Teaching Fellow, Department of French, Trinity College Dublin. Graduate of the Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy, Kingston University London.
This paper problematises the work of Franco-Tunisian film-maker and author Nacer Khemir, known in... more This paper problematises the work of Franco-Tunisian film-maker and author Nacer Khemir, known in particular for his ‘desert trilogy’, which includes Les Baliseurs du désert (1986), Le Collier perdu de la colombe (1994), and Bab’Aziz: Le prince qui contemplait son âme (2006). Khemir’s work has been relatively underanalysed in film-studies and film-philosophy. The interest of his desert trilogy comes from its mixture of fantastic and realistic or historical elements to tell stories drawn from the myths and legends of classical Islam, perhaps thus reclaiming or recovering these legends for a modern audience. Yet, in interviews concerning his later work, Khemir has stated that his desire is not to mythologise but to reveal a modern political truth, and to challenge Western negative perceptions of Islam in the post-9/11 era. Such an apparently surprising move raises the question of the status of fantasy, vision and irreality within his films. Those critics who have chosen to engage with work, such as Ridade Öztürk or David Sander, have frequently focused on his relationship with Sufi mysticism or other aspects of traditional Islamic philosophy. However, I believe we can shed further light on Khemir’s films by studying his work from within the French, and the broader film-philosophical tradition. I intend to explore Khemir’s films using the work of three film philosophers: Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière and Gilles Deleuze. I will examine the use of visions, myths, and fantasy as a cinematic device, and will discuss Khemir’s work as an example of what Cavell terms “Film-making in the subjunctive” – a strategy which he contrasts with literary or cinematic examples of “magical realism”. I will consider whether the apparitions that people Khemir’s deserts should be considered “fables” or “fabulous” in the sense used by Rancière and Deleuze.
Key Words: Nacer Khemir, Fantasy, Islamic Cinema, Tunisian Cinema, African Cinema, Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière, Gilles Deleuze.
Machinic Assemblages of Desire: Deleuze and Artistic Research 3, 2020
THIS VERSION IS A PRE-PUBLICATION DRAFT.
Recent developments in French philosophy, fifty years... more THIS VERSION IS A PRE-PUBLICATION DRAFT.
Recent developments in French philosophy, fifty years after Roland Barthes’ seminal text, The Death of The Author, have forced a reconsideration of the nature of authorship and of the process of artistic or philosophical creativity. As a contribution to this broader debate I have been re-examining literary authority with reference, in particular, to the work of Gilles Deleuze. I argue, contrary to the prevailing tendencies in the field, that a reliance on a strong conception of the ‘author’ is at the heart of his writings on philosophy, literature, and cinema, writings which are structured around a series of great proper names. In this paper, I will look to Deleuze’s concept of the ‘intercessor’ and explore possible means to flesh out this concept, crucial to the debate on authority, via the work of Portuguese modernist Fernando Pessoa.
Fundamental to the definition of the Deleuzian author is the relationship between that author and a significant persona or character known as the ‘intercessor’. Yet recent scholarship has not adequately defined the nature and role of this intercessor – a term Deleuze borrows from film-maker Pierre Perrault - and its relation to other, similar Deleuzian concepts such as the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, or the ‘Original’. Scholars such as Charles Stivale view the ‘intercessor’ as a philosophical interlocutor who challenges and extends our ideas and ‘falsifies’ the common-sense presuppositions we hold to be true. By contrast, and with particular reference to the study of literature and film, critics such as Ronald Bogue or Bill Marshall prefer to focus on the deliberate employment of the power of the false, as the passage between the several constructed roles of the ‘intercessor’ character challenges our notion of fixed and stable identities and thus truth itself.
