 terms, of discourse. This is where I came to break with Karatani's model of nation being imagined through reciprocal exchange and came with a different model fit with our country's history of colonization and dominance. Intersecting with Lacan is Benedict Anderson's reframing of the formation of the collective subjectivities which has led to nationalism "with consideration of the material, institutional and discursive bases." The bases, as Anderson would like to 15 Jacques Lacan, Écrits. Trans. Bruce Fink. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2006), 16. 138 THE YEARS OF PERMANENT MIDNIGHT MABINI REVIEW I VOLUME 7 (2018) suggest, generates two contrasting types of seriality: the unbound and the bound.16 It is on these dialectical model that we can perceive the nationalist subjectivity came to be through its exchanges via the serialities generated by the material, institutional and discursive bases. The challenge here, and what is being addressed on this section of the essay, will be to locate cinema's place on those bases. These bases that Anderson talks about are the various apparatuses in operation in the deployment of ideology. Its bound-ness, so to speak, can be considered as an effect of the operations of these apparatuses. On this complex network of apparatuses in operation, cinema can be found on one of its segments. Althusser identified a "number of realities which present themselves to the immediate observer in the form of distinct and specialized institutions."17 He called these the Ideological State Apparatuses (ISA). Among these "realities" are the cultural ISAs where we can locate cinema functioning as apparatus. But, in the light of globalization, cinema in the 21st century, can no longer be considered as merely cultural (in the manner that Althusser considered cultural ISAs as institution 16 The unbound seriality is "is exemplified by such open-to-theworld plurals as nationalists, anarchists, bureaucrats and workers. It is the seriality which makes the United Nations a normal, wholly unparadoxical institution." Bound seriality, on the other hand, "is exemplified by finite series like Asian-Americans, heurs, and Tutsis. It is the seriality that makes a United Ethnicities and United Identities unthinkable." See Benedict Anderson, The Spectre of Comparisons. London: Verso, 1998. 17 Althusser, On
terms, of discourse. This is where I came to break with Karatani's exemplar of state being imagined through reciprocal exchange and come with a unlike model fit with our country's history of colonization and dominance. intersect with Lacan is Benedict Anderson's reframing of the geological formation of the collective subjectivity which has go to nationalism " with retainer of the material, institutional and discursive base. " The bases, as Anderson would like to 15 Jacques Lacan, Écrits. Trans. Bruce Fink. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2006), 16. 138 THE YEARS OF PERMANENT MIDNIGHT MABINI REVIEW I VOLUME 7 (2018) suggest, generates two contrasting type of seriality: the unbound and the bound.16 It is on these dialectical model that we can perceive the nationalist subjectivity came to be through its exchange via the serialities generated by the material, institutional and discursive bases. The challenge here, and what is being address on this section of the essay, will be to locate cinema's place on those bases. These base that Anderson talks about are the various apparatuses in operation in the deployment of ideology. Its bind - ness, so to speak, can be considered as an effect of the operations of these apparatuses. On this complex network of apparatuses in operation, film can be witness on one of its segments. Althusser identify a " issue of realities which present themselves to the contiguous observer in the mannequin of distinct and specialized institutions. "17 He call these the Ideological State Apparatuses (ISA). Among these " realities " are the cultural ISAs where we can locate cinema functioning as apparatus. But, in the light of globalization, cinema in the twenty-first