Media, Cinema & Image

Photographs and paintings certainly create an image. But again the essence of both these pieces of art varies from each other to a large extent. Images are indeed able to usurp reality because first of all a photograph is not only an image (as a painting is an image), an interpretation of the real; it is also a trace, some-thing directly stenciled off the real, like a footprint or a death mask. (Sontag, Pg 154). Personally to me, photographs are that piece of art, through which one can explore and see the world around us. It is an imagination of the photographer that he/she tries to capture using the camera as a tool. The photograph often reflects the inner dignity of the subject being photographed. If taken properly photographs can be exclusive in sharing one’s own personal experiences, that might bring ecstasy in the making and sharing with others. On the other hand, I think painting is the medium through which the artist tries to pen down his/her feelings and inner thoughts using a medium like a canvas or a paper.

In “Susan Sontag on Photography”, Susan talks about the relationship between photography and reality.  She says that photographs become an extension of the subject, which is distributed like images that become an act of classification. Today we see a lot of images and interpret them in many different ways. Modern world is the world of advertisements. These advertisements in the form of images stare at us from the public squares, daily papers, magazines etc..and we all interpret them in a different way. Sontag depicts the idea that images desensitize the real thing, as people’s perceptions are distorted by the construction of the photograph. She adds that the demand for photographs has not stopped and that she has impacted the audiences understanding of reality, as photographs have adapted to a form of surveillance<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Sontag#Books_and_articles_on_Susan_Sontag>. Hence I would conclude by saying that the ‘image’ is the property of the audience.

Virilio highlights that there is no war without representation. As the war gets more scrupulous, it never breaks from the ‘pre-technical’ ideas of war as deception and illusion, spectacle and captivation. He argues that cinema fits perfectly when capturing the war machine as it ties together the cultural and economic strengths between the industries.According to Virilio cinema is just not mass production of images, pans and taking shots, zooming in and out, editing, etc. <http://mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl/2008/03/10/notes-on-paul-virilios-war-and-cinema/>Today cinema is just not an extension of a stage-play, but also with the latest technology available the most fantastic scenes and happenings can be presented and even the limitations of time and space can be transcended. To me, cinema as a form of media is the only form that can serve an effective medium of demonstration. Hence I would conclude by saying that the ‘cinema’ is the property of the audience, media and culture tied together.

Finally, a spectacle is the public sphere we live in. Today media, an important means of communication, is a vast source of information that entertains people across the country. Its ability to mold thoughts and form opinions can make one count it as a governing force of sorts. The various impressions it leaves upon the human mind, the views and ideas it may propagate, affect people’s lifestyles, their way of thinking and being. Guy Debord says, “The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images.”(DeBord p.4). A very good example I can think of, to explain this comment, is how different cultures, religions and societies have been spectacled by media in India over a period of years, especially to attract foreign visitors and tourists. Indian society has traditional socio-cultural standards and a spectacle is all one needs to make one see that world, clearly and demonstratively. Hence I would conclude by saying that ‘a spectacle’ is the property of the audience, media and culture, all tied together.

Images:
http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/08m2fXn4yggHY/610x.jpg
http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/1/070502-nyt-media.jpg
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/images/tropic-thunder-onset-1.jpg
http://akvis.com/img/examples/sketch/photo-on-sketch/photo-on-sketch.jpg

All Three Together

 

I believe that images, spectacles, and cinematic are all alike because they show something and have a message. They are forms of art constructed by individuals to relay a certain message.  When asked the question if it is a property of the audience, media or culture, I think that they are the property of all three. With an image, there is an audience, and by showing this image, it is the example of sharing art, a form of media. Within the image of art, there are many things incorporated such as culture because when an artist creates, it is because they are inspired with what is around them, such as their culture.

Say Cheese!

Marey's photo gun

Images belong to individuals and at the same time allow individuals to participate, through mass possession, in a shared cultural experience. As Sontag describes, an image, is not merely a copy of a thing nor an illusion or shadow of the real, but a residue of the energy it emanated at the moment it was photographed. The photograph is more than a resemblance of what it represents, it is a physical manifestation of a subjects energy. In it’s photographic capture, an image maintains some of the meaning and value of the thing it represents. In possessing a photographic document you posses in some part, what the photo represents. This concept of photography as a means of possession, is no more clearly depicted than in the original manner in which movement was initially captured on film. There is no shortage of significance to the fact that the earliest experiments in capturing movement on film used the technical mechanism of a gun to move the film through the camera, allowing the photographer to literally shoot the subject onto the negatives.

