4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

FilmPhilosophy
Journal|Salon|Portal(ISSN14664615)
Vol.6No.30,September2002

MarciaLandy

Godard:ThinkingMedia

DavidSterritt
_TheFilmsofJeanLucGodard:SeeingtheInvisible_
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1999
ISBN0521580382(hb)0521589711(pb)
297pp.

JeanLucGodardisnotasuperannuatedandhistoricalrelicto
beconsignedtothepagesofcinemahistory.Infact,asMichael
TempleandJamesS.Williamsrecentlynoted,'therealJeanLuc
Godardhasneverstoppedworkingandhaspatientlyelaborated
abodyofworkthatistrulyrichandstrange,andasambitious,
diverseandinspiringasanythingheproducedinhissupposed
1960sheyday'.[1]Hisprodigiousproductivityandthegrowing
interestinhisworkcanbeaccountedforbythephilosophical
subjectsunderhisattention:

'autobiographyandmemoryinfilmageandmelancholia
twentiethcenturyhistoryandhistoriographythefateof
Europeanartandculturetherelationbetweenaestheticsand
identityethicsandphilosophythenatureandstatusof
authorshipandliteraturetheevolutionofthevisualimagefrom
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

1/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

paintingtofilmandvideospeedandtechnologyand
videographicmontageasanewpoetics'.[2]

Thisextensivelistisadauntingchallengetoanycriticwhowould
undertakeanexaminationofGodard'sessaysandfilmsevena
reviewofthebooksandarticleswrittenabouthim.Perhapsthe
onlywaytoaddresstheseconcernsistosubsumetheminthe
contextofarelationshipbetweenmedia,philosophy,andpolitics.
Increasingly,filmcriticshavepushedtheboundariesoffilm
analysistoexploretheserelationships,andDavidSterritt's_The
FilmsofJeanLucGodardSeeingtheInvisible_,inthe
CambridgeFilmClassicsseries,isaninstanceofarecent
attempttosituateGodard'sworkonmediawithinabroader
philosophical,ifnotpoliticalmilieu.ThePrefacetoSterritt'sbook
describesthetextspublishedintheseriesas'aforumfor
revisioniststudiesoftheclassicworksofthecinematiccanon
fromtheperspectiveofthenewauteurism,whichrecognizesthat
filmsemergefromacomplexinteractionofbureaucratic,
technological,intellectual,cultural,andpersonalforces'.Sterritt's
studyofGodardfocusesparticularlyontheintellectual,cultural,
andpersonalforcesthatcharacterizethefilmmaker'streatment
ofmedia.

ThroughanintroductorychapterthatmapsGodard'sphilosophic
investmentsinmedia,followedbyacloseexaminationofsix
filmsthreefromthe1960s:_Breathless_(1960),_MyLifeto
Live_(1962),and_Weekend_(1967)onefromeachofthe
subsequentdecades:_Numerodeux_(1975),_HailMary_
(1985),and_NouvelleVague_(1990)andendingwithabrief
chapterontelevisionandmedia,Sterrittorchestratesdominant
aspectsofGodard'sfilmmaking.Whilethebookdoesnotpresent
itselfasasystematicstudyofcontemporaryphilosophy,itdoes
describethefilmsinformaltermssoastoenablethereaderto
situateGodardwithinthecontextoftwentiethcentury
philosophy,andparticularlyofcriticalworkonmedia.Having
writtenonGodard'sworkrecently,withespecialfocusonthe
characterofthisfilmmakerasphilosopher,[3]Iintendinthis
reviewtoexamineSterritt'sassumptionthat,afterthe1960s,
Godard'sfilmmaking'becamelessovertlyideological,replacing
itspassionforpoliticalissueswithafocusonaestheticand
spiritualmatters'(10).Ithasbecomecustomarytoregard
Godard'smorerecentfilmsfilmsasdepartingfromthepoliticsof
the60sandyet,tomywayofthinking,Godardhasnever
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

2/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

abandonedhisinvestigationofpolitics,thoughhisintellectual
andstylisticstrategieshavebeenattunedtochangesinthe
politicalandculturallandscape.

Certainly,Godard,likemanyofhisradicalcontemporaries,
retreatedfromthetraditionalconfrontationalcinepoliticsofthe
1960stoexploremoredeeply,inwaysreminiscentofDeleuze's
andDerrida'swork,formsofthoughtandbeliefthatcanaccount
forthepowerfulswayofcommonsense,andatthesametime
pointthewaytojammingclichedresponsestorepresentation.
Hispoliticshavenotceasedtobefocusedonmedia,buthis
strategiesaredirectedatphilosophicconcernsthatfocusonthe
necessity,yetimpossibility,ofrestoringbeliefintheworldandin
thepeopletocome.Thus,politicsisnotreliantonpreexisting
conceptionsofthepeople'asidenticalwiththeineluctable
unfoldingofhistory',asD.N.Rodowickputit.[4]Infact,thetask
ofadifferentpoliticsisnowtoseekdifferentconceptionsofthe
people,orbetteryettobringthemintoexistence.Towardthat
endnewtoolsofthoughtarenecessary,andreflectiononthe
natureandimpactofmediaistheinstrumentforsuchan
exploration.

WhatmakesGodard'smediaworkchallengingisitsincisively
criticalpreoccupationwithhistory.Godardhasconsistently
challengedreductive,programmed,andnaiveconceptionsand
practicesofmediathataretiedtotheintertwinedeconomicand
ideologicalforcesofcapital.Hisworkconfrontsthecomplex
obstaclesinthewayofrecognizingmultivalentandnon
reductiveconceptionsoftime,memory,andhistoryastheyare
conveyedthroughmediarepresentation.Foremostamongthese
impedimentsisthetendencytoregardrepresentationas
identicaltotruth.AsSterrittwritesinhisIntroduction:

'Godard'simportanceasacinematicrebelcomesnotfromhis
reconfigurationsoffilmandvideoformperse,butfromtheway
hisdissectionsandreshufflingsinteractwiththesubjectshe
choosestoexplore.Oneofthesesubjectsisalwayscinema
itselftheotherschangeashemovesfromonestagetoanother.
Whatremainsconsistent,however,ishisdeepseateddesireto
refutetwoideastakenforgrantedbythevastmajorityof
filmmakers:a)thatcinemacapturesa'direct'andsomehow
'natural'viewoftheworldandthatb)cinema'sstandard
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

3/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

psychologicaldevicesaresomehowequivalentwith*human
nature*andthusprovideaccuratecommonsensicalinsightsthat
canbeacceptedandenjoyedatfacevalue.'(2021)

Incareful,detailed,andsensitiveanalysisofGodard'sfilms,
Sterrittprobesthephilosophicandaestheticimplicationsof
Godard'srelentlessexplorationofthecinematicimageasa
mediumforcommonsense,andasapossibilityforjamming
automaticresponsestorepresentationsoastoallowforthe
possibilityofthought.Sterrittsuggests(asintheabovequotation
andinthechronologicalchoiceoffilms)thatGodardhasmoved
from'onestagetoanother'.Throughdetailedanalysisofeach
film,Sterrittseekstoidentifytransformationsthathave
characterizedthesevarious'stages'ofGodard'sworks.In
contrast,IbelievethatGodardhasbeenobsessed,albeitin
changingfashionfromhisfirsttohismostrecentfilms,with
questionsconcerningthepossibilityofcinemaforthinkingon
questionsofcultureandpoliticsastheyareimbricatedin
questionsofhistory,memory,fiction,truth,language,painting,
andmusic.Currentculturalandpoliticalanalystshavere
conceptualizedtheeconomicandpoliticalcharacterofthelast
decadesofthe20thcenturyundertherubricof*postmodernism*
and*globality*.AndGodard,throughhisencyclopaedic
knowledgeofmediaanditshistory,andhisconsistentsituating
ofculturalproductionwithininternationaleconomicand
ideologicalcontexts,haspursuedhiscinepoliticalexplorations
oftheimageintothelairsoflatecapitalism.In_TheGeopolitical
Aesthetic_FredricJamesonhasidentifiedtheparticularly'global'
natureofGodard'smorerecentwork,especially_Passion_
(1982).Jamesonwrites:

'Godard'sstrategyistoposethestrongestpossibleobjectionto
themediumtoforegrounditsmosturgentcrises,beginning
withthatoffinancingitself,omnipresentintheselatefilmsand
aboveallhereinorderthemoretriumphantlytosurmount
them.'[5]

SeekingtosituatethephilosophicsourcesofGodard'sworkin
andoncinema,Sterrittyokesthefilmmaker'snametothatof
MichelFoucault,andtoFoucault'sconcernwith
'power/knowledgerelationships',andwrites:
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

