Anyone for Nichols or Rodowick?

Interesting exchange on good ol’ Levinson there, but not anyone for Nichols or Rodowick? 

How about Nichols getting Benjamin and Baudrillard together? Not that obvious, I’d say. So here is some material for debate, I should think.

And Rodowick. I’ll admit that it’s no easy read, but you’re big girls now (en Klaas is a big boy). So here’s a hint: Think of the Babette Mangolte quote: “Why is it difficult for the digital image to communicate duration?” In the next part of the book Rodowick in a way confronts the Jean Eustache example with Aleksandr Sokurov’s Russian Ark, stating that there is a fundamental difference between both, in spite of the apparent similarity of the long take approach. For him, Russian Ark is fundamentally different. 

Have a look at Mangolte’s work here.

Advertisements

~ by fkessler on March 16, 2009.

One Response to “Anyone for Nichols or Rodowick?”

  1. My first problem with Mangolte’s quote is what do we mean by digital image – the digitalisation of film, digital photographs, bill boards, etc. – where does digital image begin?

    Secondly, Rodowick’s text made me think that digital moving images are not about how hard it has become to represent duration, but what duration/time or our point of view towards it has become? The temporality of digital – the evanescence of physical/material probes into what is a trace – as it is becoming modifiable – it is always at question. Thus digital image emphasises the evanescence of duration. It is as if we tried to keep ourselves in time – by material trace (filmstrip, movie screening, prints we keep in photo albums ). It is as if previously we were encouraged to treasure THIS moment, to treasure oneself in it as a trace.

    When duration is deconstructed – time as pausable/fastforwardable/rewindable/photoshopable – we are de(con)structed. Thus the question might be not what will cinema become, but what it is BECOMING. This does not make duration more difficult to represent – it questions the ontology of time. Time is loosing its aura. This is the potentiality of new media.

    Two quotes come into my mind – one by Augustine, the other one by J.L.Godard:

    There are three distinct times: the present of the past which is remembrance, the present of the present which is contemplation and the present of the future which is expectation. (Augustine)

    What is cinema? Nothing. What does cinema want? Everything. What can cinema do? Something. (J. L. Godard)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: