Advertisement

Forbidden Places, Tempting Spaces, and the Politics of Desire

On Stalker and Beyond
Chapter

Abstract

Andrey Tarkovsky’s film Stalker, produced in the late 1970s in the now defunct and nearly forgotten Soviet Union, is one of those rare cinematic masterpieces that rattle all our preconceptions about the relationships between politics and art, popular culture and the state, science fiction and international relations. Funded by the Soviet government, yet hailed as a dissident work of art in the West, Stalker defies easy political categorizations. It is neither a perpetuator of existing power relations nor a predictable counter-narrative of the Soviet regime. Instead, the film subverts the science fiction genre to tell a complex and metaphysical story about law, desire, and sovereignty in which characters’ relations toward an extra-juridical space called The Zone form a set of different political subjectivities and different visions of the international system.

Keywords

International System Science Fiction Aesthetic Experience Political Subjectivity Sovereign Power 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Agamben, Giorgio. 1997. “The camp as the nomos of the modern,” in Hent de Vries and Samuel Weber, eds., Violence, Identity, and Self-Determination, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 106–118.Google Scholar
  2. Agamben, Giorgio. 1998. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, translated by Daniel Heller-Roazen, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Blaney, David, and Naeem Inayatullah. 2000. “The Westphalian Deferral,” International Studies Review, 2(2): 29–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bukatman, Scott. 1999. “The Artificial Infinite: On Special Effects and the Sublime,” in Annette Kuhn, ed., Alien Zone II: The Spaces of Science-Fiction Cinema, London: Verso, pp. 249–276.Google Scholar
  5. Burke, Edmund. 1990. A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, edited by Adam Phillips, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Copjec, Joan. 1994. Read my Desire: Lacan Against the Historicists, Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Crowther, Paul. 1989. The Kantian Sublime: From Morality to Art, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  8. Freeman, Barbara. 1995. The Feminine Sublime: Gender and Excess in Women’s Fiction, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. Goulding, Daniel J., ed. 1994. Five Filmmakers: Tarkovsky, Forman, Polanski, Szabó, Makavejev Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Johnson, Vida T, and Graham Petrie. 1994. The Films of Andrei Tarkovsky: A Visual Fugue, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Kant, Immanuel. 1987. Critique of Judgment, translated by Werner S. Pluhar, Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  12. Le Fanu, Mark. 1987. The Cinema of Andrei Tarkovsky, London: BFI.Google Scholar
  13. Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1993. “The Sublime Offering,” in Jean-Luc Nancy, ed., Of the Sublime, translated by Jeffrey S. Librett, Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 25–53.Google Scholar
  14. Reuters. 1986. “Obituaries: Andrei Tarkovsky Exiled Soviet Director Made Haunting Films Filled with Symbolism,” The Globe and Mail, December 30, p. D7.Google Scholar
  15. Rogozinski, Jacob. 1993. “The Gift of the World,” in Jean-Luc Nancy, ed., Of the Sublime, translated by Jeffrey S. Librett, Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 133–156.Google Scholar
  16. Salecl, Renata. 1996. “I Can’t Love You Unless I Give You Up,” in Renata Salecl and Slavoj Žižek, eds., Gaze and Voice as Love Objects, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 179–207.Google Scholar
  17. Schmemann, Serge. 1982. “Some Soviet Films Belie the Old Political Stereotype,” The New York Times, October 24, Section 2, p.13.Google Scholar
  18. Tarkovsky, Andrey. 1987. Sculpting in Time: Reflections on the Cinema, translated by Kitty Hunter-Blair, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  19. Tarkovskaya, Marina. 1990. About Andrei Tarkovsky, Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Zupancic, Alenka. 1998. “The Subject of the Law,” in Slavoj Zižek, ed., Cogito and the Unconscious, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 41–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Žižek, Slavoj. 1994. “A Hair of the Dog That Bit You,” in Mark Bracher, Marshall Alcorn Jr., Ronald Corthell, and Françoise Massadier-Kenney, eds., Lacanian Theory of Discourse: Subject, Structure, and Society, New York: New York University Press, pp. 268–282.Google Scholar
  22. Žižek, Slavoj. 1999. “The Thing From Inner Space,” Artmargins. Online at http://www.artmargins.com/content/feature/zizek1.html [July 12, 2002].

Copyright information

© Jutta Weldes 2003

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations