ABSTRACT

Claire Denis’s and Catherine Breillat’s films pass through nightclubs with striking frequency. Though their work emerges with the rise of clubbing in the 1970s and 80s, their liminal clubs bear a skewed relation to the representation of geographically rooted subcultures. A place rather of transient fantasy, they allow marginal bodies into the light and those usually in focus to move differently, if only for a moment. This article thus asks how we might understand the queerness of the space in films with little room for overt queer politics. Drawing on queer theoretical turns to the potentiality of ephemera, I show how club aesthetics reflect differently on broader issues of antecedence and immediacy in film-phenomenology. Unlike the enduring, up-close explorations of the French cinema of sensation more broadly, the club’s stroboscopic aesthetic offers fleeting images emerging and receding swiftly beyond perception. Finding not identifiable queer representation or its absolute, ‘fluid’ dissolution as is often risked in clubbing discourse and some ‘postmodern’ interpretations of queer theory, I suggest that Denis’s and Breillat’s clubs foster attentiveness to different, impermanent and indeterminate kinds of evidence. This makes room for a body and its history without foreclosing the promise of others.

摘要

克莱尔·丹尼斯（Claire Denis）和凯瑟琳·布雷拉（Catherine Breillat）的电影以惊人的频率穿过夜总会。尽管他们的工作随着1970年代和80年代俱乐部的兴起而出现，但他们的卧式俱乐部与具有根源的亚文化的代表却存在着偏斜的关系。它们是一个短暂的幻想场所，允许边缘物体进入光线，而通常聚焦的物体可以移动，即使只是一会儿也可以。因此，本文提出了一个问题，那就是我们如何才能理解电影中空间的奇异性，而电影中却没有明显的同性恋政治空间。借助理论上对短暂性的潜力的转折，我展示了俱乐部美学如何在更广泛的电影现象学的先行性和直接性问题上做出不同的反映。与更广泛地对法国感性电影进行持久，近距离的探索不同，俱乐部的频闪美学为转瞬即逝的影像提供了迅速出现和消退的感觉。我发现，在俱乐部话语和对酷儿理论的某些``后现代''解释中经常会冒着无法识别的酷儿表现形式或其绝对的，``流畅的''消散的风险，我建议丹尼斯和布雷拉特的俱乐部促进对不同，无常和不确定的证据的关注。这为身体及其历史腾出了空间，而不会丧失对他人的承诺。无常和不确定的证据。这为一个身体及其历史腾出了空间，而不会失去他人的应许。无常和不确定的证据。这为一个身体及其历史腾出了空间，而不会失去他人的应许。