Contagiously Wandering Images
Reflecting on Hysteria in and as Artistic Research
Johanna Braun
Abstract
We seem to be living in hysterical times. Countless reports attest the recent epidemic nature of hysteria, and a simple Google search reveals the sheer bottomless well of media coverage on the infectious virtue of “mass hysteria”, covering almost every aspect of public discussions.
The arts—as it is often in such cases—seem conspicuously involved in and engaged with this “hysterical discourse”. Countless exhibitions were curated on the topic, (art) journals established, performances and conferences held, festivals organized, articles and essays written. These artistic efforts were also not bound to a specific area and instead spread globally from Australia, China, Canada, India, South Africa, Europe, or the United States, among many others.[1] Hysteria in these current narratives references conspicuously established representations of the hysteric as (public) performer and “Kunstfigur” that extend well beyond the often-referenced European medical studies of the nineteenth century—both into the past and present—and seems to spread uncontrollably through a myriad of artistic practices and public discussions throughout the centuries.[2] Surprisingly, while the strong academic interest in hysteria throughout the twentieth century and most prominently at the turn of the century is well known and much discussed, the study of how these discourses have continued well into twenty-first-century art practices, and of how those current practices very much continue a century-spanning cross-fertilization between hysteria and the arts, is largely pressing on a blind spot. It is the main objective of this exposition to illustrate how the arts seem to bundle the diverse present interests in the contagious nature of hysteria in a multitude of ways, while at the same time bringing to the forefront the century-spanning infectious relationship between hysteria and the (performing) arts, within an artistic and a self-reflexive research practice.
Inspired by a group of highly successful US mainstream horror films that illustrate poignantly the contagiousness of hysteria on the onscreen body, the film body and the spectorial body,[3] this exposition reflects on the cross-contagion of the arts, spectatorship, and a self-reflexive artistic research practice.
To map and illustrate the patterns of such an “artistic contagion”, this exposition will follow the premise of a Warburgian Bilderatlas, inspired by Aby Warburg’s extensive Mnemosyne Atlas project that I understand very much in the field of arts-based, and more so artistic research (for this argument, please also confer: Bäcklund 2004); and clearly within a performative research practice.[4] The medium and methodologies of the Bilderatlas not only provide me with a suited form to present my research findings as art, but by “doing” something that resembles the hauntings of a Warburgian Bilderatlas, the acts of collecting, archiving, interpreting and analyzing that go into making multimedia installations that encompass photography, various forms of visual print media, videos, painting, literature and writings, and performance art can come together and frame those activities from a “mad”, or in my case “hysterical” research practice. Although Warburg’s sprawling body of work is often described as “never completed”, “unfinished” or “unaccomplished”, those descriptions neglect the core artistic quality of his project. Just as Warburg kept his private library project in motion, wandering by constantly rearranging and moving it, the intrinsic set up of the Bilderatlas already suggests: there is no final form, the entire project is built on being in motion, in constant augmentation, continuously changing shape and form, and tirelessly performing, and playing by its very own rules; visualizing a contagious research practice (for more on the political and racial implications of wandering and hysteria, please confer: Weinbaum 2004, Gilman 2020). The Bilderatlas functions like a performative display that rejects the often-assumed virtue of history’s narrative as an ordered sequence of successive events: it invites rumors, secrets and ghostly whisperings; marginalized and disenfranchised voices too often rendered invisible. Images are spreading and moving around the surface, echoing the movements of contagion. I don’t think I have to elaborate in detail how this very virtue of the Bilderatlas presents itself quite uniquely and fittingly for a multifaceted hysterical arts-based performance research practice and a the theme of “contagion”—it is already revealing enough for this argument that images from Charcot’s archive on hysterical gestures wandered prominently around Warburg’s plates, sprawling uncontrollably from one plate to the next, growing and spreading by its own accord. The methodologies introduced by the Bilderatlas are not only genuinely interdisciplinary, but have the potential