlayer of an implicit double exposure." Daedalus (Winter 1960): 154-155. original footage from films is juxtaposed with reenactments. probably because the remembrance track has a sense of unreliability about it and an overly subjective emphasis. to be doubles. respectively The single-screen Remake offers a reproduction of Hitchcock's Rear Window that is interested in the original acting. but also because at those moments when it was noted (by Stanley Cavell. an elided moment is filmed twenty years later and projected between the original scenes (Image © Pierre Huyghe 1998." The effect of this retreat from the visible image bank is that the image is neither delayed as Mulvey argues nor returned as Dika asserts. 22. "Remaking Cinema." in Bloemheuvel and Guldemond. could be said to occupy the same position in relation to reenactment. a self-inscription that was not part of the "original" image-track of cinema's past." 23. Huyghe asked his actors "to repeat. quoted in Jean-Christophe Royoux. Huyghe's performers thus seem to be quoting the original actors. albeit without doing so demonstratively. In L'Ellipse (Pierre Huyghe. Sleep (Andy Warhol. but a remembrance of that image. "Cinematography: The Creative Use of Reality. to reproduce. "Remaking Cinema. in the 1970s).""^ Deren's notion of double exposure is useful here.""' Royoux notes. Film theory has paid little attention to the remembrance track of film viewing. 1954).'""^ In the examples cited so far. it is not the image that comes back. Cinéma Cinéma. Les Incivils / The Uncivib (1995). then. and Remake (1994-1995) all reenact well-known films: The Hawks and the Sparrows [Ucellaci e uccellini. as it implies that there might be two tracks unrolling during viewing: the original footage of the image track and those images that take hold of the viewer and are remembered and transformed over time. 1966). Royoux. but instead happened "elsewhere. courtesy Marian Goodman Gallery). when Maya Deren suggested that "[a]s we watch a film. Maya Deren. theory's agenda was to get closer to rather than farther 41 42 43 Huyghe." I similarly want to argue that those gallery films that reenact and remake cinema's past reinsert mnemonic acts that have been elided by film theory The elsewhere as a mnemonic act during film viewing was observed as early as 1960. 1963). Pier Paolo Pasolini. Huyghe reinserts into cinema's past the viewer's self-inscription in the meaning-making process.Cinema Journal 51 I No. 37 . 2 i Winter 2012 Figure 1. the continuous act of recognition in which we are involved is like a strip of memory unrolling beneath the images of the film itself. Sleeptalking (ivith Sleep by Andy Warhol and the Voice of John Giorno) (1998). and Rear Window (Hitchcock. 1998). "Rather than adhering to or imitating characters. thereby allowing for a gradual retreat from the "there" of cinema's past toward the "elsewhere.

in Mary Ann Doane's words. reading these recurring images as essentially about sexual difference. One advocate of remembered images.. 2 I Winter 2012 from the image. perpetuation and dissemination of dominant systems of commonly held beliefs and values. See also Paul Willemen. a "desire for cinema" is manifest as. being not merely in the past but more importantly in our pasts. that the dominance of retrospection in the look back means that Film Studies has missed out on a vital part of the way in which cinema takes hold of us. In order to adjust this omission." "authorial vision. Keathley characterizes cinephilia as a particular kind of looking (which scans the image in panoramic fashion). however.""^ The subject of cinephilia has recently experienced a surge in scholarly activity. It was emphatically not concerned with whatever irreducibly subjective meanings an image might have for this or that individual. 2002). 226-227."® In his book. preferring to argue that it is "greatness. appeared the following year. 2004). "Through the Glass Darkly: Cinephilia Reconsidered. he had misgivings about making public my chance associations to . Despite this admission. Cinephilia and History. the technology of the twentieth century. the criteria have been driven by theory (the agenda of academic Film Studies) rather than practice (viewing in the cinema). . by a particular kind of person (part expert and part enthusiast). 70. confesses that when he began writing about this." in Looks and Frictions: Essays in Cultural Studies and Film rheofy(London: British Film Institute.Cinema Journal 51 i No." and stylistic accomplishments that explain why one image or film should be remembered over another. 38 . Love and Memory. Love and Memory (Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press. Only ten years ago the literature was restricted to a few scant articles and a polemical essay by Susan Sontag published in the New York Times. In the case of my first example. at a particular kind of moment in a film (when details seize us. Only rarely. 