forwarded message from andrew at cee.hw.ac.uk

[robb monn]

Is this thread regarding the Film 'La Jette' by chance, with it's still
photo vs. narration?  If not, it might be interesting to mention it,
because is it centrally concerned with causal systems and whatever would be
the alternative.

>I am reposting this as when I replied privately to Michael I did not
>know that his original had gone to the list
>
>mglosup at randomc.com writes:
>
> [re Franz viewing Attila the Hun]
>
>> I love this scene. Franz must have faith of a religious quality in
>> cause and effect.  Franz doesn't have to actually 'connect the
>> fragments', he can assume that the connections do exist and not
>> exert himself by engaging in observation.  Of course he could have
>> seen a synopsis of the film before viewing it.
>
>You are right that Franz does not have to connect the fragments, up to
>a point. But imagine if those fragments are just dots with no lines
>between them. At what point does making the connections become a
>psychological, or better perceptual - better still conceptual
>necessity. We get so blase about teh concepts on which we have built
>our edifice that we think they must be trivial. Whereas it is merely
>that they are utterly familiar because of frequent and routine
>application of the methods and techniques which give them life. Fail
>to employ these techniques, i.e. apply the concepts, regularly enough
>and suddenly it becomes impossible to view aspects of one's world
>under the aspect of the concept (in case you know LudWit this is the
>key point behind his duck-rabbit aspect - in the case of the ambiguous
>duck-rabbit figure we cannot help but eep seeing at once rabbit then
>next duck because we cannot stop ourselves applying the two
>over-familiar concepts in rotation).
>
>Even if he had seen a synopsis how would he have known that the film
>conformed to the synopsis? If the intervals between frames get big
>enough then anything can be allowed to happen in the spaces.
>Continuity at a conceptual level relies on continuity and regularities
>at the day to day level. Franz's attempts to supplant this rule with
>notions of cause and effect is a diversion (i.e. secular history) even
>though, as you say, rooted in faith.
>
>
>Andrew Dinn
>- -----------
>And though Earthliness forget you,
>To the stilled Earth say:  I flow.
>To the rushing water speak:  I am.




robb monn

robb at shiftparadigm.org