to act “indisciplinary” (Ranciery and Birrell 2008, Kolesch and Klein 2009). In following Warburg’s declaration “I was less interested in neat solutions than in formulating a new problem” (Warburg 1988), I’m moved by what hysterical images (Bilder) can reveal about our culture(s), what they are whispering, speaking or at times shouting about, and what echoes from the past are still traceable in the present and might project into the future. Furthermore, Warburg’s project builds a bridge to the self-reflexive and creative field of Mad studies (for more on Mad Studies, please confer: Ingram 2016, LeFrançois et al. 2013, Spandler et al. 2015) of this exploration. Although not often discussed, Warburg was a psychiatric survivor himself and was institutionalized until 1924—the same year he started working on his Mnemosyne project. (Binswanger and Warburg 2007) Even after his presumed “cure” at Klinik Bellevue was declared, Warburg recurrently summons “the notion of a clinic and its inmates” when talking or writing about his library and its personnel. (Forster 1999) The “madness” that expresses itself through the tirelessly moving and changing Bilderatlas brings Georges Didi-Huberman—who needs no introduction in the ways he has shaped research on hysteria and its visual representation and cultural implications, and who traced the origin of the Mnemosyne Atlas in the trauma of the First World War and Warburg’s subsequent psychiatric institutionalization (Didi-Huberman 2012)—to declare “the intrinsic madness” of Warburg’s project (Didi-Huberman 2010, 20). Didi-Huberman then readily continued this “mad”, or more accurately hysteric, research into the twenty-first century by curating a series of exhibitions that take Warburg’s atlas as their point of departure. Here we can see how this kind of “mad research” is contagious and moves light-footedly across periods and “performers of knowledge”.
This only shows a fraction of how Warburg’s project cultivated a quite “busy afterlife” in present times, which in turn also “infects” my own creative research practice. I’m also very moved by Griselda Pollock’s work that adds an international-, postcolonial-, queer-feminist perspective to Warburgian “mad” research on images and their cultural and political implications (Pollock 2013a, 2013b, 2017, 2018) and Amanda Du Preez’s invitation to reflect on how a Warburgian approach of “Thinking Through Images” can be conceptualized in the digital age (Du Preez 2020).
This exposition is meant as an exploration of this contagiousness of “thinking with hysteria” within an artistic practice in general and to reflect on how hysteria’s performance is “infiltrating” or more so “infecting” my artistic (research) practice in a multitude of ways in particular.
[1] For more on this argument, please confer to my edited volume “Performing Hysteria. Images and Imaginations” (Leuven University Press, 2020), you can access this peer-reviewed OA publication here: https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/42712 or visit www.performing-hysterica.com or
[2] It is a not so well kept secret that while, in the late twentieth century, the medical term hysteria was struck from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the notorious characteristics of hysteria, as a mimetic disorder, cryptically emerged under the diagnosis of Histrionic Personality Disorder—and the Latin noun histrio already points us in the right direction, unveiling the hysteric as actor/actress or player. This terminological shift reveals the century-long understanding of hysteria as what we would call today a performer and pointedly illustrates how hysteria moves, plays and performs beyond the limits of medical discourse.
I use the terms hysteria and performance consciously and simultaneously cautiously, as they are central to a variety of academic and artistic fields and their definitions are ambiguous and remain contested. The term “hysteria” is here chosen deliberately, because it includes artistic, medical, religious, and political concepts throughout its extensive histories (in fact and fiction), and its representations, so the argument, have been conceived in terms of performance. The hysterics is not just “mad”: they reference a range of representations that are historically specific to hysteria and were understood in the realms of performance. Jean-Martin Charcot revealingly used the term “neuromimesis” to describe how the hysterical body could mimetically perform other distinct conditions and the very terms used to describe the hysterical body and its seizures—epileptoid, choretic, clownism, acrobatic—reflect this sentiment. Following this idea of hysteria as a playful agent provocateur, whose performative symptoms point to something pressing to be articulated “under the surface” or “between the lines”, I explore in this exposition the potentiality of a hysterical text body as a symptom of a hysterical interdisciplinary performance (research) practice.
