Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
below Figure 1. Natalie Portman we watch and study films? The body, as
becomes the Black Swan in the final
scenes of the film Merleau-Ponty writes, is “the seat of a
certain praxis, the point from which there is
something to do in the world, the register in
which we are inscribed” (quoted in Low 74).
This article is shaped by philosophical
and theoretical discourses on select
aspects of affect theory. The power of
cinema is highlighted by exploring film’s
wanton ability to touch us – not from an
emotional perspective in this case, but in a
seductively phenomenological and almost
tangible manner. Seduction can occur upon
viewing a film whose aesthetics have been
Filmmakers Affectively
between the skin of the film and the skin of
the viewer.
Human experience is rooted corporeally,
through our eyes and our sense of touch.
Reduce the Space Films that can affect how our skin feels – by
haptic and intuitive association between
the skin of the subject and our own skin –
unaware until further reflection of how “emphasize the tactile and contagious quality to representation, receptivity to similarity.
film is making us regard its subject matter of cinema as something we viewers brush up Here, I am arguing that some of film’s
emphasizes the innate and subtle affective against like another body” (Marks xii). The affective power comes from a viewer being
nature of film, and heightens the intensity of ways in which the viewer and film respond moved by the film in such a way that causes
the embodied cinematic experience. to one another “perform similar modes them to mimic the bodily actions of the
The phenomenological approach to film of perspective and expressive behaviour film’s subject. It is important to note that the
analysis can be found in Merleau-Ponty’s in different ways that are determined by viewer mimicking the actions of the body
only essay on cinema, in which he discusses the specifics of their enabling bodies” on-screen is a powerful affect, but it is not
feelings and sensations such as pleasure, (Barker 32). The camera’s smooth tracking, the sole reason for film’s power. The opening
grief, love, and hate. These feelings and slow motion, or invisible/soft editing is scene in which Nina dances part of Swan Lake
sensations are not perceived, expressed, complemented by the viewer’s eyes in turn is filmed with a very mobile camera, moving
or made meaningful first through mindful moving smoothly across the screen.6 The closer to Nina’s face and dodging arms
reflection, but through the viewer and film’s film and viewer each respond in their own in arabesque to mirror the dancing style,
embodied enactment of them. In summary: uniquely embodied ways to one another’s ranging from soft and emotional to swift and
“phenomenological film analysis approaches style of touch. A sense of the reversibility frantic. The audience shares the sense of
the film and the viewer as acting together, of touch and even sight in some instances confusion Nina feels as she is grabbed and
correlationally, along an axis that would itself between film and viewer are present in brief spun by the evil Von Rothbart because of the
constitute the object of study” (Barker 18). moments in Black Swan, for example when frenetic camera work. The framing is tight
With this in mind, we can begin to study the Nina looks into the camera – at the viewer – to their movements, the lighting seeming to
nature of tactility along the axis between and we feel as though she and the film can come only from a single spotlight, with dust
film and viewer. Merleau-Ponty’s notion see us (Figure 1). floating in its beam. There are no edits or
of reversibility can be used to consider this Aronofsky’s use of these moments is cuts in this scene, which adds to its sense of
relationship: always poignant and fleeting in order to reality (albeit dreamlike) and affectiveness,
create a sense of unease for the viewer. To even when Nina’s costumes transform and
When I touch one hand with the other be suddenly addressed by the film in such a her dance partner metamorphosizes into
each hand plays the role of both the border-disrupting way has the potential to a black-feathered monster. The touch of
touching and the touched, but my evoke a sense of abjection. The skin of the the camera in this scene is a curious mix of
experience of touching and being touched film and Nina’s skin can also address us in invasive and distanced. We are often looking
is not quite simultaneous … I feel one a border-disrupting way. The grainy film at Nina’s face, motions, and feet in close-up,
hand touching the other, but I can’t feel texture and natural lighting are evocative but the camera also moves back to allow us
both at once. (Merleau-Ponty, quoted in of the body worn down from relentlessly to take in her movements and the sudden
Barker 19) rehearsing ballet, and Nina’s epidermal subtle and (importantly) dream-like costume
conditions remind us that our skin is not an transformations. We are undoubtedly a
This vacillation between touching and impermeable container. part of Nina’s dream, as the camera’s touch
being touched is a useful analogy for the Beyond biology, the skin in more invites us into it.
