Climate Control, Modernism, and Mass Production

IF 0.2 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Mal Ahern
{"title":"Climate Control, Modernism, and Mass Production","authors":"Mal Ahern","doi":"10.1353/dis.2023.a907665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Climate Control, Modernism, and Mass Production Mal Ahern (bio) Air-conditioning (AC) made images modern. It enabled two of modernity’s paradigmatic and seemingly opposite visual forms: abstract painting and the mass-produced image. AC transformed art conservation, securing the field’s scientific authority and adapting it to the demands of modernist painting. AC also played a crucial role in the development of industrial mass production, including the production of “mass images” in newspapers and magazines and on film. In both cases, AC transformed the labor of image maintenance and production by de-emphasizing the roles of gesture and manual inscription in favor of environmental management. Rather than touch up a damaged canvas, the twentieth-century conservator preferred to prevent visible changes from happening in the first place; rather than manually align color impressions, the twentieth-century printer sought to control flows and atmospheres in the pressroom. Of course, printing and preservation alike continued to require manual touch-ups and corrections long after AC transformed these practices. But expectations changed with the new technology: manual intervention on the image surface became more the exception than the rule, conceived as an act of repair or quality control, rather than regular maintenance. Climate control thus helped secure romantic and modernist ideals of the image’s autonomy—the artist’s control over and ultimate responsibility for [End Page 3] the image—by restricting the hand of the craftsperson whose work it was to preserve and transmit that image to others. Every image has two realities: every image exists as both object and appearance. W. J. T. Mitchell has proposed that we call “pictures” those local manifestations of more fluid and intangible “images.”1 While the image-as-appearance appeals to the eye, the picture-as-object reacts to and interacts with its environment. Wood and fabric swell and contract, wet ink seizes up or runs faster and thinner, and pigments fade in sunlight or darken with oxidation. In Nicole Starosielski’s recent work on the role of temperature in media, she argues that all varieties of matter “have their own thermo sensitivities.”2 We can say the same for materials’ sensitivity to light, humidity, and the surrounding air. Everything tangible will react to the matter and conditions that surround it; every picture will inevitably change over time. The “image,” in Mitchell’s terms, transcends the specifics of the more tangible, contextually rooted “picture.” An image can survive the destruction of the individual pictures that host it; it can live on in reproductions or reinterpretations or even in verbal descriptions and memories.3 What counts as the “original” or “true” image—indeed, whether and how we separate appearance and object at all—is historically and culturally contingent. Consider, as do Alexander Nagel and Christopher S. Wood in Anachronic Renaissance, the shock of a Western visitor upon realizing that many ancient Chinese monuments receive a fresh coat of paint once a year and have for centuries.4 This visitor has encountered a radically different paradigm of historicity, one in which the artifact does not stand as the unaltered trace of a moment past but instead obtains its historical authenticity from the continuity of care it receives. Conservation practices change over time and vary across space. So too do the conventions for representing and reproducing artworks: the forms of remediation (a handmade copy, an engraving, a photograph, a photo-mechanical reproduction) that allow us to feel we have truly seen a work of art. The paradigms of conservation and reproduction I describe in this essay are specific to the twentieth-century West and particularly the United States. They constitute an “ideology of the image,” a phrase I use to describe how individuals and institutions understand the relationship between an image’s appearance and its materiality. (It is worth noting that Louis Althusser’s classic definition of ideology—“the imaginary relationship of individuals to the real conditions of their existence”—puts the imaginary, the image, at its center.)5 Image ideologies determine a picture’s “truth,” that is, what counts as a “good” copy in the production of multiples [End Page 4] or as an “authentic” artwork in the practice of restoration. These ideologies determine and are...","PeriodicalId":40808,"journal":{"name":"Discourse-Journal for Theoretical Studies in Media and Culture","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse-Journal for Theoretical Studies in Media and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/dis.2023.a907665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Climate Control, Modernism, and Mass Production Mal Ahern (bio) Air-conditioning (AC) made images modern. It enabled two of modernity’s paradigmatic and seemingly opposite visual forms: abstract painting and the mass-produced image. AC transformed art conservation, securing the field’s scientific authority and adapting it to the demands of modernist painting. AC also played a crucial role in the