The Aesthetics Of Media Representations

The Aesthetics of Media Representations

Aesthetics is commonly understood as the philosophy of art, culture, and nature and is part and parcel of representation as a mode of communication. When aesthetic feelings, experiences, and perceptions come to be explored, a specific form of social consciousness develops as aesthetic experiences appear not only in confrontation with works of art, but also in contact with social life.

Aesthetic forms of expression of media representations in particular – such as music, photographs and film – directly deliver information. In contrast to text or verbal narrative techniques which require a conscious act of transcoding, these aesthetic forms stimulate a more direct, emotional response.

Interestingly, communication in these media forms is more than a language: like semiotic processes, it is grounded in material reality. The aesthetic qualities of media representation present three forms:

(i) The aesthetic

(ii) The medium of technology

(iii) The aesthetic experience

The very mediation of the experience through a technological medium adds an additional element as it provides a way of recognising the very existence of the medium itself and observing how meaning flows through the senses of seeing, hearing and touch. The aesthetic consciousness itself can appeal to the fact that the media technology communicates itself.

So what is the relation between aesthetic qualities of media representations and their effects on consciousness and society?

The aesthetic in fact politicises representation by mobilising history and ethics, imbuing a media form with agency – allowing it to speak and, even more importantly, to suggest. An assertion of politics is expressed via aesthetics, which in turn, affects and shapes social and political consciousness and society in general.

Example:

A good example of the social and political consciousness arising in music forms has been explored in ethnographies by Tomas (2013) and Moorman (2014) on Kuduro as a media representation.

Kuduro is a contemporary genre of music and dance produced and consumed in Angola; the expression of young urban Angolans. Born of the dislocation and violence of war, musicians break down and speed up beats and dancers break down the body in order to reconnect the parts.

Kuduro dancers look like “they have no bones”. This element of the dance form is particularly pertinent as during the civil war the bodies of young people, particularly young men, were the sites of violence. When Angolan youths dance Kuduro they “remake themselves corporeally and perform their survival”, producing a novel aesthetics (Moorman, 2014).

Hence, the aesthetic quality of the music form – the lithe movements – affects and shapes political consciousness in its ability to allow dancers to turn their dire material conditions into cultural raw materials. Dancers who are missing limbs turn their physical liabilities into tools of performance.

Kuduro is the medium rather than the message, but interestingly, the medium is the message itself. Kuduro becomes a technological device mobilised by youths as a tool of social mobility and visibility. This avenue of social mobility is viewed as a way to traverse class divide.

So what does this example tell us?

What this ethnographic material presents is the idea of aestheticised politics. If we were to wrongly consider aesthetics as simply the study of the affective, the sentient, and the emotional – in other words, that which functions as art – then such modernist discourse would relegate aesthetics to outside of the realm of rationality.

Yet what we can see here is that media forms are in fact central to the repositioning of aesthetics, and by extension politics. Precisely because of the postmodern fluidity of contemporary culture to which these media forms contribute greatly, the aesthetic is no longer marginalised from the realm of politics. Rather, the aesthetic acquires agency in postmodernity and becomes indispensable in terms of its impact.

Aestheticised media representation acts as an agent that repositions politics on the edges of rationality. In so doing, the aesthetic allows for the binary opposites of reason and sentience to meet.

The aesthetic is hence an invitation to engage. The boundaries between aesthetics and politics become blurred as one is led to envision an aesthetic rearrangement of the ideological structures within which one approaches the media.

__

Moorman, M. (2014). “Anatomy of Kuduro: Articulating the Angolan Body Politic after the War”. African Studies Review 57(3): 21-40.

Tomás, A. (2014). “Becoming Famous: Kuduro, Politics and the Performance of Social Visibility”. Critical Interventions 8(2): 261-75.

Visual Representation Amid New Photographic Technologies

Visual Representation amid New Photographic Technologies

What kinds of change are we seeing in visual representation?

The notion of representation has found invigoration in anthropology through new ideas of self-representation and authorship of images. I categorise these into three shifts:

(i) The identity of those photographed is now self-represented on social media platforms and selfies in which individuals are themselves the photographer and the photographed.

(ii) The subjects of documentaries are now the producers of documentaries through the use of wearable photographic technologies.

