Hegel and Hitchcock’s Vertigo: On Reconciliation

IF 0.4 3区 艺术学 0 FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION Film-Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.3366/film.2022.0195
D. Shaul
{"title":"Hegel and Hitchcock’s Vertigo: On Reconciliation","authors":"D. Shaul","doi":"10.3366/film.2022.0195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reconstructs and evaluates a debate between Pippin and Žižek over the proper interpretation of Hitchcock’s Vertigo, in relation to Hegel’s concept of reconciliation. Both Pippin and Žižek agree that Vertigo exemplifies Hegelian reconciliation: Scottie exhibits Hegel’s reconciliatory “negation of negation” when he realizes that his lost love Madeleine had really been Judy all along, thereby losing his original loss. Yet Pippin and Žižek disagree on the precise significance of the concept of reconciliation both for the film and for the contemporary world. Žižek argues for a revolutionary reading of reconciliation in Vertigo: we learn from reconciliation that we must make a revolutionary break from the present world, in order to bring about a wholly new world. Pippin argues for a reformist reading of reconciliation in Vertigo: we learn from reconciliation that we must find the “traces of reason” latent in the present world, in order to gradually reform it for the better. Ultimately, I argue that Žižek’s reading offers the more authentically Hegelian approach to interpreting Hitchcock’s Vertigo. But if nothing else, the Pippin-Žižek debate demonstrates the profound intellectual fecundity of the intersections between film and philosophy for understanding our current historical moment.","PeriodicalId":42990,"journal":{"name":"Film-Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Film-Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/film.2022.0195","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article reconstructs and evaluates a debate between Pippin and Žižek over the proper interpretation of Hitchcock’s Vertigo, in relation to Hegel’s concept of reconciliation. Both Pippin and Žižek agree that Vertigo exemplifies Hegelian reconciliation: Scottie exhibits Hegel’s reconciliatory “negation of negation” when he realizes that his lost love Madeleine had really been Judy all along, thereby losing his original loss. Yet Pippin and Žižek disagree on the precise significance of the concept of reconciliation both for the film and for the contemporary world. Žižek argues for a revolutionary reading of reconciliation in Vertigo: we learn from reconciliation that we must make a revolutionary break from the present world, in order to bring about a wholly new world. Pippin argues for a reformist reading of reconciliation in Vertigo: we learn from reconciliation that we must find the “traces of reason” latent in the present world, in order to gradually reform it for the better. Ultimately, I argue that Žižek’s reading offers the more authentically Hegelian approach to interpreting Hitchcock’s Vertigo. But if nothing else, the Pippin-Žižek debate demonstrates the profound intellectual fecundity of the intersections between film and philosophy for understanding our current historical moment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
黑格尔和希区柯克的《迷魂:论和解
本文根据黑格尔的和解观,重构并评价了皮聘和日泽克之间关于希区柯克《迷魂记》的正确解读的争论。皮平和日泽克都认为《迷魂记》是黑格尔和解的典范:斯科蒂在意识到自己失去的爱人玛德琳一直都是朱迪时,展现了黑格尔的和解“否定的否定”,从而失去了最初的失落。然而,皮平和日泽克在和解概念对电影和当代世界的确切意义上存在分歧。日泽克主张对《迷魂记》中的和解进行革命性的解读:我们从和解中学到,我们必须从当今世界中进行革命性的突破,才能创造一个全新的世界。皮平在《迷魂记》中主张对和解进行改革主义解读:我们从和解中学到,我们必须找到当今世界中潜在的“理性的痕迹”,才能逐渐使其变得更好。最终,我认为日泽克的阅读为解读希区柯克的《迷魂记》提供了更真实的黑格尔式方法。但如果没有别的,皮平·日泽克的辩论展示了电影和哲学之间的交叉点在理解我们当前的历史时刻方面具有深刻的智慧。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Film-Philosophy
Film-Philosophy Multiple-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
52 weeks
期刊最新文献
Shane Denson (2023). Post-Cinematic Bodies Matthew Rukgaber (2022). Nietzsche in Hollywood: Images of the Übermensch in Early American Cinema Steven DeLay (ed.) (2023). Life Above the Clouds: Philosophy in the Films of Terrence Malick Francesco Sticchi (2021). Mapping Precarity in Contemporary Cinema and Television: Chronotopes of Anxiety, Depression, Expulsion/Extinction The Pleasure of Self-erasure: Malabou, (Sexual) Anarchy and Agnès Varda’s Sans toit ni loi
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1