BERGSTROM, Janet, Endless Night

«(The contemporary, theoretically aware version of interpretation) is not so much interpretation of meaning of films but rather the establishment of a "theoryfilmanalysis" in which psychoanalytic concepts (narcissism, paranoia, repression, whatever) are conjoined with a film in the interests of the interpretative elaboration of issues around (mainly) sexual difference. Psychoanalysis here become, as it were, a discourse-generator, making up with film a new genre, a new imaginary (within which, for instance, to construct "the female spectator")» (35)

BERGSTROM, Janet, Endless Night

«The analyst's compulsion, moreover, is the corollary to the particular cinema's own compulsion to visibility, a cinema itselfef haunted by the possibility of something more than its vision, its controlled continuity of screened reality ; analyst and film come across and miss one another on the common ground of their failure not to be seen by this "more" - the slippages, splinters, skewings, everything that bears the trace of what is not symbolized , not in view.» (34)

BERGSTROM, Janet, Endless Night

« Freud's psychoanalysis, that is, interrupts the vision of images, challenges the sufficiency of the representations they make, where cinema aims to sustain vision, to entertain -to blind in- the spectators with images. Franz Kafka at this same time talked of cinema putting a uniform on the eye, of its images taking over : "the speed of the movements and the precipitation of successive images... condemn you to a superficial vision of a continuous kind." » (31)

- Lien avec la citation de Kafka sur le cinématographe : "I can't stand it, perhaps because I am too visual." (voir source originale, p. 54)

BERGSTROM, Janet, Endless Night

«L’image ne reçoit pas l’inconscient. L’inconscient ne se donne pas à voir.» (citation attribuée à Freud et rapportée dans l’introduction du Scénario Freud cité p. 30)

- Résistance de la psychanalyse à l’image
- Freud ne croit pas à la figuration, ni au cinéma, ni en photographie.

BERGSTROM, Janet, Endless Night

«Such distance and disinterest notwithstanding, to think about cinema and psychoanalysis today is a substantial undertaking, the histories of the two extending across a century of multiple and complex interactions, one-sided or not. "Cinema and psychoanalysis", moreover, can be a way of enclosing and delimiting a topic that should, on the contrary, be opened up to areas of concern that are not typically taken – by film studies at least – central. There is need, for example, to consider not just how psychoanalysis and psychoanalysts are represented in cinema but also how the recourse to film functions in the analytic session, how the analysand’s speech and associations and memories may draw and depend on cinema’s given sounds and images, its provision of a residue of signifying traces taken up as unconscious material (we watch and grasp films consciously but what counts for us individually in the long run of the psyche may come with quite another urgency, be very different to whatever a film might urge in its images and their ordering, is something only analytically calculable). (26)

BERGSTROM, Janet, Endless Night

«The cinema has almost always failed to make psychic interiority meaningful on the screen.
First touch me, astonish me, tear me apart, startle me, make me cry...
You will please my eye afterward if you can. Diderot
Excess is a familiar term in contemporary film theory, a term most frequently invoked, I think, in discussion of melodrama.» (13)