ヒッチコック映画論：ドゥルーズ哲学と心的諸関係 について
著者 ブラッドリー ジョフ・ピーター・ノーマン
著者別名 BRADLEY Joff Peter Norman
雑誌名 東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要
号 16
ページ 111‑130
発行年 2014‑03‑24
URL http://id.nii.ac.jp/1060/00006440/
Creative Commons : 表示 ‑ 非営利 ‑ 改変禁止 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by‑nc‑nd/3.0/deed.ja
東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)lll‑130
HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentalrelations
BRADLEYJoffPeterNonnan＊
lll
""co"cep//sqsig",Qfcoz"se.B"/we〃の》/α舵asig"/"so"oqdqse"ser加〃ﾙe伽e切花rα"/q/"is"o/q /〃o"g肱加rα"αC"o〃o/"expe"e"ce,orwe"7の'eve"soe"/α堰erﾙe"!eα"i"gqfsig"r/W施/"re切花/α"〃Sα"e花 9"α"〃Q〃をe""9.(Peirce,1958,p.332)
oh,晩α':脆've6eco"'eα'･aceqf此ep加g7b"7s.〃ﾉﾙα/peOp/eo"gﾙ〃o伽jsgero"獅旋/ﾙe//"ow"ルo"sea"〃COル j"/bγαcﾙα"ge.(Stella,[ThelmaRitterl,Jeffiies'nurse,inR""肋"伽w)
777eg'℃a/d"ecrorsq//ﾙecI"e耐α加叩beco"Tpαﾉで臥加o"rweM；〃or〃7eだかw肋加"7rerS,qrCﾙ"easα〃
""ｲs〃α"s,6z"α肋w"ﾙrﾙﾉ"〃e,汐.剛eWﾙ/"kw"ﾙ",ove"7e"ﾉｰ加agesα"伽加e‑伽αges伽彪αdqfco"ce".(Deleuze, 1986,p.xiv)
C/"e"7q/e/ksro"esw"ﾙ6/oc肋Q/"'oye'"e"r／伽rα"o".(Deleuze,〃ﾙα〃sr"eO℃α伽e4c/?)
Inrecentyears,Al廿edHitchcock'sneurosesandpathologieshavelikedirtylinenbeenairedfbrallandsundry toview.Itisthefashiontodiscredittheman,nottheartist.Indoingsothisofiendrawsfilmsmdiesawayfiomthe splendourofHitchcock'svisionandtechnique.Ishallnotetwoexamples,althoughtherearemanymore,bothin academia,andinthepressandmedia,thelatterofwhichcatersall‑too‑oftenfbrthiskindoftediouslyreductive
t i t i l l a t i o n a n d h e a r s a y . ! I n t h e T V f i l m 7 7 7 e G " / ( 2 0 1 3 ) , b a s e d o n D o n a l d S p o t o ' s b i o g r a p h y , 2 H i t c h c o c k , p l a y e d b y T b b y J o n e s , i s p o r t r a y e d a s a d i r e c t o r o b s e s s e d w i t h h i s l e a d a c t r e s s T i p p i H e d r e n ( p l a y e d b y S i e n n a M i l l e r ) , t h e
Americanmodelandactresswhoalsoappearedinthecritically‑acclaimedmastemiece777eBﾉﾉ油(1963).After HedrendeclinesHitchcock'sovertures,thefilmportraysHitchcocksuljectinghertomomentsofpsychological tortureandbullying.*AlecmrerintheFacultyofLiterature,andamemberofthelnstituteofHumanSciencesatTbyoUniversity
112
−
勢州鐵;《
ゞi:壼篭
PictureA
哨叫,',l7FF
東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)
TheinfatuationistortuouslyprolongedasHitchcockworkswithHedreninhisnext production,MW"/e(1964),whereunrequiteddesireeffectivelyruinstheirprofessional relationship.IntheFox‑made61mproduction"/cﾉ7cock(2012),starringAnthonyHopkins asHitchcock,thedirectorcomesacrossasvoyeuristicandcovetousofhisblondelead, JanetLeigh,whoplaysMarionCrane,duringthemakingoftheshockerPSycﾙo(1960), (SeePicmreA).Shownasasexualpredator,heisportrayedasviolentandsadistictoward hiscrew・BothfilmsconstructHitchcockasthearchetypalplaythingfbrpsychoanalysis:the
勺
dirtyoldman,holdingapreordainedtriangleofdesire.'
However,thisapproachappearsperfilnctoryandtheauthorofthisessaywishestolookto
s o m e t h i n g m o r e p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 4 t o d e p i c t i n s t e a d H i t c h c o c k a s a c l a i r v o y a n t o f s o r t s , a s o n e
ofifnotthe,greatauteurgeniusesofmoderncinema・Theabovecommentsdonotdismiss feministorpsychoanalyticanalysesonthenatureofthegazeperse,butthedesignofthis paperistoretrievethephilosophicalimportofHitchcockviaGillesDeleuze'sseminalc i n e m a b o o k s , w i t h r i g h t f i l l a t t e n t i o n g i v e n t o t h e e f f e c t i v e c l o s u r e o f $ c l a s s i c a l c i n e m a ' i n H i t c h c o c k a n d t h e u n f b l d i n g o f t h e t i m e ‑ i m a g e s i n t h e f i l m s o f J a p a n e s e d i r e c t o r Y a s l j i r O
Ozu(小津安二郎)andhowHitchcocksharesmuchwithltalianneorealismintheway heparalysesthecharacterdiegetically・Inpost‑warcinema,Deleuzepointstoltalianneo‑ realism,toRossellinie/q/,asthereisaperceivedbreakingofthelinkbetweenperception andaction.Charactersaredisorientated,situatedinacatastrophicenvironmenttheyno longerunderstandethically.Thereisaresultantlossoffaithorbeliefintheworld,alossintruenarrative.
ema(explainedintermsofthemovementimage)−けomtheWestandJapan(Ozuand Usingclassicalcinema(explainedintermsofthemovementimage)−丘omtheWestandJapan(Ozuand theemergenceofthetime‑image)‑andPeirciansemioticsasmystartingpoint,andasalabourofloveand love'sworkofHitchcock,OzuandDeleuze,thefbcusofthispaperistherefbreonエイチratherthanエッ チ.LookingbeyondthetriangulationsofFreudianpsychoanalysis,theover‑codingofthemalecovetousgaze, thequestionariseshowbesttounderstandHitchcock．Isitthroughthelensofthesymbolic,iconic,semiotic,or psychoanalytic？Representativeofwhatandtowhom？Mytakeonthisisasfbllows：Ifoneescapesthelowest commondenominatorofindulgent,luridinterestinthedirector'seroticfantasyworld,oneisbettersuitedto considerthemorephilosophicallyprobingquestionofhowfilmsthink.Andasweknow廿omStanleyCavell's analysiswatchingcinemaisaphilosophicalact.Ithasmuchtodowiththinking.
