Notes - Springer978-1-137-27533-2/1.pdfNotes Introduction Haptics, Aesthetics, Philosophy , Some...

Notes

Introduction Haptics, Aesthetics, Philosophy

1. Margrit Shildrick, “Some Speculations on Matters of Touch,” The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26.4 ( 2001 ): 402. y

2. Jacques Derrida, On Touching—Jean-Luc Nancy, trans. Christine Irizarry y(Stanford CA: Stanford University Press, 2005).

3. Alois Riegl, Late Roman Art Industry, trans. Rolf Winkes (Rome: G. yBretschneider, 1985), 58–59.

4. This is Oppenheim’s central argument in The Painted Word (Ann Arbor:dUniversity of Michigan Press, 2000). She focuses upon Beckett’s “dialogue”with visual art, and argues for the importance of critical exegesis of the visual dimension of Beckett’s work, as visuality and visual perception are essential to his aesthetic.

5. Quoted in Oppenheim’s introduction to Samuel Beckett and the Arts: Music,Visual arts, and Non-print Media (New York: Garland, 1999), xv. This com-ament is from an interview with Jonathan Kalb in Beckett in Performance (New eYork: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 235.

6. Gilles Deleuze, Logic of Sensation , trans. Daniel W. Smith (London: Continuum, 2002), 41–2.

7. Antonin Artaud, The Theater and Its Double , trans. Victor Corti (London:eCalder, 1993 [ 1970 ]).

8. S. E. Gontarski, “The Body in the Body of Beckett’s Theater,” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 169–170. i

9. Laura Marks, The Skin of the Film (Durham: Duke University Press, 2000).Marks has been influenced in her thinking by a turn in film studies to phe-nomenology and affect. Of particular note in this regard is the work of Vivian Sobchack who sets out the case for such an approach in The Address of the Eye:A Phenomenology of Film Experience (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,e1992) and in Carnal Thoughts: Embodiment and Moving Image Culture (CA: eUniversity of California Press, 2004). For more on haptics and film, see Antonia Lant, “The Curse of the Pharaoh, or How Cinema Contracted Egyptomania,” October 59 ( 1992 ): 87–112; and “Haptical Cinema,” r October 74 ( 1995 ): 45–73. r

156 ● Notes

10. Marks is here quoting a conversation with Mike Hoolboom, eSkin of the Film , 162.

11. Gilles Deleuze, Cinema 2 , trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta (London:2Continuum, 2005), 12.

12. Mary Ann Caws, Manifesto: A Century of Isms y(Nebraska: Nebraska University sPress, 2001 ), 200.

13. “What has happened is that the sensory-motor schema is no longer in opera- tion, but at the same time it is not overtaken or overcome. It is shattered from

the inside. That is perceptions and actions ceased to be linked together, and spaces are now neither coordinated nor filled” (Deleuze, Cinema 2 , 39).2

14. Marks, The Skin of the Film , 127 15. André Lepecki and Sally Banes, The Senses in Performance (London: Routledge,e

2006), 1. 16. Of what is understood as dramatic in Aristotelian theater, Lehmann, in

Postdramatic Theater , trans. Karen J r ü rs-Munby (London: Routledge, 2006), writes: “It is essentially the unity of time that has to support the unity of thislogic that is meant to manage without confusion, digression and rupture”(160).

17. On narrative, Aristotle writes that the plot of the epic “should be made dra-matic, as in tragedies, dealing with a single action which is whole and com-plete and has beginning, middle and end,” Book XXIII, line 15, Poetics , trans.sGerald F. Else (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1967), 61.

c 18. Maike Bleeker, “Look who’s Looking! Perspective and the Paradox of ScientificSubjectivity,” Theater Research International 29 ( 2004 ): 31–32. l

19. Gilles Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” trans. Christian Kerslake, Parallax 3 ( 1996 ), 4.x20. Derrida, On Touching, 46. gg21. Ibid., 210.22. Ibid., 182; emphasis in original. 23 . Derrida, On Touching, pp. 209–10 and. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, eThe Visible

and the Invisible y , trans. Alphonso Lingus (Illinois: Northwestern UniversityePress, 1969), 208.

24. Derrida, On Touching, 212. gg25. Ibid., 9. 26. Stanton Garner, yBodied Spaces: Phenomenology and Performance in Contemporary

Drama (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994), 31.a27. Ulrika Maude, “The Body of Memory: Beckett and Merleau-Ponty,” in t Beckett

and Philosophy , ed. Richard Lane (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002), 120. y28. Ian James, in fThe Fragmentary Demand: An Introduction to the Philosophy of

Jean-Luc Nancy (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006), comparesyrthe language that Nancy uses to that of Merleau-Ponty, suggesting that “rather

than invoking a vocabulary of ‘incarnate sense,’ of intertwining, chiasmus, and reciprocity as Merleau-Ponty does to describe the way in which the world is

opened up through bodily intentionality, Nancy invokes a vocabulary of rup-y ture and discontinuity” (132). Yet it is possible to discern a similar vocabulary

Notes ● 157

f of rupture running through the Merleau-Ponty text, where the completion ofthe perceptual circle is always imminent, never actualized.

29. Jean-Luc Nancy, Corpus , trans. Richard A. Rand (New York: FordhamsUniversity Press, 2008), 17.

30. Ibid., 5. 31. Derrida, On Touching, 162.gg 32. Anna McMullan’s Theater on Trial (New York and London: Routledge, 1993)l

pays particular attention to the fragmentation of the visual image that occurs inBeckett’s work, noting, e.g., in relation to Ohio Impromptu , how the “two levels of representation, the scenic and the verbal, are therefore deliberately differenti-ated to produce a juxtaposition of narrative and visual image” (144).

33 . Nancy, Corpus, 53.s 34 . . Ibid., 5. 35. See Yoshiki Tajiri, Samuel Beckett and the Prosthetic Body (Basingstoke: Palgrave,y

2007). 36. Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” 4. 37. Anna McMullan, “Performing Vision(s): Perspectives on Spectatorship in

Beckett’s Theater,” in Samuel Beckett: A Casebook , ed. by Jennifer Jeffers (NY:kGarland, 1998), 134.

38. Gontarski, “The Body in the Body of Beckett’s Theater,” 172. 39. Anna McMullan, “From Matron to Matrix: Gender, Authority and (Dis)embodi-

ment in Beckett’s Theater,” in Women in Irish Drama: A Century of Authorship and Representation , ed. Melissa Sihra (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007), 107.

40. Roger Callois (“Mimicry and Legendary Psychaesthenia,” October 31 [ 1984 ]),rwriting on cross-cultural aspects of play in human behavior, suggests thatthe end goal of such mimicry in nature is a merging of the creature into the

background of its environment (16–32). There is a relationality between thebackdrops of Beckett’s dramatic spaces and the objects that fill them, and in

gmany cases the threat of merger, coupled with a desire to merge; the absorbing darkness, cradling the figure in Rockaby is a case in point. In other cases theymimicry is of a formal nature, with camera mirroring eye and so on.

41. Ulrika Maude, Beckett, Technology and the Body (Cambridge: CambridgeyUniversity Press, 2009), 38.

42. Samuel Beckett, Waiting for Godot (London: Faber, 1965 ), 62.t43. Graley Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television (Basingstoke:

Palgrave, 2007); and Jonathan Bignell, sBeckett on Screen: The Television Plays(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2009).

1 Eye: Failing, Myopic, Grainy

1. William Shakespeare, King Lear (London and Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1983r[ 1975 ]), 205.

2. Maurice Maeterlinck, Three Pre-Surrealist Plays, trans. Maya Slater (Oxford:sOxford University Press, 1997).

158 ● Notes

3. Samuel Beckett, Waiting for Godot (London: Faber, 1965 ), 63.t 4. José Saramago, Blindness , trans. Giovanni Pontiero (London: Vintage, 2005).s

5. For further analysis of this painting and the politics of vision, see DavidForgacs, “Blindness and the Politics of the Gaze,” in Indeterminate Bodies , ed.sNaomi Segal, Roger Cook, and Lib Taylor (UK: Palgrave, 2003).

6. Samuel Beckett, Collected Shorter Prose (London: Faber, 1984 ). Henceforth ereferred to in parentheses, in the text, as CSP. PP

7. Denis Diderot, “Letter on the Blind,” in Diderot’s Early Philosophical Works, ed.sand trans. Margaret Jourdain (New York: Lennox Hill, 1972), 87.

8. Ruby Cohn, A Beckett Canon (Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press, 2001), 240.


10. Jean-Luc Nancy, Noli me Tangere: On the Raising of the Body, trans. Sarah Clift,yPascale-Anne Brault, and Michael Naas (New York: Fordham, 2008), 48.

11 . See James Knowlson, Damned to Fame:The Life of Samuel Beckett (London:tBloomsbury, 1996), p. 124.

12. Henri Bergson, Matter and Memory , trans. Nancy Margaret Paul and W. ScottyPalmer (New York: Dover, 2004), 90.

13. In the notes for the 1969 Berlin Schiller Theater production, Beckett commentson Krapp’s relationship with his machine: “tendency of a solitary person to

enjoy affective relationships with objects, in particular here with tape-recorder.Smiles, looks, reproaches, caresses, taps, exclamations [ . . . ] A little throughout.Never forced,” thus emphasizing Krapp’s anthropomorphizing impulse. The machine is a companion for him. See James Knowlson, ed., l The TheatricalNotebooks of Samuel Beckett Volume III: Krapp’s Last Tape , (London: Faber, e1992), 79.

14. Pierre Chabert, “The Body in Beckett’s Theater,” Journal of Beckett Studies 8s( 1982 ): 27–28.

15. Bergson, Matter and Memory , 89.y 16. The three winds forward are two, three, and four seconds, respectively, lead-

ing up to a “crescendo of ejaculation.” See Knowlson, f Theatrical Notebooks ofSamuel Beckett , 91.t

17. Eckart Voigts-Virchow applies this term in his analysis of Quad (see “ d d QuadI and I Teletubbies : “Aisthetic” Panopticism versus Reading Beckett,” l SamuelBeckett Today/Aujourd’ hui [henceforth referred to as i SBTA ] 11 [2000]: 211),though it has perhaps some uses in the context of Krapp’s Last Tape g . Indicatinge“sensation,” the term was appropriated and reevaluated within postmodern aes-

thetics in order to valorize a more sensual approach to aesthetics. See Karlheinz Barck et al., eds., Aisthesis (Leipzig: Reclam, 1990); and Wolfgang Welsch,sAisthesis (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1987). s

18. “a glint of the old eye to come . . . ways of seeing in Krapp’s Last Tape a ” (Anna McMullan, Paper given at the Beckett working group of the International

Federation for Theater Research annual conference, University of MarylandyJune 26–July 1, 2005).

Notes ● 159

19. Samuel Beckett and Georges Duthuit, Proust and Three Dialogues (London: sCalder, 1965 [1935]), 13.

20. Graley Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television (Basingstoke:Palgrave, 2007), 13.emphasis in original.

21. Rosette Lamonte, “Krapp: Anti-Proust,” in Samuel Beckett, Krapp’s Last Tape:A Theater Workbook , edited by James Knowlson (London: Brutus, 1980). 162. k

22. McMullan, “a glint of the old eye to come . . . ways of seeing in t Krapp’s LastTape .” e

23. Julie Campbell, “The Semantic Krapp in Krapp’s Last Tape ,” e SBTA 6 ( 1997 ): 63. 24. Roland Barthes, Image, Music, Text , trans. and ed. Stephen Heath (London:t

Fontana, 1977), 188. 25. Lamonte, “Krapp: Anti-Proust,” 163.

a 26. In her discussion of the automatic or reflexive body in Beckett’s work, MarinaWarner suggests that Beckett seeks out the integrity of the “body’s thought,”

g the visceral immediacy of the hanged man’s emission, or the eyelids coming down. “Who Can Shave an Egg?: Foreign Tongues and Primal Sounds in

Mallarmé and Beckett,” in Reflections on Beckett: A Centenary Celebration , ed. Anna McMullan and S. E. Wilmer (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,

2009), 60. The context in which Beckett makes this comment is to be found in a letter to Thomas McGreevy in which Beckett suggests that Mallarmé writes‘

Jesuitical poetry’ and supposes himself a ‘dirty low church P.[Prostetant]’r ‘mourning for the integrity of a pendu’s emission of semen’. This concern for

the intrusion of the body into the aesthetic frame in a way which dismantlesror disrupts representation (irreducible materiality characterized by integrity or

truthfulness) was to becomes a feature of Beckett’s work. See fThe Letters of Samuel Beckett 1929-1940 . Edited by Martha Dow Fehsenfeld and Lois More0

Overbeck (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 134-5. This issue isdealt with in more detail in chapter 3 .

27. Bergson, Matter and Memory , 96. y 28. Yasunari Takahashi, “Memory Inscribed in the Body: Krapp’s Last Tape and thee

Noh play Izutzu ,” in The Theatrical Gamut: Notes for a Post-Beckettian Stage, eed. Enoch Brater (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995), 60. This is

the author’s own translation of the line. A complete translation can be foundin Ezra Pound and Ernest Fennellosa, The Classic Noh Theater of Japan w (NewYork: New Directions, 1959).

29. Martin Held’s words, who played Krapp in Berlin in 1969, in an interview with Ronald Hayman, in Knowlson ed., Krapp’s Last Tape: A Theater Workbook, 67. k

30. Jacques Derrida, On Touching—Jean-Luc Nancy y , trans. Christine Irizarryy(Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005), 210.

31. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible , trans. Alphonso Linguse(Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1969), 9.

