p. 50
On the screen the moving images have a present meaning despite the absence of corporeal bodies, which thereby becomes a matter of indifference. What counts is the simulacrum, not corporeal object behind it. In the prosthetic cognition of the cinema, the difference between documentary and fiction is thus effaced. Of course we still “know” that they are different. But they inhabit the surface of the screen as cognitive equivalents. Both the real event and the staged event are absent. Their appearance of being present is equally simulated.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Book: The senses still
ReplyDeleteC. Nadia Serematakis (ed)
1994; Westview Press, Inc.
0-226-74877-4
Article: The Cinema Screen as Prosthesis of Perception:
A Historical Account, Susan Buck-Morss