Film can’t philosophise (and neither can philosophy): Introduction to a non-philosophy of cinema

9Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Giorgio Agamben and the films of Tony Scott; Emmanuel Levinas and the films of Michael Haneke; Jean-Luc Nancy and Claire Denis; Slavoj Žižek and Kieslowski; Gilles Deleuze and Godard (or Alain Badiou and Godard, Jacques Derrida and Godard, Jean-François Lyotard and Godard). Linkages come readily to mind for a philosophically-inclined viewer when looking at certain kinds of film. When Michael Haneke’s Caché (France, 2005), for example, finally reveals who is the blackmailer, who is filming the guilty, with the answer, ʼno one’, some cannot help but think of Levinas. His idea of a universal responsibility before the Other that comes with human existence as such, seems to chime with Caché‘s refusal to apportion the usual roles of good and bad, yet without at the same time denying that a terrible wrong has occurred. To exist before another is to be guilty, to be responsible for that Other’s life. No one is guilty because every one is guilty.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mullarkey, J. (2011). Film can’t philosophise (and neither can philosophy): Introduction to a non-philosophy of cinema. In New Takes in Film-Philosophy (pp. 86–100). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230294851_6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free