A s w i l l b e s e e n , H i t c h c o c k ' s l e s s o n i s t h i s : T h e s p e c t a t o r a n d t h e c h a r a c t e r a r e t h e l e n s . 6 1 t i s a q u e s t i o n o f t h e
thirdeyeandthefburthdimensionoftime.WhatHitchcock'sworkineffectproducesisnotonlythescopophilia ofthespectator,whoderivespleasure廿omlooking,butalso,andmoreimportantly,mentalrelations,apure cinemaorthought.PiCtureB
BRADLEYJoffPeterNonnan:HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentalrelations ll3
Knife7
ノ〃eα〃〃so"e//7/"gro6zO/cﾙoco/qreso"/QMo"応'伽/"'s9""eα"orﾙeJ"/os"ckqシ
肋舵加oqge"池"?α〃..."goocic/eα",ルo"esrw/Iqckove/･r/le/7eaJw"〃α6"cMso"e
，
/方/"g.777eノセS "7e伽"gB""sルα加"///7qr.BI〃ん伽 …〃叩e,k"んes/s"orrjgﾙr.I
"7"s/sqW/7q/'sll加〃/ﾙﾉ"kα〃rﾙαr'SWﾙα〃たe/.〃ﾙareveバルe〃℃,》｡cα"｡"ノcol〃"eve7
"seqk"旅.Nowﾉ"i"")》o〃α肋推/sqcWc"〃伽"groルα'〃e…肪旋…k"旅…k"旅…
(noseyneighbourinB/qckﾉ"q//,1929).
IshallexamineanarrayofHitchcock'sfilmsthroughDeleuze'sphilosophyandC.S Peirce'ssemiotics,startingwiththelatterandthematteroftheknifeinB/αcえ"7α".Inthe famousknifesequenceinB/qc肋7α〃(PictureB)‑Britain'sfirst.talkie'‑thereisalready theexpressionisticmanipulationofsound,distortionintheringingbellsandtheshrieksof language‑techniqueslatertocharacterisemuchofHitchcock'soewwで.Thefbllowingis abriefsynopsisofthescene:Inabidtomaintainthesemblanceofnonnality,AliceWhite (AnnyOndra)eatsbreakfastwithherparentsintheshop'sparlour;thepreviousdayshe killedthemanwhotriedtorapeher.Thecamerahonesinonthemurderer;Alice'sguilt‑ riddenfacesignifiesitisthroughherearsthatwehear.Aneighbourdiscussesthelatest hearsayandrepeatedlyutters@knife';itsearsintoAlice'sandthespectators'minds.Alice fightstoresistthetonnent‑theactionstallsandthetensionbuildstothepointatwhich thecharacterisreadyroαα.Thepotential/"ﾙeでsinthismomentuntilshecracksand throwsthebread‑knifeoutofherhand.Theknifeonthetableisthreatening.Itcancut andkill.Inthis$mentalimage'itisnotsomuchthatthethoughtsofthecharacterare revealedbutthesoundofthewordknifeisasignthatsignifiestheobjectwhichkilleda manandthepresenceofqknifeonthetable(Colebrook,2006,p.70‑71).
TheaudienceestablishesarelationofsigntoitsoIJect(thesonicmatteroftheshriektotheominouswielding oftheknife).Aliceandtheaudiencearethethirdrelation.Thisfbrmofcinemaproducesanimageofthevirtual.
Theobjectsproperfbrthementalimagearerelations,｡symbolicacts,intellectualfeelings.UsingPeirce's Theobjectsproperfbrthementalimagearerelations，symbolicacts,intellectual従elings.UsingPeirces tenninologywecansay,therecanbeactions/reactionsifthereisapotentialpowertoact(firstness),andtherecan onlybeperceptionofrelationsifrelationshavebeenacmalised(secondnessoracmalfact);buttheperceptionof relations9"αrelationsopensthescenesuchthatthespectatormayfinallythinkbeyondthemovementspresented. InHitchcock'sfilms,inthefbrcesofrelationsthereisanimageofthirdness(thebeingoflawthatgovemfactsin thefilmre).Theschemefirstness,secondnessandthirdnesscanbeexpressedmoreeconomicallythus:possibility, existentandlaw.ForDeleuze,therearenotjustmovementsortendenciestomove,butsystemsor廿ameswhich holdthosemovementstogether.Moreover,whatwediscoverintheknifesceneistherecombinationofmarksand
ll4 東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)
sounds,producingasurplusvalueofsense(Deleuze,1990).Importantlyjtheacmalandmaterialfbrcesproduceall incomorealtransfbnnation,anewvirtualworldofsense.ltis"knifebutonethatrecallsthekillingoftherapist andtheactthatstabbedaknifeintohisbody,cuttingHeshandmeat.Backintheparlour,theknifeisfbrcuttinga loafbutoncewieldedbythemurderer,itcreatesaregimeofcrimes,cdminals,lawsandjudgements,verdicts:it manifestsanincomorealevent.
Inthebackgroundthereistheshriekingofpainwords‑knife!knife!knife!Theaffectivequalitiesofthe knife:shamnessincuttingnotonlybread,butthehorrorofarecentmemoryandthemeatofacorporealbeing constimtepuresingularqualitiesorpotentialities,pure:possibles'(Rio,2008;Deleuze,1986,p.102).Thevolume oftheutterance@knife'isincreased,engineeringanewthoughtinthespectator.Thesonicmatteropensoutonto thevirtual.Atthisjuncmre,letusremindourselveshowDeleuzerethinksPeirceintennsofhisownsemiology ofsigns.Firstnessisanimpressionisticandasensiblesignlinkedtotheaffection‑imagefbund,fbrexample, intheexpressionsofAlice'sface(faciality).SecondnessiSthesigntowhichthisaffectiongivesrise,namely aperceptionofaction.Heretheknifbisheldfbraparticularreason.Thesignofthirdnessgoesbeyondaction tofbrmmentalrelations,judgments,andsoon.Herethereisacomplexinterplayofknife,knifewielder,the repetitionofsonicmatter‑hife!knife!knife!‑andtheintuitionthatsomethingwillhappen.
Assecondnessorhaecceity‑whichincludesfirstnessasthatwhichhasbeendetenninedorbroughtinto existenceasathing‑itisatoolfbrbrandishing,cutting,slicing,stabbing,lacerating.Intermsofthirdness, symbolicallyitisthemurderweapon,nolongerabreadknifebutthememoryoftheknifewhichkilledtherapist.