position of the film viewer. The double philosophical terms is a vessel for a reversible, The mimetic faculty can be regarded as
sensation provoked by one hand touching reciprocal, and delineating relationship part of the appeal of what can be called
the other is the archetype for the subject/ between self and other. Connections are “body genres”: pornography, melodrama,
object relations in the world: irreducible one created between film and viewer that are and horror (Williams 143). “What seems to
to the other, but embedded in a constantly forged through innately identifiable patterns bracket these particular genres from others is
mutual experience, constituted of the same of movement, shapes, forms, habits, and an apparent lack of proper aesthetic distance,
“stuff ” (Barker 19). In relation to film and goals (Barker 26). The skin is crucial in the a sense of overinvolvement in sensation
phenomenology, this “stuff ” is (among other forging of connections and meaning as it and emotion” (Williams 145). Genres such
things) a sharing of sensory receptors such is the boundary between self and other. as pornography and horror call for bodily
as eyes and skin. While film does not see us When these borders are played with – skin involvement – not necessarily literal, but
in the same way that another person can, of viewer and skin of the film – acutely what Williams asserts as a sense of mimicry
much like a relationship with another person, affective responses are elicited. However, of the subject by the viewer, forming the
we are in intimate, tactile contact with the “there is never a collapse or dissolution of measure of the success of such films.7 They
film’s body – a complex relationship that is the boundary” between viewer and film, even rely on formulaic plots and stereotypical
marked as often by tension as alignment, though film can have physical effects on a characters so the viewer doesn’t have to think
by repulsion as often as attraction (Barker viewer’s skin – goosebumps, sweat, shivers, about the film. Within this, there is scope for
19). And while film cannot feel as we do, for example – and boundaries are played problematic representations (for example, of
there is a notion that “film may be thought with to cause such effects (Barker 29). the female body)8 to go unnoticed, or worse,
of as impressionable and conductive, like The mimetic faculty of film viewing or to be ignored.
skin” (Marks xii). This is referencing the “mimesis” as a philosophical term carries Marks believes that “ultimately … our
subjectivity of reception, such as when films a wide range of meanings from imitation experience of cinema is mimetic” (Marks
are circulated among different audiences,
all of which “mark it with their presence” When we watch films, our bodies are open to
(Marks xi).5
A consideration of film as having similar sensations that register quicker than they can be
properties to skin illuminates some of the
affective power of Black Swan. We can intellectually perceived.
below Figure 6. Nina lifts Beth’s tolerable, the thinkable. It lies there, quite
bed sheets to reveal a horrid infected
wound that we only see for a fraction close, but it cannot be assimilated. It
of a second, viscerally shocking us and beseeches, worries, and fascinates desire,
also leaving a lasting corporeal memory
which, nevertheless, does not let itself be
seduced. (Kristeva 1)
below Figure 7. Nina is becoming the opens with the powerful and beautiful
Black Swan. From where she used to
scratch her shoulders as a kind of self- spectacle of Nina performing a scene from
harm, black feathers pierce from within Swan Lake, along with her we are abruptly
woken from her dream. Fascination and
repulsion are at the heart of this film’s
affectiveness, and when it is all over (Figure
18), we are woken from this spectacular
nightmare, acutely aware of every fiber of
our being.
I believe we should allow ourselves to be
moved by film: it is constituted of so much
more than simply an emotive narrative
or an unflinching depiction of violence in
extreme close-ups. This article has not only
below Figure 8. Nina slips under revealed a preference for film’s power to
the bath water when, penetrating
the silence, blood drips into it from move and touch us – rather than distancing
above. Nina opens her eyes to see ourselves from its tenor and impact – but
herself for a moment, leaning over has investigated the phenomenological,
the bathtub with a sinister smile,
when it cuts back to her in the philosophical, and theoretical concepts
bath, as she emerges, panic-strick- behind the power of film. Films may arrest
en from the water our attention, but Black Swan creates a kind
of agitation and connection with the film.
We seek to be touched to subconsciously feel
and learn more.
