Patience (After Sebald) A Gestaltic journey through Deleuzian pathways

7/17/2019 Patience (After Sebald) A Gestaltic journey through Deleuzian pathways

1/25

Cristohper Ramos Flores

Patience (After Sebald)

A Gestaltic journey through Deleuzian

pathways

The documentary film

Film studies 385

Professor Julian Cornell

Wesleyan University, Fall 2013.


2/25

Patience (After Sebald):

A Gestaltic journey through Deleuzian pathwaysby Cristohper Ramos Flores

In the last couple of years, a few interesting ideas have been roaming around the

world of the thinkers, philosophers, artists and creative minds in many other fields.

Some of these ideas try to explain the way we, as living creatures (whether we are

consider ourselves smart or not in relation to other species)understand the physical

world and what happens around us; and also the abstract internal world of the self.

Of course this isnt new, those questions have been around for thousands of years. In

fact those questions may be the reason why we have given our world and culture a

specific shape. However, it seems that lately, those new ideas focus on how we

perceive the world and how we organize our thoughts about it. In this paper, I

analyse Patience (After Sebald)by focusing my discussion on two of those ideas: Gestalt

theory and the DeleuzianRhizome model. Gestalt theory seeks to explain how our

brains interpret, classify and understand what we sense, specifically through vision;

and the Rhizome model helps us explain how that interpretation, classification and

understanding get tangled between one another, driving our brains through complex

processes in which relations and meanings are created, destroyed and re-shaped, to

finally give us an understanding of the world. A simple example of this, in which we


3/25

Patience (After Sebald): A Gestaltic journey through Deleuzian pathways

can see how those processes occur in our minds, can be found every time we take a

walk in the neighbourhood where we grew up. We understand that neighbourhood in

a certain way, and it contains meanings and memories unique to us. Walking around

its streets will trigger thousands of thoughts in our brains, all of which result from the

unique combination of our experiences, the stimulus of our surroundings and the way

we relate them. In the same way, our brains can dream with tangled thoughts, ideas

and meanings associated with every piece of art. Sometimes this associated dreaming

even inspires the creation of new artworks. The piano sonata by Beethoven known as

The Tempest(inspired by Shakespeares play of the same name), or Picassos Guernica

(created in response to the bombing of 26 April, 1937 in Guernica, Spain) are some

examples.

The process of reading literature is a great demonstration of how our brains work.

Literature not only gives us the chance to internally visualise something, it gives us

the chance to create our own worlds inside our minds. But what happens when we try

to bring those internal worlds out? Grant Gee, a British filmmaker,set himself the task

of making a film based on the ideas of the German writer W.G. Sebald and his book

The Rings of Saturn and, in my opinion, succeeds in giving his film Patience (After

Sebald) the same sense of intertextuality of thoughts that the writer achieves in his

book. So, how can we relate Patience (After Sebald)with Gestalt Theory and Deleuzian

2


4/25


rhizomatic structures? The aim of this paper is to explain how Grant Gees film uses

ideas from Gestalt theory and the Rhizome model, to create an innovative essay about

Winfried Georg Max Sebald and his book.

To begin with, I cant argue that Grant Gee had any of these concepts in mind as

guidelines to give his movie a particular aesthetic or structure. Nevertheless, Gees

film was directly influenced by the aesthetics and narrative structure found in The

Rings of Saturn,which can easily be understood through a Deleuzian analysis. At the

same time, the way in which the many territorializations, deterritorializations and

reterritorializations of statements and ideas presented in the film are done through

visual processes similar to those explained in Gestalt Theory.

In an interview for Filmmaker Magazine,Damon Smith asked Grant Gee how he had

approached the task of translating Sebalds book into the cinematic medium. Gee

explained that, in order for him to feel confident about facing such a difficult task, he

decided to follow Sebalds pilgrimage route through the English coast of East Anglia,

and to film the landscapes:

I thought, Ill rewalk the walk he did and Ill film it. Suddenly it freed me from

having any Sebaldian experience at all because I wasnt attempting to inhabit him

3


5/25


or any of that it was a literary pilgrimage. And it was a very formal art device, in

a way. [1]

Gee also confesses that, after making that particular trip, he had enough material to

make an entire film just out of editing all of the footage in sequence; and he did. This

became the basic landscape that served as the structural foundation of the film,

similar to the way in which the travel gives structure and coherence to Sebalds book.