4/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

'Ifknowledgeandpowerarecloselyintertwined,asFoucault
contendsandifcinemareplicatesinformationandideaswith
unprecedentedefficiency,asGodardcontends,thennoethical
filmmakercouldmaintainaclearconsciencewithoutkeepinga
criticaleyeontheimpactmadebycinematicworksespecially
thefilmmaker'sownontheworldinwhichthey'reunleashed.'
(21)

Thus,Sterrittargues,Godard'scriticaleyeisfocusedonthe
strategiesofcinemaasitpresentstransparentandseemingly
accuraterepresentationsoftheworld,seekingrelentlesslyto
exposethestratagemsoftheprisonhouseoflanguage,making
evidentdifferentpossibilities'sorealrethinkingandrenewalcan
begin'(26).

Sterrittanalyzeseachofthesixfilmshehaschosentodiscuss
withaneyetoidentifyingthedifferentwaysinwhichGodard's
cinecritiqueiselaborated.Forexample,inthediscussionof
_Breathless_,hesinglesoutthewaysinwhichthefilmexplores
'reconcilingpersonalwillwithexistenceinaworldthatisatonce
intricatelysocial,profoundlysubjective,andutterlyirrationalin
thelongrun'(51).Stressingtheimportanceofplaceenables
Godardtoproberelationsbetweencharacterandenvironment
ahomagetoanabidinghistoricalfigureinGodard'sfilms:
RobertoRossellini.Equallyimportant,notonlyto_Breathless_
butalsotolaterfilms,aretheways(beyondmerequotation)that
thefilmexploresanddeepenstheproblematicrelationsbetween
fictionandfactandevenmorebetweenpoliticsandaesthetics.
Sterrittregardstherelationbetweencharacterandactionand
landscapeascentraltothefilm,butthetraditionalconceptionof
characterissubjecttodisintegration,examinedasaninvention,
andthetaskistounderstandthetermsandconditionsoftheir
construction.GodardpriesopenwhatDeleuzehascalledthe
'movementimage'todescribetheworkingsofpreWorldWarII
cinema,withitsorganicviewoftheworld,andwhereaction,not
time,governedthenarrative.

Inthechapteron_MyLifetoLive_,throughhisinvocationof
BertoltBrecht'swork,Sterrittintroducesanotherdimensionof
Godard'sfilmmaking,whatIwouldidentifyasGodard's
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

5/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

'pedagogical'conceptionofthecinematicimage.Thispedagogy
can,inpart,betracedtothewritingsandtheaterofBrechtand
hisconceptionofepictheater,exemplifiedbytheepisodicstyle
of_MyLifetoLive_,itsorganizationintotwelvetableaux,aswell
asitsheightenedandstylizedtheatricality.Sterrittfocusesonthe
varioustableauxasameansofreinforcingthemotifinthefilmof
vainandreductiveconceptionsofinteriority,authenticity,and
affect.Forexample,Sterrittwritesthat,

'Godardrecognizesthatexternalsareallthecameraandsound
recordercangrasp,andthatsuchoutwardsignssuperficialby
definitionmayseemsadlyinadequateifoneislookingforthe
*innerselves*ofpsychologicallydefinedcharacters...The
externalscapturedbycinemacanbehighlysuggestiveifone
acceptsthenotionthatinnerselvesareinseparablefromthe
externalactionsthattheytraceontheworldaroundthem.'(65
66)

Thechapter,buildingonthepreviousone,extendsthe
discussionofGodard'songoingandinterconnectedusesof
milieu,cinematicquotation,thefemale(andthecinematic)body
andprostitution,andproblematicquestionsconcerningverbal
andcinematiclanguage.Thefilm'spedagogyreliesonthe
variousstrategiestocomplicateprevailingconceptionsoftruth
andfalsehoodthataresubsumedinastrictdichotomybetween
realismandartificeandneedtoberenderedmoreundecidable.
Inhisphilosophicwritingsoncinema,GillesDeleuzeoffers
insightsintoGodard'spedagogicalconceptionofthecinematic
image.Deleuzewrotethat,afterWorldWarII:'Thecinemais
goingtobecomeananalyticoftheimage,implyinganew
conceptionofcutting,awhole*pedagogy*whichwilloperatein
differentways.'[6]Thispedagogyrequirescarefulattention.Itis
notapolemicoramethodforreading'truth'throughtheimage,
sincetheimageis,inGodard'swords,'justanimage'.Godard's
pedagogyinvolvesformalisminsofarasthespectatormust
becomeawareoftheimage,mustregardandunderstandthe
imageasimage,andhenceasameansofrethinkinghow
cinemareliesonperceptionandmemory.

