Paper # 2 - Ideas

For the second paper, I think I'd like to explore Deleuze's concepts of the cinema and the time image and try to re-construct an investigation of films doing philosophy by applying his concepts. In other words, I'd like to try and discover if films can make independent, original contributions to philosophy under the Deleuzian framework. My guess is that, given what the time image represents and how Deleuze's concepts play out, the method will be a bit easier (or more open) than simply going for a contestable interpretation.

Here are a few reasons why (and I'll elaborate on these in the paper): (1) Deleuze's method gives us a general ontology of the moving image versus the time image. These two images seem to be inextricably present in most if not all films (time image much less often). So, most films will be able to be "fitted" into a Deleuzian framework in virtue of these basic elements. (2) We can take issue with the framework itself, but like Sinnerbrink, it's a particular type of interpretation, albeit more technical.

Here's what I think I'm going to propose (and perhaps with a specific example): Using the concepts of time image, recollection image, dream image, and world image, we might be able to demonstrate that cinema is a reflection of life and the life process, thus most films are inherently invested in this life process. Let me break that down. In life, we encounter the sensory motor schema of perceptions leading to actions (I see an object and move upon it). But, we also form recollection and dream images (the virtual images that help us comprehend things in the present). Deleuze is actually arguing for the union of complex physical and mental stimuli in the idea that the real and the imaginary co-interact, and direct time images can pass through various "planes" of mental existence (through the dream, the recollection, etc.). So, when I see a cup in front of me, I can think about it in purely optical and sonic means, passing its image through various images of cups before me IN MY MIND that represent recollection, dreams, etc. Cinema can and does do this, according to Deleuze. To conclude, then, cinema is philosophy because it actively engages with the processes of life, just as philosophy does. It enables different ways to see the world, through the mingling of images.

I would call that the weaker thesis of the two I am thinking of. The stronger one, I think, is the idea that Deleuze is positing a sort of dualism by arguing for the union of the real and the virtual, the mind with the physical stimuli. I might investigate this line of inquiry instead of doing another film-philosophy test like the first paper. Actually, I think it's a bit more interesting, and perhaps more worthwhile because the evidence is directly present in the text. Although, perhaps I could relate this dualistic tendency to film, and also to philosophy....