32. Takahashi, “Memory Inscribed in the Body,” 58. 33. In 1977, Beckett aided his longtime friend Rick Cluchey in the direc-

tion of Krapp’s Last Tape in Berlin. Cluchey recounts that, during a break ine rehearsal, “Beckett depicts with a smile the image of an old Krapp who had

160 ● Notes

made the opposite decision: surrounded by an aged wife and many, many chil-dren . . . ‘Good God!’” It is as if Krapp knows that “whichever decision he mighthave taken, he would have failed” (Rick Cluchey and Michael Haerdter, “ sKrapp’s “Last Tape : Production Report,” in Knowslon ed., Samuel Beckett , t t Krapp’s LastTape: A Theater Workbook, 128). k

34. For Deleuze ( Cinema 1 , trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam[London: Continuum, 1986], 60–61), quoting as it does an earlier traditionof filmmaking, Film exemplifies what he terms the “movement-image,” thecamera following fluid matter in motion, and is also an “astonishing attempt”

f to answer the question of how we can be rid of perception—the perception ofothers, and the perception of self by self (69).

35. In 1964, after the filming of Film , Beckett wrote to Alan Schneider saying thaty while the piece has been “troubled by a certain failure to communicate fully by

purely visual means the basic intention,” he could see it having value chiefly “on a formal and structural level” (Maurice Harmon, ed., No Author Better Served: The Correspondence of Samuel Beckett and Alan Schneider [Cambridge, MA:rHarvard University Press, 1998 ], 166).

36. James Knowlson, Damned to Fame (London: Bloomsbury, 1996), 523. e37. Biographical sources confirm Beckett’s exposure to and continued interest in

Berkeley. His critical interest in the philosopher was not restricted to his stud-ies as an undergraduate in the early twenties. For example, a letter to ThomasMacGreevy, penned in 1933, recounts his reading of Berkeley’s Commonplace Book ,kwritten when the philosopher was an undergraduate at Trinity College, Dublin. He

remarks that it is “full of profound things, and at the same time of a foul (and false)w intellectual canaillerie, enough to put you against reading any more” (Martha Dow

Fehsenfeld and Lois More Overbeck, eds., 0The Letters of Samuel Beckett 1929–1940[Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009], 154).

38. This is from the first line in Beckett’s essay on Joyce’s Work in Progress, whichswas to become Finnegan’s Wake. See Beckett, e s Disjecta: Miscellaneous Writingsand A Dramatic Fragment, ed. by Ruby Cohn (London: Calder, 1983 ), 19.t

39. Merleau-Ponty, Visible and the Invisible , 134–135.e 40. Ibid., 138. 41. Samuel Beckett, Complete Short Prose, 1929–1989 w , ed. S. E. Gontarski (New9

York: Grove Press, 1995 ), 62–63. Ulrika Maude notes the novella’s emphasis on vision, “the eye itself is presented not as detached and disembodied, but as

fleshly and vulnerable, subject to damage and decay.” By doing this, “Beckettbrings vision closer to the proximity senses.” He thereby disables the eye as sym-

bolic of detached observation. “‘Material of a Strictly Peculiar Order’: Beckett,Merleau-Ponty and Perception,” in Beckett and Phenomenology a , ed. UlrikayMaude and Mathew Feldman (London: Continuum, 2009), 86 and 89.

42. This is the word Alan Schneider uses to describe the texture of Keaton’s eyelid, “On Directing Film ,” SBTA 4 ( 1995 ): 37.

43. Merleau-Ponty, Visible and the Invisible , 138. e 44. Ibid.

Notes ● 161

45. Ibid., 147. 46. Ibid., 148. 47. Derrida, On Touching, 213. gg 48. Harmon, ed., No Author Better Served , 166.dd 49. Schneider, “On Directing Film ,” 37. 50. Roland Barthes, Camera Lucida (London: Vintage, 1993), 94. a 51. Ibid., 79–80. 52. Ibid ., 102–3. 53. Alan Ackerman, “Samuel Beckett’s Spectres Du Noir g : The Being of Paintingr

and the Flatness of Film,” Contemporary Literature 44.3 ( 2003 ): 420.e 54. Maude, “‘Material of a Strictly Peculiar Order,’” 89. 55. Martin Jay, yDowncast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in Twentieth-Century

French Thought (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,t1993), 304.

56. Jane Hale, The Broken Window: Beckett’s Dramatic Perspective (Indiana: Purdue eUniversity Press, 1987), 82.

57. Norma Bouchard, “Film in Contexts,” SBTA 7 ( 1998 ): 124. 7 58. Yoshiki Tajiri, Samuel Beckett and the Prosthetic Body (Basingstoke: Palgrave,y

2007), 122. 59. Sylvie Debevec Henning, “Samuel Beckett’s Film and La Dernière Bande :

Intratextual and Intertextual Doubles,” Symposium 35 ( 1981 ): 140.60. Fehsenfeld and Overbeck, eds., Letters of Samuel Beckett 1929–1940, 222. 061. Hale, The Broken Window , 82. w62. Ibid., 1.

2 Ear: Full of Relentless Echoes

1. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The e Visible and the Invisible , trans. Alphonso Linguse(Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1969), 144.

2. Jean-Luc Nancy, Listening , trans. Charlotte Mandell (New York: FordhamggUniversity Press, 2007), 31.

3. Ibid., 42. 4. Mary Bryden, “Beckett and the Sound of Silence,” in Samuel Beckett and Music , c

ed. Mary Bryden (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), 25–27. 5. Samuel Beckett, eThe Beckett Trilogy: Molloy, Malone Dies, TheUnnamable

(London: Pan Books, 1979), 352. 6. Derval Tubridy, “‘Words pronouncing me alive’: Beckett and Incarnation,” in

SBTA 9 ( 2000 ): 97. 7. For further analysis of the presence of this radiophonic voice in Beckett’s

work, see Everett Frost, “Mediating On: Beckett, Embers and Radio Theory,”sin Samuel Beckett and the Arts , ed. Lois Oppenheim (New York and London:sGarland, 1999), 311–329.

8. Gilles Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” ed. and trans. Christian Kerslake in xParallax3 ( 1996 ), 126.

162 ● Notes

9. Graley Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television (Basingstoke:Palgrave, 2007), 53.

10. Sergei Eisenstein, Selected Works Volume 1: Writings, 1922–34, ed. and trans.4Richard Taylor, 4 vols. (London: British Film Institute, 1988), 163–164.

11. Sergei Eisenstein, Vsevolod Pudovkin and Grigori Alexandrov, “Statementon Sound,” in The Eisenstein Reader , ed. Richard Taylor (UK: British FilmrInstitute), 80–81; emphasis in original. See also Jean Antoine-Dunne’s influ-

ential article “Beckett and Eisenstein on Light and Contrapuntal Montage.” SBTA 11 (2000): 315–323.

12. Michel Chion, Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen , ed. and trans. Claudia Gorbman(New York: Columbia University Press, 1994), 34.

13. David Bordwell and Kristin Thomson, Film Art: An Introduction , ed. DavidBordwell and Kristen Thompson (London: McGraw-Hill Hill, 2004), 348–349.

14. Maurice Harmon, ed., No Author Better Served f : The Correspondence ofddy Samuel Beckett and Alan Schneider (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press, 1998 ), 198. 15. Zilliacus notes that “the French version reads ‘serre-kiki mental’ which

unequivocally denotes strangulation.” The earlier versions of the play repre-sent Beckett’s search for words to convey this strangulation image. Throttle,

muzzle, spike, squeeze, tighten, silence, put to silence, garrotte, finish, mum,strangle, stamp out, exterminate, still, kill, quench, fix, lay, have choked are allto be found in the developing drafts of the work, Beckett and Broadcasting: A Study of the Works of Samuel Beckett for and in Radio and Television (Abo: AboAkademie, 1976), 188.

16. Before “passion” became associated with strong or violent emotion, it denotedsuffering or enduring (in Latin g passionem ).

17. Although the play was directed by Alan Gibson, Beckett was present on setand involved in the rehearsal process for the piece. Soon after, Beckett was todirect the play himself, in Germany at Sü ddeutscher Rundfunk, having, in Knowlson’s words, “derived enormous confidence” from his work at the BBCand on Film. See Knowlson, Damned to Fame , 538–540. e

18. Katharine Weiss, “Modernism and Mechanisation: Technology in the Worksof Samuel Beckett” (PhD diss., University of Reading, 2002), 187.

19. Chion, Audio-Vision , 129. 20. Ibid., 131. 21. As with several of his plays with female roles, Beckett had Whitelaw in mind

when he wrote Eh Joe . She was not free to take the part at the time of the BBCeproduction (Knowlson, Damned to Fame , 538). This 1988 version was doneein association with RTE, Channel Four, and S ü ddeutscher Rundfunk; KlausHerm played the part of Joe.

22. Zilliacus, Beckett and Broadcasting, 198. gg23. Ibid., 186–187.24. Ibid., 190.25. Harmon, ed., No Author Better Served , 203.dd

Notes ● 163

26. Beckett himself considered the camera to function as a “peephole.” Zinman’sarticle expands on this idea, connecting it with a tradition of “peephole” art(“ Eh Joe“ and the Peephole Aesthetic,” e SBTA 4 [ 1995 ]: 59).

27. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,” in Feminist Film Theory, ed. Sue y Thornham (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006), 58–69 (62).

Originally published in Screen 16 ( 1975 ): 6–18. 28. Rosette Lamonte, “Beckett’s Eh Joe : Lending an Ear to the Anima,” in Women

in Beckett: Performance and Cultural Perspectives, ed. Linda Ben-Zvi (Urbana:sIllinois, 1992 ), 233.

29. S. E. Gontarski, sIntent of Undoing in Samuel Beckett’s Dramatic Texts(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985 ), 118.

30. Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television , 56. 31. Ibid., 62. 32. Weiss, “Modernism and Mechanisation,” 187. 33. Harmon, ed., No Author Better Served , 198.dd 34. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison , trans. Alan

Sheridan (London: Penguin, 1999), 34–35. 35. Elaine Scarry, dThe Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking of the World

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 35. f 36. Ariel Glucklich, “The Tortures of the Inquisition and the Invention of

Modern Guilt,” in The Book of Touch , ed. Constance Classen (Oxford, NY:hBerg, 2005), 127.

37. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception , trans. Colin Smyth(London: Routledge, 2002), 235; emphasis mine.

38. Ibid., 236. 39. Ibid., 235–236. 40. Scarry, Body in Pain , 29. 41. Such an approach was enabled by Beckett’s changing, during development of the

work, of Voice’s narrative from first to third person. That she describes the lastmoments of another woman brings a higher level of complexity to the work andis counted by Gontarski as the saving grace of a play that otherwise may haveremained a “maudlin account of guilt” (Gontarski, Intent of Undoing, 117). gg

42. Margharita Giuletti, “Visual and Vocal Ventures in Eh Joe ’s Telerhythms,” Journal of Beckett Studies 13 ( 2003 ): 121–122.s

43. Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television , 62. 44. Voice’s reference to the announcement of the girl’s death, “in the

Independent . . . ‘On Mary’s beads we plead her needs and in the Holy Mass,’” indicates her religious orientation ( CSP , 205). PP

45. Jean-Luc Nancy, Noli me Tangere: On the Raising of the Body, trans. Sarah Clift,yPascale-Anne Brault, and Michael Naas (New York: Fordham, 2008), 47.

46. Ibid., 47–48. This issue is pursued in more depth in relation to presence andabsence in Nacht und Tr ärr ume in chapter 5 . e

47. Arthur Schopenhauer, World as Will and Idea , Vol. 1, trans. R. B. Haldane andJ. Kemp (London: Trü bner, 1883), 292.

164 ● Notes

48. David Abrams, Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition (London: Oxford University Press, 1971), 50.

49. “Beckett and the Sound of Silence,” 30–31. 50. Lydia Goehr, yThe Quest for Voice: On Music, Politics and the Limits of Philosophy

(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), 18. 51. Ibid., 19. 52. Anna McMullan, “Versions of Embodiment/Visions of the Body in

Beckett’s . . . but the clouds . . . ,” SBTA 6 ( 1997 ): 360. 53. Quoted in Alfred Einstein, Music in the Romantic Era (London: Dent, 1941), a

21. 54. Catherine Laws, “Beethoven’s Haunting of Beckett’s Ghost Trio ,” sAssaph: Studies

in the Theater 17–18 ( 2003 ): 202. r 55. Michael Maier “Two Versions of Nacht und Trärr ume : What Franz Schubert

Tells Us about a Favourite Song of Beckett,” SBTA 20 (2006): 98. 56. Nancy, Listening , 17–18, emphasis in original. gg 57. In addition to Bryden’s article referred to earlier, a number of other articles have

r dealt in depth with silence as it occurs in the fabric of Beckett’s aesthetic. Forexample, Marjorie Perloff discusses the role of silence in the radio play Embers , sin “The Silence that is not Silence: Acoustic Art in Samuel Beckett Embers ,” sin Samuel Beckett and the Arts: Music, Visual Arts and Non-Print Media , ed.Lois Oppenheim (London: Routledge, 1999), 247–268. Helen Baldwin identi-fies links to mysticism within Beckett’s silences in eSamuel Beckett’s Real Silence(University Park: Pennsylvania University Press, 1981); and Joseph Roach takesa political approach to the “liturgical silences” in Waiting for Godot , whichtmark the absences and silences in the tragedies of human history in “The GreatHole of History: ‘Natural’ Catastrophe and Liturgical Silences,” c South AtlanticQuarterly 100 ( 2001 ): 307–317. y

58. This letter is published in Disjecta , ed. Ruby Cohn (London: Calder, 1983 ),170–173.

59. Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” 126, emphasis in original 60. Michael Maier, “ Geistertrio : Beethoven’s Music in Samuel Beckett’s Ghost Trio

(Part II),” SBTA 11 ( 2000 ): 315. 61. Maier, “Two Versions of Nacht und Trärr ume ,” 97.e 62. Eric Prieto, “Caves: Technology and the Total Art Work in Reich’s eThe Cave

and Beckett’s Ghost Trio ,” Mosaic 35 ( 2002 ): 208.c63. Maier, “ Geistertrio (Part II),” 318.64. It is also important however to bear in mind that music cannot be taken

out of the cultural context of its listener: “Emotional responses to music arelinked to a particular sequence of events based on conventions and rules that depend not only on shared understanding and representations, but also a com-mon background of knowledge and beliefs” (John Sloboda and Patrick Juslin,“Psychological Perspectives on Music and Emotion,” in Music and Emotion , ed.

John Sloboda and Patrick Juslin [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001], 91). It would appear, according to Meyer’s thinking, that it is knowing the rules

Notes ● 165

of the game that permit an awareness of when those rules are broken, and thisknowledge is a result of immersion in a particular culture; see Leonard Meyer,Emotion and Meaning in Music (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956),c46.

65. Leonard Meyer, “Music and Emotion: Distinctions and Uncertainties,” in Sloboda and Juslin, ed., Music and Emotion , 354.

66. Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” 130.67. Gontarski, Intent of Undoing, 122. gg68. Reed, The Schubert Song Companion y (Manchester: Manchester University

Press, 1985), 492–493.69. Laws, “Beethoven’s Haunting of Beckett’s Ghost Trio ,” 211. 70. Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television , 84.

71. Sloboda and Juslin, “Psychological Perspectives on Music and Emotion,” 92–93.

72. Meyer, “Music and Emotion,” 358, n49–50. 73. Royal Browne, Overtones and Undertones: Reading Film Music (Berkeley: c

University of California Press, 1994), 92–93.74. Bryden, “Beckett and the Sound of Silence,” 30. 75. Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” 127. 76. Schopenhauer, World as Will and Idea Vol 1 , 340.77. Christopher Janaway, Schopenhauer (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994),r

29. 78. Ibid., 345. 79. John Reed, The Schubert Song Companion y (Manchester: Manchester University

Press, 1985), 339. r 80. Christina Adamou, “Screening the Unrepresentable: Samuel Beckett’s Plays for

Television” (PhD diss., University of Reading, 2003), 216.

3 Mouth: Trying to Tell It All, Failing

1. Jean-Luc Nancy, Listening , trans. Charlotte Mandell (New York: FordhamggUniversity Press, 2007), 21–22.

2. Ibid., 42. 3. Adriana Cavarero, lFor More than One Voice: Toward a Philosophy of Vocal

Expression , trans. Paul A. Kottman (CA: Stanford University Press, 2001), 4. 4. Roland Barthes (in collaboration with Roland Havas), “Ascolto,” in aEnciclopedia

Einaudi (Turin: Einaudi, 1977), 1: 237. Quoted in ibid., 15. i 5. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception , trans. Colin Smyth

(London: Routledge, 2002), 181. 6. Anna McMullan, Performing Embodiment in Samuel Beckett’s Drama w (Newa

York: Routledge, 2010), 112. 7. Boyce draws on the work of J. L. Austin, whose 1960s text, s How to do Things

with Words , argued that speech in itself is an act that can bring about othersf actions and is thus described as “performative.” See “The Negative Imprint of

166 ● Notes

the Past in Samuel Beckett’s Embers and s Not I ,” II hin Recovering Memory: Irish Representations of Past and Present , ed. Hedda Friberg et al. (Newcastle upontTyne: Cambridge Scholars, 2007), 189.

8. Mary Bryden, Women in Beckett’s Prose and Drama: Her Own Other (Basingstoke:rMacmillan, 1993), 124.

y 9. Kathy Smith suggests, with reference to Elaine Scarry’s work on the bodyunder torture, that Not I demonstrates the transformation of body into voice, Iwhich is also a translation by power, in the torture chamber, of language into a scream and confession (“The Body in Pain: Beckett, Orlan and the Politics of Performance,” Studies in Theater and Performance 25 [ 2005 ]: 42). See ealso Elaine Scarry, The Body in Pain (NY, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 46.


11. Gordon Armstrong, dSamuel Beckett, W.B. Yeats, and Jack Yeats: Images and Words (Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 1990), 67. s

12. In this, Bryden draws on the writings of Bertrice Bartlett ( lWomen in Samuel Beckett’s Prose and Drama , 131).

13. Judith Butler, Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex (New York and xLondon: Routledge, 1993), 69.

14. Ulrika Maude, “A Stirring beyond Coming and Going: Beckett and Tourette’s,” 14. Ulrika Maude, “A Stirring beyond Coming and Going: Beckett and Tourette’s,”Journal of Beckett Studies 17 (2008), 162.s

15. David Eagleman, Incognito: The Secret Life of the Brain (UK: Canongate, 2012), 163.

16. Howard Kushner and Kate Brown, “Eruptive Voices: Coprolalia, Malediction, 16. Howard Kushner and Kate Brown, “Eruptive Voices: Coprolalia, Malediction,and the Poetics of Cursing,” New Literary History 35 ( 2001 ): 543.y

17. Ibid., 544. 18. Butler, Bodies that Matter f , 68. It must be noted that this argument forms part ofr

Butler’s response to criticisms of her earlier work, Gender Trouble , which seemed eto image the body as passive, blank matter onto which culture is inscribed. The more recent Bodies that Matter addresses this by talking of the relation betweenrbody and discourse as one of negotiation. The body is here viewed as a more dynamic partner in the relationship.

19. Quoted in Enoch Brater, rBeyond Minimalism: Beckett’s Late Style in the Theater(Oxford: Oxford University Press), 23.

20. Butler, Bodies that Matter , 10. r 21. Mladen Dolar, “The Object Voice,” in Gaze and Voice as Love Objects, ed. s

Renata Salecl and Slovoj Ž iž ek (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1996), 13.

22. Kathleen O’Gorman, “‘but this other awful thought’: Aspects of the Female in Beckett’s Not I ,” II Journal of Beckett Studies 1 (1992): 36.s

23. The origins of the figure of Auditor are reportedly a djellaba-clad woman leaning 23. The origins of the figure of Auditor are reportedly a djellaba-clad woman leaning against a wall in Tunisia, where Beckett was on holiday. See James Knowlson,

Damned to Fame (London: Bloomsbury, 1996), 588–589. The figure was, Brater e

Notes ● 167

writes, in a “position of intense listening,” thus the concept of Not I y was initiallyIsparked by preoccupation with such an isolated listener. See “Dada, Surrealism and the Genesis of Not I ,” in II Modern Drama 18 ( 1975 ): 50.a

24. Elizabeth Grosz, Volatile Bodies (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994), s203.

25. Marina Warner, “Who Can Shave an Egg?: Foreign Tongues and Primal Soundsin Mallarmé and Beckett,” in Reflections on Beckett: A Centenary Celebration , ed. Anna McMullan and S. E. Wilmer (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009), 60.

26. Fehsenfeld and Overbeck, eds., 0The Letters of Samuel Beckett: 1929–1940134–135.

27. Eagleman, Incognito , 131. 28. Samuel Beckett, Waiting for Godot (London: Faber, 1965 ), 17.t 29. The line from text IX of Texts for Nothing y reads: “That’s right, wordshit buryg

me, avalanche, and let there be no more talk of any creature, nor of a worldto reach, in order to have done, with worlds, with creatures, with words, withmisery, misery” (Samuel Beckett, Complete Short Prose 1929–1989, ed. S. E. 9Gontarski [New York: Grove, 1997], 137).Jonathan Boulter notes that in sTexts for Nothing there is a transformation of discourse into excrement, its entire g

y verbal-textual production into a kind of “(t)ex(t)crement” (“‘Wordshit buryme’: The Waste of Narrative in Samuel Beckett’s Texts for Nothing,” gg fJournal of Beckett Studies 11 [ 2002 ]: 10).s

30. Johanna Oksala, “Female Freedom: Can the Lived Body be Emancipated?” Feminist Interpretations of Merleau-Ponty , ed. Dorothea Olkowski and Gail yWeiss (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006), 224.

31. Ibid., 225. 32. Hanna Scolnicov, Women’s Theatrical Space y (Cambridge: Cambridge Universitye

Press, 1994 ), 149. 33. Elin Diamond, Unmaking Mimesis: Essays on Feminism and Theater (USA andr

UK: Routledge, 1997), iii. 34. Ibid., xii. 35. Alois Riegl, Late Roman Art Industry, trans. Rolf Winkes (Rome: G.y

Bretschneider, 1985), 58–59. 36. Laura Marks, The Skin of the Film (Durham: Duke University Press, 2000),

136–143. 37. Anna McMullan, Theatre on Trial: Samuel Beckett’s Later Drama (London:a

Routledge, 1993), 47. 38. Ibid., 63. 39. As Linda Ben-Zvi suggests of A Piece of Monologue : “Beckett effectively achieves

f on stage what he has previously achieved in fiction; to allow the two parts of the self to exist simultaneously.” Referring to the inner and outer parts of the

ego, she argues that That Time and e Not I also demonstrate an inability to merge Icontradictory aspects of the self (“The Schismatic Self in A Piece of Monologue ,”eJournal of Beckett Studies 7 [1982]: 11). s

168 ● Notes

40. Jacques Aumont, The Image , trans. Claire Pajackowska (London: British Film eInstitute, 1997), 189.

41. Ibid., 108. 42. Jose Ortega y Gasset, “Meditations on the Frame,” Perspecta 26 ( 1990 ): 189. a 43. Mariko Hori Tanaka, “Elements of Haiku in Beckett and Eisenstein,” SBTA 11

( 2000 ): 325–326. 44. Ibid., 325–326. 45. Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception , 194. 46. Butler, Bodies that Matter , 68. r 47. James A. W. Heffernan, r Museum of Words: The Poetics of Ekphrasis from Homer

to Ashbury (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 3–4. y 48. Murray Krieger, Ekphrasis: The Illusion of the Natural Sign (Baltimore and

London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 6. 49. Ibid., 11. 50. John Keats, Selected Poems (UK: Penguin Classics, 2007), 191. s 51. Krieger, Ekphrasis, 10. s 52. Stephen Cheeke, Writing for Art: The Aesthetics of Ekphrasis (Manchester ands

New York: Manchester University Press, 2008), 35–36. 53. Lois Oppenheim, ed., The Painted Word (Ann Arbor: University of Michigand

Press, 2000), 142. 54. Ibid., 125. 55. Ibid., 138. 56. Ibid., 125. 57. McMullan,Theatre on Trial , 59.l 58. Ruby Cohn voices her doubt over the “dramatic value” of That Time , while at the e

r same time noting the author’s intentions regarding the work, as written in a letterto Alan Schneider: “The delay in parting with [ That Time ] is due to misgivingseover disproportion between image (listening face) and speech and much time lost

in trying of amplifying former. I have now come to accept its remoteness and stillness—apart from certain precise movements of, breath just audible in silences and final smile—as essential to the piece and dramatically of value” ( tA Beckett (( Canon [Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2001], 334).

59. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 50.l 60. Walter Asmus, “Practical Aspects of Theater, Radio and Television: Rehearsal

Notes for the German Premiere of Beckett’s ‘That Time’ and ‘Footfalls’ atthe Schiller-Theater Werkstatt, Berlin (Directed by Beckett),” trans. HelenWantabe, Journal of Beckett Studies 2 ( 1977 ): 94. s

61. In The Skin Ego (trans. C. Turner [New Haven: Yale, 1989]), Didier Anzieuf writes of how the maternal voice provides a sonic skin for the infant, a bath of

sound that aids the formation of the of the skin ego, an psychic skin withoutwhich the subject is not properly formed (101). Chapter 4 of this study dealswith the question of skin and the limits of subjectivity in more detail.

62. Brater, Beyond Minimalism , 42. 63. Ibid., 43.

Notes ● 169

64. Ibid., 38. 65. Ibid., 41–42. 66. Krieger, Ekphrasis, 10. s

67. Asmus, “Rehearsal Notes for the German Premiere of Beckett’s ‘That time’ and ‘Footfalls,’” 92.

68. Oppenheim, The Painted Word , 141.dd 69. Samuel Beckett, Endgame (London: Faber & Faber, 1982 [1958]), 11.e 70. The Fiction of Samuel Beckett: Form and Effect a (Berkeley: University of Californiat

Press, 1993), 10. Quoted in Oppenheim, The Painted Word , 141. dd 71. Jean-Luc Nancy, Corpus , trans. Richard A. Rand (New York: Fordhams

University Press, 2008), 17.

4 Skin, Space, Place

1. Steven Connor, The Book of Skin (New York: Cornell, 2003), 28–29. 2. Jean-Luc Nancy, Corpus , trans. Richard A. Rand (New York: Fordhams

University Press, 2008), 15. emphasis in original. 3. See Freud, The Ego and the Id , trans. Joan Riviere (London: Hogarth, 1927).dd 4. Didier Anzieu, Skin Ego , trans. C. Turner (New Haven: Yale, 1989), 101,

emphasis in original. 5. Ibid., 40. 6. Connor, Book of Skin , 36. 7. James Knowlson, Damned to Fame (London: Bloomsbury, 1996), 616.e 8. “Woman” has been frequently framed, at least until the beginnings of modern

medical knowledge, as a vessel, passively providing a place/space for the child.Aristotle, in On the Generation of Animals, wrote: “It is clear then from whats

has been said that, in those animals that emit seed, the seed does not come from every part; and that the female does not contribute in the same way as the male

to the generation of the offspring that are constituted, but the male contributesthe source of movement and the female the matter. This why the female doesnot generate by itself; for it needs a source and something to provide move-ment and definition” (J. L. Ackrill, A New Aristotle Reader [Oxford: OxfordrUniversity Press, 1987], 242).

