This chapter proposes the concept of “vegan aesthetics” alongside an analysis of David Lynch’s Eraserhead (1977). In developing its methodology, the chapter combines Adorno’s negative dialectics with the classical idea of sympatheia or “sympathetic action” and the apprehension and sensation of the “invisible forces” that link human and nonhuman flesh. The chapter introduces various classical, early modern, modern and contemporary forms of sympathetic action, from Empedocles’s poetry, Margaret Cavendish’s theory-poetics, George Herbert’s devotional poetry, Jacques Rancière’s theory of “sympathetic poetics” and contemporary vegan theory. By analysing the way negative dialectics seeks to “break the compulsion to achieve identity” alongside the weird flesh sensation of Lynch’s cinematography, the chapter argues that the aesthetics of dialectical vegan sympathetic action is central to Lynch’s cinematography. For Adorno, the problem with aesthetic approaches to social and political injustice is that they tend to render suffering in consumable form. As an expression of negative vegan dialectics, the chapter argues that Lynch’s sympatheia of the flesh expunges consumability.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Flesh and Negation: Vegan Aesthetics and Sympathetic Action in David Lynch’s Eraserhead

  • Simon Ryle

摘要

This chapter proposes the concept of “vegan aesthetics” alongside an analysis of David Lynch’s Eraserhead (1977). In developing its methodology, the chapter combines Adorno’s negative dialectics with the classical idea of sympatheia or “sympathetic action” and the apprehension and sensation of the “invisible forces” that link human and nonhuman flesh. The chapter introduces various classical, early modern, modern and contemporary forms of sympathetic action, from Empedocles’s poetry, Margaret Cavendish’s theory-poetics, George Herbert’s devotional poetry, Jacques Rancière’s theory of “sympathetic poetics” and contemporary vegan theory. By analysing the way negative dialectics seeks to “break the compulsion to achieve identity” alongside the weird flesh sensation of Lynch’s cinematography, the chapter argues that the aesthetics of dialectical vegan sympathetic action is central to Lynch’s cinematography. For Adorno, the problem with aesthetic approaches to social and political injustice is that they tend to render suffering in consumable form. As an expression of negative vegan dialectics, the chapter argues that Lynch’s sympatheia of the flesh expunges consumability.