(iii) The consumers of documentaries are now the producers of their own lives on social media with a new aesthetic of the everyday and a curated performance of the self.

Further, unlike previous eras in which anthropologists were in control (as photographers and ethnographic filmmakers) of media technologies, individuals now themselves control photographic technologies on social media.

These shifts in photographic practice have caused a loosening of hierarchies between amateur and professional photographers and new forms of self-representation have found an outlet in orchestrated performances of the self.

From curated images on Instagram to playful forms of self-expression on Snapchat, contemporary photographic practices mark an era in which importance is placed on authorship of individual experiences. Images on social media are now experiential, communicating a social narrative and offering new means of individuality.

But has the notion of representation changed altogether?

Although representational practices have shifted in new photographic technologies, a legacy of representation inherited from what we can term the “colonial encounter” remains. Although new photographic technology heralds an era in which indigenous groups can self-represent and smartphones are abundant even in Third World contexts, owing to global socioeconomic inequality a divide remains between ‘producers’ and ‘consumers’ of culture.

Often, the socioeconomic background of indigenous groups does not accommodate self-representation. Consequently, these groups continue to be ‘producers’ of culture for those who can afford to ‘consume’ this very culture through photographic technologies. Global inequality thus furthers an othering project between producers and consumers despite saturation of photographs across the globe. Arguably, until global inequality levels turn ‘producers’ into ‘consumers’ of culture by using their own photographic technologies to ‘capture’ current consumers, an ‘othering’ process of representation persists.

The future for visual representation

Emerging studies of contemporary photographic practices indicate psychological effects from new visual practice, such as the insight that photographs on social media “can counteract the positive effects of deeper engagement and memory” (NYT News Service, 2017). A future overlap between ethnographic and psychological studies on these behavioural effects is likely. Indeed, one can predict future disruptive technologies marking further changes. In September 2017, the Nokia 8 handset will be launched, offering ‘dual sight technology’ that simultaneously captures photographs on the front and back cameras. Perhaps photographic technology will spell radical departures from traditional photography, inviting reconceptualisation of core tenets of visual anthropology.

GoPro Cameras and the Future of Representation

How GoPro cameras mark a new era in photography and filmmaking

GoPro cameras are digital camera technologies that are embedded within the category wearable technology, as they are often attached to the body, such as an action cam on goggles. They are typically used for action sports.

GoPro cameras herald a new advent in photographic practice by offering fresh perspectives for viewing photographs and videos. Unlike traditional cameras of film and photography where there exists a distance between the photographer and the camera or between the photographed object and the camera, GoPro cameras offer a feeling of embodied presence. GoPro cameras are popular, then, for showcasing a first-person, immersive perspective in such a way that the viewer herself feels she is experiencing the very same reality.

The use of first-person perspective footage raises significant questions on anthropological representation and ethnographic filmmaking. Production of anthropological documentaries come into consideration as the GoPro cameras could entail new ways of filming. The practice of an ethnographer in performing first-person, reflexive ethnography based on participant-observation to ‘grasp the native’s point of view’ (Malinowski, 1922), is premised on the belief that anthropological research can provide insight into why certain aspects of a society are meaningful for its members.

Indeed, the creation of first-person observations of ceremonies and rituals could entail new anthropological data from the perspective of the filmed individuals themselves. The idea of using GoPro cameras for ethnographic films hence introduces questions on representation and the role of the ethnographer. The production of first-person ethnographic films using wearable technology could potentially mark a new era in the relationship between anthropology and film. In particular, the use of wearable technology could elevate the agency of filmed individuals. The importance of the ethnographer would correspondingly recede.

While projects like the ‘Navajo Film Themselves’ have been unsuccessful in showcasing indigenous self-representation, I believe GoPro technology may herald a more successful outcome in ethnographic filmmaking due to the medium of wearable technology itself. Wearable technology through its positioning on the corporeal body is akin to a visible extension of the self. Accordingly, it could have better receptivity among indigenous filmmakers as an extension without interference from an external ethnographer.

Acknowledging that an ethnographer herself would edit the footage and still authenticate the indigenous experience, footage from GoPro cameras goes decidedly further than other photographic technologies. By offering first-person perspectives, it is less vulnerable to interference from external editing. The cameras pave the way for an ethnographic film to give tangible form to anthropological knowledge rather than to merely produce it.