It is worth mentioning that Sebalds books are considered travelogues, because they

feature characters who explore geographical environments whilst simultaneously

exploring their own historical backgrounds and thoughts; another interpretation is

that, through his writing, Sebald conducts an internal exploration of his own

thoughts. In the same way, the content of the film wasnt going to be defined by this

first long travel sequence Gee had made. He didnt really have a clear idea of how he

was going to structure and present the content (which, by the way, wasnt defined

either). According to the interview for Filmmaker magazinehe had his landscape and

any other material [] didnt have to drive the narrative, so it could drift in and out

[] Things surfaced out of and submerged back into this landscape footage which I

had captured. Structurally, that was what made sense.

4


6/25


With the use of the ideas already presented in this paper, analyses and comparisons

can be made between the film, the book and their Deleuzian Rhizomatic structures.

According to Deleuzes concept of territory, a space is created by the activities

happening within temporal or physical limits. This space-creating activity is a

territorialization. In the case of both the book and the film, the first territorialization is

presented with the travel. The fact that a visual and/or temporal landscape is

constructed already defines the territory that the book and the film are subject to.

Another element that makes the Rhizomatic structures possible is the so-called

deterritorialization; that is, the process by which the limits that define a territory are

destroyed. It is to take control and move away the activities and processes established

in a territorialization. Along comes the reterritorialization, by which the space of old

territories is replaced by new territories through territorialization. To put these ideas

in the context of the film and book, there are many examples of occasions in which

one idea triggers a completely different one by making very simple associations

between them. For example, Sebald, in his book, talks about the overfishing of the

English coast, and presents a postcard that shows fishermen standing amongst

hundreds of fish. A few pages later on, he moves to a different reflection about the

number of deaths produced in the area during World War II, presenting a similarly

composed image of human corpses lying on the ground. Both stories and images are

5


7/25


territories that use a process of deterritorialization/reterritorialization connected

through the bridge that the memory contained in those geographical surroundings

provides. Gee cleverly finds a way to include this in his movie, pushing it a step

further by adding archival footage of images from fish packing plants that were also

located in the same surroundings at some point in the past. In another example,

between 50 and 55 minutes into the movie, Gee presents discussions about of how the

coastline was modified and rebuilt to protect the land from both the sea, and from

military invasions. He shows images that offer proof of the devastation produced by

war and sea in the area, and at the same time he combines the images with voiceovers

of interviews telling a set of seemingly unrelated stories about Germany and Britain.

The only connection between the stories and the two countries in that particular

sequence is the memory of the devastation brought on by war and sea; it is worth

mentioning that the visual sequence reinforces the memory of those tragedies by

showing images of destroyed boats. These kinds of freewheeling connections are

found throughout the film and the book, allowing both the writer and director to

construct a Deleuzian-like Rhizome structure that gives coherence and unity to both

works.

The film contains many elements used to create a successful territorialization,

deterritorialization and reterritorialization. However, I think the most important

6


8/25


thread that allows the director to knit those Deleuzian processes together is the use of

memory as a way to enter the consciousness of the other. This helps to create a sense

of narrative, though it may be presented in a disrupted manner. Memory becomes a

trigger and bridge between those processes and their content. This appeal to a shared

history and memory reminds me of Chris Markers Sans Soleil, which also uses

memory (historical facts known by a wide audience) as the basis for building and

sustaining dialog. Nevertheless, unlike Markers film (in which nobody was directly

interviewed), Patience (after Sebald) includes testimonies that reinforce its arguments.

On the other hand, the movie is not only about the content of The Rings of Saturn, its

about Sebald, his life and his views of history. For this reason Gee interviewed many

people who knew Sebald personally, people who could talk about him from an

insiders point of view. Also, passages of the book are read aloud to back up the

arguments that the film presents about Sebalds ideas. Finally, Gee also decided to

include in the film a series of pinpointed maps from the resource Litmap, created by

writer Barbara Hui, a project aimed at finding the real places mentioned in books, to

demonstrate that all of the places that Sebald and Gee visited, and also the places that

Sebald described, evoked or thought about in his book, really do exist. In this way,

Gees film claims truth and backs up all of its arguments with a clever use of historical

footage, interviews, maps and readings, images and analysis of the book.