development of industrial mass production, including the production of “mass images” in newspapers and magazines and on film. In both cases, AC transformed the labor of image maintenance and production by de-emphasizing the roles of gesture and manual inscription in favor of environmental management. Rather than touch up a damaged canvas, the twentieth-century conservator preferred to prevent visible changes from happening in the first place; rather than manually align color impressions, the twentieth-century printer sought to control flows and atmospheres in the pressroom. Of course, printing and preservation alike continued to require manual touch-ups and corrections long after AC transformed these practices. But expectations changed with the new technology: manual intervention on the image surface became more the exception than the rule, conceived as an act of repair or quality control, rather than regular maintenance. Climate control thus helped secure romantic and modernist ideals of the image’s autonomy—the artist’s control over and ultimate responsibility for [End Page 3] the image—by restricting the hand of the craftsperson whose work it was to preserve and transmit that image to others. Every image has two realities: every image exists as both object and appearance. W. J. T. Mitchell has proposed that we call “pictures” those local manifestations of more fluid and intangible “images.”1 While the image-as-appearance appeals to the eye, the picture-as-object reacts to and interacts with its environment. Wood and fabric swell and contract, wet ink seizes up or runs faster and thinner, and pigments fade in sunlight or darken with oxidation. In Nicole Starosielski’s recent work on the role of temperature in media, she argues that all varieties of matter “have their own thermo sensitivities.”2 We can say the same for materials’ sensitivity to light, humidity, and the surrounding air. Everything tangible will react to the matter and conditions that surround it; every picture will inevitably change over time. The “image,” in Mitchell’s terms, transcends the specifics of the more tangible, contextually rooted “picture.” An image can survive the destruction of the individual pictures that host it; it can live on in reproductions or reinterpretations or even in verbal descriptions and memories.3 What counts as the “original” or “true” image—indeed, whether and how we separate appearance and object at all—is historically and culturally contingent. Consider, as do Alexander Nagel and Christopher S. Wood in Anachronic Renaissance, the shock of a Western visitor upon realizing that many ancient Chinese monuments receive a fresh coat of paint once a year and have for centuries.4 This visitor has encountered a radically different paradigm of historicity, one in which the artifact does not stand as the unaltered trace of a moment past but instead obtains its historical authenticity from the continuity of care it receives. Conservation practices change over time and vary across space. So too do the conventions for representing and reproducing artworks: the forms of remediation (a handmade copy, an engraving, a photograph, a photo-mechanical reproduction) that allow us to feel we have truly seen a work of art. The paradigms of conservation and reproduction I describe in this essay are specific to the twentieth-century West and particularly the United States. They constitute an “ideology of the image,” a phrase I use to describe how individuals and institutions understand the relationship between an image’s appearance and its materiality. (It is worth noting that Louis Althusser’s classic definition of ideology—“the imaginary relationship of individuals to the real conditions of their existence”—puts the imaginary, the image, at its center.)5 Image ideologies determine a picture’s “truth,” that is, what counts as a “good” copy in the production of multiples [End Page 4] or as an “authentic” artwork in the practice of restoration. These ideologies determine and are...
气候控制、现代主义和大规模生产
气候控制、现代主义和大规模生产Mal Ahern(生物)空调(AC)使图像变得现代。它促成了现代性的两种范式和看似相反的视觉形式:抽象绘画和大规模生产的图像。AC改变了艺术保护,确保了该领域的科学权威,并使其适应现代主义绘画的要求。AC还在工业大规模生产的发展中发挥了关键作用,包括在报纸、杂志和电影上生产“大规模图像”。在这两种情况下,AC通过减少手势和手工铭文的作用,转而支持环境管理,从而改变了图像维护和制作的劳动。比起修补损坏的画布,这位20世纪的文物保管员更倾向于从一开始就防止可见的变化发生;二十世纪的印刷工人不是手动调整色彩,而是试图控制印刷室内的流量和气氛。当然,在AC改变了这些做法很久之后,印刷和保存同样需要人工修补和修正。但随着新技术的出现,人们的期望发生了变化:对图像表面的人工干预更多地成为例外,而不是常规,被视为修理或质量控制的行为,而不是定期维护。因此,通过限制工匠的手,气候控制有助于确保图像自主的浪漫主义和现代主义理想——艺术家对图像的控制和最终责任——工匠的工作是保存和传播图像给其他人。每一个形象都有两个现实:每一个形象既是物体又是表象。米切尔(W. J. T. Mitchell)提出,我们把那些更流动、更无形的“图像”的局部表现称为“图像”。当图像作为外观吸引眼球时,图像作为物体会对其环境做出反应并与之互动。木材和织物膨胀和收缩,潮湿的墨水会卡住或跑得更快更薄,颜料在阳光下会褪色或因氧化而变暗。在Nicole Starosielski最近关于温度在媒介中的作用的研究中,她认为所有种类的物质“都有自己的热敏性”。材料对光、湿度和周围空气的敏感性也是如此。任何有形的东西都会对它周围的物质和条件作出反应;每幅画都不可避免地会随着时间的推移而改变。用米切尔的话来说,“图像”超越了更具体、更有背景的“图片”。一幅图像可以在承载它的单个图片被破坏后幸存下来;它可以在复制或重新诠释中存在,甚至在口头描述和记忆中存在什么是“原始的”或“真实的”形象——事实上,我们是否以及如何将表象和客体分开——是历史和文化上的偶然事件。正如亚历山大·内格尔和克里斯托弗·s·伍德在《错误的文艺复兴》一书中所做的那样,当一位西方游客意识到许多中国古迹每年都要重新粉刷一次,而且已经粉刷了几个世纪时,他会感到多么震惊这位参观者遇到了一种完全不同的历史性范式,在这种范式中,文物不是作为过去时刻不变的痕迹而存在,而是从它所接受的持续关怀中获得其历史真实性。保护措施随着时间和空间的变化而变化。代表和复制艺术品的惯例也是如此:修复的形式(手工复制,雕刻,照片,照相机械复制)让我们觉得我们真正看到了一件艺术品。我在这篇文章中描述的保护和繁殖的范例是针对20世纪的西方,特别是美国的。它们构成了一种“图像的意识形态”,我用这个短语来描述个人和机构如何理解图像的外观和物质性之间的关系。(值得注意的是,路易斯·阿尔都塞对意识形态的经典定义——“个人与他们存在的真实条件的想象关系”——将想象、图像置于其中心。)5图像意识形态决定了一幅画的“真相”,也就是说,在多幅作品的生产中,什么被视为“好”的复制品,或者在修复实践中,什么被视为“真实”的艺术品。这些意识形态决定了……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信