“The intentional correlate of living
experience has not remained the same. In the nineteenth century it as “the
adventure”.In our days it appears as Fate. In fate is hidden the concept of the
‘total living experience’ that is completely mortal. War is its unsurpassed
prefiguration. (That I was born German, then I must die for it – the trauma of
birth contains already the shock that is mortal. This coincidence defines
Fate.”
“That which is “always the same thing” is not
the event, but what is new in it, the shock that pertains to it.”
“Empathy comes about through a declic, a kind
of gear shift. With it, the interior life erects a pendent to the shock of
sense perception. (Empathy is alignment in the intimate sense).” [My own
translations]
I take these three comments about shock from
Benjamin’s Arcades book. Like so many of Benjamin’s sentences and phrases, they
carry a systematic hint, although the system into which they would fit was
never constructed. To that extent, they also carry a certain glamour, the
glamour of fragments that indicate some fuller but lost revelation. Like the
fragments of the pre-Socratic philosophers, one wants to remove the eclipse,
find the complete transcript, read the denser text out of which they were
seemingly scooped. But in Benjamin’s case, the fragment reproves the desire that
everything can be told, that there be some total confession that correlates to
the total systems that were in play as he wrote, that the denser text is
anything other than an excuse fit for conformists by which is lulled to sleep
our sense of an ongoing emergency. As we know, one of those total systems drove
him to suicide. Which is another way of eternalizing the fragment.
The Arcades work does not develop the notion
of shock the way it develops other themes, such as fashion. Yet, in a sense, it
was at the center of these themes, for at the center of the project was
Baudelaire, who, Benjamin claimed, based his aesthetic practice on shock. Or
based his modernity, his modernism, on shock, and in so doing incorporated it
into the genetic structure of modernism. That, as we have pointed out, shock
comes up in different disciplines, and constitutes an image in different ways
in modernity was to an extent oddly neglected in the Arcades work, which
otherwise has a very shrewd dialectical-materialist take on lighting, clothing,
urban planning, etc., all passages to the burrow, or rather, passages that make
up the burrow of the poetry.
In as much as Benjamin’s view of shock
encodes an inability to decide between mechanical movement and animal stimulus,
it bears the impress of a certain pre-modern disposition. That is, it bears the
element of the invasion of haptic space by the first mass medias. It reflects
the Productivist regime of the first half of the 19th, when life crossed with
electricity and the crowd was the physical infrastructure of industry and the
revolution. But if we take our cue from Tarde, shock, in the second half of the
nineteenth century, is a second degree phenomenon. The crowd becomes merely one
extension of the larger public (it is remembered as a sort of phantom limb),
and that public receives its shock through the ever more penetrating
environment of the visual and press medias. Shock emerges from mechanical
collision into the regime of stimulus, which is the way it forms the modern moment,
or present. Shock was not only a poetic
tool, but a tabloid style. The speed graphic camera of the 1930s, the blinding
flare of which became an icon for the sensational story, the shocking event, is
an exteriorization of the kind of shock that joined together the animal crowd
and the sensation ‘seeking’ public (which is actually sought out, rather than
seeking – this is the trick of the media), haptic space and the wired in
multitude:
“The
flash does far more than merely aid in exposing the negative. Intruding into
the cover provided by night or darkness, its scorching light transforms both the
space and figures trapped in its glare. Subject matter is vignetted and figures
and ground are flattened and abstracted. While flashed compositions have the
stark look of a woodcut, it is the faces of the photographer’s subjects that
are most affected by the bulb’s blaze. With skin flashed to white as if
powdered, mouths locked into grimaces and eyes both black as troughs and
glinting like glass, subjects suffer a loss of humanity: faces freeze into
crystal masks and individuals metamorphose into freakish ghouls.” [Hauptman,
1998]
No comments:
Post a Comment