georges didi huberman, confronti... - lensbased.net

302 Notes110. In the same sentence, Freud concludes that the symptom has two aspects, ‘‘adaptation’’and ‘‘regression.’’ Freud, Introductory Lectures . . . , in SE 16: 366.111. See Georges Didi-Huberman, ‘‘Puissances de la figure: Exégèse et visualité dansl’art chrétien,’’ in Encyclopœdia Universalis—Symposium (Paris: Encyclopœdia Universalis,1990), 596–609.112. The pertinent bibliography is large. I will mention only, regarding the critique ofsources, the indispensable book by E. von Dobschütz, Christusbilder—Untersuchungen zurChristlichen Legende, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Heinrichs, 1899), as well as the classic and moregeneral study by E. Kitzinger, ‘‘The Cult of Images in the Age Before Iconoclasm,’’ DumbartonOaks Papers 8 (1954): 83–150.113. Colossians 2:11–13; 2 Corinthians 4:15 and 4:2; Hebrews 9:24.114. This comparison was used in the seventh century, regarding the Mandylion ofEdessa, in George the Pisidian, Expeditio Persica, 1:140–44, as edited by A. Petrusi, Panegiriciepici (Ettal: Buch-Kunstverlag, 1959), 91.115. At the other end of this story, Giambattista Marino reties the knot by devotingthe second part of his Dicerie Sacre (1614), entitled ‘‘On Painting,’’ to the Holy Shroud ofTurin. G. B. Marino, Dicerie Sacre, ed. G. Pozzi (Turin: Einaudi, 1960), 73–201. See, on thissubject, M. Fumaroli, ‘‘Muta Eloquentia,’’ Bulletin de la Societé de l’histoire de l’art français(année 1982), (1984): 29–48.116. George the Pisidian, Expeditio Persica, 1:140, 91.117. A. Paleotti, Esplicatione del sacro Lenzuolo ove fu involto il Signore, et delle Piaghe inesso impresse col suo pretioso Sangue . . . (Bologna: G. Rossi, 1598–99).118. George the Pisidian, Expeditio Persica, 1:139–53, 91.119. See H. Pfeiffer, ‘‘L’immagine simbolica del pellegrinaggio a Roma: La Veronica eil volto di Cristo,’’ in Roma 1300–1875: L’arte degli anni santi (Milan: A. Mondadori, 1984),106–19.120. Dante, Divina Comedia, Paradiso xxxi, 103–5: ‘‘Qual è colui forse di Croazia / vienea veder la Veronica nostra, / che per l’antica fame non sen sazia.’’121. See Walter Benjamin, ‘‘A Little History of Photography’’ (1931), trans. EdmundJephcott and Kingsley Shorter, in Walter Benjamin, Selected Writings vol. 2, 1927–1934, ed.Michael W. Jennings, Harriet Eiland, and Gary Smith (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Pressof Harvard University Press, 1999), 507–30. Benjamin, ‘‘The Work of Art in the Age ofMechanical Reproduction’’ (1935), in Illuminations: Essays and Reflections, ed. HannahArendt, trans. Harry Zohn (New York: Schocken Books, 1968), 217–52. M. Blanchot, ‘‘EssentialSolitude,’’ in L’Espace littéraire, 22–27: ‘‘Fascination is fundamentally connected to aneutral, impersonal presence, an indeterminate One, an immense, faceless Someone. It isa relation sustained by the gaze, a relation that is itself neutral and impersonal, with thedepth without gaze and without contour, an absence that one sees because it is blinding’’(27).122. Obviously, in accordance with Genesis 1:27: ‘‘God created man in the image ofhimself, / in the image of God he created him.’’123. For the precise expression found in a tropiary, or collection of liturgical chants,honoring the Mandylion, and cited by Leo of Chalcedony as authority in his letter toNicolas of Andrinople against iconoclasm, see V. Grumel, ‘‘Léon de Chalcédoine et lecanon de la fête du saint Mandilion,’’ Analecta Bollandiana 69 (1950): 136–37.124. Because ‘‘character,’’ throughout the Christian tradition, is a notion central to thesacrament. See, for example, Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, iiia.63.1–6.125. ‘‘And when Aaron and all the sons of Israel saw Moses, the skin on his face shoneso much that they would not venture near him.’’ Exodus 34:30. ‘‘Meanwhile the eleven