Between film, video and the digital: hybrid moving images in the post-media age JiHoon Kim : INTRODUCTION

Between film, video and the digital: hybrid moving images in the post-media age

Ji-Hoon Kim

2016

Introduction : hybrid moving-images and the post-media condition

이 글에서 김지훈이 hybrid moving-image라고 한 것을 차용하자.

김지훈의 post-media condition에 대한 부분 활용해라. 저자는 기본적으로 medium toward media이다. Krauss의 담론이 망한 이유는, 자가당착에 빠진 이유는 여전이 ‘medium‘을 고수하고, medium – media를 이분법 함으로써, Modernism의 개념을 극복하고자 하는 의도와 달리, 그 안에 갇혀 버린 것이다. 이 여자가 Medium이라는 용어를 쓴 이유는 – modernism의 medium-specificity를 공격하고자 하는 의도였음을, 다른 글에서 읽었다. (10-19) 그 중에서도 16-18 중요하다. 

“Hybrid moving-images,” an array of impure images forms characterized by the interrelation of the material, technical, and aesthetic components of existing moving image media-namely, film, video, and the digital. …

Seen in this light, hybrid moving image points to the in-between spaces of existing audiovisual media, as well as to certain forms produced by an array of interrelations that drive the mutual influences between the media. These images, then, enable us to redefine each medium’s identity not as self-determined, but as constructed through its transfer to, and appropritaion of, other media and forms. (4)

hybrid term에 대한 내용 참조. Noel Carroll의 definition of moving-image 참조할려면 해라.(3)

There two aspects of hybrid moving images, the constitutive compositeness and variability of a medium, as well as the possibility for its alliance with other media.  (7)

 

POST-MEDIA CONDITIONS

This book contextualize the emergence of hybrid moving images across different genres and platforms within the larger contexts of the “post-media” age. In dong so, it argues that the images’s material, technical, and aesthetic hybridities derive from and at the same time are expressive of “post-media conditions,” which I define as an array of conditions that have posed fundamental challenges to the traditional definition of artistic media-namely, that a media’s material and technical components immediately determine its forms and expressive possibilities, which are exclusively distinct from the forms and expressive possibilities of other media. It was both the discourses on contemporary art criticism and the studies on new media and media art that coined the term, and these have developed the debates about those conditions since the late 1990s. (10)

the discourses in both domains have reached three common points of post-media conditions that lay the groundwork for this book: (1) the demise of the modernist medium specificity, that is, the proliferation of electronic and digital technologies that has led to the dissolution of the boundaries between one art form and another, which were previously sustained by a media’s unique properties; (2) as a response to the demise of the modernist medium specificity, a renewed awareness of what media’a material, technical, and aesthetic components are and what artists can do with those components; and, (3) as result of this renewed awareness, the emergence of artistic practices by which the media’s components have new, previously uncharted relationships with those of other media in ways that go beyond its formal boundaries. (10)

Krauss’s concept of the post-medium condition means that the pervasive power of electronic and digital media challenges Clement Greenberg’s idea of medium specificity so profoundly that it transcends the traditional definition of artistic medium in general. .. This is because the material and technical components of television and video are constitutively heterogenous, allowing them to exist in putatively diverse forms, spaces, and temporalities. (11)

For Manovich, the digital revolution of the 1980s and 1990s marks the most consequential development of the dissolution of modernist medium specificity, in that the shift to digital representations, along with the introduction of new editing tools that could be applied to most media and substitute traditional distinct artistic means, had led to the dissolution of the “differences between photography and painting and between film and animation.” (11)

Weibel에 대한 부분 참조하던가. (12)

Consequently, the loss of modernist medium specificity recognized by both Krauss and the “new media camp” theorists (Manovich and Weibel) asks them to revisit the traditional definition of a medium, as well as paying attention to the array to artistic practices by which that medium’s components interact with those of other media in ways that challenges the previous distinctions between one art form and another. (12)

김지훈의 post-media condition에 대한 부분 활용해라. 저자는 기본적으로 medium toward media이다. Krauss의 담론이 망한 이유는, 자가당착에 빠진 이유는 여전이 ‘medium‘을 고수하고, medium – media를 이분법 함으로써, Modernism의 개념을 극복하고자 하는 의도와 달리, 그 안에 갇혀 버린 것이다. 이 여자가 Medium이라는 용어를 쓴 이유는 – modernism의 medium-specificity를 공격하고자 하는 의도였음을, 다른 글에서 읽었다. (10-19) 그 중에서도 16-18 중요하다. 

