Burnett, R.: How images think (2004)
0.00
0.0013528543 = product of:
0.0027057086 = sum of:
0.0027057086 = product of:
0.008117125 = sum of:
0.008117125 = weight(_text_:12 in 3884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008117125 = score(doc=3884,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.061117534 = fieldWeight in 3884, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3884)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Burnett's work is a useful basic primer an the new media. One of the chief attractions here is his clear language, devoid of the jargon of either computer sciences or advanced critical theory. This makes How Images Think an accessible introduction to digital cultures. Burnett explores the impact of the new technologies an not just image-making but an image-effects, and the ways in which images constitute our ecologies of identity, communication, and subject-hood. While some of the sections seem a little too basic (especially where he speaks about the ways in which we constitute an object as an object of art, see above), especially in the wake of reception theory, it still remains a starting point for those interested in cultural studies of the new media. The Gase Burnett makes out for the transformation of the ways in which we look at images has been strengthened by his attention to the history of this transformation-from photography through television and cinema and now to immersive virtual reality systems. Joseph Koemer (2004) has pointed out that the iconoclasm of early modern Europe actually demonstrates how idolatory was integral to the image-breakers' core belief. As Koerner puts it, "images never go away ... they persist and function by being perpetually destroyed" (p. 12). Burnett, likewise, argues that images in new media are reformed to suit new contexts of meaning-production-even when they appear to be destroyed. Images are recast, and the degree of their realism (or fantasy) heightened or diminished-but they do not "go away." Images do think, but-if I can parse Burnett's entire work-they think with, through, and in human intelligence, emotions, and intuitions. Images are uncanny-they are both us and not-us, ours and not-ours. There is, surprisingly, one factual error. Burnett claims that Myron Kreuger pioneered the term "virtual reality." To the best of my knowledge, it was Jaron Lanier who did so (see Featherstone & Burrows, 1998 [1995], p. 5)."
