Loss of “Aura” for an Increase in Narrative is not without its Merits

In “Exposure Time, the Aura, and Telerobotics,” Marina Grzinic writes on Walter Benjamin’s “A Small History of Photography.” For Benjamin, “the longer the interval of exposure, the greater the chance that the aura of an environment—the complex temporal relations woven through its represented figures—would seep into the image, etching itself on the photographic plate…. More concretely, the temporal value of the interval determined a qualitative ratio between time and space in the photograph.” He goes on to explain that the “segmentations of time yielded qualitative changes in space: sensitivity to light, clearer focus, more extensive depth of field, and significantly, the fixing of movement.”

I think it is interesting what Benjamin points out—that as the exposure of a still reaches near instantaneous (as in a single frame of a video), there is what Grzinic calls a “complete aesthetic sterilization” of the image. From my basic knowledge of photography, it is true that the longer the exposure, the more depth of field, the clearer the focus, and the more visually “fixing” the movement. This is why landscape photographers such as Ansel Adams typically use a tripod and a prolonged exposure time. Even modern digital cameras have a “landscape” feature which uses a smaller aperture (or smaller lens opening) coupled with a longer exposure. However, I can’t help but disagree that a shorter exposure—and its resultant loss of focus (actually it produces images where objects at some depth is in focus while objects at other depths are out of focus)—produces a less quality picture. He may argue that a longer exposure presents the image in a way that is more like real life—where one can see everything clearly where one can see clearly wherever one chooses to direct one’s attention and focus. But what is this “aura” that he mentions, exactly. Is it this “life-like” quality of the image? I can not argue as to whether or not a short exposure produces an image with less “aura” as I am not quite sure what he means by it; though I will admit that there is a resultant qualitative difference, but not necessarily a loss of quality.

An image produced using short exposure times is not without its very admirable merits. Having certain areas of an image out of focus produces an instruction, a micro-narrative to the image; it tells the viewer what the producer of the image wants us to pay attention to. This allows for all sorts of interesting presentations and messages. Take for example an anti-drunk driving ad where a glamorized bottle of fine scotch is shown, in-focus, in the foreground juxtaposed in front of an out-of-focus scene of an auto accident with ambulance and stretcher in the background. It is much more interesting to me than one where all elements are sharp and in focus. It is also more effective. A picture such as this highlights the bottle of alcohol first, allows it to be mentally attended to—almost glamorized—before one perceives the background image. And because the traumatic image in the background is slightly out of focus, it forces the viewer to mentally think more about the scene, even produce a personalized narrative around it. The resultant loss of the “depth of field” in a short exposure photograph is, in some cases, well warranted by the increased potential for depth of meaning.

Two Sides to the Detaching Effect of Technology and “Indirect Light”

This is a Blog C post on Paul Virilio's "Indirect Light."

In his article, “Indirect Light,” Paul Virilio talks about how successive feats in technology move us further and further away from our experience of things. Our natural experience of reality is being replaced by technologically realized interfaces that detach us from the physics of real experience: the time of experience (as events are recorded and later broadcasted); the space in which these events occur (as we can digitally experience events that occur in places that are not in the same physical space of the viewer); the intelligence needed to perform certain experiences (as technologies replace human interaction completely—as in the advancement towards a fully automated “driving computer;” the physical constraints of our bodies (as light-intensification cameras make the limits of our eyes inconsequential). He writes with the stance of how these things seem to be bringing us into a dark future devoid of the humanity of natural, physical experience; these technologies separate us from what is natural—what is real.

I can’t necessarily say whether or not I agree with him. He makes valid points that do elicit a fearful vision of an automated, lifeless future. However, I doubt that we, as humans, will let this progression go so far. Besides, there are two sides to this; not all technologically-based detachment is essentially good or bad. For example, technology has replaced the need to spend our time doing mundane tasks such as washing clothes. Virilio mentions the recent use of the description, “washing-computer.” Sure, one can argue that there is some humanity in physically washing clothes. However, a nudist can also argue the act of wearing clothes challenges humanity.

It should also be noted that in many circumstances, remote automation is a far better alternative when it comes to reducing the risk of injury or death. A robotic “tele-presence” machine is indisputably preferred when disarming bombs or entering other dangerous areas. In this case, no one will argue of the benefit of technology (though also note that in this case, the bomb itself is a technological, spatially-remote replacement to physically beating people to death—a much more humanistic approach). Another form of technological detachment that has helped humanity is how medicine—antibiotics, especially—has replaced our bodies’ natural process of healing. However, some may argue that this technological intervention of bio-engineering has made our bodies’ natural ability to fight germs weaker and less effective. Even further (though perhaps to an extreme), one can argue that these technologies (that help make biological deficiencies inconsequential) disrupts natural selection, which is a very bad thing to do as it perpetuates the passing of maladaptive traits into the gene pool. For example, corrective eyeglasses—which changes the way our eyes perceive visual phenomena much like Verilio’s example of the light intensification camera—allow those of us, myself included, who would have fell victim to a saber-toothed tiger (or maybe just an unseen cliff) in more primitive times a chance to live as if we did not have such a biologically damning deficiency, and also pass on our myopic genes.

Killing the "present", one remote control at a time...

This is for Group B, on The Third Interval.

In the article The Third Interval, Paul Virillio expresses concern over increased use of and dependence on technology. He claims that human beings are becoming slaves to technology and that social interaction amongst each other has been dissipating because of it. We become immobile as we kill what Virillio calls "present time" by isolating it and no longer applying it to our "concrete presence". In other words, for example, whenever we see something or someone that is clearly on the other side of the country through, say, television or video conferencing, we are eliminating "present time" because we are watching what is happening live on the screen. We are being connected to the other side, we are here and there at the same time; we are telepresent. Virillio even makes the stunning claim that this increase in dependence leads to more single-parent families, that number of family units is decreasing because of it.

Although there may seem to be some truth in his argument, I completely disagree with it. Virillio seems to be creating these arguments without much proof, except for the fact that a human being becomes more of a couch potato whenever they pick up the remote and channel surf. At least, that was the impression I received. Indeed, there is a growing dependency on technology, especially now that people are equipped with mp3 players, cell phones, and laptops, but that does not necessarily mean that people have become less active or less social. Sure, there may be some who sit at home for a few hours and surf through the Internet, but they usually venture into the outside world and join their friends for lunch. People take walks. The world is not barren! Virillio also fails to mention the power of fast correspondence and communication through the use of the Internet, which can be highly beneficial when the need persists.

As for the breaking up of the family home, there are definitely numerous reasons as to why there are more single-parent families, which Virillio also neglects. Once again he provides no evidence for his wild claim that it has little to do with "liberation of values" and is instead due to the expansion of the urban areas.

Exposure Time, The Aura, And Telerobotics

From what I understood, Marina Grazinic, in her article, Exposure Time, The Aura, and Telerobotics, seeks to point out that media form such as photography represent the contraction of real-time into virtual time. In photography, what is important is, the temporal relation between the contents of the photograph. In other words, what's amazing about a photograph, is the feeling of holding still a moment in time. And longer the interval of exposure is, the longer will be the aura associated with it.

I think, this is true in certain respects. This is evident in new media forms as well. Grazinic points out the increasing importance being given to digitalization. She thinks of digitalization as representing an conscious desire to erase the temporal-reality and create virtual-reality. This would shorten the interval of exposure and therefore lessen the sense of aura that she speaks of.

Many new media forms such as youtube.com and myspace.com, that dominate the cyberspace, also seek to lessen the divide between the real and virtual. Less importance is placed on where the video was shot, who shot it, and when was it shot. More importance is being put on the content of the video, how easy is it to upload it, minimize buffering, and other technical things that seek to erase the temporal relations within the video and thereby create a virtual experience that is free from any real time constraints.

She also brings up a good point about technological usage is journalistic coverage of war. She proposes that we question the use of technology to create instantaneous new coverage because people might be hostile to the idea of having such images on their television screens. I think it is an important and interesting role that such technological innovations have played in shaping the political debate in this country. It is encouraging to see that technology has made it possible for us to know when a disastrous earthquake strikes thousands of miles away, so that we can send aid rite away.

This author seems pessimistic about the promise of technology, because for her what is more important are constraints like, place, position and time, that define the so called “natural Interface.” I think it is time to grow out of such mentality and be excited about the possible ways in which instantaneous telecommunication technology can be used to further the cause of mankind.

A Warning

Also from "Kinetoscope of Time"

I also was fascinated with this reading because it completely diverted from other readings that focused on man's attempt to bypass time to see the future and past. Here the man simply wanted to wait for the experience to come to him. He was not obsessed with finding out his future. He had a clear vision of what his past was and would simply wait for his future to come to him in natural time. In a way one can say that being obsessed with bypassing time can lead to one's demise. In "The Time Machine", the time traveler is obsessed with jumping over the linear path of one's time into the future. Once there, the time traveler becomes involved in a plot that is way over his head and out of his own control. Its a miracle that the Time Traveler was even able to survive his incredible trip and make it back in two pieces. The man from the Kinetoscope of Time is weary of seeing the future because he knows that precognitions of his future could severely affect him in the long run. The Kinetoscope of Time can almost be seen as a warning against obsessing over time and one's future. The author is making the statement that if one sits back and lets things happen naturally, then things will eventually turn out right. Jump ahead and your life will be turned utterly upside down. This was an interesting reading and one of the only ones in the course that appeared to downplay the role of media in bypassing linear time fragments.

Fascination of Time in Media

This blog post is for group D for "the Kinetoscope of Time."

This fictional story is about a man who looks at different types of images and scenes, yet the part I want to talk about it at the end. The man is approached by another man who offers him the chance to look into his past, and the man declines, then the other man offers him the chance to look into his future, and the man declines once again. He declares, "I shall know all in good time."

I think this concept is a good way to look at a lot of the themes we've discussed in this class, as well as a good way to look at peoples' fascination with media. Temporal manipulations, as well as just the general ability to view something that is not real life and seems a separate reality, I believe, brings up a lot of possibilities or questions for people, which is why these ideas are so prevalent in new media. Time travel is a major theme related to this. People can only know one linear reality in their lives, but with media, exploring these ideas of time travel is possible. You can relive a moment, to see how slight changes can play out in different ways, as in Run Lola Run. You can travel far into the future to see what a world you will never get to see, because you will no longer be alive, like in H.G. Wells' novel. You can also slow down and speed up time, which is also not possible in real life. Because of the fixed speed and linearity of time in our lives, people have always been fascinated with changing this fixed nature, as well as being able to manipulate time to experience something they normally could not.

I see this story as an interesting contrast to the other media works we have experienced in this class. This man is given the chance to see his future, something that is impossible in normal, linear reality. This media object gives him this possibility. Yet he declines, his reasoning being he chooses to stay in this fixed linearity, showing large amounts of patience. This idea is very foreign, and many would not choose this, because the nature of media in general has given our society not only this fascination, but an expectation of instant gratification as well, another theme running throughout this class.

Therefore, I see the end to the story as being in sharp contrast with the majority of themes in this class, yet also revealing a lot about these themes.

Tic Toc Tic Toc Tic Toc

Run Lola Run demonstrates that life is only valuable when a clock is ticking. Many of us believe that our everyday actions actions result in our future. The choices we make now; what we eat, how much we exercise, how much effort we put into our school work, who and when we will marry; all compose the future. Not many of us think about this concept when we are choosing something from McDonald's menu, are partying the day before a major final, or writing our final research paper the day it is due. Our futures do not exist in the way that Run Lola Run presents them. We do not touch a burger and then pictures flash in our minds of us 20 years later calling Jenny Craig and losing 50 pounds. Nor do we constantly think that our life is inter-dependent on the interactions and actions of others. Many believe we are responsible for ourselves only and that our actions do not affect others' futures.

We do not simply bump into a person and think that their whole life will be different or that our future will change because of this seemingly insignificant interaction. But when a time limit is set, every second suddenly counts. If we oversleep for a final, have 10 minutes to get to class, and jump out of bed bump our toe and miss the bus by a second, that toe could have ruined your academic life. The toe or all the cramming the night before, but as students we are most likely to blame the toe. If we thought of life as a longer span of time with a very real time limit, no longer 20 minutes, but time in years, then every little encounter would be magnified. Every little second would count.

Our perspective of time, of life, of each other would be much different. Life would almost be a race to achieve all the things you want to do, to do it all. Unfortunately, in real-life unlike Lola, we only get one chance. If we get shot, we reminisce, and die, we don't get back up to fix and change all the small interactions. That was it, that was the given lifetime. We don't get another one. We don't get to say "I will do it next time," because time ran out.

brenda

did you get the rough draft in the email? Daniella got it the first time...anyway you should have gotten it by now.

Loops have been Lost!

Lev Manovich describes what a loop is and how it has impacted us in society. He pretty much explains how life is one big loop and really it is. You are nothing and then you are born and you are something. You live a long life and then die and you are nothing again. It just goes around in circles or loops. He states how video games and everyday life is in loops and you just rotate around and around and this somehow keeps people entertained. But he begins to argue that life these days is moving away from the loop. The loop lifestlye of living is giving way to a more in depth and complicated means of society. I believe that the increased level of technology is the reason for this dismissal of the loop. In video games alone human society has progressed from such games as Packman to interactive games such as Dance Dance Revolution and Guitar Hero. Games are being taken away from that initial idea I started writing about where everything is to do with loops and living and dying and then doing it all over again. eg Packman is a game where you have a life and you try and live on and then die and then you can do it all over again. But how representational is this of human life? Not very because as far as I know you don't get a second chance in human life or multiple lives. These itneractive games are getting the gamers to actually play a "sport" or an "instruement" and get off their feet. There is more to the game than a human like character trying to beat the computer and then dying and doing it all over again. This dismissal of the loop is what enables us to move away from the boredom of life and its circle of repeat so unexpectedness and real life can prevail.

The Real and Truthful Characteristics of The Photograph

Camera Lucida really brings up many issues about what does it really mean to be alive or
real.....The book uses so many ideas that give suggestions about photographs and what they
really are as a medium. The book suggests that photographs are more a pose and not so much a concurrence of events. Film is shown to be a better medium than photography because photos get denied by the continuous series of images that film produces as opposed to the single one in a photo. Then there is another main issue with photography and that is that it doesn't "call up the past" (page 82). The portrait of William Casby on page 79 "Born a Slave" does not tell the reader of his journey or his past but just tells us what he is now and consequently what his bleak futrue holds...Death! Another theme brought up about the photograph is its authenticity. The thing about photographs is that if they are not altered with (new technology getting in the way of authenticity) then they are a true representation of themselves. The photograph doesn't lie and tells people where one person is if it is caught on tape. Two quotes I liked from the book to explain these two ideas were: "It does not invent; it is authentication itself" and "Every photograph is a certificate of presence". But the photograph is without a future. The photo only tells of the here and now and has little ability to tell what the future holds. Page 95 has a photo with the heading "He is dead and he is going to die......". This picture tells us little from simply viewing it but the words are what tell us about what is going to happen in the future. Photos can't tell us about the future but the combination of words and a picture can tell us so much about what will happen.

SHYAM!!!

I didn't get your e-mail! Could you send it to me please?

Peer Review: Letter to Author

Your peer review should be in the form of comments on the draft, and a 1.5 - 2 page letter to the author. Please be sure to do the following in your review:

1) Answer the author's questions about the essay
2) Cover the essay's strengths and weaknesses:

-- Content such as thesis, arguments that extend from the thesis, evidence, research, analysis of evidence and research, and organization

-- Mechanics such introduction, conclusion, connecting each paragraph back to main argument, transitions between paragraphs, style, and grammar

In other words, cover in prose form the points addressed in the peer review form you used for the last essay.

Be sure to circle the author's thesis and make comments directly on the essay draft.

Presence?

Technological advance and what it offer is simply amazing. This dance performance provides a completely different perspective looking at performing art. This performance is a mixture of physical presence and virtual presence of actors. In this performance,'reception,' it is presented in the way that physical presence interacts with virtual presence. For the audience, it is hardly distinguishable whether the actors are physically present or mere images. The idea that the actors the audience sees might be distant provokes our sense of presence. It is questionable whether virtual presence is adequate while the audience expects 'presence' of the actors in this kind of art form. Moreover, in this hybrid form of art, it is appropriate to categorize this under the previous category. I see this performance 'controversial' in the way that it asks us numerous questions to think about.
One thing connects two presences--virtual and physical--is time. It reminds of telecommunication such as cell phone or video conferencing. In this way, this mixture is easier to be understood: we do not feel dilemma considering communication through the cell phone. However, it is not the audience that interacts. It is hard to make the audience feel that two parties of actors share the same time. Since the audience is only required to watch, it is possible to question whether it is 'real.' Do we necessarily believe what we see? we are brought to watch a performance by magician for example. If we see a person talking on the phone in some kind of movie, we, the audience, are not sure whether the person's action is genuine. In other words, can the audience feel a sense of 'presence' from virtual presence? For me, it seems challenging to answer

thoughts on the reception and the integration of technology

In an increasingly digital world, it seems that no aspect of life or the arts will emerge unchanged by the essentially unimpeded progress of technology. Even the stodgiest of the performing arts have been transformed, in particular, by new video and broadcasting technologies—the finest ballet houses, for example, simulcast performances onto air waves and into other venues, while the opera-going experience has been transformed by the inclusion of supertitles broadcast above the stage. The Berkeley Dance Project’s inclusion of tele-immersion lab images is the first major technological manipulation of the modern dance medium that I have witnessed.

