Why Gesture

Reference: Church, R. Breckinridge, Martha W. Alibali, and Spencer D. Kelly, eds., Why Gesture?: How the Hands Function in Speaking, Thinking and Communicating, Gesture Studies (Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017), vii https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.7

Gesture Study


  • 제스처 스터디는 20세기쯤부터 고성장 (bourgeoning) 특히나 말을 할때의 역할로서 연구되었다.
  • “window on the mind.” ::Hearing Gesture, Susan Goldin-Meadow (2007):: frequently in a way that reflects an imagistic version of what is being spoken.


  • 아리스토 텔레스는 행위를 일으키는 것과 (what causes a — efficient cause), 행위를 하는 이유 (what behaviour for — final cause)로 나누었다.
  • 산책을 한다고 할때, working metabolic 과 근육 시스템이 efficient cause, 건강이 final cause이다.
  • 이 글에선 what gesture is for가 될것이다.


  • 이 책에서 첫 테마는 제스처에 대해서는 생물학적, 정신학적 그리고 사회적으로 해석해 본다.
  • 두번째 테마로는 제스처의 기능을 모든 시간대의 프레임으로 해석해본다. – moment-to-moment, ontogenetic, and evolutionary
  • 세번째 테마는 the methodology for studying gesture is necessarily varied.


  • Finding that gesture occurs across different contexts and under different task requirements tells us that its functions are multi-faceted and flexible.
  • 네번째 테마는, 제스처의 기능은 producer를 위해서만 기능하지 않고, 보는 사람을 위해서도 작동한다. The gestyoure supports speech to enhance internal activities of the speaker, such as thinking and language production, while simultaneously supporting speech to enhance communication to listeners, influencing the listener’s thinking and language comprehension.

398-401 (Neurological evidence Analysis)

401- (Psychological evidence Analysis)

  • Gesture appears to be linked with language to support the way spatial information in speech ::(Alibali et al., Chapter 2; Ozyurek, Chapter 3)::
  • As another example, gesture appears to reflect action in a simulated form in problem-solving contexts (Hostetter & Boncoddo, Chapter 7; Nathan, Chapter 8)
  • 특히나 챕터5 에서 McNeill and Lopez-Ozieblo’s
    • Growth Point Theory (GPT):
    • (1) gesture and speech are synchronized;
    • (2) gesture’s format, which is gestalt, 3D, and imagistic, is distinctly different from speech’s format, which is analytic, 2D, and linear;
    • and (3) because these two formats are different, the combination of gesture and speech modalities reflects a more complete version of an idea than either modality alone.


  • De Ruiter의 경우 스피치가 제스처에 영향을 끼친다고 하며 제스처가 스피치의 supplement information으로 (that is redundant with speech)라고 말해지지만 이 책에서의 연구를 통해서 사실 서로가 영향을 받으며,
  • GPT 를 통한 연구는 gestyoure content mirrors speech content, because gesture’s format is 3-D and nonlinear, it is never fully redundant with speech.
  • Gesture provides visuo-spatial information that reflects 3-di- mensional, dynamic, as well as perceptual features (Hostetter et al., Chapter 7).
  • 제스처는 embodied cognition와 연결되어있다.
    • our understanding of concepts may be grounded in the way we physically interact with the world, which is reflected in the way we gesture about the world (Cook & Fenn, Chapter 6; Hostetter et al., Chapter 7; Nathan, Chapter 8; Novack & Goldin- Meadow, Chapter 17; Hostetter & Alibali, 2008; Alibali & Nathan, 2007; McNeill, 2005; Núñez & Lakoff, 2005)
  • 챕터 17에서 제스처는 특이한 유니크한 폼의 액션이다.
    • 즉 제스처는 어떻게 직접적으로 세상에 영향을 끼치는가에 대한 정보를 담은 직접적으로 세상에 영향을 끼치지 않는 액션이다. it represents information about a direct effect on the world without having a direct affect on the world (e.g., twisting a jar lid results in an open jar in a way that producing a twisting gesture does not; see also Goldin-Meadow, 2015, and Novack & Goldin-Meadow, 2016, for discussion).
      • This in betweenplace may serve a particularly important purpose for cognition.
    • However, gesturing about acting on objectsis more likely to lead to generalization and retention than actually acting on objects(see Novack & Goldin-Meadow, Chapter 17 and also Novack, Congdon, Hemani-Lopez & Goldin-Meadow, 2014; and Congdon, Novack, Brooks, Hemani-Lopez, O’Keefe & Goldin-Meadow, under review; Wakefield, Hall, James & Goldin-Meadow, 2017).

404-405 Social Evidence (Chapter11-16)

405- (Gesture Functions in all time frames)


Developmental time frame

Evolutionary time frame

제스처 메카니즘


  • A number of evolutionary perspectives suggest that gesture evolved either as a precursor to spoken language (Bates & Dick, 2002; Corballis, 2002; Rizzolatti & Arbib, 1998; Tomasello, 2008) or simultaneously along with it (McNeill, 2012).
  • In addition, there are powerful mechanisms of gesture on the much shorter timeframe of moment-to-moment processing, which spans from seconds to minutes. For example, when people are faced with challenging spatial and motoric tasks, they produce more representational gestures when they speak, than when they face simpler tasks (Alibali, Yeo, Hostetter & Kita, Chapter 2).

제스처의 기능


  • Tinbergen (1963) points out, a behaviour can be functional without being the direct product of some specific evolutionary mechanism.
    • human hands evolved to interact with real objects in the environment, but they were co-opted over time to also serve the communicative function of gesturing about imaginary objects not present in the here and now.
  • The gestures may enhance or disrupt common ground (Nathan, Alibali, & Church, Chapter 13), clarify or confuse an important concept (Singer, Chapter 14)

챕터 2 Representational gesture help speakers package information for speaking p. 15-


  • What role do gestures play in speaking? Current theories of gesture production have three primary foci:
    1. the role of gestures in communicating information,
    2. the role of gestures in producing speech, and
    3. the cognitive processes that give rise to gestures.
  • These distinct perspectives emphasise different aspects of the complex behaviour that we recognize as gesture.


  • We focus in particular on representational gestures, which are movements that represent semantic information via form (handshape), trajectory, or location.
  • 이러한 제스처는 beat 제스처와 다르다. which are motorically simple gestures that manifest aspects of the structure and prosody of speech but do not convey semantic content (McNeill, 1992), and 또한 인터렉티브 제스처와도 다르다, from interactive gestures, which are used to regulate turn-taking and other aspects of interaction among participants in a communicative situation (Bavelas, Chovil, Lawrie, & Wade, 1992).
  • 스피치와 제스처는 다른 기호적 특성을 가진다
    • Gesture: Distinct meanings converge into a single, synthetic gesture.
    • In contrast, speech is analytic and combinatorial, in the sense that the meaning of the whole depends on the meanings of the individual elements.
  • 글로벌과 통합적인 특징으로, gestures are adept at expressing spatial, motoric, and relational information (Alibali, 2005)
  • 이 글은 Information Packaging Hypothesis Kita(2000)에 의해 개발된 메또돌로지를 이용해 분석해본다.

Information Packaging Hypothesis란?

- *Information Packaging Hypothesis* “helps speakers organize rich spatio-motoric information into packages suitable for speaking” (Kita, 2000, p. 163) 
- 키타에 따르면 공간-동적(spatio-motoric) 생각은 “alternative informational organization that is not readily accessible to analytic thinking” (p. 163) 


  • 키타의와 몰(2012)의 의견에 경우
    • In later work, Kita and Özyürek (2003) further specified this process in their Interface Model, which holds that gesture production and speech production processes are linked bidirectionally. 스피치와 제스처 사이엔 익스체인지가 일어남.
    • Through this process, gesture and speech converge in content; more specifically, gestures encode information equivalent to the infomation speech encodes within a processing unit for utterance formation (roughly a clause for adult speakers) (Mol & Kita, 2012).
  • 이 생각은 다른 두개의 컨템 스피치 속 제스처에 대한 의견과 반대된다.
    1. First, the Lexical Retrieval(회복) Hypothesis (Krauss, Chen, & Gottesman, 2000): – Briefly, gestures activate spatial-dynamic features of concepts, which in turn feed activation to lexical items, facilitating speakers’ retrieval of those lexical items.
    2. Second, the Image Activation Hypothesis(de Ruiter, 1998; Wesp, Hesse, Keutmann, & Wheaton, 2001). gestures serve to maintain activation on mental images while they are encoded in speech.