45 Mary Ann Doane. Keathley's account of the cinephilic moment in film criticism. Victor Bürgin. 2005): and Keathley. provides further evidence of the suppression of 44 Victor Bürgin. which he traces back to "photogénie" in the 1920s. Bürgin then justifies his discussion of his associations by turning to psychoanalysis. then. the Archive (Cambridge. However. "a love that is attached to the detail. The Remembered Film (London: Reaktion Books. When the type of theoretical work on photography and film in which I have been involved emerged in the 1970s it was concerned with explaining the ways in which films and photographs contribute to the formation. Contingency. was published in 2005. sequences of remembered films. Cinephilia: Movies. 46 Susan Sontag. it has usually been accompanied by a large amount of "guilty" confession. "The Decay of Cinema. a moment which is neither framed for its memorability nor necessarily a moment important to the narrative). a collection on cinephilia. and Keathley's study." New York Times. Cinephilia: Movies. the gesture within. cinephilia. the moment. eds. the trace. . we need a more introspective lens."" The resurfacing of remembered images in gallery films is symptomatic of cinema. I would argue. 1996. In other words. When introspection has surfaced in odd places over the past forty years of Film Studies. MA: Harvard University Press. Cinephilia and History. The Emergence of Cinematic Time: Modernity. has film theory studied remembered as opposed to memorable images. February 25. 1994): Marijke De Valck and Malte Hagener.

"** Cinéphile critics from the 1960s onwards. collected "memories of image moments. 39 . In The World Viewed. gone."^' Furthermore. 1979). 2 ¡ Winter 2012 introspection by film theory. Cavell's admission was made on the eve of film's acceptance into academia. and moments of dialogue. Christian Metz. However. A certain position of objectivity. stylistic details. unless they are masterpieces. by the turn away from "the power of movies" and instead toward a theorization of the spectator and the codes and conventions of film language. quoted in ibid. In those early years of film theory we find in play an obsessive desire to get closer and closer to the film. for which he was heavily criticized. . . are not there as they were . ." Rather they are there "only for the moment. to stop it in order to analyze it and pull out fragments. in part. momentous. 47 48 49 50 51 Keathley. according to Keathley. it is the "ideas and feelings" in images that really matter. He admits that for Film Studies. and analyzing films in intricate detail. . and factuality therefore dominates close analyses of this period. he confesses in his second edition that he actually "mis-remembered" key scenes. as Mulvey proves in Death 24x a Second. 5. 2nd ed. Ibid. . Stanley Cavell.."*' He also cites Christian Metz. one should no longer love the cinema and yet still love it. . he echoes some of Rancière's sentiments when he argues that. whose early writing depended on long periods spent in front of a Steenbeck. xii. unrecaptured fully except in memory and evocation. some as long as thirty years ago" would have provoked scandalized gasps from the likes of Raymond Bellour. at the expense of Cavell's remembrance-based attempt to account for how certain moments take hold of him. MA: Harvard University Press. My second example of an introspective use of cinema's past can be found in the work of the strongest advocate for the elsewhere: Stanley Cavell. in fact.^^ Placing Cavell's confession in its historical context makes it seem naive in the extreme. Caveil ponders the problems he has translating into words how cinema has taken and continues to take hold.Cinema Journal 51 No. 27. this obsession with "the image" and with a particular kind of look backward that emphasizes fragmentation and close analysis has dominated theorizations of cinema's past. He points out that "movies. 52 Ibid. Significantly.. Cinephitia and History. Cinephilia and History. Keathley. who asserts that "[t]o be a theoretician of the cinema."^" He also admits that his "way of studying films has been mostly through remembering them. scientificity. 10.. deconstructing. Not have forgotten what the cinéphile one used to be was like . an acceptance brought about. . 128. (Cambridge. What had been cinephilia's objects of obsession now became objects of suspicion." the cinephiliac anecdote becomes part of the invisible life of cinema's past. first published in 1970 and reprinted in 1979. The World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Film. 12. dissecting. and yet no longer be invaded by him."*^ Like Deren's moment of "double exposure. like dreams. We might imagine how his acknowledgment that he is often referring to films he has seen "only once. "crossing that threshold into scholarly legitimacy meant leaving the cinephilic spirit behind.

152.. a woman walks. Ibid. 17. Deadpan takes a moment from Buster Keaton's Steamboat BillJr." examines them thoughtfully. I now want to turn to how the elsewhere figures in gallery films that remake cinema's past. 2 I Winter 2012 The possibility that cinema's past might meet and mingle with or even reside in our everyday lives is developed by Keathley in relation to cinephilia. and seeks to trace how his obsessive return to them might have its "roots in personal history. 59."®® By way of example. The first scene is from Tsai Ming-Lang's Vwe l'amour (1994) and the second from Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger's A Canterbury Tale (1944). his insistent use of memories of film viewing is undertaken so as to reflect their significance for him: "Movies are hard to remember. and remakes it such that the original footage disappears from our minds and is replaced by McQueen's quite different interpretation."®' Having explored moments in which the elsewhere becomes an object of focus for writers. in the eddies of memory: memories of other films. more or less transitory. instead his words articulate scenes that are remembered in the back of his mind. Ibid. 67-68. a book that is explicitly interested in how a film takes hold outside the auditorium and in everyday life.. The sequence breaks apart. The Remembered Film."^" Cavell's project is taken up years later by Bürgin in The Remembered Film (2004). by Gavell in relation to the viewing experience." Bürgin tries to work out why two similar yet different film scenes are indelibly mixed in his mind. . Steve McQueen's Deadpan (1997) and Salla Tykkä's ^o« (2006) are composed of new footage that remakes cinema's past. "The more the film is distanced in memory the more the binding effect of the narrative is loosened. Bürgin possessively returns to images whose "narratives have dropped away. for Gavell. While there is certainly something of Mulvey's possessive and pensive spectatorship in Burgin's technique. Bürgin. The fragments go adrift and enter into new combinations. 40 . Burgin's writing is not undertaken in front of the images. adventure. And yet. the way the actual events of yesterday are. in a chapter tided "The Remembered Film. The cinephiliac anecdote. Cinephilia and History. and memories of real events. certain moments from films viewed decades ago will nag as vividly as moments of childhood. 72. in contrast to Mulvey.^"0 re-creates 53 54 55 56 57 Keathley." Having argued for a solid history of cinephilia as an attitude toward film viewing and film criticism.Cinema Journal 51 i No."" Meanwhile. and enchantment that we can step into and lose ourselves in. The World Viewed. by contrast. Cavell.®® As he explains. seeks to illuminate the ways in which movies displace themselves out of their original contexts and step into our lives. He notes. 67. In both. again like dreams. and by Bürgin in relation to what he calls "the remembered film. Keathley turns to an exploration of what he calls the cinephiliac anecdote. "Much film theory and history of the past twenty-five years has been preoccupied with articulating and exposing the means by which dominant narrative cinema creates a world of drama. The difference between the original and the remembered images occurs through the slippage from what Bürgin calls "obvious" to "obtuse" meanings.

