In 2005, fashion photographer David LaChapelle released Rize, a feature-length documentary about the inner-city Los Angeles dance movements of "clowning" and "krumping." The prestige-press lauded Rize as "a celebration" (Scott, 2005), a spectacular "visual miracle," and "unexpected knockout" (Travers, 2005). Many popular film critics praised Rize for revealing "another side" of South Central L.A., where young people use the art of dance to "rise" out of their social hardships. Most commonly, the film received accolades for its uplifting message. A review in the Washington Post, for example, noted: "That in disenfranchised communities beset by multiple blights of poverty, drugs and gang violence, there have always been stubborn, heroic artistic responses. This is simply one of the most dramatic and one of the most inspiring" (Harrington, 2005, p. WE37). In qualifying their admiration, critics commonly referred to the story as a "feel-good" movie about "hope sprouting where there should be none" (Burr, 2005, par. 1). Clowning and krumping were repeatedly treated as "salvational subcultures" (Harrington, p. WE37) that have "provided young African-Americans-most stranded in the war zones of South Central-a path away from the guns'n'poses of the area's self-styled gangstas and drug lords" (Brunson, 2005).The director, LaChapelle, is an internationally renowned photographer noted for his high-fashion celebrity photographs taken on surreal, extraordinary sets; thus, the film as a visual phenomenon is no surprise. His artwork typically plays with themes of excess aesthetically conveyed by a spectacular use of color and camp. LaChapelle's fantastic, vivid, and bizarre aesthetics are identifiable traits that run across his multi-media vita of music videos, advertisements, fashion, and fine art photography. Regarding his auteur status LaChapelle states, "My pictures are entertainment, an escape from the world we live in today. I never deal with death and violence; they're too everyday" ("High Fashion Fantasies," 1998, p. 54). Applying this statement to Rize poses a number of questions regarding the ethical and social responsibilities of a documentarian; one such question might ask how LaChapelle reconciles his own logic within a film made about the gritty, tough streets of South Central where death and violence for many of the area's constituents are "everyday" phenomena?Although his statement can be read in a number of ways, this paper argues that LaChapelle's own artistic vision ultimately compromises his role as a social documentarian of an inner-city struggle. If documentarians "speak for the interests of others" (Nichols, 2001, p. 3), then a number of ethical issues arise in the act of representing a community of which the storyteller is not a part. Structures of power, for instance, are implicit to the re-presenter/re-presented relationship and complicated by inherent social, cultural, and economic differences of either party (consciously or not). At
2005年，时尚摄影师David LaChapelle发布了Rize，这是一部关于洛杉矶市中心“小丑”和“krump”舞蹈动作的长篇纪录片。有声望的媒体称赞瑞兹奖是“一场庆典”(斯科特，2005年)、壮观的“视觉奇迹”和“意想不到的打击”(特拉弗斯，2005年)。许多受欢迎的影评人称赞瑞兹揭示了洛杉矶中南部的“另一面”，在那里，年轻人用舞蹈艺术“崛起”，摆脱社会困境。最常见的是，这部电影因其振奋人心的信息而获得赞誉。例如，《华盛顿邮报》(Washington Post)的一篇评论指出:“在被贫困、毒品和帮派暴力等多重摧残所困扰的被剥夺公民权的社区，总是有顽强而英勇的艺术回应。”这是最具戏剧性和最鼓舞人心的事件之一”(哈林顿，2005,p. WE37)。为了表达他们的赞赏，评论家们通常把这个故事称为一部“感觉良好”的电影，讲述了“希望在没有希望的地方发芽”(Burr, 2005，第1页)。小丑和krump被反复视为“拯救亚文化”(Harrington，第37页)，它们“为年轻的非裔美国人——大多数被滞留在中南部的战区——提供了一条远离该地区自诩为黑帮和毒贩子的枪支和姿势的道路”(Brunson, 2005)。导演拉查佩尔(LaChapelle)是一位国际知名的摄影师，以在超现实、非凡的场景中拍摄高级时装名人照片而闻名;因此，电影作为一种视觉现象是不足为奇的。他的艺术作品通常是通过色彩和阵营的壮观使用来传达过度美学的主题。LaChapelle的梦幻、生动和奇异的美学是他在音乐视频、广告、时尚和美术摄影等多媒体生活中可以识别的特征。关于他的导演身份，拉查佩尔说:“我的电影是娱乐，是对我们今天生活的世界的一种逃避。我从不处理死亡和暴力;它们太日常了”(《高级时装幻想》，1998年，第54页)。把这句话应用到Rize身上，就会提出一些关于纪录片导演的道德和社会责任的问题;其中一个问题可能会问，拉查佩尔是如何在一部关于中南部坚韧不拔、艰苦的街道的电影中调和自己的逻辑的，在那里，死亡和暴力对该地区的许多选民来说是“日常”现象。尽管他的陈述可以通过多种方式解读，但本文认为，拉查佩尔自己的艺术视野最终妥协了他作为一个内城斗争的社会纪录片的角色。如果纪录片“为他人的利益说话”(Nichols, 2001, p. 3)，那么在代表一个不属于故事讲述者的社区的行为中，就会出现许多伦理问题。例如，权力结构隐含于再现/再现关系中，并因双方内在的社会、文化和经济差异(有意或无意)而变得复杂。与此同时，即使是高度自反的电影制作和电影评论模式，也有可能受到一种本质化的话语的影响，这种话语预先决定了电影制作人的种族和阶级身份，因为他们与他或她在电影中所代表的社会演员有着不可分割的矛盾。这项研究也不例外。因此，本文并不主张一个富有的、国际知名的白人流行艺术家是否有能力包涵自己的主观身份，以充分描绘黑人市中心亚文化的“客观现实”。相反，这项研究通过仔细的文本分析揭示了一些高度结构化的正式代码，这些代码将拉查佩尔置于电影中，尽管他的身体不在。此外，这些代码提供了洞察电影制作人如何看待自己不仅与电影中的社会演员，而且与黑人文化的关系。根据Johnson (2003, p. ...)的说法，将黑人民间文化浪漫化的趋势在电影制作中很常见，“黑人工人阶级和市中心居民的形象以某种方式从他们周围的破坏中接种了疫苗”
{"title":"The Commodification of Blackness in David LaChapelle's Rize","authors":"K. Kuehn","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.2.52","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.2.52","url":null,"abstract":"In 2005, fashion photographer David LaChapelle released Rize, a feature-length documentary about the inner-city Los Angeles dance movements of \"clowning\" and \"krumping.\" The prestige-press lauded Rize as \"a celebration\" (Scott, 2005), a spectacular \"visual miracle,\" and \"unexpected knockout\" (Travers, 2005). Many popular film critics praised Rize for revealing \"another side\" of South Central L.A., where young people use the art of dance to \"rise\" out of their social hardships. Most commonly, the film received accolades for its uplifting message. A review in the Washington Post, for example, noted: \"That in disenfranchised communities beset by multiple blights of poverty, drugs and gang violence, there have always been stubborn, heroic artistic responses. This is simply one of the most dramatic and one of the most inspiring\" (Harrington, 2005, p. WE37). In qualifying their admiration, critics commonly referred to the story as a \"feel-good\" movie about \"hope sprouting where there should be none\" (Burr, 2005, par. 1). Clowning and krumping were repeatedly treated as \"salvational subcultures\" (Harrington, p. WE37) that have \"provided young African-Americans-most stranded in the war zones of South Central-a path away from the guns'n'poses of the area's self-styled gangstas and drug lords\" (Brunson, 2005).The director, LaChapelle, is an internationally renowned photographer noted for his high-fashion celebrity photographs taken on surreal, extraordinary sets; thus, the film as a visual phenomenon is no surprise. His artwork typically plays with themes of excess aesthetically conveyed by a spectacular use of color and camp. LaChapelle's fantastic, vivid, and bizarre aesthetics are identifiable traits that run across his multi-media vita of music videos, advertisements, fashion, and fine art photography. Regarding his auteur status LaChapelle states, \"My pictures are entertainment, an escape from the world we live in today. I never deal with death and violence; they're too everyday\" (\"High Fashion Fantasies,\" 1998, p. 54). Applying this statement to Rize poses a number of questions regarding the ethical and social responsibilities of a documentarian; one such question might ask how LaChapelle reconciles his own logic within a film made about the gritty, tough streets of South Central where death and violence for many of the area's constituents are \"everyday\" phenomena?Although his statement can be read in a number of ways, this paper argues that LaChapelle's own artistic vision ultimately compromises his role as a social documentarian of an inner-city struggle. If documentarians \"speak for the interests of others\" (Nichols, 2001, p. 3), then a number of ethical issues arise in the act of representing a community of which the storyteller is not a part. Structures of power, for instance, are implicit to the re-presenter/re-presented relationship and complicated by inherent social, cultural, and economic differences of either party (consciously or not). At ","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"52-66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69755239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The face is a living presence; it is expression.... The face speaks. The manifestation of the face is already discourse.-Emmanuel Levinas (1969, p. 66)And the whole body-a hand or a curve of the shoulder-can express as the face.-Emmanuel Levinas (1969, p. 262)It is immediacy of a skin and a face, a skin which is always a modification of a face, a face that is weighted down with a skin.-Emmanuel Levinas (1991, p. 85)Disturbing EncountersJay Rosenblatt has remarked that seeing an image of Adolf Hitler eating was the disturbing encounter behind his 1998 film Human Remains. Human Remains is Rosenblatt's best known and most discussed film. It is also one of his most controversial because of its relation to the skin of the other and to the skin of its viewers. This simple image, of possibly the most infamous dictator in modern history, involved in the simplest and possibly most commonly shared human activity, provokes us to recognize Hitler as human and disturbs our simplistic image of him as a monster. The image gets under our skin and reminds us that ethics needs a body. It reminds us that only someone who can hunger can give food. Only someone who eats, sleeps, and is weighted with skin can be ethical. Only an embodied, vulnerable human being is able to respond to the call of the other. No longer an icon of inhumanity, the ultimate sign of evil, nor a superhuman idol outside the law, the simple image of Hitler eating disturbingly thrust upon Rosenblatt the unmistakable recognition that Hitler was and will always remain human and responsible for his actions. Provoked by an image, Rosenblatt turns in Human Remains to provoke his audience with sounds and images that call us to recognize and respond to our own disturbing encounters with the duality of the skin of the other.In her book, Selfless Cinema?: Ethics and French Documentary, Sarah Cooper (2006) asks what it might mean in ethical terms not to see the face of the other as our own. What might it mean, ethically, if we were to acknowledge an irreducible alterity that comes from cinema but also slips the bonds of cinema? What if we acknowledge the difference the cinematic apparatus creates but cannot control? She claims, on the one hand, that within documentary film, as well as in all cinema, subjects of films "might be seen to resist reduction to the vision of the film-maker who fashions them, aligning this irreducibility with the asymmetrical relation to the Other in Levinasian thought" (p. 5). And, on the other, that some images "not only escape the control of the film-maker who fashions them but also the spectator" (p. 6). Some images, Cooper argues, because they provoke us to see in excess of what we expect to see, show us how elements of "documentary may resist the reflective mechanism that would refer one back to oneself or one's own world" (p. 8). When what we see exceeds what we expect, the limitations of film-making, the inability of films to completely objectify and totalize the world, di
脸是活生生的存在;这是表达式....脸说话。脸的表现已经是话语。——伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯(1969，第66页)而整个身体——一只手或肩膀的曲线——可以表达为脸。——伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯(1969，第262页)它是皮肤和脸的直接关系，皮肤总是脸的修饰，脸被皮肤压得很重。——伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯(1991,p. 85)令人不安的遭遇杰伊·罗森布拉特曾说过，在他1998年的电影《人类遗骸》中，看到阿道夫·希特勒吃东西的画面是令人不安的遭遇。《人类遗骸》是罗森布拉特最著名、讨论最多的电影。这也是他最具争议的作品之一，因为它与他人的皮肤和观众的皮肤的关系。这张简单的图片，可能是现代历史上最臭名昭著的独裁者，参与了最简单、也可能是最常见的人类活动，它让我们认识到希特勒是一个人，打破了我们把他简单化为一个怪物的形象。这幅图像触动了我们的皮肤，提醒我们道德需要一个身体。它提醒我们，只有能忍受饥饿的人才能给予食物。只有吃、睡、有皮肤的人才算道德。只有具身的、脆弱的人才能回应他人的呼唤。希特勒不再是不人道的象征，邪恶的终极标志，也不是法律之外的超人偶像，希特勒吃东西的简单形象令人不安地向罗森布拉特提出了一个明确的认识，即希特勒过去是，将来也永远是人类，并将对自己的行为负责。在一幅图像的刺激下，罗森布拉特在《人类遗骸》中转向用声音和图像来刺激他的观众，呼吁我们认识并回应我们自己与他人皮肤的二元性的令人不安的遭遇。在她的书《无私的电影?》莎拉·库珀(Sarah Cooper, 2006)的《伦理与法国纪录片》(Ethics and French Documentary)提出，从伦理角度来看，不把他人的脸视为自己的脸可能意味着什么。从道德上讲，如果我们承认一种来自电影但又摆脱了电影束缚的不可简化的另类，这可能意味着什么?如果我们承认电影装置创造但无法控制的差异呢?她声称，一方面，在纪录片中，以及在所有电影中，电影的主题“可能会被视为抵制还原为塑造他们的电影制作人的视觉，将这种不可还原性与列文亚洲思想中与他者的不对称关系联系起来”(第5页)。另一方面，一些图像“不仅逃脱了塑造他们的电影制作人的控制，而且也逃脱了观众的控制”(第6页)。因为它们激发我们看到超出我们期望看到的东西，向我们展示了“纪录片的元素如何抵制将一个人带回到自己或自己的世界的反思机制”(第8页)。当我们看到的超出我们的期望时，电影制作的局限性，电影无法完全客观化和整体化世界，以一种不像我们自己的脸和皮肤的遭遇来打扰我们。当我们看到超出我们预期的东西时，我们的自发性和权威就会受到质疑，我们的控制力就会被打断，我们的主权就会被推翻。在《总体性与无限》中，列维纳斯(1969)写道，“我们通过他者伦理的存在来质疑我的自发性”(第43页)。库珀认为，在这些令人不安的遭遇中，“伦理破坏了纪录片的存在”(第12页)。伦理打断和扰乱了电影，质疑它的自发性和权威性，质疑它捕捉和再现他人的能力。然而，伦理和电影干扰之间的平行并不是一成不变的。因为，正如库珀解释的那样，“伦理贯穿电影，但粉碎了列文式的伦理辩论和对电影或纪录片的讨论的精确镜像，因为两者都不能包含对方”(. ...页)
{"title":"The Skin of the Other: Documentary, Ethics, Embodiment","authors":"Brian K. Bergen-Aurand","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.2.100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.2.100","url":null,"abstract":"The face is a living presence; it is expression.... The face speaks. The manifestation of the face is already discourse.-Emmanuel Levinas (1969, p. 66)And the whole body-a hand or a curve of the shoulder-can express as the face.-Emmanuel Levinas (1969, p. 262)It is immediacy of a skin and a face, a skin which is always a modification of a face, a face that is weighted down with a skin.-Emmanuel Levinas (1991, p. 85)Disturbing EncountersJay Rosenblatt has remarked that seeing an image of Adolf Hitler eating was the disturbing encounter behind his 1998 film Human Remains. Human Remains is Rosenblatt's best known and most discussed film. It is also one of his most controversial because of its relation to the skin of the other and to the skin of its viewers. This simple image, of possibly the most infamous dictator in modern history, involved in the simplest and possibly most commonly shared human activity, provokes us to recognize Hitler as human and disturbs our simplistic image of him as a monster. The image gets under our skin and reminds us that ethics needs a body. It reminds us that only someone who can hunger can give food. Only someone who eats, sleeps, and is weighted with skin can be ethical. Only an embodied, vulnerable human being is able to respond to the call of the other. No longer an icon of inhumanity, the ultimate sign of evil, nor a superhuman idol outside the law, the simple image of Hitler eating disturbingly thrust upon Rosenblatt the unmistakable recognition that Hitler was and will always remain human and responsible for his actions. Provoked by an image, Rosenblatt turns in Human Remains to provoke his audience with sounds and images that call us to recognize and respond to our own disturbing encounters with the duality of the skin of the other.In her book, Selfless Cinema?: Ethics and French Documentary, Sarah Cooper (2006) asks what it might mean in ethical terms not to see the face of the other as our own. What might it mean, ethically, if we were to acknowledge an irreducible alterity that comes from cinema but also slips the bonds of cinema? What if we acknowledge the difference the cinematic apparatus creates but cannot control? She claims, on the one hand, that within documentary film, as well as in all cinema, subjects of films \"might be seen to resist reduction to the vision of the film-maker who fashions them, aligning this irreducibility with the asymmetrical relation to the Other in Levinasian thought\" (p. 5). And, on the other, that some images \"not only escape the control of the film-maker who fashions them but also the spectator\" (p. 6). Some images, Cooper argues, because they provoke us to see in excess of what we expect to see, show us how elements of \"documentary may resist the reflective mechanism that would refer one back to oneself or one's own world\" (p. 8). When what we see exceeds what we expect, the limitations of film-making, the inability of films to completely objectify and totalize the world, di","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"100-113"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69754737","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper gives evidence that visual documentation is not simply collections of images and sounds. During the colonization of Africa, conventional Western documentaries were integral to the culture of racism and impunity featuring Africans as props for a monumental construction of knowledge and iconography fuelled by so-called African racial and cultural inferiority. The pregnancy of this propaganda is still felt in contemporary Africa in terms of continental self-image, self-esteem, and life chances because these colonial documentaries had become a powerful cultural archive constricting the range of African representation and opportunities to negative cliches. Accordingly, as Jean-Marie Teno claims in Africa, I Will Fleece You (1992), one of the greatest victories of colonization was "cultural genocide" for the ways in which the local culture was erased by the colonial cultural machines sticking Africans into the purgatory of the gods of colonialism, condemning them as perpetual peripheral characters in the construction of their own history, identity, and salvation. As a result, a real and genuine African work of colonial healing, selfrespect, and dignity is a condition sine qua non for a real ascetic process of genuine cultural liberation.Considering documentary as archives, within this context, highlights the importance of justice to emphasize the Aristotelian premise that ethical principles require universal validity and application that cannot easily be buried by political expediency or provincial prejudice. For that matter, ethics in documentary stands to rupture with the naive notion of objectivity in order to confront the complex notion that documentary making is not immune from the compromises of power and, thus, can become quickly deficient in ethics. Ethics, within this context, is not simply a matter of abstraction. The work of documentary conjures a symbolic order with social and political implications; therefore, the documentarian is to be conscious of the influence of ideology, objectivity, and self-interest in visual documentation.1 In the work of Teno, it means the extent to which it is impossible to think about contemporary Africa and its struggle for democratic development while neglecting the power and legacy of centuries of Western cultural engineering in which Africans were used as props for colonial propaganda, the injustices that derived from this colonial symbolic order and the impact of its continuous imbrications in the daily life of ordinary Africans. These processes put real constraints on cultural decolonization.This work, consequently, relies on Teno and the "anti-documentary" perspective which highlights how the former colonized are taking advantage of the tools and techniques of the documentary to interrogate processes in which they were documented, produced, humiliated, and alienated by the colonizers and the ethical necessity to answer back and express a more legitimate representation of blackness in terms of h
{"title":"Colonial Visual Archives and the Anti-Documentary Perspective in Africa: Notes on Jean-Marie Teno's Films","authors":"O. Tchouaffé","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.2.82","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.2.82","url":null,"abstract":"This paper gives evidence that visual documentation is not simply collections of images and sounds. During the colonization of Africa, conventional Western documentaries were integral to the culture of racism and impunity featuring Africans as props for a monumental construction of knowledge and iconography fuelled by so-called African racial and cultural inferiority. The pregnancy of this propaganda is still felt in contemporary Africa in terms of continental self-image, self-esteem, and life chances because these colonial documentaries had become a powerful cultural archive constricting the range of African representation and opportunities to negative cliches. Accordingly, as Jean-Marie Teno claims in Africa, I Will Fleece You (1992), one of the greatest victories of colonization was \"cultural genocide\" for the ways in which the local culture was erased by the colonial cultural machines sticking Africans into the purgatory of the gods of colonialism, condemning them as