7


9/25


There is a very particular use of all of the elements that comprise Gees film. First of

all, the interview segments never solely show the interviewee. Instead, the interviews

are presented as visual collages in which interview footage is combined with other

images related to their arguments (the contents of the interviews). The interviews fade

in and out over a layering of images that juxtapose places, pages from Gees book and

historical footage, turning them into voice-over.

Picture of one of the many collages in the film

Another element is the perpetual presence of Sebald, which is made to seem more

real, almost as if Sebald himself had been involved in the making of the movie (even

though he died eleven years before the movie was released), by having Jonathan

8


10/25


Pryce read passages from the book in-lieu of Sebalds voice. Also, some radio

interviews with Sebald himself are included.

In this image one can see the point of temporal convergency between an image from the book, thedigital maps and the horizon above the sea. All three images depicting the walk.

The film is constructed of various layers, there is no linear-chronology, and it cant be

understood through the lens of the traditional use of storytelling in film or non-

fictional film. The many layers of the film are presented in a method analogous to the

way in which the travel was made, interrupted sometimes by presenting some of

the Sebalds ideas from the book, as well as Gees ideas and points of view, interviews

and beautifully constructed visual passages.

9


11/25


When it comes to sound content, Patience (After Sebald) can also be compared with

Chris Markers film and his use of familiar music that is altered and filled with a new

spirit (or emptiness from its original one if we choose to see it that way). The

soundtrack consists of electronic alterations of Schuberts song cycle Winterreise,

which is a setting of poems by Wilhelm Mler. The choice of this particular song cycle

is no coincidence. The mood that is expressed in most of these songs matches

perfectly the contents of Mllers text which talks about a man who has lost his love

and starts his own walk in what could be the search of something to give meaning to

his life, or simply a way to forget his past. Throughout the text, the wanderer sings of

loneliness, longing for death, desolation and disillusionment along with loss of hope.

This, obviously, matches the mood of both Sebalds book and the film. In the

interview for Filmmaker Magazine Gee comments:

Even before I had the notion for this film, when I was thinking of doing a short film

about Sebald, one of the first things I decided was the film stock to shoot on because

I thought the grain texture [of 16mm] and the texture of his imagery fit and I

knew I wanted to use James [James Kirby, aka The Caretaker] music. The

scratches and degradation and repetition [from manipulating old 78s] worked

perfectly. [1]

10


12/25


This comment shows that the director had a clear idea of how the soundtrack was

going to be an emotional and textural counterpoint to the content and visual

construct.

The visual content in The Rings of Saturn, as well as some of Sebalds other writings,

differentiates these books from others, since the power of these images has enormous

repercussions for the way that readers perceives Sebalds ideas in this book. The

images help to connect the many layers, creating a sense of a scrapbook; a travelogue

that resembles a collection of essays that describe devastation and loss, colored by

mournful memories. In the same way, this is also one of the most notable

characteristics of Gees film. The visual content carries an enormous part of the

weight of the films message.

As aforementioned, the film is a non-chronological continuum filled with collages,

which serve to interconnect the many layers of the film. Most of the film is presented

in grainy black and white images that match both the historical footage and the

images embedded in the book. The absence of color imparts to the movie the same

feeling of emptiness and loss that one can sense in Sebalds book. Very little color is

used in the film. Strangely enough, most of the color footage shown in the film was

not shot by Gee. The color images are historical footage of scenes from the many wars

11


13/25


mentioned by Sebald. It is almost as if Grant Gee chose to use those color images to

make these extremely painful memories stand out, in juxtaposition with the images of

beautiful and peaceful landscapes shot with modern cameras. In this way, there is a

sense of harshness evoked by his treatment of the colors. The impact of the visuals is

so strong that sometimes the voiceover and interviews dont really need to be there.

There are a few times when the voices, dialog and interviews overlap in a sort of

audio collage that results in confusion. This is an attempt to emulate, to match, the the

visual collage style of the film. Fortunately, the best visual moments of the movie are

free of any kind of speech, and the visual language employed is enough to sustain the

message.

When it comes to visual language (not sure about this phrase), it seems that the

simple narrative of the clips edited together wasnt enough for Gee. Instead, he

created a very interesting and complex way of relating images to each other. There are

many ways in which the relation and dialogs in the visual construct can be read and

understand. Nonetheless, I find the way in which the director composed collages and

sequences of images to be very exiting. I can clearly see visual structures that remind

me of those analyses of visual perception made through Gestalt Theory. For example

in the eleventh minute of the film, a sequence of clips shows a hauntingly beautiful

composition in which we see scenes from the sea. In the first clip, the camera is

12


14/25


mounted on a boat. The camera is not visible, but it is obvious the camera is fixed in

the boat because the outline of this particular ship doesnt move from its position in

the view of the camera despite the movement of the sea. In front of this boat, a smaller

boat is being wildly rocked up and down by the power of the sea waves. There is a

fade to black and then a fade into the next clip, with these fades taking the speed of

the motion of the waves from the previous clip. The next clip shows seagulls flying

and the sea as a background. In this clip the motion of the sea has the same rhythm as

in the preceding scene, and the fade to black and fade back to the clip keep the same

motion pulse, reinforcing the visual connection between the two clips. The sequence

continues with a clip showing the horizon of the sea from the point of view of a

rocking boat, which results in a moving horizon. The motion of that horizon keeps the

same rhythm as in the previous two clips. This motion, thus, becomes the

deterritorialization/reterritorialization factor that binds the clips together and unifies

the sequence. But, seen from the perspective of Gestalt Theory, the motion and the

fade to black and between the clips work as a the principle of continuity or common

fate. This principle for the theorists of Gestalt says that when the eye is compelled to

move through an object and continue to another, our brain will connect the objects,

group them and create its own conclusions that all of the objects belong together,

therefore creating a continuity that makes sense to us. In the case of this film, the

continuity doesnt happen in just one still image; rather, the gesture would be

13


15/25


incomplete if the sequence wasnt together with all three clips. One clip by itself

would just be a clip with a scene from the sea, and two of the clips would be a mere

sequence, but three clips put together in this dialog reveals a structural logic intended

to depict a full temporal image.

Sequence of the three scenes joined by shared motion and their rhythm

There are other similar examples within this movie in which we can find the principle

of continuity. Another can be found one hour and six minutes into the movie; in this

example we see a series of three to five seconds clips that have the particularity of

being blurred by some sort of veil interposed between the camera and the landscapes

being shot. The voiceover, in this case, helps the viewer put the sequence together by

describing the Island of St. Pierre in Switzerland. It is hard to tell if the images we are

trying to see in these blurry clips are images from the island, but one ends up putting

those silhouettes together as a continuum to build a landscape in mind.

14


16/25


Another example of Grant Gees use of Gestalt principles is revealed by Lise Patt

around thirteen minutes into the movie. In Lise Patts explanation we see a series of

images included in The Rings of Saturn.She argues that Sebald was creating another

level of discourse through highlighting the use of similar compositions, shapes or

contents of the images embedded in the book. Grant Gee eloquently overlaps these

images and, through fading, we understand the argument given by Patt. Throughout

the movie similar ideas can be seen in the way Gee builds his collages. By finding

similar shapes between clips and still images, he creates sequences that invoke the

Gestalt principle of similarity. Another example of this principle is found when

images from the book, landscapes and pinpoints from the digital maps are

overlapped. These images dont share a visual similarity, but their meaning, explained

by the voiceovers, carries a similar message, thus the combination makes sense.

Composition in the shotof the interviewee andcomposition of thelandscape are similar,therefore creating ane ff ec ti ve c ol la ge

composition through theprinciple of similarity

15


17/25


Patterns in the book are similar to patterns in the maps. Text and horizon match too.

The principle of closure states that the brain will fill in gaps between shapes in order

to construct a complete image. For example, having four circles displayed in a specific

non-linear arrangement might lead us to group the four shapes together and imagine

a square. The lines of the square arent there, but our brain will imagine them anyway

by using the circles as their points of intersection. We suddenly stop seeing the shapes

of the circles and only see the square. This principle is used in Gees film through the

overlapping of images. This visual mix often leads us to see the grouping of the

images rather than the images themselves. Once we group them together in our

minds we access another level of discourse. In many cases, we see shots of landscapes

with horizons that match the horizons of shots from other time periods. Put together,

an image is created which combines past (historical footage) and present (filmed by

grant Gee in his walk following Sebalds pilgrimage) overlapping in a visual

discourse about memory and mournful loss.

