## Janine Marchessault, Susan Lord (2007). *Introduction*. : University of Toronto Press. > [!INFO] > Type:: [[]] > Title:: Introduction > Author(s): [[Janine Marchessault, Susan Lord]] > Year:: 2007 > Tags:: > DOI:: > Citekey:: marchessault_introduction_2007 > ZoteroURI:: [Open in Zotero: Introduction](zotero://select/items/@marchessault_introduction_2007) > ReviewedDate:: [[2024-01-18]] ## Citation ```latex [@marchessault_introduction_2007] ``` ## Related ```dataview TABLE file.aliases AS "Title" FROM [[@marchessault_introduction_2007]] and -"Plans" and -"resources" ``` ## Summary 이책은 융합의 모든 측면은 초국가적 맥락 안에서 세계화의 긴장을 나타내며, 정치적, 사회적, 경제적, 문화적, 그리고 합법적 협상들을 만들어냅니다. 전통적 Cinematic spectacles에서 works probing the frontiers of interactive, performative, and networked meida로의 전환을 'fluid'란 컨셉을 통해 미디어 역사, 정치 경제, 문화 관행과 정책, 정체성과 시간의 새로운 표현, 미디어 특수성의 맥락에서 '유동적' 미디어를 배치하는 것이 지금 이 시점에서 매우 시급하다는 것을 주장한다. ## Annotation 에이젠슈테인의 디즈니 애니메이션에 대한 경의는 admiration based largely on the aeshtetic appreciation of the malleability of the image. He was fascinated by the ‘scattering of extremities’ found in Disney’s drawings – a phenomenological ‘attractiveness’ that emerges, he wrote, from a ‘fictitious freedom. 순간적인 잠시뿐만인 환상의 freedom for the psyche. [[Marshall McLuhan|맥루한]]의 경우도 공간적 시간적인 방식의 생각으로 'flow'를 믿지 않았다. 그에게 있어서 이러한 메타포는 너무 functionalist 기능주의적 reductive 이었다. > ‘fictitious freedom. For an instant. A momentary, imaginary, comical liberation from the timelock mechanism of American life. A five-minute “break” for the psyche, but during which the viewer himself remains chained to the winch of the machine.’ ([[@eisenstein_disney_2017]], 22-3) [[Marshall McLuhan|맥루한]]이 보기에 이 메타포는 합리주의적 컨셉의 선형의 스페이스로 돌아갈 것을 걱정했다. 그는 전기에 대한 이해가 container가 아닌, 페인팅의 connotations of spatial term "field" 혹은 [[Lewis Carroll]]의 construction of warped spaces를 더 선호했다. [[Zygmunt Bauman]]의 경우 coined the term 'liquid modernity'라는 신조어를 통해 모더니티와 캐피날리즘의 역사를 표현했다. 그가 보기에 fluidity and liquidity는 완벽한 메타포로 기능했다. "spill" "run out" "splash" and so one. ^[Zygmunt Bauman, *Liquid Modernity* (Cambridge: Polity, 2000), 2, 10–11.] - 현재의 캐피탈리즘을 묘사하기 위해서 Liquidity and fluidity, - **The central characteristic of this new fluidity is time, since without ‘the moment’ to mark it out, it would be amorphous.** - ::Zygmunt Bauman, *Liquid Modernity* (Cambridge: Polity, 2000), 2, 10–11.:: - ::꼭 시간만이 필요할까? 하긴 duration도 tI’me 일수도 있겠지만, 이건 오히려 event에 가깝지 않을까? 인간의 행위를 기준으로 duration을 정한다면 이건 더무 인간중심의 생각일까? 하지만 만약 아트가 인간을 빼놓고 인간을 중심으로 생각하지 않는다면 아트에 대한 이유가 있을까?:: - 지그문드 바우만의 경우 유동성으로 현대사회를 설명하는데, 과거의 것들(고체를) 유체화 시키면서 그 형태를 금방금방 잃어버리는 현상에 대해 얘기한다. - 이를 통해서 linear 프로세스로 묘사되는 flow의 problematic characterisation of a world made of indiscriminate ‘flows,’ an image of movement and ephemerality that can obscure real social and economic conditions, ‘frictions’ that force or hinder movement. - Twenty years ago, communications theorists predicted that the media were converging into one and that all information would be transmitted through a singular medium – a concern echoing the cultural theorists of the early part of the century. - The stories consumed in the industrialised democracies of the world are received through a multiplicity of hybrid and networked screens, creating a fragmented reception that increasingly characterises our waking hours. - **As Henry Jenkins has pointed out, ‘convergence’ must be understood as a *process* that has several different manifestations.** - 하나의 거대 기업이 (Time Warner) Thus, the concentration of ownership is also enhanced by alliances between media groups and convergences of interests. - Thus, the concentration of ownership is also enhanced by alliances between media groups and convergences of interests. - All of these aspects of convergence represent the **tensions of globalisation inside transnational contexts**, creating a multiplicity of negotiations that are political, social, economic, cultural, and legal. - For this reason, there is a great urgency at this time to situate the ‘fluid’ media in the context of media histories, political economy, cultural practices and policy, new articulations