Throughenhancingthepossibilityofmutualworkonthepartof
thefilmmakerandthespectator,Godard'sfilmsseeks,through
memoryandintelligence,tounveil'theuntruthoftruth'(toborrow
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

6/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

fromNietzsche)oftheimage.Deleuzewilldescribethisprocess
asanencounterwiththe'powersofthefalse':

'Truthfulnarrationisdevelopedorganically,accordingtolegal
connectionsintimeandspaceandchronologicalrelationsin
time.Ofcourse,theelsewheremaybeclosetothehere,andthe
formertothepresent.Butthisvariabilityofplaceandmovements
doesnotcalltherelationsandconnectionsintoquestion.They
ratherdetermineitstermsorelements,sothatnarrationimplies
aninquiryandtestimoniesthatconnectittothetrue...
Falsifyingnarration,bycontrastfreesitselffromthissystem...
Thepointisthattheelementsthemselvesareconstantly
changingwiththerelationsoftimeintowhichtheyenter,andthe
termswiththeirconnections...Thepowerofthefalseexists
onlyfromtheperspectiveofaseriesofpowers,alwaysreferring
toeachotherandpassingintooneanother.Sothat
investigators,witnessesandinnocentorguiltyheroeswill
participateinthesamepowerofthefalsethedegreesofwhich
theywillembody,ateachstageofthenarration.Even*the
truthfulmanendsuprealizingthathehasneverstoppedlying*
asNietzschesaid.'[7]

Inotherwords,Godard'sfilmsarenotdesignedtoproducean
interpretationofthecorrectmeaningoftheimagesthataddupto
animmutablesenseofthereal,oftruth,andofa
comprehensibletotality.InGodard'swork,thefilmbecomes
conceptual,thatis,itbecomesatheoryofcinemathatisalsoa
philosophy.This'theoryofcinema',

'isnot'about'cinema,butabouttheconceptsthatcinemagives
risetoandwhicharethemselvesrelatedtootherconcepts
correspondingtootherpractices...Thegreatcinemaauthors
arelikethegreatpaintersorthegreatmusicians:itistheywho
talkaboutwhattheydo.Butintalkingtheybecomephilosophers
ortheoreticians...wemustnolongeraskourselves,'Whatis
cinema?'but'Whatisphilosophy?'[8]

_Weekend_isafilmthatwouldseemtoposebothofthese
questions.Inrelationtothestatusofcinema,thefilm,forJames
RoyMacBean,equalsa'deadend','notforGodardandnotfor
cinema,butforaparticulartypeofcinemathecinemaof
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

7/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

spectacle&endashwhichispushedtoitslimit'butthefilmdoes
notrestrictitselftothe'death'ofcinema,butyokescinematicto
philosophicconcernsinitsrelentlessexplorationof'the
disintegrationofcivilization'.[9]InvokingArtaud's'Theaterof
Cruelty'andBrecht's'DialecticalTheater',MacBeanexamines
Godard'smethodforconnectingandreconfiguringcinemaand
philosophy.Towardsimilarends,SterrittinvokesJuliaKristeva
andBakhtintodescribetheclashofelementsthatcharacterize
whathedescribesas'Godard'sfilmmakingstrategy,wherebythe
virtueoffreedomthatis,aliberatedcinemamustbeborn
fromaviolent,takenoprisonersassaulton*slavery*toclassical
styleandconventionalnarrative'(106).Sterrittdescribesthe
film'sclimacticeruptionintocannibalismintermsofKristeva's
notionofabjectionandperhapsalsoofBakhtin'sconceptionof
thecarnivalesque.ForGodard,therevolutionary'sdesireis
similartothebourgeois'stoassimilatetheinformationaland
technologicalapparatusofAmericansocietyand,assuch,is
cannibalistic.Thus,inthisfilm,Godardunderminesboththe
mediatedimagesofthebourgeoisie,aswellasofthe
revolutionary,regardingeachasparticipatingindiscoursesthat
mirroreachotheranddonotopenthewaytorethinkingculture
andpolitics.

