In The Medium is the Message video, featuring Marshall McLuhan, he
purports that media is an extension of the central nervous system. I found the
part where he talked about readers being quick decision makers was very interesting.
He said that words have many different meanings, and being able to pick one
meaning for a word in a context of other words is a constant necessity while
reading. This seems like an aspect that video and film art may lose from
literature; the images and their order are preordained for the viewer,
effectively spelling out the meaning for the audience.
Another of his key points revolves
around the idea that the effect of TV is irrelevant from what specific program
one is watching. He seems to mean that the nature of the web of channels and
shows in itself takes meaning by being ever present and available to us. This
reminds me of dystopian literature and films where people are always connected
to the grid and are thus always being watched.
McLuhan also compares modern media’s
effect on people to that of shooting a revolver in days past. In regards to
media, he says, “The means of destruction at our hands are so vast that war
becomes unthinkable,” and goes on to describe Star Wars and other new media as “vicarious forms of violence in
which young people are trying to discover, ‘Who am I?’” He sees media as
inextricably linked to violence in our society, whether it be through
self-identification or otherwise.
Tied in with the violence idea is
his assertion that sports are controlled forms of violence signifying violence
that society deems acceptable. He claims that sports are nothing without an
audience, something that really hits home for me and draws a connection between
sports and video. Video, theatre, sports; all media are created with the
audience in mind and cannot exist without an audience. Video, being the product
of mass media that it is, spreads the audience out across time and place, but
it requires an audience nonetheless. McLuhan says that he “is very interested
in games as dramatizing of violent behavior, under control.” This seems to
connect to his idea of TV and other video-based media as well. The focal point,
for him, is violence in media.
Something interesting I draw from
this is that, when performing for a camera, often the audience is imagined by
the actor. The camera represents the whole world who will potentially view the
film or video that the actor is in. But really, the only person there other
than crew is the actor themselves. This separates video art from sports. With
sports, cameras broadcast the game to a wide audience not physically present,
but the game would not exist without people physically being there. The camera
acts as an intermediary between actor and audience. This reminds me of Andy
Warhol’s screen tests, short videos of random people who worked at his factory.
Here’s a clip of one:
He would let the
film fun for about three minutes or so, without giving any clear instruction to
the subject. This allowed the subject to interact with the camera, and wonder
about who would eventually be on the “other side” or in the audience.