as if to explore the theme of drowning—on which Hitchcock's sequence pivots—in more detail. but it is also immediately 58 Steve McQueen. solid. 2 1 Winter 2012 Figure 2. as McQueen has suggested. We may or may not immediately subsdtute McQueen for Keaton. televised interview. In this case the ardst takes it upon himself to stand in the middle of a cutout of a house and thereby reenact one of Keaton's most famous gags: the front of a house falls on Keaton.^^ McQueen's framing extends the physical effects on Keaton as he tries to walk through walls and climb up buildings that do not behave as they should because of freakish weather. (Image © Steve McQueen. November 30. from a side angle. Remade as a loop. This interview was part of coverage of the Turner Prize. going beyond the original by editing between this acdon and a game of underwater rugby. then a high angle. which was awarded to McQueen that year. then it falls again. The moment chosen is significant.Cinema Journal 51 No. yet he remains unhurt. towering. it is an "eyebhnk" moment—actually very short in the film—that includes one of many visual gags from a longer sequence in which Keaton becomes increasingly disoriented. 1997. Whereas Keaton is small and wiry.f/ above My Head ( 1996) and Five Easy Pieces (1995). like McQueen's previous galleryfilmsJü. We see the house fall. solid presence (Figure 2). at one point. McQueen is large and conveys a dense. his head. McQueen looks less agile. Every dme the house falls we recall the moment. we encounter Deadpan in its own gallery cube. courtesy of the Thomas Dane Gallery). then a low angle. Deadpan is shot using exaggerated construcdvist angles that posidon us looking up and down at figures. UK Channel 4. Whereas we expect Keaton to have an elasdc escape plan. McQueen remains sdll. Judy/Madeleine's wanderings in Hitchcock's Vertigo. 1999. Apart from a slight bend at the knees and the flutter that is created as the wall falls. filling a whole wall of the gray cubed space with his body or. 41 . In place of Keaton's endless energy we have McQueen's sdllness. Steve McQueen's Deadpan {1997) remakes a remembered moment from Buster Keaton's Steamboat Bill Jr.

" and McQueen's remaking exorcises its original memorability^' like Mulvey's possessive pauser. he says. So Deadpan goes on. as embodying a shift from "the visual" (adjective and noun) to "vision" that incorporates introspection. 2 i Winter 2012 remade by the swift repetition. Keathley. Deadpan channels introspection and the elsewhere. However. this moment from Keaton's film was made to be memorable.^' Deadpan provides an epiphany that looks back into cinema's past after a period of delay and returns to a remembered image. Royoux. However. 59 60 61 62 Keathley. Once the elsewhere of cinema's past comes into view in the work of the theorists and gallery films cited above. as a comic gag. 35. beginning with Godard's moment when the visual is suspended. It might be argued that. our original shock and wonder are replaced by a different kind of fascination. then we will find a second underlying quality to the introspective look back: circumspection. in order to reinsert these overlooked mnemonic acts. as presented today. Once the eyeblink moment is repeated. the author each of us finds inside when confronted with the medium of cinema. and we go back and forth between what was and what could have been. following the death of Hitchcock. he remakes it. McQueen goes back to the moment. However. Cinephilia and History. we first need to acknowledge the inadequacy of a look backward that is dependent on the visible image track. Keathley turns from Roland Barthes's work on the punctum in photography to Pater's work on painting to sketch a history of criticism in which the introspective moment features.. However. Deren." On this basis we might characterize the present era. Cavell. it becomes possible to argue that we must find a space for the remembrance of cinema's past that is also contained in that work. what McQueen takes from the original has an idiosyncratic quality about it. It is. 42 . they also offer the possibility that the act of looking backward might be introspective and alive with personal rewards. can only be understood as an introspective history: the history of the viewer. and Bürgin au gesture toward an introspective history of the cinema. we might borrow Keathley's reference to art critic Walter Pater.'" Royoux concludes that "his words seem to mean that the history of füm. As previously cited. "Remaking Cinema. In visualizing the elsewhere of cinema's past.Cinema Journal 51 i No.^° The crossover with cinephilia comes through Pater's emphasis on discrete detaus that produce "epiphanies" in the looker (here the critic)." 26. to use Keathley's terms. Royoux cites a sequence near the beginning of Histoire(s) du cinéma in which "Godard says that cinema 'is the only way of realizing that I have a story. the work of Godard and Daney gestures toward a different way of conceiving of "the image. Ibid. Ibid. 83. Pater. extracting a body in peril and playing around with it. Keaton is evoked and then forgotten. in contrast to Mulvey's and Dika's looks back. Thus."^^ If we juxtapose Godard's words with his earlier lament. again and again and again. but perhaps the key practitioner of such an approach is Godard. rather than staying with the image bank of cinema's past. To explain this fascination. the gallery films I have discussed render the past unfinished. a "privileged moment. was interested in the "impression" a painting was having on him. rather than merely retrospective and dead to the present.

