4.1 Article

Noise, ecological crises, and the posthuman sensibility of Michel Serres in Jonathan Glazer's Under the Skin

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10304312.2023.2272567

关键词

Michel Serres; sensibility; noise; posthuman; Under the Skin; intuition; environmental crisis; film; senses; Jonathan Glazer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article re-examines Jonathan Glazer's sci-fi film "Under the Skin" in light of Michel Serres's posthuman philosophy, arguing that it serves as an allegorical warning about the ongoing ecological crises and emphasizes the crucial role of artistic practice in challenging our neglect of sensible modes of being. The article focuses on the importance of "noise" in Serres's posthuman thinking and analyzes the alignment between the character "The Female" in the film and Serres's notion of sensibility.
This article revisits Jonathan Glazer's sci-fi film Under the Skin, ten years on from its release in 2013, to re-read it through Michel Serres's posthuman philosophy as an allegorical warning about the ongoing ecological crises. Making this argument involves recognizing, through Serres, the crucial role of artistic practice in questioning our current neglect of sensible modes of being. Focusing upon the importance of 'noise' within Serres's posthuman thinking, this article considers the alignment between the sensibility of 'The Female' in Under the Skin - an alien in human form (portrayed by Scarlett Johansson) - and the virtue of sensibility advocated by Serres of being 'on the cusp of sense in the making' (Webb 2018): a dynamic position situated between the chaotic noise of the world and the limitations of human language (Serres 2016). In combination with Glazer's direction, the original musical score by Mica Levi and innovative sound design by Johnnie Burn are central to the argument. An additional aim of the article is to show the significance of Serres's thinking within cultural studies, where this philosophy is currently undervalued.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据