2017) as well as at the Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut in Berlin (2018).
Section 1.2.: The Question of Embodiment in Film Studies and in Decolonial ThinkingThe Theories of Embodied Spectatorship The set of inquires called "the theories of embodied spectatorship" have provoked a vivid discussion within film studies over the last two and a half decades. However, in fact, these studies form such a variegated complex of ideas that even its overgeneralized common denominator associated with the attention to embodiment seems to be, at times, debated. 8 These theorizations present such a great heterogeneity of concepts, definitions, terminology, and inspirational sources, that perhaps the best way to eventually bind them together without risking to be vague is by recalling what they unanimously oppose. What virtually all corresponding lines of inquiry agree on is that the paradigm in film studies that was in a hegemonic position between the 70s and the beginning of the 90s, grounded on semiotic, psychoanalytic, or Marxist accounts, presents overgeneralizing, falsely totalizing and incomplete assertions that fail to account for the actual experience of film viewing. Besides, the authors in question state that the most pressing weakness of these former theoretical models, predominantly concerned with structures of the narrative or psychoanalytic implications of "the filmic gaze", is their lack of attention to the ways how films move viewers, or, in other words, how films affect spectators in corporeal and emotional terms.The causes of this flaw, as theorists observe, are manifold, but most of them derive from a set of limitations underlying Western philosophical traditions that inform these once hegemonic film theories. One of these limitations is a general disdain for emotions. In Western thought, emotions are considered to be opposed to reason, "too feminine" to enter patriarchal scientific discourse, or simply not suitable as objects of study, since they belong to the realm of the private or the subjective (Plantinga 2009, 4-5). Other than that, there is a long-standing fear and distrust of images in Western philosophy since Plato's cave, for it is assumed that images possess a seductive power due to their capacity to produce hallucinatory impressions, hence, they may be mistakenly confused with reality. Elaborated along this line, the "paranoid" and "phobic" constructs of psychoanalytic and semiotic film theory take moving images as dangerous fantasies and deceitful illusions emitted by an always manipulative apparatus that 8 See Eugenie Brinkema's endeavor to put forward a radically formalist theory that engages with "subjectless affect, bound up in an exteriority, uncoupled from emotion, interiority, expressivity, mimesis, humanism, spectatorship, and bodies" (Brinkema 2014, 45), thus, one that would be apt to analyse intensities that point beyond the grasp of structuralist film theory, and yet, without being interested in the bodily activity of the spectator. I will argue that although this postulation seems to uns...