of identity and time, and media specificity. - [[Gene Youngblood|영블러드]]의 시네마에 대한 해석 - ::Gene Youngblood, ‘Cinema and the Code,’ in *Future Cinema: The Cinematic Imaginary after Film*, ed. Jeffrey Shaw and Peter Weibel (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), 156–61.:: > The subject of ‘digital imaging,’ we agree, exists in the context of both video and the computer (different only in the source of the image and in the possibility of real time operation) and covers the generic areas of image processing, image synthesis, and writing or organising digital code in a procedural or linguistic manner. But in every case when we refer to the [[phenomenology]] of the moving image, we call it cinema. For us, it is important to separate cinema from its medium, just as we separate music from particular instruments. **Cinema is the art of organising a stream of audiovisual events in time. It is an event-stream, like music.** There are at least four media through which we can practice cinema – film, video, holography and structured digital code – just as there are many instruments through which we can practice music. - We find these distinctions useful particularly as they encourage the cross-media and intermedial analysis that we believe is imperative in the present context of hypermediation. - **Youngblood’s** groundbreaking book *Expanded Cinema*offers us three particular avenues from which to approach the **immersive**, **interactive**, and **interconnected** field of digital screen culture: synesthesia, intermediality, and the global public. - With expansion we cease to think about the screen or the frame and we are instead in the place he describes as ‘intermedia,’ that is, ‘an environment whose elements are suffused in metamorphosis.’ - * Youngblood, *Expanded Cinema*, 347. - The major **influences** in **Youngblood’s** thinking include Buckminster Fuller, [[Marshall McLuhan]], artists such as Marcel Duchamp and Carolee Schneeman, and scientists interviewed at IBM and different laboratories around the world. - 결국 얘도 [[Marshall McLuhan|맥루한]]이랑 듀샴이네. ### 11 - ★ Kracauer, like Benjamin, saw in the overlap of art, technology, and everyday life before fascism – especially in cinema and its reception – a possibility for experience to be productive of new social relations resistant to the petrification in *ratio*. - And this possibility, he insists, involves taking the uncharted path through the ‘**mass ornament**,’ not away from it, developing a critical [[phenomenology]] of the surface (as Thomas Levin calls his method in the introduction to *The Mass Ornament*). - ::Thomas Y. Levin’s Introduction to the collection of Kracauer’searly essays, *The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays*, ed. and trans. Levin (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995), 20.:: - 시네마는 **크라카우어**에게 있어서 Ciema, in Kracauer’s view, ‘**addresses its viewer as a “material-corporeal being**”’; it seizes the ‘human being with skin and hair’ - Benjamin and Kracauer’s work offers a means by which to think the historical tension between the sensate, sexuate body and its dematerialization, its enframing by technological rationality. - 수잔 벅 모스 (-> 벤야민 책 쓴사람) - As Susan Buck-Morss has argued, with Benjamin’s final sentence of the Artwork essay (‘Communism responds by politicizing art’), Benjamin is ‘**demanding of art a task far more difficult** [than making culture a vehicle for propaganda] – that is, to *undo* **the alienation of the corporeal sensorium, to** *restore the instinctual power of the human bodily senses for the sake of humanity’s self- preservation*, and to do this, not by avoiding the new technologies, but by *passing through* them.’ - 벅-모스의 주장에 따르면 벤야민은 아트의 태스크를 단지 컬처를 프로파간다를 위한 수단으로 사용하기보다, 육체적 감각기를 소외시킨것을 되돌리고, 인간 신체의 본능적 힘을 인간의 자가-보존을 회복시키는 것. 그리고 그것을 위해 새로운 테크놀로지를 피하는 것이 아닌 그것을 지나는 것. - ::Susan Buck-Morss,‘ Aesthetics and Anaesthetics: Walter Benjamin’s Art-work Essay Reconsidered,’ *October* 62 (1992): 5.:: ### Related ```dataview LIST FROM [[@marchessault_introduction_2007]] and -"Plans" and -"resources" ```