The pre-performance to “The Reception” featured one dancer present on stage sharing in a communal dance with another, located in the Hearst Mining Building but broadcast onto the stage. Although the projected image moved smoothly, its resolution was splintered, an anesthetization of the image I found appealing, but that might otherwise be looked upon as a shortcoming of the technology. It was apparent that the communal dance occurring between the dancer onstage and the dancer offstage was occurring in real time, as they mimicked each other’s movements. And yet, what purpose did the tele-immersion technology serve? While every aspect of the following performance had a clear purpose and part to play in the overall message of “The Reception,” the interaction between present and remote dancers seemed more an exercise in utilizing impressive technology as opposed to an integrated aspect of the entire performance. By contrast, the use of projected dancing images during the main portion of the performance had a clear function within the piece, underlining the tension between reality and presence emphasized by the work.

The True Aura

I understand what Marina Grzinic is saying in her article. With all the new technology, beaming and streaming images to us very quickly and in very good resolution, the auras of the objects being sent are lost because we then lose sight of our distance from the object. Aura are returned when transmission time is slow and the image is imperfect. She says, "in these very shortcomings-in the very 'imperfections' that annoy and frustrate us-lies our potential to appreciate the full richness of the subject in the image." This is because we are then reminded of our distance to this object and really how far away it is. I understand this, but I am not sure I agree with it one hundred percent. Nothing short of a person truly being in the room with you completely conveys presence, but some things I feel do it a little better than others, and I do not feel that losing sight of how far away you are from someone completely destroys the aura.
For example, I'll use the dance performance we all just saw. The image of the dancer in the lab in Hearst Mining was being streamed into the Berkeley Playhouse, and vice versa. I felt that a lot was lost because this image was so blurry. I felt like, while I see Grzinic's point in some aspects, the dancer's "aura" would have been better represented if the quality had been better. I feel like a lot of the communication between the two dancers was lost, due to the poor resolution. It was hard to make out all the different movements and steps the girls in the lab were performing. I feel that if the dancer in the Playhouse, as well as the audience, could have seen all the detailed movements of the dancer in the lab, more would have been conveyed. This is because the piece was based on the two interacting, not on just watching the dancer in the lab. Because it involved the two dancers interacting, I feel to truly reach the goal, it would have been better to see the individual movements of the dancer in the lab more clearly. The dancer in the Playhouse could have better worked with that and played off those detailed movements.
So, in the case of the dance performance, I disagree with the article, but I can almost see what she is saying. I'm not sure I completely agree though. In streaming an image that is so clear and so fast, it may be possible to disembody that object or person because it is so easy to focus on the present image, almost forgetting, in a way, about the object or person back in their original place. Yet, at the same time, if I were to be talking to a relative who is very far away, and I can talk to them in real time, very quickly, and with a crystal-clear image, I do not believe their aura is going to be damaged in any way. I would not forget that they are very far away, or disembody them...instead, I would feel their presence, their aura, just who they are, is reinforced in my mind because I am able to be exposed to them so realistically. In that sense, I disagree with the article.

New Types of Auras

New Types of Auras

As opposed to Marina Grzinic’s article “Exposure Time, the Aura, and Telerobotics,” I think the elimination of lag time and the actual meeting of two virtual people in cyberspace complicates and adds to the definition of the aura. In this article, the aura is defined as “an appearance or semblance of distance” which is usually conveyed by “exposure time” or “transmission time.” Yet in the performance “The Reception,” the absence of lag time made the virtual image of the woman on the screen in Illinios seem more real, her presence actually felt close. The ability for this woman’s 3-D image to share the same space and the same real-time as the audience and the dancers allowed for a different aura to glow from her. I do agree that if her image were to lag, she would seem further away and we would have a greater perception of the distance the image has traversed in order to be present for us, therefore having the aura that Grzinic talks about. Yet, the fact that her image is not actually in the same space as the dancers and audience is enough also to emphasize the distance the image is traversing. The woman’s point cloud image shows her as a different type of being that has a more complicated presence and aura in its own space: cyberspace.

The dance movements themselves seemed to be pretty random and not very related to the theme of “presence.” I tried to make sense of the repetitive walking, jogging, running in a circle. The rotating circle the dancers formed seemed to be like the dialing of an old fashioned phone and I think I heard the dancers calling out numbers as they were running, yet they only ran in one direction so maybe this is an incorrect interpretation. Also, the woman on the TV set seemed the most real when she “saw” the guy on stage and directly addressed him “Hey!” It actually seemed like she was present as a being, not just as an image. Then when the dancers moved with the cart, the cart seemed to be her body. The woman embodied the TV and cart, she was a different kind of being.

Presence - brought to you by...

In "The Reception," the Berkeley Dance Project dancers touched a bit on presence. They mentioned it in speech and expressed interpretation through movement. In the discussion afterwards, they defined presence as action in an environment. The use of a TV on wheels was interesting because the lady showed on the screen was trying to be present with the man wheeling the TV with him. Her request to take her with him was of some success for a few seconds until the extension cord was unplugged and she was no longer. This presence was dependent on technology. But even with the technological advances providing some opportunity to be present with someone at a different location in the same real time, there is still an absense of a sort. I felt it most when the dancers were hugging "someone", but to the third party it looked as if they were embracing air. I could vaguely see the shape of the vacuum but the actual person was not there. I'm not too sure what each act in the show was trying to convey but it was interesting to watch and definitely provoked thought about presence.

Slaves to the Music

Throughout the acts that took place during the Berkeley Dance Project today there was one thing that jumped out at me: the choreography. The choreography was incredible because the dancers not only danced well but they also performed many other actions that needed to be done to a strict time schedule. A good example of this was when one of the dancers from "The Reception" had a conversation with another dancer who was not actually present there but on the television. I was amazed at how much it looked like a conversation between two people in the same room. There were also many other actions through this particular act that were done to a strict time schedule such as the part when the dancers went behind screens and hid while a video of them dancing was played. Since there were so many different actions within the acts that the dancers needed to memorize, I began to wonder how they did it with such accuracy and rhythm. I believe that they were doing their actions in accordance with the music that was playing in the background. Each part of the songs defined their actions and it was almost as if they were slaves to the music. This reminded me of the clip from "Metropolis" when the workers are slaves to the machine and must work to a perfect time schedule in order for the factory to function. Throughout the Berkeley Dance Project, this idea was extremely evident. If the dancers didn't perform a certain action with the music playing, then that single mistake would cause a waterfall effect and the whole act would become messed up. The dancers were "slaves" to the music of each act.
On a whole the Berkeley Dance Project was interesting but I had a tough time interpreting the actions of the dancers and had trouble finding meaning in each of the acts. However, I was really impressed by the choreography and that was the one thing that jumped out at me while I was watching it.

Teletopia

I am choosing to write about something that I am concentrating on a lot at the moment with my paper and it was clearly evident in the plany we saw today, especially in the first piece. I am talking about teletopia. The idea of being in two places at the one time. This usually comes about from advancements in technology and people have the ability to be in one place but virtually be thousands of miles away. The whole idea in the play about not acutally being in the room was confusing but I liked the way the actors made use of all senses when it came to realising if the other person was actually in the room. I think it would be interesting to block out all the senses but one and see what peoples reactions were to having another person enter a room. Teletopia creates a false present and makes out that there is more than one present but really there is only one present and that is the here and now present. To be called the present you need to be physically there and virtual presence can not act as a substitute because it takes away from the realness and is less genuine. The dancing in this piece intrigued me as to how it represented teletopia in some way? But I couldn't find any links. The dancing was really such a huge part of the piece that I thought it had some meaning but I couldn't find a meaning. Any ideas in your comments?

The New "Virtual Presence"

I found “The Reception” act of the Berkeley Dance Project to be the most pertinent to our studies, in that it related modern technology’s effects upon one’s sense of presence and existence. As explained through the narration, we understand someone to be “present” when we can touch or see them physically. However it was further explored that in one’s absence, their “presence” may be replaced by something as simple as a letter or phone call from them. In this sense, presence is captured simply by any temporary filling of the void that remains when someone exits your immediate life. The next step in this exploration focused upon the ability of technology to visually construct a sense of presence. As we entered the theater, we watch as the performers danced before a screen, as a digital image of a dancer very nearly mirrored their moves. It was explained to the audience that the technology was called tele-immersion. A computer in a separate location received the imaging of the dancers movements and then sent the digitally constructed dancer’s image to the stage and was projected upon the screen. This capability, along with others such as video chatting and video recording, allow for a new experience of “presence” in that it can recreate one’s visual image. In effect, one no longer has to be within the same room as another to feel connected with such technology. But the question that then came to my mind, and what I feel was something the performance aimed to address, is how does this change one’s overall value of corporeal presence? Growing up in an age of endless advancements within technology, programs such as video chatting, while exciting, are not shocking or unexpected developments. Where as previous generations were far more reliant upon physical interaction, phone calls, letters etc. to remain connected to those in their lives, younger generations live in a perpetual state of simulated interactions e.g. text messaging, Facebook, video chatting, and instant messaging. In the dance performance, two dancers were often paired together, alongside a single dancer, as the single dancer performed with the pair in unison, as if accompanied by a fourth dancer. The single dancer moved as agilely and gracefully as the pair who moved together, demonstrating that a physical presence was of no need. Furthermore I felt that the constant interactions of the dancers, choreographed in a way such that their movements were wholly reliant upon these interactions, reinforced the idea that though we may have a virtually constructed sense of presence, the things that move us are in fact the physical interactions in our daily lives that cannot be replaced by a screen or a telephone.