Sterritt'sregards_Weekend_asportraying'acivilizationturned
upsidedownandinsideout,whereinlifeanddeath,beautyand
horror,realityandillusionbecomeheedlesslyconfoundedwith
theiropposites'(128).Hisdescriptionofthefilmisreminiscentof
Deleuze'sobservationsonthefilm(inachapterentitled'Cinema
andThought').AccordingtoDeleuze:

'Theformulain_Weekend_,*it'snotblood,it'sred*,signifiesthat
bloodhasceasedtobeaharmonicofred,andthatthisredisthe
uniquetoneofblood.Onemustspeakandshowliterally,orelse
notshowandspeakatall.If,accordingtoreadymadeformulas,
therevolutionariesareatourdoors,besieginguslikecannibals,
theymustbeshowninthescrubofSeineetOise,eatinghuman
flesh.Ifbankersarekillers,schoolchildrenprisoners,
photographerspimps,iftheworkersarebeingscrewedbytheir
bosses,thishastobeshownnotto*metaphorized*.'[10]

Presenting_Numerodeux_asrepresentativeofGodard's
filmmakingofthe1970s,Sterrittcontinueshisdiscussioninthe
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

8/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

contextofGodard'songoinginvestigationsoftheroleandfateof
thecinematicimage.Sterrittselectsthisfilm,thefirstofmanyof
Godard'ssucceedingcollaborationswithAnneMarieMieville,
becauseitisa'complexexplorationoftherelationshipsbetween
manandwoman,laborandleisure,domesticityandsociety,and
perhapsaboveallfilmandvideo,mediathatencapsulatehis
[Godard's]twinfascinationswiththeheritageofWesternartand
thestilluncharteddirectionsinwhichitselectronicfuturemaylie'
(38).ThefilmdoesnotsuggestthatGodardhasveeredaway
frompoliticalconcerns.However,itdoesrevealGodard's
awarenessofsociopoliticalandculturalchangesthatwere
transpiringinthemid70s.Inparticular,mediaissues,particularly
theroleoftelevision,reportage,andinformationhadmovedto
thefrontandcenterofsociallife,posingachallengetotraditional
conceptionsofconfrontationalpolitics.Moreover,the
proliferationofnewmediaraisednewdespairaswellasnew
hopeforculturaltransformation.Orchestratinganumberof
motifsinGodard'streatmentofcontemporaryculture,Sterritt
assertsthat,

'_Numerodeux_aimstoanalyzeandcriticizeanumberof
interlockingphenomena:thehome,wherechildrenmustcope
withsuchdauntingexistentialchallengesastheprimalscene
andotherparentalmysteriestheeducationalsystem,whichill
preparesthemforpresentorfuturetaskstheindustrialworld,
wherepeople'slivesarenottheirownthegovernmentwhich
usesandabusesusandthemassmedia,includingthefilmand
videotechnologiesusedtomake_Numerodeux_itself.'(140)

CitingtheworkofGeorgesBatailleandhisconceptionof
heterology,Sterrittstressesthisfilm'sunrelentingfocusonthe
transgressionoffamiliarboundarieswhileatthesametime
revealingblockagestogratification.ReturningalsotoKristeva
andherelaborationonabjectionanditsboundarylesscharacter,
Sterrittsuggeststhat_Numerodeux_notonlyexploresand
underminesconventionalimagesofthebodybutalso'embodies
theambivalenceofayoungmedium(video)caughtwithinits
parentmedium(film)atpreciselythemomentwhenitsnewly
acquiredpowers,purposes,andsensibilitiesarereadytoassert
themselvesbutarestilluncertainastowhattheirown
distinctivenessandusefulnessmightbe'(145).Increasinglyin
hisworkwithMieville,Godardwillcontemplatethedeathof
cinema,andcertainlyofnationalcinema,andwillstrivetolocate
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

9/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

possibilitiesinvideohowevertheabidingconcernwillbeto
challengetheprevailingcharacterofrepresentation.

