Deleuze for the Desperate #5 : movement-image

A run-through the basics of Deleuze's first book on the cinema, focusing on the definition of the image, and how the cinema illustrates types of movement important to philosophers, including notions of movement as a process in its own right, and movements from Wholes to closed sets. Also of interest to people interested in Deleuze on Bergson.
Transcript available on : www.arasite.org/deltranscript5movt.html

[@ashwinmathi8042]

This whole series been tremendously valuable in developing an understanding of Deleuze over the years. Thank you so much.

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Than ks for the encouragement Ashwin Mathi. I'm glad you found it useful.

[@glebep]

The video works very well and the lecture is very concise .

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Many thanks Gleb Piryatinskiy

[@chrisnewman2643]

Thank you for this. It has helped clarify a lot

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Thanks for the comment Chris Newman. Glad to have been of help

[@vp4744]

If only all continental philosophy books had gone through your edits! I'm only half-joking, but I really admire your skill at concision. Thanks also for showing around your neighborhood, which looks like the one I live in. Watching your videos feel like I'm walking about listening to my iphone.

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Thanks Avocado Pirate. Something is always lost with concision, of course, but I'm suggesting people go out to read for themselves, of course Glad your neighbourhood is as nice

[@lauraliebeskindmusik]

Thanks so much! This is superduper helpful!

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

You are very welcome Lauraliebeskind Musik

[@gracoii3297]

Thank you!

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

You are welcome Devil's Throat

[@aydnofastro-action1788]

Really great stuff.

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

I'm glad it might have helped.Best wishes

[@brenoobr]

Thank you so much

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Thanks for the comment

[@lidiakniaz-hunek6223]

thank you!!!!

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

You are welcome Lidia Kniaz

[@ractacsquad]

This is soooooo helpful. Thanks

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

You are very welcom Ama Jang. Good luck with it all.

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Many thanks Ama Jang

[@realexkav]

I think you got an error in the transcript: "This is unable to disturb the set".. it should say that it is able to disturb the set, shouldn't it? Thanks so much for those videos.

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Thanks for this realexkav. I checked the transcript and found a few errors in fact, including the one you mention about disturbing the set. I blame my speech-recognition stuff which likes to improve my words by adding 'un', or sometime 'are', if I pause. I see it also rendered a couple of cases of 'or' as 'all', and Deleuze as De Los. In another case recently, which I detected luckily, it had rendered Deleuze and Gattari as Deleuze Ian Guattari, doubtless a false memory of 'deleuzian', but adding a third author to the Deadly Duo. The mistake about the date for the Dreyer film of Joan was just poor checking -- no excuses. Thanks again.

[@gabrielacosta4126]

Hi there, I think this would summarize about only the first half of the book! The political implications of "the powers of the false" that kick off right afterwards are not that hard to grasp after what you established here. Also it would be very useful to recollect the Augustinian notion of time to understand Deleuze´s thought here.
Anyhow, I loved it, thank you very much!

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Thanks Gabriel Acosta. My intention is just to introduce really --and encourage further reading. I have alonger written commentary on the book on my website. The powers of the false are indeed gripping

[@realexkav]

Also The Passion Of Joan Of Arc came out in 1928, not 1932.

[@cuestiondesilencios1237]

TE AMO

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Thank you, but I am not worthy

[@skateboardf12]

at 31:00 u picked the wrong bresson when talking about joan of arc, it's a film by robert bresson and not luc bresson (u were probably thinking about luc besson)

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Thanks ltvi. I meant Luc Besson as you say. Apologies

[@skateboardf12]

i'm sorry if i didn't express myself clearly, the director deleuze is writing about is robert bresson

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Hi @@skateboardf12. Sorry --it's been ages since I did that video. I''ll track down the confusion and get back to you. Thanks

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Hi again. I got it right on the transcript (www.arasite.org/deltranscript5movt.html) , which I have amended slightly by adding Bresson's initial to make it clear. As you say, it is that Joan film which Deleuze cites in his discussion of any-space-whatever and to which I have added my own modest examples. I cited the film correctly on the transcript too. I must have misread my own script on the audio track! (I always do the transcript first and then read it aloud). Apologies again, and thanks for the correction.

[@CumulusNimbus8]

I thought the same.

[@platoniczombie]

I will never understand how a camera is capable of capturing reality objectively. A camera is not something like the sun, always there in the sky, occuring naturally in the world around us; no, it's something we made, and it requires a purpose, camera will not just start capturing something randomly.

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Yes -- it is just that certain conventions have taken on the status of objectivity? Usually by borrowing them from other forms?

[@sigriddolan8583]

thumbnail 💋

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Many thanks Sigrid Dolan

[@pascalmassie3906]

"Authors" not "autors"

[@DaveHarrisreDeleuze]

Or possibly 'auteurs'?