[3] A characteristic of these films is the appearance of the “masses” as hysterical, as unruly and out of control, referencing obviously the depiction of mass hysteria from historical medical, artistic and religious sources. These films evidently echo the current material of the intense media coverage on the topic and in turn, the film material itself appears to be contagious: the haunted corporeality of the film spreads hysterical symptoms to the audience. Myriad media reports attest mass hysteria resulting from consuming these films, and thus reproduce long-held assumptions of the connection between cinema and “madness”.
[4] For the documentation of a selection of projects involving the Bilderatlas, please confer: www.johannabraun.com. In my academic and artistic research, which often culminates in such a Bilderatlas, I trace hysteria’s performance repertoire in contemporary popular culture and political discourse, and look closer at the underlining meanings of re-producing images and gestures evidently stemming from hysteria’s performance histories.
DISCLAIMER
This draft will be further developed into an interactive media landscape with inserted media clippings of “contagious mass hysteria” in public discussions; videos of such presumed instances; it will contain moving images, sound and links to exhibitions, publications and other resources that have looked into hysteria within the arts and it will incorporate drawings/paintings/sketches from my own notebook archive and close ups from my image atlases that reflect on these themes. Therefore, this exposition will bring together and visualize this “hysterical discourse” of "artistic contagion" and its involvement, entanglement and affectedness with these current discussions around contagion, not only from a theoretical standpoint but also from an aesthetical, artistic, affected one.
SHORT BIO
Johanna Braun, is an artist, scholar, and Principle Investigator of the postdoctoral research project “The Hysteric as Conceptual Operator” [J 4164-G24], sponsored by the Austrian Science Fund [FWF], and situated at the University of California, Los Angeles, Stanford University and the University of Vienna (2018–2020). Her academic and artistic research focuses on (new) hysteria, disability and performance studies. She published the monograph All-American-Gothic Girl: The Justice Seeking Girl in US Narratives (Passagen, 2017); and most recently the volumes Performing Hysteria: Image and Imaginations (Leuven University Press, 2020) and Hysterical Methodologies in the Arts: Rising in Revolt (Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming 2020); in conjunction to numerous contributions to anthologies, art catalogues, and journals. Recently, she organized the self guided online conference #masshysteria. Politics, Affect, and Performance Strategies, hosted by Stanford University’s Department of Theater and Performance Studies (online October, 2020).
For more information please visit:
www.johannabraun.com and www.performing-hysteria.com
References
Agamben. Giorgio. 1999. “Aby Warburg and the Nameless Science.” Potentialities: Collected Essays in Philosophy, 89–103. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ballon, Bruce, and Molyn Leszcz. 2007. “Horror Films: Tales to Master Terror or Shapers of Trauma?” American Journal of Psychotherapy 61, no. 2: 211–230.
Barker, Jennifer. 2009. The Tactile Eye: Touch and the Cinematic Experience. Berkley: University of California Press.
Ben-Moshe, Liat; Chris Chapman, and Allison C. Carey, eds. 2014. Disability Incarcerated: Imprisonment and Disability in the United States and Canada. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Berenstein, Rhona J. 1996. Attack of the Leading Ladies: Gender, Sexuality and Spectatorship in Classic Horror Cinema. New York: Columbia University Press.
Binswanger, Ludwig and Aby Warburg. 2007. Die Unendliche Heilung: Aby Warburgs Krankengeschichte, edited by Chantal Marazia and Davide Stimilli. Zürich: Diaphanes.
Birell, Ross. 2008. “Jacques Rancière and The (Re)Distribution of the Sensible: Five Lessons in Artistic Research.” Art & Research 2, no. 1: 1–11.
Bogdan, Robert; Douglas Biklen, Arthur Shapiro, and David Spelkoman. 1982. “The Disabled: Media’s Monster.” Social Policy 13, no. 2 (Fall): 32–35.
Bottomore, Stephen. 1999. “The Panicking Audience?: Early Cinema and the ‘Train Effect.’” Historical Journal of Radio, Film, and Television 19, no.2: 177–216.
Bozzuto, J.C. 1975. “Cinematic Neurosis following The Exorcist: Report of 4 Cases.” Journal of Nervous Mental Disorder 161, no.1: 43–58.
