IM1 – Reading Week Two

Well.
“You have to absorb what you read.”

Sounds pretty easy at first, but after barricading myself in the study, with no TV, music, or Facebook, I think I (maybe) got a handle on this one.
This weeks reading was “Digital video and Alexandre Astruc’s camera-stylo: The new avant-garde in documentary realised?” by Bjørn Sørensen. Found here for anyone interested.
The article mainly centred around the development and progression of technological mediums, specifically film and TV. Sørensen drew on visions put forwards by Astruc (french filmmaker and critic from the 1940’s), who claimed that “…the day is not far off when everyone will possess a projector, will go to the local bookstore and hire films written on any subject, of any form, from literary criticism and novels to mathematics, history and general science” (47).
So maybe he didn’t nail it word for word, but as Sørensen points out, Astruc’s vision was pretty close to today’s contemporary media society. We might not all one an actual projector, but our DVD players and computers do a pretty good job of showing our movies. And so maybe finding a blockbuster store is like finding a Dinosaur fossil, but go to any supermarket or Video-Ezy (blockbuster was cooler – ask any 90’s kid) and you’ll be sure to find yourself a DVD. You go Astruc.

Undoubtedly, Astruc had foreseen the direction in which the TV/Film medium was heading. Continuing on from that, Sørensen explores the development of the media through the 90’s and into the 21st century, highlighting the success of the mediums through the idea of accessibility.  Film and television was not accessible when it first started gaining attention. (unless of course you had the $$$). The technology required to create such mediums was “still directed towards the professional market, and thus well beyond the means for amateur use” (50). But never fear! Sørensen explains how “the most important audio-visual medium” (50) became a norm for the general public, resulting in today’s 21st society.

1. Economic availability: Quoting Sørensen seems the best way to explain this one: “The gap in costs and quality between production and editing equipment and software for professional and mass consumers has closed up considerably” (51).

2. Miniaturisation: The once enormously large equipment that required a room to exist in, has been replaced with light, small equipment that can be used on the run and easy for individuals to use. Don’t lie to yourself, you know this is true. Growing up we all had a ‘computer room’. 90’s flashback alert!

3. New and alternative forms of distribution: This point fits in well with the remainder of Sørensen article. WWW. The World Wide Web. These days you can literally find or buy anything you want (except maybe a life sometimes) over the internet. But it wasn’t always like that. Only a very select few of the public sphere were able to access technology able to produce or view media, but now, thanks to the WWW, media distribution is as easy as clicking a button. Literally.

For me, one of the most interesting points in the article was the discussion of the World Wide Web and it’s impact on our lives. Sørensen discusses how “the web has become a rupture in the wall between the private and the public sphere…” (53), and goes onto quote Habermas:

“Use of the internet has both broadened and fragmented the contexts of communication” (54).

As a stand alone quote, this sentence grabbed my attention. The development of technology has undoubtedly changed our lives, made them easier and making tasks more efficient. But where will it stop?
It will never stop. Sørensen has displayed how quick technology has advanced in such a short amount of time, and it would be naive to think it will stop here. So where will we be in 50 years? 70 years?
Already youth are claiming they are happy they weren’t born in today’s society. 10 year olds have Facebook. 6 Year olds have iPhones and iPads. 14 Year olds are hurled up in their rooms with their DVDs and plasma screens. Do people even  call each other on the landline anymore? Do kids know what a tangible address book that doesn’t run on batteries is?
To every positive there is a negative. Sure, this technology is great. It’s broadened the public sphere in a way that could never have been achieved otherwise. But at what cost?

 

(all quotes taken from: http://vogmae.dropmark.com/163186/2924200)