[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
[Commlist] CFP Images Secondes: Post-cinema: practices of research and creation
Thu Feb 20 16:47:53 GMT 2020
Call for papers - "Post-cinema: practices of research and creation"
Images Secondes Journal (Nº3, 2021) www.imagessecondes.fr
<http://imagessecondes.fr/>
Editors-in-chief: Chloé Galibert-Laîné, PhD candidate, École normale
supérieure de Paris & Gala Hernández López, PhD candidate,
Université Paris 8.
The third issue of the French journal Images secondes questions the
heuristic and critical potential of the notion of "post-cinema" in the
context of a general reflection on the "reconfigurations" (de Rosa and
Hediger, 2016) of the cinematic medium in the age of networked digital
media. We agree with Shane Denson and Julia Leyda that if post-cinematic
media "concern the emergence of a new 'structure of feeling' or
'episteme', new forms of affect or sensibility", then "traditional
scholarly forms and methods for investigating these issues are unlikely
to provide adequate answers" (Denson & Leyda, 2016: 6).
For this reason, this issue of Images secondes will give priority to
contributions that depart from the traditional forms of academic
publishing to develop formats which explore the unique potentialities of
online dissemination. As the goal of this issue is to investigate the
complex and polyhedral relationships between cinema and online new
media, we see this as an ideal opportunity to explore the
epistemological potential of practice- based research, artistic
research, research-creation and "performative" research (Haseman, 2006).
We therefore invite contributors to propose written articles, but also
video formats, hypertexts, visual, sound, interactive, hypermedia works...
For several years now, theories about post-cinema and the post-cinematic
condition have gained visibility in the international academic
community. Although its meaning varies between authors, the term
"post-cinema" generally refers to forms of the moving image born with
the digital turn that transcend certain properties of the
cinematographic medium – including the indexicality specific to analog
film, the convention of projecting works in a dark screening room and a
relatively immediate link to an existing canon of filmic production and
the century of critical literature corresponding to the latter.
According to Denson and Leyda, post-cinematic media differ from cinema
in that they are "essentially digital, interactive, networked, ludic,
miniaturized, mobile, social, processual, algorithmic, aggregative,
environmental, or convergent, among other things" (Denson & Leyda, 2016:
1). Despite these structural differences, to use the term "post- cinema"
is to trace a filiation between cinema and new media, the meaning of
which is worth exploring both aesthetically and theoretically.
This emphasis on what new media inherits from cinema seems to recall
Serge Daney's conviction that it is relevant to "use cinema to question
other images - and vice versa" (Daney, 2015: 23). In this way, our own
critical project welcomes an ensemble of reflections that can be led
only collectively and across disciplines: we need to analyze the ways in
which cinema represents and engages with contemporary images and visual
practices; to observe how the traditional cinematic experience is
"remediated" (Bolter and Grusin, 1998) and "relocated" (Casetti, 2017)
in the age of networked media; to identify and reactivate, among the
conceptual tools developed to think the cinema of the past century,
those that can help us grasp the current evolutionary tendencies of the
moving image.
Because it reveals the need to explore theoretically and creatively
these different modalities of encounter between cinema and new media,
the notion of post-cinema is worth mobilizing—and its different meanings
should be carefully described. It has been suggested that the study of
post- cinematic "reconfigurations" could compensate, albeit partially,
for an inevitable backlog of theory with regards to contemporary art
practices, because "in order to come to grips with social and
technological change, we need a 'constant revolutionising’ of our
methods of critical reflection as well. In this regard, cultural theory
lags far behind actual artistic production" (Shaviro, 2010: 133).
According to this logic, post-cinematic works are, because of their
relations to new media technologies and their "accelerationist
aesthetics", directly engaged in this very type of proleptic
exploration. Their critical analysis thus represents an attempt to
somehow remedy the backlog to which Shaviro refers.
Other authors argue that post-cinema is a possibility inherent to cinema
itself: "within the post-perceptual ecology of twenty-first-century
media, [...] the difference 'cinema/post-cinema' itself might become not
only imperceptible, but also, ultimately, ineffectual" (Denson, 2017:
23). According to Denson, rather than a change of medium, what new media
have introduced is a new "post-perceptual mediation". He argues that
networked images do not modify our cultural productions as much as they
alter our senses and our subjective modes of perception. This analysis
aligns closely with other recent inquiries exploring the "politics of
distraction" (to borrow the name of a research project led since 2016 by
Paul Sztulman and Dork Zabunyan) and the "ecology of attention" (Yves
Citton, 2014), that seek to reflect on the effects of new media on our
bodies, our senses and our affective predilections. These studies are
strongly anchored in our contemporary times, but also inherit much from
the canonical writings of Walter Benjamin and Sigfried Kracauer, who
developed a critical, phenomenological and political approach to film
theory in the early twentieth century.
