Soar, Matt. “Making (with) the Korsakow System: Database Documentaries as Articulation and Assemblage.” New Documentary Ecologies Emerging Platforms, Practices and Discourses. Ed. Kate Nash, Craig Hight, and Catherine Summerhayes. Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 154–73.
Just from the title of this chapter, I had a reasonable idea of what would be discussed. Having had done Studio Art in year 11 and researching assemblage, I understood that a bunch of possibly unrelated materials (such as the videos used in k-films) could be put together, combined and presented in a particular manner to create meaning and carry a message. I proved this myself when I made a bionic baby in school using an old baby born, spray paint, a disassembled lighter and a bit of random creativity.
Using my prior knowledge of assemblage, it was natural for me to assume that the nature of this reading was relating to the seemingly accidental or coincidental relations found within k-films that rely on audience articulation and understanding to succeed.
It was interesting to read about the Canadian teacher that asked why he would use Korsakow when he could in fact program something similar on his own. If it came to me, I would have absolutely no clue how to produce online content similar to what I was able to achieve with Korsakow. Then I understood and appreciated that Korsakow is an extremely simple and usable way to create online content that might not be possible to those without much knowledge of online coding and the like. Then is also came to mind that because Korsakow is so straight forward, it is a pioneering bit of software that enables people that aren’t particularly tech-savvy to create and contribute to the online sphere in ways other than YouTube, Vimeo, Instagram and Vine, etc. etc.
The paragraph reflecting on the likelihood of Korsakow remaining relevant in the future was also interesting to read as Soar concedes that online documentaries aren’t perfect (can’t be played on iPads) and may go the way of the CD-ROM (new, Retina-display and ‘Air’ MacBooks don’t have a disc drive at all). Soar also raises the idea that many classical films from the early 1900s are currently/becoming viewable in other forms of media that weren’t their original medium (e.g. digital versions of classic super-8/35mm/etc. films) and contemplates that no such future is in sight for many of the current digital, interactive narratives.
The understanding that Korsakow ‘constitutes a form of “argument” (as writing does for a scholar)’ was a fascinating point. Now that the structure of Korsakow projects has been recognised as creating meaning in itself, it seems appropriate to reflect on the structure of ‘Nostalgia’ (2010). ‘Nostaligia’ was a k-film created by an RMIT student in 2010 (found here: http://vogmae.net.au/classworks/media/2010/kfilms/nostalgia/) which can be recognised as purposely using its’ structural features to create meaning. The layout of ‘Nostalgia’ is primarily framed by and focused on the background design, which reflects the meaning of the film later discovered by the audience of the film to be nostalgia and the disassembling effect it can have on a person.
Discussing the authorial decisions that must be made by a Korsakow filmmaker, Soar quotes Manovich, who understands that a logical decision must be made to determine how different film clips must be matched/related to one another to cause a relationship between the two. It is easy to see how this will directly relate and be imperative to us, as Interactive Media students creating our own k-films.
Ultimately, it was helpful to read about the intended/possible uses of Korsakow from the actual creator of the program and we’ll likely incorporate some ideas/consider points raised in this reading as we progress through interactive media and into our final k-films.