- IPH에서 키타가 한 실험.
    - [image:5DDDBD6B-5494-438C-A9C3-0C293094973A-1343-0001218ACC14AD90/Screenshot 2020-04-03 at 22.32.02.png]
- As predicted from the IPH, participants produced more representational gestures (but not more beat gestures) in the hard condition than in the easy condition, while using comparable content in speech. 
- 결과적으로 더 어려운 그림을 설명해야할 때 더 많은 제스처를 사용함

제스처의 제한


- 아이들의 제스처를 제한 시킨뒤 설명을 시켰을때, 
    - 비교문이라던가  (about information that was not perceptually present, such as information about the initial equality of the object), 
    - 아니면 변화 transformation that the experimenter had previously performed.
    - 또는 hypothetical states or transformation (e.g., “if you put these two together, then this would be longer that this”)
- 제스처를 허용했을 경우
    - tended to focus on information that was perceptually present (e.g., “this one’s taller”) 
    - often combination with deictic information with perceptual gesture information.
        - (i.e., a gesture toward one of the task objects that also depicted or highlighted a perceptual feature of the object, such as a flat palm held at the top edge of one of the glasses, to depict the height of the glass) 
- **Thus, prohibiting gestures reduced children’s focus on perceptually available spatio-motoric information in their explanations.** 


- participants who were allowed to gesture expressed a greater percentage of key events with semantically rich verbs than did speakers who could not gesture. This finding is compatible with the view that speakers package information differently when they produce gesture and when they do not. 
- In addition, speakers who could not gesture were more likely to begin units with a filler (i.e., “um,” “uh,” “and,” or “then”) than were speakers who were al- lowed to gesture. 


- (말하기 전 집중용으로) Alibali et al. (2014) argued that the boy’s gesture served to focus his attention on the width of the dish, and highlighted information about width for verbalization. 
- (할 말이 정해진 상태에서 어떻게 말할 것인지 표현할 것인지 possible option를 explore하는 용으로 제스처를 사용) In other cases, speakers’ choices about what information to express are relatively constrained or specified in advance. In such cases, speakers may use gesture to explore possible options for how to express that information. 

챕터 7 (155-)


- As movements of the body, gestures are actions, albeit representational ones that do not actually manipulate the physical environment.  
- gestures provide perceptual experiences 
- Gesture as Simulated Action (GSA) 프레임워크는 
    - which claims that gestures emerge from **perceptual representations** and **links with action** that are formed in the minds of speakers. We then consider how gestures’ relationship to perceptual-motor representations might play a functional role in strengthening those representations in the minds of speakers. 


- Researchers who argue for the **embodiment of cognition** claim 
    - (1) that psychological processes are grounded in the sensorimotor(감각운동) system 
    - and (2) that **action is an integral part of perception** (see Glenberg, Witt, & Metcalfe, 2013 for a review). 
    - Thus, perceptual judgments are not the result of abstract calculations, but involve activation of our own previous, current, and expected sensorimotor experiences.  (간단한 거리 감각에도 얼마나 그 거리에 도달하기까지 에너지가 필요한가에 따라서 더 멀리 느껴지며, 누가 총을 들고 있는가 아닌가는 우리 스스로가 총을 들고 있느냐 아닌가로 판단된다)

157 (GSA의 연구들)

- **The GSA framework** follows the claims of embodied cognition more **generally to assert that when speakers talk about perceptual and motor experiences**, they activate perceptual-motor representations of those experiences, and **these representations reactivate the same neural areas that were involved in actually having or observing those experiences**. 지각적 운동적 경험의 제스처를 할때 실제로 두뇌의 그 부분을 액티베이트시킨다.


- For example, speakers gesture more when they are describing spatial or motoric information than when they are describing abstract information (Alibali, 2005). 


- Hostetter (2014) found that speakers gestured at high rates both when describing highly motoric objects (e.g., tools) and when speaking to a listener who could see their gestures. 
- Although the framework is termed Gesture as Simulated *Action*, this should not be taken to imply that the framework excludes gestures that occur with per- ceptual representations (such as thinking about the size or shape of an object). 


- judgments of size and distance of objects are affected by our own past and anticipated experiences with those objects (e.g., Witt & Proffitt, 2005). 
- Moreover, increasing evidence suggests that **viewing an object with a particular shape activates a motor plan for how to grasp or use the object (Bub, Masson, & Cree, 2008)** as well as a motor plan for **how to trace the shape of the object** (Bach, Griffiths, Weigelt, & Tipper, 2010). 
- It is also not unusual for speakers to gesture as **they describe something that they have only read about** and have not directly experienced. 
    - embodied cognition is that psychological processes are grounded in the sensorimotor system (e.g., Glenberg et al., 2013); such psychological processes include reading. 


- This means that gestures can be thought of as highlighting perceptual-motor representations in two ways. 
    1. Gestures’ perceptual-motor representations’ production signals that a particular kind of representation is formed in the speakers’ mind, mainly one that reactivates the neural experience of the perceptual and motor event the speaker is describing.
    2. The motor plan involved in gesture can strengthen the speakers’ representation, which can affect how easy it is for the speaker to attend to, remember, or describe gestured elements of that representation 

챕터 17(381-


- When we say here that **gestures are representational actions**, we mean that they are meaningful substitutions and analogical stand-ins for ideas, objects, actions, relations, etc. 
- 여기서 **representational** 의 사용은 representational gesture (a category of gestures that look like the ideas and items to which they refer (i.e., iconic and metaphoric gestures) 와 혼동되면 안된다. ➡︎ **apply to all types of nonconventional gestures**, including representational gestures (iconics, metaphorics), deictic gestures (points), and even beat gestures (rhythmic movements closely coordinated with speech). 


- Gesture is *action*in that it involves movements of the body. 
- 하지만 제스처는 다른 방식의 액션이다.
- one that *represents* the world rather than directly impacting the world.

Properties of a Movement to be Identified as a Gesture

382-3 — Processing movement as gesture

- 재현적인 제스처는 비재현적인 제스처와의 구별이 필요하다. 
- 이 부분은 왜 사람들이 움직임을 제스처로 보게 만드는가를 설명한다.
- 첫번째 조건으로는 **빈 손**이다 ➡︎ 하지만 모든 빈 손(춤이나 운동)이 제스처로 인식되진 않는다. ➡︎ However, unlike dance or exercise, the movement itself is *not* the goal of a gesture. 

384 — The unique functions of gesture in communication, problem solving, and learning

- 제스처와 다른 움직임은 인식적으로 분리된다는 benefits가 있다.

The Place of Artists’ Cinema

Reference: Maeve Connolly, The Place of Artists’ Cinema: Space, Site and Screen (Bristol: Intellect, 2009)

Chapter 5


  • Recent years have seen a new wave of artists directing feature films devised for theatrical exhibition. Profiling ‘Hollywood’s New Wave’ in 2006, Linda Yablonsky claims that ‘more and more artists are directing feature films with large casts, big budgets, and elaborate story lines’.
    • Linda Yablonsky, ‘Hollywood’s New Wave’, ARTNews, (December 2006): 112–117. One might also add works that use well-known film actors such as James Coleman’s Retake with Evidence (2007), featuring a monologue by Harvey Keitel.
  • Douglas Gordon and Philippe Parreno’s Zidane: A 21st Century Portrait (2006) as a example
    • And Shirin Neshat, Pipilotti Rist and Piotr Uklanski
    • Sam Taylor-Wood and also Steve McQueen’s Hunger (2008)
Sam Taylor-Wood and also Steve McQueen’s Hunger (2008)
  • It could be argued, however, that Warhol’s work also remains significant for the current generation because it contested the limits of the theatrical exhibition context.


  • Venice Biennale
    • By the late 1990s, self-consciously cinematic moving image installations had emerged as a notable feature of the Biennale.
    • Turbulent by Shirin Neshat and Consolation Service by Eija-Liisa Ahtila
  • Giardini di Castello
    • Functioning as emblems (or at least relics) of national identity, the situation of the pavilions in the Grardini specifically foregrounds the relationship between landscape design, public spectacle and the material architecture of modernity.
  • any structure ‘built for the convenience of spectators’ and described the pavilion as ‘spectacular architecture that embraced the very spectacle of modern life’.
    • She also proposes a direct parallel with cinema, understood as a ‘quintessential public space: and inclusive place of social gathering and public transit as well as a site of spectacle’.
      • *Bruno, Public Intimacy, 57.


  • 작가는 부루노의 주장을 반대하며, 파빌리옹과 시네마의 다른 점을 강조한다. 지아디니 디 카스텔로 파빌리옹은 프로젝트 이미지를 위해 만들어진 공간이 아니며, 건축적 요소들은 프랙틸컬함에 의해서 선택된 것이다.
  • 최근의 시네마와 건축의 교차는 불규칙한 explorations of architecture and design by artist.
    • Alex Coles historicizes this current in a short article on ‘Pavilions’, which references works by Rodchenko, Schwitters and Allan Kaprow among others.
      • 또한 Dan Graham과 올라푸 엘리슨을 그 대표주자로 바라봤는데, 그는 Olafur Eliasson와 Dan Graham을 파빌리옹을 시네마 전시를 이을 작가로 주목한다.
      • 그러나 또한, Alex Coles은 , ‘Pavilions’ 에서 두 작가의 가장 큰 차이점을 지적했는데
        • Graham의 파빌리옹은 ‘bring the beholder back to the surface of the work and so insist that they reflect on the act of beholding itself’,
  • 또한 그라햄의 작업은 막다른 길에 다다를 수밖에 없다며 그가 컨셉츄얼하게 건축물에 접근하면서 컨템의 아트의 디자인을 향한 바운더리를 깨는 것에 실패한다고 보았다.
    • 그의 다른 작업 Cinema (1981)의 경우 설계도면과 글로만 존재하며, 유리면을 통해서 안과 밖에서 동시에 필름을 보게 할수 있게했다.
  • Eliasson offers a ‘less cerebral and more phantasmagoric experience’.
  • Alex Coles, ‘Pavilions’, Art Monthly 308, (July–August 2007): 3.


  • Chrissie Iles의 경우 현재 많은 컨템 아티스트들의 explorations of cinema는 likely to be mediated by memory and nostalgia associated with the materiality of celluloid.
    • Deadpan (Steve McQueen, 1997)
    • Trailer for a Remake of Gore Vidal’s Caligula (Francesco Vezzoli, 2006)
    • 그 이유에 대해 셀루로이드가 ‘in crisis’에 있다고 보며 Kodak (Tacita Dean, 2006)를 그 예시로 든다.
  • 그러나 글쓴이는 시네마틱의 크라이스가 주 주제가 아닌 작품들이 있다고 주장한다.
    • In fact, the articulation of a love of cinema, at the moment of its ‘loss’, may be linked to other forms of anxiety and nostalgia, articulated across a variety of practices, in a range of production and exhibition contexts where the relationship between cultural memory and public space is foregrounded.
    • 그 예시로 Anthony Vidler ➡︎ ‘architectural uncanny’, ‘warped space’, 컨셉으로 focuses on the potential of architecture to both mark a place (as landmark) and articulate a response to it.
      • He is also interested in ways in which physical place may be mediated by virtual rather than material experiences of time and space.
      • 그 예시로 Rachel Whiteread’s House 의 작업을 들며, the focus of much discussion at the time of its production and subsequent demolition, illustrates a certain anxiety about contemporary forms of spatiality.
  • According to Vidler, the proliferation of the ‘void’, in works such as House is linked to a discernible nostalgia for space at the end of the twentieth-century. – (169) There is not only no room for us in House, there is no space left either. Space is both denied and destroyed; filled, where a modernist or postmodernist sensibility would demand that it be opened.
    • Antony Vidler, Warped Space: Art, Architecture and Anxiety in Modern Culture (London;Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 2000) 236.
  • – it indicates the extent to which the experience of even an unquestionably physical artefact may be shaped by anxieties concerning emptiness or absence. – It is also possible to understand the fear of the ‘void’ through reference to the theorizations of public space that are advanced by Rosalyn Deutsche, among others, and discussed in Chapter 3. Emphasizing that democracy actually derives its legitimacy from ‘the image of an empty place’,
    • ::See Rosalyn Deustche, Evictions: Art and Spatial Politics (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1996) 273.::
    • ::Vidler, Anthony, Warped Space: Art, Architecture, and Anxiety in Modern Culture (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2000)::


  • Roberts argues that because digital (as opposed to ‘archival’) mediums are concerned with the delivery of information and with direct networks of communications,
    • any kind of informational translation of experience to be passed on from one location to another’
      • There are two key points here:
        • firstly, Roberts suggests that in the ‘archival’ medium, time participates in the creation of space through the separation of one moment from the next,
        • and secondly, she emphasizes that the archival is aligned with processes of translation.
        • 결국 디지털 미디어에서 시간과 공간은 트렌스래이션의 프로세스로 지정되는데 하나의 데이터 공간 안으로 ‘트렌스레이션’ 되는 것을 통해서 시간이 지정된다.


  • Proposing ‘hauntology’ as a counterpoint (or corrective) to Marx’s ontology, Derrida argues that the ghost first makes its appearance in use-value. He contends that it is impossible to locate a ‘pure use’ in advance of commodification because of the repetition that is necessarily associated with use-value.
    • Use cannot be determined, he proposes, without some form of repetition, which should be understood as ‘substitution, exchangeability, iterability, the loss of singularity as the experience of singularity itself, the possibility of capital’.
      • ::Jacques Derrida, Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning and the New International, Trans. Peggy Kamuf, (London and New York: Routledge, 1994) 202::
    • there, even before its first appearance.


  • 다른 아티스트들이 Vezzoli를 예시로 theatricality of the cinema and Demans offers a more metaphorical exploration of cinematic illusion and the commodity form
    • 그 예시로 ➡︎ Kultur und Freizeit (Culture and Leisure) is the title of Andreas Fogarasi’s installation
      • Andreas Fogarasi Kultur und Freizeit, 2007 Installation, Hungarian Pavilion, Biennale di Venezia 2007 Photo: Tihanyi-Bakos-Fotostudio Courtesy: Georg Kargl Fine Arts, Vienna


  • The Cinema Machine: Venetian, Atmospheric (Tobias Putrih, 2007)
    • He(Putrih) argues that while the creation of objects served as ‘as a counter-statement’, the exploration of cinema structures and forms offered a ‘place of equilibrium’.
    • It’s an “in-between” space: between the reality of the sidewalk and the fiction of the projection’.
      • ::Tobias Putrih, interviewed by Nataša Petrešin, ‘On Quasi-scientific Experiments, Collectively Built Objects and Random Structures’, in Tobias Putrih, Venetian, Atmospheric, 52nd International Art Exhibition La Biennale di Venezia, Slovenian Pavilion, Exhibition Catalogue (Ljubljana, 2007) 5.::


  • Reflections of State and Subject: [in,the] visible state (Bea McMahon, 2008)
  • Although physically separated, the projections are synchronised, creating a dialogue between images, sounds and texts so that a sentence that appears on one screen is completed on the other.
  • The screens are coated with buttermilk so that their surfaces become clouded and opaque


  • Bea McMahon’s strategy draws attention to the materiality of the installation and to the role of reflection in the creation of a video projection.

Conclusion: Materials, Places and Social Relations


  • Artists’ cinema is not aligned with any one mode of production or exhibition and many of the works I have discussed are not specifically concerned with the materiality of film.
    • Nonetheless, it is possible to discern a recovery of materiality, or perhaps a kind of ‘re-materialization’, in the relatively small number of works that assert the specificity of place by emphasizing the evidential and indexical qualities of film.
      • Commenting upon the exhibition of artists’ cinema in museums, Lars Henrik Gass recently noted that the latter are often complicit in the ‘re-auratisation of the technical image in the art world’ while at the same time demonstrating a ‘careless, cavalier approach to context and presentation’ of film works.
        • Lars Henrik Gass, ‘Afterword: After the Cinema’, Kinomuseum: Towards an Artists’ Cinema, eds. Mike Sperlinger and Ian White (Cologne: Verlag der Buchhandlung Walther König, 2008) 158.
    • In my view this issue cannot be understood solely through an analysis of the ‘technical image’, or the indexical qualities of film.
  • Chapter 1
    • I considered the possibility that the prevalence of the projected image in contemporary art practice might, by virtue of its very immateriality, somehow index the ‘unrepresentability’ of contemporary experience.
      • ::이건 아마도 ephemeral, void::
      • rise of a post-productive free-floating capitalism.
  • Chapter 3
    • I argued that the rise of the multi-screen video projection during the 1990s was informed by a broader staging of ‘publicness’ within contemporary art museums, particularly those associated with urban regeneration programmes.
      • Willie Doherty’s Re-Run. Doherty’s work is marked not only by an engagement with film structure and form but also by a self-reflexive exploration of site and setting within artists’ cinema.
  • several works where the relationship between event and document is complicated by a deliberate intertwining of the temporalities of production and exhibition, in which the ‘replay’ becomes folded into the event, most obviously in various works by Pierre Huyghe.
    • (111) My use of the term ‘event-site’ is also informed by Pierre Huyghe’s claim that the ‘replay’ now supersedes the event itself, to the extent that representation of the event is now routinely incorporated into the conception of the project. Before addressing the relationship between
  • site, event and document, some broader issues concerning the concept of location in both installation practice and film production should be noted.
    • ::Pierre Huyghe in George Baker, ‘An Interview with Pierre Huyghe’, October 110 (Fall 2004): 83.::


  • The supposed shift from material to immaterial labour has also structured much of the discourse surrounding Nicolas Bourriaud’s account of ‘post-production’. Roberts contends that Bourriaud’s thinking is directly indebted to a ‘bio-computational’ model of authorship.
    • In parallel with this move from citation to ‘flow’ in art practice, Robert emphasises that contemporary art museums have shifted their focus away from display and toward forms of cultural production that are characterised by a low artistic visibility.
    • He seems to read this development in terms of an institutional strategy to redefine (or perhaps rebrand) the museum as a site of ‘cultural flow’ rather than ‘a site of cultural domination’.


