Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ebookfiledocument - 163 (Download PDF) Image Operations Visual Media and Political Conflict Eder Online Ebook All Chapter PDF
Ebookfiledocument - 163 (Download PDF) Image Operations Visual Media and Political Conflict Eder Online Ebook All Chapter PDF
https://textbookfull.com/product/image-science-iconology-visual-
culture-and-media-aesthetics-mitchell/
https://textbookfull.com/product/theorising-media-and-conflict-
philipp-budka/
https://textbookfull.com/product/theorising-media-and-
conflict-1st-edition-philipp-budka/
https://textbookfull.com/product/media-and-conflict-in-the-
social-media-era-in-china-1st-edition-shixin-ivy-zhang/
Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict 2nd Edition Cass
R. Sunstein
https://textbookfull.com/product/legal-reasoning-and-political-
conflict-2nd-edition-cass-r-sunstein/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-visual-story-creating-the-
visual-structure-of-film-tv-and-digital-media-3rd-edition-block/
https://textbookfull.com/product/screens-producing-media-
operations-advanced-practice-for-media-server-and-video-content-
preparation-1st-edition-laura-frank/
https://textbookfull.com/product/post-conflict-performance-film-
and-visual-arts-cities-of-memory-1st-edition-des-orawe/
https://textbookfull.com/product/peace-formation-and-political-
order-in-conflict-affected-societies-1st-edition-richmond/
i
Image operations
ii
iii
Image operations
Visual media and political conflict
While copyright in the volume as a whole is vested in Manchester University Press, copyright in
individual chapters belongs to their respective authors, and no chapter may be reproduced wholly
or in part without the express permission in writing of both author and publisher.
The publisher has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for any external or
third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content
on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
Contents
Introduction 1
Jens Eder and Charlotte Klonk
vi Contents
Index 227
vii
Plates
List of plates ix
Figures
Contributors
tool of governmentality in the late Ottoman Empire. She has published in Cultural
Anthropology, American Ethnologist, Anthropology Now and Jadaliyya and has
contributed chapters to volumes on global news and journalism, photography
and memory, and visual cultures of nongovernmental activism.
Stephanie Hankey and Marek Tuszynski have been working worldwide to bring
design and technology together with activism and campaigning for the past twenty
years. They began working together in 2000 and founded the Tactical Technology
Collective in 2003, an organisation working to build the skills of activists world-
wide. In 2011 they co-founded Tactical Studios, a creative design agency for advo-
cacy and co-authored the book Visualising Information for Advocacy (tacticaltech.
org, 2013). Stephanie Hankey has an MA from the Royal College of Art and is
an Ashoka Fellow. Marek Tuszynski is the producer and director of Exposing the
Invisible , and previously co- founded the Second Hand Bank and the International
Contemporary Art Network.
Tom Holert is a Berlin-based art historian, critic, curator and artist. A former
editor of Texte zur Kunst and Spex, Holert is honorary professor of art theory
and cultural studies at the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna, where, from 2008 to
2011, he held the chair of Epistemology and Methodology of Art Production and
co-coordinated the Center for Art/Knowledge (CAK) and the PhD in Practice.
Holert is a founding member, since 2012, of the Academy of the Arts of the World,
Cologne.
Charlotte Klonk is Professor of Art History and New Media at the Institute of
Art and Visual History at Humboldt University Berlin, Germany. Previously, she
was a research fellow at Christ Church, Oxford and lecturer in the History of
Art Department at the University of Warwick. She has been a fellow at the Max-
Planck-Institute for the History of Science, at the Institute of Advanced Studies in
Berlin and the Clark Art Institute in Williamstown, MA. Her publications include,
among others, Science and the Perception of Nature (Yale University Press, 1998),
Spaces of Experience: Art Gallery Interiors from 1800–2000 (Yale University Press,
2009) and, with Michael Hatt, Art History: A Critical Introduction to its Methods
(Manchester University Press, 2005). She currently researches the history, role and
dynamic of images in acts of terror, forthcoming as Terror: Wenn Bilder zu Waffen
werden (S. Fischer Verlag, 2017).