9. Mary Bryden, rWomen in Samuel Beckett’s Prose and Drama: Her Own Other(Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1993), 7.

10. Ibid., 123. 11. See also Jennifer Jeffers, Beckett’s Masculinity (New York: Palgrave, 2009).y 12. Anna McMullan, “From Matron to Matrix: Gender, Authority and (Dis)

embodiment in Beckett’s Theater,” in fWomen in Irish Drama: A Century of Authorship and Representation , ed. Melissa Sihra (Basingstoke: PalgraveMacmillan, 2007), 98.

13. Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television , 111. 14. See Minako Okamuro, “ . . . but the clouds . . . and a Yeatsian Phantasmagoria,”

SBTA 19 ( 2006 ).

170 ● Notes

15. Herren, Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television , 120. 16. Jonathan Bignell, Beckett on Screen: The Television Plays (Manchester: s

Manchester University Press, 2009), 145–146. 17. Ibid., 143. 18. Ibid., 139. 19. See Laura Marks, The Skin of the Film (Durham: Duke University Press, 2000). 20. Gilles Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” trans. Christian Kerslake, Parallax 3 ( 1996 ):x

127. 21. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception , trans. Colin Smyth

(London: Routledge, 2002), 283. 22. Ibid., 244. 23. Ibid., 245. 24. Samuel Beckett, Company (London: Calder, 1984 ), 7. y 25. Bignell, Beckett on Screen , 17. 26. Anna McMullan, Performing Embodiment in the Work of Samuel Beckett w(New t

York: Routledge, 2010), 88. 27. Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” 128. 28. William Gruber, “Empire of Light: Luminosity of Space in Beckett’s Theater,”

in Samuel Beckett: A Casebook , ed. Jennifer Jeffers (New York and London: kGarland, 1998), 217.

29. Okamuro., “ . . . but the clouds . . . and a Yeatsian Phantasmagoria,” 261. 30. Anna McMullan, Theatre on Trial: Samuel Beckett’s Later Drama (London: a

Routledge, 1993), 110. 31. Jean-Luc Nancy, Listening , trans. Charlotte Mandell (New York: Fordham gg

University Press, 2007), 17. 32. Mladen Dolar, “The Object Voice,” in Gaze and Voice as Love Objects, ed. s

Renata Salecl and Slovoj Ž iž ek (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1996), 13.

33. Julia Kristeva, The Kristeva Reader , ed. Toril Moi (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986),rr94–95.

34. “Timaeus,” trans. by Benjamin Jowett, The Internet Classics Archive ,e http://clas-sics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html (accessed December 2, 2012 ).

35. Kristeva, Kristeva Reader , 94. rr 36. Bryden, Women in Samuel Beckett’s Prose and Drama , 189. 37. Ibid., 190. 38. Ibid., 189. 39. Elin Diamond, “Feminist Readings of Beckett,” in tPalgrave Advances in Beckett

Studies, ed. by Lois Oppenheim (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004 ), 60. 40. Specifically, she notes the extent to which drag performances suggest a “dis-

sonance not only between sex and performance, but sex and gender, and gender and performance,” thus in “imitating gender, drag implicitly reveals the imita-tive [and therefore performative] structure of gender itself–as well as its con-tingency” (Judith Butler, Gender Trouble [New York and London: Routledge,e1991], 187).

Notes ● 171

41 . Christine Jones, “Bodily Functions: A Reading of Gender Performativity in Samuel Beckett’s Rockaby,” in y Samuel Beckett: A Casebook , ed. Jennifer M.kJeffers (London: Routledge, 1998), 189.

42. Ibid., 193–194. 43. Diamond, “Feminist Readings of Beckett,” 62. 44. Walter Asmus, “Practical Aspects of Theater, Radio and Television: Rehearsal

Notes for the German Premiere of Beckett’s ‘That Time’ and ‘Footfalls’ at theSchiller-TheaterWerkstatt, Berlin (Directed by Beckett),” 83.

45. Ibid., 83–84, emphasis in original. 46. Ibid., 85. 47. Bryden, Women in Samuel Beckett’s Prose and Drama , 165. 48. Diamond, “Feminist Readings of Beckett,” 58–59. See also Diamond’s earlier

article,“Speaking Parisian: Feminist Interpretations of Beckett.” In Women inBeckett : t Performance and Cultural Perspectives, ed. by Linda Ben-Zvi (Urbana:sUniversity of Illinois Press, 1990), 254.

49. From Asmus, “Rehearsal Notes for the German Premi è re of Beckett’s t ThatTime and e Footfalls,” quoted in s e Theatrical Notebooks of Samuel Beckett: TheShorter Plays, ed. S. E. Gontarski (London: Faber, 1992), 283–284.s

50. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 101. ll 51. William Worthen, Print and the Poetics of Modern Drama (Cambridge:a

Cambridge University Press, 2009), 174. 52. David Pattie, “Space, Time and the Self in Beckett’s Late Theater,” Modern

Drama 43 ( 2000 ): 400. a 53. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 99. ll 54. Gontarski, ed., Theatrical Notebooks of Samuel Beckett: The Shorter Plays, 284. s 55. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 99. ll 56. Knowlson, Damned to Fame , 624–625. e 57. Luce Irigaray, Ethics of Sexual Difference, trans. Carolyn Burke and Gillian Gille

(London: Athlone Press, 1993), 41–42.y 58. McMullan points out that, on the one hand, Beckett transforms what Irigaray

terms the sang rouge (red blood) of the reproductive, embodied female intoethe sang blanc y of male aesthetic reproduction. Yet, on the other hand, the playc

emphasizes the “intersubjective production of self and other in which a woman(both character and actress) determines to author her vocal and embodied per-formance of selfhood” (“From Matron to Matrix,” 107).

59. Anna McMullan, “Samuel Beckett’s Theater: Liminal Subjects and the Politicsof Perception,” Princeton University Library Chronicle 67 (2006): 445. e

60. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 94.ll61. Genesis 3:16. 62. Luce Irigaray, Speculum of the Other Woman , trans. Gillian C. Gill (Ithaca:

Cornell University Press, 1985), 116.63. Peter Gidal, e Understanding Beckett: A Study of Monologue and Gesture in the

Works of Samuel Beckett (London: Macmillan, 1986), 163, quoted in McMullan,tTheatre on Trial , 101. ll

172 ● Notes

64. Samuel Beckett, eThe Beckett Trilogy: Molloy, Malone Dies, The Unnamable(London: Pan Books, 2006 ), 352.

65. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 102.ll 66. “He opened the Euphrates and the Tigris from her eyes / closed her nostrils /

He piled up clear-cut mountains from her udder / Bored waterholes to drain off the catchwater / He laid her tail across / tied it fast as the cosmic bond [ . . . ]With half of her he made a roof, he fixed the earth / He [ ] the work, madethe insides of Tiamat / surge” (Stephanie Dalley, trans., aMyths of Mesopotamia [Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1991], 257).

67. Irigaray, Speculum of the Other Woman , 237. 68. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 99–100.ll 69. James Knowlson and John Pilling, dFrescoes of the Skull: The Later Prose and

Drama of Samuel Beckett (London: Calder, 1979), 227.t 70. Martha Dow Fehsenfeld and Lois More Overbeck, eds., l The Letters of Samuel

Beckett 1929–1940 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 518.0 71. Connor, The Book of Skin , 36.

5 On the One Hand . . . (The One That Writes the Body)

1. Martin Puchner, aStage Fright: Modernism, Anti-theatricality and Drama(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002), 15.

2. Kurt Taroff, “Screens, Closets, and Echo Chambers of the Mind: The Struggleto Represent the Inner life on Stage,” Forum Modernes Theater 25/2 ( 2010 ):r181.

y 3. This image of Beckett is contradicted also, or at the very least complicated, byseveral other factors. For instance, as Herren puts it, the ban on adaptation of his work from one genre to another was enforced only sporadically and selectively.

f He regards Beckett’s collaboration with Marin Karmitz on the adaptation ofComèdie to film as revealing an author far more open to adaptation than someeof his actions would suggest (“Different Music: Karmitz and Beckett’s Film Adaptation of Comédie ,” e Journal of Beckett Studies 18 [ 2009 ]: 10–31). WhilesBeckett had little patience with some projects—notably JoAnne Akalaitis’sproduction of Endgame (American Repertory Theater, 1984)—his attitude toe

f others was quite flexible. For example, David Warrilow, a noted interpreter ofthe dramas for whom Beckett wrote A Piece of Monologue , also adapted sev-e

f eral prose pieces for the stage with Beckett’s approval. For further analysis of Beckett’s revising and adaptation of his own work from text to performance, see S. E. Gontarski’s “Revising Himself: Performance as Text in Samuel Beckett’s

Theater,” Journal of Modern Literature 22 (Fall 1998): 131–155.e 4. For images that demonstrate this, see Cathy Courtney, Jocelyn Herbert: A

Theater Workbook (USA: Applause, 1997 ), 89. k 5. William Worthen, Print and the Poetics of Modern Drama (Cambridge: a

Cambridge University Press, 2009), 160. 6. Ibid., 3.

Notes ● 173

7. Shane Weller, Beckett, Literature and the Ethics of Alterity (Basingstoke: Palgrave yMacmillan, 2006), 22.

8 . Gilles Deleuze, Logic of Sensation , trans. Daniel W. Smith (London: Continuum, 2002), 155.

9. Anna McMullan, Theatre on Trial: Samuel Beckett’s Later Drama (London:aRoutledge, 1993), 26.

10. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception , trans. Colin Smyth(London: Routledge, 2002), 360–361.

11. Jorella Andrews, “Vision, Violence and the Other: A Merleau-Pontian Ethic,”in Feminist Interpretations of Merleau-Ponty , ed. Dorothea Olkowski and GailyWeiss (Pennsylvania Park: Pennsylvania University Press), 171, emphasis inoriginal.

12. Billie Whitelaw talks of the experience as causing pain and “raging Beckettitis”in Jocelyn Herbert: A Theater Workbook , 89.k

13. Jim Hansen, “Samuel Beckett’s Catastrophe and the Theater of Pure Means,”eContemporary Literature 49 ( 2008 ): 666.e

14. Anna McMullan, Performing Embodiment in Samuel Beckett’s Drama w(New aYork: Routledge, 2010), 115.

15. Notable perhaps also is the fact that the word “catastrophe,” in Arabic “nakba,”is used by Palestinians to refer to the founding of the Israeli state in 1948. Theterm, across languages and contexts, has multiple applications.

16. Hansen, “Samuel Beckett’s Catastrophe and the Theater of Pure Means,” 679. e 17. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 28.l

18. Elin Diamond critiques the violence of such identificatory fantasies in “‘Thesociety of my likes’: Beckett’s Political Imaginary,” SBTA 11 ( 2000 ): 382–388.

19. Jennifer Jeffers, Uncharted Space: The End of Narrative (New York: Peter Lang, e2001), 203.

20. Jean-Luc Nancy, Corpus , trans. Richard A. Rand (New York: FordhamsUniversity Press, 2008), 11. emphasis in original.

21. Ibid., 10. 22. Ibid., 11 23. Martta Heikkilä , s At the Limits of Presentation: Coming-into-Presence and its

Aesthetic Relevance in Jean-Luc Nancy’s Philosophy (Frankfurt: Peter Lang,y2008), 255.

24. In an interview with Jean-Baptiste Marongiu, “Le partage, l’infini et le jardin”Libération , February 17, 2000, http://www.liberation.fr/livres/0101327381-le-partage-l-infini-et-le-jardin (accessed December 1, 2012), translation by author.

25. Enoch Brater, Beyond Minimalism: Beckett’s Late Style in the Theater (Oxford: rOxford University Press, 1990), 158.

26. Quoted in ibid., 162. 27. Ibid., 158. 28. Elaine Scarry, Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking of the World (Oxford: d

Oxford University Press, 1985), 19–20. 29. Ibid., 20.

174 ● Notes

30. S. E. Gontarski, ed., sTheatrical Notebooks of Samuel Beckett: The Shorter Plays(London: Faber, 1992 ), 418–419.

31. Gontarski, “Revising Himself: Performance as Text in Samuel Beckett’s Theater,” Journal of Modern Literature 22 (Fall 1998): 142.e

32. Worthen, Print and the Poetics of Modern Drama , 159. 33. Steven Connor, Samuel Beckett: Repetition, Theory, Text (USA: Davies Group,t

2007), 160. 34. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison , trans. Alan

Sheridan (London: Penguin, 1999), 143. 35. Ibid., 138. 36. Rebecca Schneider, “On Taking the Blind in Hand,” in The Body in Performance ,e

ed. Patrick Campbell (London: Routledge, 2001), 29. 37. Karen Laughlin, “‘Dreaming of [ . . . ] Love’: The Making of the (Post)Modern

Subject,” SBTA 11 ( 2000 ): 206. 38. Gilles Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” trans. Christian Kerslake, Parallax 3x

( 1996 ): 123.39. Gontarski, ed., Theatrical Notebooks , 409. s40. S. E. Gontarski, “The Body in the Body of Beckett’s Theatre,” tSamuel Beckett

Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 176. i 41. Eckhart Voigts-Virchow, “ Quad I and I Teletubbies or ‘Aisthetic’ Panopticisms

versus Reading Beckett,” SBTA 11 ( 2000 ): 211. 42. Gontarski, ed., Theatrical Notebooks , 415.s 43. Ibid., 427. 44. Ibid., 431. 45. Voigts-Virchow, “Quad I and I Teletubbies ,” 213.s 46. Anna McMullan, “Virtual Subjects: Performance, Technology and the Body in

Beckett’s Late Theater,” Journal of Beckett Studies 10 ( 2002 ): 168.s47. Peggy Phelan, Unmarked: The Politics of Performance (London: Routledge,e

1993), 1.

