The Medium is the Massage

This is a response to "The Medium is the Massage" (film)

The film "The Medium is the Massage" by Marshall Mcluhan is a very interesting documentary, if it should be called that, on how society exists with all the current and past mediums "massaging us" or "roughing us up". To quote McLuhan "a medium is not something neutral, it roughs you up" Mcluhan makes a claim which i found very true, when ever a new medium arises, a medium that tends to interact with the public frequently, the public tends to live in the recent past. McLuhan's example was when suburbia started to come into existence all across the nation, people "lived in Bonanza" land.

Another wonderful point made by Mr. McLuhan is that most new medium's tend to use the old mediums as content. For proof, just look at the majority of our class's Frankenstein monsters, they almost all incorporated older paintings of people or limbs.

McLuhan mentions how "everyone is involved in everyone" and that recalled our earlier reading on the railroad. The railroad allowed physical connections between cities states and countries, and following closely behind that the telegraph which allowed for an information connection that eventually stretched over the atlantic ocean. It seems that as time goes on we humans enmesh ourself more and more with these systems of interaction and information. Now we have phones, cars, planes, the internet etc... that seems to put (as advertisers love to say) 'the world in the palm of our hand' Everything is here at the touch of a button and the flip of a switch. McLuhan says that "the world is made of simultaneous relationships"- everything happens now. All we want is the result, we have cut out the process (in many situations).

I never really considered Television to "require participation", but then the example of President Kennedy's funeral and all of a sudden i had to agree. It does make sense, why do people get so addicted to tv shows? They invest themselves in the experiences and the characters. In a superficial way, they are experiencing a different life than their own.

McLuhan's film brings up many issues that alert the public to the trends and realities that new media's especially television have on our lives.

Artist Statement

My piece (which is as of now untitled) is a large messy collage of modern technological, mechanical and media based items forming a large ape-ish creature. The foremost hind leg is compiled of mainly consumer transportation. The other hind leg is composed of watches, timers, and clocks. The foremost front leg is made up of personal computers, cell phones, headphones, cables and circuitry. The other front leg is composed of military items such as rifles, tanks, submarines etc... The body is composed of many layers including pills, newspapers, small advertisements, microscopic images from an ESM, and if you look closely close up shots of gears. The head is contrastingly very simple. It consists of a scanned face from a banner, then over-layed with a filtered plastic bag and close ups on the underside of CDs for the eyes. The creature itself is walking on a temperature map of the United States.

My thoughts going in to this were how we as humans are almost modern 'frankenstien-ian' monsters. Before we leave the room we check: for our cell phone and car keys. Before we go to bed we take our pills. Our tool for telling the time as well as communicating with others has become a fashion statement. Our media is drenched with images of war and the machines that enable it. In a sense these are the external devices or ideas that i 'wear on my sleeves' every day and they impact my life one way or another. Here they have joined together to create a monster that roams the US as we do. It is as if everyone through up one item that they keep on them and it built this creature over the nation. The Face is contrastingly simple because though technology increases the ideas behind it remains simple. We want to communicate faster. We need to get from A to B. We need to protect ourselves. We need to know what time of day it is. We need to survive. Simple needs with complex tools.

Intention and Artiface

The article 'Intention and Artifice' focuses on the reality or lack there of in the world of Photography. This article was extremely intriguing and discussed a lot of important questions. On page 3 the writer makes a statement that i really loved in referring to what photography actually is, calling it "fossilized light." That phrase just stuck in my mind and i thought it perfect. Usually we think of photographs as solid objects but it is really just a freeze-frame of how our eyes absorb the light of a certain scene.

Later the author mentioned that for many conventional artists (painters, sculptors, etc...) "truth had really been another word for convention" That statement works perfectly with the still images of the horse running. The popular opinion of horses being completely off the ground at moments of their run was destroyed by the high-speed still frames of a horse showing at least one foot always on the ground. Does that really make the paintings of horses suspended in the air any less beautiful or realistic? My opinion is no. Sure it is not actually possible, but thats one of paintings strong points. It can make images look extremely real even though they technically are not possible.

Along this lines of 'what is real', the story about how a cement factory explosion was passed off as the russian nuclear reactor. With the ability to capture real images in a sequence that displays events happening (film), the human brain is able to be tricked again. Very few people know what a nuclear plant really looks like especially when its exploding. I think its interesting that in the age of film and broadcast news the necessity for the visual information is so great that if the real image can't be found another one will be substituted. 

The story about the russian farmers substituted for vietnam POWs shocked me. I didn't know it was possible at that point in time to manipulate photos so extensively. What really shocked me though was that i could tell the picture was messed up some how. It just didn't look write, the middle man's face was not proportional. I suppose thats a testament to the age i grew up in that i can look at a photo and tell 'i think that has been doctored'.

Near the end of the article George Lucas makes a statement that both scared and excited me (I also really like George Lucas). Anyway, he mentioned that we won't be able to comprehend now what will be happening to still images in the future. First thought: 'Wow, there could be some really cool things', but on second thought:'the line between reality and what is shown could be so blurred that they become indistinguishable, and that scares me.'

The Railway Journey

These few sections from The Railway Journey primarily focus on the change in culture and society due to the invention of the passenger train and the emergence of mass transportation.

I, having grown up in cars and airplanes, never thought about how much of a change that would be to all of a sudden be able to travel long distances without much effort. To imagine what they felt like i tried to envision 'teleportation' or some other sci-fi type transportation being possible. The traveling would be almost instantaneous and as convenient as that would be, I would miss the experience of 'traveling' as i know it. I would not be able to see the road unfolding before me or look down and count the swimming pools or city lights as i flew in a plane. I guess, if those experiences didn't happen any more i would feel like I lost something and that the distance between my point A and point B didn't exist. Now i would know intellectually that yes there is space between my home and the university. But experientially, i would have no real proof, understanding, or feeling of that space.

In the second chapter, the author discusses the new way of seeing life and nature through the train's window. Though travelers are not fully experiencing the natural world, that doesn't mean the experiences they are having are any less Real. These high speed trains allow citizens to view nature at high speeds. This can be both good or bad depending on the viewers particular tastes and attitudes. 

What i really liked about this reading was how it questioned technology. Yes, being able to get from A to B or C quickly and with relatively no effort can be a great aid to many human endeavors. But that also has a huge downside. As stated, towns lose their secluded nature, domestic products shipped abroad are no longer a key attraction for your specific town, etc... Technology has immense effects on society and culture, but we as humans see any innovation that makes life 'easier' as 'progress' and that must be good. This just makes me think, is my life truly better because of technology? I don't know.