Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Time Traveling Artist Drops in For Lecture at UC Berkeley

You might be interested in this on-campus talk by an artist who figures herself as a "time traveler" in her multimedia work.

~~~~~
Lecture Monday, March 5 7:30 p.m. Kroeber Hall

Since 1995, Suzanne Treister has been time traveling with Rosalind Brodsky. Treister’s vast multimedia work uses digital art, photo, video, websites, drawings, paintings and constructions to chart the life and adventures of a heroine traveling through time and history, fact and delusion: trying to rescue her grandparents from the camps of the Second World War, making a laboratory in Mad King Ludwig's castle, and visiting the swinging sixties. She receives analysis from Freud and Jung and traces the family tree of the creators of the Golem. This narrative of actuality and hallucination has been described by Art in America as "One of the most sustained fantasy trips of contemporary art." Treister was born in London and is currently based in Berlin and London.

Read more about this event here.

Labels:

Example of close reading

Hello everyone,

Many of you received comments on your papers about how you're argument is not actually doing a close analysis of the text/film. We'd like to point you to examples of close analysis in Writing Analytically. In particular, both Goodbye Lenin! (pages 185-189) and Las Meninas (pages 179-181) are examples of exploratory drafts that contain passages of close analysis. Please note that these are not polished drafts, but they should give you a sense of the level of detail and the kinds of interpretive moves that a good close analysis represents (especially paragraphs 10 and 11 in Goodbye Lenin).

If you are one of the students who is struggling with how to do a close analysis, think about how these examples identify particular details in order to go beyond a simple summary of the work. There's a temptation that I've seen in a lot of your work to merely summarize actions and events in the work to support an argument about message or thematic stucture. Instead we are asking you to go beyond this face value analysis of a text/film and actually discover evidence for your claims within the work's formal decisions or derived from the specific experience of your encounter with the text/film. One way of thinking about this kind of approach is to ask yourself: "How else could the author or filmmaker have presented this material? What has been revealed and what has been left unsaid? What decisions has the author/filmmaker made in choosing to present a particular detail in a particular way?"

Writing Analytically (p24) stresses that ideas should emerge from your experience of the text/film itself:

Having ideas is dependent on allowing yourself to notice things in your subject that you want to understand better rather than glossing over things with a quick and too easy understanding. This relates, of course, to what we have said so far about how attending to conclusions but not their causes prevents us from thinking and seeing.

Rather than diving straight into a scene in isolation from the rest of the work, your reading of this particular scene should be informed by how it fits into the larger structure of the work as a whole. Is it a turning point? Is it an anomaly? Is it representative of some larger pattern or thematic opposition?

Labels:

Monday, February 26, 2007

Change in Syllabus: Field Trip to BAM on Wednesday!

Due to another tour taking place on March 7th, our class field trip to the Berkeley Art Museum (BAM) has been bumped forward to this Wednesday, Feb. 28th, 11am-12:30pm.

Please meet in the front lobby of the Berkeley Art Museum, 2626 Bancroft Way, between Bowditch and College Ave, where the tour will begin promptly at 11:10am. We will be viewing two really amazing exhibitions: "A Rose Has No Teeth: Bruce Nauman in the 1960s" and "Measure of Time."

Because of this schedule change, we will discuss the Berkeley Art Museum works before the Paul Virilio essays. This means that the blogging order is slightly modified. Please note changes to the syllabus as follows:

Wed 2/28 – Class field trip to Berkeley Art Museum

Mon 3/5 – Discuss Berkeley Art Museum works (Group D)
Wed 3/7 – Discuss "The Third Interval" (Group B)

Mon 3/12 – Essay #1 final draft due; Continue discussion of "The Third Interval"
Wed 3/14 – Discuss "Indirect Light" (Group C)

Labels:

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

La Jetee on google video

For those who are writing about the film, La Jetee is available on Google Video for repeated viewings.

The clip we discussed in class, when the series of fade transitions between still photographs erupts into movement, is at 17:55 in the film. It's preceded by the following voiceover:

"As for him, he never knows whether he moves towards her, whether he is driven, whether he has made it up, or whether he is only dreaming"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5354377779883726771

Labels:

Memory and the body: "you are not the stuff of which you are made"




Last week you may remember Silbi talking about looking at a picture of herself and realizing that the person in the photo is no longer in existence. That comment immediately reminded me of this portion of a lecture by Richard Dawkins (in which he quotes a book by Steve Grand). Dawkins underscores this idea that the temporal continuity of one's body (i.e. the "you" that exists through time) is not really a fixed material but rather something closer to a wave (or chain reaction). I think this point is incredibly interesting in relation to Barthes ideas about photography and memory. The photograph not only freezes motion, but it freezes a (false) representation of the body as a fixed material entity. Do you remember how we talked about Peircean signs (symbol, index, icon)? Indexical signs are often associated with notions of "evidence" (i.e. smoke is an index of fire). Yet the indexical footprint of the personal photo seems to represents a sort of false evidence: an illusory connection to one's former mind and body. Feel free to check out the whole lecture here. And more TED (Technology Engineering Design) lectures here.

Labels:

Some housekeeping information

Hi everyone,

A few quick things:

(1) My office hours from now on will be in 6220 Dwinelle (i.e. no longer at Strada Cafe).

(2) I'm also switching the Thursday slot to Friday 11-12. Tuesdays will still be 4-5.

(3) As I explained in class, I'm retiring the idea of "Josh's blog round up," because it didn't seem like anyone was actually using the overviews as a way of synthesizing the blog responses. I'm OK with that; it may have felt a little too forced. I'd be open to suggestions about ways we could get you guys linking in a more organic manner. Please feel free to use the comments section here as a forum, if you'd like to weigh in on this topic.

Labels:

Saturday, February 17, 2007

Essay proposal feedback

Hi everyone,
It seems that a few of you were still waiting for the feedback to your paper proposals. All of you should have gotten your proposal feedback by now, so send me an email if you're still waiting.
--Josh

Labels:

Reviewed Essay Proposals??

Sincerely awaiting the reviewed essay proposals.

Labels:

Essay Proposal Feedback?

Has anyone received essay proposal feedbacks from Irene and Josh?

Labels:

Thursday, February 15, 2007

The Varying Experiences of Reality through Photography and Film

Well I should have taken note of the problems people have been having with posting and double checked to see that my post made it up two days ago. This is now inexcusably overdue but I suppose it's worth having up anyway. My apologies everyone.

Camera Lucida and “The Kinetoscope of Time” present us with two separate mediums through which time is expressed: photography and film. More specifically, I found each text to draw upon the relationship of the medium to the spectator’s perception of reality. However, though each text touches upon this concept, the perceptions that they each relate are distinctly dissimilar, and therefore speak to the varying experiences of reality as a result of modern technologies.
Photography and film are not the same method of expression. This is a statement so obvious it goes without saying. I only address it for it may then also seem obvious to some that they would clearly yield different understandings of reality. This distinction was not wholly apparent to me and therefore led me to the discussion of this idea. Film is simply a running reel of still photographs. In essence, film is inextricably linked to photography in that is comprised solely of photographs. However in reading Camera Lucida, the characteristics of the photograph that separates it from any other artistic medium became clear. Barthes notes “ the Photograph is indifferent to all intermediaries: it does not invent; it is authentication itself” (Barthes 87). The concept this then led me to is that film, by nature, is capable of producing fiction; photography however is bound by reality and fact. A photograph is an undeniable physical representation of what was before the camera in a specific moment and place. It is in this way the photography succeeds beyond any other medium or capability of the human mind to assure one of reality.
“The Kinetoscope of Time” conveys a separate experience of reality through its narrative. The narrator is presented with the opportunity to view his future through the film of a kinetoscope, an early screening invention. He reaches this proposition after having viewed a series of short films depicting dance and battle. He enjoys these films immensely, but is however adverse to the idea of seeing scenes of his own life and alleged future. Therefore, it must be understood that there is a valued distinction between one’s own reality and the “reality” put forth through film. Film may be a series of photographs, but when viewed in rapid succession, one is drawn from the reality of the moment in which each photograph exists, and rather becomes involved in the story that lies before them. It is in this way that film may serve as a means of time travel, a means by which time is manipulated and one may temporarily escape their own position in time. What may be taken from the narrative then, is that though we enjoy these momentary escapes and the ability to manipulate time through film, we are undeniably bound to the pattern and motion of time as we know it, and therefore our own realities.

Labels:

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Link - Explaining time in a dimensional sense

Imagining the Tenth Dimension

When I read the Time Machine I was reminded of this flash presentation. I think it'll be really useful for anyone inclined towards the concept of time as another dimension. In any case, it's really fascinating and interesting to watch, so everyone can go ahead and check it out if they have time.

Labels:

Irene's office hours re-scheduled for President's Day

Please note that due to President's Day on Monday, I've rescheduled my office hours next week to Wednesday, 4-5:30pm.

What a breathtaking range of responses to the films we watched yesterday--great job Group A!

Labels:

Remain Quiet and Still in the Subterranean Apocalypse

As the credits roll, the "film" La Jetée is presented as a
"photo-roman," french for a "photo-novel." A novel in photos. What
elements were missing? There is no dialog, only narrative. And in
the place of moving images there are only still shots in sequence,
save for a single 10-second clip. The "photo-novel" still retained some of the core
elements of films, with the director very much in control of what the
audience is seeing and hearing and controlling how long we spend
gazing on a particular image.

The experience of watching the photo-novel was not altogether
different from watching a standard film. It often felt less a
sequence of stills and more like the director simply instructed
his actors to remain quiet and still in each shot.

The decision to use a clip in that one part of the film was lost on
me, although there must have been some reason for it. It is preceded
by several shots of the same subject, the woman in bed with her eyes
closed but seemingly not asleep, and the suggestion of post-coital
giddiness seems to be intended. The stills are cut closer and closer
together, and several stills are used of the same subject where a
single still would be used in other parts of the film, and suddenly
the woman's eyes flutter open and the audience realizes that we have
shifted into a real moving image.

I suppose the timing of this sequence coincides with the main
character's increasing ability to exist and function in this "memory"
time, travelling into the past with greater and greater permanence,
and just as the moving image of the woman seems more real than the
snapshots, it helps us feel how these moments in the past are becoming
more and more real for the main character.

Still, I felt like there was another point being made by this that I
was missing.

It was striking, seeing this for the second time (I rented it a decade
ago after watching the 1995 Terry Gilliam film 12 Monkeys), and noting
this time how much the Wachowski Brothers borrowed for their 1999 film
The Matrix. In particular, the shots of the character lying prone in
a cot with electrodes attached to him, being sent from a glum
apocalyptic subterranean future to another time and place -- an almost
exact prototype for the mode of astral travel that is presented in The
Matrix.

Which brings me to another observation -- this obsession with humanity
being driven underground. We have tunnel dwellers in H. G. Wells'
Time Machine, underground workers in Metropolis, post-apocalyptic
underground civilization in la Jetée, underground Zion in The Matrix.
Why is it that we are to be denied the light of the sun in all of
these imagined futures? Are some of these stories paying homage to
other ones or have all these creative types come up with this
subterranean fate for humanity independently?

The sun, the giver of light, the very reflection of which is crucial
to the capture of images and moving images, is that which we
apparently most fear to lose.

Labels:

Le Jetee vs. subtited films and Edward Muybridge

In watching Le Jetee, I couldn't help but see the parallels between the photo-based film and a subtitled one: both rely on the viewer to put each frame together and create a sense of flow and movement between scenes. Also, I appreciated the way Chris Marker used several different photos of the same subject matter in a row, to have the same effect of Edward Muybridge on animals: he gave the characters movement even though they were not actually moving on-screen. Specifically in the final scene, where the main character is running toward the end of the peir to reach the woman he loves, there is a fairly long series of photos that show him progressing down the pier, and then falling to his death. I think that by not showing the fluid movement, Marker was able to place more emphasis on his facial emotions, which are more important to the scene than seeing him actually run. Also, by showing him run in a series of photos, it was more dramatic to see him fall to his death, because the movement didn't offer a transition into his fall.

Labels:

Life Is A Picture

ChrisMarker’s La Jetée uses the concept of photography as a memory and of the process of living. His snippets are then used to show the larger context; as if life wasn’t a flow of motion but rather still frames captured in a consecutive way. It is almost as if Dziga Vertov critiqued La Jetée in his “Kino-Eye.” La Jetée was… "filmed in a way that sets out the relevant materials one after the other and forces the eyes of the audience to see the consecutive details that they must see. The film camera drags the eyes of the audience… in the most profitable order and it organizes the details into a regular montage exercise" (Kino-Eye. 92). Time traveling and memory are one in La Jetée. They both take place in his adult mind, but also in his childhood reality. The line is blurred between past and present as he is shown his own death.

Labels: , , , ,

Eternal Time Loops

The movie La Jetee presents another form of time travel that differs from the methods we have encountered so far in our texts. The use of memory as time travel is so true in everyday life, it's amazing that people do not call our brains time machines. Afterall, we think about the future and the past and create images in our minds about both.
Most of the movie was actually composed photographs, besides one, short animation. The only animated part of the movie was when the woman that the man was infatuated with was lying in bed and opened her eyes and blinked a few times. This scene must be significant since it is the only nonphotographic portion of the film. The waking animation could signify waking up from dreams/memory that are mental forms of time travel. The man sort of wakes up from his own time travel when he sees his own death. However, the whole thing about finally choosing where he goes in his memory and dreams and finding the woman is that he realizes that his life, or the expanse that he remembers and lives in, is merely a loop that will continue forever more through history and the future. This reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five in a way since the narrator presents time as lots of loops that go on forever and occur spontaneously with each other in different dimensions. I always found this idea of time and history and future fascinating and I've sort of believed in this idea since I thought about it when I was younger. The thought of some parallel dimensions that have the same events occurring, just off time, is another method of time travel that could be possible if it were true.
One point of discrepency I have with the film is the photographs. Are they real photographs? There are images of the arc de triumph destroyed and such, so are the photographs edited? Are they really photographs then?

Labels:

La Jetée: A clouded view from the observation deck

In the odd and somewhat creepy movie “La Jetée” many elements of time travel and the enslavement of human freedom through technology was presented. The film’s structure through moving through still shots represents an important part of how humans tend to structure their thoughts and imaginations. Most of us usually see our memories as photos in our mind, rather than a video of our memories, and “La Jetée” seems to take into account how the human mind works. One frequent image in the initial parts of the film is the evil looking scientist with his dark eye goggles. This seems as the filmmaker intends to show a representation of how technology has become an invasive all-seeing eye, as in big brother from Orwell’s 1984. The metaphor seems to continue as this evil scientist conducts inhumane experiments on people as he scopes into the dreams and memories of humans that seem to make them turn insane. The filmmaker also seems to be making many suggestions to future generations as to be watchful of the growing technology, as it eventually seems to destroy humanity, as it did with all of Paris in the film. One striking shot from the destruction of Paris is the destroyed Arc de Triomphe, which is shown broken in two. This represents how such magnificent edifices of older years where Napoleon created a new French society seem to be destroyed by the age of modernity. Beyond the destruction of humanity by technology, one striking scene stands as an important contrast to the entire film. There is one scene where the girl is shown breathing, with her mouth and chest slowly moving, and it is the only part of the entire film where video is used instead of still shots. The girl breathing is an important symbol throughout the entire film as it represents an action so pure and free from any bounds of society or modernity that it is free from the bounds of still frames and moves vividly in video. The filmmaker sees the girl as a symbol of purity and she also is shown in plain clothes, again, representing this purity and freedom from society. Also another striking shot is where the people of the future are shown as having a third eye, often a symbol of all seeing power. In many cultures the third eye represents the soul or an organ that possess the power to look deeper into humans and peer into their soul, and this symbol carries onto the images of people from the future. Additionally, humans today are showed as blind to certain spiritual elements, as the man is shown with dark glasses that seem to prohibit him from seeing things that these advanced creatures can. Ultimately, the beings from the future are able to see what the man could not; his ultimate death from the same evil-looking scientist at the Orly airport beside the woman he thought would be his savior.

Labels:

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Endless Time in La Jetee

One aspect that intrigued me in La Jetée was the loop that the main character creates when he goes back in time all the way to his childhood at the end of the movie. It not only ties the movie back to itself, but it also results in an endless loop of his viewing of his own death as a child and his dying in front of his childhood self as an adult. This cycle of never-ending time is almost like a way to immortality, though it is violent and impossible to break out of -- he is doomed to forever repeat trauma and death. The fact that his childhood trauma gives him the ability to travel in time as an adult further emphasizes this inescapable loop. This loop is very much similar to the concept of the ourobouros - a snake eating its own tail, representing a vicious cycle or things beginning as they end.

The other, almost painfully obvious significant point in the movie was the moving shot of the woman when she wakes up in the bed. This is used as a formal device to emphasize the scene; the scene first moves slowly, then the rate of the photographs becomes faster and faster as she finally wakes up and blinks at the camera. The scene itself could have been used to emphasize the idea of waking up from the endless loops we create for ourselves each day and actually changing something, instead of repeating the same negative habits over and over as if we were machines needing new input from an operator.

There is simply too much that can be written about this movie, and I certainly haven't fully explained these two points, but La Jetée definitely gives us something to think about.

Labels:

Time Indefinite: Memories embedded into technology

While I was watching this film, I was struck by Ross McElwee’s compulsive obsession to film every aspect of his life. As demonstrated by the filming of his brother shaving in front of a mirror 12 years ago to his sister giving him advice after a break-up, he uses film to transverse time. By playing back his old footage, he allows viewers to travel into his past with him as he narrates different memories he has. His obsession to film seems to suggest his dependence on technology to capture seemingly everyday moments in his life. He relies on it to help him remember moments in his life, such as his post-baptism moments with his mother. Yet, as demonstrated with his battery dying after his wedding announcement, technology still has a funny way of failing him. He was obsessed with finding a new battery to document this, but wouldn’t his natural perception and memory of the event be sufficient? He does not think so. I feel like his obsession to film indicates a dependence on technology to record what he goes through on a daily basis, everyday memories from his point of view. His memories are embedded in his film, and his past is intertwined with a tainted reliving of a memory. The camera is the self-created barrier that prevents him from experiencing the beauty of natural memory.

Labels:

La Jetée, Photographs of Death

Chris Marker’s unique film La Jetée greatly parallels many of the concepts of photographs in Roland Barthes’ Camera Lucida. The film presents the devastation of humans’ desire to go back to the past by means of experimental time travel, in order to seek help following the destruction of WWIII. The protagonist’s obsession with a particular childhood memory at Orly Airport, where, as a child, he was captivated by a young woman while witnessing the shooting of a man, leads him to his own death. This fate of the protagonist relates to the idea of a photograph as death in Camera Lucida. In Camera Lucida, Barthes claims that a photograph “produces Death while trying to preserve life … With the photograph, we enter into flat Death” (92). According to Barthes, while the photograph tries to preserve life by capturing the past, it “tells [one] death in the future” by providing “the absolute past of the pose” (96). Similar to this notion, the protagonist of the film tries desperately to preserve his childhood memory by giving up the future that is full of other possibilities. However, as his past becomes almost tangible to him, the past brings death to him to show that one can never have the real past back, even through photographs. Marker plays with Barthes’ perception by creating a film almost entirely composed of individual photographs in various still shots and close ups, and long shots. Therefore, the protagonist literally tries to preserve his past in the photographs of the day of the Orly Airport incident in his memories, which leads him to “flat Death.”

Furthermore, the film emphasizes the idea of the photograph as death by presenting contrast in the one scene that does have short and subtle motion. When the protagonist spends the day with the young woman from his childhood memory, the woman falls asleep in the sun. The film then shows a long and silent sequence of the still photographs of her sleeping as the protagonist narrates, “Now she is asleep in the sun … she is dead.” As the noise of the birds chirping gets louder, the woman (sleeping or dead) in a frozen photograph suddenly wakes up, and blinks her eyes in animated motions as in a regular movie. The reason why the woman can move, become alive, as in real life in this particular scene is because she is not captured in a photograph. This relates to Barthes’ beliefs about the difference between cinema and photograph, “Like the real world, [in] the filmic world … ‘the experience will continue to flow by in the same constitutive style’; but the Photograph breaks the ‘constitutive style’; it is without future” (89-90). With this notion, La Jetée delivers death in photographs in this short scene by contrasting it to life in motion pictures that are more like the real world.

Labels:

Memory time travel ( La Jete`e)

La Jete`e
Memory time travel

It is interesting to see everything in black and white photograph to tell a story that is in motion. The motion is not always movement in the pictures but motion through time and kind of space and is difficult to see that in pictures. When this time traveler goes back he does not use a machine per se rather he travels in his mind to the past. In a way he's traveling into his memories like one would reflect back on something that happened where he would remember something and be there. Every time he would go back into the past he would search for this girl, woman who he was infatuated with, it was interesting to see how every time he went back she would not be able to remember him but he could remember her. Sort of like him having a memory of a memory in which the memory just remember. When he would go back in time even though he was using his head he still looked the same as if he was in the present odd because usually in the mind you're able to change your perspective on things and appearances as well. There's another strange point where he's in the past with the woman and she points to a Sequoia that's been cut in half and you can see the rankings around that symbolize time and she points to a particular time to say something and he points off the tree to an empty space where the tree has not grown that far yet and he says that's where he's from the time in the future. And the whole shadow and a black-and-white photos and how that expresses emotions of each individual character in the photo is interesting because you're able to see things in an unusual way that express emotions like suffering or fear and you're able to somewhat eat off of it. Probably though the most unusual thing is the parallelism between the past and the present and how it's related. For instance as a child seeing some one die gave him this strange interactive imagination which in the future allowed him to travel back into time and ultimately be killed be that same moment that inspired him as a child, watching himself die.

Labels:

Photography: a deeper meaning

Camera Lucida shows the reader the deeper meaning of the camera. It tells us that photography tells the real time and does not lie. The "Winter Garden" photograph makes the viewer feel their own death just by looking at that photo. Paintings just don't possess the same reality that a photograph can. Photographs just show one point in time. They are merely a pose and not a process or concurrence of events like that of the film. Photo vs film is shown on page 78: "The pose is swept away and denied by the continuous series of images". A photo is a living image but can show a dead image. It can be a living image of a dead thing. A simple photograph can only show one point in time. It can not tell past or future but only the situation at that current time (page 82: "The photograph does not call up the past". Photographs tell the truth and are a form of evidence: two quotes from page 87 in the book which highlight these are: "It does not invent; it is authentication itself" and "Every photograph is a certificate of presence". The difference between life and death for a camera is just a simple click away. The actual characteristics of the photograph material are lifelike: the paper fades, weakens, vanishes just like all life forms. Headings or titles to photos may tell us more about the picture and its past, present and future than just the picture itself.

Labels:

Monday, February 12, 2007

The Will of Humanity

H.G. Wells' The Time Machine is a curious text. It is very clearly a critique condemning the effects of industrialization on our society, but the story's criticism seems to span a bit wider than that. I see The Time Machine as a critique of human will and of the purpose and use of ANY technology. It is a reflection of social trends that humanity has set into motion long before the Industrial Revolution.

For example, let's examine the Eloi. They are said to be successors to an expansive race, a race that left behind massive building structures for which the Eloi have no use. The Eloi live in ignorant bliss, fragile and kind. What I think is most important about the Eloi race is the Time Traveler's description of them as "happy". Though they become fearful at night, their lives tend to be "happy". This is the first clue to Wells' critique of will. A race of technological ambition devolves into stupid, happy critters.

Next, we have The Time Traveler. He is the most important clue to Wells' intentions, mostly because of his own personal views regarding each race. He dislikes the Morlocks. In many respects, in fact, he empathizes with the Eloi. He sees the Morlocks as extremely dangerous, evil savages. In contrast, he adores the Eloi. In other words, he refuses to acknowledge the inherent flaws of Eloi society unless they directly affect him (eg. their inability to read), and he refuses to acknowledge the inherent virtues of the Morlocks unless they are stated from a wholly empirical standpoint (eg. their dominance over the Eloi). I would say, then, that the Time Traveler's affinity for the Eloi is a reflection of his own will and desires prior to his adventure.

Through the Eloi, Wells has conveyed the consequence of general human will. Humans want to be blissful. They do not want to work. They do not want to study. They do not want to have to defend themselves. They want to live lives of lazing luxury and simple freedom. Through The Time Travelever, Wells shows the connection between will and technology. The Time Traveler is a scientist who worships technology, and he empathizes with the Eloi. Completely oblivious to the connection, the Traveler does not understand why a race of such technological success has devolved into a race of fragile ignorami. The key is the technology, the reflection of the will of the race that ultimately leads to its demise.

Labels:

Illusion in "The Kinetoscope of Time" and Other Works

...It looks like this did not post earlier when I tried, so I'm glad I checked at the last minute. I hope this goes through.

Since this is a blog response and not a more formal paper, I would like to note some of my thoughts upon first reading "The Kinetoscope of Time," as they raise some intriguing points about the nature of time-viewing in this short story.