“The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images.”(DeBord p.4)

As a culture becomes more dependent upon creating and consuming images, the spectacle arises as the dominant mode for communicating all experience. In such a heavily mediated environment, any experience, to be relevant for social discourse, must be documented to the point of becoming a spectacle. Here, each individual must continually be in the process of creating spectacle of their own lives, through image documentation, in order to make their lives a worthy point of intersection for social relations. Such self documentation serves a dual purpose, as Sontag no doubt referencing the panopticon, describes; cameras create a spectacle for the masses and a surveillance for the rulers (Sontag p.178). As individuals strive to create mass spectacles from their lives, they are taking possession of their identities yet at the same time, present them within the public sphere, opening their personal lives to the observation, dissection and judgment of those seeking to maintain cultural control.

Are we the “image”, “spectacle”, and “cinematic”?

From Debord’s text, a spectacle is our society that we live in today. We are inundated with constant imagery that has been manufactured or a source of creative reproduction. There is a separation between reality and replication; genuine and imitation. When I think of spectacle I have a perception of something or someone becoming transformed into media news. A spectacle is a manifestation of entertainment in our society, but as Debord infers we cannot truly see it because it is us and we are surrounded by it. “It is the heart of the unrealism of the real society” Debord states (140). The spectable that we are familiar with today through media is created, yet we see it as real. I found it particularly interesting when Guy Debord asserts that the spectacle is fashioned in order “to make one see the world by means of various specialized mediations…” (142). I wonder if we are so unaware of the spectacle that we can never truly return to a sense of reality.  If Debord is correct, then this is our reality since we created it and it would be difficult if not impossible alleviate the spectacles that surround us.

According to Sontag, the creation of a photograph is more than just an image; it holds a sense of capturing a moment in which no other medium alike can. Sontag argues that painting is more or a representation and does not retain the interests of some if given the choice to choose between. Is painting a medium that can no longer continue to progress? My roommate is in the MFA program at and just went through final critiques. She mentioned to me that one student was given especially tough and callous feedback from not only the instructors, but the students as well. It was mentioned that everything that could have been done with painting has already been done. I found this especially interesting and fascinating. Is the image, as Sontag suggests more captivating due to the originality of the moment (155)? I do agree with Susan that photography is more consumer -friendly. Photography and the replication of images allows for constant mass distribution and sharing of places, events, etc. When discussing Proust, Sontag states that the relation to photography is not only “extensive and accurate” , but “texture and essence” (164).With the mass distribution of images, I cannot help but think about the nostalgia that may become lost. With the internet, images can easily become other’s property, altered, and then reproduced again. I assume that we can alleviate unwanted distribution through our own personal choice of not sharing, but that is not our culture today.

Cinema, as discussed by Virilio also touches on the replication of reality in order for viewers to feel the experience. This is evident in the precise coordination of movements and actions during scenes. Cinema seems to encapsulate the “image”, “spectacle” and “cinematic”. The abilities to use this technology within combat were a great advancement, but also seen as evidence of the cinematic due to the advances in capturing film. Virilio creates a link between the advances of military technology to the visual representations in war films. There was a use to create an image of what war was like and help deliver a form of propaganda to those back home. With our current war, images, videos, and stories have been distributed to us through the media.

The arguments that are presented by this week’s authors are reminiscent of the discussion that we had in class during the Benjamin and Baurdillard. They share similar observations with regard to our perception and altered perception of images in that the reality that we live in is impacted by the visual representations that we are surrounded by. The “image”, spectacle”, and “cinematic” are property of our culture. As we verge into and explore the use of our technology, we are testing the limits and capacities of what we can do. All three elements are the result of the progression of our media.

Happy Holidays!

(A late Dec. 2nd Post) New Media: “immediacy”, “hypermediacy”, & “remediacy”

The wide spread use and popularity of social networking sites comes to mind when addressing “immediacy”, “hypermediacy”, and remediacy”. Networking sites, such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and even Second Life site offer can offer representations addressed in text by Bolter and Grusin. I believe that these sites can cross over into bother immediacy and hypermediacy. As Bolter and Grusin state, “immediacy leads to hypermediacy”.

