VV(7) 2

[Terrance]

John Bailey wrote:
> 
> Of course, there's always been the vexing topic of what it would mean to a
> person whose 'impersonations' increasingly faltered, and they lost control
> of their identity. Playing this thought out to its logical conclusion would
> mean that their very personality would disperse, become a crossroads....hey,
> waidaminit!

"What is it that has happened? Nothing. Nothing; simply that
a practical act, through its precision and rhythm, and
through the memories it evokes, suddenly seem to be its own
reason for being...Whereupon the purpose of this action
turns into a mere pretext. Time is reversed: the blow of the
hammer is no longer struck in order to build the
merry-go-round, instead the fair, the profits the show man
is planning on, the merry-go-round, all that exists only to
provoke the hammers blow; future and past cooperate to
produce the present...The booths, the buildings, the ground
all become a décor; in an outdoor theater, as soon as the
actors appear, the trees turn into pasteboard, the sky
becomes a painted backdrop. In the very instant in which the
act is transformed into a gesture, it drags along with into
irreality the whole enormous mass of being itself."
--Sartre, Les Mains sales

"My perception of the other persons body is radically
different from ny perception of things." --Sartre, L'Etre et
le neant

"The Modern artist, the early men of film,  are breaking the
immediate whole perceptions down into parts, fragmenting
them, and these fragments are as strange to him as they are
to us. In the fragmentation on the screen...we sense the
violence in these grotesque fragments, the autonomy of the
medium over the its material, the will to fragmentation of
the director, his high-riding freedom over his story and
over matter itself. But the total effect of these gleaming
and rapid bits of vision is instructively different from
what happens in words."   --Fredric Jameson,