Jacques Ranciere, Nicholas Bourriaud, Peter Weibel등 언급함. 내 리서치랑 합쳐라.

Manovich and Weibel also consider the emblem “post-media” as opening up a situation in which digital technologies serve as an environment in which techniques and aesthetic features of a media are dislocated from tis medium-specific boundaries and become increasingly hybridized with those of other media. It is in these two senses that the two theorists’ arguments on the post-media conditions are not unlike Krauss’s technical support or Ranciere’s milieu.(15)

p15의 마노비치 software 부분 활용해라. digital이 DMI에 add diversity 했다는 부분으로. Manovich도 2010이후로는 hybridization등을 좀 더 focus하는 것 같다. Weibel도 단절로만 보는 것은 아니라고 김지훈 언급함. Manovich의 Hybrid revolution 참조해라.(16)

 For Manovich, the developments of various software applications to simulate the aethetics and working methods of prevous media amout to what he calls a “hybrid revolution” in the culture of the moving image since the 1990s. (16)

It should be noted that Krauss’s argument on the post-medium and the post-media discourses of the “new media camp” have an antagonistic relationship with each other in terms of their opposing views on the impact of electronic and digital technologies. (16) 여기부터 17페이지까지 중요하다. 왜 Krauss 가 fucked up 되었는지. medium과 media 를 분리했고, 그 결과로 자신이 벗어나고자 했던 modernism 관점에 갇혀버림. 김지혼운 또한 Manovich도 너무 digital을 절대적인 것으로 간주함으로써, 이전 매체들의 가능성을 차단하는 오류가 있다고 지적했다.(17-18)

Consequently, electronic and digital technologies might disallow the idea of medium specificity if it means an array of boundaries that distinguish one art form from another, but this does not necessarily mean the total annihilation of all the material, technical, and aesthetic components in the traditional technologies for artistic practices. (18)

In sum, my comparative reading of the post-medium and the post-media discourses demonstrate that despite the duality of “medium” and “media”, both share with one another the demise of the modernist medium-specificity argument that insists upon the boundaries between one art form and another, and the reconfiguration of media as internally divided and non-reductive rather than the traditional idea of the medium as primarily defined by its unique material properties. (19)

 

FILM’S POST-MEDIA CONDITIONS

이 부분에서 저자는 Friedberg, Doane등의 이론을 들면서 단절이 아니라 연속이라고 이야기한다. 현재 cinema의 identity crisis에 대해서 이야기한다. (22)

이 과정에서 Kim은 Manovich의 의견을 참고한다.  cinema as cultural interface. 이 의견은 Rodowick, Doane, 등과 대치되는 의견이다. 저들은 post-filmic conditions of digital cinema를 강조했다. crisis of celluloid cinema 를 이야기한다. – 근데 진짜 doane이 그래??? 내가 읽기로는 아니었는데… (23)

Kim은 media를 hybrid로 분석함에 있어서 두 가지 입장을 제시. 통시적 입장 Diachronic hybridization하고 공시적 입장 synchronic hybridization.이 있다. 즉 저자는 25에서, continuity와 discontinuity를 함께 봐야 한다고 이야기 한다. coexist with its hybrid aspects. 심지어 Hadjioannou조차 2012글에서 boundaries are shifting이라고 했다.. 제길. 또 읽어야 해.  25. (24-26)

 

VIDEO’S POST-MEDIA CONDITIONS

이 부분에서 저자는 film – electronic video (analog video) – digital video를 추적한다. 이제 digitize되면서 film  video 간의 indexicality, temporality등 구분이 흐려지고 있다. weakened medium-specificity of video

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s