The title and denouement of the story reveal much, I think, about the way its content can be interpreted. The title refers to a kinetoscope, which was a real Thomas Edison invention made over a century ago. The device was a forerunner of modern-day motion pictures - it was basically a peephole behind which a continuous loop of film passed, giving the crude illusion of motion. The end of the story mentions the mysterious "supervisor" of the circular hall as the Count Cagliostro. Cagliostro too existed in history; he was an Italian who dabbled in the occult and is today thought to have been a charlatan. The real-life versions of both the kinetoscope and Cagliostro suggest an illusory, counterfeit aspect of seeing the past and the future, which is reinforced by the climax in which the narrator turns down offers to see his personal past and future because he wants to independently control his own destiny. This is somewhat unlike Man with a Movie Camera and The Time Machine, neither of which really explores the idea of exploring time in a more personal fashion.

Barthes does so in Camera Lucida, but basically with still pictures, not movies (though he does not really view photographs as illusory, but rather just as still images whose real power lies in their effect on viewers). His conclusions are different, however, as he seems to think of death as a part of viewing almost any personal picture. The narrator of "Kinetoscope" takes a much more stoic position, denying himself even the chance to view his death because he "must find the fortitude to undergo it somehow" regardless (Matthews 14).

All this seems contradictory in some respects with the narrator seeing a succession of richly detailed animated visions earlier; the scenes are all described in sumptuous visual detail, as if Matthews is trying to make a film with text. Descriptions such as "infinitesimal sparks darted" (8), "Eastern in their glowing gorgeousness" (8), and "lines of liquid light" (10) evoke such vivid mental images that they seem almost like poetic scriptwriting. Combined with the kinetoscopes in the main hall through which the narrator peers, they made me think of movies almost immediately. But movies nowadays explore both the past and the future in extremely personal ways with their protagonists, and these productions are brought to millions of viewers at once. What would the narrator of "Kinetoscope" have thought of this, I wonder?

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Photograph preserves

I did not know that I need to click "publish." no wonder it didn't show..

It must be so nice to analyze the whole book in this short paper. However, the broadness of the book or messages in the book limits me (yet, I do not fully understand). So I will try to focus on a few parts which struck me like a lightning of insightfulness.

Most of time, the one who is being photographed is aware of one’s self being photographed. As being aware of that, the one engages in the action of “posing.” Barthes refers the action to “transformation”—feeling the creation of one’s body or the mortification by the photograph. Though it is imaginary, through “posing” Barthes metaphorically mentions that he derives his existence from the photographer. It is an interesting notion that by the time one performs the action, the one realizes that his image will be regenerated—possibly over and over. It is agreeable that such an action qualifies as “transformation” in the sense that the action is acknowledgement of his permanent image created. However, a question arises: what about the photograph does not involve in the action of “posing” (for example, a situation that you do not notice you are being photographed)?

In contrast to an image is being eternalized, the subject is become an object. Barthes refers this to “death”; the subject does not necessarily have any importance in the photograph anymore. It is understandable that after the photograph is taken, the subject—someone who is photographed—is breathless, motionless, and even timeless. Whether or not the subject exists any more, it is clear that it is no longer important in the photographed image itself. It is paradoxical that the photograph is no longer relevant to its referent: the photograph eternalizes and objectifies the subject or the referent. The photograph then gains its meaning or identity other than the replication image of the referent. I am not sure that Barthes meant the idea of “death” even taking into account of the referent’s existence. This, the referent’s existence does not have any influence on one’s replica, means that the photograph is granted a distinct identity or meaning apart from the referent.

“In this glum desert, suddenly a specific photograph reaches me, it animates me, and I animate it. So that is how I must name the attraction which makes it exist: an animation. The photograph itself is no way animated (I do not believe in “lifelike” photographs), but it animates me: this is what creates every adventure.”—pg20,

It might be necessary for me to connect to the class’s main focus—time machine and machine time. Despite the photograph can not exist without the referent, the photograph still exists even if the referent no longer exists. Barthes asserts that the photograph animates him. To Barthes, the photograph means preservation. It can be said “time machine”; however, the photograph does not bring you to future nor is it meant to. What I mean by ‘preservation’ is that the subject is eternalized in the photograph. This gives me a clue why Barthes prefers a photograph to a movie: “I do not believe in “lifelike” photographs.” This seems that Barthes rejects an idea of the photograph as a tool to portray the world does not exist. In the photograph, the subject is preserved for eternity that the past is present.

Labels: ,

Linking Kinetoscope, Man with the Movie Camera, and Camera Lucida Temporally and Spatially

Broader Connections in “The Kinetoscope of Time”:

In “The Kinetoscope of Time,” Brander Matthews sets up a narrative structure quite similar to that of a film. Just as the film camera is used to show a representation of space and time based on the director’s and editors’ interests and biases, Matthews gives a representation of time and space by providing exclusive visual details—only the details he wishes the reader to imagine. Matthews sets up this narrative structure as a tool to bring “scenes” or “images” to life, just as Vertov brings still images to life in MWMC. The difference between film and text though in this case is that in film, the interpretation of images is left to the viewer; only the images themselves are concrete, even though the film itself is biased towards the director’s and editors’ interests. In the text, on the other hand, Matthews says what conclusions should be drawn from the specific details he provides to set up an image or scene. Besides the details he provides, the rest of an image or scene is left up to the imagination of the reader. His narrative structure seems to follow a pattern: he sets up an “image” or “scene” with concrete and evaluative details, then conclusions are drawn from these images and scenes, and this order is repeated for each succeeding vision the narrator sees (Matthews 8-11). The evaluative details especially, such as ”irresolute paces,” “curiously shaped,” “anticipated triumph” (Matthews 8) suggested certain embedded presumptions and assumptions about that particular person or object the details referred to. It seems as though the diction Matthew uses to describe images enslaves the mind to picture only what he finds significant, just as the film camera enslaves the human eye to certain images, as Vertov states in his manifesto..

Other Significant Aspects:

Matthews seems to mark the passage of time through his succession of visual details. The successive visions the narrator sees mark how they help give the narrator a sense of time. The narrator senses time and space through the intervals of “darkness” and “light.” He describes these opposites differently each time: “blackness” vs. “blackness robed in color,” “darkness” vs. “glow,” “darkness” vs. “disappearing darkness,” “light died away, void blackness, nothing” vs. “full clear light,” (Matthews 8-10) and then he describes the lack of light more dramatically: “empty blackness”, “inexorable veil of darkness,” “blackness,” “nothing,” “opaque depth.” (Matthews 10-11). His sense of time and space changes depending on the length of the intervals between visions. During the first time he had to wait long between visions, he starts describing the “darkness” as nothing. It seems as if the long passage of time changed his sense of space and soon saw “nothing” instead of “blackness” or “darkness.” He sensed the blackness would not be lit, consequently it failed to seem as blackness and just fritted away into nothing. The narrator’s dependence on time causes him to change his sense of space when he loses his sense of time. This could also be happening to the Time Traveler in Time Machine since the Time Traveler marks the passage of time in the future by day and night.


Connections to Camera Lucida:

This anxiety of waiting in unknown time also comes up in Roland Barthes’ Camera Lucida. Barthes speaks of this “waiting” as the only thing left for him to do after his mother’s death. He comes to his conclusion after describing how photographs produce “Death while trying to preserve life” (Barthes 92). He states: “The only “thought” I can have is that at the end of this first death, my own death is inscribed; between the two, nothing more that waiting…” (Barthes 93). Barthes connects how a photograph can give a negative perception of time. This paradoxical photograph of his mother that he says captures her “true being” also makes his mother’s and his own death more real. Barthes says that the details of this photograph seem to “puncture” or “prick” him because when he looks at it he thinks his mother is going to die. The photograph distorts his sense of time since his mother is already dead.

Labels:

Camera Lucida?

Why is it that no one posted responses for Camera Lucida? Did I get the hw wrong or is something wrong with my blog account? I'm confused.

Labels:

Saturday, February 10, 2007

Josh's blog round up

As I mentioned in a post last week, we really encourage you to integrate your blog responses into larger conversations occurring on this blog. The 'date' at the bottom of each post is actually a permalink, so you can copy it into the text of your response and directly link to the material you cite. [I'm repeating myself here but...] As we further develop the topic of this class, it will be increasingly important that you are able to build upon, question, and synthesize ideas developed in this blog. Good writing doesn't take place in a vacuum, and so we'd like you to be able to use this forum as a way of connecting your own responses to those of your peers. In this way we're also encouraging you to integrate the various texts and films around broader thematic topics of the course.

