[Frameworks] Deleuze and Husserl

Wed Aug 26 13:22:16 UTC 2020

Kerstin thank you so much for this information.
English text here: The Haitian Rushes <http://johannjacobs.com/en/formate/the-haitian-rushes-by-maya-deren/>.
There may be a trip to Zurich in my future
unless the Whitney can be cajoled
into giving space to Maya’s voodoo voice.

> On Aug 26, 2020, at 3:18 AM, Kerstin Schroedinger <krstn at zeromail.org> wrote:
> 
> as far as i know 
> there is a project to do with the Jacobs Museum / Foundation in Zurich Switzerland
> to preserve the ‘Haitian Rushes’
> there was an exhibition there in 2016
> https://johannjacobs.com/de/formate/maya-deren-die-haitian-rushes/ <https://johannjacobs.com/de/formate/maya-deren-die-haitian-rushes/>
> 
> best
> 
> Kerstin Schroedinger
> schroedinger.blackblogs.org <http://schroedinger.blackblogs.org/>
> +49 179 473 2258
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 26. Aug 2020, at 2:27 AM, David Baker <dbaker1 at hvc.rr.com <mailto:dbaker1 at hvc.rr.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Chrissie,
>> 
>> If you would allow  the discussion to expand to Black Lives Matter 
>> a film comes to mind I have only seen in an excerpt at Anthology on Jan. 26, 2010  <https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/arts/dance/28lost.html>
>> as part of a program presented by Danspace Project,
>> Maya Deren’s Unedited Haiti Footage.
>> 
>> When I saw this work I was overwhelmed by its consequence.
>> I was very familiar with the Ito/Winett edit of this material, 
>> Divine Horsemen: The LIving Gods Of Haiti (1954).
>> However the experience I had with the fragment of Unedited Haiti Footage was very different,
>> an order of cinematic magnitude I have never forgotten and always wished 
>> to see in its entirety.
>> 
>> Immediately after the program I brought my ardor 
>> to this forum. 
>> Pip lent important information,
>> 
>>> We screened the totality of Maya Deren's Haiti Footage on April 4th, 2004 at 4pm in the Auditorium du Louvre in Paris. The screening was organized in parternship with Anthology in the hopes of raising money to preserve the footage. Jonas Mekas dedicated the screening to Jean Rouch.
>>> 
>>> What was actually screened was 240 minutes of silent 16mm footage, the complete unique print, the first and only time it has been screened in Europe. The auditorium was full, so over 400 people saw this footage that day. Nobody came forward with funds to preserve it.
>>> 
>>> The footage is beautiful. It should be preserved - a new internegative could be struck for a few thousand dollars and a print could circulate. Deren never touched the footage or edited it our of allegiance to the voudoun gods.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Vociferous discussion ensued.
>> 
>> Jonas Mekas in a rare appearance by way of Andy Lampert sent this:
>> 
>> "Andy, please let all well-meaning but little informed enthusiasts know that the work on preserving HAITI footage has been going for several years now with Martina Kudlacek and myself in charge of  it. Martina has put a lot of work into it, and has prepared a detailed description of materials , a plan for how to go about the preservation work, and a budget for doing that work which in 2005 was c.70,000 but I figure now it will be over $100,000.  Martina is returning back to New York to continue the work this March, so it will be at that time that we'll have an updated budget and updated plan how to go about it (changing technologies have opened other choices and possibilities). In 2005 all my efforts to find suport for sponsoring the project ended on dead ears. It looks like it took an earthquaque and destruction of half of Haiti, to open some ears and eyes. No guarantee that this will also open the checkbooks, but all of you, excited well meaning  people should know that I have never given up on any of the projects that I worked on, you should know that much about me by now. Maya's HAITI film will be preserved and made available to all. And so will be our LIbrary wing built too. On the completion of Anthology, our Cinema Cathedral, I have been working for thirty years. On completion of Maya's HAITI I have been working only for five years. Both cathedrals will be completed, I promise you that.  But I want you to know that talking, no matter how enthusiastic and well--meaning, has not built any cathedrals yet. I need your concrete, in this case your money, to complete   the two cathedrals.   
>> Jonas"
>> 
>> Ten years later I am wondering how this ineffable work on such an extraordinary subject by an auteur as consequential as Maya Deren is still invisible, endangered, unknown.
>> 
>> Your esteemed thoughts would be most appreciated.
>> 
>> David
>> 
>> PS Hannah Frank’s Frame By Frame matters to me too.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 25, 2020, at 5:35 PM, Chrissie Iles, Curatorial <chrissie_iles at whitney.org <mailto:chrissie_iles at whitney.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Most importantly, what are we all doing to support Black filmmakers and thinkers, and expand the discussion beyond the Eurocentric model to take on the larger, more inclusive post colonial thinking that is now so urgent. We’re in the middle of the biggest uprising in American history, and that changes everything and honestly blows all this out of the water in terms of what we need to be thinking about now. 
>>> Chrissie 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 25, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Michael Betancourt <hinterland.movies at gmail.com <mailto:hinterland.movies at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Bernie,
