What makes an observer modern? ; Dirichi Ike-Njoku
xxx
In the first place, what is an observer? From Jonathan Crary's work, an observer is not merely one who sees, but one who observes within a prescribed set of possibilities, embedded in a system of limitations and conventions (Taussig, 6). Therefore, in identifying the modern observer, I will take into account that he sees within the system, limitations, and conventions of modernism.
Which in turn begs the question, what is modernism? And what are these limitations and conventions that it imposes on the observer? I would like to think of modernism in the light of the classicism of the previous era, this era which was characterized by the consideration of empirical observation, or perhaps 'sensual perception', as an objective truth. However, at the turn of the mid-19th century, even preceding the invention of the camera, certain changes began to be observable in the mindset of what I would call the social zeitgeist. More and more emphasis began to be placed on visual perception as a subjective experience, and this has since changed the world's notion of knowledge. Goethe's experiment with the camera obscura, that epitome of the classicist notion of the objectivity of truth, could be taken to be a mark of the new emphasis of this era on the subjectivity of perception, experience, knowledge, and vision.
Hence, I would like to think of a modern observer as one who demonstrates these characteristics; one who expresses a certain form of skepticism whenever confronted with what society or any media would present as an objective truth/theory.
In the first place, what is an observer? From Jonathan Crary's work, an observer is not merely one who sees, but one who observes within a prescribed set of possibilities, embedded in a system of limitations and conventions (Taussig, 6). Therefore, in identifying the modern observer, I will take into account that he sees within the system, limitations, and conventions of modernism.
Which in turn begs the question, what is modernism? And what are these limitations and conventions that it imposes on the observer? I would like to think of modernism in the light of the classicism of the previous era, this era which was characterized by the consideration of empirical observation, or perhaps 'sensual perception', as an objective truth. However, at the turn of the mid-19th century, even preceding the invention of the camera, certain changes began to be observable in the mindset of what I would call the social zeitgeist. More and more emphasis began to be placed on visual perception as a subjective experience, and this has since changed the world's notion of knowledge. Goethe's experiment with the camera obscura, that epitome of the classicist notion of the objectivity of truth, could be taken to be a mark of the new emphasis of this era on the subjectivity of perception, experience, knowledge, and vision.
Hence, I would like to think of a modern observer as one who demonstrates these characteristics; one who expresses a certain form of skepticism whenever confronted with what society or any media would present as an objective truth/theory.
| Previous page on path | What Makes An Observer Modern?, page 3 of 10 | Next page on path |
Discussion of "What makes an observer modern? ; Dirichi Ike-Njoku"
Add your voice to this discussion.
Checking your signed in status ...