6 On the Other Hand . . . (The One ThatRefuses to Touch)

1. Margrit Shildrick, “Some Speculations on Matters of Touch,” fThe Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26.4 ( 2001 ): 392 y

2. Ibid., 402. 3. The reference to the “Latin quarter hat” and to the Isle of Swans in Paris links

the play to Beckett’s relationship with Joyce. But as with much of Beckett’s work other biographical references are apparent, such as the apartment he and

his wife Suzanne shared in Paris. While I recognize these potential biographicalmarkers, which are perhaps clearer in this play than in others, no one “story”can offer definitive explanations for the play.

4. James Knowlson, Damned to Fame (London: Bloomsbury, 1996), 664.e

Notes ● 175

5. Anna McMullan, Theatre on Trial: Samuel Beckett’s Later Drama (London: aRoutledge, 1993), 113.

6. S. E. Gontarski, Thee sIntent of Undoing in Samuel Beckett’s Dramatic Texts(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985 ), 178.

7. Maurice Harmon, ed., t No Author Better Served: The Correspondence of Samuel Beckettand Alan Schneider (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 391. r

8. Gontarski, Intent of Undoing, 177. gg 9. Willi Apel, ed., Harvard Dictionary of Music, 2nd ed. (London: Heinemann,c

1970), 404. 10. Alfred Einstein, Schubert , trans. by David Ascoli (London: Caselli, 1951), 330.t 11. See Gontarski, Intent of Undoing, 174. gg 12. Ibid., 175–176. 13. Jean Baptiste Poquelin-Moliè re, rThe Dramatic Works of Moliere V2: School for

fHusbands; The Bores; School for Wives; School for Wives Criticized; Impromptu of Versailles; The Forced , trans. Henri van Laun (MO: Kessinger, 2010).dd

14. McMullan, Theatre on Trial , 114.l15. William Worthen, Print and the Poetics of Modern Drama (Cambridge:a

Cambridge University Press, 2009), 3. 16. Ohio Impromptu , dir. Charles Sturridge (Dublin: RTE, 2001).17. Garin Dowd, “Karaoke Beckett, or Jeremy Irons, Mimicry and Travesty in

Ohio Impromptu on Film,” SBTA 13 ( 2003 ): 178. 18. Ibid., 176.19. Bert O. States, f Great Reckonings in Little Rooms: On the Phenomenology of

Theater (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1985), 31.r 20. Ibid., 35. 21. Ian James, fThe Fragmentary Demand: An Introduction to the Philosophy of

Jean-Luc Nancy (CA: Stanford University Press, 2006), 138.y 22. Ibid., 132. 23. For James, this entails a collapsing of the “transcendent, the spiritual, or the 23. For James, this entails a collapsing of the “transcendent, the spiritual, or the

idea into the touch in separation of finite sense and impenetrable matter.” Indoing so, “Nancy is elaborating an atheism,” but one that is deeply aware of its

y Christian provenance (ibid., 142). There is no metaphysical beyond of the bodyor of the world, but only a “single body infinitely altered and exposed both inits fall as well as in its raising,” Jean-Luc Nancy, g Noli me Tangere: On the Raisingof the Body w , trans. Sarah Clift, Pascale-Anne Brault, and Michael Naas (NewyYork: Fordham, 2008), 48.

24. Jean-Luc Nancy, Being Singular Plural, trans. Robert D. Richardson and Annell E. O’Byrne (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000), 3, emphasis in

original. 25. See also, for further commentary, Christopher Watkin, “A Different Alterity:

Jean-Luc Nancy’s ‘Singular Plural,’” Paragraph 30 ( 2007 ): 53. h 26. Peter Boxall, “Beckett and Homoeroticism,” in Palgrave Advances in Beckett Studies, s

ed. Lois Oppenheim (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004 ), 128–129.

176 ● Notes

27. Mary Bryden, Samuel Beckett and the Idea of God (UK: Palgrave Macmillan,d1998), 186–187.

28. Nancy, Noli Me Tangere, 32.e 29. Jonathan Kalb, “The Mediated Quixote: The Radio and Television Plays and

Film,” in The Cambridge Companion to Beckett , ed. John Pilling (Cambridge: tCambridge University Press, 1994), 142.


31. Martha Dow Fehsenfeld and Lois More Overbeck, eds., l The Letters of SamuelBeckett 1929–1940 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 222. 0


33. James, Fragmentary Demand, 133–134. dd 34. Nancy, Corpus , 5; emphases in original.s 35. John 20:29. 36. John 20:17. 37. Nancy, Noli me Tangere, 47.e 38. Ibid., 48. 39. Knowlson, Damned to Fame , 682–683. e 40. Graley Herren, “ Nacht und Tr“ ärr ume : Beckett’s Agony in the Garden.” fJournal of

Beckett Studies 11 ( 2001 ): 58. s 41. Knowlson, Damned to Fame , 682. e 42. See Anna McMullan, “Virtual Subjects: Performance, Technology and the

Body in Beckett’s Late Theater,” Journal of Beckett Studies 10 ( 2002 ), 165–172. s 43. Louis Marin, On Representation , trans. Catherine Porter (CA: Stanford

University Press, 2001), 386. 44. McMullan, “Virtual Subjects,” 168. 45. Jean-Luc Nancy, The Ground of the Image, trans. Jeff Fort (New York: Fordham,e

2005), 37. 46. Peter Boxall, Since Beckett: Contemporary Writing in the Wake of Modernism

(London: Continuum, 2011), 60. 47. Christina Adamou, “Screening the Unrepresentable: Samuel Beckett’s Plays for 47. Christina Adamou, “Screening the Unrepresentable: Samuel Beckett’s Plays for

Television” (PhD diss., 2003), 216.48. Anna McMullan, Performing Embodiment in Samuel Beckett’s Drama w (Newa

York: Routledge, 2010), 88. 49 . Philip Auslander, Liveness : Performance in a Mediatized Culture (London: e

Routledge, 1999), 31. 50. Ibid., 36. 51. Eckart Voigts-Virchow, “Exhausted Cameras: Beckett in the TV Zoo,” in

Samuel Beckett: A Casebook , ed. Jennifer M. Jeffers (London: Routledge, 1998), k237–238.

52. Gilles Deleuze, “The Exhausted,” trans. Christian Kerslake, Parallax 3 ( 1996 ): x128.

Notes ● 177

l i i diConclusion Departing Bodies:Between Doubting Thomas and Noli me Tangere

1. John 20: 24–29. 2. Peggy Phelan, Mourning Sex: Performing Public Memories (London: Routledge, s

1997), 36. 3. Ibid., 35. 4. See Martin Crowley’s “Bataille’s Tacky Touch,” Modern Language Notes 119s

( 2004 ): 778–779. 5. Jean-Luc Nancy, Noli me Tangere: On the Raising of the Body, trans. Sarah Clift,y

Pascale-Anne Brault, and Michael Naas (New York: Fordham, 2008), 48. 6. Samuel Beckett, How It Is (New York: Grove Press, 1964 ), 9. s7. Samuel Beckett, Company (London: Calder, 1984 ), 7.y8. Ulrika Maude, Beckett, Technology and the Body (Cambridge: Cambridgey

University Press, 2009), 73–74. 9. Derval Tubridy, “‘Words pronouncing me alive’: Beckett and Incarnation,”

SBTA 12 (2000): 94–95. 10. Ibid., 97. 11. Ibid., 103. 12. Jean-Luc Nancy, Corpus , trans. Richard A. Rand (New York: Fordhams

University Press, 2008), 3. 13. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible , trans. Alphonso Linguse

(Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1969), 147.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Beckett , Samuel . The Beckett Trilogy: Molloy, Malone Dies, The Unnamable. London:ePan Books, 2006 .

———. Collected Shorter Plays. London: Faber, 1984 .s ———. Company . London: Calder, 1984 .y——— . Complete Short Prose, 1929–1989, ed. S. E. Gontarski. New York: Grove 9

Press, 1995 .——— . Disjecta , ed. Ruby Cohn. London: Calder, 1983 .———. Endgame. London: Faber & Faber, 1982 (1958).——— . How It Is . New York: Grove Press, 1964 . s ———. More Pricks Than Kicks . London: Calder, 1993 .s——— . No Author Better Served: The Correspondence of Samuel Beckett and Alan

Schneider , ed. by Maurice Harmon. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, rr1998 .

——— . Proust & Three Dialogues. London: John Calder, 1965 .s——— . Waiting for Godot. London: Faber, 1965 . t

Visual Material

A Piece of Monologue. Directed by Robin Lefevre. Ireland: RTE, Channel 4 and the eIrish Film Board. 2001.

. . . but the clouds . . . Directed by Donald McWhinnie and Anthony Page. London:British Broadcasting Corporation. 1970.

Eh Joe. Directed by Alan Gibson. London: British Broadcasting Corporation.1966.

Eh Joe, Footfalls & Rockaby. Directed by Walter Asmus. Ireland: RTE, Channel 4 yand S ü ddeutscher Rundfunk. 1988.

Film. Directed by Alan Schneider. New York: Evergreen. 1964. Ghost Trio. Directed by Donald McWhinnie. London: British Broadcasting

Corporation. 1977.

180 ● bl h Bibliography

Krapp’s Last Tape. g Directed by Donald McWhinnie. London: British BroadcastingCorporation. 1972.

Not I. Directed by Anthony Page. London: British Broadcasting Corporation. 1973.Ohio Impromptu. Directed by Charles Sturridge. Ireland: RTE, Channel 4 and the

Irish Film Board. 2001. Quad I & II. Directed by Samuel Beckett. Stuttgart: S ü ddeutscher Rundfunk. 1981. That Time. Directed by Charles Garrad. Ireland: Channel 4 and the Irish Film

Board. 2001. What Where. Directed by Damian O’Donnell. Ireland: RTE, Channel 4 and the e

Irish Film Board. 2001.

Secondary Sources

A Abrams , David . Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition . London: Oxford University Press, 1971.

AAckerly , Alan, and S. E. Gontarski . The Faber Companion to Samuel Beckett. London:tFaber, 2006.

AAckerman , Alan . “Samuel Beckett’s Spectres Du Noir : The Being of Painting and therFlatness of ‘Film.’” Contemporary Literature 44.3 ( 2003 ): 399–441.e

AAckrill , J. L . A New Aristotle Reader . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987. r Adamou , Christina . “Screening the Unrepresentable: Samuel Beckett’s Plays for Adamou , Christina . “Screening the Unrepresentable: Samuel Beckett’s Plays for

Television.” PhD diss., University of Reading, 2003. Andrews , Jorella . “Vision, Violence and the Other: A Merleau-Pontian Ethic.” In Andrews , Jorella . “Vision, Violence and the Other: A Merleau-Pontian Ethic.” In

Feminist Interpretations of Merleau-Ponty, edited by Dorothea Olkowski and GailyWeiss, 167–182. Pennsylvania Park: Pennsylvania University Press, 2006.

AAntoine-Dunne , Jean . “Beckett and Eisenstein on Light and Contrapuntal Montage.” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 315–323.i

AAnzieu , Didier . Skin Ego. Translated by C. Turner. New Haven: Yale, 1989. AApel , Willi , ed. Harvard Dictionary of Music, 2nd ed. London: Heinemann, 1967. c AAristotle . Poetics . Translated by Gerald F. Else. Ann Arbor: University of Michigans

Press, 1967. AArtaud , Antonin . The Theatre and Its Double . London: Calder, 1993 ( 1970 ).e Asmus , Walter . “Practical Aspects of Theatre, Radio and Ttelevision: Rehearsal Asmus , Walter . “Practical Aspects of Theatre, Radio and Ttelevision: Rehearsal

Notes for the German Premiere of Beckett’s ‘That Time’ and ‘Footfalls’ at the Schiller-Theater Werkstatt, Berlin (Directed by Beckett).” Translated by HelenWatanabe. Journal of Beckett Studies 2 ( 1977 ): 82–95.s

AAumont , Jacques . The Image . Translated by Claire Pajackowska. London: BritisheFilm Institute, 1997.

A Auslander , Philip. Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture. London: Routledge, 1999.

Baldwin , Helen . Samuel Beckett’s Real Silence a . University Park: PennsylvaniaeUniversity Press, 1981.

Banes , Sally, and Andr é Lepecki , eds. The Senses in Performance . London: Routledge, e 2006.

bl hBibliography ● 181

Barthes , Roland . Camera Lucida . Translated by Richard Howard. London: Vintage,1993 ( 1981 ).

———. Image, Music, Text . Translated and edited by Stephen Heath. London:tFontana, 1977.

Ben-Zvi , Linda . “Beckett and Television: In a Different Context.” aModern Drama 49 ( 2006 ): 469–490.

———. “The Schismatic Self in ‘A Piece of Monologue,’” sJournal of Beckett Studies 7 (1982): 7–17.

Bergson , Henri . Matter and Memory . Translated by Nancy Margaret Paul and W.yScott Palmer. New York: Dover, 2004 ( 1912 ).

