A critique on Philip Auslander’s ‘Digital Liveness: A Historical Philosophical Perspective’
Introduction
Auslander’s article talks about the concept of digital liveness. The article also reviews various ideas forwarded by other writers on digital liveness apart from stating Auslander’s thoughts on the issue. Auslander argues that our experience with digital technologies as being live is because of the function of the technologies’ capability to react to us in real time.5 He claims that liveness is an effect of mediazation that takes place in various fields of technology. Auslander states that recording technologies led to the idea of perceiving representations as being live.1 This is with a claim that there was no need for a live category in performances before the advent of recording technologies.
The author argues that the origin of live performance ranges between the last 100 to 150 years. The author claims that live and mediatized forms of performance have a relationship that is historical and dependent and cannot undergo absolute differentiation. The author notes that necessity is always the cause for any creation and thus there was a need for liveness. He tries to extend Winston’s notion of generating ideas as the reason behind any creation. The author argues that media technologies arise because of a “supervening social necessity”. 12For instance, he states that sound recording as an aspect of liveness developed in the nineteenth century due to the institutionalization of radio broadcasting.
Scholarly discourse
The author borrows attali’s concept that the earliest forms of sound recording served as resultant adjuncts to live performance, and this was to preserve it. Therefore, these technologies preserved the existing forms of performance. There was also no need of distinguishing between live and recorded performance, as they were discrete in their existence. Live music has a superior production in terms of sound than recorded music. This is why the Department of Commerce allowed licenses to stations that used live music.9 However, listeners were unable to distinguish between recorded and live sound because of sensory deprivation. The author argues that currently, use of the world live does not follow conditions for it to be referred as live. There is a need for performers and audience to be present. 10This is not the case with live broadcasts. He states that listening should have liveness that gives one the experience of affection. However, he adds that there has been an expansion of the meaning of ‘live’ with time.
The author uses Gadamer’s discussions of aesthetics for his argument in the way we interact with machines. Gadamer states that a work of art involves a demand for it and acceptance by the audience.11 Therefore, Auslander uses this to argue that operations in real time claim upon us to interact with them. Only when we claim and respond to them do we interact with them in a live way. Moreover, he uses Nass’ idea that our interaction with computers is parallel to the interaction with other human beings. 8He says that we respond to an activity in a social interaction way in relation to its value.
Relation to Music Performance
There has been a drop in the value of live performances due to the increase in recording technology.2 For instance, most people view the idea of buying specific recording media for a successful music career than to struggle yearly performing in bars. Mediatized performances have made music production take a different course.7This is with the introduction of high-tech musical instruments that are computerized. Over the recent past, music videos tried to imitate live performances. Therefore, there is a close relationship between mediatized performances and music performances.
Values
The author argues that any work of art is crucial and, therefore, there is a need to consider it as something of a greater value. In order to experience the liveness of interactive technology, we must take claims that need liveness and presence. 3 Additionally, we should engage with technological tools with enthusiasm so that we are familiar with them. This argument shows the need for consciousness for us to better mediatized performances. This is from the author’s statement that consciousness helps us construe the works of art from the past as contemporary and technology as live.
Success of the Author in Making Point
The author is extremely successful in his arguments. He is able to convince the audience that our interaction with technology becomes live when we engage with them in the right way. He states that in order for liveness to happen, we must accept the technologies’ claim as binding on us. 4 Moreover, we should take it seriously and hold on to the object with consciousness.
In conclusion, I do not disagree with the points that the author gives. It is particularly true that liveness comes up due to our interaction with objects in a willing way apart from accepting the claims of the objects. It is upon one to give himself to experience technology in the way they wish. Digital liveness comes about as a relationship between oneself and the technologies.6
Bibliography
1 Peggy, P. “Performance, Live Culture, and Things of the Heart.” Journal Of Visual Culture 2, no. 3: 2003. 291-302.
2 Shaffer, T.S. “Music as Performance Method: “The Score” in Experimental Performance.” Cultural Studies/Critical Methodologies 10, no. 4: 2010. 320-325.
3 Phelan, P. “Renewing the Ado: Blau and Beckett.” Modern Language Quarterly 70, no. 1: 2009.11-18.
4 KORNHABER, D. “‘The Art of Putting Oneself on Stage before Oneself’: Theatre, Selfhood, and Nietzsche’s Epistemology of the Actor.” Theatre Research International 36, no. 3: 2011. 240-253.
5 Davis, S. “Liveness, mediation and immediacy – innovative technology use in process and performance.” Research In Drama Education 17, no. 4. 2012: 501-516.
6PHELAN, P. “Just want to Say”: Performance and Literature, Jackson and Poirier.” PMLA: Publications Of The Modern Language Association Of America 125, no. 4. 2010.: 942-947.
7 McLaughlin, S. “If a tree falls in an empty forest : Problematization of liveness in mixed-music performance.” Journal Of Music, Technology & Education 5, no. 1.2012: 17-27.
8 Auslander, P. “DIGITAL LIVENESS.” PAJ: A Journal Of Performance & Art 34, no. 2012. 3: 3-11.
9 Mazumdar, R. “Film stardom after liveness.” Continuum: Journal Of Media & Cultural Studies 26, no. 6: 2012. 833-844.
10 Barker, M. “Crash, theatre audiences, and the idea of ‘liveness’.” Studies In Theatre & Performance 23, no. 1. 2003: 21-39.
11 Causey, M. “Digital Practices: Aesthetic and Neuroesthetic Approaches to Performance and Technology.” Contemporary Theatre Review 19, no. 2. 2009.: 237-239.
12 Nelson, B. “Opera on Screen (Book).” Opera Quarterly 17, no. 2001.4: 718.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|
Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay? Then look no further. Our research paper writing service is what you require. Our team of experienced writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specified instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed. This is the perfect way you can prepare your own unique academic paper and score the grades you deserve.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]