_HailMary_offersapowerfulinstanceofboththecontinuityof
Godard'sintellectualconcernsandofthechangingformswith
whichhechoosestochallengecommonsenseversionsofthe
world.ThediscussionofthisfilmisthelongestinSterritt's
volumeashemeticulouslytracesthemultiplelinesofMieville
andGodard'sjointproject.Inexaminingthefilm'srecourseto
suchrecurrentimagesasthemouth,aswellasotherbody
openings,Sterrittdeftlyidentifiesthetransmogrificationsthat
takeplaceinthefilm,betweenthebodyandspirit,theindividual
andthecosmos,interiorityandexteriority,andthesacredand
theprofane.However,asmightbeexpected,thefilmdoesnot
presenttheviewerwithtraditionalreligionorwithtraditional
cinema.Instead,asSterrittindicates,

'thewebofimagesisdifficulttoparse,butonecouldhardly
expectittobeotherwise,since,afterall,theaimofthe_Hail
Mary_filmsistoexploretheunshowableandunsayable,through
anartisticmediumthattakesshowing(picture,montage)and
saying(sound,narrative)asbasicprinciples.Onemust
rememberthatmuchofGodard'scinema(especiallyhislater
work)restsontheparadoxicalhypothesisthatourexistential
environmenthasadualnature.Ononelevel,itisamaterial
realmthatcanbeknownbythefivesensesandrecordedby
cinematictechnologies.Onanotherlevel,itistheshadoworveil
ofaspiritualdimensionthatisimperceptibletooursensesand
impenetrabletoourconsciousthoughts.Attemptingtomanifest
theimmaterialthroughmaterial(filmic)devicescanleadonlyto
eminentlyambiguousresults.'(217218)

Sterritt'sdescriptionoftherelationshipbetweentheseenandthe
unseen,andofthemysteriouscharacterofthoughtinGodard's
laterfilms,isechoedbyLaetitiaFieschiVivetinherdiscussionof
anotherGodardfilm,_OhWoeIsMe_(_Helaspourmoi_,1993).
InparticularwithreferencetoGodard'sattitudestowardhistory,
shecommentsthat:'thereasonwhythereissomethinghindering
thepowerofsightinthefilmisbecauseitisimpossibleforthe
historicalapproachtoprovideacompletevisionofthepast'
moreover,'theinvisiblesomethingcanbesaidtoacquirea
virtualbodybutonlythankstoelementsthatremainobscureand
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

10/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

unknown'.[11]AparticularmotifthathashauntedallofGodard's
workisthequestionofmemory,amotifintimatelytiedtohis
resistancetocommonsenseandclicheandtohisattemptsto
rethinkthecharacterofhistory.

ThispreoccupationwithmemoryinGodard'sfilmshasan
antecedentinthehistoryofthenouvellevaguefilmmakersand
critics.ItisinpartderivedfromBazinandthe_Cahiersdu
cinema_groupinsofarasthey,likeRobertoRossellini,regarded
theexperienceofcinemaas'moreprofoundthanmere
understanding'.[12]AswithBazin'swritingsoncinema,
Godard'sfilmspastandpresenthaveanaffinitywithHenri
Bergson'sdistinction(inrelationtomemory)betweentwokinds
ofrecognition:automatic,andhabitualorattentive.Ofthis
distinction,Bergsonwrote:

'iftheideaistolive,itmusttouchrealityonsomeside,thatisto
say,itmustbeable,fromsteptostep,andbyprogressive
diminutionsorcontractionsofitself,tobemoreorlessactedby
thebodyatthesametimethatitisthoughtbythemind.Our
body,withthesensationsitreceivesontheonehand,isthen,
thatwhichfixesourmind,andgivesitballastandpoise.The
activityofthemindgoesfarbeyondthemassofaccumulated
memories,asthismassofmemoriesitselfisinfinitelymorethan
thesensationsandmovementsofthepresenthour,butthese
sensationsandthesemovementsconditionwhatwemayterm
ourattentiontolife,andthatiswhyeverythingdependsontheir
cohesioninthenormalworkofthemind...'.[13]

AsinthewritingsofDeleuzeoncinemaalsoheavily
dependentonBergson'swritingsonformsofmemory,andon
thedynamicpossibilitiesofthetimeimageincontradistinctionto
theautomaticandclichedcharacterofthemovementimage
Godard'sabidingconcernwiththedebilitatingbutalsocreative
dimensionsofthepasthavecenteredoninvestigatingmodesfor
jammingsensorymotor,commonsensicalresponsestoimages
intheinterestsofarrivingatamorecriticalrelationtothepast
andtoquestionsofsamenessanddifference.Forexample,in
_ForEverMozart_(1997),theallusiontoRavel's_Bolero_as
fatalcarriesoneofthefilm'simportantquestions:'Isthehistory
ofEuropeinthe1990sasimplerehearsalwithslightsymphonic
variationofthechaosandcowardiceofthe1930s...adreadful
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

11/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

unending_Bolero_byRavel?'TheinvocationoftheRavelpiece
asanexemplarymusicalinstanceofrepetitionwithslight
variationoffersoneversionofartthatremainslimitedand
confinedtotheendlessconflictbetweenthemachinicandthe
chaotic,suggestingacertaindeterminismandinevitability.
Mozart'smusic,however,istied,liketheimageoftheskyinthe
film,toaformofdreamingorimaginationthatcinemacanevoke,
suggestingavisionofdifference,ofconstantmovementandof
playfulness.

