Page - 85 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Volume 01/01

Religion, Belief and Medial Layering of Communication | 85www.jrfm.eu 2015, 1/1, 75–88 frenkel employs a number of tactics to dislodge what is ordinarily considered a natural connection between speaker and what is spoken. The pairing of the voice (speaking in a phonetically perceptible language that lends itself to literal interpreta- tion) with the sign language of the deaf (a silent, visually perceptible language) is a brilliant means of dissociating the body from language. speech, paradoxically, is illus- trated visually, while at the same time, it is not. The elementary equality of linguistic expression in sign and in spoken language forces the viewers of the video to constantly shift their mode of reading according to the media of expression combined. Moving between listening and looking, it be- comes evident that the two modes of perception interact and interfere with one an- other, insofar as an aural sign is always already linked to a visual representation, while a visual sign evokes phonemes; otherwise, they would not be signs, in Ferdinand de saussure’s sense of the concept. in the case of the “talking face”, the narrative voice-over can be only provision- ally assigned to it or to the mouth as the source of the articulation. This is due to the fragmentation, the disruptions, and the close-up enlargement of the face, rendered anonymous and androgynous by the black cloth covering the speaker’s hair. The talk- ing mouth sometimes occupies the entire visual field. The shots of a talking mouth in such extreme close-up demonstrate the physical effort involved in producing pho- nemes through the integrated actions of tongue, teeth, and lips, to the point that bubbles of saliva are formed. Viewed in slow motion, the act of speaking and speech itself become eerie processes that assume almost monstrous features. The effect is a disconnect between the effort of speaking and the content of speech. The voice adopts several different narrative positions layered one upon the other, referring to other narrators and narratives. running through the entire video is the question of who is speaking at any given time. Who is the Messiah? Who are the sav- iours whose messages we are hearing? The gap between the face and what is being spoken becomes increasingly wide, as represented by the open, devouring mouth. Oral speech is emitted from the dangerously gaping chasm of the mouth, where monstrous teeth, tongue, and lips produce sounds that are inevitably perceived as threatening. it is here that one is reminded of flusser’s account: “hordes of words arise within me almost without pause. They clamour for order, insist on my direction, demand articulation.”29 flusser is referring to himself here, describing his mouth as a space occupied by an enemy force that in a sense pries open his lips from within, compelling him to speak. But what is the effect of infusing “joyful tidings” – a message of salvation, no less – with menace? among other things, it draws our attention to the “mis-speaking” (the German word for which, versprechen, means both promising and mis-speaking) of speech and of language itself. Messages of salvation are thus likened to enemy 29 flusser 1999, 219.