Before you write your blog responses for this week, please take a moment to familiarize yourself with the responses from previous weeks, and in addition take a look at the following overview of this past week's blog responses:

Mike seemed to build on Daniella's ideas, observing that:

As soon as the device disappears, the appreciation and observation of the future is diminished to mere luxury and the sole purpose of this journey is to RETURN to the present state.
....
such material obstacles such as the disappearance of the machine itself and the interference of the murlocks have ironiacally hindered the freedom and ambitions of the time traveler, when he was supposed to transcend on his way to explore the future.

Sean built on Felix's observations of The Time Machine as critique of industrialization, arguing that by placing this critique in the future Wells is granted...

...more freedom to hypothesize about what current practices might lead to, and at the same time protected him against being labeled as too critical of contemporary society.

Devaansh points out how Well's critique of capitalism/industrialization is somewhat complicated by the fact that the time machine itself is a product of that very mode of hyper-industrial growth.

Phoebe pointed out the inconsistency in the way the time traveler seems to view humanity:

The Time Traveler has this inconsistent view of what humanity is. On the one hand, he views the Eloi as less than human because of their lack of intellect, but on the other hand he does not acknowledge the intellect that the Morlocks have.

Caitlin pointed out the parallels to marxist revolutionary imagery but notes that:

Instead of praising the Morlocks, the working class, the Time Traveller prefers the Eloi, the representation of the capitalists.

Jane looked at the time traveler as a likely candidate for one who would get along with the "haves" rather than "have-nots." Can we think of inventors as a kind of elite or do they have more in common with the mechanically adept Morlocks?

Dan demonstrated how a work of futuristic science fiction ultimately sheds more light on the particular historical context in which the author is situated.

And of course, just as we can look back and see Well’s future as a product of his time, in the future others will look with interest at our visions of the future based on our current ideas on climate change, space exploration and genetic engineering. Thus, it seems that visions of the future are not only predictions of what will come, they are also testaments of the time in which they are conceived.

Rachel pointed out how the Time Traveler's (and our) conception of mechanized, regimented time, contrasts sharply with "a world that’s conception of time solely revolve[s] around night and day." She also explores the lack of a family unit (in the Eloi) as a similar sort of stripping away of social structure—a hypertrophied example of the kind of productivity oriented individuation that occurs in a capitalist system. This idea of individuation seems to be connected to the occupational titles of the Time Traveler's dinner guests. She also hints at the temporal dimension of the family unit by pointing out how families are organized around generational "lifetimes" (which by their nature shouldn't be "wasted"). For the Eloi, the notion of a life-span, has lost its potency as a marker of time, just as the family unit has ceased to indicate any relevant social relationship.

Eddie took Guillermo and Shane's arguments about the plausibility of Wells's future world a step further pointing out differences between de-evolution and evolution.
For me, this kind of plausibility argument raises questions about what kind of expectations a reader brings to a piece of science fiction. I think it's interesting how we feel so compelled to evaluate science fiction as a kind of forecast for the future. I found myself having the same reaction. Does Wells invite this kind of critique? I think in some ways he does, but I also think it's important to ask the question: what can we learn from trying to understand a vision of the future that originates in our own immediate past? Dan seems to have addressed some of these questions in last week's post.

Labels: ,

Friday, February 09, 2007

Dissatisfaction with The Time Traveler’s Analyses

In The Time Machine, Herbert George Wells makes a profound proposition of life on Earth some 800,000 years into the future. He attempts to explain the evolution—rather de-evolution—of man into the Eloi and Morlock people as well as the social relationship between these people through a combination of Darwinian and Marxian concepts. As time has honored, both of these schools of thought provide, arguably, some of the most popular and accepted theories for explaining biological and social change. However, they should not be viewed as a “Complete Guide to Life on Planet Earth;” they fail to fully account for much of the things Wells presents in his fantasy, future world.

Perhaps I am being overly critical, or petty; or maybe I just wish that Wells, through the words of the Time Traveler, had spent more time discussing his analyses of how the Elois and Morlocks came to be as they were. While reading The Time Machine, I was irked by a constant feeling of incomplete satisfaction with his somewhat cursory reasoning; I felt it was possible, but not very probable.

He attributes the Elois’ feebleness and lack of sexual specialization to a lack of necessity. I agree with this. Sexual specialization in humans evolved as a necessity when humans began walking upright, narrowing birth canals and leading to prolonged pregnancies. Women needed men to commit themselves as providers in order to ensure birth. This familial structure was then needed after birth in order to teach the young skills needed to survive in an increasingly complex world. In a world where there is little danger and plenty of easily picked food, there is no need for hunting, gathering, and nurturing. Therefore physical strength is also not needed. Neither is intellect. “Like the Carlovingian Kings, [who] had decayed to a mere beautiful futility”(48), the comfortable, safe, and nourished Eloi did not need much intelligence to survive.

But I argue, the need for something is not the only reason for it to exist; there is also DESIRE. The desire to know, to understand, to create, and once self-aware, to find purpose in one’s existence. It was not because of necessity that man deciphered astronomy, created calculus, formulated the laws of physics, and painted the Sistine Chapel. Man inherently possesses the desire to do more than just eat, sleep, and procreate. Once we had evolved to a being with the ability to think beyond instinctual levels, I doubt that we would ever stop using our minds for these purposes, even if there was no effort required for survival. In fact, many of the Renaissance men who pioneered these great leaps in intellect and creation lived comfortable lives afforded by wealth. It was their desire that compelled them to think. I just don’t completely buy that these same humans de-evolved and allowed their minds to wane simply because of a lack of necessity. If man became extinct after having rid the world of all its evils (disease, overpopulation, etc. as told by the Time Traveler) and the Eloi evolved from some other lesser animal, I would be more inclined to believe.

The predator and prey relationship between Morlock and Eloi people also lacks an acceptable and complete explanation. With his basis in Marxian and Darwinian social and evolutionary theories, The Time Traveler speculates that the Elois were the aristocratic “Haves,” and the Morlocks, the oppressed “Have-Nots.” And that as the vegetarian Elois enjoyed their utopian comforts (and grew weak and dumb as a result), the carnivorous Morlocks grew savage underground, only surfacing during the night to hunt for their Eloi meals. If the Elois were able to de-evolve into the delicate creatures that they were meant that there was no need for them to keep their strength and intellect. This suggests that the Morlocks did not look to them as a source of food until recently. The Morlocks would have had to have had other sources of meat that recently went extinct, or that they, in relatively recent generations, just decided to include their Eloi cousins in their diet. It may be argued that mice have been eaten by birds of prey for millennia, yet mice have not evolved to defend themselves in any meaningful way. But this relationship of predatory bird and preyed rodent exists because of progressive evolution; it occurred from the bottom up (if that makes sense). But to de-evolve into this relationship seems unlikely to me unless the Morlock and Eloi peoples were completely isolated from each other for many millennia to allow for them to arrive at their current evolutionary states. But that cannot be true, since the Elois wear clothing manufactured by the Morlocks.

Which leads me to wonder one final thought. What do the Elois barter for their clothing? They have nothing to offer.

Labels:

Monday, February 05, 2007

Clarifcation on Essay #1 Freewriting assignment

I wanted to reiterate the freewriting assignment for generating ideas for Essay #1, as well as add a few pages from Writing Analytically to help you along:

Please read Writing Analytically from the bottom of page 113 to the top of 116 ("Passage-based Focused Freewriting") as a guideline for the following freewriting assignment.

1) Read the Essay #1 Assignment sheet. Choose what reading and film you will analyze for the essay. (See below for guidelines on choosing the reading and film.)

2) Select a passage from the reading that you have chosen (one that needs to be discussed, that poses a question or problem, that seems striking, important, anomalous, unclear, or puzzling). Transcribe the passage on a sheet of paper.

3) Freewrite on the passage for 10 minutes using the guidelines from Exercise 4.2, page 114-115 in Writing Analytically.

NOTE:
The movie that you pick is provisional, just to get you started on thinking of a topic. Pick a film that you either have an existing interest in, or that you are curious about if you haven't seen it yet. We've seen clips from Metropolis and Modern Times in class, and there's a clip from Kinoglaz on the blog, which should give you at least a taste of those works. Having an idea of where you might be headed is the main point. I'll assign another free-write on Wednesday to do over the weekend on a film, so you'll have time to watch it on your own.

As for the reading on which to write a passage, the idea is again to pick a work that you might be interested in writing more extensively about. I put Camera Lucida in there (about the temporality of the photograph), as well as the option of choosing your own reading in case there were people who wanted to explore something upcoming and new rather than something we've already discussed extensively in class.

