crystal image – continuing the unthinkable

In a recent post I pointed to some threads of thought from an article by Colin Gardner which I experienced as highly interesting for its effort to deduce a theory of multiplicity within the visual from a synthesis of Bergsonian and Deleuzian terms and interpretations.
In the following excerpt he continues to outline his thought process into the unthinkable defined in an analysis of the cinematic image …. becoming the cinema of brain: as unlinked images, multiple voices, each secreted inside another voice, each extending to infinity. There’s no longer a whole thinkable through montage, or an internal monologue utterable through an image.
At the moment when he comes to look at the point of the Bergsonian difference as a durational multiplicity (see last post or text) the shattering of the ‘internal motor’ (i.e. time- image) has to be marked for a full understanding of the liberated temporality. Thus he relates to the Deleuzian crystal image with its double-sided nature of the actual and the virtual:

The Nietzschean nature of the crystal-image is clear insofar as each side of the seeming binary is in a constant game of tag with its opposite, so that opposition is subsequently aporetic, forging a circuit of eternal return of difference as multiplicity, a celebration and affirmation of the indeterminacy of chance. A key objective metaphor for the crystal-image is the mirror, whereby the reflected image assumes independence of its host and passes into the actual, while the actual image returns into the mirror, creating an endless reversibility, a circuit of liberation and capture. Because actual and virtual are also linked with the real and the imaginary, with the present and the past, perception and recollection, the crystal creates an indiscernibility which allows time and memory to be released and to become actualized. The crystal-image is thus the actual representation of split time, since the past is constituted not after the present that it was but at the same time, time has to split itself in two at each moment as present and past, which differ from each other in nature, or, what amounts to the same thing, it has to split the present in two heterogeneous directions, one of which is launched towards the future while the other falls into the past…Time consists of this split, and it is this, it is time, that we see in the crystal.
….

.. to come via the unthinkable to this definition of embodiment for the movement of the interstice:


As Deleuze confirms, when we think, ‘it is not the gods which we encounter: even hidden, the gods are only the forms of recognition. What we encounter are the demons, the sign-bearers: powers of the leap, the interval, the intensive and the instant; powers which only cover difference with more difference.’ For Deleuze, ever the Spinozan, the unthinkable of thought, the aporia that decenters thinking from thought in the form of a movement of difference, lies in the motion of a body, with all of its affects, percepts, impulses and intensities.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Archives

Written by:

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *