Deleuze and Aristotle Applied to the Imagination Through Screenwriting

By Gaston Cavalleri

Deleuze and Aristotle applied to the imagination through screenwriting, a thesis for students of arts, will enthuse and inform aspirations in screenwriting and philosophy. Aimed at creative writers who wish to write a thesis or simply understand and appreciate the stepping stones of a screenwriter’s journey. Gaston Cavalleri parcels Gilles Deleuze, Aristotle, the imagination and screenwriting into a 15,000 word screenplay and a 5,000 word exegesis.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Gaston Cavalleri
• Release date: Jul 16, 2016
• ISBN: 9780994618221

Gaston Cavalleri

Gaston Cavalleri is an author and screenwriter from Australia. He lives in Bondi Beach, a transition he made from a country town fifteen years ago. His date of birth is 18 January 1980. He has a Master of Arts (Writing and Literature), a Bachelor of Science (exercise science) and a purple belt in Brazilian Jiu-jitsu. Gaston is the author of Crystal Caviar and Blue Smartie. His writing began seven years ago - a career choice he made after renovating four properties that led him to Sydney airport for a flight to South America. This adventure lasted six years and sparked his need to write.

Book preview

Deleuze and Aristotle applied

to the imagination through screenwriting

By

Gaston Cavalleri

***

Published by:

Caviar Literature at Smashwords

Copyright © 2016 by Caviar Literature

****

All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and the above publisher of this book.

This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, brands, media, and incidents are either the product of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. The author acknowledges the trademarked status and trademark owners of various products referenced in this work of fiction, which have been used without permission. The publication/use of these trademarks is not authorized, associated with, or sponsored by the trademark owners.

Smashwords Edition Licence Notes

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to your favorite retailer and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

****

www.caviarliterature.com

Author’s note

When I started writing in 2008 I began asking myself: what makes you think that you can write? and why don’t you study writing? I enrolled in a Master of Arts (Writing and Literature) soon after and was expected to write a thesis.

Deleuze and Aristotle applied to the imagination through screenwriting includes two parts: a creative work and an exegesis. Its publication is for readers who’ve ever asked themselves: what makes you think you can write? or why don’t you study writing?.

Gilles Deleuze, Aristotle, the imagination and screenwriting have been bundled into a 15,000-word screenplay and a connected 5,000-word essay. Christopher Nolan’s movie Inception is mentioned in the exegesis to assist with interpretations of Deleuzian and Aristotelian approaches to the imagination. It is not in my legal power to provide a copy of Inception within my work. I have provided the details of the movie in a bibliography to the exegesis.

Table of Contents

Author’s note

1 Exegesis

2 References

3 Creative Work

4 OTHER BOOKS

Exegesis

Deleuze’s philosophy of cinema offers patterns of thought that cannot be addressed through Aristotelian thinking concerning the imagination, as shown when applied to Imagining Caviar and Inception.

Shooting an arrow out to sea then hoping that it hits a fish is an unlikely hope that shares similar qualities to approaching a stranger on the street and hoping to guess their thoughts. The two scenarios first need to be broken down for an ideal comparison, one to the concentration of fish in the water, let this be scenario A, and the other to the thoughts in the imagination, which can stand as scenario B. From a scientific perspective the only similar qualities would be that the probability of them occurring is unlikely. The truth is that the two scenarios have different qualities; one situation has a subject of matter: the arrow, and the other situation has a subject without matter: the stranger’s mind. It could be said that since the mind does not consist of material its analysis is not for the science of material things (Bergson, 1912, p. 28), but Greek philosopher, Aristotle, born 384 BC, seems to agree that the analysis of the imagination should consider material things: all men seem to seek the causes named in Physics (Aristotle, 2000a, p. 17), he once said, which may be a limiting thought if it is applied to items without matter, such as the imagination (Aristotle, 2000a, p. 20).

Aristotle’s work provides the framework for many philosophers (Gross, 1995), though his beliefs concerning things without matter, such as the imagination, seem to lack structure and persuasiveness: assured knowledge of the soul is one of the most difficult things in the world (Aristotle, 2000b, chap. 1). According to Aristotle the soul is directly related to the imagination, as he believes thinking […] is held to be part of the imagination (Aristotle, 2000d, chap. 3) and the soul is acted on by what is capable of being thought (Aristotle, 2000d, chap. 4). So, if Aristotle has difficulties in knowing the soul, it could be said that he considers knowledge of the imagination to be one of the most difficult things in the world to achieve. He thought that the source of the soul was the heart, after all (Gross, 1995); a potentially flawed thought that could be linked to his attempts to define the whole of nature as one science:

Presumably the whole of nature is matter. Hence we must inquire first what nature is: for thus we shall also see what natural science treats of and whether it belongs to one science or to more to investigate the