Bignell , Jonathan . Beckett on Screen: The Television Plays. Manchester: ManchestersUniversity Press, 2009.

c Bleeker , Maike . “Look Who’s Looking! Perspective and the Paradox of ScientificSubjectivity.” Theatre Research International 29 ( 2004 ): 28–41.l

Bordwell , David, and Kristin Thomson . Film Art: An Introduction. London:McGraw-Hill, 2004.

Bouchard , Norma . “Film in Contexts.” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 7 ( 1998 ):i121–133.

Boulter , Jonathan . “‘Wordshit bury me’: The Waste of Narrative in Samuel Beckett’sTexts for Nothing.” gg Journal of Beckett Studies 11 ( 2002 ): 1–20.s

Boxall , Peter . “Beckett and Homoeroticism.” In Palgrave Advances in Beckett Studies ,sedited by Lois Oppenheim, 110–132. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

— ———. Since Beckett: Contemporary Writing in the Wake of Modernism . London:Continuum, 2012.

Boyce , Brunhilde . “The Negative Imprint of the Past in Samuel Beckett’s Embers andsNot I .” In II Recovering Memory: Irish Representations of Past and Present, y edited byHedda Friberg et al., 156–201. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars, 2007.

Brater , Enoch . Beyond Minimalism: Beckett’s Late Style in the Theater. Oxford:rOxford University Press, 1987 .

— ———. “Dada, Surrealism and the Genesis of Not I .” II Modern Drama 18 ( 1975 ): 49–59. a — ———. “The Thinking Eye in Beckett’s Film .” Modern Language Quarterly 36 y

( 1975 ): 166–176. Browne , Royal . Overtones and Undertones: Reading Film Music y . Berkeley: Universityc

of California Press, 1994. Bryden , Mary . “Beckett and the Sound of Silence.” In Samuel Beckett and Music , c

edited by Mary Bryden, 21–46. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. ————. Samuel Beckett and the Idea of God. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998. dd ————. Women in Beckett’s Prose and Drama: Her Own Other . Basingstoke:r

Macmillan, 1993. Butler , Judith . Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. New York and x

London: Routledge, 1993.————. Gender Trouble . New York and London: Routledge, 1991.eCallois , Roger , and John Shepley . “Mimicry and Legendary Psychaesthenia.”

October 31 ( 1984 ): 16–32.r


Campbell , Julie . “The Semantic Krapp in Krapp’s Last Tape .” e /Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 6 ( 1997 ): 63–72. i

Cavarero , Adriana . For More than One Voice: Toward a Philosophy of Vocal Expression . Translated by Paul A. Kottman. CA: Stanford University Press, 2001.

Chabert , Pierre . “The Body in Beckett’s Theatre.” Journal of Beckett Studies 8 ( 1982 ):s23–28.

———. “Samuel Beckett as Director.” Translated by M. A. Bonney and J. Knowlson,in Samuel Beckett, Krapp’s Last Tape: Theatre Workbook 1 , edited by JamesKnowlson, 85–107. London: Brutus, 1980.

Cheeke , Stephen . Writing for Art: The Aesthetics of Ekphrasis w. Manchester and New sYork: Manchester University Press, 2008.

Chion , Michel . Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen a . Edited and translated by ClaudiaGorbman. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.

Cohn , Ruby . A Beckett Canon . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2001. Connor , Steven . The Book of Skin . New York: Cornell, 2003. ———. Samuel Beckett: Repetition, Theory, Text. USA: Davies Group, 2007.t Courtney , Cathy . Jocelyn Herbert: A Theater Workbook. USA: Applause, 1997 . Crowley , Martin . “Bataille’s Tacky Touch.” Modern Language Notes 119 ( 2004 ):s

766–780. Dalley , Stephanie , trans. Myths of Mesopotamia . Oxford and New York: Oxford

University Press, 1991. Deleuze , Gilles . Cinema 1. Translated by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam.

London: Continuum, 1986. ———. Cinema 2 . Translated by Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta. London:2

Continuum, 2005. ———. “The Exhausted.” Translated by Christian Kerslake. Parallax 3 ( 1996 ): 113–135. x——— . Logic of Sensation . Translated by Daniel W. Smith. London: Continuum,

2002. Derrida , Jacques . On Touching—Jean-Luc Nancy . Translated by Christine Irizarry.y

Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005. Diamond , Elin . “Feminist Readings of Beckett.” In Palgrave Advances in Beckett Studies,

edited by Lois Oppenheim, 45–67. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. ———. “‘The society of my likes’: Beckett’s Political Imaginary.” tSamuel Beckett

Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 382–388.i ———. “Speaking Parisian: Feminist Interpretations of Beckett.” In Women in

Beckett : t Performance and Cultural Perspectives –, edited by Linda Ben-Zvi, 208–s216. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1990.

———. Unmaking Mimesis: Essays on Feminism and Theatre. USA and UK:eRoutledge, 1997.

Diderot , Denis . Diderot’s Early Philosophical Works y . Edited and translated bysMargaret Jourdain. New York: Lennox Hill, 1972.

Dolar , Mladen . “The Object Voice.” In Gaze and Voice as Love Objects y , edited bysy Renata Salecl and Slovoj Ž i ž ek, 7–31. Durham and London: Duke University

Press, 1996.


Dowd , Garin . “Karaoke Beckett, or Jeremy Irons, Mimicry and Travesty in OhioImpromptu on Film.” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 13 ( 2003 ): 169–182.i

Eagleman , David . Incognito: The Secret Life of the Brain . UK: Canongate, 2012. Einstein , Alfred . Music in the Romantic Era . London: Dent, 1941. ———. Schubert . Translated by David Ascoli. London: Caselli, 1951.t Eisenstein , Sergei. The Eisenstein Reader y . Edited by Richard Taylor, translated byr

Richard Taylor and William Powell. London: British Film Institute, 1998. ———. Selected Works Volume 1: Writings, 1922–34 y . Edited and translated by4

Richard Taylor, 4 vols. London: British Film Institute, 1988. Ettinger , Brachia . The Matrixial Borderspace a . Minneapolis: University of Minnesotae

Press, 2006. Fehsenfeld , Martha Dow, and Lois More Overbeck , eds. lThe Letters of Samuel

Beckett 1929–1940. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Forgacs , David . “Blindness and the Politics of the Gaze.” In Indeterminate Bodies , s

edited by Naomi Segal, Roger Cook, and Lib Taylor, 192–204. UK: Palgrave, 2003.

Foucault , Michel . Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison . Translated by AlanSheridan. London: Penguin, 1999.

Frost , Everett . “Mediating On: Beckett. Embers and Radio Theory.” In s lSamuel Beckett and the Arts , edited by Lois Oppenheim, 311–329. New York and London:sGarland, 1999.

Garner , Stanton B . yBodied Spaces: Phenomenology and Performance in Contemporary Drama. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994.

Gidal , Peter . sUnderstanding Beckett: A Study of Monologue and Gesture in the Works of Samuel Beckett. London: Macmillan, 1986.t

Giuletti , Margharita . “Visual and Vocal Ventures in Eh Joe ’s Telerhythms.” l Journalof Beckett Studies 13 ( 2003 ): 112–126.s

Glucklich , Ariel . “The Tortures of the Inquisition and the Invention of ModernGuilt.” In The Book of Touch , edited by Constance Classen, 120–131. Oxford,hNY: Berg, 2005.

Goehr , Lydia . The Quest for Voice: On Music, Politics and the Limits of Philosophy . yOxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.

Gontarski , S. E . “The Body in the Body of Beckett’s Theatre.” /Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 169–177. i

———. The Intent of Undoing in Samuel Beckett’s Dramatic Texts . Bloomington:sIndiana University Press, 1985 .

——— . ed. — The Theatrical Notebooks of Samuel Beckett: t The Shorter Plays , volumesIV. London: Faber, 1992 .

Grosz , Elizabeth . Volatile Bodies . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994. s Gruber , William E . “Empire of Light: Luminosity of Space in Beckett’s Theatre.” In Gruber , William E . “Empire of Light: Luminosity of Space in Beckett’s Theatre.” In

Samuel Beckett: A Casebook , edited by Jennifer Jeffers, 203–223. New York andkLondon: Garland, 1998.

Hale , Jane Alison . The Broken Window: Beckett’s Dramatic Perspective. Indiana: Purdue University Press, 1987.


Hansen , Jim . “Samuel Beckett’s Catastrophe and the Theatre of Pure Means.”eContemporary Literature 49 ( 2008 ): 660–683.e

Heffernan , James A. W . Museum of Words: The Poetics of Ekphrasis from Homer to Ashbury . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.y

Heikkil ä , Martta . cAt the Limits of Presentation: Coming-into-Presence and its Aesthetic Relevance in Jean-Luc Nancy’s Philosophy . Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2008. y

Henning, Sylvie Debevec . “Samuel Beckett’s Film and La Dernière Bande : Intratextual and Intertextual Doubles.” Symposium 35 ( 1981 ): 131–153.

f Herren , Graley . “Different Music: Karmitz and Beckett’s Film Adaptation ofComédieéé .” e Journal of Beckett Studies 18 ( 2009 ): 10–31.s

———. “ Nacht und Tr“ ärr ume : Beckett’s Agony in the Garden.” tJournal of Beckett Studies 11 ( 2001 ): 54–70.s

———. Samuel Beckett’s Plays on Film and Television . Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007. ———. “Splitting Images: Samuel Beckett’s Nacht und Trärr ume .” e Modern Drama 43a

( 2000 ): 182–191. Hubert , Marie-Claude . “The Evolution of the Body in Beckett’s Theatre.” fJournal of

Beckett Studies 4 ( 1994 ): 55–66.s Irigaray , Luce . An Ethics of Sexual Difference . Translated by Carolyn Burke ande

Gillian Gill. London: Athlone Press, 1993. ———. Speculum of the Other Woman. Translated by Gillian C. Gill. Ithaca: Cornell

University Press, 1985. Iverson , Margaret . Alois Reigl: Art History and Theory. Massachusetts: MIT Press,

1993.J James , Ian . c The Fragmentary Demand: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Jean-Luc

Nancy. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006.yJ Janaway , Christopher . Schopenhauer. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.rJ Jay , Martin . h Downcast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in Twentieth-Century French

Thought. London: University of California Press, 1993.tJ Jeffers , Jennifer . Beckett’s Masculinity . New York: Palgrave, 2009. y ———. Uncharted Space: The End of Narrative. New York: Peter Lang, 2001. J Jones , Christine . “Bodily Functions: A Reading of Gender Performativity in Samuel

Beckett’s Rockaby.” In y Samuel Beckett: A Casebook , edited by Jennifer M. Jeffers,k179–202. London: Routledge, 1998.

Kalb , Jonathan . Beckett in Performance . New York: Cambridge University Press,e 1989.

———. “The Mediated Quixote: The Radio and Television Plays and Film .” In e TheCambridge Companion to Beckett , edited by John Pilling, 124–144. Cambridge:tCambridge University Press, 1994.

Keats , John . Selected Poems . UK: Penguin Classics, 2007.s Knowlson , James . Damned to Fame . London: Bloomsbury, 1996. e Knowlson , James , and John Pilling . aFrescoes of the Skull: The Later Prose and Drama

of Samuel Beckett. London: Calder, 1979.t ——— . Light and Darkness in the Theatre of Samuel Beckett. London: Turret,

1972.


———. John Pilling . ed. Samuel Beckett, Krapp’s Last Tape: A Theatre Workbook.London: Brutus, 1980.

——— . The Theatrical Notebooks of Samuel Beckett: Krapp’s Last Tape , volume III.eLondon: Faber, 1992.

Krieger , Murray . Ekphrasis: The Illusion of the Natural Sign . Baltimore and London:John Hopkins University Press, 1992.

Kristeva , Julia . The Kristeva Reader. Edited by Toril Moi. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986. Kushner , Howard I ., and Kate E . Brown. “ Eruptive Voices: Coprolalia, Malediction,

and the Poetics of Cursing.” New Literary History 35 ( 2001 ): 537–562.y Lamonte , Rosette . “Beckett’s Eh Joe : Lending an Ear to the Anima.” In Women in

Beckett; Performance and Critical Perspectives, edited by Linda Ben-Zvi, 228–223.sUrbana: University of Illinois, 1990.

———. “Krapp: Anti-Proust.” In t Theatre Workbook 1, Samuel Beckett: Krapp’s LastTape , edited by James Knowlson, 158–173. London: Brutus, 1980.e

Lant , Antonia . “The Curse of the Pharaoh, or How Cinema ContractedEgyptomania.” October 59 ( 1992 ): 87–112.r

———. “Haptical Cinema.” October 74 ( 1995 ): 45–73. r Laughlin , Karen . “‘Dreaming of Love’: Beckett’s Theatre and the Making of the

(Post)Modern Subject.” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 202–209. i Laws , Catharine . “Beethoven’s Haunting of Beckett’s Ghost Trio.” o Assaph: Studies in

the Theatre 17–18 ( 2003 ): 197–213.e Lehmann , Hans-Thies . Postdramatic Theatre. Translated by Karen J ü rs-Munby.

London: Routledge, 2006. Maeterlinck , Maurice . “The Blind.” In Three Pre-Surrealist Plays y , translated bys

Maya Slater. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. Maier , Michael . “ Geistertrio : Beethoven’s Music in Samuel Beckett’s Ghost Trio (Part

II).” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 )i : 267–278. ———. “Two Versions of Nacht und Trärr ume : What Franz Schubert Tells Us about

a Favourite Song of Beckett.” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 18 ( 2006 ):i91–100.

Marin , Louis . On Representation . Translated by Catherine Porter. Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press, 2001.

Marinetti , Filippo Tomasso . “Tactilism.” In Manifesto: A Century of Isms y , edited bysMary Ann Caws, 197–200. NA: Nebraska, 2001 .

