F 2 F

Hitchcock's own profile--his trademark--strikes a balance and connotes reasonability that his heroines tend to lack. In ubiquitous cameos, what was a graphic abstraction becomes filmed presence, so that the double nature of his visage is performed: is he man on the street or auteur, flesh or logo, individuated or absolute? The filmed director dramatizes what Deleuze describes as Hitchcock's knowingness regarding the double-faced nature of the shot: "one [face] turned towards the characters . . . the other turned towards a whole which changes progressively as the film goes on" (Cinema One, 203). He is omnipotent as director, but would be powerless in the dire situations of social cunning that his characters negotiate; these social situations are dire precisely because they have deep roots in the asocial. The asocial is what Deleuze calls the "demark," that which leaps out of the web of relations and potentially can change one's perception of them. It is Hitchcock's women who are closer to the asocial, to the demark, than is Hitchcock himself--the demark's most masterful director (however paradoxical directing the demark might seem).