SERGEI M EISENSTEIN

characters’; in other words of an interpretation of this content” (Aumont, Montage-
Eisenstein, p. 176).
19. Eisensteinmakesthedistinctionbetweentwokindsofmimesisinhis1929lectureat
La Sarraz, “Imitation as Mastery,” in The Eisenstein Collection, ed. Richard Taylor
(London: Seagull Books, 2006), pp. 11-19.
20. Iampolski, The Memory of Tiresias, 227.
21. Sergei M. Eisenstein, “Yermolova,” in SW 2, p. 97 (My modified translation). See
also: Sergei M. Eizenshtein, “Montazh” (1937), in Izbrannye proizvedeniia v shesti
tomakh, 6 vols. (Moskva: Iskusstvo, 1964-1971), vol. 2, p. 387.
22. Eisenstein, “Montage 1937,” in SW 2, pp. 32-33. Emphases are Eisenstein’s own.
23. Aumont, Montage Eisenstein, p. 158.
24. See, for instance, his use of newspaper clipping from Newsweek, in the notes
published in this volume with the title “Dynamic Mummification: Notes for a
General History of Cinema.”
25. As when he deduces the necessity of cinema from a general hypothesis of
anthropological finitude, i.e., what is eternally true is human striving for eternity
(“Dynamic Mummification,” p. 156).
26. See a statement like “Cinema begins from level zero.” (“The Heir,” here, p. 109).
Defamiliarization can, for example, also be found in a strange subtitle of one of the
sections in an entry from December 28, 1947, where Eisenstein posits a leap “From
DionysustoTelevision”(“DynamicMummification,”p.169).Thisidea,whichposits
a continuity – if not direct coincidence – between cultic communion and the
experience of television, by relating the two historically distant phenomena in the
text, reappears in the section “Übergang zum Television” of “In Praise of the Cinechronicle”
(here, p. 237).
4. Nico Baumbach, Act Now!, or For an Untimely Eisenstein
1. “The Problem of the Materialist Approach to Form” (1925), in Sergei M. Eisenstein,
Selected Works, Volume I: Writings, 1922-1934, ed. and trans. Richard Taylor (London: I.
B. Tauris, 2010), p. 64. (Hereafter Selected Works [4 vols.] is abbreviated as SW.).
2. Ibid, p. 65.
3. See Sergei Eisenstein, “The Heir,” here, p. 109.
4. Paul Willemen, “Reflection on Digital Imagery: Of Mice and Men,” in New Screen
Media: Cinema/Art/Narrative, ed. Martin Rieser and Andrea Zapp (London: BFI Press,
2008), p. 16.
5. Lev Manovich, The Language of New Media (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001), p. 58.
6. Jonathan Beller, The Cinematic Mode of Production: Attention Economy and the Society of the
Spectacle (Hanover: Dartmouth College Press, 2006), p. 99.
7. Jan Simons, “New Media as Old Media: Cinema,” in The New Media Book, ed. Dan
Harries (London: BFI, 2002), p. 236.
8. Bill Seaman, “Recombinant Poetics: Emergent Explorations of Digital Video in
VirtualSpace,”inNewScreenMedia:Cinema/Art/Narrative,ed.MartinRieserandAndrea
Zapp (London: BFI Press, 2008), p. 252.
502 notes