[current issue] [back issues] [submissions] [links] [staff] [mail us]

Introduction
 


by Dr David Gerstner

All Rights Reserved © David Gerstner and Deep South
Deepsouth v.6.n.3 (Spring 2000)

 

[previous page - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 ]

 

The Mediated World - The Possibilities of Spectacle

 

During the Roman Empire the Coliseum was the site for fourteen-hour long spectacles where an assortment of Roman people (senators, artisans, prostitutes (male and female), gladiators, cinaedi ("effeminate males"), and emperors) gathered for their weekly entertainment. So as not to be bored, programs at the Coliseum were structured in such a way that at least nine different stages offered some sort of spectacle (gladiator fights, theatrical performances, live animal battles). A Roman was never bored with merely one show at a time. One could always change focus (channel surf?) to experience something different. And if the Coliseum did not offer enough distraction, the Circus Maximus around the corner provided the thrill of chariot racing. There was always something to do!

 

Romans reveled in their urban splendor and the sense of enormity that accompanies urban life (the city of Rome was populated with over a million people at the time - same as contemporary Auckland - New Zealand's largest city). They marveled at the sporting and theatrical events staged not only for their entertainment, but at the power with which the political ideology of the day demonstrated itself through such multi-media events. Entertainment was all well and good, but the presence of the Emperor over - looking his subjects and, more importantly, controlling the performance agenda (quite literally life and death issues) during the day's program surely had its political value.

 

These cultural circuses or these Roman media events are perhaps an instructive point of departure. Certainly Romans were not the first to introduce the site of theater as simultaneously an entertainment and ideological sphere (one might turn back to Greek and Egypt and forward to Mussolini and Hitler-origins and its followers aren't important here). The dazzle of the Coliseum spectacle, however, might help us to put into perspective our understanding of contemporary mediated events. The Roman spectacle further puts into historical perspective the terms "media event" and, relevant to our theoretical concerns, spectacle. How different is antiquity from the "modern" age?

 

In the Film and Media course we considered how and what constitutes media. What is its cultural and historical significance? How are ideas mediated and communicated in order to disseminate knowledge and, simultaneously, power? How is cultural meaning made? The new millennium has ushered in a seemingly intensified and radically different concept of communication processes. The speed of virtual information has purportedly surpassed the wildest dreams of past technology inventors (and not to mention those who have made millions of dollars in the early investment days of this technology). But, has there truly been a "technology" or "communication revolution?" Has the hegemonic cultural ideology altered in some radical way or have the technological terms under which this ideology operates simply shifted so as to enhance the efficiency of capitalism?

 

Indeed, technology has always offered the promise of dynamic change and progressÑthe dream of a better life is served (ironically) by the built-in obsolescence of the technology itself. In other words, things break down so that we can buy the "new and improved" product to live even more efficiently than we did before with the previous product. Is "progress" really the promise of a better existence? Does technological progress turn us into ideological automatons or does the detritus of technology provide some subversive tools for dealing the dominant political ideology (which is what exactly?)? The ideo(ology) of progress is a cultural phenomena that complexly inscribes a number of political and economic global structures.

 

Importantly, where is the body in this mediated sphere. The operations and effects/affects of media necessarily rely on human production and consumption. Where does the human body fit in the mediated cultural fields of everyday life? How is the body defined in relation to the cultural logic of media? How does race, class, and gender delineate the relationship of the body to cultural media? Is there, in effect, such a thing as media without a relationship to the body? What discourse and discursive practices of media maintain the long-standing mechanisms of ideology? What are the metaphors that link the body with media? What reinforces the implications of such metaphors? What is the phenomenological affect of media on our "life experience?".

 

[next page - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 ]