Page 161 - Darko Štrajn, From Walter Benjamin to the End of Cinema: Identities, Illusion and Signification. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2017. Digital Library, Dissertationes, 29.
P. 161
identity in a notion of the eastern and western european cinema
the main point of Fichte’s idea of the absolutely free subjectivity in that
the Subject posits himself by his activity. It could be argued that Hegel sig-
nalled here his own “step forward” by conceptualising the notion of alteri-
ty. Due to a degree – to put it mildly – of ambiguity in the discourse of both
of these philosophies, one would need a much wider analysis to ascertain
any definite claim. For our aim in this chapter it isn’t so important to solve
this very interesting controversy, which is still alive among specialists, who
deal with the philosophy of German idealism. Hence, to put it bluntly – it
is not so important either – whether Hegel was right or not. My aim here is
only to indicate the fact that early in the 19th century the notion of identity
gained such implications in its meaning, which later on proved to be cru-
cial, and I have in particular in mind the connection between identity and
difference (or in another specifically post-modern articulation: the alterity)
and the activity. Of course, all of these notions are strongly attached to the
notion of the Subject. Hegel’s criticism of Fichte concerning the notion of
identity marks a point in Europe‘s history, when the reflexive concepts be-
came indispensable for any understanding of the productivity of concepts,
which were inscribed into new social realities. Ethnicities, cultures, nations
as new entities, which determined formations of collective identities, com-
prising slowly changing individual identities, happened to be just some as-
pects of these new social realities in the context of the rise of capitalism, in-
dustry and bourgeois class society.
Suicide at the Seashore
As the bourgeois class society developed new forms of representation of a
socially constructed reality, and a special place and role for aesthetic prac-
tices (usually known as art) in this reality, identity became a denominator
of a lot of different uses and meanings. On the other hand, the term itself
lost its “innocence” due to complex impacts of new forms of representa-
tion, which (as a necessary intellectual addition) contributed to the repro-
duction of the public. The role of photography and film in this sense was
immense. Maybe we could say today that film after a period of developing
different formats in different registers reached a point, when we could al-
most determine subjectivity (in a psychological or sociological sense) in the
social reality as a kind of “representation of representation”, meaning that
the “real subjectivity” represents an imagined or a conceptual representa-
tion of subjectivity. In any case, in the age of television and digitalisation,
images, gestures, recognition patterns, representations of bodies and so on,
159
the main point of Fichte’s idea of the absolutely free subjectivity in that
the Subject posits himself by his activity. It could be argued that Hegel sig-
nalled here his own “step forward” by conceptualising the notion of alteri-
ty. Due to a degree – to put it mildly – of ambiguity in the discourse of both
of these philosophies, one would need a much wider analysis to ascertain
any definite claim. For our aim in this chapter it isn’t so important to solve
this very interesting controversy, which is still alive among specialists, who
deal with the philosophy of German idealism. Hence, to put it bluntly – it
is not so important either – whether Hegel was right or not. My aim here is
only to indicate the fact that early in the 19th century the notion of identity
gained such implications in its meaning, which later on proved to be cru-
cial, and I have in particular in mind the connection between identity and
difference (or in another specifically post-modern articulation: the alterity)
and the activity. Of course, all of these notions are strongly attached to the
notion of the Subject. Hegel’s criticism of Fichte concerning the notion of
identity marks a point in Europe‘s history, when the reflexive concepts be-
came indispensable for any understanding of the productivity of concepts,
which were inscribed into new social realities. Ethnicities, cultures, nations
as new entities, which determined formations of collective identities, com-
prising slowly changing individual identities, happened to be just some as-
pects of these new social realities in the context of the rise of capitalism, in-
dustry and bourgeois class society.
Suicide at the Seashore
As the bourgeois class society developed new forms of representation of a
socially constructed reality, and a special place and role for aesthetic prac-
tices (usually known as art) in this reality, identity became a denominator
of a lot of different uses and meanings. On the other hand, the term itself
lost its “innocence” due to complex impacts of new forms of representa-
tion, which (as a necessary intellectual addition) contributed to the repro-
duction of the public. The role of photography and film in this sense was
immense. Maybe we could say today that film after a period of developing
different formats in different registers reached a point, when we could al-
most determine subjectivity (in a psychological or sociological sense) in the
social reality as a kind of “representation of representation”, meaning that
the “real subjectivity” represents an imagined or a conceptual representa-
tion of subjectivity. In any case, in the age of television and digitalisation,
images, gestures, recognition patterns, representations of bodies and so on,
159
