Bruno’s original text reads as follows:
Cinematic pleasure belongs to the range of erotic pleasures of the nomadic gaze first known to the traveler and the flaneur and then embodied, by way of panoramic spatio-visuality, in the modes of inhabiting space of transitorial architectures. Suggesting these historic aspects of the fascination of the apparatus, and highlighting its fantasmatic connection to travel and landscaping. One looks back not only to early cinema but also 'back to the future'. This view offers numerous avenues for future studies. One can place the art of " unconscious optics" in the context of contemporary forms of intercultural traveling and sites of spatio-temporal tourism, of which airplane cinema is the ultimate metonymy. For if "the unconscious is housed," it is also “moving”.
Embodying the dynamics of journey, cinema maps a heterotopic topography. Its heterotopic fascination is to be understood as the attraction to, and habitation of, a site without a geography, a space capable of juxtaposing in a single real place several possibly incompatible sites as well as times, a site whose system of opening and closing both isolates it and makes it penetrable, as it forms a type of elsewhere/nowhere, where "we calmly and adventurously go travelling". Thus, we female spectators, in the midst of the "far-flung ruins and debris" of our old enclosed prison world, may go traveling. As we move through filmic architectures, as in "streetwalking" through the meter-polis, our mother-city, we reclaim forbidden pleasures – wandering through erotic geographies.
Giuliana Bruno, ‘Streetwalking around Plato’s Cave’, in Streetwalking on a ruined map: cultural theory and the city films of Elvira Notari (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), p.57.
See also: Steve Pile & Nigel Thrift, ‘Mapping the subject’, in Mapping the Subject: Geographies of Cultural Transformation (London: Routledge, 1995), p.22.