Inthecontextofmusic,Mozart(andtheyoungmandressedas
Mozart)inthefilmprovidesacontrasttothecrassformsof
filmmaking,dramatizedinoneofthefilm'ssegments.Thefilm
endswithanimageofhismusicalscript,signifyingthenecessity
ofturningthepage,andofmovementratherthanstasisand
closureallattributesofGodard'sconceptionofthecinematic
image,animagethatelevatesthedynamismofmemoryoverthe
fixityofofficialhistory.Similarto_OhWoeIsMe_,_ForEver
Mozart_isimmersedinrelationsbetweenpastandpresentas
theyinvolvepoliticalevents(theSpanishCivilWarandtheWar
inBosnia),memoriesoffascism,memoriesofcinema,and
questionsofobjectivity.ButinGodard,asDeleuzenotes,

'thedistinctionbetweensubjectiveandobjective...tendsto
loseitsimportance...Werunintoaprincipleof
indeterminability,ofindiscernibility:wenolongerknowwhatis
imaginaryorreal,physicalnormental,inthesituation,not
becausetheyareconfused,butbecausewedonothavetoknow
andthereisnolongeraplacefromwhichtoask.Itisasifthe
realandimaginarywererunningaftereachother,asifeachwas
beingreflectedintheother,aroundapointofindiscernibility...
Theimaginaryandrealbecomeindiscernible.'[14]

Inhispenultimatechapter,Sterrittaddressestheroleofmemory
inGodardthroughadiscussionofafilmthathasreceived
minimalcriticalattention:_NouvelleVague_.Thediscussion
validateshow,inGodard'swork,indiscernibilitybetweenthe
imaginaryandtherealarecentraltoeveryaspectofthe
filmmaker'sinvestigationsofcinema.Sterrittclaims:

'Thinkingof_NouvelleVague_asamemorymoviehelpsexplain
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

12/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

suchcharacteristicsasthevividnessofitsimagesthemind's
eyesometimesseeslongpastrecollectionsinamazingdetail
andtheemotionalchargethattheseimagescarry,quiteapart
fromtheincidentsandencountersthattheycontainandconvey.
Consideringthefilmasanexerciseinmemoryalsoshedslight
onthearbitrarinesswithwhichtheimagesrelatetooneanother.
Likedreams,memoriesoftenfollowanonlogicoftheirown
givenGodard'slifelonginterestinescapingthelimitsoflogicand
rationality,itisnotsurprisingthathewouldeventuallyusethe
prerogativesofmemorytoanchoranentirework.'(230)

Appropriately,Sterritt'sdiscussionofthesixfilmshascometo
restontheissueofmemoryand,asSterrittsuggests,inhelping
toaccountforanunderstandingofthearbitrarinessofimage
relationships.Throughthetimeimage,Godardisableto
juxtaposepersonalrecollectionwiththeartisticpastofcinema,
thuselaboratingonhisongoingresistancetothefixityofnaming
andmeaninginhisbattleagainstwhatDeleuzehasdescribedas
theubiquityofthecliche,seekingtoanimateattentivememory
andpermittheviewer'toseewhattimeiscapableof',as
JonathonDronsfieldputit.[15]Inthisrespect,videoappearsto
be,asSterrittandothershaveasserted,acongenialmediumfor
Godard'sexperimentation,permittinghimtopursuehis'longtime
fascinationwithspontaneouscreationand(alwaysatthetopof
hisagenda)challengingcommonsensenotionsofsocially
productiveart,entertainment,andcommunication'(249).

