Harry Potter and the Usual Conflict which creates a Series of Unfortunate Events (Lectorial 8)

My understanding of narrative is as a sequence of events  motivated and propelled by casualty (cause and effect), in which characters are revealed through their interactions, a series of which propels a plot through the relations between characters reaching a resolution. This does not mean that narrative necessarily has to be portrayed in this linear fashion as Jean-luc Godard said “a story should have a beginning, a middle and an end, but not necessarily in that order”. Narratives traditionally follows a structure, using tropes, conventions and repeated representations to create audience expectations. By manipulating these expectations that convention has created, modern producers are able to evoke a stronger, more personal response for example when somebody slowly swings shut the bathroom mirror while a baby cries in a monitor there is (more than likely) somebody standing behind them with a knife. But what if they’re not there? What if they’ve already stabbed them, they close the cabinet and the camera pans down to reveal their blood-stained torso, and then the baby cries into the monitor. Conventions can work across or be limited to genre.

There are some interesting examples where authors have challenged conventions and commented on them within the text itself. I recommend Tex Avery’s Red Hot Riding Hood, and Walt Disney’s Duck AmuckMost commonly these conventions are challenged in video but  the use of the narrator is prominent in books and audio as well, challenging conventions of narratives in medium is the whole concept behind famous radio adaptation war of the worlds. It is not, I believe, always necessary to go to this extent to criticise convention and will experiment in the manipulation of audience expectation to have a more powerful emotive impact in individual scenes within a greater narrative form.

The (your name) Effect – Lectorial 5

How lovely would it be to leave this world with an idea or process known as “The Liam Effect.” I assume it would be much more powerful a thought if your name were Liam, so I suggest you read and understand it as “The (your name) Effect.” Liam’s effect is a work in process, and my “Jarrod Effect” is yet to be conceived and there is a flurry of contraception blocking my way – the commitments to work, uni, sport and family limits the chances of “The Jarrod Effect” being ready for production any time soon. One person who has succeeded in bringing their effect to public view (no, not Ashton Kutcher’s Butterfly Effect) is Lev Kuleshov.

This is quick video that sums up his theory, that how we interpret an image or scene is influenced by what immediately follows or precedes. Bare this in mind while you watch:

Kuleshov took the stock footage of a reasonably expressionless man and played it three times interposed and edited against various scenes. He believed that viewers understanding of the man and his expression would change each time depending on what footage it was placed against. Indeed his audiences of the 1920s saw that if seen after the bowl of soup the man appeared hungry, after the body of the child he seemed upset and towards the lady he seemed lustful. Personally I did not feel that his expression changed at all (it doesn’t) however the meaning and my understanding of this man still differed in each scenario.

My perception of the man is that he is disinterested and unaffected by whatever it is that is happening. How then could he appear to others to be hungry upset or lustful? Still, my reading of this man as a character changed with each section, against each of these images I found myself asking what kind of a man responds like that; the important question, WHY?

Shown after the bowl of soup my idea of him was as a man well-off, to whom food was in constant supply and his disinterest was due to his wealth and satisfaction. Depicted following the deceased child this man took on a completely different identity, somebody unaffected by this sight must be psychopathic or disturbed, I began questioning whether he was a killer. In contrast to the lady his disinterest created a new level altogether, the passing of time, or a history, as in my opinion he no longer seemed interested they may have previously been an item and he has grown tired, moved on or been betrayed.

This effect while seeming obvious today was groundbreaking research in these youthful years of film. Today this effect is used in every piece of edited media to one extent, people master in the manipulation of audience understanding or response and purposefully make viewers develop their own ideas as their perception is actively influencing in blank space.

Blood in the Gutter – Lectorial 4 – subtitled: we’re gonna need a montage

As we continue to work on our creative self portrait the class has become oriented around the techniques and effects of editing in media. Next week our second project brief is due and it is helpful to understand what message can be conveyed or implied through the editing of film media. An interesting read about just how important the space is between two frames is Scott McCloud’s “Blood in the Gutter” (1993). It discusses comic strips and how most of the action happens in “the gutter” the place between frames as the reader perceives the passing of time or the happening of an action. While not as prominent in other mediums of multimedia, what is left out is often just as important as what is shown.

In the making of film there are various staples, whether concrete or abstract happenings that often act as a signal for a greater meaning. For example the sound of a church bell could be used to signal the start or the end of something, when that is matched with an image of somebody stressed the viewer instinctively reads that they are late. Sound bridges can be used to signify two separate scenes occurring simultaneously or immediately after. One feature used in many films that is riddled with cliches of structure, texture and technique is a montage. Here’s a satirical take on a montage that makes it just how apparent the effects of editing are:

(You may have to click the link to take you to youtube if it doesn’t work)

 

Did You Miss Anything? A discussion of hyper and deep attention- Lectorial 1

Rumour has it you didn’t make it to the Media Lectorial today. Maybe you got lost. Maybe you slept in. Maybe your cat died. Maybe you thought daylight savings started. Maybe you’re a dyslexic agnostic insomniac and you stayed up all night wondering if there really is a dog. Anyway, after asking the stupid question “did i miss anything?” Here is your stupid answer.

According to poet Tom Wayman you missed everything and nothing:

Nothing. When we realized you weren’t here
we sat with our hands folded on our desks
in silence, for the full two hours.

Everything. Contained in this classroom
is a microcosm of human experience
assembled for you to query and examine and ponder.

A less sarcastic man would answer quite simply: “we wrote a list of ten things we wanted to achieve from this course and then discussed a paper by N. Katherine Hayles on Hyper and Deep Attention.” You may have no idea what hyper and/or deep attention is, more unfortunately some of you may not know what a paper is. Fortunately though I will discuss the meanings of hyper and deep attention below and include a link to the meaning of paper here courtesy of dictionary.com.

Firstly Hayles proposes that developments in programmed, interactive and mass media are begin to impact on how businesses in developed societies function and how the members of their society communicate, defining their social context. This change in it’s essence can be shown in her study of the correlations between deep attention, hyper attention and their uses for the individual and their community.

Hyper attention is seen as an ability to focus on multiple stimuli, or rather being able to quickly transition from one stimulus to another. It is associated with a desire for interaction and incentive, while also resulting in an intolerance for boredom. Inversely, deep attention steers focus towards one source of information and the ability to immerse oneself in that source, possibly still with multiple lines of thought but all focus on interpretation of one stimulus. Hence, it encourages an eye for detail, unconsciously removes distractions and can detriment multi-tasking.

The transition Hayles identifies as steering away from deep attention towards traits of hyper attention, particularly with the younger demographic. So what effect does this this have on Media?

It would seem that it changes the ways we produce media, we receive it and ultimately how we perceive it. A increased demand from audiences to be stimulated and provided with information in a shorter time frame impacts various sections of the media industry from advertising, to programming to how film and audio are edited. A perfect example of producers responses to this are “Vines” or seven second videos. It’s flexibility to impact through various formats, particularly social media and availability to be created and spread by anyone makes it a successful stimulus in a hyper attentive world.

Now here’s a video insert for no other reason than to stop you getting bored (if you made it this far).

As younger audiences develop this attitude studies have shown that more youths are simultaneously accessing multiple streams of information including hard media. In Hayles’ paper she shares data from the Kaiser Family Foundation that found 30% of children alternate doing homework while accessing external media. This increases the importance of media to constantly provide interesting stimuli, interaction or offer incentives.

As I write this I’m listening to my iPod – a playlist of Childish Gambino, Allday and Seth Sentry – and if a song becomes boring or slows my process on this blog I skip it, simple as that. However, if the song were to be interactive, say like a choose your own adventure and I could choose the verse, chorus or loop that came next I would indulge and involve more with the stimulus. Also if they were to offer incentives, say every time I finished a song to the end my fan rating would go up, while I wouldn’t necessarily be more indulged I would make a habit of seeing a song through to the end, a trait drawn from deep attention.

These weapons of mass production are noticed most in the entertainment and games industries. This desire for multiple streams and types of stimuli means that video games must alternate between and consist of high impact gameplay, stimulating interface and image, intricate and/or interactive storylines and also offer incentives for continued gameplay. Many designers and individual games have managed to adapt efficiently to this style and with success; Steve Johnsons’ research also as part of Hayles paper proposed that video games through their structure of escalating intensity, stimulus and reward encourages gamers to progress, relying on a similar chemical urge to that of gambling.

This understanding of hyper and deep attention will help with my processes of creating and particularly editing material as I’m aware of the relationship and perspective of audiences. As the scope of Hayles’ research incorporated many forms and mediums of media production and consumption it becomes relevant to a various aspects of the industry. However, this analysis is very specific to time, demographic and to a lesser extent place, an investigation of current methods of youth’s interaction with western media.

In conclusion the shift from deep to hyper attention has a correlation with development of media and indeed wider society. However, is this shift the cause for a change in in the media industry? Could it be the vice-versa, that new media, relying on multiple streams of simultaneous stimulus has brought this shift? Are the younger generation the cause, or simply just a cog in the wheel that happens to be spinning in the same direction? I don’t know, so if anyone has anything to suggest/add, please let me know.