Thissymbolisesmeditatively9"αprospectiveactionthethreatofbeingcaught,heractionsexposed,her廿eedom curtailed.Theknifeinteractswiththebreadbutterandisaffectedassuch.Thereisamaterialityoftherelation, theknifeaffectsthebreadandisaffectedbythematerialityofthebrutethingasithasto"resist'thebread's characteristics.Theknifeonthetablecancutandkill."/ﾉ"℃"e"s.Itis.a'threat・Whatisimportanttonotehere isthementalimage'srelationtotheimageofthevirtual.Onthispoint,HitchcockexplainstoFrancoisTruffaut (1967)thatheisopposedtoactorsoractressessimplyconveyinginnerfeelingstotheaudiencethroughfacial expressions.Inthisway,theaudiencecomestounderstandthattheytooareawareofthe.meaning'oftheknife. HitchcockexplainstoTruffaut:
7VIewm"gwqy/ogoa加卿〃肋sce"ewoz〃加vebee"/oルαVerﾙeﾉ7ero/"eco"vey/Jer/"" たe""gFrorﾙe α"仇e"cehy/7erjZIciα/expressio".1'伽αgal"s〃加/､肋形α//i/b,peop/e'sjZMces伽"'rreVeα/w加〃ﾙeW力加虎o『たe/， 小α〃胴di花αo〃"?"s〃〃/oco"veW/7iswo碗α"'S伽",eQ/伽 ror〃eα"成e"Ce帥〃花かc/"e〃α"c〃eα"s…
肋α"ksro"7ecq"7em,rﾉ7ep"Mc/s"owαα"α/か/M"g/ﾙesce"e，
R e f e r r i n g t o 肋 加 / q g e ( 1 9 3 6 ) 9 ( P i c m r e C ) , h e s a y s f a c e s s e l d o m r e v e a l w h a t p e o p l e t r u l y t h i n k o r f e e l . I n s t e a d ,
thepurviewofthedirectoristoconveya@fiameofmind'totheaudiencebypurelycinematicmeans'.ThescenePictureC
BRADLEYJoffPeterNonnan:HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentalrelations ll5
inStJ加rqgewhereMrs.SylviaVerloc(SylviaSidney)decidestokillherterroristhusband KarlVerloc(OscarHomolka)withaknifeiscitedbyHitchcocktoexplainthatthecamera fiamesherhand,eyes,andmovesbackandfbrthbetweenthetwountil@suddenlyherlook makesitclearthatshe'sbecomeawareofthepotentialmeaningofthatknife'(Truffaut, l967,p.111).ThecamerathenpanstoMrVerloc,whoiseating,andbacktothehandand
theknife.
ThisinterpretationclearlycompareswellwithDeleuze'sidiosyncraticreadingofthe historyofcinema,whichinsiststhat@purecinema'conveysnotonlyactsoremotionsbut also//7e"7ec加"/s"7sqﾊﾙo"g/7/.Cinemaisathinkingmachine.ItfbllowsfbrDeleuze
t h a t H i t c h c o c k ' s c a m e r a e s t a b l i s h e s t h e m e n t a l ‑ i m a g e . T h i s i s n o t s o l e l y a c l o s e c i r c u i t
ofoqectsandsignsbuttheintemretantorthought,themental‑imagethatisgenerated.AtthebegimingofReqr肪"伽w(1954),Deleuzewritesthatthecamerapansaroundthe courtyardandsearchestheapamnentoftheimmobilisedJeffJefferiesashesleeps.For Deleuze,itisthecamera,andnotthedialogueinHitchcock'sfilms,whichexplainswﾉZy (Deleuze,1986,p.201).Importantly,thereisakindofautonomouscamera‑consciousness motionindependentofthecharacters'desire.Mentalrelationspertainnottotheanalytical deconstructionoftheHitchcockiancameragazebutbelongontheplaneofaffectsand percepts.Onthispoint,Hitchcock,inlengthytalkswithTruffautregardingRec"肋"伽W saysitisentirely@amentalprocess,donebyuseofthevisual'.Heinsists:
"yo〃'で"e加加rαβ伽I〃α火yea応agocα" 此α'､〃"WM；w"c/7w"q///i℃' //7e〃j"iQwewQfo"e〃α"
ん"7esS/ewa砿s"""gl〃αwj"伽Ⅶ〃ｾﾉ〃7e/7qd/o/ook,/ﾙe〃IルaJroc"rjow加//7esqW//ie〃α〃加c肺oルis 形αc伽".NOWw加〃w ノセα/か伽加gwqs.Fﾙow加gα籾e"〃"ocessQMemα",帥meα"sQ/piα"res,hyw/Iqrﾙe
S a W
Ineffect,whatheseesisamentalprocess@blownupinhismind'.JamesStewartasJeffifiesdoesn'temoteas suchbutmakesthecamerashowtheviewerwhatheisineffectthinkingandpeeringat.Expressedbythemaster himselfHitchcocksaysinthefirstinstanceyouhaveanimmobilisedmanlookingout.Thesecondpartshows whathesees.Thethirdparthowhereacts.Hitchcocksaysthisisthepurestexpressionofacinematicidea.For him,他αr肋"dbwis&strictlypurecinema'(Stevens,2006,p.268):,Youdoaclose‑upofJamesStewart.He
l o o k s . Y o u g o b a c k t o h i m a n d h e r e a c t s . S o y o u s e t u p a m e n t a l p r o c e s s . ' ' P u t a n o t h e r w a y , t h i s i s w h a t D e l e u z e
designatesasnoosignsorthought‑signs‑whicharisewhenmovementunfUrlsbeyondtheconventionsofspatial extensiontointensivethoughtitselfForDeleuze,Hitchcockineffbctperfectedtheaction‑image(secondness),116 東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)
BRADLEYJoffPeterNorman:HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentall･elatiolls 117
Atthisjunctureletussummarisetheabove.InB/qc伽αﾉ/,Hitchcockisalreadydeveloping,improvisingand creatingnewcinematictechniques;alreadymanipulatingthedesiresoftheaudience.Indeed,accordingtoJean
D o u c h e t , ' 0 w h i l e P e i r c e c o n s i d e r s t h a t t h e i n t e r p r e t a n t s i g n ' ' i s a l w a y s p r o d u c e d b y o r f b r a r a t i o n a l b e i n g , f b r
Hitchcockdesirealwaysintervenesinmeaningandlogicalrelations.Thelogicalprocessesofinductionandd e d u c t i o n a r e s e c o n d a r y t o . t o f e e l i n g s o f d e s i r e a n d f e a r ' . ' 2 1 n H i t c h c o c k ' s 6 1 m s , a c t i o n s , a f f e c t i o n s , p e r c e p t i o n s
areamatterofintemretation,@丘ombeginningtoend'(Deleuze,1986,p.200)." I , 2 ; " I , 2 , 3 , 4 : P e i r c e ' s @ t h i r d n e s s ' ' j a n d z e r o n n e s s α1,2;α1,2,3,4:Peirce'sthirdnesSandzeronness