Mario Frustration: live video game commentary

Link to video

Warning very strong language!

I hesitated about whether to post this given the amount of profanity, but it's too good (and too relevant) to pass up.

FYI: The commentary was actually added later, although I think it still works as a kind of odd window into video game play: as a roller coaster experience of frustration, elation, and addiction.

Also, notice how much the player anthropomorphizes Mario by engaging in dialogue about their "team" effort. Sometimes he apologizes to Mario and other times he blames him. In this sense, certain faults are experienced as the player's while other faults represent the avatar's own failure to follow directions.

Super Mario Brothers seems to derive both frustration and pleasure from the inconsistent relationship between "input" and "output" of Mario's actions. In this sense, the process of figuring out what to do or where to go is much less challenging than the actual ability to accomplish these tasks through proper timing and coordination.

I think it's especially interesting how the commentary points out the attraction of witnessing novel ways to die. By forcing us to loop again and again over "the known" features of a game level, we become highly sensitive to small additions of novelty. This novelty itself becomes a kind of attraction—even when the spectacle in question is merely a new way of seeing one's avatar die.

I also like how the game ultimately ends not with the death of Mario but with the level of frustration reaching such a peak that the player gives up in disgust. This seems to connect to Irene's comments (last class) about how game play is not structured with the beginning-to-end linearity of mortal time lines.

Anyway, I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts.

PS: For an added bonus, scroll through the video in fast forward, and you'll be surprised how much the Mario world starts to look like a Martin Arnold film!

Sterilized Images

This essay brings up many interesting assertions about the effect of technology on images and photography. For instance, Grzinic discusses the emergence of shorter exposure intervals to reduce uncontrollable movements that reduce blurriness in photographs. Grzinic says, “I am interested in this contraction of the interval of exposure time because it depicts a process of erasure, the desire to rid ourselves of the uncontrollable movements and imperfections of long exposure times.”(58) Grzinic interprets the shortening of exposure of time as an erasure because She states that the chance of the aura being present in the photograph is erased. Grzinic defines aura “as the unique appearance or semblance of distance, no matter how close the object may be.” (57) So, the emergence of crisp and clear photographs has reduced the distance between the viewer and the photograph, which she believes has also lead to sterilized images of the world.

First, Grzinic discusses aesthetic sterilization of images. To demonstrate this phenomenon Grzinic cites the photography of Renger-Patzsch who took stylized photographs of tenements and an electric cable factory in his book, The World Is Beautiful. Grzinic criticizes these photographs saying, “It has succeeded in turning abject poverty itself, by handling it in a modish, technically perfect way, into an object of enjoyment.”(58) Grzinic connects these photographs and images from the Gulf War as a continuation of the sterilization process in photography. Through stylistic techniques, Grzinic believes that images have become sterilized because their value lies in their aesthetic qualities not in their content. Grzinic does see hope in future technology to reinstate aura into photographic images. With the introduction of practical problems such as transmission time, bandwidth restrictions, and time delays Grzinic believes that the aura of an image could reappear. Grzinic says, “As I have already noted, Benjamin understands the aura as an appearance or semblance of distance. Telerobotic time-delay brings about precisely such an appearance of distance.”(60) So our technological frustrations, remind us that the image is distant.

Grzinic’s ideas on the aura of images are very interesting, but her ideas about the sterilization of images are complicated. With the Internet, it is difficult for me to believe that images have become sterile. With a quick Internet search, you can discover images of everything from pornography to violence.

Have you ever transcended space and time? Yes... no... wait... what?

“Time delay enhances our sense of time and distance for the subjects of the image itself.” (221) The Internet is a means for us to instantly transport ourselves from one place to the next. Yet, due to bandwidth restrictions, we are unable to receive information at the speed we want. This gap between the desired speed of transmission and the actual speed of transmission serves as a reminder for us that there still is a barrier in instantaneous transmission. This barrier brings to light the reality that spatially we are not in close proximity to what we are searching for. “In the very ‘imperfections’ that annoy and frustrate us – lies our potential to appreciate the full richness of the subject in the image” (222). Through these gaps from the restrictions of bandwidth, we are reminded of how we are still able to cross the barrier of space through the internet. Although the information we are receiving is not exactly instantaneous, the speed we receive is still done at an incredible rate. Through this annoyance we can fully comprehend the amazing movement of information because of the speed at which it is transmitted. This makes me think of the commercial for Cisco, the human network. In the commercial, people are able to receive video feeds of their favorite sports team regardless of where they are. In the commercial, the people receiving the video feeds only focus on the fact that they are receiving the game. They do not focus on the fact that technology has allowed them to receive the game whenever, wherever. If there was a slight delay in the game, the realization of the fact that they are actually able to receive their coveted sports program anywhere by means of technology comes to light. Through unwanted time-delays, people are reminded that there is a spatial barrier that is being crossed through technology.

Perfection?

Marina Grzinic makes an interesting argument about imperfections, arguing that it is these exact imperfections that make things interesting and, in effect, “restores their aura.” She further argues that the aura of objects or people is lost in translation when they are manipulated by technology. I don’t fully agree with Grizinic on this point—it is easier to identify and appreciate certain goals when it takes one time and energy to achieve their goals. She might be underestimating the importance of this issue.

Imperfections are indeed what makes us unique. However I think Grzinic is remise to not point out that it is the allure of perfection that draws individuals to modern media and technology. Not only does technology make our lives arguably more efficient, but it allows us to escape into a world where perfection exists. Consumers and audiences alike understand realism—we experience our own lives in reality. To argue that objects can lose their “aura” simply through being processed through technology—does it give people enough credit? Is there anyone who truly looks at a computer screen and at reality and doesn’t recognize that there is a tangible difference?

In addition, I feel that there is a further hole in Grzinic’s argument. It is important to be an informed consumer of the media and I think it is fair to say that people who watch the evening news (and thus are getting five minute abbreviated and edited stories about wars or world news) understand the fact that what they are being shown has been manipulated and compiled by anonymous person. As the audience, we generally do not have the luxury of being able to discuss and talk to the editors in the newsroom or the journalists who take the footage. There are many levels of censorship and as the audience, we have to be active receivers of the news and acknowledge that choices were made along the way of producing certain stories—the cameraman had to decide what was worth filming and what was not, the anchors, writers and editors, had to decide how to talk about what footage would be shown. It is naiveté to take what we are given at face value, to trust that individual biases affect us and there is no such thing as truly unbiased and fair journalism. I’m not convinced that Grzinic gives people enough credit.

Computerized Graphics Just Can't Cut It

While reading Marina Grzinic’s article entitled Exposure Time, the Aura and Telerobotics, I found her characterization of computer generated images to be especially illuminating. In her article the author states that “as more of and more of our images are computer generated, and television and radio are overtaken by the near instantaneous speed of calculation, we are witnessing an ever more exact and complete aesthetic sterilization of the image”.

I could not agree more with this characterization. While reading this passage I immediately began to think the many problems with the modern special effects used in contemporary filmmaking.

In modern films, all special effects and major props are no longer constructed with real materials but instead they are generated for half the cost by computer animation and design programs. While these computer generated accessories cost less and can sometimes achieve the desired effect, they can almost never fully convince the audience of their authenticity. So while the computer can get the job done, it can’t actually convince the audience that what is going on is actually real.

A clear example of this shortcoming can be seen in the two Star Wars Trilogies. In the first trilogy (released in the late 70’s) all special effects and props were 100% analogue, and the audience could feel the reality of it all. When we saw the space ships parked in a hanger we could see that the ships were metal and that they were actually designed and constructed. When we saw the robots and aliens we could see that real actors were wearing real costumes in order to play these parts in the film and this overbearing sense of authenticity and had a powerful effect on the audience.