16


18/25


Historical footage and landscape shots combined, appealing to the sense of memory

I was able to find very few examples of the principle of proximity in the film,

especially because this principle talks about objects that, when put together, we

associate or segregate into groups. Since the film shows mostly shots of landscapes,

its hard to imagine that the director arranged the landscapes or any other images to

follow this principle. The landscapes and images presented already have their own

visual logic. In Grant Gees collage style, even when the images dont belong together,

we tend to create associations that resemble the principle of proximity due to the

sequences and compositions decided on by Gee. One clear example of this is found at

twenty-eight minutes. In this sequence the interviewee is talking about a message

(directed to living beings in outer space) that was recorded and sent aboard the space

probe Voyager 2 in 1977. Along with this discussion we see footage from the Voyager

space program. At some point we see the Voyager 2 and Saturn overlapping an image

17


19/25


of two middle-aged gentleman sitting inside what seems to be a reading room. What

we understand from this collage is the idea of a conversation, as if the Voyager 2 was

giving a message of greeting to Saturn in the same way the two men are probably

discussing the contents of a book. By grouping the two elements of the Voyager

program image and the two men in the reading room, we have a sense of proximity

that creates a unified whole in the discourse. We no longer see two entirely different

clips overlapping; instead, we see a whole scene in which we group the four elements

and imagine the multilayered conversation between the four of them.

Voyager 2 and Saturn on the left and two men conversing on the right

Finally, the last of the Gestalt principles that I found within the film is the figure and

ground which allows our brain to understand the contents of an image. In the case of

18


20/25


this film, the figure and ground are not the mere visual constructs that we see and

understand from the images. Since a film, in contrast to still images, is able to present

motion pictures, Gee gives a ludic treatment to the collage and takes advantage of the

temporality and evident movement of the images, overlapping the roads he shot (in

black and white) with images of his own feet (in color) to make reference to Sebalds

walk around East Aglia territories, as well as his own.

Colored clip of Gees feet ontop of the roads of the blackand white clip

Colored clip of a man walkingon top of the road in black and

white

19


21/25


It is very important to mention, again, that it is me who is finding the Gestalt

principles in Gees film and that I didnt find any source that could prove that the

director was, in fact, considering them. Nevertheless, in the context of some of the

aforementioned examples, a discussion about perception is the thread that joins the

arguments of the interviewees. Also, we have to remember that Gestalt Theory

proposes that our brains are always looking for ways to relate objects to each other so

that they can process information more efficiently in batches instead of focusing on

every little detail. In using these principles, whether consciously or unconsciously,

Grant Gee helps the viewer to understand the complex content of the film with the

visual constructs that allow to group ideas, concepts and arguments, making it easier

to process all of the information in batches, instead of what could seem to be

unrelated incoherent discourses. It is by appealing to our perception and by

understanding how our brain processes information that the director of the film is

able to create even more levels of discourse.

Some other aspects of the visual treatment of the movie make me think Grant Gee was

not approaching Sebalds book in the traditional way a filmmaker approaches an

author, a biography or a story. There are a few cuts between sequences in which the

images fade to black, pausing briefly and allowing a moment of reflection in which to

absorb the complexity of the content. This reminds me of the way in which a reader

20


22/25


sometimes needs to stop his reading in order to think, assimilate, understand and

enjoy his readings. The film seems to be articulating a philosophy towards Sebalds

book through the interpretation that reflects the experience of a reader. In this case,

Grant Gee acts as the virtual reader, nevertheless allowing room for the viewer of the

film to follow both his and Sebalds ideas, and simultaneously to add their own

interpretation to the whole experience of the film. This process, which allows the

viewer to customize the film to himself, the way one does with a book, is so effective

that anyone who sees the film will almost certainly find himself interested in reading

The Rings of Saturnor any other text by Sebald. On the other hand, it is possible that

due to the complexity of the film, the many layers of discourse, and the arbitrary

wandering between the many essays presented in the film, the average viewer might

lose interest in the movie very quickly, unlike an experienced viewer who has the

background to be able to read the arguments. This complexity and lack of clear

narrative or definitive interpretation could be seen as the films major flaw;

nonetheless it is in its complexity where we find its genius. And, this lack of definition

interpretation is consistent with Sebalds writing.