Marks , Laura . The Skin of the Film . Durham: Duke University Press, 2000. Maude , Ulrika . Beckett, Technology and the Body. y Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 2009. ———. “The Body of Memory: Beckett and Merleau-Ponty.” In d Beckett and

Philosophy , edited by Richard Lane, 108–122. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2008. y ———. “‘Material of a Strictly Peculiar Order’: Beckett, Merleau-Ponty and

Perception.” In Beckett and Phenomenology w , edited by Ulrika Maude and MathewyFeldman, 77–94. London: Continuum, 2009.

———. “‘A Stirring Beyond Coming and Going’: Beckett and Tourette’s.” fJournal of Beckett Studies 17 ( 2009 ): 153–168.s


McMullan , Anna . “From Matron to Matrix: Gender, Authority and (Dis)embodi-ment in Beckett’s Theatre.” In dWomen in Irish Drama: A Century of Authorship and Representation , edited by Melissa Sihra, 97–108. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007.

— ———. “a glint of the old eye to come . . . ways of seeing in Krapp’s Last Tape .” Paperegiven at the Beckett working group of the International Federation for TheatreResearch annual conference, University of Maryland June 26–July 1, 2005.

———. Performing Embodiment in Samuel Beckett’s Drama . New York: Routledge, 2010.

———. “Performing Vision(s): Perspectives on Spectatorship in Beckett’s Theatre.”In Samuel Beckett: A Casebook , edited by Jennifer Jeffers, 134–158. New York: kGarland, 1998.

———. “Samuel Beckett’s Theatre: Liminal Subjects and the Politics of Perception.”Princeton University Library Chronicle 67 ( 2007 ): 450–464. e

———. Theatre on Trial: Samuel Beckett’s Later Drama . London: Routledge, 1993. — ———. “Versions of Embodiment/Visions of the Body in Beckett’s . . . ebut the

clouds . . . ” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 6 ( 1997 ): 353–363.i — ———. “Virtual Subjects: Performance, Technology and the Body in Beckett’s Late

Theatre.” Journal of Beckett Studies 10 ( 2002 ): 165–172. s Merleau-Ponty , Maurice . Phenomenology of Perception . Translated by Colin Smyth.

London: Routledge, 2002. ————. Sense and Non-Sense . Edited by John Wild et al. USA: Northwesterne

University Press, 1991. ————. The Visible and the Invisible . Translated by Alphonso Lingus. Illinois:e

Northwestern University Press, 1969. Meyer , Leonard . Emotion and Meaning in Music . Chicago: University of Chicagoc

Press, 1956. ————. “Music and Emotion: Distinctions and Uncertainties.” In dMusic and

Emotion , edited by John Sloboda and Patrick Juslin, 341–360. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2011.

Molière, Jean-Baptiste Poquelin. rThe Dramatic Works of Moliere Volume 2: School for fHusbands; The Bores; School for Wives; School for Wives Criticized; Impromptu of

Versailles; The Forced . Translated by Henri van Laun. MO: Kessinger, 2010.dd Mulvey , Laura . “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” In Feminist Film Theory, y

edited by Sue Thornham, 58–69. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006( 1975 ). Originally published in Screen 16 ( 1975 ): 6–18.

Nancy , Jean-Luc . Being Singular Plural. Translated by Robert D. Richardson and llAnne E. O’Byrne. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000.

————. Corpus y . Translated by Richard A. Rand. New York: Fordham University sPress, 2008.

————. The Ground of the Image. Translated by Jeff Fort. New York: Fordham,e 2005.

————. Interview with Jean-Baptiste Marongiu, “Le partage, l’infini et le jar-din,” Libération , February 17, 2000. Translation by author. http://www.libera-tion.fr/livres/0101327381-le-partage-l-infini-et-le-jardin (accessed December 1, 2012).


———. Listening y . Translated by Charlotte Mandell. New York: Fordham UniversityggPress, 2007.

———. Noli me Tangere: On the Raising of the Body. Translated by Sarah Clift, yPascale-Anne Brault, and Michael Naas. New York: Fordham, 2008.

O’Gorman , Kathleen . “‘but this other awful thought’: Aspects of the Female in O’Gorman , Kathleen . “‘but this other awful thought’: Aspects of the Female in Beckett’s Not I .” II Journal of Beckett Studies 1 ( 1992 ): 77–94.s

Okamuro , Minako . “ . . . but the clouds . . . and a Yeatsian Phantasmagoria.” lSamuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 19 ( 2006 ) i : 259–268.

Oksala , Johanna . “Female Freedom: Can the Lived Body be Emancipated?” InFeminist Interpretations of Merleau-Ponty, edited by Dorothea Olkowski and GailyWeiss, 209–228. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006.

Oppenheim , Lois , ed. Samuel Beckett and the Arts . New York and London: Garland,s 1999.

———. The Painted Word . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000.ddOrtega y Gasset , Jose . “Meditations on the Frame.” Perspecta 26 ( 1990 ): 185–190.a Pattie , David . “Space, Time and the Self in Beckett’s Late Theatre.” aModern Drama

43 ( 2000 ): 393–404. Perloff , Marjorie . “The Silence that is not Silence: Acoustic Art in Samuel Beckett

Embers .” In s Samuel Beckett and the Arts: Music, Visual Arts and Non-Print Media , edited by Lois Oppenheim, 247–268. London: Routledge, 1999.

Phelan , Peggy . Mourning Sex . London: Routledge, 1997. x————. Unmarked: The Politics of Performance . London: Routledge, 1993. ePlato. “Timaeus.” Translated by Benjamin Jowett. The Internet Classics Archive. e

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html (accessed December 2, 2012 ). Prieto , Eric . “Caves: Technology and the Total Art Work in Reich’s The Cave ande

Beckett’s Ghost Trio.” o Mosaic 35 ( 2002 ): 197–213.c Reed , John . The Schubert Song Companion y . Manchester: Manchester University

Press, 1985. Riegl , Alois . Late Roman Art Industry. Translated by Rolf Winkes. Rome: G.y

Bretschneider, 1985. Roach , Joseph . “The Great Hole of History: ‘Natural’ Catastrophe and Liturgical

Silences.” South Atlantic Quarterly 100 ( 2001 ): 307–317.y Saramago , Jose . Blindness . Translated by Giovanni Pontiero. London: Vintage, 2005. s Schneider , Alan . “On Directing Film .” Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 4 ( 1995 ): i

29–40.Schneider , Rebecca . “On Taking the Blind in Hand.” In The Body in Performance, e

edited by Patrick Campbell, 23–38. London: Routledge, 2001. Schopenhauer , Arthur . World as Will and Idea , volume 1. Translated by R. B.

Haldane and J. Kem. London: Tr ü bner, 1883. Scolnicov , Hanna . Women’s Theatrical Space y . Cambridge: Cambridge University e

Press, 1994 .Shakespeare. William . King Lear . London and Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1983r

( 1975 ). Shildrick , M . “Some Speculations on Matters of Touch.” eThe Journal of Medicine

and Philosophy 26.4 ( 2001 ): 387–404. y


Sloboda , John, and Patrick Juslin . “Psychological Perspectives on Music andEmotion.” In Music and Emotion , edited by John Sloboda and Patrick Juslin,71–104. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Smith , Kathy. “The Body in Pain: Beckett, Orlan and the Politics of Performance.”Studies in Theatre and Performance 25 ( 2005 ): 33–46.e

Sobchack , Vivian . The Address of the Eye: A Phenomenology of Film Experience.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.

———. Carnal Thoughts: Embodiment and Moving Image Culture y . CA: Universityeof California Press, 2004.

States , Bert O . Great Reckonings in Little Rooms: On the Phenomenology of Theatre . eLos Angeles: University of California Press, 1985.

Tajiri , Yoshiki . Samuel Beckett and the Prosthetic Body. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007. Takahashi , Yasunari . “Memory Inscribed in the Body: Krapp’s Last Tape and thee

Noh play Izutzu .” In The Theatrical Gamut: Notes for a Post-Beckettian Stage, e edited by Enoch Brater, 51–65. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,

1995. Tanaka , Mariko Hori . “Elements of Haiku in Beckett and Eisenstein.” lSamuel

Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 324–330.i Taroff , Kurt . “Screens, Closets, and Echo Chambers of the Mind: The Struggle Taroff , Kurt . “Screens, Closets, and Echo Chambers of the Mind: The Struggle

to Represent the Inner life on Stage.” Forum Modernes Theater 25/2 ( 2010 ):r179–194.

Tubridy , Derval . “‘Words pronouncing me alive’: Beckett and Incarnaton.” InSamuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 9 ( 2000 ): 93–104.i

VVoigts-Virchow , Eckhart . “Exhausted Cameras: Beckett in the TV Zoo.” In lSamuel Beckett: A Casebook , edited by Jennifer M. Jeffers, 225–250. London: Routledge,k 1998.

— ———. “Quad I and I Teletubbies or: ‘Aisthetic’ Panopticism versus Reading Beckett.” sSamuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 11 ( 2000 ): 210–218.i

WWagner , Peter . Icons, Texts, Iconotexts: Essays on Ekphrasis and Intermediality. Berlin:yWalter de Gruyter, 1996.

WWalton , Jean . “Seeking out the Absent One of Samuel Beckett’s Film .” sNew Orleans Review 19 ( 1992 ): 126–135. w

Warner , Marina . “Who can Shave an Egg?: Foreign Tongues and Primal Sounds Warner , Marina . “Who can Shave an Egg?: Foreign Tongues and Primal Soundsin Mallarm é and Beckett.” In Reflections on Beckett: A Centenary Celebration ,

f edited by Anna McMullan and S. E. Wilmer, 53–81. Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press, 2009.

WWatkin , Christopher . “A Different Alterity: Jean-Luc Nancy’s ‘Singular Plural.’”Paragraph 30 ( 2007 ): 50–64. h

Weiss , Katharine . “Modernism and Mechanisation: Technology in the Works of Weiss , Katharine . “Modernism and Mechanisation: Technology in the Works ofSamuel Beckett.” PhD diss., University of Reading, 2002.

WWeller , Shane . Beckett, Literature and the Ethics of Alterity . Basingstoke: PalgraveyMacmillan, 2006.

WWhitelaw , Billie , interviewed by Linda Ben-Zvi in eWomen in Beckett: Performance and Cultural Perspectives, edited by Linda Ben-Zvi, 3–10. Urbana: Illinois, 1992.s


W Worth , Katharine . “Women in Beckett’s Radio and Television Plays.” In Womenin Beckett: Performance and Cultural Perspectives –, edited by Linda Ben-Zvi, 236–s242. Urbana: Illinois, 1992 .

W Worthen , William . Print and the Poetics of Modern Drama . Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2009.

Zinman , Toby . “ Eh Joe“ and the Peephole Aesthetic.” e /Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd’ hui 4 ( 1995 ): 53–54. i

———. Beckett and Broadcasting: A Study of the Works of Samuel Beckett for and in Radio and Television . Abo: Abo Akademie, 1976.

Abbott, H. Porter, 84Abrams, David, 48Ackerman, Alan, 31Acousmatic, 40, 43, 52, 80, 124Acousmêtre, 40Adamou, Christina, 59, 148Aisthesis, 130Alexandrov, Grigori, 37Allegory of the Cave, The, 71.

See also PlatoAndrews, Jorella, 116Antoine-Dunne, Jean, 162 n10Anthropocentrism, 6–7Anzieu, Didier, 81, 88, 97, 103, 168 n61Aporetic, 85Appoggiatura, 53Aristotle, 5, 10, 106, 156 n17, 169 n8Armstrong, Gordon, 65Artaud, Antonin, 4Asmus, Walter, 40, 46, 102, 103Aumont, Jacques, 74, 75Auslander, Philip, 149Austin, J. L., 165–6 n7

Bacon, Francis, 3–4Baldwin, Helen, 164 n57Banes, Sally, 5Barthes, Roland, 20, 30, 61Bataille, Georges, 121Baudrillard, Jean, 149

Beckett, Samuel, worksAll that Fall, 40, 48ll. . . but the clouds . . ., 10, 11, 49, 89,

90–6, 123, 150Calmative, The, 26Catastrophe, 11, 113, 114, 116–22,

125, 126, 127, 131, 136, 152Comédie, 172 n3Company, 93, 152Disjecta: Miscellaneous Writings and

A Dramatic Fragment, 160 n38Eh Joe, 9, 10, 11, 35, 36, 37–48, 54,

73, 120, 145, 146, 148, 149, 150, 152, 153

End, dd The, 11Endgame, 5, 13, 70, 84Film, 9, 10, 11, 24–34, 41, 72, 75,

100, 130, 144, 160 n35Footfalls, 4, 10, 11, 71, 89, 93, 101,

102–11, 147, 152Ghost Trio, 9, 10, 11, 35, 36, 48–60,

85, 91, 96, 136, 140, 143, 147, 149, 152

Happy Days, 48How It Is, 152Krapp’s Last Tape, 9, 11, 13–24, 33,

34, 37, 48, 80, 84, 115, 152, 158 n13 n16

La dernière bande, 20. See alsoKrapp’s Last Tape

Index

192 ● Index

Beckett, Samuel, works—ContinuedLetters of Samuel Beckett 1929–1940,

159 n26, 160 n37Lost Ones, The, 152Malone Dies, 152Molloy, 66, 152Murphy, 66Nacht und Träume, 1, 2, 9, 11, 12,

36, 48–60, 133–4, 142–50Not I, 9–10, 11, 61–72, 73, 77, 78, II

85, 86, 114, 117, 147, 152, 166–7 n23

Ohio Impromptu, 11, 12, 48, 113, 114, 133–42

A Piece of Monologue, 9–10, 11, 62, 72–7, 78, 79, 80, 84, 85, 86,96, 126, 147, 152