Now contrast this to the new Star Wars Trilogy, filled with non-existent animated characters and CGI space ships. I think we can all agree that it had quite a different feel to it, in fact, I think we can all agree that it just didn’t feel right. When the computer animated Jar Jar Binks starts talking you just don’t feel the authenticity of the character. Instead, all of a sudden you feel as if you’re in a cartoon. In addition, all the ships and the buildings are perfectly streamlined, and plated with shining metallic silver. What happened to that authentic feel of the first Trilogy? Where are the old fighter ships that look like a space version of an old beat up Chevy or a World War II Spitfire – used, abused, dented and rusted like a real fighting craft. Where are the dirty, ugly aliens? Instead we are barraged with cartoon like aliens and perfectly constructed crafts which seem to bring us to some Saturday morning cartoon version of Star Wars.

In short, as Marina highlights in her article computer graphics just don’t have the “feel” of the real thing, they are too mathematically perfect, too smooth and streamlined to be a part of the real, imperfect, wonderful world. Until we have a computer program that can incorporate rust, tears, dirt and sweat into the programming matrix, computer graphics will always be limited to a sterile world of unauthentic, unconvincing mathematically perfected images.

Computerized Graphics: A new aura, not no aura

I actually had a quite a different reaction than Ben regarding Grzinic's thoughts about computer graphics (see Computerized Graphics Just Can't Cut It). I agree with Ben that the 3 new Star Wars movies sucked compared to the first three, but I will get into that later. My biggest point of contention is Grzinic's claim that computer-generated graphics of virtual reality collapse the exposure time down to nothing. This strikes me as a very ignorant claim by someone who knows very little about computer graphics. Computer generated images take a really, really long time to design and an extremely long time to render. I view both of these processes as a form of art and I think most people would only disagree with me about the rendering. In this way, computer-generated images actually have a really long exposure time and I think this imbues them with a very strong aura. My thoughts may be biased because I am a computer scientist and have worked with computer graphics before and know how painfully tedious and difficult it is, but when I look at computer-generated images I think primarily about the process that went into making it.

But, as Ben pointed out the new Star Wars trilogy sucked. I blame a lot of that of George Lucas' naive misuse of CGI with Jar Jar Binks being a great example. The current level of computer graphics cannot adequately imitate reality in many cases. Any person who has a good command of the art knows how and when to use it and not use it. Computer graphics is a tool for a director to use and it is not the answer for every situation. Most directors and the film community realize this which is why the most extensive use of CGI you see today is in the many animated movies that come out such as Monsters Inc., Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, etc. These people know that CGI is not yet capable of displaying a completely convincing reality so they avoid the issue by creating made up realities in which they don't have to play by the normal rules. Yes CGI is used by most Hollywood movies these days, but it is used mostly for effects, scenery, background shots, etc. Human perception is much more lenient when looking at these things as compared to a close up of a speaking character.

Lord of the Rings is, for the most part, an example of a director who knows how to use computer graphics in film. Peter Jackson knew enough to make sure that his main characters were all real human characters and that whenever possible the audiences main focus on the screen should be real as well. Instead of making the entire armies using CGI (as Lucas did in Star Wars), Jackson used real actors for the front of the army and then CGI to fill in behind them. Most of the detail is then seen in the real actors so the viewer is given the perception that the whole army is more real. Of course during long shots Jackson knows he can use almost entirely computer-generated shots because the level of detail is not high enough to easily notice differences. One of the main differences between Lucas and Jackson is that Jackson used CGI to augment real images and Lucas tried to use it as the whole image of at least the main focus of the image.

Anyway, I am going off on a tangent about these two director's films. My main point is that in all these films, even when they suck, there is an aura in the images that I very strongly identify with. Grzinic's idea that computer-generated images collapse exposure time and kill the process is unfounded. These technologies do get rid of some processes but they create other ones that are also etched with aura from the creation process. In conclusion, I'm definitely not trying to say that CGI is better than reality. I am saying that instead of being seen as the end of art and the destruction of the aura of the image it is actually very artful and because of the way it is produced has a lot of aura contained in it.

Presentation Schedule

Here is the schedule for your research essay presentations. To reiterate the assignment: This presentation should consists of 5-6 minutes of explication: the topic of your paper; your working thesis; the themes you will be exploring; your evidence choices; your organizational plans; etc. The final 4-5 minutes will be spent asking questions of and receiving feedback from your classmates. Come prepared with any questions or problems you may have concerning your essay.

Monday, April 16th
Meegan
Brenda
Frank
Robert
Eddie

Tuesday, April 17th
Stephanie
Nina
Valerie
Alex
Tom S
Tim

Wednesday, April 18th
Dan
Devaansh
Felix
Katherine
Phoebe

Monday, April 30th
Rachel
Danica
Jane
Miriam
Guillermo
Caitlin

Tuesday, May 1st
Shyam
Silbi
Jeff
Mike
Shane
Nehal

Wednesday, May 2nd
Sean
Ifan
Daniella
Angie
Tom M
Caroline

Editing/repetition

I found this cool video on YouTube and couldn't help but think of this class. Enjoy=)

Urban Diary + Harvard

Urban Diary

I stumbled across this website while researching my own topic. I think it would be useful for anyone doing a paper on databases/Lev Manovich's essay on databases. The "Urban Diary" is also a part of an art website called "The Place".

Harvard Interactive Media Group

I also found this while reading Kotaku and thought it might be of interest re: video games as an educational subject.

Playtime

I was never into video games (I was never that good) but last night's video game session sparked my interests in them. There is no doubt that the Wii was the most popular of the night. I think its because of the innovating controls, cartoon-like graphics, and the fun it provides. I have never played the Wii before, but I am amazed how advance these games are now. Contrast from PacMan or Tetris, the video game industry has advance significantly these past years. I still remember when games were on one singular plane, and but now one can go in all directions like in games "Clouds".

There is no question how new games are far more complex today. Yet, could they be just too complex? One of the reasons why I don't play video games is becuase you have to learn how to play them, and that could take a good amount of time considering how games now have missions and objectives, large open planes and such. Plus, now games are longer with multi levels, encouraging people to play for hours and hours-making it almost addictive. The Wii paper on the other hand, had mini-games making it easier to play and caters to all ages.

In regards to the maturity of games today, they are more interactive than when I was a kid. They require more than action from the player than just pressing buttons. For example in DDR, you forget its just a game and gives the illusion that the player is dancing away at a club or something. With the Wii, the innovating remote really challenges the traditional remote. I have a feeling that future consoles would incorporate this.

All in the timing

There are a plethora of games— video and otherwise —that challenge players to work against time to achieve a goal. In our present society, people crave quickness, acceleration, and fast thrills. Not having to succumb to the burden of time is now second-nature to us. Gaming simply ups the ante a notch. In today's gaming world, hand-eye coordination is a thing of the past. Now we have to deal with a more BODY-eye coordination, and this all-too-commonly coupled with time-based challenges.

The quintessential time challenge is Tetris. Tetris gives one a limited amount of time to rotate and successfully placed a shape onto a pile of other shapes such that each horizontally completed square area disappears, allowing for more room to place more blocks. The amount of time allotted to place blocks decreases as the game progesses. Similarly, the Wii game WarioWare gives players a continually decreasing amount of time to perform random tasks with the WiiMote, a revolutionary controller with 360 degress of sensory input that allows for a variety of potential uses. The game is similar to Four Second Frenzy in that each task is given a very, very short amount of time to complete with no preceding instructions on what the task will involve.

Dance Dance Revolution is a bit different, as it uses predetermined rhythms (defined by popular dance music) that a player must abide by while performing tasks limited to placing one's foot (or both feet) on one of four squares. Time does not decrease as the game progresses; rather, the foot placements become increasingly difficult.

Videogame Session

Warioware on the Wii was made up of a set of mini-games that were very short in length. It was these few seconds of the game that are most memorable. However, time spent playing the game is actually made up of mostly animations before and after the times one actually gets the chance to interact and use the remote. I find it interesting and somewhat natural to assign priority to part of the time spent playing the game.

People generally improved as the game went on. I have always wondered why time seems to slow down in situations that call upon skills that we have practiced. For instance, in basketball, before taking a lay-up, I feel that there is enough time to consider the position of the opponent, the hoop, my body, and also consider different ways to finish the lay-up. Time seems to slow down in situations like these. I experienced this phenomena with when playing videogames as well.
The Wii takes an interesting approach at trying to immerse players into the game. While DDR is an attempt to make a game of someone's dancing skills, the game is not the perfect way to measure if someone is a good dancer. On the flips side, being good at DDR does not necessarily make you a good dancer. These facts are barriers to the immersiveness of the game. There are tricks to win this game that are not directly translatable to dancing. For instance, one very helpful piece of advice is to keep your feet in the middle and then step out before returning to the center. The Wii makes a sincere attempt to break these boundaries that keep a player from being completely immersed in the game.