Mulvey makes a strong case for the
“fundamental sadism of the voyeuristic
position” of film viewing, and calls for
the “destruction of cinematic pleasure”;
below Figure 9. A pivotal moment an “aesthetics of distance”; and a sort
in the film as Nina realizes that she of passionate detachment (quoted in
hasn’t stabbed her adversary Lily
with a piece of broken mirror, but Shaviro, The Cinematic Body 12–13). While
herself. She slowly reaches into the her arguments are purposefully polemical
wound in her stomach and pulls out
the bloodied shard of glass in horror
to illustrate problems of representation
in mainstream cinema, it’s as if this
“aesthetics of distance” is the only valid way
to approach films (Shaviro, The Cinematic
Body 12). Supposedly, film’s power is so
alluringly seductive that we must be aware
of all its tricks to snare our bodies and warp
our minds, and that we should constantly
consider deeper meanings, political stances,
and ethical nature. In addition, there seems
to be a general trend suggesting “moral
to cognitively register what we are seeing. complement the narrative as the most high ground can only be [attained] through
Personally, it was only with the ability to disturbing moments occur when Nina is distancing devices” (Johannes). There’s a fear
pause, fast-forward and rewind this scene considering her darker role as it infects her of “giving way to the insidious blandishments
that I was even aware that Aronofsky had mind and her body, breaking boundaries of visual fascination” in film theory, and to
filled it with such horrors, yet while watching to become the Black Swan. When the film avoid this horrid trap, a theoretical edifice
it I can recall a sense of unease, though not
fully understanding why. These are just a
limited selection of the many, many shots
Aronofsky bombards us with in this short
scene, but this bombardment provides the
viewer with rich visceral, subliminal tableaux,
forming meaning and eliciting response.13
These images flit across the screen and
simultaneously across our skin. In their
transience, they can do nothing but register
viscerally, through our eyes and over our skin.
Aronofsky plays with our skin, making
us feel secure in certain scenes, and tearing a b ov e Figure 10. A still of Von Roth-
the rug from under us in others. The visuals bart (club scene)
must be constructed as a defence against its scholars have not only in confronting the aesthetics of cinema may come from the sense
threatening pleasures (Shaviro, The Cinematic sensual experience of cinema but also in of voyeurism inherent in cinema, but Black
Body 13). confronting a lack of ability to explain its Swan’s affectiveness hinges on a necessary
Cinema has the uncanny ability to convey somatism as anything more than mere interaction with the film. Affect derives not
phenomena that appear real, which in turn physiological reflex, or to admit its meaning as from the gaze, but from involvement through
have the ability to move and touch us. This anything more than metaphorical description. physiological identification, mimesis, and
power marks the confusion and discomfort Some of the devaluation of discussing the palpable contact between the skin of the film
and the skin of the viewer.
Those who attempt to theorize the kinds
of feelings experienced when watching
film encounter difficulty in simply applying
language to a realm of phenomena for which,
generally speaking, there are few words.
Paradoxically, proponents of affect theory
must analytically deconstruct films in order
to explain immediate phenomenological
and corporeal processes and responses that
are too quick or minute for the intellect
or consciousness to comprehend, or even
a b ov e Figure 11. Hands filling the be aware of without such retrospective
frame (club scene) analysis. Our entire vocabulary has derived
from theories of signification that are still
wedded to structure. In discussing affect the
employment of language is necessary, but
this does not mean that we cannot strive
for a theory that appreciates the value of
filmmakers’ abilities to make us acutely
aware of the body and its interactions with
cinema, and of processes that operate on
multiple levels of sensation beyond the reach
of many philosophical and critical modes
of standard rhetorical and semiotic models.
The intellect serves to distance us from
a b ov e Figure 12. Replicated figures reality and from experience: from intuition.
of Nina (club scene)
We intuit through our skin, our bodies: we
are corporeal material beings. Distance
comes from cognition and abstraction,
which is undoubtedly useful in exploring and
understanding things – scrutinizing as I have
here – on another level to that of immediate
perception. However, when it comes to
experiencing reality, we do not think first and
feel second. This is why affect is so applicable
to film criticism. The way films make us feel,
we can now understand, is far more than
just a physiological identification or mimetic
process. The film is felt on the skin, in the
a b ov e Figure 13. Nina and Lily (club
scene)
skin, and under the skin.
