/lit/ - Literature

>>11239544
>>11238972
>>11239362
In Cinema 1: The Movement Image, Gilles Deleuze also demonstrates the film's influence on his way of thinking about the cinematic medium's potential,discussing how its uniquely cinematic structuring of temporal sensibilities outmodes simplistic apprehensions of time and demonstrates time's multiplicity. He argues that the alternation between Intolerance's four distinct narratives is not motivated by the requirements of the film's theme, of a message sourced in the narratives themselves, but instead, based in the powerful concept of cinematic montage itself, a distinguishing feature of the cinema, which can bring disparate visions of specific times and spaces into conversation in a way that may, in Deleuze's apprehension of the American tradition, be fashioned to seem purely organic. Therefore, it it cinema's intrinsic ability to invisibly stitch together actualities of immensely different spatial and temporal provenance which enables the "timeless struggle" theme of Intolerance, as well as provides the exceptionally apt depiction of temporality as it really is, extant across all of history in equal measure in simultanaeity, in what Deleuze might have termed "any time whatever," but also only able to be experienced in the immesurably atemporal moment of "the present." In addition to Intolerance's organicized representation of time as existing and being experience identically across eras, "time as whole, as great circle or spiral," time as it might exist in the fullest sense of ideal history and memory, Deleuze also uses Intolerance to help illustrate the other part of the dialectic of experienced time, time as "The continually diminishing interval between two movements or two actions."

>>11208745
>>11208493
In Cinema 1: The Movement Image, Gilles Deleuze also demonstrates the film's influence on his way of thinking about the cinematic medium's potential,discussing how its uniquely cinematic structuring of temporal sensibilities outmodes simplistic apprehensions of time and demonstrates time's multiplicity. He argues that the alternation between Intolerance's four distinct narratives is not motivated by the requirements of the film's theme, of a message sourced in the narratives themselves, but instead, based in the powerful concept of cinematic montage itself, a distinguishing feature of the cinema, which can bring disparate visions of specific times and spaces into conversation in a way that may, in Deleuze's apprehension of the American tradition, be fashioned to seem purely organic. Therefore, it it cinema's intrinsic ability to invisibly stitch together actualities of immensely different spatial and temporal provenance which enables the "timeless struggle" theme of Intolerance, as well as provides the exceptionally apt depiction of temporality as it really is, extant across all of history in equal measure in simultanaeity, in what Deleuze might have termed "any time whatever," but also only able to be experienced in the immesurably atemporal moment of "the present." In addition to Intolerance's organicized representation of time as existing and being experience identically across eras, "time as whole, as great circle or spiral," time as it might exist in the fullest sense of ideal history and memory, Deleuze also uses Intolerance to help illustrate the other part of the dialectic of experienced time, time as "The continually diminishing interval between two movements or two actions."

>>11196789
In Cinema 1: The Movement Image, Gilles Deleuze also demonstrates the film's influence on his way of thinking about the cinematic medium's potential,discussing how its uniquely cinematic structuring of temporal sensibilities outmodes simplistic apprehensions of time and demonstrates time's multiplicity. He argues that the alternation between Intolerance's four distinct narratives is not motivated by the requirements of the film's theme, of a message sourced in the narratives themselves, but instead, based in the powerful concept of cinematic montage itself, a distinguishing feature of the cinema, which can bring disparate visions of specific times and spaces into conversation in a way that may, in Deleuze's apprehension of the American tradition, be fashioned to seem purely organic. Therefore, it it cinema's intrinsic ability to invisibly stitch together actualities of immensely different spatial and temporal provenance which enables the "timeless struggle" theme of Intolerance, as well as provides the exceptionally apt depiction of temporality as it really is, extant across all of history in equal measure in simultanaeity, in what Deleuze might have termed "any time whatever," but also only able to be experienced in the immesurably atemporal moment of "the present." In addition to Intolerance's organicized representation of time as existing and being experience identically across eras, "time as whole, as great circle or spiral," time as it might exist in the fullest sense of ideal history and memory, Deleuze also uses Intolerance to help illustrate the other part of the dialectic of experienced time, time as "The continually diminishing interval between two movements or two actions."