poses her camera. Salla Tykkä's Zoo (2006) looks back circumspecmoment is not Scottie's obsession. Finally. As she turns and walks back toward us we see that she has a camera in her hands. At the end of Zoo it is revealed that the woman has actually been looking for a place to drown herself. but rather a more elided subtext: female subjectivity and the theme of drovraing. 2 I Winter 2012 What vision also adds to the visual is what Daney gestures toward in his ruminations on the transformation of images. However. and looks intently. Further.Cinema Journal 51 No. Zoo opens with a blonde woman in a tight gray suit and black high heels lingering at the end of a wooden platform that overlooks some water (Figure 3). thus becoming a "thinking twice. and we discover that she is visiting some kind of zoo. Thus. At first it is hard to discern what is happening in the underwater images. vision allows for "invisibility. and between muted browns and yellows and vibrant blue colors. or the supernatural. emerges. The strolling continues. In distinction from the visual. then. Comparing the two sets of images we are left with juxtapositions between above (land) and below (underwater). The cinephilic nature of Tykkä's remake is evident in the fact that what she takes out of this Figure 3. from different angles. 43 . even before this climax the theme of drowning is explored through the juxtaposition with the underwater images. Like Deadpan." In order to explore how this might work we can turn to a second example of cinema remade. But after the first loop the possibility that both sets of images are exploring the same theme. through the underwater images the nature of drowning is explored: bodies are held underwater against their will. She walks between cages. there is a shared sense of increasing tension as the woman looks for a suitable pool and an underwater female body fights against other rugby players. Zoo takes one moment from cinema's past and amplifies an aspect of it. between one body walking and many bodies swimming. tively to Hitchcock's Vertigo (Photo of installation by the author). making every viewing a double viewing. The circumspective adds to the introspective the idea of a doubling of vision such that the present moment is forever accompanied by the past and every visual image is approached with caution and suspicion. although their contrast to the zoo images is evident. The term "vision" can be used to describe something seen in the imagination. she lays down her camera and serenely walks into the water. climbing some steps and discovering a pool. Every few minutes her actions are juxtaposed with images of several bodies playing underwater rugby. which suggests visibility. Salla Tykkä's Z"»." I want to use it here to encapsulate the memory layer of cinema's past that runs underneath all our present experience of cinema. in this case Judy/Madeleine's faked drowning in Vertigo.

and although diegeticaüy she is alone in the frame. setting. In his article "The Tracking Shot in Kapo" (1992)." Royoux.^oo's literal and metaphorical juxtapositions between below and above. 44 . some of his ideas seem to encapsulate the challenge wrought on the visible image track of cinema's past by circumspection. if we juxtapose the blonde wandering around a zoo with Scottie following Madeleine. leaving the film and the world continuing without it. Daney" the critic. we watch the woman looking but never get to see (from her eyes) at what exactly she is looking. I cannot imagine a love for cinema that does not rest firmly on this stolen pre. and declares that his agreement with the point that Rivette was making about the reframing of a death scene signaled the birth of "S. inside and outside. 63 64 Daney. 1960).sent: 'to continue without me. . I have already signaled Serge Daney as a writer who was attempting to extend how we might think about images. he was shown them by Rivette's words. we find him attempting to explain his trajectory as a critic. For Daney. Further. and several times players frantically swim to the surface to take a breath. What Daney also takes from this genesis is the recognition that although he did not see the images. the elsewhere operates through the readings and writings about films that one has and has not seen. in disparate articles he contemplates the difference between the seen and the shown and the image and the visual. the narrative of Scottie's obsession in the face of his own personal weakness becomes the backstory for . Therefore. as well as the viewing and remembering of them: "The brain functions as a secondary projector that would keep the image