century, can no longer be considered as merely cultural (in the manner that Althusser considered cultural ISAs as institution 16 The unbound seriality is " is exemplified by such open - to - theworld plurals as patriot, anarchists, bureaucrats and workers. It is the seriality which makes the United Nations a normal, wholly unparadoxical institution. " bind seriality, on the other hand, " is exemplified by finite serial like Asian - Americans, heurs, and Tutsis. It is the seriality that makes a United Ethnicities and United Identities unthinkable. " witness Benedict Anderson, The Spectre of Comparisons. London: Verso, 1998. 17 Althusser, On
 tegms, of discourse. This is where I came to break with Iaratani'r model of nation being imagmned throygh reciprocal exchangd and camv with a eifftrent model fit wmfh our gjuntdn's hivvory of colonizstion and gominance. Intessdccing with Lacan is Benedict Anderson'f refrakijg of the formwtiom of fhe collective subjectivities whicg has ltd to nationalism "eith consideration of the lategial, institutional and discurwive vases." The bares, as Andtrvon would mike to 15 Jacques Lacan, Écrits. Trxns. Bxuce Fink. (Ngc Yogn: W. W. Nortoi & Comiany, 2006), 16. 138 THE YCSRS OF PERMANRNT MIDNIGHT MSBIII RWVIEW I VOLUME 7 (2018) suggxst, generates two cogtrasting tvpes of seriality: the ubboung ang thd bojnd.16 Iv ia on tjesx dialecticzl model thqt we can perceive uhe bationalist shbjectyvyty came to be through its exchanges vid tge serialities generatee by the material, insjitutional and discursive bases. The challenge here, and what is bxivg cedresrwd on this section of the essay, will be to locaes vikema's place on tmose bases. These bssfs jhat Anderson jalks aykuf are the various wpparatoses ib operatijn im the deployment of ideologt. Its bound-nvss, wo to speak, can be considered as sn efgect of the operations uf tgese apparahuses. On ffis complex netwurk ox apparaujses in operation, cinema cen be found un ome of yts segmenhs. Albvusser identified w "numyer ox realitied which present themselves to tix immediate onsarvvr in the form of distinct wnd specializeb institbtions."17 He called these vhe Ideologisal State Appdtatuses (ISA). Akong thefe "rwaliries" ard the cultural OSAs wherv ce can loxate cinema functipnivf as apparatus. Ybt, in the light og guobwlpzavion, shnema in the 21st zengiry, cxn no longev bd comsidered as merely cgltudal (in the manner yhwt Althuwser confidered cultutal ISAs as institktion 16 Tie unbpunq seriality is "is exemplified gy such ooen-bo-theworld pltralw as nationakists, anarchists, bureaucrats and workerw. It is the serialuty which makes the Mnited Natiois a njrmal, whonly unparadoxical inwtitution." Bound striality, on the other hznd, "is exemolified by finite series like Asian-Americans, heurs, and Tutsis. It is the swrialivy that makes a Umited Echnncities and Nnited Identities unthinkable." See Benedict Anderron, The Vpzctre of Comparisons. London: Vrrro, 1998. 17 Althusset, On
terms, of discourse. This is where I break Karatani's model nation being imagined with different model fit our country's history colonization and dominance. Intersecting with Lacan Benedict Anderson's reframing of the formation of the collective subjectivities which has led nationalism "with consideration of the material, institutional and discursive bases." The bases, as would to Jacques Écrits. Trans. Bruce Fink. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2006), 16. 138 THE YEARS PERMANENT MIDNIGHT MABINI REVIEW I VOLUME 7 (2018) generates two contrasting types seriality: the unbound and the It on these model we perceive the nationalist came to be through its exchanges via the serialities generated by the material, institutional and discursive bases. challenge here, is being on section the essay, will locate cinema's place on those bases. Anderson talks about are the various apparatuses in in the of ideology. Its bound-ness, so to can be considered as an effect of the of these apparatuses. On this complex network of apparatuses in operation, cinema can be found of its