忧郁症

看影片前半段的时候就感觉到伯格曼扑面而来：一片绿地中的庄园，空旷大房子里冷漠的人情——姐妹之间，尤其是母女之间，以及，所有角色都像在给杂志拍照，静止，沉默，斜视45度，作

此时导演还没甩包袱，俺也沉浸在一知半解的快感中，直到末日和死亡的暗示越来越重，Justine说“世界充满邪恶，无人会留恋，地球是宇宙中唯一的生命载体。”这片就完全进入到伯格曼的语境，同时俺也知道，它很难引起观众情感上的共鸣，因为它违反了“神的第一定律”

所谓“神的第一定律”，当然建立在神客观存在，而且全能至善的假设。具体内容为：“不承认神或对神无意识的人一样可享神的恩赐。”

这条定律是必要的——假设有神而他就在你的面前，你如何确定呢——查看身份证，或让他拔出石头里的宝剑？

一个靠谱的神能预料到人的无知——对身份和生存意义的无知，而不是强调”不信就整你“，如同多数宗教的十不准上写的那样

理论上，理性上，逻辑上，一个无知的人就该像伯格曼或伍迪·艾伦，当他们意识到“生命的出现源自偶然，肉体的死亡即是尽头”的可能性，就会得出“生活无意义”的结论，类似于Justine，永远开心不起来

理论上，理性上，逻辑上，你无法在那样的前提下还让人相信“生活是值得为之奋斗的”，但在现实中，这些鬼扯淡的命中率极高，催尿励志无所不能。这是因为神为了实现第一定律而给人类打了“死亡防治疫苗”，于是在默认的无神论者泛滥的中国，也少见没病没灾就被死亡吓破胆的人

结果是，《第七封印》或《星尘往事》之类唬人的作品往往适得其反，没有人看完后会大喊：“给我跟上吊的绳儿。‘而是：”这他妈的太吊了。“（当然更多的还是表现为”我要去睡觉“）

俺捏着鼻子看圣经的短暂日子里，也有那么一两个晚上被死亡吓得屁滚尿流，就跟《怎样都行》里大喊”horror “的拉里·大卫一样，不过总体上还是吃嘛嘛香

总之，人们天生注意不到死亡的主题，天生不会承认生命的虚无（承认这个的基本都是为了勾引文艺女青年）

《忧郁症》也一样，里头搞得小行星撞击，还有女主角那个悲观厌世影响不到任何人——拉斯·冯·提尔是个连戛纳都敢驱逐的可爱而猥琐的胖子，凭什么与神的定律叫板呢

以上内容，不完全地解释了该片低分的原因~

当然，仅因为主题，俺就可以把它和《生命之树》选为最爱之一

除此之外，这片里真正有趣的是人对死亡的反应，Claire知道2012要到了，就带着孩子去Village，The Village有啥？奈特·希亚马兰吗（俺喜欢这个冷笑话），不还是一样死。但可以理解，要是我，也想找个人多的地儿，您想象一下——跟很多人一起等死舒坦，还是在无人小岛上等死舒坦

如果答案是肯定的，说明你也不是理性的动物，如果所有人都那么感性——我觉得，这来自超自然力量的人为设计的可能，要比只是偶然”进化“的可能性大得多

所以在内心深处我一直相信神的存在——不是”中国人需要信仰“那一类的比喻暗喻隐喻，神必须跟隔壁二大爷一样鲜活生动。当然，个人信仰从来不重要，因为答案在过去已经发生

也就是说，神已经存在了，哪怕你不承认



或者不存在，那可就倒血霉了

      面对这样一部既爱又恨的电影，真的不知道该如何给它打分。这也是近几年里来我所看过的最妙的一部电影了。看这部电影简直就像是读艾柯的书一样，有种被忽悠了的感觉。只不过后者会让人觉得钦佩，而这部影片，却让人有种略微矫情的印象。
       首先从片头讲起，不得不承认，电影开始的那几分钟着实惊艳了我。在瓦格纳创作于1865年的经典歌剧Tristan and Isolde: Prelude and Liebestod悠扬的旋律中一幅幅画面次第出现：女主角背后纷纷落下的死去的鸟，布满奇怪的双重影子的空旷广场，一幅油画前落下纸片的余烬，一颗蓝色的行星遮挡住了心宿二的光芒，母亲抱着孩子在19号高尔夫球洞附近的草滩中挣扎跋涉，倒下的骏马，无数飞虫飞绕在女主角周围圆形区域的外围，太阳月亮与蓝色行星光芒下的三个人，地球与蓝色行星，双手连接了蓝色电弧的女主角，挣脱束缚的新娘，不断接近交错的地球与蓝色行星，空无一人的沙发以及窗外正在燃烧的事物，手捧花束躺在水中的新娘，削木头的小男孩与走近的女人，吞噬地球的蓝色行星。所有这十六个慢镜头美得让我屏住了呼吸，同时由于镜头中多次出现了我所喜欢的宇宙以及旷野，包括寂寥的意象，这一切简直要让我热泪盈眶了，在电影正式开始以前，我已经可以确认，该片的导演简直就是一个艺术家，画面感太棒了。在这里，请大家记住这十六个慢镜头，因为其实这十六个镜头已经串起了故事的主要内容，而且包括一些暗示。
       影片分为两部分，第一部分：Justin，第二部分：Claire。各取自两姐妹的名字。

       首先从第一部分说起，女主角结婚的场景。第一部分借由女主角在婚礼上各种奇特的表现充分体现了她的抑郁症特征。值得注意的四个细节：
       第一个细节，是女主角刚刚到达结婚现场，询问远方天空的那颗红色亮星的名字，姐夫告诉她那是天蝎座的心宿二。这个细节也与后面新娘从宾客席中落跑，在高尔夫球场中一边小解一边望向的星空形成了某种暗示，因为如果我没看错的话，这个时候心宿二已经被遮挡住了，消失在了星空中。
       第二个细节，新娘拒绝了新郎的求欢要求，转而跑到草地上与一个陌生男人野合。这也与之后当那个男人提出要与女主角百年好合时遭到拒绝形成了某种呼应。或许对于患抑郁症的女主角来讲，一切来自别人、外界的请求都是某种试图侵入她个人世界的异物，这是她所无法接受的。而她自己所追寻的，则无论在别人眼里是否合理，在她自己的感觉中，都是最为合理，以至于也许别人的反应并没有那么重要，或者说她本身也并不在乎。
       第三个细节，女主角自己进到书房中，将一些打开的画册换成了另外一些画册，不知道在这里是导演本身的心理诉求，还是表现女主角的心理诉求，总之据我肤浅的观察，女主角将一些类似于波普艺术的绘画换成了印象派以及新古典主义或者说是浪漫主义的画作。将一些由抽象符号构成的画作换成了可以表现内心情感奔突的画作。我分析的可能不太准确，不过我个人的理解，导演这里想要表现得可能是个人的一种艺术诉求。
       第四个细节，新娘也就是女主角在跟新郎一起放飞孔明灯之后，新娘通过天文望远镜观察孔明灯，但是接下来电影中出现了几张星云的图片，这也许象征着新娘内心中真正想要看到的，正是浩渺宇宙中的星云。这一点也恰恰符合我的胃口，那就顺便提一下电影中在这个细节中出现的几张星云图，顺次描述：第一张，M16星云，也就是鹰状星云，由于其外形很像一只鹰，因此得名。位于巨蛇座内。第二张，则是著名的M20星云，三叶星云，其中红色部分是发射星云，而蓝色部分则是反射星云。其位于人马座内。第三张，依然是M16鹰状星云，不过拍摄自不同角度。第四张图由于小生才疏学浅，所以只能根据颜色推测大概，蓝色的反射星云，大致推断是M20星云或者是M78星云的局部，这个就很不肯定了。
        第一部分勾勒了女主角的状况。整个婚礼的过程都给人一种违和感，莫名其妙的上司，奇怪的父母，致辞时说不出话来的新郎，不断在发牢骚的姐姐与姐夫。唯一正常的也就是她的小外甥了。尽管从某种角度上讲女主角的姐姐算是一个正常人，但是这个正常人在第二部分之中，也显得非常不正常了。
       第二部分是一个科幻故事。同时也是一个毁灭的故事。在第二部分里，故事开始剥丝抽茧，女主角自诩可以预见未来，她的姐姐Claire则恐慌于即将撞向地球的蓝色行星，姐夫则是一个天文学家，坚称地球不会出现危险。几个细节：
       第一，姐夫向女主角透露说Claire很容易就会变的焦虑，通过影片中的镜头，也可以看到貌似Claire本人的心理状况也并不是很好，所以我怀疑其实女主角一家其实都在心理上存在这样或那样的隐患。第二，当男主角看到蓝色行星距离地球越来越近时，突然间消失了，然后其尸体在马厩中被发现，影片暗示其为自杀。第三，姐姐在一天晚上尾随女主角发现裸体沐浴在蓝色行星的光芒中，并且一边抚摸自己一边很享受的样子。第四，每次女主角骑马到了一个特定的小路，马总不愿意跑过去，接下来当姐姐Claire带着孩子落跑时，恰巧走的就是这条路，这时候天上下起了乒乓球大小的冰雹，请注意关键的地方出现了，那就是母子二人身旁的高尔夫球洞的标号旗，上面赫然写着19。而不难回忆起来的是，在第一部中，姐夫曾经两次提到，高尔夫球场中只有18个球洞。这个第19号球洞或许是在某种意义上表示，一个人对于自我与本我的一种超越，在这个过程中必然会遭受外界的打击（冰雹），而最后，或许是出于懦弱，人会选择回归，面对死亡，直接引出最后的结局。
       
       以上是对剧情的大致分析，下面说一下本人对于这部电影的一点点看法。导演明显是一个艺术气息很浓的人，唯美的画面感，无论是取景、穿插出现的星云、对于气氛的控制能力，都很值得称道。但是，我个人的理解，从电影的第一部看来，这部电影是一部心理片，而第二部，则直接变成了灾难片。这里面有一些令人费解与跳跃的地方。对于这一点，我的看法是：导演应该是从忧郁症本身来入手，因为忧郁症患者在古时候很多时间里被看做是先知一样的人物，因为忧郁症患者有一种渴望世界灭亡，渴望世界末日来临的情感，就仿佛影片中女主角的未卜先知能力一样，我想导演也在暗示这一点。因此，导演旨在通过末日来形容忧郁症本身。女主角已经罹患了忧郁症，这种病症在某种程度上摧残着女主角，也许会最终将其击垮，影片中也有叙述，比如女主角虚弱的体质。而没有患上忧郁症的人，则均毁灭于一场来自于一颗名叫忧郁行星的蓝色星球所带来的灾难。这里插句题外话，对于蓝色行星的运行轨迹，我觉得有些出入，因为从体积来看蓝色行星比地球要大得多，所以那张图上画的行星运行轨道并不准确，地球应该会被拉离最初的运行轨道。不过这里相信导演也是做了事先调研的，对于艺术，就不苛求这么多了。
       导演用这样一种末日的手法来象征意义的表现了忧郁症毁灭世界的意象。其艺术表现力虽然值得称道。但不得不讲的是，将这样两个故事拼凑到一起，确实有些牵强。而且影片中或多或少的提到了星空中的星云与星座，不知道是我的过度诠释还是理解错误，影片似乎在暗示，这颗蓝色的忧郁行星似乎是被女主角的心中忧郁的情感吸引而来，所以她才那样的笃定，所以她才总是热衷于仰望星空。
       有些牵强的故事叙述风格，可以说这部影片是一部很好的艺术作品，但并没有很好的讲一个故事。给人很美的感觉，却同时让人心绪烦乱，丝毫找不出任何的逻辑性。所以，感觉此片有些极端，很难评分，但此篇评论又不得不评分，所以最后不得不给到一个不尴不尬的分数：三星。
      在影评的最后，补充一个细节，在序幕中出现的那幅画，由彼得·勃鲁盖尔所作，这位16世纪的荷兰画派画匠秉承了博斯的画风。而电影中的这幅画名叫《雪中猎人》，创作于1565年，现收藏于维也纳美术史博物馆。

首先。我是想给’较差‘的

但考虑到万一这只是因为比较小众，不是因为不好，那就很对不住喜欢它的朋友了
=============================
后来回头看，发现这个评论有这么多人跟，就觉得还是要负责任一点，嗯，这个片是给忧郁症病友看的，没有这类心里障碍的朋友会觉得这片难以理解，不过如果你看出了蛋疼的感觉，那就证明你看懂了忧郁症的不爽。
=============================
以前遇到满屏好评，出现一个差评后，大多数人都会无情拍砖差评者，认为他们是自己理解不了而满口喷粪。。。所以我先澄清，我只是想写贴给观影经验不甚丰富的童鞋，如果想看片消遣，不要对这片有太大期望


我一直自觉属于观影经验较为丰富的看客了，大多数种类的电影我都还是能接受的，但这片让我对自己的观影能力产生了疑问

片子全长2个小时，前5分钟的开场是相当惊艳的，各种nb的镜头和画面，讲了一个蓝星球浪漫地撞烂了地球的故事

然后就是1个小时的。一个蛋疼的婚礼

讲了一个女的，在婚礼上莫名其妙的崩溃，然后自我折磨然后折磨别人。不晓得是怕结婚还是讨厌世俗，还是讨厌父母的不和谐，还是讨厌拜金主义。。。。这一个小时看得我相当无语，无语是因为不理解，不理解为什么一个什么都看不惯的人还装模作样的结婚，还各种想让自己开心，然后立刻干出相当崩溃的事情让自己重新不开心。

这时候我已经忘了电影名字了（因为当时看这片完全是随机看到的）

然后我就果断回顾了一下，发现这女的原来是忧郁症。好吧一切都说得通了，这货的精神是个悲剧，所以会这么蛋疼

理解了这个人的行为，我就不理解导演了，这果断是一个专门拍给忧郁症人士找共鸣的片吧。。。我一直以为，电影看的是种共鸣，导演的任务是把某些自己想表达的，震撼的东西用某种更易懂，更有力度的方式展现出来，以和观众思想中的某处达成共鸣，让观众体会到那种想法和震撼。

但这么一种小众的情感，是想要我等世俗生活中的“现实主义粗鄙观众”找哪样的共鸣呢？完全理解不了，就开始觉得片子拖沓冗长了，不由得开始寻找镜头，影片细节方面有无亮点。

不得不说亮点还是相当多的，比如主角婚礼，一开始我还以为他们办婚礼的地方是个酒店什么的，后来发现原来是主角姐姐的家，不得不说老美真tm会享受啊，住这样的地方。。。主角你还忧郁症啊 啊 啊。。住在天朝的穷b不理解啊

好吧，根据经验。。一个片要是前期这样拍，一般都是因为导演实际上是在做细腻的铺垫，为了使后面某种惊人的事的发生更自然点，于是我就带着这样的期待，去看后面那一个小时了


后一个小时的主要任务是将这一帮人丢到世纪末日的大背景下。
现实主义世俗们无法接受世界覆灭这样的事情。好不容易整了那么nb的大房子，说完就完，那哪成啊。。。他们一开始极力否认世界会毁灭。。但当那大蓝星星真的越来越近以后，所有正常人都不淡定了，以主角姐夫（自杀）和主角姐姐（不知所错，忧郁了）为代表。而我们的主角淡定得一塌糊涂。

要我说。。这不废话吗，以我对忧郁症的理解，他们每时每刻都处于所有人都不能理解的压抑之中，每日面临的都是世界毁灭般的绝望无助，早都习惯了，他们最大的痛苦是周遭人完全无法理解他们，就如同我看这片的情感一样。

但当世界毁灭的那一刻，全世界正常人都体会到了忧郁症患者平日的那种感觉了。全世界都抑郁了。于是抑郁症患者说，你们总算能体会到我有多tm不爽了吧，突然觉得自己特有优越感。

我觉得这可以类比肚子疼。我每每肚子疼到想拉X却没厕所的时候，就浑身出冷汗。那时候，我就特不能理解为什么别人那么开开心心蹦蹦跳跳，觉得全世界都应该和自己一样肚子疼，然后满脸纠结啊。

咳，说远了

莫非这就是导演想要表达的？忧郁症患者，平时那么苦B，只是因为他们呆错了环境，因而不适应了。就好像把鱼拿到陆地上一样。
但如果把他们放到正确的环境（世界末日）里面，他们就能用表现的比正常人要好多了？

