Media Specificity.. BAM

A week ago, I was all about Media Specificity (and still am to some extent).  However, now it is more a useful prompt than an increment of value.  Now, it seems more handy as a hypothetical tool of academic taxonomy and assessment, rather than an indicator of quality. In short, it seems reductive. “Reading” a work is so tethered to its framing and context that Bordwell’s criticism from pg. 31-32 seems more than fair.  However, on the same token, Bordwell does begin by stating classic works of cinema “triumphed partially because they exploited the mediums unique resources” (12). Identifying a medium’s functional and aesthetic “essence” is rightfully murky and subjective and perhaps "inherently insupportable when applied to as variegated a medium as cinema” (32).  Though, this effect may be slightly mitigated by the occasional rigid structure of technical constraints.

Though this does beg the question, what aspects can you go on, what can you maximize in order to create the mythological work of “grand climax” (31) in any medium?  Can there be distinctive possibilities to leverage in the pursuit of “creating forms or evoking feelings”?  I want to say yes and I think the answer lies partially in Bordwell’s reference to “limits” or “what it can’t do” to find out what it can.  Perhaps, my honest acceptance of the notion of Media Specificity (though it seems problematic and impossible) comes from training in Digital Literature and Kate Hayles contemporary notion of Media Specific Analysis for learning how to read/analyze mediated works.  It is strange for me to see a notion that is still considered innovative in the writing community, not only have a history, but already look “decidedly forced”(31). But, writing is a strange alien retroactive world, so maybe it shouldn't be surprising. Though, in retrospect it was always easy to level the criticism of “already obvious” and “ context dependent” on Hayles notion.

I realize that I’ve only touched on a small section of Bordwell; I was just taken by that section.  In Bordwell, I’m also interested in how the tension between narrative and experimental played out in the success of early cinema.  There is much I had also wanted to address in Pingree and Gitelman.  Especially, about notions of how media work in tandem the “ total cultural economy” and how “the best media mediate less” (xiv).  I’m also interested in the relation of bodies/gestures to media and how it is for/of the uniquely human.