Braun, Johanna, ed. 2020a. Performing Hysteria. Images and Imaginations. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
Braun, Johanna. 2020b. “Hysterical Cure: Performing Disability in the Possession Film.” Performing Hysteria: Images and Imaginations, edited by Johanna Braun, 204–233. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
Brody, Jennifer DeVere. 2008. Punctuation: Art, Politics, Play. Durham: Duke University Press.
Burstow, Bonnie; Brenda A. LeFrançois, and Shaindly Diamond, ed. 2014. Psychiatry Disrupted: Theorizing Resistance and Crafting the (R)Evolution. Montréal, London, Ithaca: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Butt, Gavin, ed. 2005. After Criticism: New Responses to Art and Performance. Oxford and Malden: Blackwell.
Bäcklund, Jan. 2004. “Aby Warburg: Art Research Between Art Theory and Artistic Practice.” Denmark: The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts. Accessed on 19 Jul. 2020: http://lnu.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1412022&dswid=6262
Böhler, Arno; Christian Herzog, and Alice Pechriggl, eds. Korporale Performanz. Bielefeld: Transcript, 2013.
Böhler, Arno; Krassimira Kruschkova, and Susanne Valerie Granzer, eds. Wissen Wir, Was Ein Körper Vermag? Bielefeld: Transcript, 2014.
Carroll, Noël; Laura T. Di Summa and Shawn Loht, eds. 2019. The Palgrave Handbook of the Philosophy of Film and Motion Pictures. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cartwright, Lisa. 1995. Screening the Body: Tracing Medicine’s Visual Culture. Minnieapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Casetti, Francesco. 2018. “Why Fears Matter: Cinephobia in Early Film Culture.” Screen 59, no. 2: 145–157.
Cixous, Hélène. 1976. “The Laugh of the Medusa,” transl. by Keith Cohen and Paula Cohen. Signs 1, no.4 (Summer): 875–893.
Chivers, Sally and Nicole Markotić, eds. 2010. The Problem Body: Projecting Disability on Film. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Clover, Carol. 1993. Men, Women & Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Conner, Steven. 2004. The Book of Skin. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Cull Ó Maoilearca, Laura and Alice Lagaay. 2020. The Routledge Companion to Performance Philosophy. London and New York: Routledge.
Didi-Huberman, Georges. 2010. Atlas: How to Carry the World on One’s Back? Madrid: Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía.
Didi-Huberman, Georges. 2012. “Warburg’s Haunted House.” Common Knowledge 18, no.1: 50–78.
Dombois, Florian. 2009. “0-1-1-2-3-5-8-. Zur Forschung an der Hochschule der Künste Bern.” Forschung. Jahrbuch Nr. 4. Bern: Hochschule der Künste Bern.
Dumas, Chris. 2014. “Horror and Psychoanalysis: An Introductory Primer.” A Companion to the Horror Film, edited by Harry M. Benshoff, 21–37. Oxford and Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Du Preez, Amanda. 2020. “Approaching Aby Warburg and Digital Art History: Thinking Through Images.” The Routledge Companion to Digital Humanities and Art History, edited by Kathryn Brown, 374–385. New York and London: Routledge.
Fleming, Michael and Roger Manvell. 1985. Images of Madness: The Portrayal of Insanity in the Feature Film. London: Associated University Presses.
Forster, Kurt W. 1999. “Introduction.” The Reneval of Pagan Antiquity: Contributions to the Cultural History of the European Renessany, by Aby Warburg. Los Angeles: The Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities.
Garber, Marjorie. 2003. Quotation Marks. London and New York: Routledge.
Garrisi, Diana and Jacob Johanssen, eds. 2020. Disability, Media, and Representations: Other Bodies. London and New York: Routledge.
Gilman, Sander. “Wandering Imaginations of Race and Hysteria: The Origins of the Hysterical Body in Psychoanalysis.” Performing Hysteria: Images and Imaginations, edited by Johanna Braun, 41–60. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
Grieveson, Lee. 2018. Cinema and the Wealth of Nations: Media, Capital, and the Liberal World System. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Greenwood, Janinka. 2019. “Arts-Based Research.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Accessed on 19 Jul. 2020: https://oxfordre.com/education/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-29.
Gunning, Tom. 1999. “An Aesthetic of Astonishment: Early Film and the (In)credulous Spectator.” Film Theory and Criticism, edited by Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen, 818–32. New York: Oxford University Press. (originally published in 1989 in Art and Text 34)
Hamilton, J. W. 1978. “Cinematic Neurosis: A Brief Case Report.” Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis 6, no. 4: 569–572.
Henderson, Bruce and R. Noam Ostrander. 2010. Understanding Disability Studies and Performance Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
Herzogenrath, Bernd ed. 2017. Film as Philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Hills, Matt. 2004. “Doing Things with Theory: From Freud’s Worst Nightmare to (Disciplinary) Dreams of Horror’s Cultural Value.” Psychoanalysis and the Horror Film: Freud’s Worst Nightmares, edited by Steven Jay Schneider, 205–222. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ingram, Richard A. 2016. “Doing Mad Studies: Making (Non)sense Together.” Intersectionalities 5, no. 3 (Special Issue, Mad Studies: Intersections with Disability Studies, Social Work, and “Mental Health”): 11–17.
Jones, Amelia and Andrew Stephenson, eds. 1999. Performing the Body / Performing the Text. London: Routledge.
Kanter, Jodi. 2007. Performing Loss: Rebuilding Community through Theater and Writing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Kolesch, Doris and Julian Klein. 2009. “Galileis Kugel oder das Absolut Relative des Ästhetischen Erlebens.” per.SPICE! – Wirklichkeit und Relativität des Ästhetischen, edited by Julian Klein, 7–18. Berlin: Theater der Zeit.
Kuppers, Petra. 2003. Disability and Contemporary Performance: Bodies on Edge. London: Routledge.
——. 2005. “Bodies, Hysteria, Pain: Staging the Invisible.” Bodies in Commotion: Disability and Performance, edited by Carrie Sandahl and Philip Auslander, 147–62. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
LaFrancois, Brenda; Robert Menzies and Geoff Reaume, eds. 2013. Mad Matters: A Critical Reader in Canadian Mad Studies. Toronto: Canadian Scholar’s Press.
Levack, Brian. 2013. The Devil Within: Possession and Exorcism in the Christian West. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Livingston. Paisley. 2009. Cinema, Philosophy, Bergman: on Film as Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Livingston, Paisley and Carl Plantinga, eds. 2011. The Routledge Companion to Philosophy and Film. London and New York: Routledge.
Longmore, Paul K. 1985. “Screening Stereotypes: Images of Disabled People in Television and Motion Pictures.” Social Policy 16 (Summer): 31–37.
Lunsford, Andrea. 2015. “Writing is Performative.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, edited by Linda Adler-Kassner and Elizabeth Wardle, 43–44. Logan: Utah State University Press.
Marks, Laura. 2000. The Skin of the Film: Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment and the Senses. Durham: Duke University Press.
Marshall, Jonathan W. 2016. Performing Neurology: The Dramaturgy of Dr Jean-Martin Charcot. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Metz, Christian. 1982. The Imaginary Signifier: Psychoanalysis and the Cinema. Translated by Celia Britton, Annwyl Williams, Ben Brewster and Alfred Guzetti. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Mitchell, David T.; Susan Antebi, and Sharon L. Snyder, eds. 2019. The Matter of Disability: Materiality, Biopolitics, Crip Affect. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Mitchell, Lee Clark. 2020. Mark My Words: Profiles of Punctuation in Modern Literature. London and New York: Bloomsbury.
Norden, Martin. 1994. The Cinema of Isolation: A History of Physical Disability in the Movies. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Ostrander, Noam and Bruce Henderson, eds. 2013. Disability and Madness: Special Issue of Disability Studies Quarterly 33, no. 1.
Pelias, Ronald J. 2014. Performance: An Alphabet of Performative Writing. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
Pelias, Ronald J. 2019. The Creative Qualitative Researcher: Writing That Makes Readers Want to Read. London and New York: Routledge.
Phelan, Peggy. 1993. Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. New York: Routledge.
Pickens, Therí Alyce. 2019. Black Madness :: Mad Blackness. Durham: Duke University Press
Pollock, Della. 1998. “Performing writing.” The Ends of Performance, 73–103, edited by Phelan and Lane. New York: New York University Press.
Pollock, Griselda. 2013a. After-Affects /After-Images: Trauma and Aesthetic Transformation in the Virtual Feminist Museum. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Pollock, Griselda. 2013b. Art in the Time-Space of Memory and Migration Sigmund Freud, Anna Freud and Bracha Ettinger. London: Freud Museum and Leeds: Wild Pansy Press.
Pollock, Griselda. 2017. “Monroe’s gestures between trauma and ecstasy, Nympha and Venus: reading the cinematic gesture ‘Marilyn Monroe’ through Aby Warburg.” Gesture and Film: Signalling New Critical Perspective, edited by Nicholas Chare and Liz Watkins, 99–131. London: Routledge. (This is a first glimpse in her forthcoming book length study: Monroe’s Mov(i)es: Class, Gender and Nation in the work, image-making and agency of Marilyn Monroe, 2021)
Pollock, Griselda. 2018. Charlotte Salomon and the Theatre of Memory. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Rawls, Christina; Diana Neiva and Steven S. Gouveia, eds. 2019. Philosophy and Film: Bridging Divides. New York: Routledge.
Read, Rupert, and Jerry Goodenough, eds. 2005. Film as Philosophy: Essays in Cinema After Wittgenstein and Cavell. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rokem, Freddie. 2010. Philosophers and Thespians: Thinking Performance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ronell, Avital. 1989. The Telephone Book: Technology, Schizophrenia, Electric Speech. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Ruprecht, Lucia. 2019. Gestural Imaginaries: Dance and Cultural Theory in the Early Twentieth Century. New York: Oxford Unversity Press.
Sandahl, Carrie and Philip Auslander, eds. 2005. Bodies in Commotion: Disability and Performance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Scheible, Jeff. 2015. Digital Shift: The Cultural Logic of Punctuation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine, ed. 2009. The Corporeal Turn: An Interdisciplinary Reader. Exeter: Imprint Academic.
Sinnerbrink, Robert. 2011. New Philosophies of Film: Thinking Images. London and New York: Continuum.
Smith, Angela. 2011. Hideous Progeny: Disability, Eugenics, and Classic Horror Cinema. Columbia University Press.
Sobchack, Vivian. 1992. The Address of the Eye: A Phenomenology of Film Experience. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Spandler, Helen; Jill Anderson, Bob Sapey, eds. 2015. Madness, Distress and the Politics of Disablement. Bristol: Policy Press.
Sutton, Travis. 2014. “Avenging the Body: Disability in the Horror Film.” A Companion to the Horror Film, edited by Harry M. Benshoff, 73–89. Malden: John Wiley & Sons.
Thomson-Jones, Katherine, ed. 2016. Current Controversies in Philosophy of Film. New York and London: Routledge.
Tremain, Shelley. 2017. Foucault and Feminist Philosophy of Disability. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Trinh, Minh-ha T. 1991. When the Moon Waxes Red: Representation, Gender and Cultural Politics. New York: Routledge.
Vaughan. Hunter. 2013. Where Film Meets Philosophy: Godard, Resnais, and Experiments in Cinematic Thinking. New York: Columbia University Press.
Warbug, Aby. 1988. “Italien Art and International Astrology in the Palazzo Schifanoia in Ferrara.” German Essays on Art History, edited by Gert Schiff, 252–253. New York: Continuum.
Wartenberg, Thomas E. 2007. Thinking on Screen: Film as Philosophy. New York: Routledge.
Wartenberg, Thomas E. and Murray Smith, eds. 2006. Thinking Through Cinema: Film As Philosophy. Oxford and Malden: Blackwell.
Weinbaum, Alys Eve. 2004. Wayward Reproductions: Genealogies of Race and Nation in Transatlantic Modern Thought. Durham: Duke University Press.
Williams, Linda. 1991. “Film Bodies: Gender, Genre, and Excess.” Film Quarterly 44, no. 4: 2–13.