While people did have to be reminded to stay in the range of the sensor, this is an indication of how this new approach to videogames is able to draw people in. I was very surprised that people did not complain about the responsivness of the remote. In watching how the Wii works, my first concern was if the remote was more of a gimmick and not as accurate as using a more traditional control scheme. This new and addicting control scheme tries to incorporate more of the body. As people have mentioned earlier, time seemed to go by faster on the Wii. I feel that the immersivness of using the remote technology was the leading factor contributing to this distorted measurement of time.

Conquering space in games

Previous game consoles had you gaged in a story or an adventure, where you can interact with the game in order to "level up" - somehow proceed further. Other games, such as Tetris, gave you a logic puzzle of sort to solve, where the player is passively active in the background controlling the fate of their character or their game. The controller (let it be a keyboard, a joystick, etc) was the way for you to guide the game and be a part of it.
Wii changed all that, by breaking the space barrier between the player and the game. No longer are you an outsider that tells the characters or the pieces how to move - you actually have to move them yourself. A prime example of this are sports games that are available on wii, where you are no longer controlling a player to perform as action, but you are the player playing on the baseball field, a tennis court, or inside the bowling alley. The way you physically play allows you to emerse yourself within the surroundings of your screen, as you run up towards the screen in order to throw a bowling ball, or save the falling girl that you love (MONAAA) by reaching out to her with a motion towards the screen. Although you are not physically inside the game's environments, you become a big component of it as you summon the world you play in onto the screen. As someone has previously stated, this is possibly the closest we've gotten to virtual reality, in terms of technology that is available to the mass public.

Since wii has been the popular topic to blog about, I figured I'd talk about a very different game, that unlike the wii, garnered very few spectators who lasted only for a moment, although they kept on coming back to see if anything else was learned. Yes, I am talking about Cloud, the experimental game from USC. Unlike Wario Ware Smooth Moves (Nintendo Wii), where you were told how to use your controller and you had to figure out within 5 seconds what was the task at hand, Cloud offered very little explanation about your objective as you explored the world for a very long duration (until you got bored or gave up?). If you poke around enough, you can find out the controlls of the game (Thank you "h"), but although you learn how to consume a cloud, spit it out, and fly around, your objective remains unclear. The reason I decided to bring this is for the following question: Which game brings you closer to a virual reality - the world of Wario Ware Smooth Moves where you are physically emmerse yourself and complete 5-10second tasks; or the world of Cloud, where you must emerse yourself for a long duration in attempt to explore the world and learn about it. And did anyone figure out the objective of Cloud?

Types of Gaming

I had a lot of fun with the game playing session today, especially with Dance Dance Revolution. Although I was really horrible at it, I found it more fun than most other games there because it involved music and of course, the player’s complete physical involvement in the game. This physical aspect can be said about the Wii as well, but I just did not find Wario Ware very interesting after the initial excitement of this new concept of gaming. People still could not keep their eyes off it as it was the center of attention for most of the gaming session. I think this is because the Wii’s concept of gaming is so natural and easy to learn. I remember the first time I tried video games a long time ago. I think it was Super Mario for the Super Nintendo. I kept moving the controller itself in a jumping motion when I made Mario jump. After some cousins telling me not to do this, I had to force myself just to press whatever controls needed and not do everything Mario was doing. But this natural way of playing that I had is exactly what the Wii uses and is what pulls everyone in. The same set of games on the Wii were also on the gameboy advanced, but I think most people found that boring because of the traditional controls.

When I played the Wii, the time went much faster as compared to when we played other games like clouds for example. Clouds is the exact opposite of Wii in some ways because it is so unnatural and complicated. All the controls are placed at weird places on the keyboard and there were no instructions whatsoever. Some of us finally figured out how to do certain things like move clouds around but it took a while.

Yet another thing that made the Wii more interesting was that each individual game within the Wario Ware set was timed. The tasks were often easy to do in these games but the challenge was to do it before time ran out. The other games, however, were not timed outright but definitely required one to do actions within a certain time. For example, you had to orient the shape appropriately before it reaches the bottom in tetris. You had to make certain steps at the right time according to the arrows in DDR. You had to make certain turns on time and move around the environment fast enough to avoid the ghosts in pac man. After each level usually, the environment gets faster which means you have to be faster as well. This type of gaming involving time contrasts with gaming that give you all the time in the world. In Clouds, for example, you had quite a bit of free time to fly around and look for clouds or land.

Betamax and time travel in 1975

"The Betamax will allow you to break the time barrier... to record the present and save it for the future!"

This is fascinating on so many levels: (1) a window into people's television viewing habits in the 1970s, (2) a connection between television recording, the database, and the time machine, and (3) a potential critique of Virilio's tendency to overlook asynchronicity in new media. Wow!
Via Laughing Squid.

Let's Get Ready to Play!

Today’s screening provided an interesting perspective on the different things people consider entertaining. It fascinates me that the more technology we acquire, the more simplistic things become. The wii, for example, is so amazingly advanced. It is a videogame capable of sensing the player’s movements and coordinating that with what is on the screen. Yet, we are playing games where we need to shake the ants off of a banana, or blow up a balloon. We have of these possibilities set before us (open to our imagination) and we choose to play things that happen in everyday life anyway. I would have to agree with Shane’s assumption that Wario Ware was only intended to display all the capabilities of the new system. There was nothing jarring or intriguing about the games other than the tutorials showing the various ways to manipulate the controller and the possibility of something greater. If we start to have videogames that can sense our very movements, there might be other innovations created to anticipate our every need (our televisions, our beds, etc.).

The time aspect of the screening was also quite interesting. I really like to play videogames. I often use my younger cousin as an excuse to play any chance I get. Usually, when the two of us play, it is only the two of us. We have two controllers and an ample supply of two-player games. I can spend the whole day playing games with him and not realize just how much time has passed. As much as I love spending time with my family, I think the desire to win is what keeps me from realizing how much time I wasted. Every time I play, I get closer and closer to either completing the level or finishing the game. So, in adventure games I don’t measure how much time has gone by, instead I measure how many lives I’ve played. That is a slightly more manageable number.

With the screening today, there was a lot of waiting around. Though I cheered for the success of my peers, I didn’t get emotionally attached or involved with the progress of the games. As a result, I was very aware of the time that was passing. My reaction to this screening is quite similar to my reaction to television shows. If I get emotionally connected to or attached to characters, I find myself anticipating the coming of next week’s episode. If I watch the show only in passing, I am more aware of my surroundings than I am of the show itself. Even though trying the games were quite fun, it was extremely difficult to get too ‘into’ the game seeing that we would have to take turns and then switch twenty minutes or so later.

Everybody say "Wiiiiiii!!!!"

Okay, so I was also another who was disappointed that Super Smash Bros. (the original or Melee) wasn't one of the games that we were to play tonight. But given as the purpose of this was to have everyone play games that were easy to adjust to, I didn't mind so much afterwards.

I personally believe that the most popular game of the night was WarioWare: Smooth Moves for the Nintendo Wii. Although you can definitely not mess with classics like Tetris and Pac Man, since games like those paved the way for the games we have today, WarioWare is unique on its own right. So far, this game has made use of the new Nintendo technology in every way possible (and in the beginning, the only game until recently). It's funny because it also reflects on the times. We have become a fast-paced world. Our generation has grown up prepared to take on challenges that speeds towards us, including the current developing technology: internet, cell phones, computers, etc. The concept of the game is to figure out within a span of about 5-30 seconds (depending on the mini-game) what action must be taken with the controller when the command is given on the screen. The more the level is completed, the faster it goes until you reach the boss stage. The controller must be held in the position given (a picture of a man with his own "Form Baton" in the position) before the mini-game begins. What's even funnier are the messages in between, teaching the player in which position the controller must be held. The narrator's speech contrasts to that of the entire game: it's very slow and mellow, resulting in his punchlines being funnier.

Compared to the classic games played during class, the games in WarioWare were much more unexpected. Although you weren't sure where the ghosts would roam around next in Pacman, they would still follow the same pattern of trying to follow the yellow munching ball and destroy him. Whereas in WarioWare, each level was different. Each story had to use a different strategy (or strategies), and each strategy had several different uses that didn't appear in any certain order.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that although games do still in fact follow a pattern (take DDR for instance, the direction of the arrows are pretty much the same, depending on the stage) and have since the birth of video games, the player now has more choices (as in DDR, song choices) and variety (the many mini-games in WarioWare). Some reflect our fast-paced world, because if they didn't, gamers would be bored.

A question for regular gamers: does anyone notice that when you play certain games time seems to fly much faster than normal?

Video Game Play session

I was disappointed to hear that smash bros wasn't going to be one of the games. But I still had fun.

What I realized while watching people play the wii was that this was the first major breakthrough toward making a game hyperinteractive with the human body. Before, the sega genesis, super nintendo, dreamcast, n64, playstation, and gamecube have all had similar controllers in that they all involve just buttons and maybe joysticks. I've seen arcade games before with helmets you wear but they never seem to have caught on. The wii is the first mainstream system that doesn't just involve pressing buttons and moving a joystick. The player plays by sweeping, chopping, slicing, poking, and all sorts of movements with the controller. I was surprised that slapping the controller would result in an action too. I think this is a big step toward making video games more sensitive to the human body. I can see future nintendo and playstation controllers having touch pad controllers to sense where you fingers are and eventually, maybe sensors that you stick on to your body and a player being able to move the character by moving his own body. The wii made me realize how far video game engineering has come. The controller is so effective at sensing subtle pointing jabs and tilts. Maybe in the future I will be able to play basketball as realistically as in a gym while staying in my room. This engineering will also affect other areas of study. Having a robot that is controlled by the movements of a human body would help in space exploration, construction, war, and who knows what else.

Aside from the wii, the game that engaged me the most was actually tetris. I can't see that game going out of fashion. It demands innate logic that deep down everyone has, just maybe not as developed as others.

Wario ware just seemed like a game made by nintendo to show off to players how versatile the wii controlled is. The game had tutorials on different ways to hold it and move it. But, the games were really basic and the graphics weren't really that great.

Gameplay Session Games

Here are the game titles that we played in tonight's gameplay session:

Pac-Man (PC)
Tetris (PC)
Brain Age (Nintendo DS)
Wario Ware (Nintendo Gameboy Advance)
Cloud (PC)
Dance Dance Revolution Extreme (Playstation 2)
Wario Ware Smooth Moves (Nintendo Wii)

Wii, expanding the boundaries of video games

Obviously today's video games sessions winner was the Nintendo Wii.
Of course, it was the most recent one and it has been the most hot platform on the
video game market recently. But obviously our wonderful, *cough*, instructors had
something on their mind when they brought it in to our session.

Wii is different from other video games because it expands the virtual video reality
from the images we see on the screen to our immediate reality.

Maneuvering that joy pad into set positions and moving it around in the air was something really different from just pushing buttons at the right moment, like conventional video games have been. The actual actions you take in our immediate reality takes affect in the virtual reality in the video game, thus connecting those two.

It was also important that Wario, the main character in the game, found the exact same Wii control pad that the real user uses. What that does is that it directly connects the player with thevideo game world. It is no longer you assuming this other identity and doing unrealistic
actions , for example shooting rockets or flying airplanes by a push of a button.
When playing Wii, you direct very "urgent" girls and boys to each of their restrooms, you pick your nose, you literally drop the joy pad, you make food; all actions that are rather realistic and more intimate to us.


I think this connection Wii established between the player and the video game reality is why Wii was so successful worldwide. The unique joy pad and the skillfully made games took gaming to another level, shortening the gap between virtual and "ultimate" reality, in my opinion.

SO YOU THINK YOU CAN DANCE?

Why yes I do believe I can dance... dance dance revolution that is!
I love this game. I stopped playing it in high school through now, but I was a hardcore DDR fan back in the day. I would play nonstop with buckets of sweat coming out. I swore I lost like 10 pounds playing this game. Maybe I should start again. But that's besides the point.

A little history lesson my friends. Dance Dance Revolution was introduced in 1998 from Konami as a new form of gaming arrived. DDR was introduced as a line of games called Bemani, which involved music and interaction. I Believe that Beatmania was the first creating, which focused on a similar concept to DDR, but with a DJ styled control. Introduced as an arcade game, DDR quickly became popular with the people of Japan. It then came to the US and swept people off their feet, literally.

One of the reasons why I think that DDR became so popular was because of its highly interactive nature. It went where no other video games had gone and introduced the physical apsect to gaming. No longer are you the observer, sitting down, playing with a controller, but you physically became the controller while dancing. Aside from its cardio benefits, this game definitely became a crowd favorite because it was able to involve people in a new dimension. Socially, it forced become who were normally afraid to dance into the center of attention, and many lost their fear.

While physically playing the game, a new factor of game play is introduced, FATIGUE! No longer are you worrying about the fatigue of the character, but your own physical state. You cannot play this game for 12 hours at a time without hurting yourself, believe me, I've tried before. It is one of the few games that will leave you broken and sore, but yet, you'll be asking for more. By involving so much cardio, your hear rate speeds up, almost accelerating your own body. If you get good enough, it seems as if time does slow down for you as you are able to hit every step, making one feel like a god. Endorphins kick in, similar to the Runner's high, continuing to slow down you're perception of time. You are invincible. You become a DDR master.

Presentations on April 16th

There are 5 spots for presentations on this day. Please do not sign up if all five spots have already been filled.

Presentations on April 17th

There are 6 spots for presentations on this day. Please do not sign up if all six spots have already been filled.

Presentations on April 18th

There are 5 spots for presentations on this day. Please do not sign up if all five spots have already been filled.

Presentations on April 30th

There are 6 spots for presentations on this day. Please do not sign up if all six spots have already been filled.

Presentations on May 1st

There are 6 spots for presentations on this day. Please do not sign up if all six spots have already been filled.

Presentations on May 2nd

There are 6 spots for presentations on this day. Please do not sign up if all six spots have already been filled.

Free Advanced Screening of KNOCKED UP on 4/10

Hi,

I just wanted to let everyone know that I am hosting a screening for Universal of Knocked Up next Tuesday at 8pm in Wheeler Auditorium. Everyone I have talked to has said that the film is hilarious, and it has received very good reviews. There are no special tickets for this screening. It is first come first serve. So arrive early to guarantee your spot. If you would like to check out the trailer, go to http://www.knockedupmovie.com. Below is a synopsis of the film.

SYNOPSIS

On the heels of 2005's blockbuster The 40-Year-Old Virgin, writer/director Judd Apatow again mines hilarity from the relatable human in a comedy about a one-night stand with unexpected consequences: Knocked Up. Katherine Heigl (Grey's Anatomy, Roswell) joins Virgin alums Seth Rogen, Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann for a comic look about the best thing that will ever ruin your best-laid plans: parenthood. Allison Scott (Heigl)is an up-and-coming entertainment journalist whose 24-year-old life is on the fast track. But it gets seriously derailed when a drunken one-nighter with slacker Ben Stone (Rogen) results in an unwanted pregnancy.

Faced with the prospect of going it alone or getting to know the baby's father, Allison decides to give the lovable doof a chance. An overgrown kid who has no desire to settle down, Ben learns that he has a big decision to make with his kid's mom-to-be: will he hit the road or stay in the picture? Courting a woman you've just Knocked Up, however, proves to be a little difficult when the two try their hands at dating.

As they discover more about one another, it becomes painfully obvious that they're not the soul mates they'd hoped they might be. With Allison's harried sister Debbie (Mann)and hen-pecked brother-in-law Pete (Rudd) the only parenting role models the young lovers have, things get even more confusing. Should they raise the baby together? What makes a happy lifetime partnership after all? A couple of drinks and one wild night later, they've got nine confusing months to figure it out..

The Butterfly Effect

When watching the movie Run Lola Run I was especially struck by one original and innovative aspect of the film – the snapshots into the future of the people Lola interacts with. Throughout the film Lola is continually entering people’s lives and subtly but fundamentally altering their future. The director highlights Lola’s “butterfly effect” by showing a set of snapshots illustrating the futures of the people that Lola affects.

A clear example of this can be seen in Lola’s interaction with the woman and baby who Lola bumps into as she runs out of her apartment. In each of the three scenarios in the film, Lola’s differing interaction with the woman creates three possible future outcomes for the woman. In the first scenario Lola lightly bumps the woman and the woman becomes an alcoholic and loses her baby. In the second scenario Lola smashes into the woman and the woman eventually wins the lottery. And in the third scenario Lola avoids the woman altogether and the woman eventually becomes devoutly religious.

This aspect of the movie impressed me so much because it drew a clear parallel between the film and narrative loop as expressed in Lev Manovitch’s article “Database”. The possible outcomes illustrated in the film are very comparable to the algorithms Manovitch describes in the programming of video games. In both cases the seemingly inconsequential choices and actions taken by the independent character have innumerable effects on the overall outcome of the narrative.

Moreover, both the film and the game are simply artificial representations of this “butterfly effect” in real life. Yet, unfortunately in the real world the butterfly effect can only be theorized and hypothesized upon, because there is absolutely no way to truly measuring the butterfly effect. In order to do so we would have to manipulate time backwards and alter events which of course is impossible. But nonetheless we can recreate this effect through art, giving humans the visual and mental satisfaction of this phenomenon.

Overall, this aspect of the film struck me because it has been employed so many times in other films of our generation. Films such as The Butterfly Effect, Sliding Doors, Drift, Clue and Wayne’s World all employ this technique to carry the narrative of the film forward. Yet the film Run Lola Run is unique in the sense that not only the main characters are offered multiple outcomes. In this film even the slightest interaction with strangers is portrayed as having an enormous effect on the strangers’ life, thus extending this concept of the “butterfly effect” one step further throughout the narrative.