going. . as Royoux puts it. Despite the fact that Tykkä has filmed new footage. and action suggest a reference to Vertigo. seen and fantasized. Thus. He returns to a review by Jacques Rivette of Kapo (Gillo Pontecorvo. This doubleness is what I refer to when I propose the notion of the circumspective look backward. then the circumspection that is often a part of that past challenges our understanding of the image. Thus is also born a sense that cinema can take hold elsewhere. given their transformation. acting. "The Time of Re-departure. dream and reality. If the introspective look draws from the elsewhere of cinema's past. Tykkä also makes us aware of our own looking by framing her within frames or moving around her (from left to right). going beyond the strict domain of the visible."^* Daney engages with notions of the image again and again in his work in a sometimes confusing spiral of possibilities. "The Tracking Shot in Kapo. thought and experienced.'"^^ Although some of Daney's evocation of the expansion of cinema here can be seen as straightforward cinephilia. into cinema's past. and hence of how cinema's past might continue to take hold in exciting ways. the "concept of image . Tykkä edits her film as if Scottie were present. While the added underwater images engage with the epiphanic quality discussed in relation to Deadpan. as he realized that he shared Rivette's strong conviction. In short. in ^oo I would argue that we might be accompanied in our viewang by our memory of the original. 2 | Winter 2012 we see bubbles rising to the surface as evidence of breath being held." 346. The blonde appears to be looking for something. a film which Daney admits he still has not seen. Tykkä denies us point-of-view shots. hence.Cinema Journal 51 i No. need[s] to be enlarged. elements of costume. in the body of his work we find that.

" the original footage. and Chrissie lies. for w h o m the image must be dug up from the past. as Royoux puts it." the r e m e m b r a n c e of the i m a g e / m o m e n t / f i l m in the viewer's mind. has been seen. the image is not only that which can be seen. Hal Foster. T h e gallery films I have discussed repeat the return to cinema's past of previous experimental work..Cinema Journal 51 | No. and Tykkä. 2 \ Winter 2012 Given this. M c Q u e e n . Instead. the image "remains" for Daney and Royoux. offers a point of contrast whose radical challenge is aptly summed up by critic and curator Ghrissie lies: "I think the relationship between film a n d art is a one-way love affair. and. a m o n g others. this arrangement between film and the visual arts has more often been undertaken in a spirit of destruction than of collaboration. " T h e image is what remains of the film once it is viewed. for w h o m the image must be in front of us in order to stay alive (and be added to)."®® Royoux's use of the word "remains" is instructive. However. having encountered delayed images a n d returned images we are left with "remaining images. we find introspection—and circumspection—that sees the past as alive with personal rewards. because it has stretched from the "there. or will be seen. By channeling introspection. 45 . I a m arguing. rather. emphasis mine." T h r o u g h these remaining images the discursive patterns of the discourse between art and film are radically challenged. as well as those of Mulvey and Dika. to the "elsewhere. In place of loss we find a sense of being captured a n d held once more. And in place of the dismantling of cinema's past we find its remaking. for it goes against the conclusions of Rodowick a n d Gherchi Usai. Hence. As I suggested at the beginning of this essay. Huyghe." October 104 (Spring 2003): 74. for reenacted a n d r e m a d e films. T h e work of G o r d o n . in place of the retrospection and nostalgia that seal cinema's death. I turn back to Royoux to summarize Daney's thoughts. "Round Table: The Projected Image in Contemporary Art. but the film world is largely indifferent to the fact."®® In this essay it has been my aim to call attention to the love of cinema's past that is to be found outside the movie theater a n d beyond the visible image track. Malcolm Turvey. Artists love film. 4( 65 66 Ibid. film theory may yet learn from artists to love and live with cinema again. while artist filmmakers have often reused cinema's past as their material. For Daney.

However. download. or email articles for individual use. .Copyright of Cinema Journal is the property of University of Texas Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. users may print.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->