Nonetheless, the term post-cinema also raises some difficulties. In
addition to the potentially problematic scope of its field of
application, its etymology itself can be interrogated: should the prefix
be understood as suggesting that post-cinema comes "after", and thus
replaces cinema? The good health of the contemporary film industry
decisively contradicts those who have expressed fears that new forms of
media would spell the end of cinema as an art form and as a popular
entertainment. Are we then to recognize in this prefix an enthralment
with theories of postmodernism, understood as a singular period of our
collective relation to the world, to history and to images, as much as
as an aesthetic theory in its own right? What can we say about our times
and our relations to moving images when we consider new media as
"post-cinematic"? In the era of the "convergence" of various audiovisual
media (Jenkins, 2006) and after the advent of the computer code as a
form of "monomedia" (Manovich, 2016), about which some argue that, by
phagocytizing the other media, it "annihilates the idea of the medium"
itself (Doane, 2007: 130), is it still relevant to defend the
distinction between cinema and post-cinema at all?
We propose four main axes of reflection, which aim to map in a
symmetrical (although necessarily fragmented) way the exchanges and
dialogues between cinema and new media :
AXIS 1: Leaving the cinema
The first axis of reflection aims to identify, among the aesthetic forms
and concepts inherited from the history of cinema, the most useful tools
for observing, describing and thinking about the discourses, spectator
experiences and interactive practices related to new media. This work
was initiated by Lev Manovich, who pointed out among other things that
images generated by computers (CGI), if they renounce the realism in
which André Bazin saw the ontology of cinema, also inherit from the
earliest techniques of animation (the magic lantern, the Thaumatrope,
Zoetrope, Praxinoscope, etc.) that are often considered to be at the
origins of the cinematic medium (Manovich, 2016: 23). Other works have
pushed forward and sideways this line of thinking, as Dork Zabunyan did
in his critical analysis of the videos produced during the Arab
uprisings of 2011 (The Insistance of Strugle, 2019). Contributions
exploring these questions may focus on such topics as: - the different
implications of the term "post-cinema" in reference to networked media
and the social practices they enable;
- the different implications of the term "post-cinema" in reference to
networked media and the social practices they enable;
- the reactivation of concepts inherited from the theoretical and
critical literature on cinema in the context of new media analysis,
perhaps including a case study of a particular post-cinematic medium;
- the study of the aesthetic (dis)continuities between cinematic
practices before and after new media (e.g., considering artists working
with pixelization and glitch as an actualization of the work made by
"materialist" experimental filmmakers ...).
AXIS 2: Post-cinema on screen
The second axis seeks to observe the different ways in which
contemporary cinema reflects and responds to the forms of visual
practice that appeared with the growth of new networked technologies.
Cinema can train us to apprehend the complexity and the unthinkable
amplitude of cyberspace, which has now become a "hyper-object" (Morton,
2018) that exceeds our scale, and thereby help us to to situate
ourselves in the globalized and hyper-connected media ecosystem.
Contributions in this axis could explore such themes as:
- representations and figurations of new media and the forms of
sociability that they enable in contemporary cinematic fictions (for
example, in Michael Haneke's Happy End, Olivier Assayas' Personal
Shopper...);
- the influence of the language of new media on the work and style of
contemporary filmmakers ("amateur aesthetics ", vertical framing,
fictions told from the graphical interface of a desktop, horror movies
made out of fake digital found footage...);
- the critical study of documentary and netnographic films made with
footage from the Internet (The Uprising, Peter Snowdon, 2013; Roman
national, Grégoire Beil, 2018); and of audiovisual works exploring
digital imagery that are designed for both the cinema and as museum
installations (Grosse fatigue, Camille Henrot, 2013 ; All that is solid,
Louis Henderson, 2014).
AXIS 3: Cinema among new networked media
The third line of thought seeks to update decades-long debates over
aesthetic and theoretical issues related to the practice of expanded
cinema (notably, in France, writings by Jacques Aumont and Raymond
Bellour, and internationally, by Gene Youngblood), with a special focus
on the role played by new networked media in the transmedial expansion
of contemporary cinema. The following themes might be explored with this
in mind:
- the phenomenon of "relocation" (Casetti, 2015) and the reception of
cinematic works outside of projection rooms, particularly on networked
devices: watching films on small screens, on public transportation; the
phenomenon of the second screen...;
- the new networked cinephile practices (online discussion forums,
cinephile pages and groups on digital social networks, video essays and
the transmission of cinephilic knowledge on YouTube and other platforms,
fan fictions, remixes and mashups...);
- the development of new cinematic forms in relation to the emergence of
new distribution platforms: web- series, transmedial storytelling, web
documentary... and their related structures of production (on this
subject, see in particular the section "Construction sites" in the 30th
issue of the journal Revue Documentaires, "Au milieu des new media",
edited by Alice Lenay and Jacopo Rasmi).
AXIS 4: Returning to the cinema
Finally, the fourth axis serves to stress how the notion of post-cinema
is not a new one. This enables (and necessitates) our looking back at
the history of cinema, broadening our definition thereof in the process.
Additionally, new image technologies offer new digital tools for the
study of cinematic history, such as those used in the field of digital
humanities. Contributions in this axis might address the following topics:
- redefinitions of the specificity of the cinematographic medium as
invited by its extension to include new formats and new practices of the
moving image;
- the relative "newness" of new media, with regard to older forms and
practices of the moving image (see for instance André Gaudreault's work
on early cinema, or existing literature on the history of video art);
- the contribution of new digital technologies to the study of cinematic
history (film annotation softwares, videographic research, data
visualization, such as Lev Manovich's work Visualizing Vertov).
Terms, instructions and schedule
Following the model of other academic journals accepting scientific
contributions in forms aside from the traditional written paper (Journal
for Artistic Research, Screenworks, [in]Transition...), we are keen to
establish an evaluation grid that will enable the scientific committee
to judge the quality and seriousness of proposals from contributors,
whatever their forms. Contributions experimenting with non-traditional
forms of publication will be evaluated with the same rigour as any
scientific paper. The consistency and integration of the form and theme
of each proposal will be prioritized when it comes to the assessment of
contributions.
For contributions employing a non-traditional publication format, the
submission should be accompanied by a text of approximately 1500 words,
specifying the research question, the methodology used, the sources and
references that have fed into the creative work, as well as a
justification of the chosen form in relation to the scientific
objectives pursued.
For proposals adopting the form of a written academic paper, final texts
should come to between 20 000 and 35 000 characters.
Proposals for contributions should be submitted in PDF format before
April 20th 2020, to the following address: (articles /at/ imagessecondes.fr)
<mailto:(articles /at/ imagessecondes.fr)>. Proposals, sent as an attached
file, should be composed of:
- a title;
- an abstract not exceeding 500 words (plus bibliography) exposing the
format of the proposal (written article, video, sound work...) and
justifying it with regard to the issue in question.
The identity of the author should not be mentioned in this document, but
in a separate one which will include the name of the author, their home
institution (if applicable), a short biography (150 words maximum) as
well as a presentation of the author's artistic work (if applicable).
Proposals as well as final contributions may be submitted in French or
English. English contributions will be translated into French before
publication. APC's are not required.
Calendar
Final contributions must be submitted by September 30th 2020. The issue
will be published at the beginning of 2021 on the journal's website at
www.imagessecondes.fr <http://www.imagessecondes.fr/>.
* Receipt of proposals: April 20th
* Notification of acceptance: May 30th
* Receipt of complete articles or creations: September 30th
* Publication: early 2021
References
Jacques Aumont, Que reste-t-il du cinéma ?, Paris, Vrin, 2013.
André Bazin, « Ontologie de l’image photographique », dans Qu’est-ce
que le cinéma ?, t. 1, Paris, Editions du Cerf, 1958, p. 11-19.
Raymond Bellour, La Querelle des dispositifs, Paris, P.O.L., 2012.
Jay David Bolter & Richard Grusin, Remediation. Understanding New Media,
Cambridge, MIT Press, 1998.
Francesco Casetti, The Lumière Galaxy. Seven Key Words for the Cinema
to Come, New York, Columbia University Press, 2015.
Yves Citton, Pour une écologie de l'attention, Paris, Seuil, 2014.
Serge Daney, La Maison cinéma et le monde, t. 4, Paris, P.O.L., 2015.
Gilles Deleuze, « Lettre à Serge Daney : Optimisme, pessimisme et
voyage », in Pourparlers, Les éditions de Minuit., Paris, 1990, p. 97-112.
Shane Denson, « Speculation, Transition, and the Passing of Post-cinema
», in Miriam de Rosa & Vinzenz Hediger (dir.), « Post when? Post what?
Thinking the Moving Image Beyond the Post-Medium Condition », revue
Cinema & Cie, numéro spécial, XIV, n° 26/27, 2017, p. 21-32.
Shane Denson & Julia Leyda (dir.), Post-Cinema: Theorizing 21st-Century
Film, Falmer, Reframe Books, 2016.
Mary-Ann Doane, «The Indexical and the Concept of Medium- Specificity»,
Differences : A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, 18.1, 2007, p.
128-152.
Miriam de Rosa & Vinzenz Hediger (dir.), « Post when? Post what?
Thinking the Moving Image Beyond the Post-Medium Condition », revue
Cinema & Cie, numéro spécial, XIV, n° 26/27, 2017, p. 21-32.
André Gaudreault & Philippe Marion, La fin du cinéma ? Un média en
crise à l’ère du numérique, Paris, Armand Colin, 2013.
Brad Haseman, « A Manifesto for Performative Research », in Media
International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, vol. 118, n°
1, 2006, p. 98-106.
Henry Jenkins, Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide, New
York, NYU Press, 2006.
Alice Lenay & Jacopo Rasmi (dir.), « Au milieu des nouveaux media »,
revue Documentaires, n° 30, 2019.
Lev Manovich, The Language of New Media, Cambridge, MIT Press, 2001. Lev
Manovich, « Une esthétique post-media », Appareil, n° 18, 2017.
URL : http://journals.openedition.org/appareil/2394.
Steven Shaviro, Post-cinematic Affect, Winchester, O Books, 2010.
Dork Zabunyan, The Insistence of Struggle - Images, uprisings, counter-
revolutions, Barcelona, IF Publications, 2019 [original : 2017].
Scientific committee
* Christa Blümlinger (Université Paris 8 — Vincennes Saint-Denis)
* Camille Bui (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne)
* Amélie Bussy (Université Bordeaux Montaigne)
* Miriam de Rosa (Coventry University)
* Shane Denson (Stanford University)
* Térésa Faucon (Université Sorbonne Nouvelle - Paris 3)
* Catherine Grant (Birkbeck, University of London)
* Damien Marguet (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
* Caroline San Martin (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne)
* Sergi Sánchez (Université Pompeu Fabra)
* Antonio Somaini (Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3)
* Cécile Sorin (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
* Guillaume Soulez (Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3)
* Barbara Turquier (La Fémis)
* Gwenola Wagon (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
* Dork Zabunyan (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
Website www.imagessecondes.fr <http://www.imagessecondes.fr/>
El El mié, 19 feb 2020 a las 23:22, Nico CARPENTIER
<(nico.carpentier /at/ fsv.cuni.cz) <mailto:(nico.carpentier /at/ fsv.cuni.cz)>> escribió:
Dear Gala,
Did you mention somewhere that APCs are not required? I couldn't find
it, and it's a requirement (see commlist.org <http://commlist.org>)
Best
n
On 2020-02-19 18:28, Gala Hernández López wrote:
> Dear Nico,
>
> Hope this finds you well. This is the call for papers for the French
> journal "Images Secondes", accepting papers in English and French
about
> the notion of "post-cinema". Here's the English version of the
CFP, for
> the commlist.
>
> Thank you for all your work!
>
> Best regards,
> Gala Hernández
>
> *******
>
> *POST:*
>
> Call for papers - "Post-cinema: practices of research and creation"
> Images Secondes Journal (Nº3, 2021) www.imagessecondes.fr
<http://www.imagessecondes.fr>
> <http://imagessecondes.fr>
>
> Editors-in-chief: Chloé Galibert-Laîné, PhD candidate, École normale
> supérieure de Paris & Gala Hernández López, PhD candidate,
Université
> Paris 8.
>
> The third issue of the French journal Images secondes questions the
> heuristic and critical potential of the notion of "post-cinema"
in the
> context of a general reflection on the "reconfigurations" (de
Rosa and
> Hediger, 2016) of the cinematic medium in the age of networked
digital
> media. We agree with Shane Denson and Julia Leyda that if
post-cinematic
> media "concern the emergence of a new 'structure of feeling' or
> 'episteme', new forms of affect or sensibility", then "traditional
> scholarly forms and methods for investigating these issues are
unlikely
> to provide adequate answers" (Denson & Leyda, 2016: 6).
>
> For this reason, this issue of Images secondes will give priority to
> contributions that depart from the traditional forms of academic
> publishing to develop formats which explore the unique
potentialities of
> online dissemination. As the goal of this issue is to investigate
the
> complex and polyhedral relationships between cinema and online new
> media, we see this as an ideal opportunity to explore the
> epistemological potential of practice- based research, artistic
> research, research-creation and "performative" research (Haseman,
2006).
> We therefore invite contributors to propose written articles, but
also
> video formats, hypertexts, visual, sound, interactive, hypermedia
works...
>
> For several years now, theories about post-cinema and the
post-cinematic
> condition have gained visibility in the international academic
> community. Although its meaning varies between authors, the term
> "post-cinema" generally refers to forms of the moving image born
with
> the digital turn that transcend certain properties of the
> cinematographic medium – including the indexicality specific to
analog
> film, the convention of projecting works in a dark screening room
and a
> relatively immediate link to an existing canon of filmic
production and
> the century of critical literature corresponding to the latter.
> According to Denson and Leyda, post-cinematic media differ from
cinema
> in that they are "essentially digital, interactive, networked,
ludic,
> miniaturized, mobile, social, processual, algorithmic, aggregative,
> environmental, or convergent, among other things" (Denson &
Leyda, 2016:
> 1). Despite these structural differences, to use the term "post-
cinema"
> is to trace a filiation between cinema and new media, the meaning of
> which is worth exploring both aesthetically and theoretically.
>
> This emphasis on what new media inherits from cinema seems to recall
> Serge Daney's conviction that it is relevant to "use cinema to
question
> other images - and vice versa" (Daney, 2015: 23). In this way,
our own
> critical project welcomes an ensemble of reflections that can be led
> only collectively and across disciplines: we need to analyze the
ways in
> which cinema represents and engages with contemporary images and
visual
> practices; to observe how the traditional cinematic experience is
> "remediated" (Bolter and Grusin, 1998) and "relocated" (Casetti,
2017)
> in the age of networked media; to identify and reactivate, among the
> conceptual tools developed to think the cinema of the past century,
> those that can help us grasp the current evolutionary tendencies
of the
> moving image.
>
> Because it reveals the need to explore theoretically and creatively
> these different modalities of encounter between cinema and new
media,
> the notion of post-cinema is worth mobilizing—and its different
meanings
> should be carefully described. It has been suggested that the
study of
> post- cinematic "reconfigurations" could compensate, albeit
partially,
> for an inevitable backlog of theory with regards to contemporary art
> practices, because "in order to come to grips with social and
> technological change, we need a 'constant revolutionising’ of our
> methods of critical reflection as well. In this regard, cultural
theory
> lags far behind actual artistic production" (Shaviro, 2010: 133).
> According to this logic, post-cinematic works are, because of their
> relations to new media technologies and their "accelerationist
> aesthetics", directly engaged in this very type of proleptic
> exploration. Their critical analysis thus represents an attempt to
> somehow remedy the backlog to which Shaviro refers.
>
> Other authors argue that post-cinema is a possibility inherent to
cinema
> itself: "within the post-perceptual ecology of twenty-first-century
> media, [...] the difference 'cinema/post-cinema' itself might
become not
> only imperceptible, but also, ultimately, ineffectual" (Denson,
2017:
> 23). According to Denson, rather than a change of medium, what
new media
> have introduced is a new "post-perceptual mediation". He argues that
> networked images do not modify our cultural productions as much
as they
> alter our senses and our subjective modes of perception. This
analysis
> aligns closely with other recent inquiries exploring the
"politics of
> distraction" (to borrow the name of a research project led since
2016 by
> Paul Sztulman and Dork Zabunyan) and the "ecology of attention"
(Yves
> Citton, 2014), that seek to reflect on the effects of new media
on our
> bodies, our senses and our affective predilections. These studies
are
> strongly anchored in our contemporary times, but also inherit
much from
> the canonical writings of Walter Benjamin and Sigfried Kracauer, who
> developed a critical, phenomenological and political approach to
film
> theory in the early twentieth century.
>
> Nonetheless, the term post-cinema also raises some difficulties. In
> addition to the potentially problematic scope of its field of
> application, its etymology itself can be interrogated: should the
prefix
> be understood as suggesting that post-cinema comes "after", and thus
> replaces cinema? The good health of the contemporary film industry
> decisively contradicts those who have expressed fears that new
forms of
> media would spell the end of cinema as an art form and as a popular
> entertainment. Are we then to recognize in this prefix an
enthralment
> with theories of postmodernism, understood as a singular period
of our
> collective relation to the world, to history and to images, as
much as
> as an aesthetic theory in its own right? What can we say about
our times
> and our relations to moving images when we consider new media as
> "post-cinematic"? In the era of the "convergence" of various
audiovisual
> media (Jenkins, 2006) and after the advent of the computer code as a
> form of "monomedia" (Manovich, 2016), about which some argue
that, by
> phagocytizing the other media, it "annihilates the idea of the
medium"
> itself (Doane, 2007: 130), is it still relevant to defend the
> distinction between cinema and post-cinema at all?
>
> We propose four main axes of reflection, which aim to map in a
> symmetrical (although necessarily fragmented) way the exchanges and
> dialogues between cinema and new media :
>
> AXIS 1: Leaving the cinema
>
> The first axis of reflection aims to identify, among the
aesthetic forms
> and concepts inherited from the history of cinema, the most
useful tools
> for observing, describing and thinking about the discourses,
spectator
> experiences and interactive practices related to new media. This
work
> was initiated by Lev Manovich, who pointed out among other things
that
> images generated by computers (CGI), if they renounce the realism in
> which André Bazin saw the ontology of cinema, also inherit from the
> earliest techniques of animation (the magic lantern, the
Thaumatrope,
> Zoetrope, Praxinoscope, etc.) that are often considered to be at the
> origins of the cinematic medium (Manovich, 2016: 23). Other works
have
> pushed forward and sideways this line of thinking, as Dork
Zabunyan did
> in his critical analysis of the videos produced during the Arab
> uprisings of 2011 (The Insistance of Strugle, 2019). Contributions
> exploring these questions may focus on such topics as: - the
different
> implications of the term "post-cinema" in reference to networked
media
> and the social practices they enable;
>
> - the different implications of the term "post-cinema" in
reference to
> networked media and the social practices they enable;
>
> - the reactivation of concepts inherited from the theoretical and
> critical literature on cinema in the context of new media analysis,
> perhaps including a case study of a particular post-cinematic
medium;
>
> - the study of the aesthetic (dis)continuities between cinematic
> practices before and after new media (e.g., considering artists
working
> with pixelization and glitch as an actualization of the work made by
> "materialist" experimental filmmakers ...).
>
> AXIS 2: Post-cinema on screen
>
> The second axis seeks to observe the different ways in which
> contemporary cinema reflects and responds to the forms of visual
> practice that appeared with the growth of new networked
technologies.
> Cinema can train us to apprehend the complexity and the unthinkable
> amplitude of cyberspace, which has now become a "hyper-object"
(Morton,
> 2018) that exceeds our scale, and thereby help us to to situate
> ourselves in the globalized and hyper-connected media ecosystem.
> Contributions in this axis could explore such themes as:
>
> - representations and figurations of new media and the forms of
> sociability that they enable in contemporary cinematic fictions (for
> example, in Michael Haneke's Happy End, Olivier Assayas' Personal
> Shopper...);
> - the influence of the language of new media on the work and
style of
> contemporary filmmakers ("amateur aesthetics ", vertical framing,
> fictions told from the graphical interface of a desktop, horror
movies
> made out of fake digital found footage...);
>
> - the critical study of documentary and netnographic films made with
> footage from the Internet (The Uprising, Peter Snowdon, 2013; Roman
> national, Grégoire Beil, 2018); and of audiovisual works exploring
> digital imagery that are designed for both the cinema and as museum
> installations (Grosse fatigue, Camille Henrot, 2013 ; All that is
solid,
> Louis Henderson, 2014).
>
> AXIS 3: Cinema among new networked media
>
> The third line of thought seeks to update decades-long debates over
> aesthetic and theoretical issues related to the practice of expanded
> cinema (notably, in France, writings by Jacques Aumont and Raymond
> Bellour, and internationally, by Gene Youngblood), with a special
focus
> on the role played by new networked media in the transmedial
expansion
> of contemporary cinema. The following themes might be explored
with this
> in mind:
>
> - the phenomenon of "relocation" (Casetti, 2015) and the
reception of
> cinematic works outside of projection rooms, particularly on
networked
> devices: watching films on small screens, on public
transportation; the
> phenomenon of the second screen...;
>
> - the new networked cinephile practices (online discussion forums,
> cinephile pages and groups on digital social networks, video
essays and
> the transmission of cinephilic knowledge on YouTube and other
platforms,
> fan fictions, remixes and mashups...);
>
> - the development of new cinematic forms in relation to the
emergence of
> new distribution platforms: web- series, transmedial
storytelling, web
> documentary... and their related structures of production (on this
> subject, see in particular the section "Construction sites" in
the 30th
> issue of the journal Revue Documentaires, "Au milieu des new media",
> edited by Alice Lenay and Jacopo Rasmi).
>
> AXIS 4: Returning to the cinema
>
> Finally, the fourth axis serves to stress how the notion of
post-cinema
> is not a new one. This enables (and necessitates) our looking
back at
> the history of cinema, broadening our definition thereof in the
process.
> Additionally, new image technologies offer new digital tools for the
> study of cinematic history, such as those used in the field of
digital
> humanities. Contributions in this axis might address the
following topics:
>
> - redefinitions of the specificity of the cinematographic medium as
> invited by its extension to include new formats and new practices
of the
> moving image;
>
> - the relative "newness" of new media, with regard to older forms
and
> practices of the moving image (see for instance André
Gaudreault's work
> on early cinema, or existing literature on the history of video
art);
>
> - the contribution of new digital technologies to the study of
cinematic
> history (film annotation softwares, videographic research, data
> visualization, such as Lev Manovich's work Visualizing Vertov).
>
> Terms, instructions and schedule
>
> Following the model of other academic journals accepting scientific
> contributions in forms aside from the traditional written paper
(Journal
> for Artistic Research, Screenworks, [in]Transition...), we are
keen to
> establish an evaluation grid that will enable the scientific
committee
> to judge the quality and seriousness of proposals from contributors,
> whatever their forms. Contributions experimenting with
non-traditional
> forms of publication will be evaluated with the same rigour as any
> scientific paper. The consistency and integration of the form and
theme
> of each proposal will be prioritized when it comes to the
assessment of
> contributions.
>
> For contributions employing a non-traditional publication format,
the
> submission should be accompanied by a text of approximately 1500
words,
> specifying the research question, the methodology used, the
sources and
> references that have fed into the creative work, as well as a
> justification of the chosen form in relation to the scientific
> objectives pursued.
>
> For proposals adopting the form of a written academic paper,
final texts
> should come to between 20 000 and 35 000 characters.
>
> Proposals for contributions should be submitted in PDF format before
> April 20th 2020, to the following address:
(articles /at/ imagessecondes.fr) <mailto:(articles /at/ imagessecondes.fr)>
> <mailto:(articles /at/ imagessecondes.fr)
<mailto:(articles /at/ imagessecondes.fr)>>. Proposals, sent as an attached
> file, should be composed of:
>
> - a title;
>
> - an abstract not exceeding 500 words (plus bibliography)
exposing the
> format of the proposal (written article, video, sound work...) and
> justifying it with regard to the issue in question.
>
> The identity of the author should not be mentioned in this
document, but
> in a separate one which will include the name of the author,
their home
> institution (if applicable), a short biography (150 words
maximum) as
> well as a presentation of the author's artistic work (if
applicable).
>
> Proposals as well as final contributions may be submitted in
French or
> English. English contributions will be translated into French before
> publication.
>
> Calendar
>
> Final contributions must be submitted by September 30th 2020. The
issue
> will be published at the beginning of 2021 on the journal's
website at
> www.imagessecondes.fr <http://www.imagessecondes.fr>
<http://www.imagessecondes.fr>.
>
> * Receipt of proposals: April 20th
> * Notification of acceptance: May 30th
> * Receipt of complete articles or creations: September 30th
> * Publication: early 2021
>
> References
>
> Jacques Aumont, Que reste-t-il du cinéma ?, Paris, Vrin, 2013.
>
> André Bazin, « Ontologie de l’image photographique », dans
Qu’est-ce que
> le cinéma ?, t. 1, Paris, Editions du Cerf, 1958, p. 11-19.
>
> Raymond Bellour, La Querelle des dispositifs, Paris, P.O.L., 2012.
>
> Jay David Bolter & Richard Grusin, Remediation. Understanding New
Media,
> Cambridge, MIT Press, 1998.
>
> Francesco Casetti, The Lumière Galaxy. Seven Key Words for the
Cinema to
> Come, New York, Columbia University Press, 2015.
>
> Yves Citton, Pour une écologie de l'attention, Paris, Seuil, 2014.
>
> Serge Daney, La Maison cinéma et le monde, t. 4, Paris, P.O.L.,
2015.
>
> Gilles Deleuze, « Lettre à Serge Daney : Optimisme, pessimisme
et voyage
> », in Pourparlers, Les éditions de Minuit., Paris, 1990, p. 97-112.
>
> Shane Denson, « Speculation, Transition, and the Passing of
Post-cinema
> », in Miriam de Rosa & Vinzenz Hediger (dir.), « Post when? Post
what?
> Thinking the Moving Image Beyond the Post-Medium Condition », revue
> Cinema & Cie, numéro spécial, XIV, n° 26/27, 2017, p. 21-32.
>
> Shane Denson & Julia Leyda (dir.), Post-Cinema: Theorizing
21st-Century
> Film, Falmer, Reframe Books, 2016.
>
> Mary-Ann Doane, «The Indexical and the Concept of Medium-
Specificity»,
> Differences : A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, 18.1, 2007, p.
> 128-152.
>
> Miriam de Rosa & Vinzenz Hediger (dir.), « Post when? Post what?
> Thinking the Moving Image Beyond the Post-Medium Condition », revue
> Cinema & Cie, numéro spécial, XIV, n° 26/27, 2017, p. 21-32.
>
> André Gaudreault & Philippe Marion, La fin du cinéma ? Un
média en crise
> à l’ère du numérique, Paris, Armand Colin, 2013.
>
> Brad Haseman, « A Manifesto for Performative Research », in Media
> International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, vol.
118, n°
> 1, 2006, p. 98-106.
>
> Henry Jenkins, Convergence culture: Where old and new media
collide, New
> York, NYU Press, 2006.
>
> Alice Lenay & Jacopo Rasmi (dir.), « Au milieu des nouveaux media »,
> revue Documentaires, n° 30, 2019.
>
> Lev Manovich, The Language of New Media, Cambridge, MIT Press,
2001. Lev
> Manovich, « Une esthétique post-media », Appareil, n° 18, 2017.
>
> URL : http://journals.openedition.org/appareil/2394.
> Steven Shaviro, Post-cinematic Affect, Winchester, O Books, 2010.
>
> Dork Zabunyan, The Insistence of Struggle - Images, uprisings,
counter-
> revolutions, Barcelona, IF Publications, 2019 [original : 2017].
>
> Scientific committee
>
> * Christa Blümlinger (Université Paris 8 — Vincennes Saint-Denis)
> * Camille Bui (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne)
> * Amélie Bussy (Université Bordeaux Montaigne)
> * Miriam de Rosa (Coventry University)
> * Shane Denson (Stanford University)
> * Térésa Faucon (Université Sorbonne Nouvelle - Paris 3)
> * Catherine Grant (Birkbeck, University of London)
> * Damien Marguet (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
> * Caroline San Martin (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne)
> * Sergi Sánchez (Université Pompeu Fabra)
> * Antonio Somaini (Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3)
> * Cécile Sorin (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
> * Guillaume Soulez (Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3)
> * Barbara Turquier (La Fémis)
> * Gwenola Wagon (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
> * Dork Zabunyan (Université Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis)
>
> Website www.imagessecondes.fr <http://www.imagessecondes.fr>
<http://www.imagessecondes.fr>
>
> --
> Gala Hernández
> Filmmaker, PhD research fellow in Film Studies (Lab. ESTCA
> <http://www.estca.univ-paris8.fr/index.php/gala-hernandez/> - EDESTA
> <http://www.edesta.univ-paris8.fr/>, Université Paris 8)
> www.galahernandez.com <http://www.galahernandez.com>
<http://www.galahernandez.com/> /
> www.after-social-networks.com
<http://www.after-social-networks.com>
<http://www.after-social-networks.com>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nico Carpentier
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web: http://nicocarpentier.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
New MA program on Media and Area Studies
http://marsmaster.cz/
https://vimeo.com/383173852
----------------------------
New special issue:
Rescuing Participation
https://revistacomsoc.pt/issue/view/103
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles University in Prague
Institute of Communication Studies and Journalism
Smetanovo nábřeží 6, 110 01 Praha 1, Czech Republic
----------------------------
Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) - Free University of Brussels
& Uppsala University
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SQRIDGE ngo
An intersection of academia and arts
http://www.sqridge.org/
----------------------------
The Commlist
http://commlist.org/
----------------------------
International Association for Media and Communication Research
Participatory Communication Research Section
http://iamcr.org/s-wg/section/pcr
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail (CharlesU): (nico.carpentier /at/ fsv.cuni.cz)
<mailto:(nico.carpentier /at/ fsv.cuni.cz)>
E-mail (UUppsala): (nico.carpentier /at/ im.uu.se)
<mailto:(nico.carpentier /at/ im.uu.se)>
E-mail (VUBrussels): (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
<mailto:(nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)>
Room (CharlesU): Hollar building Room 105
Phone (CharlesU): +420 222 112 134
Web: http://nicocarpentier.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
*Upozornění :*****
*Není-li v této zprávě výslovně uvedeno jinak, má
tato e-mailová zpráva nebo její přílohy pouze informativní
charakter. Tato
zpráva ani její přílohy v žádném ohledu Univerzitu Karlovu k ničemu
nezavazují. Text této zprávy nebo jejích příloh není návrhem na
uzavření
smlouvy, ani přijetím případného návrhu na uzavření smlouvy, ani jiným
právním jednáním směřujícím k uzavření jakékoliv smlouvy a nezakládá
předsmluvní odpovědnost Univerzity Karlovy. Obsahuje-li tento e-mail
nebo
některá z jeho příloh osobní údaje, dbejte při jeho dalším zpracování
(zejména při archivaci) souladu s pravidly evropského nařízení GDPR.*
*
*
*Disclaimer:*****
*If not expressly stated otherwise, this e-mail message
(including any attached files) is intended purely for informational
purposes and does not represent a binding agreement on the part of
Charles
University. The text of this message and its attachments cannot be
considered as a proposal to conclude a contract, nor the acceptance
of a
proposal to conclude a contract, nor any other legal act leading to
concluding any contract; nor does it create any pre-contractual
liability
on the part of Charles University. If this e-mail or any of its
attachments
contains personal data, please be aware of data processing
(particularly
document management and archival policy) in accordance with
Regulation (EU)
2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council on GDPR.*
---------------
The COMMLIST
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please use it responsibly and wisely.
--
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
--
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
URL: http://nicocarpentier.net
---------------
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
