Search results
,” and the temporal and spatial. Thereby, it cast alienated individuals at the center yet set them adrift, showed the finger to promises of progress, sieved the contradictions of imagined worlds, held up a mirror to the lies of nation, and looked into the eye of a living ghost, India’s Partition and its intimate violence. Now the auteur and the actor, new flâneurs both, could grimly move through
liberty, for example Mill, have escaped this charge (Thompson 1976: 136). Rousseau’s Wirkungsgeschichte has been less fortunate (Cobban 1968 for an overview). Louis Sebastien Mercier singled him out as one of the ‘first authors of the revolution’ (‘l’un des premiers auteurs de la revolution’) (Mercier 1791; see also Swenson 1999), and he has often been quoted, for example by Burke (1791) and Constant (1818), as a ‘Jacobin’, and as someone who ‘furnished deadly pretexts for more than one tyranny’ (Constant 1988: 317). That Robbespierre himself singled him out as the
design, punk’s presence in cinema has been eclectic. Undoubtedly, a marked dimension of avant-garde auteurship has always featured in punk’s relation with film. Rooted in subversive artistic -208- When the punks go marching in sensibilities and positioned resolutely outside the mainstream, this tradition measures up to the economic and aesthetic imperatives Thompson sees as punk cinema’s defining attributes. But this seditious auteurism has existed alongside – and has often intersected with – approaches more akin to the brash, irreverent practices of exploitation