Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Figures and frames
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Preface: a Deleuzian cineosis
- PART ONE UNFOLDING THE CINEOSIS
- Section I First Introduction – Two Regimes of Images
- Section II Second Introduction – A Series of Images and Signs
- 1 Perception-images
- 2 Affection-images
- 3 Impulse-images (the nascent action-image)
- 4 Action-images (small form, action → situation)
- 5 Action-images (large form, situation → action)
- 6 Attraction-images (first reflection-image; sixth mental-image)
- 7 Inversion-images (second reflection-image; fifth mental-image)
- 8 Discourse-images (third reflection-image; fourth mental-image)
- 9 Dream-images (third mental-image)
- 10 Recollection-images (second mental-image)
- 11 Relation-images (first mental-image)
- 12 Opsigns and sonsigns
- 13 Hyalosigns
- 14 Chronosigns
- 15 Noosigns
- 16 Lectosigns
- Afterword to Part One: the unfolded cineosis
- PART TWO ENFOLDING THE CINEOSIS
- Section III Third Introduction – Cinematographics (1995–2015)
- Select Bibliography
- Filmography
- Index
8 - Discourse-images (third reflection-image; fourth mental-image)
from Section II - Second Introduction – A Series of Images and Signs
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 December 2019
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Figures and frames
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Preface: a Deleuzian cineosis
- PART ONE UNFOLDING THE CINEOSIS
- Section I First Introduction – Two Regimes of Images
- Section II Second Introduction – A Series of Images and Signs
- 1 Perception-images
- 2 Affection-images
- 3 Impulse-images (the nascent action-image)
- 4 Action-images (small form, action → situation)
- 5 Action-images (large form, situation → action)
- 6 Attraction-images (first reflection-image; sixth mental-image)
- 7 Inversion-images (second reflection-image; fifth mental-image)
- 8 Discourse-images (third reflection-image; fourth mental-image)
- 9 Dream-images (third mental-image)
- 10 Recollection-images (second mental-image)
- 11 Relation-images (first mental-image)
- 12 Opsigns and sonsigns
- 13 Hyalosigns
- 14 Chronosigns
- 15 Noosigns
- 16 Lectosigns
- Afterword to Part One: the unfolded cineosis
- PART TWO ENFOLDING THE CINEOSIS
- Section III Third Introduction – Cinematographics (1995–2015)
- Select Bibliography
- Filmography
- Index
Summary
The discourse-image, the ‘discursive’ figure, is the third and final transformation of action-image forms, the third and final avatar of the reflection-image (C1: 192; C2: 33). Here the action-image is fully captured by the mental-image, and the forms of the small and the large become ‘figures of thought’ (C1: 190). In the first instance, the discourse-image is that which ‘subjects the large form to a broadening which operates as a transformation on the spot’ (C1: 192). For Deleuze, this is the extreme limit of the large form action-image, where the situation appears as a problem which will be explored throughout the film, the resolution that of a considered response. In the second instance, the discourseimage is that which ‘subjects the small form to a lengthening, a drawing-out which transforms it in itself’ (C1: 192). This is the extreme limit of the small form action-image, no longer describing a passage from action to situation as that which discovers the coordinates of a determination, but rather a revealing of the conditions of a problem. Thus the two sides of the problem; the problem being a question (?) and the figure of thought that inspires the discourseimage; this figure explicated in two signs of composition as the extreme limits of the large and the small forms of the action-image (C1: 195). These limits are transformative, not in reference to an immediate confrontation of one form with the other (attraction-images), nor in reference to the reciprocal influence that causes a reversal (inversion-image), but rather through the fullest possible domination of the domain of thought and the mental-image. Each action-image reflects directly upon itself, interrogates and becomes an image of thought for itself, in so doing enacting a reflection. Once again, Deleuze merely hints at a genetic sign, but it is reasonable to assume (just as with the other avatars of the reflection-image) that this is where the two signs of composition collapse in upon one another, where the extreme limit of the large form action-image and the extreme limit of the small form action-image extend to convergence. In other words, the extreme limit of action-images in general, of the avatar of action, where we cannot tell if the originary form is the small or the large – and the film begins, is permeated by and ends with problems.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Deleuze's Cinema BooksThree Introductions to the Taxonomy of Images, pp. 115 - 121Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2016