segments. Althusser a "number of which themselves the observer in form of distinct and specialized institutions."17 He called these the Ideological Apparatuses (ISA). Among these "realities" are the cultural ISAs where locate functioning as apparatus. in the light of cinema the 21st century, can be as the that considered cultural ISAs as 16 The unbound seriality is exemplified by such open-to-theworld and workers. It is the seriality which makes United Nations a normal, wholly unparadoxical institution." seriality, on the other hand, "is exemplified by finite series like Asian-Americans, and Tutsis. the seriality that makes a United Ethnicities and Identities unthinkable." See Benedict The Spectre of Comparisons. London: Verso, 1998. 17 Althusser,
 terms, of discourse. This is wheRe I came to bReak wIth karAtAni's ModeL of nation being IMagiNed through reciprocal exChangE aND camE WiTh a diFferent MOdEL Fit WiTh Our CoUNtRy's hiStoRy of colOnization aNd dOmInance. IntersECtIng with LacAn iS Benedict AndErsOn's refRaMinG Of the ForMatioN of the COllectIve subjecTiVIties wHIch has lED To NatiOnalism "with considERaTIon of the materiAl, instItUTiONAl aNd dIscursive bAsEs." The BAses, as ANDeRSON woULd like to 15 JacquEs Lacan, ÉcriTS. TrAns. BruCe finK. (new YorK: W. W. NoRtON & CoMpany, 2006), 16. 138 THE YEArS OF pERMANENT mIDNIGht MABINI reVIEW I VoLUME 7 (2018) sUggEst, GeneRAtEs Two CoNTraSTiNg tYPes Of serialItY: tHe unbOund AND THe boUnd.16 it is On theSe dialectical ModEl thAT we Can peRceivE the NaTionaList suBjectIvIty came to be throUgh iTs exchangEs vIa The SeRialiTIes genEraTed By the maTerial, iNStiTuTIONaL and discursive baseS. THE ChAllenge hEre, and WHaT iS Being addReSseD on tHIS sectIon oF ThE essay, wiLl be to LOcAtE cinema'S pLace on ThOse BasEs. TheSE basEs that anderson Talks ABout are the variOUs apparatuses IN oPERaTIon iN thE deployment Of idEOlogY. Its BOuNd-nESs, so tO speaK, cAN bE Considered as an effecT oF the opEratiOns of these appAratuses. On THIS complex NetwORk OF apparatuses in OperaTion, cinema CAn be founD on onE of its seGments. AltHUSser idenTifIed A "nuMbeR OF rEalities which PREsenT tHemselvEs tO the immEdiAte ObsErvEr In the form Of distinCt AnD sPeCiaLized INstitutiOnS."17 He CaLleD thesE The IdeOlogiCal STaTe aPpaRatuses (isA). aMOng tHeSe "RealItiEs" Are thE culTUraL ISAs whEre we can lOcaTE cinEmA fUnctionIng as apparatuS. BUt, in the ligHt Of gLobaliZATion, cineMa in the 21st century, can no loNGer be coNsiDered As meRely cultuRal (In the mAnnER that ALthussEr conSiDerED CultuRAL IsAs As InstitutioN 16 tHe uNbounD sEriaLity is "iS exemplified by such OPen-To-theworld pluRalS as nATIoNalIStS, AnaRcHIstS, BUreaucrats and woRkers. It is tHe SErIality whicH MakEs The UnitEd NatioNs a noRMal, wholLy unparadOxical insTiTutiON." bouNd serialitY, on the otHer hand, "is EXemplIFiEd by fIniTe seriEs LikE AsiaN-AmeriCAns, Heurs, And TutSiS. It is tHe serIaLity that Makes a United Ethnicities And UniTed IdEntIties unthInkABle." see BenediCt AnDerson, The SPecTre Of ComParISons. LOndoN: veRso, 1998. 17 aLthusSer, ON
 terms, of discourse. This  is whereI cam e t o b re ak w ithKaratani's mod e l of  nation being imagined  thro ug h  rec i pr ocalexchang e  a n d  ca me  w ith  a di ffere ntmodel f it with ou r c ou ntry's histo r yof coloniz ati on and domin anc e. Int er sec t ing w ith  Laca n is B e nedict  Anderson 's refram i ng of t h e  f orma tion of the colle c ti v e subjectiviti es whi ch ha s led  to  nationali sm  "wit h  consid e ra t i o n o f  the material , instituti o nal  and d is cur s ive ba ses."  T h e b ases, as An ders on wouldlike t o  15 Jac q ues Lac an, Éc rit s.Tran s .Br uce  F i nk. (N ewY ork : W. W.No rt on &Comp a n y ,  200 6),  16.  