Whose Story is This? The Non-existence of the External Gaze in David Lynch’s Films

A. Favaro
{"title":"Whose Story is This? The Non-existence of the External Gaze in David Lynch’s Films","authors":"A. Favaro","doi":"10.22492/ijmcf.5.1.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The tendency to eschew a coherent narrative has been very common especially since the 1990s and a certain approach to narration has become observable within postmodern cinema: the viewer is denied access to the truth and realities concerning dramatic structure and characters, either during part of the narrative, or throughout the entire movie. For instance, Stuart Mitchell (1999) points out that in David Lynch’s Lost Highway, as Lynch himself points out, the dream/dreaminess is neither a fantasy nor a delusion but something intrinsic to the character, thus what we watch is essentially the story of the main character and it is realistic according to his logic. Analysing the David Lynch’s Lost Highway (1997), Mulholland Drive (2001) and Twin Peaks: The Return (2017), this article will discuss how any attempt by the viewer to achieve the truth and to distinguish reality from fantasy may be fruitless and how the filmic or fictional reality may result undistinguishably from so-called material reality. I argue that the viewer moves and stumbles with the gaze of the camera which reveals that the reality is something constructed, and that the objective reality of an external gaze doesn’t exist.","PeriodicalId":413069,"journal":{"name":"IAFOR Journal of Media, Communication & Film","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IAFOR Journal of Media, Communication & Film","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22492/ijmcf.5.1.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The tendency to eschew a coherent narrative has been very common especially since the 1990s and a certain approach to narration has become observable within postmodern cinema: the viewer is denied access to the truth and realities concerning dramatic structure and characters, either during part of the narrative, or throughout the entire movie. For instance, Stuart Mitchell (1999) points out that in David Lynch’s Lost Highway, as Lynch himself points out, the dream/dreaminess is neither a fantasy nor a delusion but something intrinsic to the character, thus what we watch is essentially the story of the main character and it is realistic according to his logic. Analysing the David Lynch’s Lost Highway (1997), Mulholland Drive (2001) and Twin Peaks: The Return (2017), this article will discuss how any attempt by the viewer to achieve the truth and to distinguish reality from fantasy may be fruitless and how the filmic or fictional reality may result undistinguishably from so-called material reality. I argue that the viewer moves and stumbles with the gaze of the camera which reveals that the reality is something constructed, and that the objective reality of an external gaze doesn’t exist.
这是谁的故事?大卫·林奇电影中外部凝视的不存在
自20世纪90年代以来,回避连贯叙事的趋势非常普遍,后现代电影中出现了一种特定的叙事方式:观众无法接触到关于戏剧结构和人物的真相和现实,无论是在部分叙事中,还是在整个电影中。例如,Stuart Mitchell(1999)指出,在David Lynch的《失落的公路》中,正如Lynch自己指出的那样,梦/梦幻既不是幻想也不是错觉,而是角色固有的东西,因此我们所看到的本质上是主角的故事,根据他的逻辑,这是现实的。通过分析大卫·林奇的《失落的公路》(1997)、《穆赫兰道》(2001)和《双峰归来》(2017),本文将讨论观众实现真相和区分现实与幻想的任何尝试是如何徒劳的,以及电影或虚构的现实是如何与所谓的物质现实无法区分的。我认为,观众在镜头的注视下移动和绊倒,这揭示了现实是一种建构的东西,而外部注视的客观现实并不存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信