## Vinzenz Hediger (2017). *Can We Have the Cave and Leave It Too?: On the Meaning of Cinema as Technology*. : Amsterdam University Press. > [!INFO] > Type:: [[chapter]] > Title:: Can We Have the Cave and Leave It Too?: On the Meaning of Cinema as Technology > Author(s): [[Vinzenz Hediger]] > Year:: 2017 > Tags:: > DOI:: 10.2307/j.ctt1zqrmrh > Citekey:: hediger_can_2017 > ZoteroURI:: [Open in Zotero: Can We Have the Cave and Leave It Too?: On the Meaning of Cinema as Technology](zotero://select/items/@hediger_can_2017) > ReviewedDate:: [[2023-10-06]] ## Citation ```latex [@hediger_can_2017] ``` ## Related ```dataview TABLE file.aliases AS "Title" FROM [[@hediger_can_2017]] and -"Plans" and -"resources" ``` ## Summary - ## Annotation 기술로서의 영화는 1970년대 장치 이론의 틀 안에서 처음 화두가 되었습니다. 알튀세르의 이데올로기 비판과 플라톤의 동굴 모델이라는 렌즈를 통해 장치 이론은 영화를 우리 등 뒤에서 이데올로기적 혼란을 일으키는 환상의 기술로 규정하고, 이를 드러내고 해체하는 것이 영화 이론과 비평적 영화 실천의 과제라고 주장했다. 스페이스 오디세이의 뼈-스페이스쉽, Terrence Malick의 *The Tree of Life* (2011)에서 나온 공룡과 50년대 가족 인생의 juxtaposition (ur-scene of the discovery of technology)은 * Ernst Haeckel’s famous drawings of ontogenetic recapitulation or of the pictograms, which illustrate evolution through a succession of apes and hominids, leading up to *homo sapiens sapiens*, condensing millions of years of evolution into a striking spatial succession from left to right . * ![[Ernst-Haeckel-scheme-tree-form-The-Evolution-1910.jpg]] * ![[SS2603249.jpg]] * As paleoanthropologist Stanley Amborse puts it, Kubrick’s cut raises a specific question concerning technology: “What happened between the first tool use by our ape ancestors and the first complex projectile launched into flight with another tool?” * 1. Ambrose, ‘Paleolithic Technology’. * 스페이스 오디세이에서 * At one level, the scene appears to suggest that human history is a history of aggression, enhanced by technology. * Yet, not just in appearance, the hominids at the beginning are very different from the humans that travel through space in the later parts of the film. * ==Technology, Kubrick’s cut also suggests, is the way through which hominids evolve into humans.== * In that sense, the humans that appear in the film after the cut are not just users of technology: ==Technology defines what it means to be human.== * he second reading, which connects human evolution not just with predation and tool use, but with creativity, aligns with a line of thought that runs from the philosophy of technology from the nineteenth century through today’s Science and Technology Studies (STS), with support from an important strain of twentieth century paleoanthropology. * Raising the question of cinema as technology thus leads us from the field of film and media theory to that of the philosophy of technology, and from aesthetics to epistemology and anthropology, before we can return to film theory. ## 216 - 영화 및 문화 사학자들은 영화와 현대성의 관계를 광범위하게 탐구해 왔다. - Charney and Schwartz, *Cinema and the Invention of Modern Life*; - Casetti, *Eye of the Century*; - Hansen, *Babel and Babylon*; Singer, *Melodrama and Modernity*. - As George Steiner argues for artistic creation, “all human constructs are combinatorial”: “Performative novelties – acrylic paint, the neon tube, the saxophone in its time, electronic music today – obscure this fundamental truth. What they ‘make new’ is the old recombined, differently hybrid.” * 1. Steiner, *Grammars of Creation*, 156. * While works such as Karel Reisz’ *The Technique of Film Editing*,22 which was first published in 1953 and revised in 1968, discussed montage and other aspects of film making as a craft, and while the classics of film theory, from Eisenstein to Epstein, were written by film makers dealing theorizing their artistic practice, cinema technology only became a central concern of film studies within the framework of the “new film history” in the 1970s. * The point of David Bordwell’s ‘historical poetics of film’, for instance, was that in order to properly understand a film, one had to be familiar with the techniques employed in its production or creation. * 23. Bordwell, *Poetics of Cinema*. * And while the history of non-linear editing, for instance, remains as yet to be written, it is safe to assume that the paradigm will continue to be productive. * 23. Lefebvre & Furstenau, ‘Digital Editing and Montage’. ### Related ```dataview LIST FROM [[@hediger_can_2017]] and -"Plans" and -"resources" ```