Loop

Lev Manovich’s text “The New Temporality: The Loop as a Narrative Engine” discusses the

idea of “the loop.” What is the loop? rises as an immediate following question while Manovich introduces this new idea. Manovich starts with two simple examples of media with “the loop:” “cultural object (game) or software (various media players such as QuickTime Player).” At this moment, it is not so clear of what exactly the loop is; the best guess is some kind of a repetition. A notion of what two examples share in common is that they both presents digitalized images (assuming “game” as videogame.) In addition, digital images are not meant to be or necessarily a record of real images.

The following paragraph has proved that I was not quite following what Manovich implies by the “loop.” Manovich draws an example of “a loop”—not clear whether he used it as an example of “the” loop or simply a loop—from the sequence of Man with a Movie Camera: the cameraman cranks the handle of his camera as he films. Manovich mentions that “a loop created by the circular movement of the handle gives birth to a progression of events a camera moving through space recording whatever is in its way.” In Manovich’s definition, the loop is simply a process of recording. It is questionable whether digital images that circular movement is not necessarily relevant contradict Manovich early examples of the loop.

The idea of the loop becomes clear as Manovich builds on his argument. Manovich asserts that because of limitations—storage or bandwidth—“early QuickTime movies and computer games relied heavily on loops.” I assume Manovich’s idea of the loop as fragmented part of a sequence or a sequence with duration. It is interesting, yet outdated claim; because technological advance is so quick and face-paced, some computer games actually creates images displayed instantaneously not limited to play loops of already-recorded clips (such as recent 3D games require expensive graphic engine). This digital image fails to qualify as a loop since there is no sense of a “sequence.”