Inga's Veil, Evening, erotic novel, film poem page four


 
     Later in the film the image is reiterated by filming her body horizontally in more complicated set ups, her concupisciescence watched by the camera's technique of varying angle, her each movement, displayed as erotic form, being explored by the shadow perspective of depth as angles rather than object lines converge, the image  of the erotic love object repeated as being successive having qualities and attributes that, as graphic plasticity are comparative rather than multiple object relations within a linear plane, or multiple object representations within an abstract plane or multiple plane.
     There is unity to the scene that is organic in that she has been in love with him and that he is not presently in the room, 'unity as an artistic principle of perfect form if teleological as ideal, unity as interrelated beauty within unities of time. Similarly, there is a unity within the shot in that there is a lack of movement other than her body having just then truning, almost pirrouetting to almost find him there, only to be positioned as an embodiment of love, if not  an embodiment  of her love for an older man, love being embodied as aesthetic object desired for at distance, and yet only at distance, the syntagmatic alignment of what has value by being imaginary and or absent is constructed by her subjectivity being aware of what has been left as reference, left as mystery. He is with her as what is known between them, watching her as something transcendental in that he is a non-diegetic character symbolic of the contemplation of beauty, there being an internalization of their having had been being together, her form interrelated with the plotline as the object of fantasy and as fantasizing desire.
     "I don't feel the need to impose upon you other than that I feel like listening to you. You had mentioned earlier that you would be there. I needed to talk to you at the time but not about anything specific."
     "Whereas?"
     "In particular, I'm thinking of looking at you and would like it if everything else could wait."
      She thought, pausing longer that it had when they had had the conversation, there being a temporal position within the scene to the voice-over that is contingent upon her movements and those of the camera,  "I was really about to say, 'Intuitively?', next."
     As it is still early in the, she is mostly a mystery to the film viewer as a female narrative fantasy, the camera watching her continuously during the length of the shot; then again as to create an ideal conception that every possible angle could be filmed at anytime where the duration would be arbitrary the camera watching her only on the authority of her being fantasy and only as authorial when poisitioned where she as fantasized about can be filmed, any interrelated spatial context has still been momentarily left offscreen. What interpellates an identification with the inscription of her subjective desire is that her nude image is as cinematic spectacle, if and when cinematic spectacle, the erotic appropriated and made increasingly available with structrues of the film that are not only those of aesthetic content, but those of erogenous attraction, the visual dimensions articulated within the film being as a zone of passion, or a zone of love felt intensely enough it can be lived for without passion so as to go beyond it as into devotion. Although the retrospective voice over is kept in the film, it can still only be inferrred as to whether she had seen him earlier or whether he had telephoned her earlier, the being a continuity script that includes both that she had had breakfast with him and that she had often been thinking of when they had been together more than a week before, the retrospective voice over narratives intertwined within the film; its is as voice over addressing the spectator directly, but only as being at a juncture of plot events. In one copy of the continuity script had been several instances of her interior monolouge jotted down in the margins, written in pen, including the quote accompanying this series of shots, "More intriguing than I had first tought.", which in no way appears in the rushes of the film and is out of sequence.
     As a protagonist, in so much as the development of the film is centered around her search for vale as poetic prior to religious or moral, she is complete for the viewer as a discursive agency and as the fantasy object of desire in soliloquy- it is only slowly that the film-viewer relation develops into an unfolding of her physically seeking sexual gratification, it is only slowly that the film enters into narrative scenes that contain erotic resolution of plot as immediate climactic experiences, as either concievably orgasmic clitorally, near orgasmic as auto-erotic or while reluctantantly auto-erotic on her part, the reluctant writhing and caress of postponing female onanism on her part as hours collapse into minutes, or as lesbian fantasy, lesbian indulgence, concievably brought to plateau as the nude is cleanesed by the look of the other and the accompanying lesbian subject positioning constructed around any involvement with her or with her and her lover, whether sexual or only romantic and intellectual. There is an instance during one of their conversations later in the narrative where she asks him, "Is it not that ideas can often carrry emotion?" After either he waits to answer or only responds silently by not saying anything, she adds a second question, "Emotion at first thought complete, although fleeting."
     Her qualities and attributes are still left to be divulvged within the film's becoming increasingly intimate, if not through the mood of the scene; with spectatorial distance, an aesthetic interest is developed from the need to feel the sensations of objectified pleasure to a deepened attraction to the object mysteriously still ever beautiful. What is to seem suprising in the film to the viewer comparing herself to the protagonist as a speaking or non-speaking subject  through the look while the absent-narrator imparts what is absent and or lacking to her is as of yet only felt by their both being perceptive, by both character and viewer being intuitive, and in being perceptive their being levels of shared erotic fantasy within the layers of being observant.
     The narrative-spatial dimensions of the scene consist of adjacent spaces that include those that have not yet been explored as looked at and omnly then having become as her subjectivity in its interplay of address and reception with the omniscient authorial. Her glance an erotic metaphor, inscribed textually  as the glance given by the feminine nude body by there being a heightening interest in how and when her sexual fascination pursues and achieves gratification throughout the erotic core of the narrative, telescoped , if not passively as a combining of the desiring gaze in a thematic substructure with pleasure fantasy and female lonliness into later shot reverse shot, offline reverse angle dialougue scenes, then stanzaiclly foreshadowed into either shots of her telephoning from other than the desk, or into nude, overhead shots of her in the bedroom during multiple angle  scenes, each of those showing her decision to either keep her telephone on the dresser  or bureau or to keep it nearer to the bedside, each instance of the camera cutting to either a nude over head strait on shot of her while on her back, or nude over head over the shoulder shot of her on  her stomach, perhaps orgasming, perhaps during massage, a withheld variation of the reiterated motif, and as further or layered variation, the angles being held from different camera distances, her facial expressions to whisper in nuances of acknowledgement, and or disbelief, centered around lubrication and release, if only the release of fantasy.
     Her gaze froms an excess within any interchange of subjectivitities in that she is still the only on screen character, and if it is only an appreciation of her beuaty bu him, it forms an excess as being unseen by him and felt by her as seen while unseen, the subjective transactions of desire the object of a present tense voyeurism. The viewer can only be introduced to subjects by the actress being aware of them and by her making the viewer aware of them, so as to compare her relationship to them as poetic truth, within her eyeline there being a sensibiltiy that while not entirely directing the female viewer to any excess of detail or significance, a a subjective close shot  would, introduces a unity that is narrative in her being presented as visual motif, and as an individual, if not entirely solitary, motif, as an embodiment of her being beuatiful while percieving romantic beauty, an objectification of her having sexual emotion and emotion that can deepen and that after having become exhilerated into nearly more rapid breathing, would only soften, would only then moisten. It being within introspective narrative that each event is transposed, the modality of exposition and exhibition allows an emotional structuring to the scene.
     It can be remembered that during the first scene of the film there are only insert shots that can be distinguished as transpiring during the same scene and are non-disruptive to its thematic integrity despite how abruptly the camera cuts back to her crossing the room, it being implicational that she is thinking of the action in the flash forward shots, it yet to have taken place. The film has not yet shown retrospective shots that clearly from their subject and its associations are shots contained within a flashforwarded series of shots but within the diegetic spatial-temporal continuum in fact are to be from before the film's opening sequence, their having been had been being inserted into the flashforwarded series shots, so as to place Winter New Year, Winter New Year, then Summer, then Spring, then Summer, then Winter New Year, then Winter New Year, then Spring and continuing with Spring to Summer. There is a cutback within a flashforward midway through the film.
 
 


 
 
 
 
 

Complimenary Movie

 


Complimentary Movie





YouTube Video






Ċ
Scott Lord,
Aug 28, 2012, 2:37 PM
Comments