Apparatus Theory

Christian Metz
Social movements of the 1960s/rising currency of
psychoanalytic theory/Althusser all lead to the rise of apparatus
theory
Apparatus theory brings us to Lacan and a bit to Freud
Psychoanalytic theory in media studies is no longer as pervasive
as it was at the time when apparatus theory was very popular
Apparatus theory: the analysis of the effects of how cinema
achieves its effects; still used today in Zizek and Adrejevic
although they look at the reality TV apparatus it still fits within
this theory because he looks at the unconscious desires that are
tapped into and manipulated repeatedly in the relationship
between reality TV and the spectator; also relates it to a stage of
capitalism, as Metz does
Mirror stage, voyeurism, scopophilia, spectators relationship to
the film consider these in tandem with Blowup
o Metz is interested in the overall cinema apparatus; doesnt
matter what film or scene
Weve already passed through the mirror stage; what
goes on when we watch a film is past the mirror
stage, but still bound up with the ego stage always
searching for a sort of unification that ties back to
our infancy
We identify with either the characters, the looks that
are played out (the man looks at the woman or his
friend or off screen), but says the primary
identification is with the cinematic apparatus itself:
we physically merge with the apparatus itself
Penley: the mirror identification is secondary
for him; even more fundamental is the
spectators ID with his own active vision as it is
relayed by the camera Primary ID is wtiht he
camera or spectator himself in his own act of
perceiving, which is the basis for the formation
of the transcendental subject with mastery
over the visual domain unification of
fragmented psyche because you are the
master of the visual domain
What massages the absence/presence binary for
Metz? The disavowal of the absence: What
distinguishes the cinema is a turn of the screw
bolting desire to lack spectators removed from

images and sounds in theatre, but also removed from

filmed or recorded object that exists in its own space
The object is doubly removed potential site
of frustration he argues that makes us a
voyeur, because the object represented thats
absent, we dont have consent to view it,
watching without being seen watching the
cinema becomes an authorized scopophilia
o How do we get over the fact that what
we are seeing isnt real, but our pleasure
hinges on the fact that we can accept
that its real? doubling of knowledge
and suspecnse of knowledge theory of
fetishism
Disavowal: I know, but
o For Metz, based in psychoanalytic stages
and processes; how fetishism does this
with the phallus, the film-goer does this
with the image
Penley: the spectator admits that
what he perceives isnt there, but
makes himself believe its there
nonetheless I know, but I know
the mother doesnt really have a
penis, but I believe it to be there all
the same
The fetish material is the
fetish itself
o Working through the drives and desires brings us back to
the cinema; Metz wants to explore why go at all?
Says it taps into our psychic processes and
reproduces itself; profits hinge on ability to provide a
form of wish fulfillment or other psychoanalytic
processes
In that sense, even in this piece we can see
how the cinematic apparatus is a product of
industrial capitalism
o Wish fulfillment in the service of profit
making
o How is cinema related to the imaginary? Penley says it is
closely tied to this for two reasons: 1. Its manipulation of
the 5 senses (he says there are more senses involved than
any other art form) 2. That which is depicted is extremely
absent she says the combo of present/absent is
exemplified in the mirror stage of Lacan: the infant sees

itself for the first time, existing as an autonomous entity for

the first time at the moment when its not there
-

Constance Penley
Through broader mechanisms, ideology takes hold apparatus
theory
If all of film is a machine, then how can you have a progressive
or feminist film? How can we do something that might be
oppositional?
o Does watching people watching screens take us out of the
notion that we are an all-perceiving spectator?
The answer isnt to try to account for the female body in an
essentialist way anti-essentialist feminism
o Woman is not just the female body; dilemma is how do you
account for the female without working with the body?
Ought to think about identification and fantasy that
are not linked to the body, that work through the
symbolic instead
Zizek
Looking Awry: Introduces Lacan through popular culture
o Z. is transparent about the project hes involved in