perpetual peripheral characters in the construction of their own history, identity, and salvation. As a result, a real and genuine African work of colonial healing, selfrespect, and dignity is a condition sine qua non for a real ascetic process of genuine cultural liberation.Considering documentary as archives, within this context, highlights the importance of justice to emphasize the Aristotelian premise that ethical principles require universal validity and application that cannot easily be buried by political expediency or provincial prejudice. For that matter, ethics in documentary stands to rupture with the naive notion of objectivity in order to confront the complex notion that documentary making is not immune from the compromises of power and, thus, can become quickly deficient in ethics. Ethics, within this context, is not simply a matter of abstraction. The work of documentary conjures a symbolic order with social and political implications; therefore, the documentarian is to be conscious of the influence of ideology, objectivity, and self-interest in visual documentation.1 In the work of Teno, it means the extent to which it is impossible to think about contemporary Africa and its struggle for democratic development while neglecting the power and legacy of centuries of Western cultural engineering in which Africans were used as props for colonial propaganda, the injustices that derived from this colonial symbolic order and the impact of its continuous imbrications in the daily life of ordinary Africans. These processes put real constraints on cultural decolonization.This work, consequently, relies on Teno and the \"anti-documentary\" perspective which highlights how the former colonized are taking advantage of the tools and techniques of the documentary to interrogate processes in which they were documented, produced, humiliated, and alienated by the colonizers and the ethical necessity to answer back and express a more legitimate representation of blackness in terms of h","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"82-99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69755325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Susan Muska and Greta Olafsdottir's documentary, The Brandon Teena Story (1998), released one year before the popular Hollywood film, Boys Don't Cry (Dir. Kimberly Peirce, 1999), is suggested by Jennifer Devere Brody (2002) to be a "more ethical and perhaps even more experimental [film]" (p. 92) than its fictional counterpart. Much has been written about the various media representations of the Brandon Teena tragedy. Most have focused on the inconsistencies revealed in the different texts, or the various ways in which transsexual identity is displayed. Valid as those approaches are, our paper is not going to compare texts, or discuss transsexual identity. Instead, we seek to investigate the notion of ethics in The Brandon Teena Story by assessing how its structure balances both message and metaphor. Throughout this paper, the message to which we refer is the arguments that the film advances, while the metaphors are representative of the narrative, the visual effects, the symbolic imagery, and the score. The intention is to provide an analysis on the ethics of representation in documentary, especially, as in this case, when the main subject of representation is absent. The documentary will be closely examined in order to interrogate the general assumption that it is more ethical in its presentation of facts. We hope to reveal much more about the film's views on the subject of Brandon Teena's murder than may initially be apparent. The purpose of such analysis is to unveil how the documentary addresses Brandon Teena's "story" in such a way that submerges the issues of gender identity beneath other social discourses. We intend to show how the documentary presents Brandon as a "problem" rather than a person.The events that ended Brandon Teena's life are a mix of fraud, sexual abuse and finally murder. While there have been various media recreations of the events that led to Brandon's death, it has been argued by Judith Halberstam (2005) that Kimberly Peirce's film Boy's Don't Cry "more than any other representation of the case has determined the legacy of the murders" (p. 24). The fictional film was greatly influenced by the earlier, lesser-known documentary. Though these films provide similar accounts of the crimes there are several key differences between the two that affect the messages they provide. It is understandable that Brody, as stated above, may find the documentary "more ethical" than the Hollywood film, since documentary through its association with "presenting" facts rather than "constructing" fiction, tends to encourage such opinions. However, in the case of the Brandon Teena topic, a crime story about a transsexual who is raped and murdered, what exactly does more ethical mean? Does it suggest that we have a clearer understanding of Brandon's identity, or a clearer understanding of the sequence of events (cause and effect) that led to his murder? In our opinion, the interesting, but frustrating aspect of nearly all the texts that attem
{"title":"The Problem of Brandon Teena: Ethics in the Story Documentary","authors":"George S. Larke-Walsh, J. Kelly","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.2.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.2.33","url":null,"abstract":"Susan Muska and Greta Olafsdottir's documentary, The Brandon Teena Story (1998), released one year before the popular Hollywood film, Boys Don't Cry (Dir. Kimberly Peirce, 1999), is suggested by Jennifer Devere Brody (2002) to be a \"more ethical and perhaps even more experimental [film]\" (p. 92) than its fictional counterpart. Much has been written about the various media representations of the Brandon Teena tragedy. Most have focused on the inconsistencies revealed in the different texts, or the various ways in which transsexual identity is displayed. Valid as those approaches are, our paper is not going to compare texts, or discuss transsexual identity. Instead, we seek to investigate the notion of ethics in The Brandon Teena Story by assessing how its structure balances both message and metaphor. Throughout this paper, the message to which we refer is the arguments that the film advances, while the metaphors are representative of the narrative, the visual effects, the symbolic imagery, and the score. The intention is to provide an analysis on the ethics of representation in documentary, especially, as in this case, when the main subject of representation is absent. The documentary will be closely examined in order to interrogate the general assumption that it is more ethical in its presentation of facts. We hope to reveal much more about the film's views on the subject of Brandon Teena's murder than may initially be apparent. The purpose of such analysis is to unveil how the documentary addresses Brandon Teena's \"story\" in such a way that submerges the issues of gender identity beneath other social discourses. We intend to show how the documentary presents Brandon as a \"problem\" rather than a person.The events that ended Brandon Teena's life are a mix of fraud, sexual abuse and finally murder. While there have been various media recreations of the events that led to Brandon's death, it has been argued by Judith Halberstam (2005) that Kimberly Peirce's film Boy's Don't Cry \"more than any other representation of the case has determined the legacy of the murders\" (p. 24). The fictional film was greatly influenced by the earlier, lesser-known documentary. Though these films provide similar accounts of the crimes there are several key differences between the two that affect the messages they provide. It is understandable that Brody, as stated above, may find the documentary \"more ethical\" than the Hollywood film, since documentary through its association with \"presenting\" facts rather than \"constructing\" fiction, tends to encourage such opinions. However, in the case of the Brandon Teena topic, a crime story about a transsexual who is raped and murdered, what exactly does more ethical mean? Does it suggest that we have a clearer understanding of Brandon's identity, or a clearer understanding of the sequence of events (cause and effect) that led to his murder? In our opinion, the interesting, but frustrating aspect of nearly all the texts that attem","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"33-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69754867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
IntroductionEvoking Andrew Holleran's observation that "every new friendship in the gay life entailed an explanation of How I Got Here," Patrick Merla concludes that "coming out" has become a central event in a gay man's life, and "the way in which the man comes out reverberates throughout his life" (Merla, 1996). Coming out, that is, the act of enunciation of an individual's non-heteronormative sexuality, is key to the social narrative of being gay in America. This "event" is central also to a lesbian's life and within lesbian identity. As in Weiss's discussion, the coming-out narrative is reflected in lesbian independent films (Weiss, 2004) as well as other cultural contexts. In the genre of lesbian feminist fiction, moreover, the coming-out narrative has been the paradigmatic model of writing since the 1970s (Wilson, 1996; Jolly, 2001). To broaden the scope still, those who are bisexual, transsexual, and even those with disabilities and cancer, those who are rape victims, straight spouses of homosexual partners, and non-racially marked ethnicities all need to come out (Field, 1993; Buxton, 1994; Carbado, 2000; Arnold, 2000; Lesbian and Breast Cancer Project Team, 2004; Lo, 2006). Indeed, the "coming out" narrative is pervasive and central in the conceptualization of non-heteronormative identity formation and community development and has been