There is no easy way to compare this documentary to some others, due to its non-

linearity, the continuum of collages, the freewheeling diverging discussions, the

fading in and out interviewees and many other aspects that make this film as unique

as Sebalds writings. Gee constructs a film and visual discourses that are rich with

21


23/25


content, but he lets others do the talking. The stories that the interviewees tell are

sometimes personal, in relation to Sebald or about the way they understand Sebalds

writings. Most of the times these interviews seem to lead the direction of the film

towards tangential stories that Gee later connects to the book and Sebalds walk.

This film doesnt arrive at any particular conclusion about Sebalds book. It presents

ideas from the book, some biographical comments about Sebald, puts the book in

historical and geographical context, and offers the interpretations of the interviewees.

The coast of Suffolk becomes the container of both past and present, in a particular

temporal structure that carries contents only accessible by memory. The present has

new meanings when contrasted with the past, and vice versa. East Anglia represents,

in both the book and the film, the evidence that backs up Sebalds meditations about

memories, war, death, devastation and decay and the feeling that everything remains.

The wide ranging discussions included are strong enough to make Sebalds literary

world appeal the viewer to the viewer, and this is perhaps the major accomplishment

of the film.

Patience (After Sebald)is a journey that follows the walk from the book as it displays a

series of Gestaltic compositions that build a Rhizhomatic Deleuzian-like structure. It is

an amazing look into Sebalds travel through the English coast, history, and his own

mind. This film might be compared to Chris Markers Sans Soleil,which also portrays

22


24/25


humanity in a way that would be impossible to accomplish in the traditional linear

structures of film. The result is neither a film, an adaptation or the book nor a biography

of the writer, rather, it seems to be more of a response to Sebalds work. Gee offers in

this film a context for a deeper appreciation of the book. Professor Linda Kelly

Alkana, from the Department of History in California State University Long Beach,

expresses her thoughts about the movie in the following way:

The power of this film lies in its ability to capture visually the ethereal nature of

Sebalds musings without trying to just put pictures to words and places. The film

reveals that Sebald believed that images can paralyze moral capacity, and can

militate against our capacity for reflective thinking. Just as his own observations

in Rings of Saturn engage his readers in reflective thought, Grant Gees choice of

commentators, his cinematography, and the over-all presentation of Patience (After

Sebald) engage viewers in much the same way. [9]

I wonder if there is another cinematic example that precedes Grant Gee's Patience (After

Sebald)other than the works by Chris Marker. It is hard to label this film with any of the

conventional categories of documentary film. In fact, it sometimes becomes hard to see

the film as a documentary, since it does not only claim truth but instead seems to be

more of an essay or even an approach and explanation of Sebalds philosophical

statements.

23


25/25


Bibliography, citations and online resources

1. SMITH, Damon. Filmmaker magazine. Online magazine retrieved on Nov-30-2013at http://filmmakermagazine.com/45517-grant-gee-patience-after-sebald

2. SEBALD, Winfried Georg. The Rings of Saturn. New directions publishingcorporation, 1998.

3. DELEUZE, Gilles and GUATTARI, Flix. A thousand Plateaus: Capitalism andSchizophrenia.Univesity of Minnesota Press, 1993.

4. DELEUZE, Gil les and GUATTARI, Flix. Lanti-dipe: Capitalism andSchizophrenia.Univesity of Minnesota Press, 1977.

5. CLOREBROOK, Claire. Deleuze: A guide for the perplexed. ContinuumPublishing, 2006.

6. GOLDSTEIN, E. Bruce. Perceiving Objects and Scenes. The Gestalt Approach toObject Perception.Cengage Learning, 2009.

7. PALMER, Stephen E. Visual Perception of Objects. In HEALY, Alice; PROCTOR,Robert; and WEINER, Irving. Handbook of Psychology: Experimental psychology.John Wiley and Sons, 2003.

8. GREENE, David B. Winterreise: A Study in the Aesthetics of Mixed Media. In theThe Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 29, No. 2 (Winter, 1970). TheAmerican Society for Aesthetics, 1970.

9. ALKANA, Linda Kelly. Educational Media Reviews Online. Retrieved onDec-03-2013 at http://emro.lib.buffalo.edu/emro/emroDetail.asp?Number=4994
http://filmmakermagazine.com/45517-grant-gee-patience-after-sebald

Documents

Patience (After Sebald) A Gestaltic journey through Deleuzian pathways