{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026378896882494004, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0028776978417266188, 'mean_word_length': 5.063953488372093, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Flesh for the Author: Filmic Presence in the Documentaries of Eduardo Coutinho

Theoretical discussions about the filmed body’s corporality or materiality have often addressed the emphasis on physical presence as something that halts narrative progression, even if temporarily. But whereas classical narratives may allow for pauses for the appreciation of, say, the physical attributes of a star, in other modalities the stress on corporality may indicate a more or less significant disdain for plot progression. In his revisionist and elucidating approach to early cinema Tom Gunning identified an impulse to simply present a filmed subject or landscape—the cinema of attractions, he says, was made of “instants, rather than developing situations.” 1 Gilles Deleuze, in turn, wrote about a cinema of bodies that do not enact unfolding events—in the domain of a “time-image” defined by the coexistence rather than the succession of temporalities, 2 the body appears as marked by accumulated experiences. 3 Though by no means similar to the idea of attraction, Deleuze’s conceptualization of the actor’s body as heavy, worn out, and tired is as much about “presence” as the aesthetics of astonishment described by Gunning. In the realm of literary theory, Roland Barthes elaborated on yet another conception of presence as a means to differentiate authorial figuration from authorial representation, discussing the reader’s desire for a writer to be found in the text “not in the guise of direct biography (which would exceed the body, give a meaning to life, forge a destiny),” 4 but in his or her physicality—thereby merging the writer and her work into one single entity. Barthes replaces the idea of authorship as origin with the concept of authorship as process, whereby the author ceases to be anterior to the text to become either a scriptor, a weaver of preexisting discourses, 5 or a voice relevant not as the conveyor of a message, but as a corporeal presence in a “tissue” that is “worked out in a perpetual interweaving.” 6 Figuration, says Barthes, “is the way in which the