Page 176 - Darko Štrajn, From Walter Benjamin to the End of Cinema: Identities, Illusion and Signification. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2017. Digital Library, Dissertationes, 29.
P. 176
from walter benjamin to the end of cinema
is especially significant – moments, which are meant to become “fixed” on
pieces of film. It must also be considered that one of the inherent attrib-
utes of photography and film is the possibility for unlimited copying. By
their reproduction we have to deal with the especially important impact on
a collective aspect of subjectivity and its identity. This gives way to the im-
plication of a simplicity of any audio or audio-visual narratives. There is al-
most no doubt that such a record as, for instance, a film, represents such
a powerful means of verification of memory in almost any respect: his-
torical, collective, and even individual or psychological. However, through
the accumulation of various modes of audio-visual recordings – no mat-
ter what kind of objects we can think of. For example, a memory, which is
stored on various media (photographs, films, tapes, drives, etc.), becomes
more complex as it becomes increasingly inaccessible in its totality. With
regards especially to film and other forms of audio-visual representations,
such products in a sense, “objectify” memory by the inherent act of exter-
nalisation. However, due to many multiple levels of reality, memory itself
becomes open and vulnerable to manipulation. Nevertheless, due to all cir-
cumstances, memory as it is “materialised” in film, is unavoidably con-
structed dynamically. This makes the work of film archives especially de-
manding and ethically accountable.
In the midst of these time-images and time-spaces, which are inhab-
ited by memory, the notion of identity is formed. Thus, this notion brings
us closer to the realm of culture since identity acquires its relevance in re-
lation to the notion of difference. Each film is in one way or another relat-
ed to these notions, which form its basic grammar. Since each instance of
identity is a product of some course or process of identifying activity (or
similarities of code and conduct within a cultural context), which works
through the differences towards recognising something or someone as be-
ing the same as it- or him or herself, the movement of representation, such
as in the case of a film, enters the process of identifying. This is the point,
where the aspect of aesthetics plays a big role. It would probably be quite
difficult to establish why exactly it happened that film, so soon after it’s in-
vention, became associated with art instead of remaining just some kind
of gadget for representing reality in a sense of documenting facts, events
or scientific research. As much as we take it for granted or as a natural fact
that film prevalently became a form of art, we should be reminded of many
perceptions from the early times of cinema, when many cultural authori-
ties believed that film was only an ephemeral attraction. However, the very
174
is especially significant – moments, which are meant to become “fixed” on
pieces of film. It must also be considered that one of the inherent attrib-
utes of photography and film is the possibility for unlimited copying. By
their reproduction we have to deal with the especially important impact on
a collective aspect of subjectivity and its identity. This gives way to the im-
plication of a simplicity of any audio or audio-visual narratives. There is al-
most no doubt that such a record as, for instance, a film, represents such
a powerful means of verification of memory in almost any respect: his-
torical, collective, and even individual or psychological. However, through
the accumulation of various modes of audio-visual recordings – no mat-
ter what kind of objects we can think of. For example, a memory, which is
stored on various media (photographs, films, tapes, drives, etc.), becomes
more complex as it becomes increasingly inaccessible in its totality. With
regards especially to film and other forms of audio-visual representations,
such products in a sense, “objectify” memory by the inherent act of exter-
nalisation. However, due to many multiple levels of reality, memory itself
becomes open and vulnerable to manipulation. Nevertheless, due to all cir-
cumstances, memory as it is “materialised” in film, is unavoidably con-
structed dynamically. This makes the work of film archives especially de-
manding and ethically accountable.
In the midst of these time-images and time-spaces, which are inhab-
ited by memory, the notion of identity is formed. Thus, this notion brings
us closer to the realm of culture since identity acquires its relevance in re-
lation to the notion of difference. Each film is in one way or another relat-
ed to these notions, which form its basic grammar. Since each instance of
identity is a product of some course or process of identifying activity (or
similarities of code and conduct within a cultural context), which works
through the differences towards recognising something or someone as be-
ing the same as it- or him or herself, the movement of representation, such
as in the case of a film, enters the process of identifying. This is the point,
where the aspect of aesthetics plays a big role. It would probably be quite
difficult to establish why exactly it happened that film, so soon after it’s in-
vention, became associated with art instead of remaining just some kind
of gadget for representing reality in a sense of documenting facts, events
or scientific research. As much as we take it for granted or as a natural fact
that film prevalently became a form of art, we should be reminded of many
perceptions from the early times of cinema, when many cultural authori-
ties believed that film was only an ephemeral attraction. However, the very
174
