
Damon R Young
Associate Professor of French and Film & Media at UC Berkeley, and faculty in the Program in Critical Theory. Formerly, assistant professor and postdoctoral scholar in the Society of Fellows at the University of Michigan.
My next project, "After the 'Private Self'," offers a media history of the subject through a study of self-representation from Rousseau's Confessions to Kim Kardashian's Selfish.
https://bullybloggers.wordpress.com/2020/03/25/safe-spaces/
Phone: (510) 664-7442
Address: 6224 Dwinelle Hall,
University of California,
Berkeley CA 94720
My next project, "After the 'Private Self'," offers a media history of the subject through a study of self-representation from Rousseau's Confessions to Kim Kardashian's Selfish.
https://bullybloggers.wordpress.com/2020/03/25/safe-spaces/
Phone: (510) 664-7442
Address: 6224 Dwinelle Hall,
University of California,
Berkeley CA 94720
less
Related Authors
Rachel Kuo
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
James Cohen
Queens College of the City University of New York
Jordan Schonig
Texas Christian University
Geoffrey Hondroudakis
University of Melbourne
Jirah Canilao
Ateneo de Davao University
Thao Ho
Humboldt Universität zu Berlin
Scott Wark
University of Warwick
Jonathan S Carter
Georgia Southwestern State University
Susanne Ylönen
University of Jyväskylä
InterestsView All (20)
Uploads
Books by Damon R Young
Papers by Damon R Young
http://128.122.109.51/imr/content/pathological-gaze
Available at http://post45.research.yale.edu/2019/05/ironies-of-web-2-0/
https://filmquarterly.org/2018/12/07/the-liberal-sexual-subject-a-conversation-with-damon-r-young/?fbclid=IwAR0ZeHxvUOaE1vOEXExnP2vmQb0grWwaq0DeprXjzjXWDu0rCjHX2hzE2mA
1970s film theory was obsessed with sex and desire, but have we ever had a *queer* theory of the cinema? Not really: a heterosexual presumption was built into apparatus theory's key formulations, but on the other hand, yes: it is latent within apparatus theory's analysis of the structural conditions (technological, social and psychic) of the cinema. In order to make this clear, the essay turns to Metz's contemporary Andy Warhol, approaching him not as a gay iconoclast but as a theorist of the cinema, and putting him as such in conversation with Metz and Baudry, as well as Stanley Cavell and Linda Williams. Against those critics who have (for good reasons) sought to defend Warhol's films from the charge of "voyeurism," the essay argues that what is indeed voyeuristic in those films discloses the voyeurism structurally inherent to the cinema and reveals it to be, if not always specifically sexual, fundamentally queer. Finally, it argues that even as apparatus theory describes a set of technological and spectatorial conditions that are no longer paradigmatic, its signal achievement was to lay bare the relation of technological elements to psychically dense modes of subjectivity, and as such it provides a crucial foundation for asking in what ways post-cinematic media produce a new orientation of, and technical infrastructure for, desire.
http://128.122.109.51/imr/content/pathological-gaze
Available at http://post45.research.yale.edu/2019/05/ironies-of-web-2-0/
https://filmquarterly.org/2018/12/07/the-liberal-sexual-subject-a-conversation-with-damon-r-young/?fbclid=IwAR0ZeHxvUOaE1vOEXExnP2vmQb0grWwaq0DeprXjzjXWDu0rCjHX2hzE2mA
1970s film theory was obsessed with sex and desire, but have we ever had a *queer* theory of the cinema? Not really: a heterosexual presumption was built into apparatus theory's key formulations, but on the other hand, yes: it is latent within apparatus theory's analysis of the structural conditions (technological, social and psychic) of the cinema. In order to make this clear, the essay turns to Metz's contemporary Andy Warhol, approaching him not as a gay iconoclast but as a theorist of the cinema, and putting him as such in conversation with Metz and Baudry, as well as Stanley Cavell and Linda Williams. Against those critics who have (for good reasons) sought to defend Warhol's films from the charge of "voyeurism," the essay argues that what is indeed voyeuristic in those films discloses the voyeurism structurally inherent to the cinema and reveals it to be, if not always specifically sexual, fundamentally queer. Finally, it argues that even as apparatus theory describes a set of technological and spectatorial conditions that are no longer paradigmatic, its signal achievement was to lay bare the relation of technological elements to psychically dense modes of subjectivity, and as such it provides a crucial foundation for asking in what ways post-cinematic media produce a new orientation of, and technical infrastructure for, desire.