The purpose behind these early exercises is not to nail you to any particular film or reading, but to help you generate ideas for your paper based off of a hunch about what works you find or will find most interesting. After all, the paper should be a process of discovery about something you have an initial interest in, and this is just the beginning of that process!

Labels:

Time, Productivity and Family

What struck me as particularly unique and insightful in H.G. Wells “The Time Machine” was the revelations about contemporary relationship with and purpose of time. Time has very often been the source and the reason for the way society functioned—night implied a time of darkness where work could no longer be done and daybreak marked the beginning of the working day, the time when it would once again be possible to be productive. In past societies and in our own, time alone has been responsible for many facets of natural life. In the United States, for one example, time dictates just about everything: political life (through elections and/or times of service), social life (with what is deemed appropriate at a certain time in an individual’s life) and economic life (monetary gain and loss being marked by time periods). Time very much impacts the daily life of our productivity.

In “The Time Machine”, however, the Time Traveller stumbled randomly upon a world that’s conception of time is solely revolved around night and day. There is no importance placed upon productivity and initially the Time Traveller marvels at this societies ability to live in a truly Communistic world (where greed or ambition simply don’t play a role in the day to day goings on of the year 8271). He plays particular attention to the familial structure, which, according to the works of several theorists studied in sociology, political science and anthropology, unveils the most discerning and discriminating facts about the beliefs and traditions of any one society. The family structure, which the Time Traveller argues is basically nonexistent in the year 8271, is one of a few major ways that outsiders are able to understand what is valued by a society as well as expose the basic power structure within a particular society.

The lack of familial structure in 8271, as theorized in this book, was further emphasized through the story of Weena, who would have drowned without so much as an glance from the others had it not been for the duty felt by the Time Travellers. This duty, that is a staple of our modern way of interacting with others, says much about the relationship that we in the modern day have with time in that time is not something that is wasted. Just in the same way that the Time Traveller would not stand idly by and watch the life of Weena go to waste (and her “time” cut unceremoniously short), our modern relationship with any “waste” of time (or taking time for granted, rather) was unveiled and highlighted.

Ultimately the modern relationship and emphasis on productivity as well as what is revealed by the lack of familial bonding and structure is one of the core ways that the conception of time is played with and manipulated in “The Time Machine”. The fact that everybody in the present time of the novel is referred to by their occupations is revealing of the implicit notion that time is not important unless productivity is evident. The lack of family structure is simply a byproduct of this mentality seen at its most shocking height.

Labels:

Previous blog responses

I'd like to encourage you all to link to each other's blog responses. The 'date' at the bottom of each post is actually a permalink, so you can copy it into the text of your response and directly link to the material you cite. As we further develop the topic of this class, it will be increasingly important that you are able to build upon, question, and synthesize ideas developed in this blog. Good writing doesn't take place in a vacuum, and so we'd like you to be able to use this forum as a way of connecting your own responses to those of your peers. In this way we're also encouraging you to integrate the various texts and films around broader thematic topics of the course.

In that spirit, I've tried to synthesize some of your blog responses into a very brief (and meandering) overview. I encourage you to use it as a reference as you skim the blog for posts that resonate with your own ideas. This description is by no means exhaustive. I merely picking out passages or ideas that I thought were particularly salient. Where it was easier to simply excerpt your writing I've included block quotes. Feel free to add your own thoughts and additions in the comments section.

(Also, note that I haven't been able to include responses from this week yet.)

Meegan pointed out Vertov's seeming hypocrisy in "adapting" the written words of his manifesto from a graphic medium into a visual one--precisely the kind of translational act that he purports to argue against. Some commenters noted a difference between adaptations of a narrative 'platform' vs. rhetorical 'dissertation.' It will be interesting to see if this discussion of translation (between media) pops up again later in the course.

Jeff talked about how Vertov's imagery melded the human and machine into a kind of hyper repetitive automaton.
As dummies are models that are supposed to represent human this shows that we're turning into these machines by doing the same monotonous work and having on alive objects to do the same things that we are able to do.
Valerie and Tom both provided vivid experiential descriptions of their encounter with Vertov's unusual formal devices. Tom said he felt like he was a "lab rat" in one of Vertov's experiments and criticized Vertov's overemphasis of reflexive gestures (too many shots of the camera shooting another camera for example). Valerie on the other hand, felt more comfortable when she discovered that Vertov was using the theme of a "day in the life" (in the Soviet Union) as structuring device. She also observed the rapid camera movement (literally the camera was often placed on moving objects) and linked this technique to a particular historical context of rapid speed and industrial advancement.

Silbi situated the man/machine hybrid within a particular political context. In contrast to those of you who found Vertov's treatment of the human body threatening, she emphasized the positive aspects of this theme.
Man with a Movie Camera subtly conveys Lenin’s political ideology in that era. The movie puts a great emphasis on a Proletariat-oriented society under the rule of Lenin. The members of the upper class enjoying the horse-carriage ride is portrayed pejoratively as old and outdated compared to the automobiles and trolley cars. Most of the scenes of the film show the unity among the common people en masse, mostly proletariat, enjoying and participating in the same activities, whether they are working or playing. The film expresses the pleasure and satisfaction resulting from a society where everyone shares and works together equally and fairly.
Nina emphasized the way that Vertov uses the camera as personified subject. She pays particular attention to the sequence with an approaching train. Also, echoing Jeff, she argues that Vertov uses camera (and editing) to make humans seem like they're working at inhuman pace.

Stephanie presented a detailed reading of the orchestra scene (intro), arguing that Vertov depicts humans as subject to (or perhaps oppressed by) machine time.
Here, Vertov is again depicting humanity’s dependence on machine temporally, instead of spatially like the beginning part with the seats. The orchestra players are waiting on the camera’s cue, essentially running on machine time. Humans subject themselves to their control, and once again, the machine-to-human dependency and restriction that was previously present has completely changed.
Nehal looked at "The Man with a Movie Camera" not as a "day in the life" but rather as an allegory for a longer temporal framework—metaphorically suggestive of the preindustrial era leading to the industrial age (with its 5 year plans and rapid development). He also echoes many of you in pointing out temporal oppositions, between: old and new, horse-and-carriage vs. car, marriage vs. divorce, birth vs. death

Miriam points out that Vertov's lack of obvious spatiotemporal clarity was compensated for by consistency of themes. She also notes how MWMC demonstrates the human aspects of the Kino-Eye--which I thought was interesting because this idea of the "Kino-Pilot" as a particular body seemed less emphasized in manifesto.

Felix was the first to discuss "The Time Machine" and touched on themes of Darwinism in order to cast the novel as Wells's critique of British capitalism.

Shyam pointed out differences between time travel and cinematic time warping. But then he reconnected Vertov and Wells by integrating the three aspects of time travel introduced in class (in order to show how each is broken): 1. linearity, irreversibility, continuity. I thought this was a really good example of how to synthesize two works and place them within the context of the course's theme.

Alex connected "The Time Machine" to "Metropolis," comparing the underground workers to Morlocks. He also points out how different the time traveler's expectations of future turned out to be from his actual experience. This idea seems to underscore the notion of the time machine as an inherently political device (available to offer a kind of sociohistorical critique) because it allows us to measure and re-evaluate some of the rationale for how we imagine movement towards future worlds.

Kathrine connected the notion of time standardization to the physical blurring of the time machine:
When the Time Traveler initially showed his companions the model version of his time machine, “the little machine suddenly swung round, became indistinct, was seen as a ghost for a second…” as it disappeared into either the past or the future. (Wells 8) This machine is supposed to represent time. As it propels itself into a different space, it loses its shape and distinct look. The imagery painted is one that is slowly blending into the background. As the time machine model is losing its place in time, and defying all the laws that we know about time, it is losing itself. Could it be that the time we decided to standardize has become a comment on who we are as a society?
She goes on to highlight the differences in the kinds of details Wells uses to describe permanent vs. fleeting things... including names (less descriptive) vs. the machine itself (highly descriptive).

Guillermo, like Shane, focuses on plausibility of Wells's future world scenario. I think it's interesting how we feel so compelled to evaluate science fiction as a kind of forecast for the future. I found myself having the same reaction. Does Wells invite this kind of critique? I think in some ways he does, but I also think it's important to ask the question: what can we learn from trying to understand a vision of the future that originates in our own immediate past? Dan seems to have addressed some of these questions in his recent post this week.

Ifan made a really interesting argument about consciousness and links the notion of time travel to the idea of memory.
Within each hour, our consciousness constantly zips back and forth between the immediate and distant memories of the past and future.
.....
While proclaiming that Vertov wanted to portray the consciousness’ ability to travel through time would be too convenient of an exaggeration, it is important to remember that one’s consciousness unpredictably travels back and forth across what Wells calls the “Time-Dimension” (Wells 5).
.....
"We are always getting away from the present moment. Our mental existences, which are immaterial and have no dimensions, are passing along the Time-Dimension with uniform velocity from the cradle to the grave" (Wells 5).
Daniella made an interesting observation about the time traveler's sudden discomfort with the idea of temporal liberation once he loses his time machine and begins to fear the impossibility of a return trip.
Although he is bombarded with several benefits of the future, his confidence in his surroundings begins to deteriorate once his machine is stolen. The time frame he is currently stuck in is no longer a utopia of the future, but a vast unknown world full of what seem like unpleasant creatures. Without the machine, the Time Traveler feels lost and helpless, fearing that he will not be able to return to his own time frame, and to the familiar.

Labels: ,

Sunday, February 04, 2007

The Future as a Product of the Time in which it is Conceived

The Future as a Product of the Time in which it is Conceived

While reading H.G. Well’s novel The Time Machine, my thoughts continually gravitated towards two overriding themes in Well’s vision of the future – the influence of Marxism and Darwinism.

The evolution of humans based on the Marxist divisions of bourgeoisie and proletariat is the premise of the future for Wells, but it just seemed so outdated and unrealistic to me. Why is Well’s future based on the assumption that Marxism and Darwinism will eventually eclipse all other influences and become the driving force of humankind? What about the human ability to develop supranational governments, achieve social harmony or produce advanced technology

While the author provides a loose account explaining how and why humans have reached this situation – “This has ever been the fate of energy in security; it takes to art and to eroticism, and then come languor and decay” pg. 28 – a much better explanation of Well’s vision of the future can be understood by examining the time and place he wrote the novel.

Herbert George Wells wrote the novella in London at the turn of the century and it seems to be a clear reflection of the time and place it was written in. Upon closer examination it makes logical sense that his vision of the future is overwhelmed by the mixture of evolution, social Darwinian and Marxist themes. Inevitably Well’s novel is a product of London (the center of the world at the time) in the late 1800’s and the many social and scientific theories and ideologies of the time. In fact The Communist Manifesto was first produced in 1848 but by 1895 it had been translated and published in every major language and every major country. As for evolution, Darwin released his first copy of The Origin of Species in 1859, which spread like wildfire throughout Europe.


So it seems clear that The Time Machine is not only a vision of the future, it is also a historical testament of how we once viewed the future of man. Undoubtedly to people at the time, evolution and Marxist social theories were the inevitable forces that would shape mankind in the future. And of course, just as we can look back and see Well’s future as a product of his time, in the future others will look with interest at our visions of the future based on our current ideas on climate change, space exploration and genetic engineering. Thus, it seems that visions of the future are not only predictions of what will come, they are also testaments of the time in which they are conceived.

Labels:

Men are From Mars, Women are from Venus…

…Or in this case, man is from the present and woman is from the future. On his first night after meeting the Elois, he ponders about how these creatures are so alike in dress, speech, reaction to life, and how they could have evolved in this manner. Though his initial thoughts on the Elois were that of a society which does not require reasoning, he soon discovers that they live in what he thinks is a perfect society with no machines (something that we in the present age can only imagine due to our dependency of machinery and technology). This different world is one that he cannot relate to.

One of the women he gets acquainted with is Weena. Upon rescuing her from drowning, the Time Traveler builds a relationship with her and is taught more about the society that he has stumbled into. Her devotedness to the Time Traveler is one of great gratitude, perhaps a result of not receiving such kindness from the society she is from. Another difference to point out, this Eloi friend is afraid of the dark. Later he finds out that it is because of the hungry Morlocks.

In this novel, Wells depicts class struggles that occur even lightyears ahead of our time. If the Elois represent those who Have and the Morlocks the Have-Nots, it makes sense that the Time Traveler can relate more with the Elois. His friendship with Weena shows this point. Though his interaction with her proves that he can mingle with them, it is not to say that he belongs with them according to the structure of this society. I found it interesting that in the end Weena is left to burn in the forest (by the fire that was started with the match that the Time Traveler was using to scare off the Morlocks) while the Time Traveler is “tricked” back into his time machine and survives the disaster. Weena and the Time Traveler are from different worlds and are in the end separated when they try to merge the two together.

Labels:

"The Proletariat: Friend or Foe"

In the latter half of H.G. Wells’ novel, The Time Machine, the Time Traveller is illuminated to sinister elements in the relationship between the Morlocks and the Eloi. After descending into one of the Morlock’s wells, the Time Traveller discovers that the Morlocks are carnivorous, unlike the Eloi. At first, the Time Traveller speculates about the source of their meat. Later, he concludes that the Morlocks must prey upon the Eloi at night, which would explain their fear of the dark and shadows as well. The Time Traveller describes this role-reversal when he says, “Ages ago, thousands of generations ago, man had thrust his brother man out of the ease and the sunshine. And now that brother was coming back – changed!”(48). According to the Time Traveller, the old order had been reversed; a revolution had taken place.

The revolution that the Time Traveller describes between the Eloi and the Morlocks resembles the revolution that Marxists prophesized with the emergence of industry. For instance, the Time Traveller describes the Eloi as, “Like the Carlovingian Kings, [who] had decayed to a mere beautiful futility”(48). This shows a Marxist belief about revolution because Marxists believed that in the future there would be no need for capitalists and that workers would assume control over industry. So in line with Marxists’ theories on revolution, the Eloi had become futile and displaced by the Morlocks. Further, the relationship between the Eloi and Morlocks resembles the relationship that Marxists described between capitalists and the proletariat. For example, the Time Traveller repeatedly refers to the Eloi as the aristocracy and the Morlocks as workers. For instance, the Time Traveller says, “The Upper-world people might once have been the favoured aristocracy, and the Morlocks their mechanical servants; but that had long since passed away”(48). So, the events of the future that the Time Traveller depicts reflect Marxists’ predictions concerning the worker’s revolution and displacement of capitalists.

However, the Time Traveller does not describe the future as a utopian community like the Marxists. The Time Traveller regards the Morlocks as “inhuman and malign” (48). Instead of praising the Morlocks, the working class, the Time Traveller prefers the Eloi, the representation of the capitalists. The Time Traveller explains his sympathy for the Eloi when he says, “The Eloi had kept too much of the human form not to claim my sympathy, and to make me perforce a sharer in their degradation and their Fear” (53). His affection for the Eloi is represented in his relationship with Weena as well. So, had working for ages on the machines underground made the Morlocks inhuman? Perhaps, but the Time Traveller does not have a disdain for machines. When the Time Traveller is in the museum he says, “Here I was in my element, for rising on either side of me were the huge bulks of big machines. You know I have a certain weakness for mechanism, and I was inclined to linger among these” (55). So, the Time Traveller’s affection for the Eloi and his description of the future as ripe with conflict and fear between the Eloi and Morlocks betrays the Marxists’ preference for the working class.

Labels:

Degeneration of Humanity in The Time Machine

There are certain traits that characterize humanity that are thought to transcend culture and time, such as compassion, analytical intellect, empathy, hatred, etc. In The Time Machine, Wells creates this parallel idea of what humanity consists of. On the one hand there are the Eloi, who have the form and emotions of human beings of today, but they do not have the intellect of present-time humans. On the other hand there are the Morlocks, who look nothing like present-day humans, but they do have enough intelligence to understand machinery, to trap the Time Traveler, and to differentiate between the existence of the Time Traveler and the Eloi. However, the Time Traveler does not view each of these species has human, and shows an inconsistency in his explanation of what humanity means.

There is an inconsistency in the Time Traveler’s views of the Eloi. Because of the degradation of the intellect of the Eloi, the Time Traveler did not view them as completely human. Upon seeing an inscription on the wall of the Palace, the Time Traveler tries to have Weena decipher the inscription, but learned that “the bare idea of writing had never entered her head” (82). He then states, “She always seemed to me more human than she was” (83). Yet because the Eloi has kept the human form, they are able to “claim [the Time Traveler’s] sympathy” (81). Because of the way the Eloi live, they are deficient in intellect and abilities. The do not need to know how to swim, think, or even prepare food, but they still have human emotions. After being saved by the Time Traveler, Weena expresses her gratitude by giving him “a big garland of flowers” (54). This bouquet shows that the Eloi are still have human emotions such as gratitude and appreciation of beauty. In the epilogue, the narrator views the flowers as “witness that even when mind and strength had gone, gratitude and a mutual tenderness still lived on in the heart of man” (120). The Time Traveler and even the narrator show that the Eloi portray some aspects of humanity through the idea that they still express some emotions.

