Angelaki 23 (4):19-24 (2018)

Elise Woodard
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
In this text, Georges Didi-Huberman responds, in letter-form, to the critical reflections about his work formulated by Jacques Rancière in “Images Re-read: Georges Didi-Huberman’s Method.” Didi-Huberman disagrees with Rancière’s analysis that images are “passive” and that the words which accompany them are “active.” Instead, he agrees with Merleau-Ponty’s view, which postulates that any analysis of images that seeks to disentangle its elements will render the image unintelligible. In opposition to Rancière’s presentation of his work, Didi-Huberman argues that his method is one of tracing the mutually entangled implications of images. Furthermore, Didi-Huberman challenges Rancière to articulate what exactly “the sensible” means when he uses the phrase “distribution of the sensible.” While Rancière distrusts the reliance on pathos and emotions when it comes to analysing images, Didi-Huberman argues that “the sensible” will always involve the body with all its pathos, emotions and gestures.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/0969725x.2018.1497267
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,916
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Visible and the Invisible.B. Falk - 1970 - Philosophical Quarterly 20 (80):278-279.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

In the Image of Auschwitz.Bruno Chaouat - 2006 - Diacritics 36 (1):86-96.


Added to PP index

Total views
27 ( #420,158 of 2,497,793 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #171,267 of 2,497,793 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes