BOOK LAUNCH UPDATE: New Date (July 3) and Location! In conversation with Mark B. N. Hansen

Please note: Due to factors outside of my control, the book launch event for Post-Cinematic Bodies, originally scheduled for this Thursday June 29, has been postponed to next Monday, July 3 at 7pm.

I am happy to announce that I will be in conversation with Mark B. N. Hansen!

Please also note the change of venue, to the Kurfürstenstraße location of Hopscotch Reading Room!

BOOK LAUNCH! June 29, 2023: Hopscotch Reading Room, Berlin

[UPDATE: POSTPONED TO JULY 3 — MORE INFO HERE]

On Thursday, June 29, Hopscotch Reading Room (Gerichtstraße 43 in the Wedding district of Berlin) will be hosting a book launch event for my new book Post-Cinematic Bodies — which will be out both in print and open-access digital formats from meson press. There will be paperbacks available for purchase at the launch, and they’ll be more widely available soon afterwards. If you’re in town, come out around 7pm for a short reading, discussion, and drinks!

[UPDATE: POSTPONED TO JULY 3 — MORE INFO HERE]

Coming Soon! Post-Cinematic Bodies

Cover artwork by Karin Denson

Coming soon from meson press, in the Configurations of Film book series!

Post-Cinematic Bodies

How is human embodiment transformed in an age of algorithms? How do post-cinematic media technologies such as AI, VR, and robotics target and re-shape our bodies? Post-Cinematic Bodies grapples with these questions by attending both to mundane devices—such as smartphones, networked exercise machines, and smart watches and other wearables equipped with heartrate sensors—as well as to new media artworks that rework such equipment to reveal to us the ways that our fleshly existences are increasingly up for grabs. Through an equally philosophical and interpretive analysis, the book aims to develop a new aesthetics of embodied experience that is attuned to a new age of predictive technology and metabolic capitalism.

Exploring Cinematic Mixed Realities

Exploring Cinematic Mixed Realities: Deformative Methods for Augmented and Virtual Film and Media Studies

Arguably, all cinema, with its projection of three-dimensional spaces onto a two-dimensional screen, is a form of mixed reality. But some forms of cinema are more emphatically interested in mixing realities—like Hale’s Tours (dating back to 1904), which staged its kinesthetic, rollercoaster-like spectacles of railway travel inside of a train car that rocked back and forth but otherwise remained stationary. Here the audience of fellow “passengers” experienced thrills that depended not so much on believing as on corporeally feelingthe effects of the simulation, an embodied experience that was at once an experience of simulated travel and of the technology of simulation. Evoking what Neil Harris has called an “operational aesthetic,” attention here was split, as it is in so many of our contemporary augmented and virtual reality experiences, between the spectacle itself and its means of production. That is, audiences are asked both to marvel at the fictional scenario’s spectacular images and, as in the case of the “bullet time” popularized a century later by The Matrix, to wonder in amazement at the achievement of the spectacle by its underlying technical apparatus. The popularity of “making of” videos and VFX reels attests to a continuity across cinematic and computational (or post-cinematic) forms of mixed reality, despite very important technological differences—including most centrally the emergence of digital media operating at scales and speeds that by far exceed human perception. Seen from this angle, part of the appeal—and also the effectiveness—of contemporary AR, VR, and other mixed reality technologies lies in this outstripping of perception, whereby the spectacle mediates to us an embodied aesthetic experience of the altogether nonhuman dimensionality of computational processing. But how, beyond theorizing historical precursors and aesthetic forms, can this insight be harnessed practically for the study of film and moving-image media?

Taking a cue from Kevin L. Ferguson’s volumetric explorations of cinematic spaces with the biomedical and scientific imaging software ImageJ, I have been experimenting with mixed-reality methods of analysis and thinking about the feedback loops they initiate between embodied experience and computational processes that are at once the object and the medium of analysis. Here, for example, I have taken the famous bullet-time sequence and imported it as a stack of images into ImageJ, using the 3D Viewer plugin to transform what Gilles Deleuze called cinema’s presentation of a “bloc of space-time” into a literal block of bullet-time. This emphatically post-cinematic deformation uses transparency settings to gain computational insight into the virtual construction of a space that can be explored further in VR and AR settings as abstract traces of informational processing. Turned into a kind of monument that mixes human and computational spatiotemporal forms, this is a self-reflexive mixed reality that provides aesthetic experience of low-level human-computational interfacing—or, more pointedly, that re-constitutes aesthesis itself as mixed reality.

Clearly, this is an experimental approach that is not interested in positivistic ideas of leveraging digital media to capture and reconstruct reality, but instead approaches AR and VR technologies as an opportunity to transform and re-mix reality through self-reflexively recursive technoaesthetic operations. Here, for example, I have taken the bullet-time sequence, produced with the help of photogrammetric processes along with digital smoothing and chromakeying or green-screen replacement, and fed it back into photogrammetry software in order to distill a spatial environment and figural forms that can be explored further in virtual and augmented scenarios. Doing so does not, of course, present to us a “truth” understood as a faithful reconstruction of pro-filmic reality. On the contrary, the abstraction and incoherence of these objects foreground the collision of human and informatic realities and incompatible relations to time and space. If such processes have analytical or theoretical value, it resides not in a positivistic but rather a deformative relation to data, both computational and experiential. Indeed, the payoff, as I see it, of interacting with these objects is in the emergence of a new operational aesthetic, one that transforms the original operational aesthetic of the scenario—its splitting of attention between spectacle and apparatus—and redirects it to a second-order awareness of our involvement in mixed reality as itself a volatile mixture of technoaesthetic forms. Ultimately, this approach questions the boundaries between art and technology and reimagines the “doing” of digital media theory as a form of embodied, operational, and aesthetic practice.

“Aesthetics of Discorrelation” and “Exploring Cinematic Mixed Realities” — Two Events at Duke University, Feb. 20 and Feb. 21, 2020

This coming week I will be at Duke University for two events:

First, on Thursday, February 20 (5pm, exact location to be determined), I will be giving a talk titled “Aesthetics of Discorrelation” (drawing on work from my forthcoming book Discorrelated Images).

Then, on Friday, February 21 (1-3pm in Smith Warehouse, Bay 4), I will be participating in a follow-up event to the NEH Institute for Virtual and Augmented Reality for the Digital Humanities, or V/AR-DHI. I will present work on “Exploring Cinematic Mixed Realities: Deformative Methods for Augmented and Virtual Film and Media Studies” and participate in a roundtable discussion with other members of the Institute.

Virtual and Augmented Reality Digital (and/or Deformative?) Humanities Institute at Duke

I am excited to be participating in the the NEH-funded Virtual and Augmented Reality Digital Humanities Institute — or V/AR-DHI — next month (July 23 – August 3, 2018) at Duke University. I am hoping to adapt “deformative” methods (as described by Mark Sample following a provocation from Lisa Samuels and Jerome McGann) as a means of transformatively interrogating audiovisual media such as film and digital video in the spaces opened up by virtual and augmented reality technologies. In preparation, I have been experimenting with photogrammetric methods to reconstruct the three-dimensional spaces depicted on two-dimensional screens. The results, so far, have been … modest — nothing yet in comparison to artist Claire Hentschker’s excellent Shining360 (2016) or Gregory Chatonsky’s The Kiss (2015). There is something interesting, though, about the dispersal of the character Neo’s body into an amorphous blob and the disappearance of bullet time’s eponymous bullet in this scene from The Matrix, and there’s something incredibly eerie about the hidden image behind the image in this famous scene from Frankenstein, where the monster’s face is first revealed and his head made virtually to protrude from the screen through a series of jump cuts. Certainly, these tests stand in an intriguing (if uncertain) deformative relation to these iconic moments. In any case, I look forward to seeing where (if anywhere) this leads, and to experimenting further at the Institute next month.

Matthew Wilson Smith: The Nostalgia of VR

Smith poster DAW 2018

On Tuesday, May 15th, we’ll have our fourth and final Digital Aesthetics Workshop of the Spring quarter, “The Nostalgia of Virtual Reality” with Matthew Wilson Smith, at 4 PM in the Stanford Humanities Center Board Room. In this workshop, we will discuss the degree to which emergent technologies of virtual reality are indebted to longstanding concepts of presence and disembodied consciousness.

Matthew Wilson Smith is an Associate Professor of German Studies and Theatre and Performance Studies at Stanford University. His  interests include modern theatre; modernism and media; and relations between technology, science, and the arts. His book The Nervous Stage: 19th-century Neuroscience and the Birth of Modern Theatre explores historical intersections between the performing arts and the neurological sciences and traces the construction of a “neural subject” over the course of the nineteenth century. It was published by Oxford University Press in 2017. His previous book, The Total Work of Art: From Bayreuth to Cyberspace (Routledge, 2007), presents a history and theory of modern artistic synthesis, placing such diverse figures as Wagner, Moholy-Nagy, Brecht, Riefenstahl, Disney, Warhol, and contemporary cyber-artists within a genealogy of totalizing performance.