Body Positive: The Vibrant Present of Derek Jarman’s Edward II (1991)
Body Positive: The Vibrant Present of Derek Jarman’s Edward II (1991)
复制标题
身体呈阳性：德里克·贾曼饰演的爱德华二世的充满活力的呈现 (1991)
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lee Benjamin Huttner
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lee Benjamin Huttner
本文认为德里克贾曼的爱德华二世（1991年）在电影的historiopoetic项目，确定酷儿的身体作为网站，通过和历史上写的。分析是通过阅读爱德华二世中的几个关键场景以及贾曼自己写的关于他与艾滋病有关的疾病和他自己死亡的内在感受来发展的。贾曼在他的电影中运用了时代错误和预言等技巧，创造了一种混合了过去、现在和未来的水晶般的时间性。爱德华二世将不同的历史时刻联系在一起，阐明了文艺复兴时期酷儿压迫和镇压的历史传统，同时也指出了20世纪艾滋病毒和艾滋病的修辞是一种系统性的压迫手段，将酷儿的身体描绘成已经死亡。因此，酷儿的身体总是在时间和历史上紧张和曲折的，历史化酷儿身体的项目是一个闹鬼或幽灵的过程，无法放弃它的幽灵。本文认为，爱德华二世通过身体暴力、性爱遭遇和触觉亲密等场景，理论化了身体与自身和其他身体的跨时间的奇异情感关系，以及特定历史时刻对奇异身体的性爱组织和管理。它的结论是从事德勒兹批评贾曼的电影，以确定“充满活力的现在”首先是一个corruptous时间性，无论是书面和阅读的艺术家，观众和历史主体的身体。
This essay considers Derek Jarman’s Edward II (1991) in relation to the film’s historiopoetic project that identifies the queer body as the site through which and upon which history is written. The analysis is developed by reading several key scenes in Edward II alongside Jarman’s own writing on his AIDS-related illness and the felt immanence of his own death. Employing techniques such as anachronism and prolepsis, Jarman crafts in his film a crystalline temporality that hybridizes past, present, and future. Yoking together disparate historical moments, Edward II illuminates a historical tradition of queer oppression and repression in the Renaissance, while also pointing to the twentieth-century rhetoric of HIV and AIDS as a systemic means of oppression by rendering the queer body as already dead. Thus, the queer body is always temporally and historically tensed and inflected, and the project of historicizing the queer body is a haunted or spectral process, unable to give up its ghosts. This essay argues that Edward II, through scenes of physical violence, erotic encounter, and haptic intimacy, theorizes the queer affective relations of the body to both itself and other bodies across time, as well as the erotic organization and management of the queer body in particular historical moments. It concludes by engaging in a Deleuzian critique of Jarman’s film to identify the “vibrant present” as above all a corporeal temporality, both written and read by the body–of the artist, viewer, and historical subject.