ThematerialityofcinemaisinterpretedbyDeleuzeasasemioticfiameworklikeanyother.Assuch,he
r e i n t e r p r e t s P e i r c e ' s c l a s s i c s e m i o l o g y o f t r i a d i c r e l a t i o n s a n d f i n d s a p o t e n t i a l l y l i m i t l e s s t a x o n o m y o f i m a g e s
andsigns.AlthoughhedeploysPeirciantenninology,albeitinmaverickandsometimescontradictoryways,what isinterestingishowhislogicofdeductionnecessitatesapercePtionimage‑the@setofelementswhichactona center,andwhichvalyinrelationtoit'(Deleuze,1986,p.217).Theperceptionofperceptionistheconditionof possibilityofthetriadicrelation.Asiswidelyknown,Peirce'staxonomyofsigns,thethreefilndamentalCeno‑ RWﾙagoノセα〃categoriesofbeingandconsciousnessarefirstness,secOndness,andthirdness.Yetevenbefbref i r s t n e s s , D e l e u z e r e i n t e m r e t s P e i r c e ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f z e r o n e s s a n d f i n d s a c t g ノ セ e z e ﾉ ℃ o f i m a g e s , a v i r t u a l p l a n e
ofmovement‑images‑aplaneofimmanence‑廿omwhichsignstakeshape.Deleuzebuildsaninterpretation ofsemiotics廿omPeirce'staxonomyofsigns‑icons,index,symbols‑whichfindsitswayintohistwocinema booksand777eLog/('Q/.Se"se(1990).FromthisDeleuzemakestheargumentthatPeirceandHitchcockwere bothconcernedwiththirdness.Brieflyexpressed,icons,indexandsymbolsfbnntriadicrelationsconsistentw i t h f i r s t n e s s ( t h e i s o f な " ) , s e c o n d n e s s ( t h e e x i s t e n t i a l : a p h y s i c a l f b r c e , a s h o c k ) , a n d t h i r d n e s s a s a m e d i a t i n g , g e n e r a t i n g c a t e g o r y . B u t , I a r g u e , D e l e u z e r e a d s t h e ! s i g n ' c o n t r a r y t o P e i r c e a n o r t h o d o x y . ' 5 1 n t e n n s o f c i n e m a
historyandthroughcombiningelementsofBergson'sMq"eﾉ．α"dA化"70"(1896)andSpinoza'sphilosophyofthe bodyandaffect,andbreakingcruciallywiththeSaussureanlinguisticsemiotictradition,whatDeleuzefindsisthat Peirce'striadicsemiologyofimagesismissingarelationtomovement.HisinnovationisthatPeirce'staxonomy presupposesanimagewhichmustbededuced.He611sthisconspicuousabsencewiththeafbrementionedp e r c e p t i o n i m a g e o r d e g r e e z e r o n e s s ‑ a v i r t u a l p l a n e o f m o v e m e n t ‑ i m a g e s 廿 o m w h i c h s i g n s f b r m . ' 6 P e i r c e ' s
observationaboutthenatureofzeroinOb/ec"''eLog/c(1898,p.148)helpstoclarifythenatureofthepurezero:〃セ "αﾉγ,"7e",w"ル〃o/ﾙ/"g,p"肥zeﾉ℃.B"〃ﾙ/s/s"o〃舵〃oﾉﾙ加gQ/､"egα"o".For"or"7eα"so//7eﾉ･Iﾙα",α orﾙerIs耐e}でんaqy"o""Q//ﾙeO'城"α/〃z""em/seco"ci"ss"c/7"〃叩//esαﾉﾃﾉ別wﾙ//e/ﾙepﾉでse"r〃ﾉでzeJ℃/s
"/or/oeve"/加r.7ﾙe"o""gQ/"egα"o"/siﾙe〃orﾙﾉ"g fたαrﾙ,w〃/cルco"jesseco"/o,o'･城eﾉ.eVerWﾙ/"g.
B"//岫伽ノセごeﾉ℃/ ﾙe〃orﾙﾉ"gq/"or/7q''/"g6ee〃加r".刀7e'で/s"o/"C/M伽α//"7g,"oco"似ｲ伽o",02"wq/tlor ﾉ"wα城〃o/αⅥMMsI/7ege}""""α/〃o伽"g,加wﾙ/cルr/7ewﾙo/e〃"ﾙe応ejs加voA'edoﾉ"ん℃s加伽weci4ss"cﾙ,〃
ll8 東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)
isq6so/"/ely〃"de/i"edα"d""伽?" 〃 M/り＃'‐伽"'〃essposs/〃岬7舵'でjs"ocoﾉ叩"伽o〃α"d"o/αw"is 伽2 "〃e 戸でe伽"2．
BRADLEYJoffPeterNomlan:HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentalrelations ll9
exampleinHitchcock'sfilmsR叩e(1948)‑havebecomespectators.777eﾉｾﾉSeSOﾉ"erﾙ/"g/obeex"Qcreが℃ﾉ"/ﾙis,
" e r ﾙ 加 g r o b e / 肋 " g / " . 2 0
Attheneurologicallevel,themental‑imageengineersa@relation'toitsobiectinthebrain.Itdemandsanactof Ginterpretation'廿omthespectatortothinkwhattheimagepertains@to'‑thatistosay,thoughts,emotions,filrther relations.InRec"･肪"伽w,becausethechair‑boundJeffiiesfbnnsmentalimagesthroughthelensofthecamera:
heisreducedtoapureopticalsituation.Asthementalimageandrelation‑imagebecometheobiectofanimage,
a n d i n w e a v i n g a ､ f a b r i c o f r e l a t i o n s ' , H i t c h c o c k ' s l i m i n a l a r t b r i n g s c i n e m a t o c o m p l e t i o n , o r a t l e a s t p r e ‑ w a r
classicalcinemawhenceunderstoodasapassagefromthemovementtothetimeimage.Affectsareengineeredby therelationshipbetweenbodyandbrain(Marks,1998),betweenperceptionandmemory.Relationsmanifestas aconsequenceofthe!paralysing'ofcharactersbutalsobyfbrcingthespectatortohaveanactiverelationtothe film.Thespectatorisaffectedandpromptedtoengagecognitively‑tothinka廿esh.Itthusbecomesaquestionof howonerespondstoimages,bothemotionallyandneurologically.ForBarbaraKennedy(2000),Hitchcock9"αdirectordeliriouslydesirestotouchthebodiesofhisaudience‑to makethemsweat,jump,blush,feelnauseous.Hitchcock'sfilms‑spinechillingandtingling,bloodboiling,hair raising,heartthumping,skincrawling‑demandanembodiedreading‑quitedifferent廿omrigidpsychoanalytic models‑asfilmspectatorshipisamultimodalexperience‑soundstriggertastes,sightsexcitetouch,smells
p r o v o k e s a l i v a t i o n . 2 I T h e s e n s o r y a n d p e r c e p t u a l ! I ' t h a t i s t h e s p e c t a t o r i s d e s t a b i l i s e d w i t h i n $ H o w s , e n e r g i e s ,
movements,and廿agments'(Kennedy,2002).Itisrelationalandmachinic.TheideaofembodimentcanbefbundinthecinemaofSergeiEisenstein(1898‑1948),whichaimstofind newwaysofcreatingbodilysensations'.Moderncinematicspectatorshipisembodied,notasanautonomous@I',
6
butasanexperiencingbodyfilllofkineticrhythms,neuro‑chemicalbalances.Ithasarelationshiptothebrain,
t o s y n a e s t h e s i a , t o t h e h a p t i c , 2 2 t o a p o l W a l e n c e o f s e m i o t i c c h a i n s , n o t t o p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . R e f l e c t i n g u p o n t h i s
new@postmodemscopicregime',PaulElliot(2011,p.13)insistswithboththeautonomousvisualsenseanda fixedontologicalsubjectunderassault,understandingthemechanismofvisionistherefbrepremisedmoreona compositionalgraspoftheothersenses,thebodyandthesensorium.Thisnecessitatesthinkingthesensoriumin tennsofneuroscience‑andmoreconcretely,howtouch,smell,tasteandothersensualexperiencesworkupon vision.OnthismatteritisDeleuzewhohasmuchtosayonthebrain'srelationtotheimage.I n b r u t e e v e r y d a y n e s s , t h e a c t i o n ‑ i m a g e a n d m o v e m e n t ‑ i m a g e t e n d t o d i s a p p e a r . 2 3 1 n p u r e o p t i c a l s i t u a t i o n s , o n e
d i S c e r n s a n e m a n c i p a t e d s e n s e , a @ d i r e c t r e l a t i o n ' w i t h t i m e a n d t h o u g h t . T h e r e i s a d e l i n k i n g o f p e r c e p t i o n a n d
action,andanextensionoftheopsign‑opticalsigns‑a@sliver'oftime,renderingtimeandthoughtperceptible. AnotherexampleofhowthiscognitivedemandisplaceduponthespectatorisfbundinS""c/o"(1941)(Picmre D),wheretheilluminatedglassofmilkbeingcarriedupthestairsbecomesafbcalpointfbrthespectator.In Hitchcock'sfilms,we6ndthedemarcationandperfectionofthemovement‑image(intennsoftheunbroken120
PictureD
東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)
sensorymotorcontinuityoftheprotagonist)andtheemergenceoftime‑images,wheretime isnolongerindirectlypresentedviathemontageofmovement‑images.Thoughtiswithout
lmage.
Asmentionedpreviously,Hitchcockremainstiedtotheclassicalfilmparadigmbecause mentalrelationsareregulatedbythesensory‑motorschema.Yettheimagesofthought Hitchcockengineerspushthemental‑imagetoitslimit.Colebrook(2006,p.71)explains thispointwell:"Facedwithaffectsandactions,thespectatorispresentedwiththepowerto thinkassuch,whatitmeanstothink."DeleuzeaccordsHitchcockapivotalplaceincinema ashetranscendstheaction‑imagetoproducementalrelations,exuding:akindofvision'. Deleuze(1995,p.54)writes:@$It'snotamatterofthelook,andifthecamera'saneye,it's themind'seye."Itisathirdeye､Thespectatorisnotlookingfbrrepresentationsofhisown life,butisparticipatinginthegameofrelationsestablishedbyHitchcock.
@Thelastoftheclassicdirectors',.thefirstofthemoderns'(Deleuze,1995,p.54)‑this isHitchcock.AtthebeginningofC/"e胴α2,Deleuzediscussescamera‑consciousnessand howitproducesmentalconnectionsintime.HesaysHitchcockhasapremonitionofthis, whichwillcometrue(1989,p.23),addingHitchcockenvisions.acamera‑consciousness whichwouldnolongerbedefinedbythemovementsitisabletofbllowormake,butby thementalconnectionsitisabletoenterinto'.Herethentheroleofthementalimageis illuminatedthroughthenotionofthevirtualasitdescribesthepowertothinkassuch,q powertofbnnrelations.Hitchcockpresentsanimageofrelationsthatfbrcestheproblemof themovement‑imagetocrisispoint.AccordingtoDeleuze,Hitchcockisthought‑provoking becauseherefilsestorepeattheclichedsetofwhodunitgesturesandinsteadexamines
､thesetofrelationsinwhichtheactionandtheonewhodiditarecaught'(1986,p.200). AlthoughHitchcockiancinemaremainsclassicalinthesensethatitisinextricablybounduptothesensorymotor schemaandthepassageoflogicalrelations,italsoheraldsthecrisisinthemovement‑image.
Automatism,fOurthdimensionandthethought‑Image
FilmmakerandfilmtheoristJeanEpsteinalsofindsintheautomatismofthec加ematographicimagea resemblancewithmentaloperations.Inthegenreofcinemaitselfhefindsanewwayofthinkingwhichis transfbnnativeofourrelationshiptothewor1d.ForEpstein,throughautomatismasphotog6nieonecanevince
a t r u e c i n e m a , f b r e x a m p l e , t h e w a y c i n e m a c a p t u r e s a b u r n i n g c i g a r e t t e i n a n a s h t r a y . 2 4 F o r E p s t e i n , t h i s i s
demonstratedinthecapacityofthecameratoimbue､beauty,graceandpresence'inthemostbanalofobjectsandg e s m r e s . B o t h E p s t e i n a n d D e l e u z e 伽 d i n t h i s n e w w a y o f t h i n k i n g a d i r e c t a c c e s s t o t i m e . 2 5 T i m e i n t h e c i n e m a
isakintothefburthdimensionaddedtotheotherthreespatialdimensions.Deleuzeonthismatterwrites:@@Time,BRADLEYJoffPetel･Nonnan:HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentalrelations 121
incinema,seemstobeinthings.''26Camera'sautomatismwasthesourCeofanewsuMectivity@riveted'tothe
machine.