Immediacy within the social networking sites allows the use of actions or activities that mimic real life transactions. One purpose is to create a sense of immediacy in communication and creating connections with others.  Through graphical representations users can hug, chat, and distribute flair buttons that resemble real life buttons in shape and size. The hypermediacy affects the applications within these online locations. Through the applications that are offered, site users retain the ability to categorize multiple pages concern topics, videos, pictures, etc in order to divulge information about them.  The interfaces of these sites make it easy to view and upload content in an organized manner. It is both “simultaneously automatic and interactive” (Bolter & Grusin, 33).The vast availability of full text journal articles, magazines, interviews through databases online is an example of remediacy.  I am also reminded of videos such as those on YouTube that are created utilizing a mesh of photos, video clips, and music. These generated compilations are the “collage” (47) or “aggressive remediation” (46) that both Bolter and Grusin address. It is the combination of both past and present media.

Considering Dewey’s ideologies, immediacy and hypermediacy within the contexts that I discussed might be considered more of a personal expression. Is there truly a need coming from these social networking sites? Maybe the need is for instant communication and interaction. Dewey states “impulsions are the beginning of complete experience because they proceed from need…” (58). Furthermore, the ability to express in confined by the networks configurations. Users are limited to the amount of uses within these sites. Using production, such as creating a video “collage” (47) on YouTube, allows for both an expression and production of material. Creators are only limited by their knowledge and experience with such applications. “Expression as personal act and as objective result are organically connected with each other” (Dewey 82).

(A late Oct. 12th Post) The Public Sphere Ideology

According to Habermas, the ideal form of the public is sphere is the allocation for all individuals (regardless of specific groups or orientations) to come together and participate in public discourse. The ideology of the public sphere is one in which all are equal. With the convergence of the ideas/thoughts of individuals in one space, one can hope that a universal understanding or consensus be formed. This ideology is great in theory, but not practicality, especially in our current society.

The internet has provided an open forum for all to participate in discussions through blogs, chat rooms, video uploads, and websites. With so much opinion out there, the messages get lost and it becomes difficult for the true underlying meaning or intention to come to surface. It becomes clouded with propaganda and mixed messages, leaving the reader/viewer to either join in their views or defer to other sources.  To me the only true way to avoid use the influence of propaganda or fallacies through media is to obtain some objective outlook when viewing the messages. The more information that can be gathered on a particular matter (for example politics) the more informed one can become and formulate their own opinion.

There is the concern (and counter argument of Habermas) that not all are equal afforded the opportunity to have access to the same information or as Garnham states “once communication is mediated, these universal equalities can no longer be guaranteed” (Garnham, 365). The public sphere ideology is controlled no longer by all, but through some form of party interest. These governing authorities continue to prevail due to status and the ever present notion that they are speaking on behalf of the general public. This in turn leaves all those who feel underrepresented or those who are not represented with little confidence in leadership and possibly disjointed from the process of discourse.

Hearing the latest (technology)

very new technology has a learning curve.  There is always that time where people say “I’ll never” or  “that won’t catch on”.   This dates back to story telling, the printing press to Sterne’s topic– the electric telegraph,  and Grodal’s which brings it into the 21^st century with video games, tv and movies.   It makes perfect sense that with each new technology we learn anew to use our senses. 

Sterne talks about early telegraph operators eschewing the tape in favor of listening to the dots and dashes.  These operators learned early that it is easier to hear the language of Morse code than it is to see it. 

Sterne calls the theory of telegraphy “nascent cybernetics.  This is no surprise since cybernetics itself was a communication theory developed on the basis of technical issues in the communication network that replaced telegraphy in the United States, the telephone” (p. 143). 

Another, somewhat unrelated example:  a class of fifth graders were given calculators in a math class.  Each child began using the calculator not by putting it down on the table and punching one button at a time, but by holding it as they would a cell phone and inputting number with their thumbs.  Those children learned to use a new technology, and applied it to an older one. 

We saw in this election year what it meant to politics, as the Obama camp conducted the first successful YouTube/Facebook/MySpace/Twitter campaign for the presidency.  People have embraced this new technology, particularly young people, and the campaign used it brilliantly to create a sense of inclusion. 

On a completely unrelated note, I was very interested in Sterne’s description of early “telegraphic weddings”  where women would marry men they’d never met over the telegraph wire.  Turns out online dating was a scam back then too. 

808’s and Heartbreak

I recently heard a DJ enthusiastically introducing Kanye West’s new song, of course she loved the album but felt that it was a curious choice to make an album with such highly emotionally charged themes (of recent breakups and his mother’s death) yet use such a technologically infused sound (his voice is highly altered in a very obvious manner throughout the album.)