The reasons behind why the Time Traveler sees the Eloi as less than human does not carry out to his reasoning behind why the Morlocks are less than human. The Time Traveler views the Morlocks as “inhuman sons of men” and that they are “less human and more remote than our cannibal ancestors” (80). Yet, his idea of the Eloi as being less than human due to their lack of intelligence does not carry through to the Morlocks. Their humanity is displayed when the Time Traveler finds his time machine. He finds that the time machine was “carefully oiled and cleaned” (103). This shows that the Morlocks have an understanding of technology to some degree. As the Time Traveler begins to examine the time machine, the bronze panels “suddenly slid up and struck the frame with a clang” (103). The Morlocks are clever enough to trap the Time Traveler by using his machine as a lure. They also realize that they are fighting against only the Time Traveler by luring him alone into the panels of the sphinx. The Time Traveler has this inconsistent view of what humanity is. On the one hand, he views the Eloi as less than human because of their lack of intellect, but on the other hand he does not acknowledge the intellect that the Morlocks have.

Through the time machine, the idea that humanity can lose its essence is brought to light. Two creatures exist with faint traces of the basic principles of what humanity is. One has the emotions that separates humans from animals, but does not have the analytical intellect of a human. The other has the ability to reason, but does not have the form of human. The idea that humanity can transcend time is shattered to some degree within The Time Machine and is replaced with the idea that humans may literally adapt to their stations in life. Yet, Wells overlooks one of the most basic human emotions, compassion. It is hard to believe that the Haves will not feel any compassion towards the Have-Nots before these adaptations of each species could even occur. It is still harder to believe humanity gets trumped by time, and this may be the reasons for the inconsistencies in the Time Traveler’s idea of what humanity is.

Labels:

IS WELLS FOR INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION OR AGAINST IT?

Wells has presented a fictitious story about one man’s journey into a future where knowledge has withered away and a bipolar society has emerged as a consequence of the traditional distribution of labor. Much can be ascertained from the fact that Well’s Time Machine was written around the onset of the Industrial Revolution in 1895. Just as the 19th century was coming to close, a series of problems emerged resulting from the urbanization of society. Much like the factory workers of New York city in 1895, the Morlocks, represent the scum and the backbone of the changing time, while the Elois live a leisurely life, much like the wealthy capitalists. Economic inequality is an observable consequence of the Industrial Revolution. And by painting a future exaggerating this inequality, Wells evokes a sense a disappointment. This seems to suggest that Wells abhors the Industrial Revolution.

Before I make this second point, let me clarify that I believe that technology and the Industrial revolution go hand in hand. Most of the material progress made during the 20th century can best be ascribed to the Industrial Revolution. In the novel, we see time and again, a need for technology felt by the time traveler. There is a need felt for the dynamite to break open the Sphinx door, a perpetual need for light to defend the Morlocks, a need for transportation. The time traveler finds use for the matches, camphor and an Iron bar that he recovers. These are all objects that one would associate with technological progress made during the Industrial Revolution. Thus by highlighting a need for technology in the world of the future, Wells once again evokes a sense of disappointment, but this time it seems to suggest that Wells actually found the Industrial revolution to have positive effects.

It is interesting to discuss this question because, Wells opinions seem contradictory. And it is this contradiction that speaks for the true nature of the Industrial Revolution and technology, which is undoubtedly a double edged sword.

Side Note: The parallel romance with Weena was a much appreciated distraction from the dull inferences about our future.

Labels:

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Why travel time to talk about the present?

I think “The Time Machine” is less about the mysteries and science of time travel than it is a critique or warning of the consequences of industrialization. Wells warns about the potential harms of subjugating the working class and also of eliminating challenges from life. He sees a future where the poor or working class have been banished from the surface of the earth and are no longer even seen to be the same species as the upper class which was allowed to stay on the surface. The Eloi are Wells' comment on the “easy life” of the elites and what happens when survival is not challenged. Although Wells wrote this book over 100 years ago, I think the novel's lesson is even more relevant in today's world. The evolution of humans into lesser beings is also the subject of the movie Idiocracy (which I mentioned in an earlier comment).

It interested me that Wells foresaw the impact that industrialization would have on people's attitudes toward melanin. Before industrialization, most workers were agricultural and developed darker skin. In contrast, the elites stayed inside most of the time and had pale skin. As a result, pale skin was seen as a sign of success because it meant you did not have to do real labor out in the hot sun. Wells saw that now the majority of the working class was kept in factories during daylight hours and rarely saw the sun. He speculated the continuation of this, and progressively worse working conditions, would make the working class very pale skinned. The Morlocks in The Time Machine represent the projection of this 800,000 years into the future, but we can already see some of what Wells “predicted.” Tan skin is now viewed in our culture as being more attractive than pale skin and I think what Wells saw happening during the industrial revolution has a lot to do with it. In the modern age, a lot of labor (particularly factory work) is done inside, while the elites, with their free time, are able to stay outside and get a tan.

Depicting the future working class as barely resembling humans seems like a comment on hazards already known to be caused by inhumane working conditions, like rickets for example. Rickets was a disease that riddled young children working in factories in England, because they did not absorb enough sunlight to produce Vitamin D and suffered the painful growth deformities caused by the deficiency. The Morlocks are Wells' warning of what the future might be like if such practices are not changed. Wells' time traveler guesses that “thousands of generations ago, man had thrust his brother man out of the ease and the sunshine.” By this he is hypothesizing that the working class was pushed underground, but it could also be seen as Wells describing the thrusting of workers into factories where they get no sunlight.

Even though I think Wells was commenting on English society at the end of the 19th century, it is understandable why he set his book in the future. Time travel allowed him more freedom to hypothesize about what current practices might lead to, and at the same time protected him against being labeled as too critical of contemporary society.

Labels: , , ,

Primer


This movie won multiple awards at the 2004 Sundance film festival. It only cost around $7,000 to produce. The writing, directing, score, and lead character are all performed by the same person. Of course, the movie is about a time machine, but it's unlike any movie you've ever seen. I promise. Primer is available at the media resource center. I also own it so if someone would rather watch it in the comfort of their own home, I'd be willing to loan it.

Here is a link to the trailer:

http://primermovie.com/trailer-Large.html

Labels:

Friday, February 02, 2007

Response to "Time Machine"

The latter part of "Time Machine" was rather focused on resolving
the problems and ironies that have presented themselves in the first
half of the book. The mysteries between the Eloi and the Morlocks are
explained on some level and the adventure through time eventually
comes to an end, at least for some time.


I think the irony lies in that even though the time traveler embarks
on this grand journey to trancend and be emancipated from all the
restrains of space and time, eventually the time traveler is so inevitably
binded by the "time machine" itself. As soon as the device disappears,
the appreciation and observation of the future is diminished to mere luxury
and the sole purpose of this journey is to RETURN to the present state.

During this quest to return, the time traveler realizes the existence of the
morlocks, the more unappreciated species that survivied in the future.
However he tries to fight those with matches, he is eventually overwhelmed.
The stark contrast between the lifestyle of the Eloi and the Murlock
made me realize that the Murlock were a mere byproduct of the
Eloi who lead such a glamorous and peaceful life on the surface.

In conclusion, such material obstacles such as the disappearance of the
machine itself and the interference of the murlocks have ironiacally hindered
the freedom and ambitions of the time traveler, when he was supposed to
transcend on his way to explore the future. An interesting fact is that time could
not be conceived nor conceptualized as itself in terms of that world where
this takes place. Time is always realized through a relative standard or point of time
such as the Sun going down and up or creatures acting in a certian way.

Labels:

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Office Hours and more

I made an announcement in class on Wednesday, but just to repeat, starting next week my regular weekly office hours will be Tu/Thu 4-5 at Strada Cafe. I'll be at Strada at 4:00 today in case anyone comes. People who are interested should check out Jane McGonigal's lecture "The Limits of Ubiquitous Play" (4:00 in 150D Moffitt). I think I'll be heading over there late if no one shows up at Strada. If you'd like to catch me after the lecture that's fine too. As always, I am available by appointment too.

Labels:

How the brain processes "split-second" time

Here's an article via boingboing about how the brain processes sound (at high speeds). It reminded me of our discussion about the impact of the metronome in class. Try out the sound experiment yourself (links included in the article). Apparently our brains process the time delay between rhythmic sounds based on what other sounds occur before and after. It's a very peculiar phenomenon.

Labels: