Despite the density of the Kittler reading, I came to view the history of film, especially in the context of its technological evolution, in an entirely different light. I wanted to share my thoughts on a particular quote the struck me instantly as relevant and blog worthy- "Since it's inception, cinema has been the manipulation of optic nerves and their time." When sitting and enjoying a movie on the big screen, it is only natural to get lost in the fiction of it all: overwhelmed with special effects music, action scenes and if you're lucky, even some well-written dialogue. Everything can seem so complicated, that it's difficult to establish a starting point for how the film came about and how it pulled itself together. Films today, are filled with complexities and while they are complex, I think Kittler makes a very powerful point about their humble beginnings. Film is a manipulation of the same optic nerves as photographs and their entire existence depends on the nature of photography.
Since, the science of photography is a prequisite to filmmaking, Kittler challenges the reader to try to make a distinction between where photography ends and film begins. Moreover, "it is arbitrary to say where the development of the moving pictures began and it is impossible to see where it will lead" (117). Did the art and science of film begin when movement was formerly introduced to the cinema? Or "did it start when the first presentation of successive pictures at such a speed that the impression of movement resulted?" (117) These questions are posed to the reader at the beginning of the article, when the reader has a rather simplistic view of film. However, as I continued on reading about the various instances in which historical figures such as Edison and Chamberlin interacted with film and photography, answers to the above questions became much more blurred and less one-dimensional. Admittedly, before reading Kittler, I held a much more simplistic understanding towards film; I saw film as a process that involved great collaborative efforts amongst individuals and while this is true, there is an entire mechanical aspect of film that has to do with the "manipulation of optic nerves and their time." Aspects that boil down to the tiny pixels and angles used by photographers.
Nicole, I am a little confused by the trajectory of your reading of Kittler, because it sounds like you actually broadened your understanding of film history in two ways--a) through the knowledge of the "great collaborative efforts" and b) through Kittler's emphasis on the technical side of film and its relation to photography. I'd say that Kittler's reflection on film is more psychological or psychosocial than cognitive/scientific, but I appreciate your attention to his argument's nuances and often tricky, dense prose!
ReplyDelete