Reading Response #9
1. "Theorists describe postmodernism as skepticism about "master narratives" or "meta narratives"--narratives that reputedly reveal the structural basis of all narrative systems" (p. 303).
2. Simulation is a copy and simulacrum is a substitution that questions the real (p. 307).
3. "Postmodernism's reflexivity, in which the text refers to its own means of production, has its origins in modernism" (p. 313).
4. Drawn cartoons form visual construction of unthinkable events that is impossible in live film (p. 218).
5. "The world of images today consists of a huge variety of copies, parodies, replicas, reproductions, and remixes" (p. 322).
6. Pastiche is a term used to describe the culture of parody and remake (p. 325).
7. "Postmodern design and architecture have built on these changing concepts of space to reflect in self-conscious ways on design and the history and function of architecture" (p. 331).
What was interesting the most was that of remaking. How can an image have so many different point or make different statements? Its interesting how people can interpret images super differently, and because of their interpretations they remake certain images to their understanding. Will images be remade differently? How often are they remade to represent the same meaning or the original meaning behind the image? I found it pretty fascinating to read.
2. Simulation is a copy and simulacrum is a substitution that questions the real (p. 307).
3. "Postmodernism's reflexivity, in which the text refers to its own means of production, has its origins in modernism" (p. 313).
4. Drawn cartoons form visual construction of unthinkable events that is impossible in live film (p. 218).
5. "The world of images today consists of a huge variety of copies, parodies, replicas, reproductions, and remixes" (p. 322).
6. Pastiche is a term used to describe the culture of parody and remake (p. 325).
7. "Postmodern design and architecture have built on these changing concepts of space to reflect in self-conscious ways on design and the history and function of architecture" (p. 331).
What was interesting the most was that of remaking. How can an image have so many different point or make different statements? Its interesting how people can interpret images super differently, and because of their interpretations they remake certain images to their understanding. Will images be remade differently? How often are they remade to represent the same meaning or the original meaning behind the image? I found it pretty fascinating to read.
Comments
Post a Comment