뉴미디어 플랫폼에서의 영화의 규정에 대한 고찰 = A Bordering on Film in New Media Plat Form

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to reestablish shifted status of cinema in digital media environment. Experimental film has been unable to develop its own discursive power within the gravitational field of art and cinema. Pseudo Cinema which form of digital art that generated from new media ground; Interactive visual art, animation and stage installation made by phantomlike virtual images, have obviously different aesthetical nature from cinema. Furthermore, New Media plat form do not include cinema as his subgenre. In 1960s, when ontological meaning of film cover cinema, film has be known as an authoritative art medium in critical visual culture. As Annette Michelson once said, Everything else goes into the set of not-cinema. As Allan Kaprow`s term, post-medium condition, film was appropriated art material in the generation of post-war generation by its expensive nature. During post-war generation, the main topic in visual culture has been moved from medium-discourses; like painting centered art world, to time-art discourses. Film has been understood as a meta-medium in time-art. But in New Media flat form, cinema is not the meta-genre but also New Media itself do not include cinema as its essential meaning. There are two major problems of film that formally believed as a substantial nature of itself but no longer applicable in digital media environment. The first problem is a convention of film regarding of narrative. So to speak, the various forms of avantgarde, experimental, materialist and structuralist cinema have eschewed the conventions of narrative feature. Second is our superstitious assumption that film material has been linked with representation of time. This ghostlike misbelief was the dominant philosophical meaning and aesthetical situation of cinema in its recent thirty years. But substantiality is no longer verifiable and not true for digital media. Everything was once cinema, but in New Media plat form, cinema rather obliged to answer the question: what we can call as cinema? The main reason that we cannot judge digital media as higher field from cinema is because cinema has been developed from technological ontology of photography. Even though we cannot call most of digital contents from new media environment as a branch of cinema, those media contents still could explained by early form of cinema. But, we need to acknowledge, those media forms in digital, as unique art forms that germinated from different ground from cinema and developed as a totally independent form.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 FRANCISCO CASSETTI, "Sutured Reality" 137 : 97-,
• 2 JEFFREY SKOLLER, "Shards, Shadows and Specters"
• 3 LEV MANOVICH, "Media After Software" 12 :
• 4 ANDRÉ BRETON, "Manifesto of Surrealism"
• 5 JONATHAN WALLEY, "Identity Crisis: Experimental Film and Artistic Expansion" 137 : 25-, 2011
• 6 BRUCE JENKINS, "Hollis Frampton: Recollections/Recreations"
• 7 ANNETTE MICHELSON, "Film and the Radical Aspiration"
• 8 ANNETTE MICHELSON, "Film and Radical Aspiration" 42 : 1966
• 9 GENE YOUNGBLOOD, "Expanded Cinema"
• 10 ALLAN KAPROW, "Assemblage, Environments and Happening"
• 11 CHRISTIAN METS, "A Semiotics of the Cinema"