Timothy Lenoir is Distinguished Professor of Science and Technology Studies
and of Cinema and Digital Media at University of California, Davis, USA. He has
published several books and articles on the history of biomedical science from
the nineteenth century to the present and on the roles of federal programmes and
university–industry collaborations in stimulating innovation in several areas of
science, technology and medicine. Lenoir has published several recent studies
on computational media and human technogenesis, including an extended essay,
‘Contemplating Singularity’, an edited e-book, Neurofutures, and several essays in
the area of game studies. With Luke Caldwell, Lenoir is co-author of The Military–
Entertainment Complex, forthcoming from Harvard University Press (2017).
xiv
Notes on contributors xv
Screen Dynamics: Mapping the Borders of Cinema (Austrian Film Museum, 2012;
co-editor), Wörterbuch kinematografischer Objekte (August, 2014; co-editor),
Cinematographic Objects: Things and Operations (August, 2015; editor) and
Farocki/Godard: Film as Theory (Amsterdam University Press, 2015).
Verena Straub is an art historian, working at the collaborative research centre
Affective Societies at Free University Berlin. Previously, she was research associate
at the Cluster of Excellence Image Knowledge Gestaltung at Humboldt University
Berlin (2013-2016). She studied in Toronto and Berlin where she received her mas-
ter’s degree in Art and Visual History and is currently completing her PhD thesis
on video testimonies of suicide bombers and their adaptation in contemporary
art. Verena Straub also works as a freelance journalist, contributing to national
daily papers and art magazines.
11
Introduction 11
By ‘image’ I mean any likeness, figure, motif, or form that appears in some medium
or other. By ‘object’ I mean the material support in or on which an image appears,
or the material thing an image refers to or brings into view …. By ‘medium’ I mean
the set of material practices that brings an image together with an object to produce
a picture … understood as complex assemblages of virtual, material, and symbolic
elements. (Mitchell 2005, xiii)
The WikiLeaks video Collateral Murder, for instance, is a moving image that shows
a helicopter attack on civilians (a real event as referential object). It appears on
individual computer screens (material objects) as the result of an interplay between
various media technologies and practices: the helicopter’s analogue technology for
recording the image, the military database accessible to the whistle-blower, the
Internet as a communication network, the various digital devices and platforms
allowing the WikiLeaks team to process and spread the image data and, finally,
users’ routers and computers all over the world.
Confusingly, however, images and pictures themselves are sometimes also
referred to as media. The term ‘media’ has many different meanings (see Mock
2006). Even if it is confined to ‘means of communication’, it may refer to (a) semi-
otic forms or texts, including images; (b) material artefacts or technical devices
of communication, including pictures or their material displays; and (c) social
organisations, systems or dispositifs such as television and print journalism.
Depending on the context, we speak of media sometimes in the second, but mostly
in the third sense. On the basis of this understanding, we can say that images are
encountered in many different media, such as photographs, comics, films, televi-
sion programmes, video games and Internet platforms. Marie-Laure Ryan (Ryan
2005), Joshua Meyrowitz (Meyrowitz 2009) and others have emphasised that media
differ with respect to their specific features, which in turn enable different forms
of interacting and operating with images. Compare, for instance, print magazines
and video platforms. The technical and organisational structures of these media
are extremely different, and so are their semiotic modes, their conventions of pro-
duction and reception, their communicative forms, their practices and use values.
Printed magazines embed still images into written texts in a specific language; their
authors are clearly identified, but it is difficult for the audience to ‘talk back’, to reuse
or to share the images. In the newsroom, press photographs are carefully selected
according to news values, aesthetic conventions, ethical norms and other pragmatic
and economic considerations (see Gürsel, this volume). This set of practices is com-
pletely different from video platforms that circulate all kinds of user-generated vid-
eos across borders (see Gregory, this volume; Christensen, this volume).
As wide as the variety of images and their relations to media is, the range of
operations that can be performed by (using) images is just as broad. As indicated
above, images influence events in very different ways: they generate knowledge
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
To obey the behests of the democratic caucus of this body, whose
leadership on this floor, whose representative national authority—
the one here and the other elsewhere—have championed the cause of
the Bourbon-funder party in Virginia, would be an obsequious
surrender of our State policy and self-condemnation of our
independent action.