Proust, 18Quad, 11, 113, 114, 126–32, 147, 149ddRockaby, 10, 11, 71, 89, 93, 96–102,

103, 110Rough for Theatre I, 13IITexts for Nothing, 167 n29ggThat Time, 9–10, 11, 62, 77–86, 115,

147, 153Unnameable, The, 36, 109, 152Waiting for Godot, 5, 11, 14, 70What Where, 11, 113, 114, 115, 153

as theatrical text, 122–26as television drama, 126–32

Words and Music, 48Beckett on Film, 139Beethoven, Ludwig van, 48, 51, 54, 58Beharry, Shauna, 5. See also Marks,

LauraBeing Singular Plural, 141llBen-Zvi, Linda, 167 n39Bergson, Henri, 17, 18, 21Bignell, Jonathan, 91Bishop Berkeley, 25, 160 n37Bleeker, Maike, 5Blind, The, 13–14Blindness, 14Body. See also Exscription

automaticity of, 10, 17, 20, 59, 62, 64, 66–7, 70, 159 n26

in Christianity, 8, 47–8, 140, 144–7, 151, 152. See also Christianity

desiring, 16, 17, 19–20, 54, 58experience. See Embodimentegendered, 39, 63–4, 68–72, 97, 99,

101, 107, 109–10, 112and immateriality, 1, 9, 21, 22–4,

27, 46–7, 125, 130, 142, 144, 146–7, 148–9, 150, 152–3. See also body, materiality of

and language, 9–10, 39, 62–4, 66–8, 71, 73–4, 76, 77–8, 80, 82, 84, 85–6, 152–3

lived, 32, 70–1materiality of, 4, 7, 9, 16–17, 19,

21–2, 29, 31–2, 61–2, 66–7, 68, 73, 76–7, 80, 84–5, 110–11, 115, 117, 119, 121,124, 132, 139–40, 141, 145–6, 148–9, 150, 152–3, 159 n26. See also body and immateriality

as obscenity, 16, 66–71performing, 5, 12, 16, 21, 71, 100–2,

111, 114–15, 127–9, 140philosophy of the, 2, 7–8power and the, 42–4, 66, 100,

117–18, 123, 125–6, 127, 131–2

representations of, 2, 4, 10, 29–31, 33, 54, 101, 111, 118, 120–1,127, 147, 151–2

text and the, 114, 120–1Bologne, Jean Claude, 143Bouchard, Norma, 32Boxall, Peter, 141, 148Boyce, Brunhilde, 63Brater, Enoch, 81–2, 123, 166–7 n23British Broadcasting Corporation

(BBC), 38, 91, 152 n17Brown, Kate, 66Brown, Royal, 57Brueghel the Elder, 14, 152

Index ● 193

Bryden, Mary, 11, 36, 49, 64, 65–6, 98, 100, 103, 143, 146

Buñuel, Luis, 32Butler, Judith, 66, 67–8, 100, 166 n18,

170 n40

Callois, Roger, 157 n40Campbell, Julie, 19Caravaggio, Michelangelo Merisi da,

151Cartesian thought, 65, 100Cavarero, Adriana, 61Caws, Mary Ann, 156 n10Cézanne, Paul, 33, 116–17, 144Chabert, Pierre, 17Cheeke, Stephen, 78, 82Chiasm, 12, 23, 26, 35, 144, 153Chion, Michel, 38, 40Chopin, Frédéric, 135Chora, 97–8. See also Kristeva, JuliaChristianity, 6–8, 17, 19, 43, 47, 108,

119, 140, 143–8, 150, 151–2,154, 162 n16. See also hapticcertitude

Closet drama, 113, 121Cluchey, Rick, 159–60 n33Cohn, Ruby, 15, 158 n58Connor, Steven, 87, 88, 112, 127Coprolalia, 66Corpus, 12, 15, 120

Death and the Maiden, 48Debevec Henning, Sylvie, 33Dehiscence, 7, 9, 24, 74, 76, 84, 85.

See also Inclusive disjunctionDeleuze, Gilles, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 37, 51, 53,

58, 92, 95, 115–16, 124, 129, 150, 156 n13, 160, n34

Derrida, Jacques, 2, 6–8, 22, 27, 153Descartes, René, 14Diamond, Elin, 71–2, 100, 102, 103Diderot, Denis, 14Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the

Prison, 128

Dolar, Mladen, 68, 97Dowd, Garin, 139Duchamp, Marcel, 41

Eagleman, David, 66, 70Einstein, Alfred, 136Eisenstein, Sergei, 37, 75Ekphrasis, 62, 77–9, 82–4, 85Embodiment, 1–4, 6, 9, 12, 26,

63–70, 111–12, 143–4, 152.See also Body

selfhood and, 12, 16, 21, 23, 86,88–9

vision and, 11, 26–7, 31, 32, 150, 152–3

Étants donnés, 41Exscription, 115, 119–22, 128, 138

Forgacs, David, 158 n5Foucault, Michel, 42, 128Freud, Sigmund, 88, 89, 106, 108Friedrich, Caspar David, 58Frost, Everett, 160 n7

Garner, Stanton, 7Genesis, 108Gender, 67, 72, 89–90, 100–1, 105–11Gibson, Alan, 162 n17Gidal, Peter, 109Giuletti, Magharita, 46Glucklich, Ariel, 43Goehr, Lydia, 49Gontarski, S. E., 4, 9, 41, 127, 130,

134, 135, 136, 140, 163 n41Gospel of John, 4, 145–6, 151Grosz, Elizabeth, 69Gruber, William, 96

Hale, Jane, 32, 34Hansen, Jim, 117, 119Haptic

certitude, 30, 142, 144–6, 148, 149, 151–2, 154

cinema, 4, 5, 24, 28, 155 n9

194 ● Index

Haptic—Continueddiscourse, 153epistemology, 32, 75, 153image, 4, 24, 27–8, 31, 32, 71–3,

110, 130–1interface, 2, 14, 22–3, 33–4, 62–3,

88, 98, 111meanings of, 1–3, 8, 9and memory, 23in performance, 5, 22, 24, 62, 72relief carving, 3, 72, 96, 101sound, 16, 36, 59–60visual art and, 3, 5, 116and visual impairment, 2, 12, 13–15,

32, 92–3, 130, 152visuality, 4, 91. See also Optic

visualityvoice, 37–9, 45–8

Haptocentrism, 6–8. See also Derrida,Jacques

Havel, Vaclav, 116Heikkilä, Martta, 121Held, Martin, 21Herbert, Jocelyn, 103Herm, Klaus, 81, 82Herren, Graley, 11, 18, 37, 41, 47, 55,

90–1, 145–6Humanism, 6Husserl, Edmund, 7

Inclusive disjunction, 77, 111, 138, 140, 142, 154

Incredulity of Thomas, The, 151Intersubjectivity, 23, 27Irigaray, Luce, 69, 71–2, 106, 108Irons, Jeremy, 139

James, Ian, 144, 156 n28, 175 n23Jay, Martin, 32Jeffers, Jennifer, 120Jones, Christine, 100Joyce, James, 174 n3Jung, Carl, 89, 102Juslin, Patrick, 52, 164–5 n64

Kalb, Jonathan, 143Kaun, Axel, 51, 111Keaton, Buster, 24–5, 26, 28, 31,

32, 33Keats, John, 78King Lear, 13rrKinuta, 21Knowlson, James, 25, 111, 125, 146,

162 n17 n21, 166–7 n23Krieger, Murray, 77, 78, 82Kristeva, Julia, 97Kushner, Howard, 66

Lacan, Jacques, 56Lamonte, Rosette, 19, 20, 41Lant, Antonia, 155 n9Laughlin, Karen, 129Laws, Catherine, 49–50, 55Lehmann, Hans-Thies, 5, 156 n16Lepecki, André, 5Letters from Siberia, 38Letter on the Blind, 14ddLinear perspective, 5, 24, 31, 32, 33,

71–2Liszt, Franz, 135London, 103

MacGreevy, Thomas, 70, 144Magee, Patrick, 20Maier, Michael, 50, 52Mallarmé, Stéphane, 70“Manifesto on Tactilism,” 4.

See also Marinetti, FilippoMarin, Louis, 147Marinetti, Filippo, 4Marker, Chris, 38Marks, Laura, 4, 5, 72Maude, Ulrika, 7, 11, 66, 152, 161 n41Mary Magdalene, 145McMullan, Anna, 9, 10, 18, 19, 73,

80, 94, 97, 104, 107, 109, 116, 118, 131, 134, 147, 157 n32, 170 n60

Memory, 17, 20, 21, 59–60, 80–1, 83

Index ● 195

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, 2, 6–7, 11, 23, 26, 27, 32, 35, 43, 44, 62,65, 66, 76, 86, 92–3, 116, 144, 153, 154

Meyer, Leonard, 53, 56, 57Michelangelo di Buonarroti, 154Mimesis, 10, 71Mizuko, 109Molière, (Jean-Baptiste Poquelin), 134,

137, 139Monodrama, 51Montage, 37Mulvey, Laura, 41Music, 48–60

as haptic, 50, 54, 59–60, 135–7Musique concrète, 40Myth, 109, 172 n66

Nancy, Jean-Luc, 2, 6–8, 11, 15, 35, 47,51, 61, 76, 85, 87–9, 90, 92, 97, 111, 115, 120–1, 127, 140–1, 143–5, 150, 152, 154, 175 n23

Noli me tangere, 47, 145

Ode on a Grecian Urn, 78Oedipus Rex, 13O’Gorman, Kathleen, 69Okamuro, Minako, 96Oksala, Johanna, 70Oppenheim, Lois, 3, 78, 84, 155 n4,

164 n57Optic image, 4, 27, 31, 96Optic visuality, 4, 91, 101

Painted Word, The, 78Parable of the Blind, dd The, 14, 152.

See also Brueghel the ElderPattie, David, 104‘Peephole’ art, 41Perception, 7, 12, 18, 25, 26–7, 32, 33,

34, 38, 40, 55, 62, 71, 84, 92,94, 116–17, 118, 119, 122, 131,139, 148, 152, 155 n4, 156 n13, 160 n34

Perloff, Marjorie, 164 n57Phelan, Peggy, 131, 151,Phenomenology, 2, 4, 6–8, 9, 22, 26, 60Phenomenology of Perception, The, 92.

See also Merleau-Ponty, MauricePhilips, Siân, 40Pinter, Harold, 21Plato, 71, 98Poetics, 5, 156 n17. See also AristotlePostdramatic, 5Postdramatic Theater, 5rPrieto, Eric, 52Psychoanalysis, 56, 59, 68, 89, 100, 103Puchner, Martin, 113, 121Pudovkin, Vsevolod, 37, 75

Reed, John, 55, 58Rembrandt van Rijn, 151Riegl, Alois, 3, 4, 72Roach, Joseph, 164 n57Romanticism, 48–50, 55, 58Royal Court Theater, 21

San Quentin Drama Workshop, 23Saramago, José, 14Scarry, Elaine, 42, 44, 123, 125Schmal, Hildegard, 102Schiller Theater, Berlin, 82, 89, 102Schneider, Alan, 24, 25, 28, 41, 134Schneider, Rebecca, 129Schopenhauer, Arthur, 48, 49, 58Schubert, Franz, 48, 50, 53, 54, 55, 58,

133, 135, 143, 148Scolnicov, Hanna, 71Serres, Michel, 87Shildrick, Margrit, 1, 133Skin ego, 88, 100, 111, 168 n61.

See also Anzieu, DidierSloboda, John, 52, 56, 164–5 n64Sobchack, Vivian, 155 n9Smith, Kathy, 166 n9States, Bert O., 139Suddeutscher Rundfunk, Germany,

127, 130, 162 n17

196 ● Index

Surrealism, 32Syncopation, 53Syncope, 8

Takahashi, Yasunari, 21, 22Takiri, Yoshiki, 32Tanaka, Mariko Hori, 75Tandy, Jessica, 67Taroff, Kurt, 114Television, 9–10, 46–8, 51, 59, 91, 96,

126, 148–50Technology, 2, 15, 23, 28, 36, 50–1Theater, 4, 5, 21–2, 24, 71, 73, 82,

100, 114, 117, 138Tieck, Ludwig, 49Timeaus, 98Tourette’s Syndrome, 66–7Touch

ethics of, 83–4, 103, 131–2, 133–4,141–2, 151, 153

failure to, 1, 11–12, 22–4, 27, 33, 47–8, 86, 131, 142, 150, 154

violence of, 11, 45, 59, 115–17,119, 120, 123–4, 125–6, 127,131–2, 150

Tower, The, 90–1Tubridy, Derval, 152

Un chien andalou, 32. See also LuisBuñuel

Versailles Impromptu, 134, 139Visible and the Invisible, The, 6–7, 65.

See also Merleau-Ponty, MauriceVisual impairment, representations of,

13–15Voigts-Virchow, Eckart, 130, 149,

158 n17

Warner, Marina, 70, 159 n26Weiss, Katherine, 39, 42Whitelaw, Billie, 3, 40, 46, 78, 104,

114, 117, 162 n21Worthen, William, 104, 124, 127, 138

Yeats, W. B., 90–1, 95

Zeami, 21Zilliacus, Clas, 40, 162 n15Zinman, Toby, 41, 163 n26

Notes - Springer978-1-137-27533-2/1.pdfNotes Introduction Haptics, Aesthetics, Philosophy , Some...

Documents

Transcript of Notes - Springer978-1-137-27533-2/1.pdfNotes Introduction Haptics, Aesthetics, Philosophy , Some...