While Pessoa has been studied at length within French philosophy, by such figures as Alain Badiou and Judith Balso, they have not attempted an analysis of his work in connection to Deleuze. In the Portuguese context however more attention has been paid to the relations between these two thinkers. Scholars such as Jose Gil have remarked upon the resonance between Deleuze and Pessoa, arguing that the latter’s work illustrates Deleuze’s concepts (such as the Body Without Organs) better than Deleuze himself was able to do. Yet limited attention to date has been paid to the Deleuzian nature of one of Pessoa’s most important literary techniques, the creation of a constellation of poetic voices known as ‘heteronyms’ which Pessoa employed in the writing and publicising of his major works. Should these heteronyms simply be posited as a mere postmodern game? I believe they can instead be read productively in conjunction with the Deleuzian concept of the ‘intercessor’, which I consider to be an umbrella term which includes the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, the ‘original character’ among others. By considering the intercessor a form of heteronym of the author, we can use Pessoa’s philosophical writings to further expand our understanding of this broader notion of authorship in Deleuze’s sense. I reference in particular Deleuze’s essays on literature, and notably his work on TE Lawrence, which I bring into a productive communication with Pessoa’s shorter prose pieces. I will argue that Pessoa’s heteronyms provide a productive model for our understanding of the Deleuzian ‘intercessor’, particularly as regards their relation with the ‘impersonal’ or bachelor author who creates them, and thus offers
valuable philosophical insight into the process of artistic creativity itself. By bringing together the heteronym and intercessor, I hope to further our understanding of the philosophical basis for creativity in these two thinkers. That is, we can define literary, artistic and philosophical creation – or as Deleuze termed it, the creation of concepts and affects - as the practice of speaking through another persona, or a philosophical ‘mask’: and thus speaking adjacent to oneself
This paper problematises the work of Franco-Tunisian film-maker and author Nacer Khemir, known in... more This paper problematises the work of Franco-Tunisian film-maker and author Nacer Khemir, known in particular for his ‘desert trilogy’, which includes Les Baliseurs du désert (1986), Le Collier perdu de la colombe (1994), and Bab’Aziz: Le prince qui contemplait son âme (2006). Khemir’s work has been relatively underanalysed in film-studies and film-philosophy. The interest of his desert trilogy comes from its mixture of fantastic and realistic or historical elements to tell stories drawn from the myths and legends of classical Islam, perhaps thus reclaiming or recovering these legends for a modern audience. Yet, in interviews concerning his later work, Khemir has stated that his desire is not to mythologise but to reveal a modern political truth, and to challenge Western negative perceptions of Islam in the post-9/11 era. Such an apparently surprising move raises the question of the status of fantasy, vision and irreality within his films. Those critics who have chosen to engage with work, such as Ridade Öztürk or David Sander, have frequently focused on his relationship with Sufi mysticism or other aspects of traditional Islamic philosophy. However, I believe we can shed further light on Khemir’s films by studying his work from within the French, and the broader film-philosophical tradition. I intend to explore Khemir’s films using the work of three film philosophers: Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière and Gilles Deleuze. I will examine the use of visions, myths, and fantasy as a cinematic device, and will discuss Khemir’s work as an example of what Cavell terms “Film-making in the subjunctive” – a strategy which he contrasts with literary or cinematic examples of “magical realism”. I will consider whether the apparitions that people Khemir’s deserts should be considered “fables” or “fabulous” in the sense used by Rancière and Deleuze.
Key Words: Nacer Khemir, Fantasy, Islamic Cinema, Tunisian Cinema, African Cinema, Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière, Gilles Deleuze.
Machinic Assemblages of Desire: Deleuze and Artistic Research 3, 2020
THIS VERSION IS A PRE-PUBLICATION DRAFT.
Recent developments in French philosophy, fifty years... more THIS VERSION IS A PRE-PUBLICATION DRAFT.
Recent developments in French philosophy, fifty years after Roland Barthes’ seminal text, The Death of The Author, have forced a reconsideration of the nature of authorship and of the process of artistic or philosophical creativity. As a contribution to this broader debate I have been re-examining literary authority with reference, in particular, to the work of Gilles Deleuze. I argue, contrary to the prevailing tendencies in the field, that a reliance on a strong conception of the ‘author’ is at the heart of his writings on philosophy, literature, and cinema, writings which are structured around a series of great proper names. In this paper, I will look to Deleuze’s concept of the ‘intercessor’ and explore possible means to flesh out this concept, crucial to the debate on authority, via the work of Portuguese modernist Fernando Pessoa.
Fundamental to the definition of the Deleuzian author is the relationship between that author and a significant persona or character known as the ‘intercessor’. Yet recent scholarship has not adequately defined the nature and role of this intercessor – a term Deleuze borrows from film-maker Pierre Perrault - and its relation to other, similar Deleuzian concepts such as the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, or the ‘Original’. Scholars such as Charles Stivale view the ‘intercessor’ as a philosophical interlocutor who challenges and extends our ideas and ‘falsifies’ the common-sense presuppositions we hold to be true. By contrast, and with particular reference to the study of literature and film, critics such as Ronald Bogue or Bill Marshall prefer to focus on the deliberate employment of the power of the false, as the passage between the several constructed roles of the ‘intercessor’ character challenges our notion of fixed and stable identities and thus truth itself.