Then she announced the song, 808’s and Heartbreak.

For the uninitiated, 808’s refers to the sounds produced by the original digital beat machine the Roland TR 808.

808’s have never sounded like real drums. Many sophisticated drum simulating machines have since been created since, yet musicians like West continue to use (or emulate) the 808 for its raw emotional electronic sound. The sound has come to represent a certain honesty, simplicity and energy from it’s iconic use in tribal music, hip-hop and R&B. Is it really that surprising that West would also use the 808s heartbeat to express his emotion?

Because perception is dependent on our bodies physical ability to process, be it through cones in our eyes or reverberations against ear drums, our relationship to them will always be complex. Each of these texts refers at some point to an emotional experience created by the physical interaction with the medium. Video gamers feel fear, surprise, pride and it’s genuine. The telegraph was no sooner invented than it was making love connections and of course, breaking hearts. Just last week my iPhone got the nickname Yenta2K for helping to bring two people together in an unlikely manner.

As long as we are using these technologies to mediate our communication with other humans there will always be an emotional connection to the apparatus. Hearing and seeing through new media may alter some behaviors and expectations that go along with them but they cannot change what is essential to human-ness. What separates human machine from technological machine is that physical emotional connection. While we have bodies with systems that can be metaphorically linked to technologies we create, we are still separated by fact of this connection. Our bodies are literally our minds.

Great little doc on the 808. Note that the first producer talks about the physical feeling of the sound.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5156041728430798000

Physical Adaptations to New Media

“Our experience of stories exist as representation of exterior worlds and they may be described as such, but at the same time they are body-brain-internal processes that need to follow the innate specification of that platform” (Grodal 130).

Grodal uses the story as a way to kind of materialize experiences and help us to visualize the connection between external events and our internal reactions to them.  He examines media through the ages and how as media build on each other and the stories become more and more complex, our interactions with these media shift as well.  Because new media almost inevitably infiltrates our lives and our personal experiences, our bodies are forced to actually physically adapt to them in order to successfully function in society.  Just as societies once existed without knowing how to speak or read or type, a society will one day exist in awe of our primitive society.  Technology is human evolution and it manifests itself on many levels, including the physical.

But these physical adaptations do not come without psychosomatic counterparts.  As our bodies change to introduce this new technology into our society, so do our psyches.  Our individual perceptions shift as do our societal norms and values.  The things we find aesthetically pleasing, the physical actions we find acceptable/taboo, the stereotypes we assign are constantly shifting as media continues to transform and evolve.

Grodal cites one of our major misinterpretations of stories as attempting to define them as “being based on a ‘retelling’ or ‘representation,’ not as an experience that takes place in a progressing present” (134).  We often find ourselves shocked by technological and societal changes.  We, for some reason, seem to expect our world to remain static, when, in fact, this is a completely unnatural assumption.  Everything around us is constantly changing.  The world is spinning, time is progressing, everything is altered.  We, of course, are no exception.  We adapt to our environment in order to survive.  New technologies take over, leaving us incompetent without them.  The new media controls the age in which we live.  The medium is the message.

Technology, Aesthetics and Human Perception

The new technology of podcasting is becoming increasingly popular as an e-learning tool. According to Johnathan Sterne’s, “The Audible Past”, for sound, the feature, which stands out, is its characteristic of assuming a desired form. This element of sound makes it different from other senses. In recent years, podcasts have evolved as a sound reproducing technology. Research helps us to understand how the elements of media aesthetics like sound, text and virtuality provide knowledge magnify and plasticize ideas about podcasts. (Jonathan Sterne, “The Audible Past: Cultural Origins of Sound Reproduction”).

There is a reciprocal sense of resiliency between the learning practices that were informed by sound reproduction and podcasting technology itself that was enhanced and adapted through the knowledge imparted. Teachers can record lectures, book discussions and assignments. It consists of a series of audio and visual files, which can be distributed over the internet.

Through podcasts, a student can view different audio and visual perceptions. When they see a particular image with preconceived ideas, they tend to see what is there in their mind rather than seeing what is on the screen. The perception changes based on the designs and patterns on the display screen. Human perception has contributed to enhancing technology. Consciousness is also playing a role here because; the viewer is just blindly following what the mind is telling without being conscious. At this time, only the visual senses are working and all other senses are passive.
<http://rccs.usfca.edu/bookinfo.asp?ReviewID=305&BookID=258>