H7O−
凡"e"eve'"6g/b'℃α"d"eve/‑qgα"?s"'Ceルas//7ec"7e"7qbee"soc/ose/o/"esse"ceq"d施伽ﾉ抑se..ropノセse"／
α〃!"7qgeQ//"α〃〃70Z""Ce"/"r)"α"sα〃e,""eα"cIvα〃""ageﾉ〃wﾙ/cルノ'e〃oro"伽℃cog"/sesル伽s蛎加r.伽"？
w〃cﾙ,α加veα",ルe,"のﾉ/eα' α加z"師加s〃(乃kVo‑Gq,WimWenders)‐
HitchcocktoOzu:Inpre‑warcinema,Deleuzealsofindstheslightbreakingthroughofa@verypuretime‑image', whichemergesinJapanesecinemainthel930sandl940s.Inthestill‑lifemomentsinOzuYasUjirO'sfilms, Deleuzefindsan!unchangingfbnnoftime'whichaidshiminexplicatinguponthelooseningofthesensory‑motor link.OzuandHitchcockbecomekeyconduitsfbrtheemergenceofthetime‑image・InOzu'sfilms,lifeissimple. Itismanneverceasestocomplicateit,orasDeleuzesays,by,disturbingstillwater'(qg伽"〃'eα〃伽ﾉw7α"花). Deleuzewrites(1989,p.14):
7ﾙe'で1sα〃"'ejb'･/I/t,q/"e/b'伽α/ﾙ,α〃"7ejb/‑Iﾙe′"oﾉﾙeﾉ;α〃ﾉ"e/b"//ie伽"gﾙ/eﾉ;加/"7e〃ﾉ"ixrﾙe"'叩，
" ， α え e / 〃 e ' " α 〃 e α ' ． / " 伽 o ' て た ' ; s e 〃 〃 e " ' 叩 〃 ? c o " / 7 / c " . 7 7 ' / s / s O z " ' s / ﾙ " 伽 " g . . 耽 なゆ / e , α "" 7 α 〃 〃 e y e ﾉ ｡ s / 叩 S c o " 7 p / / c α " " g 〃 勿 ' . d i s " " " " g s " / / w q / e r ' . . . . .
Thereisnostrictdistinctionbetween,ontheonehand,banal,everydaylife,andontheother,amomentof resolutenessordecision.Deleuzewrites(1989,p.15):$.Itismenwhoupsettheregularityofseries,thecontinuity oftheuniverse.''ItistherefbrenotonlyHitchcock'sworkthatwefindamutationinthecinematicimage.Ozu's workisequallyproductiveofauniquelynon‑logocentriccinematicconsciousness.lnthestill‑lifefbrmsand
e v e r y d a y b a n a l i t y o f e m p t y s p a c e s o f O z u ' s e x q u i s i t e c i n e m a , D e l e u z e d i s c e m s t h e i n c i p i e n t t i m e ‑ i m a g e . 2 7 S u c h a
fbnnoftimedoesnotitselfchange,butdespiteevelything,everythingchangesinit.Hewrites(C/"e"7α〃,p.18):
/〃eye〃血y加"α/伽/舵αc伽"‑伽ageα〃eve"r/7e"1ove"7e"r‑j"7qgere"d/od/sq"eα〃"./tJvoz"Q"z"で叩"cα/
s伽α伽"s,6"//ﾙ elでveα/CO""ec"o"sQiα〃ewWe,wﾙicルαノセ〃oﾉo"gej"se"so/,ﾉ‑"70/oI‑q"c/wﾙ/cル6""grﾙe e"7α"αpqredse"ses加IC伽でc〃セノα伽〃w"ル〃"7eα"伽ﾙo"gﾙ/、
DeleuzetherefbrereadsOzu'siilmsand6ndsarelationshipoftime,asenseof伽花e,.alittlebitoftimeinits
p u r e s t a t e ' ( z ｲ " p e 〃 火 / e 〃 ﾌ s q / ･ e / q r p z " ･ ) . I n a p h i l o s o p h i c a l s e n s e , O z u i s r e a d a s d e p i c t i n g t i m e i n a p u r e s t a t e .
ThevaseinLq/e助""g(1949)(PictureE)conveyspuretime.Thesceneindicateshowweinhabitandoperate withintime・OzuisanalysedbyDeleuzeintennsofthewayheutilisesspace.Suchdisconnectedspacesare122 東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)
exploredbythecamera:theybecomeany‑space‑whatevers(eSpqce9"e/co"9"e).Onespacebecomesjustasgood asanotherandthisdisturbsDeleuze.Ozu'sspacesaffbrdpurecontemplation.Whatremainsistheany‑space‑ whatever,thescreenin廿ont,theparalysisofrelations,thenon‑place(Bradley,2011).Chaoscannotbeorderedin landscapesdestroyedbywarorincitieslaidwastebymOrtar6re,aerialassaultsortheA‑bomb(Deamer,2008,p. 371).Despitethesomewhatarbitraryperiodisationofcinemapre‑orpost‑WorldWarll,Deleuzeclaimsthatthe SecondWorldWarmarksthecollapseofthesensory‑motorschemaandwiththatmomentpassed,thetime‑image inWestemcinemabeginstoemerge.Amoredetailedbreakdownofthetransfbnnation廿omclassicaltomodern cinemaiscategorisedbyDeleuzeasfbllows:aroundl948inltaliancinema,1958withtheFrenchNewWave,and aroundl968withNewGennanCinema.Astheinventorofopsignsandsonsigns(visualandauditorycomponents ofatime‑imagefilm),Ozu'scinemamanifestspurelyopticalandsoundsimations,whicharestrictlyactionless.29
Deleuzewillcometoconsiderthiseventasprovokingsomethingintolerableandunbearable.He(1989,p.19)
wntes：
""ew"eQfc/7"ααeﾉ‑./b'･α〃ewc"?e"'α,hjsbecα"sewﾙαrﾙq"e"s/o//ie加伽es"o/be/o"gror/le腕α"do"か 加〃CO"Ceγ" he"7,6eca"Se/ﾉ？〃k"ow/7owroex"αα/細 ﾉﾙeeve"〃ﾙe〃〃ﾉﾙα/Ca""orbe陀伽cedrow/W 加卯e"s,．/ﾙα/〃〃Qf加ex〃α"s"6/eposs/〃/〃ﾉﾙa/co"s/""/esrﾙe""6e"q6/e,r/7ejmo〃α6/e,r〃ev/sio"α〃'spq".
Throughthedestructionofltaliancities,theshatteringoftheAmericandream(theaction‑imageindefinitive crisis),andthelackoftrustindemocracy,modemitysignifiesthecollapseoftrustandconfidenceinbeliefitself IntheprefaceofCj"e〃α2,Deleuzefindsinthepost‑warperiod,amyriadofsimationsinwhichcharactersin filmsnolongerknowhowtoreact,andaprolifbrationofspaceswhichtheynolongerknowhowtodescribe.The conditionsofmovementhavechanged.Deleuzewrites(1989,p.166):"Wedonotevenbelieveintheeventswhich happentous,love,death,asiftheyonlyhalfconcernedus・Itisnotwewhomakecinema;itistheworldwhich Iookstouslikeabadfilm."
Abrokenlinkexistsbetweenmanandtheworld(Deleuze,1989,p.172).Modemmanhasabeing‑in‑the‑
worldalbeitonedominatedandpetrifiedbypureopticalandsoundsimations.ThisissototheextentthatDeleuze findsanewraceofmutantcharactersinearlymoderncinemawhoperceiveratherthanacted,.theywereseers'. Crucially,thepowerofmoderncinemaisnottoproduceillusionsanddreamsbuttorestoreabeliefintheworld andtoreconnectmantowhatheseesandhears.Itisnotsomuchthequestionofhowcinemamanufactures illusionsbutratherhowitrestoresbelief(Deleuze,1989,p.176).Onthispoint,itcanbesaidthatalthoughwe mightfindourselvesuncomfbrtablewiththereductionofthehistoryofcinemaintoabroaddistinctionbetween movementandtime‑images,itisworthwhiletorememberthatDeleuzeisnotsuggestingthereisaprecise historicaldistinctiontobemadebetweenclassicalandmoderncinemabutratherisnotingthelackofbeliefin theaction‑imageassuch‑apointwhich,Ithink,Ranciere(2006)andotherscruciallymiss.Indiscussinghowto
PictureE
BRADLEYJoffPeterNonnan:HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentalrelations 123
respondtotheintolerable,WimWendersfindsitisOzuwhodepictsthetransfbnnation oflifeinJapan,theslowdeteriorationoftheJapanesefamilyandnationalidentity.ltis afmctionofcinematomakeusfeelthatsomethingisn'tright.Onthispoint,Wenders
e c h o i n g D e l e u z e i n s i s t s O z u g e t s t o t h e t r u t h o f t h e b a n a 1 . 3 0
Conclusion
ThispaperwritesotherwisethanasinglefbcusonHitchcockasthequintessential
p e e p i n g T o m , 3 ' t h e v o y e u r , o r s c o p o p h i l i a c a s s u c h , f b r i t i s t h e i m m o b i l i s e d s e e r
entangledwithinpetrifiedrelationsthatisworthyoffilrtherattention.WhilstLaura Mulvey'scritique(1989)ofthemalegazeproducedaparadigmshifiinfilmsmdies,the analysisofpurecinemaandthethinkingofmentalrelationsneednotnecessarilyadopt towhatlseeasareductionistfbnnofintemretation.TheremarkinRea7陥"伽wby Stella(ThelmaRitter),Jeffies'nurse,onherpatient'sandsocietalparalysis,mentioned atthebeginningofthepaper,capturesmuchoftheSpiritofschizoanalysis.Thisis preciselyDeleuze'spointalsobecausefbrhimitisaquestionoffbrgingrelationswith theoutside,notbulyingoneselfeverdeeperintothetheatreandplagueofthepreordainedunconsclous
LurkingorinsinuatinghimselfbetweenFreudandDeleuzeisZiZek,whoseanalysis whilstexceedinglyinterestingpositsitselfv/s‑j‑WsHitchcockiancinemaatthelevel
o f L a c a n i a n p s y c h o a n a l y s i M 2 Y e t a s t h e s c h i z o a n a l y t i c d i r e c t i o n o f t h i s p a p e r h a s b e e n
W
fbcusedonaffectsusingPeirceansemioticsandSpinoza,itisatoddswithZiZek.He isrighttoaskhowdoweknowwhatwedesire.Buthisanswerthatdesireisartificial, becausethereisnothingspontaneousornamralabouthumandesiresseemsunsatisfactory.
V
AsweknowwithZiZek,spectatorsaretaughttodesireandcinemaistheultimatepervert artbutthispapermakesthecasethatHitchcockatthebeginningofhiscareer‑developingandextendingthe
m o n t a g e i d e a s o f S e r g e i E i s e n s t e i n ‑ c r e a t e d a c i n e m a t h a t t h i n k s . R u n n i n g t h r o u g h o u t D e l e u z e ' s e x p l i c a t i o n o f
mentalrelations,we伽dHitchcockasoneofthefbundingfathersofcinema,anauteurgenius.Moreover,1believe wecansaveHitchcockfiomthereductionistbilgewhichfailstothinkfilmasphilosophy,asathinkingthing, whenwethinklessaboutthegazeofthemanbehindthelensandmoretodowiththelensthatthinks,guides, desires,anddirectstheviewertocovet・ToreduceHitchcock'smastemiecestoanothercaseofmaletriangulated desireandlittleelsesadlymissesthepoint.Hitchcock'scinemaispz"℃asitoperatesthroughmentalrelations. WhileDeleuzeunderstandsthisandthinksitwithPeirce'sassistance,Zi乞ekhastoreintemretLacantogetatthereal.
124 東洋大学人間科学総合研究所紀要第16号(2014)
WehavefbundthatHitchcockplaysacentralroleinDeleuze'scartographyofthecinema.Hitchcockremains thought‑provokingprimarilybecauseoftheperceptualinnovationsinhislife'swork.Theideathatthecameracan manipulatethespectatorisonewhichcompelledDeleuzetothinkaboutfilm'sconnectionwiththebrain.Thetask ofthephilosopheristothinktheseconceptsandtocreatesignswhichtranscendtheirsignification,togobeyond them,tofbnnnewideasandcouplingSpertainingtobothcinemaandphilosophy:tofbnnulateabecoming‑cinema ofphilosophyandabecoming‑philosophyofthecinema.Tofabricatethenew.Fabricatingandfabulatinga廿esh anduniquewaytoviewtherelationshipbetweenphilosophyifilmandaesthetics,Deleuzethinkscinema9"αart fbnnintermsofitsencounterwithphilosophy:asamumalbecoming.Filmaltersourmodesofthinkingabout movementandtimebecause‑asamanifestationofpurethought,pureimmanenceandsensation‑cinemathinks withaffectsandprecepts.Intennsofneuroscience,thebrainisseenas@acontinuouslychangingprocess'andone .filndamentallyconnectedtomovementandtime'(Pisters,2012).
Followingon廿omBergson,Deleuzeconsideredcinemaasameanstoperceivetimeandmovementasawhole.
Thequestioniswhataffectsarecreatedinartandwhatperceptsareproducedinphilosophy.Philosophybecomes
. c i n e m a t i c ' a s f i l m ‑ p h i l o s o p h y . F i l m b e c o m e s n o t j u s t . p h i l o s o p h i c a l ' b u t m a n i f e s t s a f f e c t i v e a n d a e s t h e t i c t h o u g h t
‑akindofc加e"7α"c伽"〃"g.Assuch,cinemaasamediumofthoughtthinks.DeleuzefindsinResnais'films suchasM"osﾙ〃αMb〃""7oz"(1959)acertainkindofphilosophicalactivity.Hischaractersdonottalkabout philosophy,theydonotparrotthedirector's〃ｾ"α"Sc加"""g.WhatDeleuzeinsistsuponisthatResnais@invents' acinemaofphilosophyandcreatesanunprecedented@cinemaofthought'.Hefbnns@araremarriagebetween
p h i l o s o p h y a n d c i n e m a ' ( D e l e u z e , 1 9 8 9 , p . 2 0 8 ‑ 2 0 9 ) a n d t h i s r a i s e s q u e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e s h a m e o f b e i n g a m i d s t t h e d e s t r u c t i o n a n d d e a t h o f t h e 2 0 t h c e n m r y a n d t h e u t o p i a n m o m e n t w h i c h c o n s i d e r s t h e @ p e o p l e y e t t o c o m e ' .
Onthispoint,Deleuzewriteswithgreatacumen,andinaveinatoddswiththecatatoniaofAdomo'sthought:@ . T h e g r e a t p o s t ‑ w a r p h i l o s o p h e r s a n d w r i t e r s d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t t h o u g h t h a s s o m e t h i n g t o d o w i t h A u s c h w i t z , w i t h ' ' 3 3 C i n e m a t h u s r e v e a l s , q u e s t i o n s a n d p r o b e s i n i t s o w n w a y . A f f e c t s o n s c r e e n d e s c r i b e s t i m e . F i l m
Hiroshima.
affectsthespectatorbecausethemediumisnotdominatedbythecontentofthemonologue,dialogueororatoryof aparticularactororactressbutthepercepmalandtemporalmediumwhichdirectlyactsuponthebrain(Deleuze andMcMuhan,1998).Thebodyandthesensesareaffectedasawhole.Thereisaninterplaybetweenaffectand cognition;perceptioniseljoinedwithaction.Itisimageswhichstarttonarrate:imagesfbnnthoughts.Spurred
o n t o t h i n k b y t h e a u t e u r g e n i u s o f H i t c h c o c k a n d t h e s h e e r t i m e l e s s m " e s t y o f O z u ' s f i l m s , D e l e u z e ' s p h i l o s o p h y
asksmanyquestionsabouthowimagesaffectthediagramofbodyandbrain,perceptionandmemory.BRADLEYJoffPeterNonnan:HfbrHitchcock:purecinemaandmentalrelations 125
BibliOgraphy
Allen,R.,&Ishii‑Gonzales,S.(2003).〃"c/7cock.･Pqs/α"dF"""で.London:RoutledJ.
Badiou,A.,&Tbscano,A.(2005).〃α"dbookq//"αes//7e"cs.Stanfbrd,CalifStanfbrdUniversityPress. Bogue,R.(2003).De/e"zeoﾉ7c/"e"1q.NewYork:Routledge.
Boりkovac,N.(2013).[ﾉ"""7e4'"4jbc".｡G///esDe/e"zea"dα"Er/7/csQ'C/"e"7q.Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversityPress. Bradley,J.(2012).無場所のトランスナシヨナルカルチユラルヒストリーについての研究，東洋大学人間科学総合研究
所紀要(14),47‑60.
Carroll,Noel.@Film/MindAnalogies:TheCaseofHugoMunsterberg'.ん"ﾉ""q/Q/"esl/ie"csα"d""C""C/S"46.4(1988):489‑
99．
Deamer,D.(2008)"TheSpectreoflmpossibility,Deleuze,JapaneseCinemaandtheAtomBomb',Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation,ManchesterMetropolitanUniversity.
Deleuze,G.(1986).C/"eﾉ"α/.･//7e"7ove"7eﾉ"‑/"7qge.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinneSota・OriginallypublishedL'ﾉﾉ"age‐
〃7oz"e"7e"『.(1983).
Deleuze,G.(1989).C加e"7q2.･//7e〃ノガ2−""age.London:Athlone.OI･iginallypublishedZ,'i"7qge‑/eﾉ"s.(1985).
Deleuze,G.(1990).777e/og/cQfse"se.NewYOrk:ColumbiaUniversityPress.OriginallypublishedLogiquedusens(1969). Deleuze,G.(1995).NEgo"α"o"s,/972‑I990.NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.OriginallypubliShedPoz"pqﾉ．/e"s(1990). Deleuze,G.,&Guattari,F.(1983).Anti‑Oedipus:CapitaliSmandschizophrenia.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
OriginallypubliShedL'anti‑Gdipe,1977.
Deleuze,G.,Guattari,F.,Tbmlinson,H.,&Burchell,G.(1994).Whatisphilosophy?.NewYOrk:ColumbiaUniversityPress. OriginallypublishedQu'est‑cequelaphilosophie?.(1991).
Deleuze,G・(2006).,&LapoUjade,D.(2006).7Woreg/"'esQﾉ"αcW7ess.･7tWsq"〃/"rerv/ews/975‑1995.LosAngeles,CA:
Semiotext(e.OriginallypublishedDe"xﾉ･空""火/b"se/α""でsrex"(2004).
Deleuze,G.,&McMuhan,M(OctoberO1,1998)､TheBrainlstheScreen:InterviewwithGillesDeleuzeon@TheTime‑Image'.
D/scoz"汐e,20,3,47‑55.
Elliott,P(2011).〃"cﾙcockα"α/ﾙeC/"e"?qQ/.Se'7sα"o"s.･E"76odiedF""7777eon'α"〃α"e碗α"cRecep//o".London:1.B.TauriS. EIsaesser,T・(28thNovember2012),FilmandPhilosophyAfierDeleuze,IKKMlecture.
EIsaesser,T.,&Hagener,M.(2010).Filmtheory:Anintroductionthroughthesenses.NewYork:Routledge. Evans,B.,&Reid,J.(2013).De/e"ze&jZMsc/s/w.･Sea"加wq/;qes//7e//cs.London:Routledge.
Flaxman,G.(2000).77?e〃αj"/sr/7escJでe":De/e"zeq"d//7epﾙ"osQpﾉIVQ/c"7e"7q.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress. HemedeLacotte,S.(Fall2005).:EpsteinetDeleuze,cinemaetimagedelapensee.'Cﾉ7/"7eノゼs57,76‑77.
Jagodzinski,J.(2012).Ayc加α"α"ご/"gc/"e"7q:4pmdi/c"vee"co""/eﾉ･肌'"ﾙLacα",De/e"ze,α"d"ek.NewYOrk,NY:Palgrave
Macmillan・
Keller,S.,&Paul,J.N.(2012).Jeα"助sre/".．α"jcq/es""q"d"ew〃α"s/α"o"s・Amsterdam:AmsterdamUniversityPress.
Kennedy,B､M(2000).De/e"zea"dc/"eﾉ"α・・771eα'ﾙe""Q/.se"""o".Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversityPress.
Kennedy,B(2002).℃horeographiesoftheScreen'.IowaJournalofCulturalSmdiesI(2002):63‑77.Availableat:http://ir.uiowa. edu/1cs/voll/issl/7(accessedlO‑22‑2013).
Kolker,R.P.(2004).""c/""c"cocA'spq)'c"o．･"cqsebook.NewYork:OxfbrdUniversityPress.
Liszka,J.J.(JanuaryO1,1990).Peirce'sIntemretant・刀α"sac"o"sq/I力eC"『/esS.Pe"℃eSbc/e"26,1,17‑62.
