The Prehistoricity of Cinema: Werner Herzog's Cave of Forgotten Dreams

Film-Philosophy 27 (2):282-300 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article argues that Werner Herzog's 2010 film Cave of Forgotten Dreams both enacts and undermines a desire for origins that was characteristic of 20th century modernist discourse. I argue that the aim of the film is literally to embody the origin of cinema, as figured in the recurring motif of projected light playing across the darkened walls of Chauvet Cave, the earliest known site of prehistoric painting. Drawing on texts by Wilson Harris, Giorgio Agamben, Jean-Luc Nancy, and Maxine Sheets-Johnstone, this article demonstrates that the phenomenology of the film's cave scenes and of its archaeological reconstructions produces not a straightforward self-presence at the scene of origins, but rather an “anachronic” or split temporality that links an imagined state of primordiality to the contemporary moment in a way that eludes the problematic modernist criterion of psychological authenticity. By failing to produce an immersive illusion of prehistoricity, the film is constantly thrown back onto its own simple act of “monstration”, or showing, without any transcendental ground. Instead of revealing a moment of origin, then, Cave of Forgotten Dreams plays the shifting role of what I describe, following the art historian Whitney Davis, as an ever-displaced “Figure 1” in an imaginary history of cinema.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,154

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-05-13

Downloads
26 (#841,117)

6 months
8 (#551,658)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Beginning the history of art.Whitney Davis - 1993 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 51 (3):327-350.

Add more references