SERGEI M EISENSTEIN

244. Ibid., p. 12.
245. On the presence of these theological references in Bazin’s idea of realism, see
Vinzenz Hediger, “Das Wunder des Realismus. Transsubstantiation als med-
ientheoretischeKategoriebeiAndréBazin,”inmontageAV(January18,2009),pp.75-
107.
246. Bazin, “The Ontology of the Photographic Image,” p. 14.
247. Ibid.
248. HereishowMalrauxpresentstheconnectionbetweenbaroqueartandcinemainhis
Esquisse d’une psychologie du cinéma: “Ce qu’appellent les gestes de noyés du monde
baroque n’est pas une modification de l’image, c’est une succession d’images; il
n’est pas étonnant que cet art tout de gestes et de sentiments, obsédé de théâtre,
finisse dans le cinéma…” (André Malraux, Esquisse d’une psychologie du cinéma [1939],
ed. J.-C. Larrat [Paris: Nouveau Monde, 2003], p. 45). See also André Malraux,
Psychologie de l’art (Genève: Albert Skira, 1949), p. 111.
249. Bazin, “The Ontology of the Photographic Image,” pp. 14-15. On Bazin and the idea
of cinema as “change mummified,” see the essay by Philip Rosen in this volume
(“Eisenstein’s Mummy Complex: Temporality, Trauma, and a Distinction in
Eisenstein’s ‘Notes for a General History of Cinema,’” here, pp. 393-404) and his
Change Mummified: Cinema, Historicity, Theory (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press, 2001).
250. Jean Epstein, “Bonjour cinéma” [1921], in Écrits sur le cinéma 1921-1953, tome 1: 1921-
1947, preface by Henri Langlois, introduction by Pierre Leprohon, 2 vols. [Paris:
Cinéma club/Seghers, 1974], p. 92). See also Hervé Joubert-Laurencin, “Embaumement,”inDictionnairedelapenséeducinéma,ed.A.deBaecqueandP.Chevallier(Paris:
Presses Universitaires de France, 2012), pp. 270-272.
251. Aby Warburg, “The Art of Portraiture and the Florentine Bourgeoisie” [1902], in The
RenewalofPaganAntiquity,intro.KurtW.Forster,trans.DavidBritt(LosAngeles:The
Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities, 1999), pp. 435-
450.
252. On the notion of “survival” as a historical and culturological category, see Edward
Tylor, “On the Survival of Savage Thought in Modern Civilization,” in Proceedings of
the Royal Institution of Great Britain 5 (1866-1869), pp. 522-535. As Georges Didi-
Huberman has shown in his L’Image Survivante (pp. 51-60, in the chapter titled
“Nachleben, ou l’anthropologie du temps: Warburg avec Tylor”), Tylor’s notion of
“survival” was an important reference for Warburg in elaborating the notion of
“Nachleben.”
253. Julius von Schlosser, Ephemeral Bodies: Wax Sculpture and the Human Figure, ed. R.
Panzanelli (Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2008), pp. 286-287.
254. André Bazin, “The Myth of Total Cinema,” in What Is Cinema?, vol. 1, pp. 17-22.
255. André Bazin, “On Why We Fight: History, Documentation, and the Newsreel,” in Film
& History 31.1 (2001), pp. 60-62.
256. Ibid. On Bazin’s notion of “total history” see Vinzenz Hediger, “Aufhebung.
Geschichte im Zeitalter des Films,” in Lorenz Engell, Oliver Fahle, Vinzenz Hediger,
and Christiane Voss, Essays zur Filmphilosophie (München: Fink, 2014).
257. “Dynamic Mummification,” p. 143.
446 notes