(And if cinema can do what Kant could not do, then where does that place us?)

Five Remarks on Two of Stanley Cavell’s Parenthetical Questions, or, The Remains of the Spectator’s Condition

Abstract

Explanation of the connection between gaslight and spirit may be taken as the tenor of the explanation given by the cook Elizabeth when Paula, drained, manages to scream down the stairwell for Elizabeth to come up. Entering Paula's room and, in response to Paula’s question, assuring her that there’s no one in the house to cause any dimming, Elizabeth adds: “But the gas comes in pipes; and I expect there gets more gas in the pipes at some times than there does at others.” Paula sees the possibility: “Yes. Yes. I suppose that could explain it.” It does not explain the ensuing noises, however, and it does not really in itself match what calls for an explanation: it does not connect the specific conduits between the seen and the unseen. (And can film do what Kant could not do?"