如果真是这样。。我真是服了。。。。。

后5分钟就是全篇前5分钟继续演下去。。好吧画面不错。。。

综上。。我的评论就是，够矫情，够矫情，够矫情

矫情的慢速镜头切换，矫情的叙事节奏，矫情的主角

以我对电影的适应能力来说。。适应不了

但片子的章法技巧都无可挑剔，演员演技也很好，所以绝不是那种imdb 5分一下的烂片。只是实在无法体会导演想表达什么

另外吐槽一下豆瓣影评。和imdb评分。。。不知是大家看到不懂的片就不敢打低分，还是我的理解力已经跟不上前沿思潮，竟然都这么高分诶。。。还看不到负面评论诶。。。


非常希望看这片感到震撼的人。。能帮我翻译翻译这片。。顺便帮我这愚笨的大脑开开窍

Lars von Trier’s Melancholia (2011) stages an interesting reversal of this classic formula of an object-Thing (an asteroid, alien) that serves as the enabling obstacle to the creation of the couple. At the film’s end, the Thing (a planet on a collision course with Earth) does not withdraw, as in Super 8; it hits the Earth, destroying all life, and the film is about the different ways the main characters deal with the impending catastrophe (with responses ranging from suicide to cynical acceptance). The planet is thus the Thing-das Ding at its purest, as Heidegger would have it: the Real Thing which dissolves any symbolic frame – we see it, it is our death, we cannot do anything. The film begins with an introductory sequence, shot in slow motion, involving the main characters and images from space, which introduces the visual motifs. A shot from the vantage point of space shows a giant planet approaching Earth; the two planets collide. The film continues in two parts, each named for one of two sisters, Justine and Claire.

In part one, ‘Justine’, a young couple, Justine and Michael, are at their wedding reception at the mansion of Justine’s sister, Claire, and her husband, John. The lavish reception lasts from dusk to dawn with eating, drinking, dancing and the usual family conflicts (Justine’s bitter mother makes sarcastic and insulting remarks, ultimately resulting in John attempting to throw her off his property; Justine’s boss follows her around, begging her to write a piece of advertising copy for him). Justine drifts away from the party and becomes increasingly distant; she has sex with a stranger on the lawn, and, at the end of the party, Michael leaves her.

In part two, ‘Claire’, the ill, depressed Justine comes to stay with Claire and John and their son, Leo. Although Justine is unable to carry out normal everyday activities like taking a bath or even eating, she gets better over time. During her stay, Melancholia, a massive blue telluric planet that had been hidden behind the sun, becomes visible in the sky as it approaches Earth. John, who is an amateur astronomer, is excited about the planet, and looks forward to the ‘fly-by’ expected by scientists, who have assured the public that Earth and Melancholia will pass each other without colliding. But Claire is getting fearful and believes the end of the world is imminent. On the internet, she finds a site describing the movements of Melancholia around Earth as a ‘dance of death’, in which the apparent passage of Melancholia past Earth initiates a slingshot orbit that will bring the planets into collision soon after. On the night of the fly-by, it seems that Melancholia will not hit Earth; however, after the fly-by, background birdsong abruptly ceases, and the next day Claire realizes that Melancholia is circling back and will collide with Earth after all. John, who also discovers that the end is near, commits suicide through a pill overdose. Claire becomes increasingly agitated, while Justine remains unperturbed by the impending doom: calm and silent, she accepts the coming event, claiming that she knows that life does not exist elsewhere in the universe. She comforts Leo by making a protective ‘magic cave’, a symbolic shelter of wooden sticks, on the mansion’s lawn. Justine, Claire and Leo enter the shelter as the planet approaches. Claire continues to remain agitated and fearful, while Justine and Leo stay calm and hold hands. The three are instantly incinerated as the collision occurs and destroys Earth.

This narrative is interspersed with numerous ingenious details. To calm Claire, John tells her to look at Melancholia through a circle of wire which just encompasses its circular shape in the sky, thus enframing it, and to repeat this 10 minutes later so she will see that the shape has become smaller, leaving gaps within the frame – a proof that Melancholia is moving away from the Earth. She does this, and grows jubilant when she sees a smaller shape. However, when she looks at Melancholia through the frame some hours later, she is terrified to see that the shape of the planet has now expanded well beyond the frame of the wire circle. This circle is the circle of fantasy enframing reality, and the shock arrives when the Thing breaks through and spills over into reality. There are also wonderful details of the disturbances that happen in nature as Melancholia approaches the Earth: insects, worms, roaches and other repellent forms of life usually hidden beneath the green grass come to the surface, rendering visible the dis-gusting crawling of life beneath the idyllic surface – the Real invading reality, ruining its image. (This is similar to David Lynch’s Blue Velvet, in which, in a famous shot after the father’s heart attack, the camera moves extremely close to the grass surface and then penetrates it, rendering visible the crawling of micro-life, the repelling Real beneath the idyllic suburban surface.)

The idea for Melancholia originated in a therapy session von Trier attended during treatment for depression: the psychiatrist told him that depressive people tend to act more calmly than others under extreme pressure or the threat of catastrophe – they already expect bad things to happen. This fact offers yet another example of the split between reality – the social universe of established customs and opinions in which we dwell – and the traumatic, meaningless brutality of the Real: in the film, John is a ‘realist’, fully immersed in ordinary reality, so when the co-ordinates of this reality dissolve, his entire world breaks down; Claire is an hysteric who starts to question everything in a panic, but nonetheless avoids complete psychotic breakdown; and the depressed Justine goes on as usual because she is already living in a melancholic withdrawal from reality.

The film deploys four subjective attitudes to-wards this ultimate Event (the planet-Thing hitting the Earth) as Lacan would understand them. John, the husband, is the embodiment of university knowledge, which falls apart in its en-counter with the Real; Leo, the son, is the cherubinic object-cause of desire for the other three; Claire is the hysterical woman, the only full subject in the film (insofar as subjectivity means doubts, questioning, inconsistency); and this, surprisingly, leaves to Justine the position of a Master, the one who stabilizes a situation of panic and chaos by introducing a new Master-Signifier, which brings order into a confused situation, conferring on it the stability of meaning. Her Master-Signifier is the ‘magic cave’ that she builds to establish a protected space when the Thing approaches. One should be very careful here: Justine is not a protective Master who offers a beautiful lie – in other words, she is not the Roberto Benigni character in Life Is Beautiful. What she provides is a symbolic fiction which, of course, has no magic efficacy, but which works at its proper level of preventing panic. Justine’s point is not to blind us from the impending catastrophe: the ‘magic cave’ enables us to joyously accept the End. There is nothing morbid in it; such an acceptance is, on the contrary, the necessary background of concrete social engagement.

Justine is thus the only one who is able to propose an appropriate answer to the impending catastrophe, and to the total obliteration of every symbolic frame.

……………………..

Alan Weisman’s book The World Without Us, a vision of what would have happened if humanity (and only humanity) were suddenly to disappear from the earth – natural diversity blooming again, nature gradually overgrowing human arte-facts. In imagining the world without us, we, humans, are reduced to a pure disembodied gaze observing our own absence, and, as Lacan pointed out, this is the fundamental subjective position of fantasy: to observe the world in the condition of the subject’s non-existence (the fantasy of witnessing the act of one’s own conception, the parental copulation, or of witnessing one’s own burial, like Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn). The World Without Us is thus fantasy at its purest: witnessing the Earth itself retaining its pre-castrated state of innocence, before we hu-mans spoiled it with our hubris. So while The Tree of Life escapes into a similar cosmic fantasy of a world without us, Melancholia does not do the same. It does not imagine the end of the world in order to escape from family deadlock: Justine really is melancholic, deprived of the fantasmatic gaze. That is to say, melancholy is, at its most radical, not the failure of the work of mourning, the persisting attachment to the lost object, but their very opposite: ‘melancholy offers the paradox of an intention to mourn that precedes and anticipates the loss of the object’.

Therein resides the melancholic’s stratagem: the only way to possess an object that we never had, which was from the very outset lost, is to treat an object that we still fully possess as if this object is already lost. This is what provides a unique flavour to a melancholic love relationship, such as the one between Newland and Countess Olenska in Wharton’s The Age of Innocence: although the partners are still together, immensely in love, enjoying each other’s presence, the shadow of the future separation already colours their relationship, so that they perceive their current pleasures under the aegis of the catastrophe (separation) to come. In this precise sense, melancholy effectively is the beginning of philosophy – and, in this precise sense, Justine from Melancholia is not melancholic: her loss is the absolute loss, the end of the world, and what Justine mourns in advance is this absolute loss – she is literally living in the end time. When catastrophe was just a threat of catastrophe, she was merely a depressed melancholic; once the threat is here, she finds herself in her element.

And here we reach the limit of event as re-framing: in Melancholia, the event is no longer a mere change of frame, it is the destruction of frame as such, i.e., the disappearance of humanity, the material support of every frame. But is such a total destruction the only way to acquire a distance from the frame that regulates our access to reality? The psychoanalytic name for this frame is fantasy, so the question can also be put in the terms of fantasy: can we acquire a distance towards our fundamental fantasy, or, as Lacan put it, can we traverse our fantasy?


Zizek, S. (2014) Event: Philosophy in Transit. London: Penguin Books Ltd.