/end/
Notes
1. It is interesting to consider the root of the
definition of the word seduction: attraction or
allure, or to lead aside. This idea of cinema
leading aside ties in with the idea that it can
be devious and manipulative, and we should
therefore question its motives. There can
also be a seduction into unpleasant realms
a b ov e Figure 14: Nina is split (club of repulsion and disgust, but we can still be
scene) seduced by the power of the images.
below Figure 15. Black Swan 4. Within this is a sense of knowing what objects
make-up (club scene) feel like by simply looking at them, which is as
a result of past experience of touching similar
objects. See Laura Marks (63–64).
5. This is an example of the fundamental
subjectivity of film viewing. See Marks (xi–xii).
6. This introduces the idea of the touch of the
camera, which I will expand upon later.
7. See p. 145 of Film Genre Reader III (Williams).
8. Representations of the female body are what
Williams is most concerned with. See pp.
144–57 of Film Genres Reader III.
9. The scenes in which Nina’s fingers and toes
(particularly cuticles and nails) begin to split, tear,
below Figure 16. Abstraction of
body/movement (club scene)
peel, and bleed are reminiscent of a number
of horror films in which characters are in their
early stages of physical transformation. For
example, Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum) in David
Cronenberg’s The Fly (1986) peels of his nails
as his skin begins to change, precluding his full
body mutation into a human fly. Also, in District
9 (Blomkamp, 2009), after coming into contact
with an alien substance, Wikus Van De Merwe’s
(Sharlto Copley) fingernails can be peeled off.
What makes this kind of horror so affective is that
it is at our fingertips. In addition, Julia Kristeva’s
assertion that leprosy is a form of abjection
below Figure 17. Still filled with contributes to the reason behind the horror of
Nina’s image (club scene) such bodily affectations (see Kristeva 101).
10. Examples, see Norman K. Denzin, The
Cinematic Society: The Voyeur’s Gaze (Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995), Clifford T. Manlove,
Visual “Drive” and Cinematic Narrative: Reading
Gaze Theory in Lacan, Hitchcock, and Mulvey
(Cinema Journal 46.3 [2007]: 83-108), and Todd
McGowan, The Real Gaze: Film Theory After
Lacan (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2008).
11. The use of mirrors in Black Swan can be seen
to represent the fracturing/splitting of Nina’s
identity: doppelgängers and reflections which
differ from Nina’s actual movements. In addition,
below Figure 18. Nina’s final dance
as the Black Swan and her complete the featuring of mirrors in horror films is almost
(imagined) metamorphosis into the commonplace, so viewers have been conditioned
character through past experience to not trust or be fearful
of what we might see in them. (See Lacan’s writing
on “The Mirror Stage” in Contemporary Critical
Theory [Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
1989], 502-509, and also Philip Tallon’s “Through
a Mirror, Darkly” in The Philosophy of Horror
[Lexington: UP of Kentucky, 2010], 33–41.)
12. In the use of extreme close-ups.
13. Shaviro discusses this notion of bombarding the
viewer with audiovisuals. In relation to Gamer
(Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, 2009),
2. There are many philosophers who argue that Technics and Time, 3: Cinematic Time and the Question of another film that’s been critically derided by some,
perception is continually changing due to all Malaise [Palo Alto, CA: Stanford UP, 2011], 13–16). Shaviro has observed that it “offers us a continual
experience prior to the present moment of See also: Bergson and “interpenetration” (324–38). cinematic barrage, with no respite” (Shaviro
perception. With film, as a temporal object which 3. By using the term immediacy, I am referencing “Gamer”). He goes further to say that “the frequent
is technically the same no matter how many times the fact that film is immersive, “which means that cuts and jolting shifts of angle have less to do with
it is replayed, this change in our perception is most it is a medium whose purpose is to disappear” in orienting us towards action in space, than with
apparent as our viewing of it changes depending the sense that it must – to be affective – be similar setting off autonomic responses in the viewer …
on any number of variables (see Bernard Stiegler’s to reality (Bolter and Grusin 21). the shots, and the way they are edited, have only
➜
Anon. “A Series of Holes Tied Together with \
String: Black Swan Review.” LoveFilm.com. 2011. Marks, Laura U. The Skin of the Film: Author Biography
Web. 9 April 2012. <http://www.lovefilm.com/ Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment, and the Senses. Joanna Scholefield is a First Class
film/Black--Swan/153685/review/958264>. Durham: Duke University Press, 2000. Print. Honors graduate in Film Studies.
\ \ Her interests in both film and art are
Barker, Jennifer M. The Tactile Eye: Touch Massumi, Brian. Movement, Affect, Sensation: grounded in her philosophical exploration
of their aesthetics and affective nature.
and the Cinematic Experience. Berkeley, CA: Parables for the Virtual. Durham: Duke She is presently studying in preparation
University of California Press, 2009. Print. University Press, 2002. Print. for a Master’s degree at the London
\ \ Metropolitan in Curating Contemporary
Bergson, Henri. Creative Evolution. Trans. Arthur Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Art.
Mitchell. London: Greenwood, 1944. Print. Perception. Trans. Forrest Williams. London:
\ Routledge & Kegan Paul, 2002. Print.
Bolter, David, and Richard Grusin. \
Remediation: Understanding New Media. ———. The World of Perception. Trans. Oliver
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010. Print. Davis. London: Routledge, 2004. Print.
\ \
Deleuze, Gilles. Cinema 1: The Movement ———. “The Sensible World and The World
Image. Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara of Expression.” Themes from the Lectures at
Habberjam. London: Continuum, 2005. Print. the College de France 1952–1960. Trans. John
\ O’Neill. Evanston: Northwestern University
➜
———. Cinema 2: The Time Image. Trans. Press, 1970. 31-37. Print.
Robert Galeta and Hugh Tomlinson. \ Mentor Biography
London: Continuum, 2005. Print. Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Kathrina Glitre is Senior Lecturer at
\ Narrative Cinema.” Issues in Feminist Film the University of the West of England,
Ditzian, Eric. “Black Swan: Director Darren Criticism. Ed. Patricia Evans. Bloomington, IN: teaching modules on film cultures,
Aronofsky on Ballet, Natalie Portman and Indiana University Press, 1990 (1975). Print. Hollywood, and screenwriting. She
is the author of Hollywood Romantic
Lesbian Kisses.” MTV Movies Blog. 2010. Web. \ Comedy: States of the Union, 1934–1965
30 October 2011. <http://www.mtv.com/ Roudiez, Leon S. “Translator’s note.” (Manchester University Press, 2006)
news/articles/1646763/black-swan-director- Julia Kristeva, Powers Of Horror: An Essay On and a member of the Editorial Board for
darren-aronofsky-on-ballet-natalie-portman- Abjection. Trans. Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Movie: A Journal of Film Criticism.
lesbian-kisses.jhtml>. Columbia University Press, 1982. vii–x. Print.
\ \
Fienberg, Daniel. “Movie review: Black Swan.” Shaviro, Steven. “Black Swan.” The Pinocchio
Hitflix.com. 2010. Web. 9 April 2012. <http:// Theory. Blog. 2010. Web. 27 February 2012.
www.lovefilm.com/reviews/Black--Swan>. <www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=975>.
\ \
Gormley, Paul. The New Brutality Film: Race ———. “Gamer.” The Pinocchio Theory. Blog.
Department Overview
and Affect in Contemporary Hollywood Cinema. 2009. Web. 28 March 2012. <http://www.
The Department of Arts and Cultural
Bristol: Intellect, 2005. Print. shaviro.com/Blog/?p=830>.
Industries runs programs in film, film
\ \ with screenwriting, English, drama, and
Hiltunen, Kaisa. “Closeness in Film ———. The Cinematic Body. Minneapolis, MN: history. Its inclusive approach works
Experience: At the Intersection of University of Minnesota Press, 1993. Print. to forge links between critical theory,
Cinematic and Human Skin.” n.d. Web. 12 \ analysis, and practice to develop cultural
and historical understanding..
December 2011. <http://corpusaesthetics. Sobchack, Vivian. Carnal Thoughts: Embodiment
net/doc/closeness_in_film_expirience.pdf>. and Moving Image Culture. Berkely, CA:
\ University of California Press, 2004. Print.
Johannes. “Black Swan and Art.” Montivedayo. \
Blog. 27 December 2010. Web. 15 March 2011. Williams, Linda. “Film Bodies: Gender,
<http://www.montevidayo.com/?p=709>. Genre and Excess.” Ed. Barry Kieth Grant.
\ Film Genre Reader III. Austin, TX: University
Kristeva, Julia. Powers of Horror: An Essay on of Texas Press, 2003. 141-159. Print.
Abjection. Trans. Leon S. Roudiez. New York: \
Columbia University Press, 1982. Print.