A Moment in Time

The use of time was brilliant in Run Lola Run, a film I truly enjoyed because it showed the randomness of life—one only has power over their own choices and cannot plan for events out of their control. In Run Lola Run, we see Lola fighting to protect her boyfriend, Manni, who has gotten into deep trouble with mobsters. The film unfolds in 20 minute intervals (as Manni only has 20 minutes to come up with 100,000 marcs or face impending death), with 3 very different scenario’s playing out. These scenarios are directly a result of a difference in time of a second—for example, in all 3 scenarios, Lola has an interaction or effect on a white car. The white car either gets hit in the front of the car, side of the car or Lola herself lands atop of the car depending on the amount of time it took her to make a decision about what to do next to save her boyfriend. Her timing with this white car is a direct result of her choices and whether she is able to quickly get down the stairs and begin running.

The insightful thing to this film was truly in the endings of each scenario, which showed how easily one decision can derail a person’s life or one moment in the wrong place can end a person’s life (just as Lola was accidentally shot in the first scenario or Manni was accidentally run over by a car in the second scenario). It’s incredibly cliché for a film’s ultimate theme to be “time is fleeting” or “live each moment as if it were your last”—however, Run Lola Run provides a new and refreshing perspective on this whole genre of filmmaking, as evidenced in the different endings. In the first two endings, both Lola and Manni are accidentally killed—the only overlapping theme of their deaths was, simply, bad timing. However, timing worked in their favor (as did luck, with Lola winning thousands of marcs gambling in the casino) and they both walked away from the situation unharmed and extraordinarily rich.

Another interesting aspect of this film, which added to its complexity, was that the audience was rooting for Lola to succeed and for Manni to be saved. The audience felt this way, despite the fact that it was clearly poor choices that put them in this particular predicament. The audience also bore witness to the destructive capabilities of both of the characters, with Manni finding it within himself to rob a supermarket and Lola taking her own father (or the man she thought was her father) hostage in his own bank. The order of the scenarios was also particularly interesting to me, as well, with the last and final scenario showing the goodness and kindness of both characters (juxtaposing against the horror of what had happened in the two previous scenarios). Had the orders of the scenarios been reversed, the audience would have been left with a very different perspective on Lola and Manni—would we have thought that they deserved it, especially after what we saw they were capable of? Or was it the extraordinary circumstances that led to unusual behavior out of both of them? The order of the narration is particularly crucial for the audiences' understanding of Lola and Manni.

Lola's "Ripple Effect" & the Number "20"

In the German film Run Lola Run, the concept that one's actions (significant or seemingly insignificant) affect subsequent events and apparent outcomes is played with through the replay of three completely different "realities."

A slight delay or advancement in "Lola's time" (tripping down the stairs or jumping past the man with the dog as she runs down the stairs of her apartment) changes the her encounter with Mr. Meyer as he drives out of the garage building, also changes whether or not her dad's lover gets a chance to disclose that her baby is from another man. These proceeding events change the ultimate outcome that makes for the completely different conclusions of her dilemma.

Though this concept of the "ripple effect" is not a new one (another great--though underappreciated--film that uses this motif is The Butterfly Effect) Run Lola Run takes this theme to an extreme in its quick scenes of the "still frame," photograph-style revelations of the random characters she runs into during the film. For example, in each of the three "realities" the woman with the stroller either becomes a baby kidnapper(?), a street-side evangelist, or a lotto winner depending on when Lola runs into her. This is a bit too far fetched to me to believe, though it is not clear how many other minor events in the mother's life are affected because of Lola's other interactions changed due to timing.
--------------------
At the risk of looking too deeping into something minor, I was wondering whether there was any significance to the number Lola chose to gamble on in the casino. It is very, very unlikely that that number would win twice in a row (1440 to 1) and that is why I pondered whether it was a reference to something in the film or just an arbitrary number that had meaning only to the director or writer.

Arnold Conquers the Fourth Dimension

Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy is a vehicle for experimental filmmaker Martin Arnold to make a couple statements. A quick search on Google turns up this quote by the artist:

"The cinema of Hollywood is a cinema of exclusion, reduction and denial, a cinema of repression. There is always something behind that which is being represented, which was not represented. And it is exactly that that is most interesting to consider."

So Martin sets about exposing the hypocrisy in the "wholesome" work of Andy Hardy. Is there really a Freudian/Oedipal subtext in these movies? If so, was it the actors who snuck it in or was it explicitly directed by a bored Andy Hardy? Who knows.

What's intriguing about Life Wastes is not so much the overt accusations that Arnold makes about these films but his method. With one hand glued to the jog shuttle, he turns Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland into his slaves, his puppets, his marionettes. Arnold is able to manipulate his playthings into new gyrations, extend a fleeting glance or gesture into a minute-long expose, turning a whispered, hidden emotion into one shouted from the rooftops for our amusement.

We the audience are his puppets, too, as we are forced to watch this or that bit of the original sample over and over, long past our standard tolerance for the stuttering, nauseating motion. It made me more aware of how my attention is manipulated and directed (a la Vertov's Kino-Eye) in all film, although I am usually too entertained to actively resent or resist it.

Ultimately, Arnold has conquered the fourth dimension. For fifteen diabolical minutes, Arnold flaunts his newfound power like a child who has just learned how to disrupt an ant colony. Throughout our lives, we are slaves to the constant march of time, never able to pause it or stop or reverse or loop it to our own ends. When given the opportunity, who could resist the giddy feeling of turning the tables and becoming master of time, shaking it around, holding it upside down, bullying it for lunch money.

It's a bit juvenile, but it was pretty funny in a couple spots.

Three realities???

I have seen this movie three times now. The first screening that I watched was an "Appreciating the Arts" course in high school, the second time was at home with my sister, the third time was in class. After the first screening I was appreciative of the movie, but did not believe that I had the capacity to endure the music, and the mental exhaustion that it leaves its audience with, for the second time. But ironically it was this music that help intensify the movie watching experience and kept me in my sit for the second and third time.
----------

An interesting way to analyze this movie is by looking at the three sequences as three realities in the life of this certain individual, Lola. An obvious observation that one can make is the fact that each sequence has a different end to it. When Lola hangs up that red phone, at that point she knows (and the audience knows) what her circumstances are i.e what are the cards she is being dealt. By showing different endings, the film maker is alluding to the fact that Lola's decisions and actions had consequences. In other words, in each situation whatever Lola is given the power to find her own ending by doing certain actions/decisions. So in that sense this movie seems to celebrate Existentialism, which states that humans are capable of giving meaning to their lives. So, once Lola knows what her circumstance/cards are, she can play them accordingly and she, is as an individual, capable of effecting the outcome.

But at the same time it also seems to critique existentialist thought, because at several points in the first and second sequence, Lola simply has no control over situation. For example, I would regard the time delays that often causes the twist in her plans, as something that is out of her control. And especially in the third sequence, much more emphasis is put on luck. But it is in this third sequence where she has less control over her situation that is ultimately the best outcome.
In this third sequence she also seems to be praying, something she didn't do in the first two instances.

Natural or Seizure-like?

The entire Alone Life Wastes Andy Hardy consists of loops of actions and sounds from previously made films. At once, I noticed the connection to Manovich's work on loops. The mini loops really did seem like natural movements seen and done in everyday life, especially in the very first scene. The boy hugging, squeezing, and kissing his mother somtimes didn't even seemed like he wasn't on loop. Our actions are oftentimes repetitive on a microtime scale and also on a more macro level. This makes me consider how time usually is considered as longer periods and how we can forget the slight things that happen in microseconds or just really small amounts of time. That amount of time is so minute to us that we're oblivious to it. Yet, this movie emphasizes everything about those microsecond actions and sounds. Repetition of these intervals brings forth these tiny motions and shows the natural nature of repetition and loops. Just as Manovich's essay discusses, loops are not elementary in media form, they are a part of complicated, sophisticated, and modern technology also. They are also part of nature and have existed pretty much forever.
The analytical part aside, I've never felt that a film could ever seem so long to me even though it was short. At the beginning, I understood the purpose to the film, especially after reading Manovich's work. But watching such small repetitions for 15 whole minutes became pretty frustrating. Especially when the singing and sounds came into play, the reptitions became rough for my ears and eyes. Also, by the end the loops were somewhat longer and involved things such as full foot movements back and forth, back and forth. At this point the actions were no longer so natural to me and they became actual loops to me as if the player were broken. There were also loops right at the cuts of editing which were so far from natural that it made me feel like if I were epileptic I was going to seize! Overall, the point of the film fit well with the previous reading, but it was too long and by the end I couldn't wait for it to stop.