Photography and film are closely intertwined; yet a significant void remains between the two mediums. This essay explores the relationship between still and moving images, and draws upon a number of pieces of evidence in order to illuminate the dialogue between the two. The essay argues that the relationship between still and moving images has changed considerably over the last 200 years, and that the narrative continues to evolve.
The literature about the relationship between still and moving images does not give a direct answer to the question of the relationship between still and moving images. As words, "still" and "moving" seem to be different concepts that are a dichotomy, which means they are opposite. One of the main questions to ask is why these two concepts are polarised.
This essay tackles one of the most difficult questions in contemporary art. Since it began, people working in photography have tried to understand how to capture movement. The essay uses post-structuralist theory to try to explain how maybe people are actually right when they feel that there is something wrong about stillness and movement having to be different things. The theory can help to show that often the things that we take for granted aren't right at all, and that actually we invent a lot of the things that we think are basic truths.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. THEORY
3. DISCUSSION
4. CONCLUSION
Research Objectives and Themes
The primary objective of this essay is to critically analyze the perceived dichotomy between still and moving images, examining whether they are inherently distinct categories or if this division is a sociocultural construction. By applying post-structuralist theories, the paper investigates how human perception, language, and historical discourse influence our understanding of these visual mediums.
- The paradox of still versus moving images as foundational concepts.
- Application of Foucault’s theory of modernity and the role of normative dichotomies.
- Examination of the "body" as a fluid, interconnected space in post-structuralist thought.
- Historical analysis of photographic and cinematographic evolution regarding movement.
- The role of artists and filmmakers in challenging traditional visual boundaries.
Excerpt from the Book
THEORY
This theory is one way of explaning how people might find it hard to understand why there is a strange relationship between still and moving images. The theory basically says that the idea that still and moving are different is not true, but is invent by people. The theory is based on post-structuralism. Post-structuralism was developed in the midl Twentieth century, particularly by the French philosopher Michel Foucault. Foucault was interested in trying to understand and explain why society is fair to some people but not to others (Veyne, 2010). In particular, he was trying to understand why homosexuals were so hated. The result of his studies is called his theory of modernity.
In order to construct his theory of modernity, Foucault looked back to the work of the eighteenth century philosopher Kant (Couzens, 1986). Kant was working during a time that is known as the Enlightenment era, or the ‘Age of Reason’. It was during this Age of Reason that ‘modern’ society as we now understand it is thought to have started. According to both Kant and Foucault, this ‘modernity’ resulted in a change in the way that peoples brains worked. First it was just academics, then it became everyone. People began to rationalise the way that they behaved and the way that other people behaved. They began to ask ‘why’.
According to Foucault, this led in time to the construction of a “normative sociocultural behavioural code” (Couzens, 1986, p.32). This means that suddenly, there was a ‘normal’ and an ‘abnormal’ way of being, and society began to construct itself along “fundamental dichotomies” (Couzens, 1986, p.32). A fundamental dichotomy is something that is an opposite. There was ‘normal’ sexual behaviour and ‘abnormal’ sexual behaviour. Some people were ‘sane’ and some were ‘insane’. This can be seen in some of the language that entered the English vocabulary at this time, which included words such as ‘lunatic’ and ‘asylum’.
Summary of Chapters
INTRODUCTION: Establishes the paradox that still and moving images are treated as opposites despite film being essentially a series of still images, and outlines the essay's intent to explore this division.
THEORY: Utilizes post-structuralist thought, specifically the work of Michel Foucault, to argue that the distinction between still and moving images is a social construct rather than a natural truth.
DISCUSSION: Examines the historical evolution of capturing movement in art and photography and showcases how contemporary artists use juxtaposition to challenge the viewer's perception of these mediums.
CONCLUSION: Synthesizes the theoretical arguments to suggest that there is no fundamental difference between still and moving images, framing them as interconnected components of a fluid reality.
Keywords
Still images, moving images, post-structuralism, Michel Foucault, modernity, dichotomy, narrative, photography, cinematography, sociocultural construction, Judith Butler, Donna Haraway, perception, movement, truthfulness.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper explores the relationship between still and moving images and challenges the common assumption that these two mediums are inherently opposites.
What are the central thematic areas?
The study centers on post-structuralist theory, visual history, the social construction of reality, and how artists manipulate time and perception.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine if the divide between still and moving images is a physical reality or an artificial category imposed by societal norms and discourse.
Which methodology is employed in this research?
The author employs a theoretical and critical analysis based on post-structuralist philosophy, particularly focusing on the works of Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, and Donna Haraway.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body covers the theoretical foundations of social dichotomies, historical artistic efforts to capture motion, and contemporary media examples like film and digital installations.
What are the main keywords defining this work?
Key terms include still images, moving images, post-structuralism, social construction, discourse, perception, and visual art.
How does Foucault’s 'theory of modernity' apply to images?
The author uses Foucault’s concept of 'normative dichotomies' to explain how society classifies 'still' and 'moving' as distinct, oppositional categories through learned behavior and language.
Why are artists like Eadweard Muybridge and Ori Gersht significant?
These artists are highlighted for their technical and thematic interventions that blur the line between frozen time and fluid motion, forcing viewers to question their assumptions about the stability of images.
What is the significance of the film 'La Jett'?
It is presented as a crucial example of how the human brain processes sequences of still images as moving, thereby supporting the argument that the distinction between the two is a psychological and social illusion.
- Citation du texte
- Chul Stride (Auteur), 2016, A Post-Structuralist Look at the Relationship Between Still and Moving Images, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/376871