  • Sacredness is making a comeback here, there and everywhere. In a muddled way we are hoping for the return of the traditional aura…A phase in the modern project is being wound up. Today, after two centuries of struggle for singularity and against group impulses, we must bring in a new synthesis which, alone, will be able to save us from the regressive fantasy that is abroad. Reintroducing the idea of plurality, for contemporary culture hailing from modernity, means inventing ways of being together, forms of interaction that go beyond the inevitability of the families, ghettos of technological user-friendliness, and collective institution on offer.
    • ::Nicolas Bourriaud, Relational Aesthetics, (Dijon: Les Presses du Reel, 2002) 60. Emphasis added.::
  • According to Bourriaud, the public, in the form of the ‘micro-community’ gathering in front of the image, is the source of the aura: ‘the aura of art no longer lies in the hinter-world represented by the work, nor in form itself, but in front of it, within the temporary collective form that it produces being put on show’.
    • ::Bourriaud, Relational Aesthetics, 61.::
  • But even if the limits of the temporary collectivity or micro- community described by Bourriaud are all too apparent, the staging of the cinematic, whether through technologies of projection or architectures of display, can involve some form of reflection upon the structures and processes through which experiences of collectivity are constituted.
    • ::이 부분은 동의한다. 기기적인 프로젝션이건 건축적 display건 비판적 critique::
  • My research into the place of artists’ cinema responds directly to the pronounced visibility of certain forms of artists’ film and video over the past decade, across multiple contexts of contemporary art production and exhibition. There is some evidence to suggest that this era of high visibility may now be coming to an end.
    • it may be that the tendency to overtly and visibly stage the cinematic through projection, site or setting might be waning.
      • 그래서 어떤 possibbiliies 란 말인가?
    • Many of the works discussed towards the close of my study are marked by an awareness of the screen as a physical structure, and the cinema as setting for a collective experience.
      • Yet in some recent examples, the display of the projected image is deliberately frustrated, as in the case of Bea McMahon’s [in,the] visible state or Aurélien Froment’s White Balance.
    • Although the notion of ‘artists’ cinema’ seems destined (like television) to become increasingly anachronistic, the works discussed should continue to merit attention beyond the context of contemporary art practice. Ultimately, even when artists’ claims upon cinema are open to contestation, they still have the potential to inform an understanding of its history, its present and, perhaps most importantly, its future.

Media-archaeology and Artist: Rear‐View Mirror

202003290348 — Media-archaeology and Artist: Rear‐View Mirror

Reference: Erkki Huhtamo, ‘Art in the Rear‐View Mirror: The Media‐Archaeological Tradition in Art’, in A Companion to Digital Art, ed. by Christiane Paul (Chichester, West Sussex ; Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2016), 69-

일반학자들과 미디어 고고학과의 관계


  • Devices that have disappeared not only as material artifacts but even from cultural memory have been unearthed, dissected, reinvented, and combined with ideas from other times and places.  
  • Intellectually and emotionally challenging works are created by ambitious artists who have done their historical homework. 


  • By exploring forms like panoramas and stereoscopy, artists such as Jeffrey Shaw, Michael Naimark, and Luc Courchesne—although producing works that were contemporary high‐tech creations—were also implying that there was a technological past worth exploring.
  • (글쓴이의 질문) I began questioning the discursive construction of contemporary media culture, wondering what may have been hidden behind its dominant utopian and “progressivist” narratives. 
  • In idiosyncratic ways everyone was animated by a desire to question the prevailing “grand narratives” about technology, science, and media.  ➡︎ 커다란 내러티브란건 정말 있기는 한걸까
  • Influenced by Michel Foucault’s archaeology of knowledge, they began exploring the archives for omissions, undetected or masked ruptures, and dark corners. 


  • Media archaeology questions technological determinism by emphasising the multiplicity of the factors that affect historical agents at any one moment and contribute to the formation of media culture. 
  • (키틀러와 맥루한의 차이점) The human remained the center of McLuhan’s thinking, whereas for Kittler the onslaught of technological devices used for the “inscription” and storage of words, sounds, images, and numerical data pointed toward the posthuman condition, where humans would disappear and history come to an end2 (Kittler 1990). 
  • 키틀러의 경우 특별히 스스로 미디어 고고학으로 지칭하지 않았으나 데리다의 탈구축이론 deconstructionism, 라캉의 정신분석학, 그리고 푸코의 지식의 고고학에 영향을 받았다.



  • “The point is confirmed: history is a story of loss and recovery and comes to us in bits and pieces,” The Gesualdo Hex(2010) 
  • Most importantly, the results of the excavations made by artists are expressed by different means. Instead of being translated into the meta‐language of words, artworks often re‐enact features of the excavated object itself. 
  • Like artists, media archaeologists travel between tempo- ralities, comparing them, juxtaposing them, and persuading them to illuminate each other. 
  • To be worth being identified as media‐archaeological, an artwork must evoke earlier media in one way or another. Such works can be treated as “metacommentaries” on media culture, its motifs, its structures, and its ideological, social, psychological, and economic implications (Huhtamo 1995b). 
  • 미디어-고고학 아트는 1980 후기쯤에 시작한 것으로 보인다. 초기 contributions 스콜러들 (Huhtamo and Parikka 2011, 3, 6–7, 14) 
    • Aby Warburg
    • Walter Benjamin
    • Dolf Sternberger 
    • Ernst Robert Curtius
  • 아티스트들
    • 모더니스트 eschewed the past
      • Le Corbusier
      • Walter Gropius
      • Kasimir Malevich
      • Piet Mondrian
    • 퓨처리스트
      • Filippo Tommaso Marinetti 의 리드
    • Kirk Varnedoe and Adam Gopnik’s exhibition catalogue High and Low: Modern Art and Popular Culture(Varnedoe and Gopnik 1990) 


  • 비록 학자들과 아티스트들이 멀게는 르네상스 시대부터 미디어에 대한 아이디어를 차용했지만 
    • Aby Warburg’s pioneering research demonstrated, the references mostly concerned styles and motifs—Warburg’s “pathos formulas” (Michaud 2004, 7–9 and passim)—rather than tools and conditions of visual illusions. 
    • 다다이스트, 초현실주의 (특정지을 수 없는 아티스트들) Marcel Duchamp, Frederick Kiesler 가 아마도 처음으로 테크놀로지와 conversational relationship 을 발전시킨 케이스일 것이다.
      • 다다이스트 예시) Francis Picabia’s Dadaist paintings of machines are early examples (Pontus Hultén 1968, 82–95) 

  • 초현실주들은 극도로 past의 archived plundered (약탈) 하였는데 
    • using them[past archived] as repositories for ideas to s(t)imulate the operations of the unconscious mind. Max Ernst 막스에른스트’s graphic novels La femme 100 têtes(1929) and Rêve d’une petite fille qui foulut entrer au carmel(1930) demonstrated how popular illustrations from magazines, encyclopedias, children’s books, and other sources could be turned into uncanny collages that penetrated beyond the rational surface of bourgeois normality while preserving traces of their actual referents.


  • 두샴은 “미디어 아티스트”는 아니지만 적은 숫자의 아티스트들만이 그보다 미디어와 complex한 relationship 을 develop했다.
    • 예를들어서 는 chronophotography 를 연상시킨다.
  • Posing as an optician‐scientist, Duchamp bridged the past and the present, combining 3D with 4D. 
  • 그중에서도 가장 complex media-archaeological contribution은 Étant donnés: 1. la chute d’eau, 2. le gaz déclairage

Art, Technology, and the Past 50s/60s


  • has 60/70년대의 구성주의, 네오 다다이즘, 실험주의 아티스트, 
    • More intense, indirect approach to constructing functioning devices to administer visual and auditory experiences for their audiences. Yet, no consensus about the implications of the human–machine relationship was reached. 
    • the constructivist line continued the anti‐passéist agenda of early 20th‐century modernists 
    • It was the neo‐Dadaist trend that drew inspiration from the past, making ambiguous and impish references to “obsolete” cultural forms and mixing them with products and ideas from contemporary culture. 


  • Experimental artists of the 1960s did not ignore media history, but it was rarely their major concern. 
    • 예를 들어 Stan Vanderbeek 의 경우 Movie‐ Drome(1963) 
  • 하지만 이 경우도 무빙 이미지 컬처를 reinvetion하는 것이 목적이었지 미디어 히스토리는 중심이 아니었다.
  • 다른 예시로는 Brion Gysin and Ian Sommerville’s Dream Machine (or Dreamachine, 1961). 
  • 과거 zoetrope 와의 공통점이 제시되지만, one should also consider the differences related to function and the context of invention and use. 
    • Gysin characterized the sensation with a media‐related metaphor as “a multidimensional kaleidoscope whirling out through space” (diary entry, December 21, 1958, quoted in Weiss 2001, 113). 
    • Gysin wanted to produce a machine for creating the kinds of sensations he had experienced. (“spontaneous hallucinations” he experienced on a bus trip in southern France)
    • The zoetrope was a moving picture machine, whereas the *Dream Machine*was meant to tease out images assumed to pre‐exist in the user’s mind. 


  • The Dream Machinedeserves a place in the history of media‐archaeological art, because it belongs to a tradition running from the “natural magic” of 17th‐century Jesuits to kaleidoscopes, phenakistiscopes, and zoetropes, quack machines for healing with light, and kinetic artworks such as Duchamp’s Rotoreliefs and  Schöffer Nicolas’s Le Lumino(1968) and *Varetra*(1975). 


  • 다른 예시로는 Alfons Schilling (1934–2013) 
    • Duchamp’s disks always produced discrete figures in motion (including their pulsating illusions of depth), whereas Schilling’s rotating paintings emphasized the fusion of colors and shapes when spun. 
  • As Max Peintner has shown, Schilling’s contraptions were deeply rooted in the history of perspectival imaging, joining the broad tradition of perspective machines, katoptric experiments, and optical prostheses described by Martin Kemp in his book Science of Art(Kemp 1990; Schilling 1997). 
  • Alfons Schilling과의 다른 비교 예시로는 American Jim Pomeroy (1945–1992) 

Jim Pomeroy, Stereo Views “From Artpark 1987…”, reel 2, 1988

  • Schilling’s stance was cool and formal; he called himself an “artist and visual thinker” or “artist and innovator,” and rarely paid much attention to thematic social and cultural issues. Pomeroy was colorful and eclectic, a manifestation of a long American tradition of enthusiastic self‐taught tinkerers (DeMarinis 1993, 1–15). 
    • Newt Ascending Astaire’s Face(1975) 
  • As Roland Barthes famously demonstrated, photographs can never be sites of incontestable truth. Their meanings depend on cultural coding and textual “anchor- ing” that can be (ab)used for ideological purposes (Barthes 1977, 15–31). 
    • * His later idea, expressed in Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography(1980, trans. 1981), of the “punctum” partly undermined his earlier semiotic position. 

아방가르드시네마, 필름역사 (중시)주의, Archaeologies of Projection


  • 아티스트
    • Revisionist film historians Noel Burch, the issue contained material about filmmakers such as Klaus Wyborny who had since the late 1960s incorporated references to early cinema into their works. 
    • Other names could be added to the list: 
      • Ken Jacobs, 
      • Hollis Frampton, 
      • Malcolm LeGrice, 
      • Ernie Gehr, 
      • Robert Breer, 
      • and Werner Nekes. 
        • The latter’s experimental feature film Uliisses(1980–1982) was packed with media‐archaeological references (Nekes 1987). 
  • 50년대와 초기 60년대는 개인적 (myth)poetic works가 주를 이루었다.  Foten with echoes of surrealism. 

☐ 특히 Stan Brakhage  202004011903 — Stan Brakhage

☐ Moth

Some Notes on the Selection of Titles for By Brakhage: An Anthology, Volume Two | The Current | The Criterion Collection

  • 60년대 후기를 지나면서 structural and conceptual forms로 들어섰다. 
    • “cinematic apparatus” (the material‐metapsychological context of the filmic experience) 
    • (Structural filmmaker) Ken Jacobs’s Tom, Tom the Piper’s Son(1969) 의 경우 1905년대의 필름을 늘이고 자르고 줄이면서 짧은 필름을 거의 2시간 가량으로 늘렸다. 그로인해 filmic text를 강제적으로 들어나게 했다.
      • Bart Testa has rightly characterized Tom, Tom the Piper’s Sonas “an archaeological essay in addition to a semiotic genealogy of film language” (Testa 1992, 222–272). 
  • 60 년대에 또 유행을 한 것은 “thumb movies” (adding a tactile dimension to the visual experience) ➡︎ flipbook 은 이미 1860년대에 발명되었다. Englishman John Barnes Linnett in 1868. 
    • 플립북을 만든 다른 익스페리멘탈 필름메이커에는
      • Robert Breer (as early as 1955), 
      • Oskar Fischinger (as Mutoscope reels), 
      • Stan Vanderbeek, 
      • Douglass Crockwell, 
      • Andy Warhol, 
      • Jack Smith, 
      • and Birgit and Wilhelm Hein, 
      • as well as by Fluxus artists like George Brecht, Mieko Shiomi and Dick Higgins. 
  • 70년대에 들어와서는 
    • John Baldessari, 
    • Gilbert & George, 
    • Eduardo Paolozzi 
    • and François Dallegret contributed to the artists’ flipbook tradition. 
  • 지속적으로 만들어져 현재에는 
    • visual artists like Keith Haring, 
    • animation filmmakers like Peter Foldes and Taku Furukawa, 
    • and media artists like Gregory Barsamian and Tony Oursler (Gethmann et al. 2005).
  • Robert Breer also created his own versions of Mutoscope viewers and exhibited his flipbooks as murals (Gethmann et al. 2005, 74). 


  • 스콜러
    • The discovery of early cinema by avant‐garde filmmakers became associated with emerging forms of cinema scholarship, 
    • such as writings on the cinematic apparatus (dispositif) by scholars such as Jean‐Louis Comolli and Jean‐Louis Baudry and the “new film historicism” represented by Tom Gunning, André Gaudreault, Noel Burch, Charles Musser, Thomas Elsaesser, Miriam Hansen, and others (Testa 1992, 18). 
    • Gunning demonstrated by discussing the complex relationships between the successive “new beginnings” introduced by avant‐garde cinema and the cinema of the earliest times (Gunning 1983, 355–366). Gunning, Tom. 1983. “An Unseen Energy Swallows Space: The Space in Early Film and Its Relation to American Avant‐Garde Film.” In Film Before Griffith, edited by John L. Fell. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    • https://www.rebeccacummins.com/
    • Such “memory lapses” remind us that media‐archaeological excavations should not be limited only to identifying forgotten predecessors and unacknowledged cultural contexts. They must be performed on the terrain of contemporary art as well. 


  • Avant‐garde filmmakers extended their explorations to other types of projected images as well. Ken Jacobs, whose profuse work with found footage film had raised issues about the shape of film history since the 1950s, played a central role here by moving into experimental live performance. 
  • 켄 제이콥의 파라시네마는 두개의 섭헤팅으로 나뉜다
    • The Nervous System
      • pair of modified 16 mm film projectors that can project single frames—both forward and backward—and a variable‐speed motorised shutter wheel rotating in front of their lenses 
    • The Nervous Magic Lantern
      • He went further back to the basics. The effects are produced by manipulating light by means of colour filters and spinning wheels. 


  • Such “memory lapses” remind us that media‐archaeological excavations should not be limited only to identifying forgotten predecessors and unacknowledged cultural contexts. They must be performed on the terrain of contemporary art as well. 
    • 두개 다 테크노로지컬 시스템으로 have been utilised in series of performances. 
    • Jacobs has since moved both forward and backward in time. The Nervous Magic Lanternretreated to the “primitives” of light, color, and shadows (perhaps echoing the multimedia lightshows of the 1960s), whereas works like Capitalism(2006) extended Schilling’s discoveries into the realm of the digital.  쉴링의 영향
    • Capitalism: Slavery – Ken Jacobs – The Film-Makers’ Cooperative
    • 다른 작가의 예시로는 (whose non-filmic projection works bring up historical precedents) Tony Oursler’s The Influence Machinewas a large‐scale outdoor installation shown in New York and London (Oursler 2000) 
  • Slide Movie—Diafilmprojektor(2006) by Gebhard Sengmüller 

뉴미디어아트, 미디어고고학, 여성미디어아티스트. (80년대)


  • In the 1980s a growing number of artists began creating installations in which digital technology played a central role. 
  • 갤러리 방문지를 physically interact 시키는 것이 주요 특징이다. “Grand narrative” of techno culture around 1990 을 evoke 하는 것도 특징이다.
  • 이러한 작업들은 특정적으로 과거를 언급하진 않지만, 매우 많은 작업들이 그렇게 했다. which may have reflected the uncertainties about media culture at the time. 
  • In 1994, I considered the appearance of this approach as a sign of the times (콜드워의 종식 테레토리얼, 문화적 큰 변화), as proof that “media art is gradually reaching maturity, but it also implies a certain anxiety (Huhtamo 1994c).” 


  • The reference point behind 
    • The Banff Kinetoscope, or Field Recording Studies(1993–1994) by Michael Naimark,

  • The Virtual Body(1994) by Catherine Richards, 
  • “at once a scientific instrument, an aesthetic object, and a postmodern magic box,” is a column‐like viewer with a video simulation of a rococo salon inside. 
  • * Curiosity Cabinet at the End of the Millennium
  • and A Dialogue with Hunger(1993) by Heidi Tikka’s works is the long history of “peep media” (the practice of peeking at hidden images through lenses), but they dealt with it in very different ways (Huhtamo 2006). At Hand, movable touch installation


  • 페미니스트 이론과 관계를 조명한다
    • There has been an extraordinary amount of interest in media‐archaeological approaches among female artists (although not always explicitly defined as such by the artists themselves). One could argue that this must have something to do with the parallels between media archaeology, feminist theory, and women’s history. Much like media archaeologists, feminist theorists and women’s historians are engaged in activities aimed at uncovering suppressed phenomena and discourses, combating narratives converted into “truths” in the male‐dominated society. 

이야기, Alternative Archaeologies of Moving Images and Sound


  • 미디어 고고학의 레퍼런스들은 포스트모던의 문화의 급증을 바탕으로 한 경우가 많으며, 광범위하게 적용하는 것은 더이상 가능하지 않다. 그중에서도 꾸준하게 makes sense하는 아티스트에는 
    • Toshio Iwai “Another Evolution of the Moving Image.” 


  • The story of morphovision’s development is a good example of Iwai’s media‐ archaeological approach (Iwai, 2005b). 
  • Paul DeMarinis “Another Evolution of the Sound Image.” Paul DeMarinis
  • I think that by carefully studying the histories of current day technologies, we can uncover insights into the constellation of human and technical arrangements that can help to projectively crystallize an understanding of the real nature of our current condition. This is based on my prejudice that cultures have long‐standing currents of agenda—over hundreds of years and often unspoken—and that technologies, like the rest of material culture, are a reification of these agendas. They are neither dis- coveries nor neutral. They come out of the dreams of people and offer indications of social relations. (Pritikin 2012) 


  • Applying Wittgenstein’s idea of family resemblance to Iwai’s output, one could suggest that his practice forms a web of interconnected ideas in a state of constant transformation. 
  • The old meets the new, low tech meets high tech. Iwai has made numerous forays into entertainment and design, even designing a raincoat from new super non‐absorbent material that makes it possible to play with the raindrops—to enjoy the rain. He has also applied ideas from his art installations to museum displays. 


  • 이와이가 테크놀로지의 Natural magic 을 그린다면 이마리니즈는 DeMarinis builds machinic artworks that sing, speak, transmit messages, and resonate culturally in the observer’s mind. 
  • 이 두 아티스트의 차이
    • DeMarinis is a learned artist‐researcher, who also finds inspiration in forgotten patent documents and old books of science and technology. So is Iwai, but in a different sense. For Iwai the device—the technical apparatus—is the center of everything, a mechanism full of unrealized potential
    • 디마리니즈의 질문은 ➡︎ His creations seem to be asking: What hap- pened? What did not happen? What would have happened, if …? What would hap- pen, if …? 


  • DeMarinis’s work undermines simple deterministic ideas. In typical manner, he wrote in connection with The Messenger: “there is no inherent bi‐directionality in electrical communication” (DeMarinis 2010b, 240). 
  • DeMarinis’s works with radios reveal parallels with the interests of hackers and techno‐hobbyists. 



  • diversity 로 인해 Fitting all this—and other unnamed things—under a neat conceptual umbrella and classifying everything under a limited set of headings would be impossible, and per- haps not even desirable. 
  • Generalizations of any kind are risky, but it may not be incorrect to say that all experimental art strives for the indeterminate and the unchained, even when highly structured. 
  • The Internet, in particular, is a huge topos storage area and accelerator. 
  • Access to channels of information is a precondition for developing a media‐archaeological awareness. The emergence of interest in early silent films in the 1960s and 1970s had to do with new possibilities of seeing such works in film archives and clubs and on television. 


  • the media‐archaeological turn has something to do with an overarching, partly uncontrolled and troubling transition that is underway in media culture. 
  • To return to McLuhan’s metaphor evoked at the beginning of this study, gazing into the rear‐view mirror is a necessary precondition for finding routes—scenic, exciting, and safe, although not necessarily the quickest and the most direct—to navigate into the future.  ⬅︎ 이게 이 사람 목적이네.

Journey to the Seaside and honest back story of my work

What is the nature of making art? If it is not simply about fashioning forms and colours, then it has to do with the production of meaning…If you begin there you realize that potentially everything is material for art, because at some point it has to have an aspect of concretion and must be framed in relation to people’s lives.

Stuart Morgan, and Joseph Kosuth, ‘Art as Idea as Idea: An Interview with Joseph Kosuth’, Frieze, 6 May 1994 <https://frieze.com/article/art-idea-idea> [accessed 22 February 2020]

Yes, I love seaside. From my background, there should always be a reason why that content. but since I had a conversation with my loving friend,

What truly important is seeking what you really want. What feeling you want to present? How do you feel recently? What is your thinking about this bittersweet life? So, I decided to go to seaside again and make a video with it. I want to put that place name as secret because that would be only my place and intimate place of mine, where someday I would like to bring someone to show how I felt that times.

Yes… There was so many trouble
I finally found my place
And I started shooting

Honestly, I never used this Canon XA10(it was only one remained at uni’s resources store…,) I had no idea what kind of images I can get from it. I was afraid because it was a challenge with the unknown. The place where I’d planned to go, because I already been there, I knew what viewpoint I could get. But that new place was totally unknown, and I should believe my instinct (well that’s life babe.) It doesn’t matter how the image’s quality is high or best colour or not, it is still my image. I had a rough idea that I wanted to make, but real work starts when you really move your hands and begin to do something.

Honest Story

I love to make. It is an exciting experience that I’m actualise something that only existed in my imagination. Although I had a plan, it doesn’t mean that I know why I am doing right now, it can remain a lot of questions. Why sea wave? Why that composition? Why am I making this? Why is tactile or touching so important? After I finished editing, I tried to get the answer to this work; then I realised that I should go back to personal memory.

I remember that hand. No, I am thinking that hand right now. That moment, I didn’t see that hand, but by sense, I could see how it stroked my heart and my hand. I didn’t care in front of the street; how I worked, how was the sky, I just wanted to feel that hand. And I still can see it as if it is happening in front of me. As a third person, I can see in front of me. It is surprising how that small part of the body could create that much sensation. Each of my fingers, fingertips, between the fingers, touched another fingers, fingertips, between the fingers. I don’t remember surrounding, just fingers and warmth of the hand in the dark black hole. It hurt because there was an ending, I knew even that time, it will be end soon. But, no I am not sad because it finished, that long and the short moment has already distilled within my memory, became a violent wave, continuously crush my head and heart. The face faded away from my eyes, that skin scent evaporated from my nose, that warmth cooled in my heart, but that image of touch remained everywhere. It has extracted into the sense of eyes, as a looping memory, possess it as mine and possessed by it.

I never expressed how I felt at that time. Verbal communication is always hard to deliver. The simple words cannot show everything I want to say. I do not know even there was something between hand; I never asked about that moment. Perhaps I was afraid that if there was only one hand. Perhaps I was afraid as soon as I verbalised that memory it would vanish from the memory as if it was just my imagination, never happened in my life.

So, I made this video. I visualised that hand. Metaphorical wave crushes everywhere and touches your eyes from a distance. It never ends, or it ever moves. In the video, visual and sonic senses composed into the one image, but tactile. Is that intentional? Or just I couldn’t deliver the tactility of it?

It’s gone now. Remained only perhaps, maybe or never. But looping.

Seeable Relationship. Sayable connection. #03

This post is not organised writing or essay, but the fragmented thought.


Were we to attempt to see the intervals between things as themselves things, the appearance of the world would be just as noticeably changed

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, and Donald A. Landes, Phenomenology of Perception (Abingdon, Oxon ; New York: Routledge, 2012), p. 16

If we hold ourselves to phenomena, then the unity of the thing in perception is not constructed through association, but rather, being the condition of association, this unity precedes the cross-checkings that verify and determine it, this unity precedes itself. If I am walking on a beach toward a boat that has run aground, and if the funnel or the mast merges with the forest that borders the dune, then there will be a moment in which these details suddenly reunite with the boat and become welded to it. As I approached, I did not perceive the resemblances or the proximities that were, in the end, about to reunite with the superstructure of the ship in an unbroken picture. I merely felt that the appearance of the object was about to change, that something was imminent in this tension, as the storm is imminent in the clouds.The spectacle was suddenly reorganised, satisfying my vague expectation. Afterward I recognised, as justifications for the change, the resemblance and the contiguity of what I call “stimuli,” that is, the most determinate phenomena obtained from up close and with which I compose the “true” world.

Ibid, pp. 17-18

The unity of the object is established upon the presentiment of an imminent order that will, suddenly, respond to questions that are merely latent in the landscape. It will resolve a problem only posed in the form of a vague uneasiness;

Ibid, p. 18

Is the moment changing? The duration of changing? There is an interesting example by Merleau-Ponty, which is used as the rabbit and the hunter image in English and french version, but different example in Korean translation. When one woman saw her hotel uniform lover, he is a handsome and beautiful lover. But when she saw him by accident around the hotel, he is just a uniformed hotel carrier. (Each book in French and English pages are below.) I am assuming this example differences because the translator used another source such as the Japanese or German version. However, it is fascinating differences how two examples can explain same thing in different way about the shifting of the unity from one to another without interrupting two unity world. Further, for me, it should be approached differently as a lover and as an image. Well, let’s find out how I can use this example

Merleau-Ponty claims that unity of the thing in perception is not constructed through association, but rather, being the condition of association, which can deliver the immediate answer.

Phenomenology of Perception

The unity of the object is established upon the presentiment of an imminent order that will, suddenly, respond to questions that are merely latent in the landscape. It will resolve a problem only posed in the form of a vague uneasiness; it organises elements that until then did not belong to the same universe and which, for that reason, as Kant said insightfully, could not have been associated.

대상의 통일성은 예의 그 광경에 잠재되어 있을 뿐인 문제에 대하여 단숨에 답을 제공하려는 임박한 질서의 예감에 기초해 있고, 모호한 궁금증의 형태로만 제기 되었을 뿐인 문제를 해결해주며, 그 통일에 도달할 때까지 동일한 세계에 속하지 않았던, 그 때문에 칸트가 심원하게 말한 바대로 연합될 수 없었다던 요소들을 조직한다.

Ibid, p. 18

What answer? Answer from the vagueness? Is that means unity is immanent in the quality of the duration even before the unity? Or is it within the duration of the changing? Or shifting. Once this unity constructed until it is changed into a different world, it habitually maintains its world. Him as a unity of the constructed world. This changing should be a painful and aggressive one. Until then, he would be, or I would see him as a different from the others and not as my unity.

The condition of the seeable, which is stimulated by space or the knowledge, doesn’t satisfy my question of the seeable him (Well, obviously, I just started phenomenology of perception, so I guess there is a long way to go). But I remember Susan Sontag is questioning in her book about the pain from the war pictures. Are we used to its pain because photo exposed too often? Or are we getting a different way of affection?

  • Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, Phénoménologie De La Perception, Tel, 4 (Paris: Gallimard, 2009), p. 23; Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, and Donald A. Landes, Phenomenology of Perception (Abingdon, Oxon ; New York: Routledge, 2012), p. 16
  • Sontag, Susan, Regarding the Pain of Others (New York, N.Y: Picador, 2003)

Extra ➡︎ Action and Speech

Reference: Emmelhainz, Irmgard, ‘Can We Share a World Beyond Representation?’, 106, 2020, pp, 1-10

In The Human Condition Arendt stresses repeatedly that action is primarily symbolic in character and that the web of human relationships is sustained by communicative interaction (HC, 178–9, 184–6, 199–200). We may formulate it as follows. Action entails speech: by means of language we are able to articulate the meaning of our actions and to coordinate the actions of a plurality of agents. Conversely, speech entails action, not only in the sense that speech itself is a form of action, or that most acts are performed in the manner of speech, but in the sense that action is often the means whereby we check the sincerity of the speaker.


  • Lebenswelt: the world of common human experience and interpretation.
  • According to Arendt, modernity, propelled by the destruction of all tradition, is characterised by the irretrievable loss of the experience of shared meaning, which was previously created by talking to and making sense with one another. This loss is accompanied by the disappearance of a space for arguing, resining, argumentation: the space of politics, comprised of speech and action. ::Arendt, Hannah, Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought, Penguin Classics (New York: Penguin Books, 2006)::
  • As Gilles Deleuze put it, the link between man and the world has been broken. Modernity also means the replacement of “society” and “community” by “mass society.”
  • For Arendt, mass society is characterised by isolation and a lack of normal social relationships; as a result, consciousness of a common interest is absent.


  • For Hannah Arendt, the expansion of authoritarianism in Europes in the twentieth century stemmed from the alienation and loneliness brought about by the degradation of the world in common. ➡︎ 문화적 요소가 결핍됬다기 보다 커지면서 퍼진거겠지
  • Representation — the dispositif that, via speech and action, enables appearance in the world in common, and also the human capacity for the creation and dissemination of shared meaning and traditions — has been hijacked by capitalism, authoritarianism, democracy, the internet, and spectacle. ➡︎ 여기서 디스포지티프 의미는 스트럭쳐, 전통과 의미를 구성하는 디스포지티프 ➡︎ 푸코의 글을 다시 읽어보자.
  • Speech and action ➡︎ 한나 아렌트의 스피치와 액션의 의미는 뭐지?
    • 고전적 구분을 따른 아렌트
    • 폴리스(polis) = 공공적 영역 -> 활동 ➡︎ speech
    • 사회적 영역 ➡︎ 경제 활동 및 결사 혹은 집단 ➡︎ 생의 욕구를 해소 하는 장소
    • 오이코스(oikos) = 사적 영역
  • ::각각의 영역에는 각각의 dispositif가 존재하는 걸까?::
  • 여기서 아마도 푸코와의 차이점은 (혹은 같은 점은) Political I’magination (19세기) reproducers a representative form of social cohesion. They did this by constructing and disseminating a world of shared meaning that expressed the alleged “essence” of an imagined community: shared cultural history, iconography, language, food, and dress. ➡︎ ::Anderson, Benedict R. O’G, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Rev. ed (London ; New York: Verso, 2006)::
  • 1960년대경에선 아트계에서 abandoned representation and dismissed representativity as totalitarian structures, as vehicles for a bland, sexist, and racist humanism and a trite universalism. ➡︎ 청소년기에 있는 것 처럼 스트럭처를 거부했고 (만들어진 스트럭처) 그러면서 각자가 결국 자신의 젠더, ethnic origin, political struggle, or sexual orientation을 대표하며 입장을 발표했다.
  • Minorities
  • 1980s ‘90s 경에선 representativity 가 다시 되돌아왔고 with a vengeance through identity politics and consciousness-raising activism
  • A new, invisible social contract was drawn up in which individuals would now only speak on behalf of themselves as representatives of their own persona experiences of ethnic, political, or gendered specificities, with the mandate to address “everyone” and to secure recognition of “my” ordeal ➡︎ ::결국 self 는 representation으로 밖에 존재할 수 없게 된 것 아닐까? 나는 나를 represents 한다. Self-representation. 하지만 만약에 이게 계속 된다면, 결국 남는 건 텅 비어버린 representation.::
  • 20세기 후반에 globalisation dismantling of the referential economy of political and aesthetic modernity ➡︎ assigned artists universal representativity. Under globalisation, art is disseminated to a globalised mass society through and internationalised culture industry. ➡︎ ::아트 란 그룹 자체로 representation ➡︎ 이건 사실 아트가 아트만을 얘기하게 된 계기가 될 수도 있겠다.::


  • The main problem with artworks that speak on behalf of the struggle of others, or that seek recognition for “my private ordeal.” is that they inhibit a moralising realm of non-shared meaning ➡︎ ::의미 없는 외침:: ➡︎ ::이건 다시 같은 질문으로 되돌아온다, 혼자서만 하는 소리를 작업할 의미가 있는가?:: ➡︎ ::아트 학교에서의 문제점 중에 하나는, 개개인의 목소리에 귀를 기울이기에 점점 더 개인적이 되어가는 질문이 된다는 것에 있을지도 몰라.::
  • When despotic forms of empathy prevail, action and speech are reduced to sheer appearance. Speech without action — such as speech that merely demands recognition — fils to disclose the position that the speaking human occupies in relation to others and the world, beyond simple identitarian or subjective categories. In the opposite case — when we have gestures without speech — these gestures take the form of brute physical action without verbal accompaniment and are thus meaningless (like terrorist attacks or massacres in schools and public spaces.) ➡︎ ::이거야 말로 내가 커뮤니케이션의 중요성을 말했던 부분중에 하나다::
  • For Arendt, actions are only made relevant by the spoken word, which identifies the speaker as the actor announcing what she’s is doing, thereby giving meaning to her actions, but only in relation to others. In other words, no other human behaviour is in greater need of speech than action


  • Through speech and action, we not only learn to understand each other as individual persons, but also to see the same world from on another’s (sometimes opposing) standpoints. In this context, universality means that while everyone sees and hears from a different position, some people have the capacity to multiply their own point of view. ➡︎ ::Arendt, Hannah, Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought, Penguin Classics (New York: Penguin Books, 2006), p. 219.::

Seeable Relationship. Sayable connection. #02

This post is not organised writing or essay, but the fragmented thought.

From the last posting, I think it is worth to continue the topic. Although, I am interested in the topic of the moment of becoming ‘seeble’ or the after moment of the affection (I guess I should read Massumi again), it is still related what is ‘seeing,’ in Foucault’s term

First of all, what intrigues me is when Rajchman describe that Foucault’s seeing is not only visionary but is part of doing. There are two ‘doing’ in self-evidence prison, a participation or acceptance we can refuse. In Foucault’s idiom, évidence is related to the acceptability of a practice. “It is to try to see how we might act on what cannot yet be seen in what we do. It is, in short, a “critical” art, and it is in exercising it that Foucault would be, in Deleuze’s term, a seer or voyant (p. 94).” Then, what is the seer? Deleuze explained Foucault’s seer as a someone who seeing unseen évidneces that makes things we do acceptable or tolerable to us (Deleuze, 1986). In other word, Foucault opens up the conversation that unseen self-evidence, which is not hidden but unseeable. Rather deliver decisive answer but, a seer that make unseeable to seeable êvidnece. If I can connect with this relationship, I may say relationship itself, or the moment itself can be an act of seer with out subject.

Foucault found the similarity of the historians eye to the fiction’s making visible the unseen space of seeing; making visible unseen manifest.

not to show (faire voir) the invisible, but to show the extent to which the invisibility of the visible is invisible. Hence [fiction] bears a profound kinship with space. . . .

Foucault/Blanchot, New York, Zone Books, 1987, p. 24.

Similar aim which showing how things might be otherwise, beyond our self-evidences, other possibilities into the life (I would like connect this in next post about the ‘clicking moment of the realisation’; what is realisation? is it from the invisibility? or unseen? and second question would be the relationship with the space, or the power of the space). Furthermore, Foucault continue to the ‘spatialisation’ of the knowledge. Rather than perceptual evidence through a logic of inference, inductive or deductive, as modern western scholars obsession of the observation, the knowledge in fact, constructed as fiction writers.

Here, I should make clear about my understanding, that it is not about the validation of the philosophy or the science, but the social construction of the knowledge and the space, until the eye no longer deciphers the “prose of the world,” and where, therefore, “the eye was … destined to see and only see, and the ear to hear and only hear (Foucault, The Order of Things, p. 43.). There are many way of the “modes of spatialisation,” such as Natural science’s “technology of the visual”: observatories, microscopes, cyclotrons. And experimentation is central to them. This is not only the history of the philosophy or science, but in the fine art, where validation of the eye had been playing main role. While machinery vision replaced human vision, human eyes had located in new way of spatialisation(let’s keep talking about this later.) Of course, both related representation of the language in theFrench idea which voir with évidence(isn’t it same for Deleuze? Folding the idea from the french), and the knowledge as a spatialised contents in the brain. Is it lost space? displace? Here, again question is what is Foucault’s ‘spatialisation?‘ what does it means when he said space makes knowledge seeable? what’s Foucault’s apparatus?

One of the essential conditions for the epistemological “thaw” of medicine at the end of the 18th century was the organization of the hospital as an “examining apparatus.”

Foucault, Discipline and Punish, p. 185.

Seeable Relationship. Sayable connection. #01

When I first saw him.

The seeing is not about the biological vision, but a moment of recognition about a person, as in front of you or in the same space. It can be anywhere–a first meeting, or a date, or in a party. This visibility can be triggered by anything, from the voice or his perfume or small gesture. Actually, it doesn’t matter what makes him seeable because there is no decisive factor for each case. That moment comes without reason or definite time but suddenly make him seeable. Only that time, he arrives in your life, changes my seeing into a different angle. It is not like the romantic movie that illustrates this moment with bright sunshine or the sound of the bell. It is plain moment, something made you notice him. From that moment, the memories with him pile up and becoming accumulation in the part of life.

I have small doubt about what Foucault said “form of visibility.” As Deleuze pointed out, he is an “audiovisual” thinker. His idea about the relationship between space, knowledge, and power are related to visibility. Human’s physical interaction with spatiality creates seeable knowledge, which has been generated in different disciplines and knowledge. Yet, this visibility cannot explain the visibility of the moment of recognition in the individual relationship. My experiment started a long time ago by taking off my glasses. I cannot see clearly, his face nor his features. This restriction of the one sense, however, cannot prevent seeing him once I recognised him. Once he became seeable, vision restriction is not a huge problem to make him feelable. I can see him in the crowd, I can feel him without seeing him. Maybe, this is what Foucault wanted to assert in his book; the power of the moment of becoming seeable. The moment of the awareness.

It generated a few questions; when I could “see” him? Why I can still “see” him? When he becomes a personal relationship? About the personal relationship, when it becomes stronger than the moment of the seeable, personally, it is the moment when he got the name. Not a name of his own, but a name from me. As name becoming more personal, his feature becoming stronger inside of me. One Korean poem I love, Kim Chun Soo’s ‘Flower‘ goes

Before speaking her name
she had been nothing but a gesture.

When I spoke her name,
she came to me and became a flower.

Now who will speak my name,
one fitting this colour and fragrance of mine,
as I had spoken hers
So that I may go to her and become her flower.

We all yearn to become something.
I yearn to become an unforgettable meaning to you
And you to me

Seeable, is more to see the gesture of the form. It has no particular subjectivity until it gets its name. However, I am still questioning, how I noticed him, his form of gesture, feelable gesture, the moment of the seeable to feelable. When he was “nothing but a gesture.” It is difficult question, and I have, yet, no answer about this questions. I only can say, it is beautiful changing, beautiful my own changing, and beautiful forgetting. But I cannot figure out what happened in that moment. This visibility is strong enough to make me forget about before the seeable moment.

What happened exactly?
Why I can see you?
Why I am looking for you?
Why your gesture makes me feel?

Desired Desires

I just suddenly started writing and didn’t notice this long… just wrote anything without conclusion…—Sometimes I feel that the connotation of ‘desire’ is, even in Art institutions, inevitably connected with negativity. In many time, desire to live, to be loved, to be happy, and beauty–either sexually or sacred, is conceived as a manifestation of the chaotic and naive expression.

“Pure” babies are monstrously demonstrating those desires. For instance, the desire to devour all the knowledge from the world is associated with the desire to survive. However, as an icon of the “pureness,” those emotions have conceived something that should be protected until it is somehow stained with ‘black desires.’ Surely, it shouldn’t be compared to a ‘pure baby,’ who has no freedom or ability to think about the freedom, with a grown human’s desires in ‘beautifully constructed society,’ which must be protected for the consensual civilisation.

All the anger, recently has shown in many countries, are delivered by the lack of satisfaction of the desires. Which is, I believe, should be the most basic fulfilment; ‘Desire to Live as a Human being.” In my opinion, the negativity of desire is not coming from ‘pure desire,’ but from the laking in desire. Backfire of this poverty of desire causes anger, fury, and finally abandonment. Which we can observe from young people in East Asia(I’m talking here mostly, South Korea and Japan, where young people’s desire are rejected and denied.) This is my most concern recently. More and more desires become and camouflaged into pure anger, as it is the answer of all. However, show your desire, is not means that break down everything with anger, but building the foundation to achieve those desire, which I believe the most potent stimulus for life. Babies are not crying to angry, they cry to fulfil their basic desire.

There should be a reason why these disguises happening. But it is impossible to grasp the one reason for the current social problem, and of course because I’m not a expert for social or economic, so it isn’t make sense that I conclude the reason here. But I’m studying communication, especially for visual and social. Therefore, I believe is it worth to tackle this problem from the ‘desire’ point of view. I believe the power of desires, but before we really understand what is desired and what we want, it cannot show its potentiality and possibility.

No more posts.