While Pessoa has been studied at length within French philosophy, by such figures as Alain Badiou and Judith Balso, they have not attempted an analysis of his work in connection to Deleuze. In the Portuguese context however more attention has been paid to the relations between these two thinkers. Scholars such as Jose Gil have remarked upon the resonance between Deleuze and Pessoa, arguing that the latter’s work illustrates Deleuze’s concepts (such as the Body Without Organs) better than Deleuze himself was able to do. Yet limited attention to date has been paid to the Deleuzian nature of one of Pessoa’s most important literary techniques, the creation of a constellation of poetic voices known as ‘heteronyms’ which Pessoa employed in the writing and publicising of his major works. Should these heteronyms simply be posited as a mere postmodern game? I believe they can instead be read productively in conjunction with the Deleuzian concept of the ‘intercessor’, which I consider to be an umbrella term which includes the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, the ‘original character’ among others. By considering the intercessor a form of heteronym of the author, we can use Pessoa’s philosophical writings to further expand our understanding of this broader notion of authorship in Deleuze’s sense. I reference in particular Deleuze’s essays on literature, and notably his work on TE Lawrence, which I bring into a productive communication with Pessoa’s shorter prose pieces. I will argue that Pessoa’s heteronyms provide a productive model for our understanding of the Deleuzian ‘intercessor’, particularly as regards their relation with the ‘impersonal’ or bachelor author who creates them, and thus offers
valuable philosophical insight into the process of artistic creativity itself. By bringing together the heteronym and intercessor, I hope to further our understanding of the philosophical basis for creativity in these two thinkers. That is, we can define literary, artistic and philosophical creation – or as Deleuze termed it, the creation of concepts and affects - as the practice of speaking through another persona, or a philosophical ‘mask’: and thus speaking adjacent to oneself
Uploads
Papers by Niall Kennedy
I intend to explore Khemir’s films using the work of three film philosophers: Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière and Gilles Deleuze. I will examine the use of visions, myths, and fantasy as a cinematic device, and will discuss Khemir’s work as an example of what Cavell terms “Film-making in the subjunctive” – a strategy which he contrasts with literary or cinematic examples of “magical realism”. I will consider whether the apparitions that people Khemir’s deserts should be considered “fables” or “fabulous” in the sense used by Rancière and Deleuze.
Key Words: Nacer Khemir, Fantasy, Islamic Cinema, Tunisian Cinema, African Cinema, Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière, Gilles Deleuze.
Recent developments in French philosophy, fifty years after Roland Barthes’ seminal text, The Death of The Author, have forced a reconsideration of the nature of authorship and of the process of artistic or philosophical creativity. As a contribution to this broader debate I have been re-examining literary authority with reference, in particular, to the work of Gilles Deleuze. I argue, contrary to the prevailing tendencies in the field, that a reliance on a strong conception of the ‘author’ is at the heart of his writings on philosophy, literature, and cinema, writings which are structured around a series of great proper names. In this paper, I will look to Deleuze’s concept of the ‘intercessor’ and explore possible means to flesh out this concept, crucial to the debate on authority, via the work of Portuguese modernist Fernando Pessoa.
Fundamental to the definition of the Deleuzian author is the relationship between that author and a significant persona or character known as the ‘intercessor’. Yet recent scholarship has not adequately defined the nature and role of this intercessor – a term Deleuze borrows from film-maker Pierre Perrault - and its relation to other, similar Deleuzian concepts such as the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, or the ‘Original’. Scholars such as Charles Stivale view the ‘intercessor’ as a philosophical interlocutor who challenges and extends our ideas and ‘falsifies’ the common-sense presuppositions we hold to be true. By contrast, and with particular reference to the study of literature and film, critics such as Ronald Bogue or Bill Marshall prefer to focus on the deliberate employment of the power of the false, as the passage between the several constructed roles of the ‘intercessor’ character challenges our notion of fixed and stable identities and thus truth itself.
While Pessoa has been studied at length within French philosophy, by such figures as Alain Badiou and Judith Balso, they have not attempted an analysis of his work in connection to Deleuze. In the Portuguese context however more attention has been paid to the relations between these two thinkers. Scholars such as Jose Gil have remarked upon the resonance between Deleuze and Pessoa, arguing that the latter’s work illustrates Deleuze’s concepts (such as the Body Without Organs) better than Deleuze himself was able to do. Yet limited attention to date has been paid to the Deleuzian nature of one of Pessoa’s most important literary techniques, the creation of a constellation of poetic voices known as ‘heteronyms’ which Pessoa employed in the writing and publicising of his major works. Should these heteronyms simply be posited as a mere postmodern game? I believe they can instead be read productively in conjunction with the Deleuzian concept of the ‘intercessor’, which I consider to be an umbrella term which includes the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, the ‘original character’ among others. By considering the intercessor a form of heteronym of the author, we can use Pessoa’s philosophical writings to further expand our understanding of this broader notion of authorship in Deleuze’s sense. I reference in particular Deleuze’s essays on literature, and notably his work on TE Lawrence, which I bring into a productive communication with Pessoa’s shorter prose pieces. I will argue that Pessoa’s heteronyms provide a productive model for our understanding of the Deleuzian ‘intercessor’, particularly as regards their relation with the ‘impersonal’ or bachelor author who creates them, and thus offers
valuable philosophical insight into the process of artistic creativity itself. By bringing together the heteronym and intercessor, I hope to further our understanding of the philosophical basis for creativity in these two thinkers. That is, we can define literary, artistic and philosophical creation – or as Deleuze termed it, the creation of concepts and affects - as the practice of speaking through another persona, or a philosophical ‘mask’: and thus speaking adjacent to oneself
I intend to explore Khemir’s films using the work of three film philosophers: Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière and Gilles Deleuze. I will examine the use of visions, myths, and fantasy as a cinematic device, and will discuss Khemir’s work as an example of what Cavell terms “Film-making in the subjunctive” – a strategy which he contrasts with literary or cinematic examples of “magical realism”. I will consider whether the apparitions that people Khemir’s deserts should be considered “fables” or “fabulous” in the sense used by Rancière and Deleuze.
Key Words: Nacer Khemir, Fantasy, Islamic Cinema, Tunisian Cinema, African Cinema, Stanley Cavell, Jacques Rancière, Gilles Deleuze.
Recent developments in French philosophy, fifty years after Roland Barthes’ seminal text, The Death of The Author, have forced a reconsideration of the nature of authorship and of the process of artistic or philosophical creativity. As a contribution to this broader debate I have been re-examining literary authority with reference, in particular, to the work of Gilles Deleuze. I argue, contrary to the prevailing tendencies in the field, that a reliance on a strong conception of the ‘author’ is at the heart of his writings on philosophy, literature, and cinema, writings which are structured around a series of great proper names. In this paper, I will look to Deleuze’s concept of the ‘intercessor’ and explore possible means to flesh out this concept, crucial to the debate on authority, via the work of Portuguese modernist Fernando Pessoa.
Fundamental to the definition of the Deleuzian author is the relationship between that author and a significant persona or character known as the ‘intercessor’. Yet recent scholarship has not adequately defined the nature and role of this intercessor – a term Deleuze borrows from film-maker Pierre Perrault - and its relation to other, similar Deleuzian concepts such as the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, or the ‘Original’. Scholars such as Charles Stivale view the ‘intercessor’ as a philosophical interlocutor who challenges and extends our ideas and ‘falsifies’ the common-sense presuppositions we hold to be true. By contrast, and with particular reference to the study of literature and film, critics such as Ronald Bogue or Bill Marshall prefer to focus on the deliberate employment of the power of the false, as the passage between the several constructed roles of the ‘intercessor’ character challenges our notion of fixed and stable identities and thus truth itself.
While Pessoa has been studied at length within French philosophy, by such figures as Alain Badiou and Judith Balso, they have not attempted an analysis of his work in connection to Deleuze. In the Portuguese context however more attention has been paid to the relations between these two thinkers. Scholars such as Jose Gil have remarked upon the resonance between Deleuze and Pessoa, arguing that the latter’s work illustrates Deleuze’s concepts (such as the Body Without Organs) better than Deleuze himself was able to do. Yet limited attention to date has been paid to the Deleuzian nature of one of Pessoa’s most important literary techniques, the creation of a constellation of poetic voices known as ‘heteronyms’ which Pessoa employed in the writing and publicising of his major works. Should these heteronyms simply be posited as a mere postmodern game? I believe they can instead be read productively in conjunction with the Deleuzian concept of the ‘intercessor’, which I consider to be an umbrella term which includes the ‘conceptual persona’, the ‘aesthetic figure’, the ‘original character’ among others. By considering the intercessor a form of heteronym of the author, we can use Pessoa’s philosophical writings to further expand our understanding of this broader notion of authorship in Deleuze’s sense. I reference in particular Deleuze’s essays on literature, and notably his work on TE Lawrence, which I bring into a productive communication with Pessoa’s shorter prose pieces. I will argue that Pessoa’s heteronyms provide a productive model for our understanding of the Deleuzian ‘intercessor’, particularly as regards their relation with the ‘impersonal’ or bachelor author who creates them, and thus offers
valuable philosophical insight into the process of artistic creativity itself. By bringing together the heteronym and intercessor, I hope to further our understanding of the philosophical basis for creativity in these two thinkers. That is, we can define literary, artistic and philosophical creation – or as Deleuze termed it, the creation of concepts and affects - as the practice of speaking through another persona, or a philosophical ‘mask’: and thus speaking adjacent to oneself