{"title":"Horror as Film Philosophy","authors":"Lorenz Engell","doi":"10.3390/philosophies9050146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article starts from Gilles Deleuze’s assumption of film being a philosophy in its own right and applies it to the horror genre. It reads Stanley Cavell’s concept of genre, Timothy Jay Walker’s work on the Horror of the Other (1) and Eugene Thacker’s understanding of philosophical horror (2). It researches horror film as philosophically relevant access to nothingness (3) and shifts to the operations of assigning places to nothingness according to its respective place of access (off screen, on screen, behind the screen/behind the camera) (4). It then gives short analyses of Midsommar (5), Hereditary (6), Tarantula (7), and The Conjuring (8). In Tarantula, the screen functions as a shield against the agent of nothingness residing behind it. Once surmounted from behind by nothingness, the screen is finally purged. In Hereditary and Midsommar, nothingness is always already here, in full light, constantly transforming everything into nothing. In The Conjuring, the morphings and vectorial movements have nothingness evaporate from the screen to what lies behind it, namely (digital) picture technology. The screen turns into a membrane between nothingness and its condition, technology. As a consequence, we have to switch from philosophical horror to technological horror as access to nothingness (9).","PeriodicalId":31446,"journal":{"name":"Philosophies","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9050146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The article starts from Gilles Deleuze’s assumption of film being a philosophy in its own right and applies it to the horror genre. It reads Stanley Cavell’s concept of genre, Timothy Jay Walker’s work on the Horror of the Other (1) and Eugene Thacker’s understanding of philosophical horror (2). It researches horror film as philosophically relevant access to nothingness (3) and shifts to the operations of assigning places to nothingness according to its respective place of access (off screen, on screen, behind the screen/behind the camera) (4). It then gives short analyses of Midsommar (5), Hereditary (6), Tarantula (7), and The Conjuring (8). In Tarantula, the screen functions as a shield against the agent of nothingness residing behind it. Once surmounted from behind by nothingness, the screen is finally purged. In Hereditary and Midsommar, nothingness is always already here, in full light, constantly transforming everything into nothing. In The Conjuring, the morphings and vectorial movements have nothingness evaporate from the screen to what lies behind it, namely (digital) picture technology. The screen turns into a membrane between nothingness and its condition, technology. As a consequence, we have to switch from philosophical horror to technological horror as access to nothingness (9).
文章从吉勒-德勒兹关于电影本身就是一种哲学的假设出发,将其应用于恐怖类型。文章解读了斯坦利-卡维尔(Stanley Cavell)的类型概念、蒂莫西-杰伊-沃克(Timothy Jay Walker)关于 "他者的恐怖"(Horror of the Other)的著作(1)以及尤金-萨克(Eugene Thacker)对哲学恐怖的理解(2)。它研究了恐怖电影作为与哲学相关的通向虚无的途径(3),并转向根据其各自的通向地点(银幕外、银幕上、银幕后/摄影机后)为虚无分配位置的操作(4)。随后,它对《Midsommar》(5)、《Hereditary》(6)、《Tarantula》(7)和《The Conjuring》(8)进行了简短分析。在《蛛网》中,银幕起到了抵御幕后虚无媒介的作用。一旦被虚无从背后超越,屏风最终会被清除。在《遗传》和《Midsommar》中,虚无总是在这里,在光的照耀下,不断地将一切转化为虚无。在《魔咒》中,变形和矢量运动让虚无从屏幕上蒸发到屏幕背后,即(数字)图像技术。屏幕变成了虚无与其条件(技术)之间的一层薄膜。因此,我们不得不从哲学的恐怖转向技术的恐怖,以此来通向虚无(9)。