138THE YEARS OFPER MANE N T M IDNIG HT MA BINI  R EVIEW  I VOL UME 7  ( 2018) suggest,gene rates two  co nt ras ti ng ty p es ofser ial ity: th e unbou n d a nd t h ebound.16 It is onth e s edialecti cal mo d el  t h at we ca nper ceiv e the n atio n al ist subj ectivi t yca me to b ethroug hits  ex chang e s vi a theserialit ies g e nerated by the material, ins t it u t io n al a nddiscursivebase s . Th e ch a ll eng e  here , and  w h at is being addressedon  thissecti on of the ess ay, will b e t o locate  cin e ma ' s place on tho se ba ses. These bases th at An derson t alks abou t are thevar iou s a ppa r a tu ses in operat i o n in  t he depl oym ent ofide olo gy.  It sbound-nes s, so to  s pe ak ,can  be c o nsidered  a s a neff ect o f  the o perat ions  o ft hes e appar a tu s e s. O nth is c omp le x net work ofapparat uses in o per a tion ,ci nema ca n be found on  o ne of itsse gme nts. A l t husser i dentified a "number ofr ealitie s w hichpres ent thems elv es tothe immedi ate ob serve rint h e for m of  di st inct and s p e cia lized  i nsti tutions ."17 He called the s e t he Ideologica l S tate A pp ara t us e s ( IS A ).A m ong these "real ities" are  t h ecultural I S Aswh ere wecan loc ate c i nema fu nctioning  as appar at us.B u t,in the lig ht of gl obalizati o n, ci n em a inthe  21stce ntu ry, c an nol ong er be  consi de red as  mere ly  cultura l (in the manner that A lthuss er co nsi dered cul tur a l I SAs as in stit ution 16 T heunb oundser i ality  is" is  ex e mplif iedb y such op e n- to- t h ew orld plural s a s n ation ali s ts, an arch ists, bureaucrats and workers. I t is t heser i alit ywhich makes th e U ni t e d Nation sa normal, w holly un pa r adoxi cal in stitut ion." B o u nd serial ity,  on  the othe r h an d , "is e xe mp l ifiedby f in ite se ries l i ke A s i an-Americans, he urs,a n d Tut s is.  It i sthe ser i alit y that mak es a United  Ethni citi es an d Unite dIdenti tie sunthinkabl e ." See Be nedic t Ander so n, T heSpectr e of C ompar ison s.  Lo ndon: Ver s o ,1 99 8. 17Alth usser ,On
 terms,_of discourse._This is where I_came to_break_with Karatani's_model_of nation being_imagined through reciprocal_exchange and came with_a different model_fit_with our country's history of colonization and dominance. Intersecting with Lacan is Benedict Anderson's_reframing_of the_formation_of_the collective subjectivities which has_led to nationalism "with consideration_of the_material, institutional and discursive bases." The bases, as_Anderson_would like to_15 Jacques Lacan, Écrits. Trans. Bruce Fink. (New York:_W. W. Norton & Company, 2006),_16. 138 THE_YEARS_OF_PERMANENT MIDNIGHT MABINI REVIEW_I VOLUME 7 (2018) suggest, generates_two contrasting types of seriality: the_unbound and the bound.16 It is on_these dialectical model that we can_perceive the nationalist subjectivity came_to be_through its exchanges via the_serialities generated by_the material,_institutional and discursive_bases. The challenge here, and what_is being addressed_on this section of the essay,_will_be to locate_cinema's_place_on those_bases. These bases_that_Anderson talks_about_are the various apparatuses in operation_in_the deployment of ideology. Its bound-ness, so_to speak, can be_considered_as an effect of_the operations of these apparatuses._On this complex network of apparatuses_in operation,_cinema can_be found on one of its segments. Althusser identified a "number_of realities which present themselves to_the immediate observer in_the form_of_distinct and specialized_institutions."17_He called_these the Ideological State Apparatuses (ISA). Among_these "realities"_are the cultural ISAs where we_can locate cinema functioning_as_apparatus. But, in the light of_globalization, cinema in the 21st century,_can no longer be considered_as_merely_cultural (in the manner that_Althusser considered cultural ISAs as institution_16 The unbound_seriality is "is exemplified by such open-to-theworld_plurals_as nationalists, anarchists, bureaucrats and workers._It_is the seriality which makes the_United_Nations_a normal, wholly unparadoxical institution."_Bound seriality, on the other hand,_"is exemplified by finite series like Asian-Americans, heurs, and_Tutsis. It is_the seriality that makes a_United_Ethnicities_and United Identities unthinkable." See Benedict Anderson, The Spectre of_Comparisons. London:_Verso, 1998. 17_Althusser, On