The desire of our people for cordial relations with all sections of a
common country and the people of all the States of the Union, their
devotion to popular education, their efforts for the free enjoyment of
a priceless suffrage and an honest count of ballots, their
determination to make Virginia, in the public belief, a desirable
home for all men, wherever their birthplace, whatever their opinions,
and to open her fields and her mines to enterprise and capital, and to
stay the retrograde movement of years, so as to bring her back from
the fifteenth in grade to her original position among the first in the
sisterhood of States, forbid that my action here should be controlled
or influenced by a caucus whose party has waged war upon my
constituency and where party success is held paramount to what I
conceive to be the interests of Virginia and the welfare of the whole
country.
The readjusters of Virginia have no feeling of hostility, no words of
unkindness for the colored man. His freedom has come, and whether
by purpose or by accident, thank God, that among other issues which
so long distracted our country and restrained its growth, was
concluded, and I trust forever, by the results of the sanguinary
struggle between the sections.
I have faith, and it is my earnest hope, that the march of an
enlightened civilization and the progress of human freedom will
proceed until God’s great family shall everywhere enjoy the products
of their own labor and the blessings of civil, political, and religious
liberty.
The colored man was loyal to Virginia in all the days of conflict and
devastation which came of the heroic struggle in the war of sections
that made her fields historic. By no act of his was either the clash of
arms provoked or freedom secured. He did not solve his duty by
consideration of self-interest.
Speech of Hon. Justin S. Morrill, of Vermont,
If we had been under the banner of free trade in 1873, when the
widespread financial storm struck our sails, what would have been
our fate? Is it not apparent that our people would have been stranded
on a lee shore, and that the general over-production and excess of
unsold merchandise everywhere abroad would have come without
hindrance, with the swiftness of the winds, to find a market here at
any price? As it was the gloom and suffering here were very great,
but American workingmen found some shelter in their home
markets, and their recovery from the shock was much earlier assured
than that of those who in addition to their own calamities had also to
bear the pressure of the hard times of other nations.
In six years, ending June 30, 1881, our exports of merchandise
exceeded imports by over $1,175,000,000—a large sum in itself,
largely increasing our stock of gold, filling the pockets of the people
with more than two hundred and fifty millions not found in the
Treasury or banks, making the return to specie payments easy, and
arresting the painful drain of interest so long paid abroad. It is also a
very conclusive refutation of the wild free-trade chimeras that
exports are dependent upon imports, and that comparatively high
duties are invariably less productive of revenue than low duties. The
pertinent question arises, Shall we not in the main hold fast to the
blessings we have? As Americans we must reject free trade. To use
some words of Burke upon another subject: “If it be a panacea we do
not want it. We know the consequences of unnecessary physic. If it
be a plague, it is such a plague that the precautions of the most
severe quarantine ought to be established against it.”
COMMERCIAL PROTECTION.
The sum of our annual support bestowed upon the Navy, like that
upon the Army, may be too close-fisted and disproportionate to our
extended ocean boundaries, and to the value of American commerce
afloat; yet whatever has been granted has been designed almost
exclusively for the protection of our foreign commerce, and amounts
in the aggregate to untold millions. Manufacturers do not complain
that this is a needless and excessive favor to importers; and why,
then, should importers object to some protection to a much larger
amount of capital, and to far greater numbers embarked certainly in
an equally laudable enterprise at home?
THE THEORY.
But English free trade does not mean free trade in such articles as
the poor require and must have, like tea and coffee, nor in tobacco,
wines and spirituous liquors. These articles they reserve for
merciless exactions, all specific, yielding a hundred millions of
revenue, and at three times the rate we levy on spirits and more than
five times the rate we levy on tobacco! This is the sly part of the
entertainment to which we are invited by free-traders.
In 1880 Great Britain, upon tobacco and cigars, mainly from the
United States, valued at $6,586,520, collected $43,955,670 duties, or
nearly two-thirds as much as we collect from our entire importations
of merchandise from Great Britain.
