Atlas of Emotion : Giuliana Bruno
이 책의 저자는 film (more like cinema), architecture를 연결한다. Eisenstein의 traversing 이론을 도입해서 연결하는데 실은 나는 공감이 안 간다. 이게 시네마가 아니고 비디오 설치라면 오히려 좀 맞을 수도 있겠다. film / architure모두 dynamic terrain이라 보고 있고. 이를 traversing-movement로 연결한다. 즉 이제 moving image와 건축 모두 site-seeing 이라는 건데 – 이 부분은 좀 참고 가능할 듯-projection mapping: Bruno의 architecture의 movement와 연결짓는 것 참고하면 좋을 듯. traversing
haptic이라는 감각을 끌어오는데 이 부분도 좀 흥미로움. Haptic- the sense of touch- constitues the reciprocal contact bewteen us and the environment, both housing and extending communicative interface. But the haptic is also related to kinesthesis, the ability of our bodies to sense their own movemtn in space-both geographic and cultrua-and, by extension, in the articulation of the spatial arts whtmselves, which include moton puctures. (6)
내가 보기에는 건축의 physical movement를 자꾸 film/ cinema의 mental/ psychological movement에다가 연결을 하니까 공감이 안 되는 것 같음. 너무 갖다 붙이는 격.
Cinema was named after the Greek work kinema, which connotes both moton and emotion. …It implies more thatn the movement of bodiesand objects as imprinted in the change of film frames and shots, the flow of camera movement, or any other kind of shift in viewpoint. Cinematic space moves not only through time and space or narrative development but through inner space. (이게 영 공감이 안 간다.) Film movew, and fundamentally moves us, with its ability to render affects and, in turn, to affect. (7)
Site-seeing : The cine city
site-seeing partakes in a shift away from the long-standing focus of film theory on sight and toward the construction of a moving theory of site. As it designs a cartography of film’s position within the spatial arts and their practices, our erring is ultimately a movement from the optic to the haptic- an affair that touches on a range of movements. (15) 아이젠스타인의 Montage and architecture(1930s) 에세이의 영향 많이 받음
A Geography of the Moving Image
traversing practice / haptic maps/ path / site-seeing/ architectural-filmic ensemble / filmic-architectural connection/
Eisenstein reveals the perceptual interpay that exists between immobility and mobility. There is a mobile dynamics involved in the act of viewing film,s even if the spectator is seeminly static. 나는 동의 못해. 그렇게 치자면, 안 그런 매체가 어디있냐… (55)
Like film, architectre-apparently static-is shaped by the montage of spectatorial movements. (56) …This is how architectural experiences which involve the dynamics of space, movement, and narrative-relate to and, in fact, embody the effect of the cinema and its promenade. (57)
르 코르뷔지에와 아이젠스타인 사이에 교류가 있었다고 한다. 이건 좀 재미있음. 둘이 서로에게 크게 영향 받았다고 이야기했음.
Architecture joins film in a practice that engages in relation to movement. As “site-seeing,” the moving image creates its own architectural premenade, which is inscribed into and interacts with architecture’s narrative peripatetics and “streetwalking.” In this way, the route of a modern picturesque is constructed…. When an architectural iste is scenically assembled and mobilzed, as cities often are, the effect of site-seeing is produced. Film creates space for viewing, persuing, and wandering about. Acting like a voyager, the itinerant spectator of the architectural-filmic ensemble reads moving image views as practices of imagnig. (59)