Sterritt'sstudyconformstomuchoftherecentworkonGodard
thatlinksthefilmmakertomajorquestionsconcerningoldand
newmedia.ParticularlyadmirableisthewayinwhichSterrittis
abletothreadhiswaythroughtheverydifficultfilmsandbring
newinsightstobearontheirformandonthecharacterof
Godard'sphilosophicinvestigationsoftheimage.Inparticular,
thelengthyandnuanceddiscussionof_HailMary_shedslight
onobscurefeaturesofthefilm,andalsobringstothesurfacethe
complexityanddepthofGodard'sphilosophicinvestmentin
media.Oneoftheadvantagesofhavingselectedonlysixfilmsto
discussistheopportunitytoappreciatetheintricaciesof
Godard'sstyle,hisencyclopaedicrangeofallusionand
quotation,andthephilosophicsourceandnatureofhis
concerns.Whilethebookdoesintroduceadiscussionofhis
otherfilms,includingthosefrom1991to2000,Imissedthe
opportunitytoengagewiththecomplexitiesofsuchfilmsas_For
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

13/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

EverMozart_andparticularly_Histoire(s)ducinema_(1989
1997).Sterrittdoesmakereferencetothesefilms,andmuchof
whathesayscanshedlightontheselaterfilms,butnonetheless
Ifindtheselectionsacontradictioninaworkthatseeksto
establishtheongoingvitalityandimportanceofGodard'smedia
work.

Anothertroublingaspectofthisextremelywellresearched,well
written,knowledgeable,andeminentlyreadablebook,isitstoo
easydismissalofpoliticsinGodard'sworkafterthe1960s.The
GodardthatemergesfromSterritt'sstudyeveninhis
discussionofthefilmsofthe1960sseemscleansedofpolitics.
Inthiscontext,itwassurprisingtomethatJamesRoy
MacBean's_FilmandRevolution_wasnotevencited.InSterritt,
thepoliticalGodardhasgivenwaytoGodardthephilosopher
andmetaphysician,thusdownplayingtheimportofGodard's
ongoingconcerntochallengetheculturalandpoliticalimpactof
cinema,television,andmedia.Nonetheless,_TheFilmsofJean
LucGodard_holdsaveritablecornucopiaofideasonthe
dynamiccharacterofGodard'sfilmmaking,andhispreeminent
roleasananalystofculture.

UniversityofPittsburgh
Pennsylvania,USA

Footnotes

1.MichaelTempleandJamesS.Williams,'Introduction',in
TempleandWilliams,eds,_TheCinemaAlone:Essaysonthe
WorkofJeanLucGodard,19852000_(Amsterdam:Amsterdam
UniversityPress,2000),p.9.

2.Ibid.,p.11.

3.MarciaLandy,''JustanImage':Godard,Cinemaand
Philosophy',_CriticalQuarterly_,vol.43no.3,Autumn2001,pp.
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

14/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

934.

4.D.N.Rodowick,_GillesDeleuze'sTimeMachine_(Durham:
DukeUniversityPress,1997),p.152.

5.FredricJameson,_TheGeopoliticalAesthetic:Cinemaand
SpaceintheWorldSystem_(Bloomington:IndianaUniversity
Press,1992),p.159.

6.GillesDeleuze,_Cinema2:TheTimeImage_,trans.Hugh
TomlinsonandRobertGaleta(Minneapolis:Universityof
MinnesotaPress,1989),p.22.

7.Ibid.,p.133.

8.Ibid.,p.280.

9.SeeJamesRoyMacBean,_FilmandRevolution_
(Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress,1975),p.45.

10.Deleuze,_Cinema2_,pp.182183.

11.LaetitiaFieschiVivet,'InvestigationofaMystery:Cinema
andtheSacredin_Helaspourmoi_',in_TheCinemaAlone_,p.
190.

12.TagGallagher,_TheAdventuresofRobertoRossellini_
(NewYork:DaCapo,1998),p.430.

13.HenriBergson,_MatterandMemory_,trans.Nancy
MargaretPaul(NewYork:ZoneBooks,1991),p.173.

http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

15/16

4/3/2015

Landy on Sterritt

14.Deleuze,_Cinema2_,p.7.

15.JonathonDronsfield,'ThePresentNeverExistsThere:The
TemporalityofDecisioninGodard'sLaterFilmandVideo
Essays',in_TheCinemaAlone_,p.62.

Copyright_FilmPhilosophy_2002

MarciaLandy,'Godard:ThinkingMedia',_FilmPhilosophy_,vol.
6no.30,September2002<http://www.filmphilosophy.com/vol6
2002/n30landy>.

SaveasPlainTextDocument...Print...Read...Recycle

BacktotheFilmPhilosophyhomepage

http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol6-2002/n30landy

16/16