After all, is it not rather conspicuous hypocrisy for England to
disclaim all protection, so long as she imposes twenty-nine cents per
pound more upon manufactured tobacco than upon
unmanufactured, and double the rate upon manufactured cocoa of
that upon the raw? American locomotives are supposed to have great
merit, and the foreign demand for them is not unknown, but the use
of any save English locomotives upon English railroads is prohibited.
Is there any higher protection than prohibition? And have not her
sugar refiners lived upon the difference of the rates imposed upon
raw and refined sugars? On this side of the Atlantic such legislation
would be called protection.
· · · · ·
Queerly enough some of the parties referred to, denounce the tariff
men as but “half-educated,” while, perhaps, properly demanding
themselves exclusive copyright protection for all of their own literary
productions, whether ephemeral or abiding. It is right, they seem to
think, to protect brains—and of these they claim the monopoly—but
monstrous to protect muscles; right to protect the pen, but not the
hoe nor the hammer.
Free trade would almost seem to be an aristocratic disease from
which workingmen are exempt, and those that catch it are as proud
of it as they would be of the gout—another aristocratic distinction.
It might be more modest for these “nebulous professors” of
political economy to agree among themselves how to define and
locate the leading idea of their “dismal science” whether in the value
in exchange or value in use, in profits of capital or wages, whether in
the desire for wealth or aversion to labor, or in the creation,
accumulation, distribution and consumption of wealth, and whether
rent is the recompense for the work of nature or the consequence of a
monopoly of property, before they ask a doubting world to accept the
flickering and much disputed theory of free trade as an infallible
truth about which they have themselves never ceased to wrangle. The
weight of nations against it is as forty to one. It may be safe to say
that when sea-serpents, mermaids, and centaurs find a place in
natural history, free trade will obtain recognition as a science; but till
then it must go uncrowned, wearing no august title, and be content
with the thick-and-thin championship of the “Cobden Club.”
All of the principal British colonies from the rising to the setting of
the sun—India alone possibly excepted—are in open and successful
revolt against the application of the free-trade tyranny of their
mother country, and European States not only refuse to copy the
loudly-heralded example, but they are retreating from it as though it
were charged with dynamite. Even the London Times, the great
“thunderer” of public opinion in Great Britain, does not refrain from
giving a stunning blow to free trade when it indicates that it has
proved a blunder, and reminds the world that it predicted it would so
prove at the start. The ceremony of free trade, with only one party
responding solitary and alone, turns out as dull and disconsolate as
that of a wedding without a bride. The honeymoon of buying cheap
and selling dear appears indefinitely postponed.
There does not seem to be any party coming to rescue England
from her isolated predicament. Bismarck, while aiming to take care
of the interests of his own country, as do all ministers, on this
question perhaps represents the attitude of the greater part of the
far-sighted statesmen of Europe, and he, in one of his recent
parliamentary speeches, declared:
Without being a passionate protectionist, I am as a financier,
however, a passionate imposer of duties, from the conviction that the
taxes, the duties levied at the frontier, are almost exclusively borne
by the foreigner, especially for manufactured articles, and that they
have always an advantageous, retrospective, protectionist action.
Practically the nations of continental Europe acquiesce in this
opinion, and are a unit in their flat refusal of British free trade. They
prefer the example of America. Before self-confident men pronounce
the whole world of tariff men, at home and abroad, “half-educated or
half-witted,” they would do well to see to it that the stupidity is not
nearer home, or that they have not themselves cut adrift from the
logic of their own brains, only to be wofully imposed upon by free-
trade quackery, which treats man as a mere fact, no more important
than any other fact, and ranks labor only as a commodity to be
bought and sold in the cheapest or dearest markets.
So long as statesmen are expected to study the prosperity and
advancement of the people for whose government and guidance they
are made responsible, so long free-trade theories must be postponed
to that Utopian era when the health, strength and skill, capital and
labor of the whole human race shall be reduced or elevated to an
entire equality, and when each individual shall dwell in an equal