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for reminding me why I don’t get involved in these discussions. Not in decades ... but animation and avant-garde film is a topic that is of personal interest. So, let me begin by saying that there is no emotion in this response I’m writing. I'm not angry, upset or anything except (perhaps) a bit disappointed. But I’d done with this discussion since I recognize a pattern of "gas lighting." You can claim I'm being over sensitive, that's fine. I'm not interested. This is not the start of a flame or me walking away in a "huff" because you're "right" (I don't think you are, and I'm not), but simply my giving up on the discussion entirely as I have more important and useful to me ways to spend what time I have; if this seems rude or confrontational, I'm sorry, but that is not the intention here. This is me making a polite exit, one where I do not accept the behavior I have observed directed at me.
>>>> 
>>>> So my response is simply, “No. I’m done.” 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> For readers who haven’t been following, or who don’t understand what I mean, go through the other posts. "Gas lighting" someone in a discussion is an attempt to make the person you’re “conversing” with feel like they don’t know what they’re talking about, to make them doubt their expertise, knowledge, ideas. It is an attempt to make the challenge posed by their comments present go away. Recognizing it is simple. It works like this:
>>>> 
>>>> First, claim to have been unclear and explain a point that was perfectly obvious. This creates the sense that your comments have been misunderstood and makes the person being gas lighted doubt their comprehension.
>>>> 
>>>> Then, deny (some or all) of what the other person has been said, dismissing it as irrelevant or incoherent. Ignore the rest.
>>>> 
>>>> Next, drop in a few ad hominem asides during your comments that are irrelevant, but put the other person in “their place.” (These can be used to attach what you think are their credentials.)
>>>> 
>>>> Finally, introduce a non sequitur argument phrasing it so it can be seen as an attack. Whether it's coherent or relevant doesn't matter so long as it becomes the focus of discussion. Feel free to contradict your earlier comments since it doesn't matter what you're saying so long as the person you're addressing feels they don't know what they're talking about and defer to your "expertise."
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> So as I said, I’m done with this discussion. Feel free to have the last word.
>>>> 
>>>> Michael Betancourt
>>>> Savannah, GA USA
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> michaelbetancourt.com <http://michaelbetancourt.com/> | vimeo.com/cinegraphic <http://vimeo.com/cinegraphic>
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:47 AM Bernard Roddy <roddybp0 at gmail.com <mailto:roddybp0 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> Greetings, Michael.
>>>> 
>>>> There was ambiguity in my sentence regarding Pip. When I wrote that I think "he" sees himself as doing philosophy, I am referring to Deleuze. 
>>>> 
>>>> There is way too much to try to address in your post. But whenever you introduce audiences, I think you are off track. Or, you are not talking about philosophical questions, whatever people teaching film studies might happen to say.
>>>> 
>>>> There is a priority on narrative in Delueze. This I see as distracting given my priorities. And all these questions about language derive from literary cases of narrative. Remember Pasolini and the "cinema of poetry," which was supposed to conceive of cinema as unlike the written story? 
>>>> 
>>>> Of your quotations, the one from pp. 26 - 27 bears on narration. Deleuze seems to be asking what explains the appearance of narration when it appears. And he seems to be less inclined to adopt the terms from linguistics that were so common in discussion of cinema during the heyday of Barthes and semiotics.
>>>> 
>>>> Only at the end do you take up what I find a manageable question, and the one at stake for me here. I wouldn't say the question concerns Deleuze exegesis. It was, rather, in what way are we going to think about animation? 
>>>> 
>>>> And yet, given the right focus, I would like to enjoy Deleuze's work. I just opened to p. 56, where he mentions Bergson and Husserl, and where this term "movement-image" seems to receive a definition. Think of movement as non-mental and image as mental. The long history of discussion around how the mind and body could interact comes back to the surface, but where "mind" is now "image" and the "external world" is represented by "movement."
>>>> 
>>>> That's a history making its way into what we would probably appreciate more if it presupposed a little less. These are extremely attenuated summaries of chunks from modern philosophy. And with them Deleuze spins his own equally abbreviated thinking.
>>>> 
>>>> For me, it was about the appearance of movement in cinema and how it is to be explained. But the cinema has offered a model for explaining the same appearance in everyday perception. So, what we have is a history of philosophy that has thought in terms like film strips offer (and long before cinema, as it happens).
>>>> 
>>>> My reference to Husserl presents the alternative. You may want to think about differences between past and future frames, but you'll end up with nonexistent parts of something that is supposed to be presently observed (what is past is gone). So in Husserl we have an incredibly developed alternative nobody bothers with. (And who is really going to know what Derrida's thinking about Husserl involved? I mean, seriously.)
>>>> 
>>>> Option 1: You understand time as if it is made up of moments that can be divided. The model is space. Option 2: You realize that you only perceive what is present. And you also realize that doing geometry isn't the same as drawing conclusions from your little sketches. In geometry, Husserl says, you work with essences. There is a point of contact with your sketch, but your basis for thinking is not empirical.
>>>> 
>>>> And so we have Ariadne and the construction of space without temporal parts. We have geometry done on a grand scale. And we have an alternative for the person who shoots frame by frame her drawings of figures - or the navigation of her architectural designs.
>>>> 
>>>> Bernie
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> FrameWorks mailing list
>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/attachments/20200826/7d001d81/attachment.html>