Welcome to the first post of my post-grad program, Filmmaking & Media Arts! Currently I'm not much of a blogger but who knows... I just might like it!
So, where to begin? I suppose I will begin at the beginning.
Upon arrival and induction into the course I was able to breathe a sigh of relief when I realized that everyone is human, just like me. The course conveners, lecturers, and instructors were very kind and accepting, and assured us all that though it may not be an easy journey, they will do their very best to help in any way possible. One thing that was asked of us was to create a blog... which explains this debacle. I will use this to share my musings regarding the readings, assignments, and general filmmaking and creative process.
On to the readings!
First, I read "Perspectives on Post-Cinema: An Introduction" by Shane Denson and Julia Leyda. In this reading, the authors begun by explaining that their purpose is not to create a new genre or to create anything really, but rather to have a conversation - to be part of a bigger conversation - regarding post-cinema and the world in which we live. There was also the question of what post-cinema actually is. I am unsure as to whether there is a complete definition as of yet, but my interpretation is (and also an explanation that I can use in order to simplify things a bit,) that it is a period of time after the introduction of certain technologies, usage of technologies, and societal fads or trends that utilize these technologies, that differ from the "original cinema". For instance, the usage of Instagram as "post-cinema" versus director William Wyler's production of the film Ben Hur (1959) as "cinema". During my undergrad (also at the University of Glasgow), I was introduced to the concepts of Modernism and Post-Modernist theatre. This view of Cinema and Post-Cinema seemed achingly similar to that for me. In Shane Denson's piece Cinematic Memories of Post-Cinematic Transition, he states "...A case could be made for any of these, I suppose, but in terms of the rapid flux of media as an overall environment at the time, no single medium impresses me as clearly dominant—and this, to me, is what marks this transitional era as truly post-cinematic. Not because the cinema was dead, but because it was precisely un-dead." What I take away from that statement is that post-cinema doesn't mark the death of cinema, but rather a shift or transition into something different; even an addition of other medias to grow even bigger, and to take a different shape. Nothing was replaced - cinema was not replaced - but rather the introduction and "folding in" of other technologies, media devises, media platforms changes it's consistency; and living in the age that we do, I believe it would be silly not to acknowledge that shift.
