(1) A version of this paper was delivered as a talk at the last conference of the Society for Cinema Studies, April 4-7, San Diego. The panel was called: Rereading Deleuze: New Perspectives on Film, Television, and Electronic Media.
(2)Tessa Dwyer picks up on the confusing status of the cinematic 'examples'. She argues that the omission of stills from Deleuze's books "constitutes a dramatic device that stages (and continues to rehearse) lines of differentiation between image and text, viewing and reading, film and theory." (554) "Straining to Hear". Buchanan, Ian (ed.) A Deleuzian Century?. South Atlantic Quarterly 96:3. Summer 1997. 543 - 562.
(3) Michael Salcman, M.D. "Postmodernism and the Art of Gabriele Leidloff". Lecture at Columbia University, New York, April 16, 1997. Another of Gabriele Leidloff's projects encompasses a cooperation with neurologists. Instead of engaging in a discourse with art historians who would traditionally be interpreting her art, neurologists have been invited to write about it because the artist is interested in their specific views.
(4) Please note that I showed the piece on video when this talk was delivered -- the transposition to the Internet has had the funny effect of making Deleuze's point but contradicting the argument that I (in accordance with the author's 'intention') have been making: the alienation effect of Ms de Mooy's slowness (and with it the artist's comment on narrativity) gets completely lost.
(5) To explain what he means by the crystal image, Deleuze refers to cinematic constructions of images that employ mirrors, e.g. images showing two identical scenes where one cannot tell the difference between the image of a scene and the image of the scene's refection in a mirror, between the actual image and the mirrored one.