adopted in different venues and contexts that are not directly related to sexuality. There is something about the coming out experience that is conformatory, that confers an acceptable identity onto someone, that assures the subject group support and inclusion.Yet, "coming out" is not a definitive or fixed event or process as the term itself might imply, but rather an individually variable experience(s) whose meaning is contextually and historically dependent. By demonstrating the heterogeneous use of the term "coming out," I hope to problematicize the naturalization of "coming out" as an inevitable process in identity formation and a narrative in identity expression. Contrary to its "naturalness," the term "coming out" has been deployed as a trope to frame our conceptualization of nonheteronormative identity and expression. The exact time when sexuality becomes, if at all, a constitutive part of one's identity may vary across culture and history. Foucault notes, in the Western culture, the discursive explosion of the eighteenth and nineteenth century caused a centrifugal movement with respect to heterosexual monogamy and scrutiny of the sexuality of those who did not like the opposite sex and for these people to make the difficult confession of what they were (Foucault, 1990, 38-39).Adoption and Transformation of the Coming Out Metaphor in Post-Stonewall U.S. History"Coming out" of non-heteronormative individuals is a relatively recent phenomenon in Western culture. In fact, research on the historical discourse of gay culture indicates that "coming out" gained its social significance as a strategic pract
{"title":"Contra Queer: The Metaphoric Incommensurability between Queer Politics and Coming Out","authors":"Alice Liao","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.2.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.2.17","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionEvoking Andrew Holleran's observation that \"every new friendship in the gay life entailed an explanation of How I Got Here,\" Patrick Merla concludes that \"coming out\" has become a central event in a gay man's life, and \"the way in which the man comes out reverberates throughout his life\" (Merla, 1996). Coming out, that is, the act of enunciation of an individual's non-heteronormative sexuality, is key to the social narrative of being gay in America. This \"event\" is central also to a lesbian's life and within lesbian identity. As in Weiss's discussion, the coming-out narrative is reflected in lesbian independent films (Weiss, 2004) as well as other cultural contexts. In the genre of lesbian feminist fiction, moreover, the coming-out narrative has been the paradigmatic model of writing since the 1970s (Wilson, 1996; Jolly, 2001). To broaden the scope still, those who are bisexual, transsexual, and even those with disabilities and cancer, those who are rape victims, straight spouses of homosexual partners, and non-racially marked ethnicities all need to come out (Field, 1993; Buxton, 1994; Carbado, 2000; Arnold, 2000; Lesbian and Breast Cancer Project Team, 2004; Lo, 2006). Indeed, the \"coming out\" narrative is pervasive and central in the conceptualization of non-heteronormative identity formation and community development and has been adopted in different venues and contexts that are not directly related to sexuality. There is something about the coming out experience that is conformatory, that confers an acceptable identity onto someone, that assures the subject group support and inclusion.Yet, \"coming out\" is not a definitive or fixed event or process as the term itself might imply, but rather an individually variable experience(s) whose meaning is contextually and historically dependent. By demonstrating the heterogeneous use of the term \"coming out,\" I hope to problematicize the naturalization of \"coming out\" as an inevitable process in identity formation and a narrative in identity expression. Contrary to its \"naturalness,\" the term \"coming out\" has been deployed as a trope to frame our conceptualization of nonheteronormative identity and expression. The exact time when sexuality becomes, if at all, a constitutive part of one's identity may vary across culture and history. Foucault notes, in the Western culture, the discursive explosion of the eighteenth and nineteenth century caused a centrifugal movement with respect to heterosexual monogamy and scrutiny of the sexuality of those who did not like the opposite sex and for these people to make the difficult confession of what they were (Foucault, 1990, 38-39).Adoption and Transformation of the Coming Out Metaphor in Post-Stonewall U.S. History\"Coming out\" of non-heteronormative individuals is a relatively recent phenomenon in Western culture. In fact, research on the historical discourse of gay culture indicates that \"coming out\" gained its social significance as a strategic pract","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"11 1","pages":"17-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69755144","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is commonly assumed that the perfection of digital copies, as opposed to the "noise" in analog copies, represents an enhancement of information transmission. Actually, however, that analog "noise" was "signal" to those receiving the analog copies. From the recipients' perspective, the fullness of the signal they once received from analog copies abated with the noiseless digital alternative.When I was a sophomore in college, one of my professors in elaborating what made for an A and what made for a B said that he had no option but to assign the one or the other, that he could not do what he witnessed as an between an A and a B. He remarked to the class that when transcripts of his record were sent out, way before there were computers, the Registrar handcopied this hybrid glyph making sure to reproduce it with its full ambiguity. Such, he said, he could not do for us, for all grades in the mid-'70s were entered into a database and mainframe-generated labels were placed on transcripts of record. What made his story compelling, what held the class' attention, was the cutesy implausibility of someone manually copying such a hybrid grade without resolving it into either of its constituents. In the analog world, such a "perfect" copy was an anomaly. In the digital world, were there such a glyph, it would be the norm.I want in this essay to point out the consequences of the loss of this technological noise to scholars. One of the most difficult to obtain desiderata for scholars who work hard and long on their papers is genuine, helpful, informed, and informative feedback on their work. Too often, such feedback concentrates on such inessentials as the number of references, the length of the paper, and a lot of to-do about pronominal constructs (not just the "he"/"she" controversy, but also the nuanced switching between the editorial "we," the authorial "I," and the autobiographical "I"). The only comments that can ever be helpful to the author are those that did not occur to him - obviously, the author is aware of the length of his submission, the length of his bibliography, and his choice of pronominal constructs. All too often, moreover, such unhelpful comments are delivered with a degree of invective made possible only by the blind-review process.Formerly, authors would often get a polite note of rejection from the editor, denying the paper further review. Sometimes, the short note would cite "a scope of the journal" issue, the number of submissions received compared with the number that could be accommodated, and the like. The next sentence usually informed the authors not to take such judgments as an indication of the worth of their own paper and may even have praised the paper, directly or indirectly. Since editorial review almost always precedes formal review by referees, it is essential for an author to understand what that last sentence means in his case: It may mean nothing, simple boilerplate, or it may mean a simple case of submitting to th
{"title":"How Digital Perfection Disempowers Scholars","authors":"J. S. Fulda","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.2.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.2.5","url":null,"abstract":"It is commonly assumed that the perfection of digital copies, as opposed to the \"noise\" in analog copies, represents an enhancement of information transmission. Actually, however, that analog \"noise\" was \"signal\" to those receiving the analog copies. From the recipients' perspective, the fullness of the signal they once received from analog copies abated with the noiseless digital alternative.When I was a sophomore in college, one of my professors in elaborating what made for an A and what made for a B said that he had no option but to assign the one or the other, that he could not do what he witnessed as an between an A and a B. He remarked to the class that when transcripts of his record were sent out, way before there were computers, the Registrar handcopied this hybrid glyph making sure to reproduce it with its full ambiguity. Such, he said, he could not do for us, for all grades in the mid-'70s were entered into a database and mainframe-generated labels were placed on transcripts of record. What made his story compelling, what held the class' attention, was the cutesy implausibility of someone manually copying such a hybrid grade without resolving it into either of its constituents. In the analog world, such a \"perfect\" copy was an anomaly. In the digital world, were there such a glyph, it would be the norm.I want in this essay to point out the consequences of the loss of this technological noise to scholars. One of the most difficult to obtain desiderata for scholars who work hard and long on their papers is genuine, helpful, informed, and informative feedback on their work. Too often, such feedback concentrates on such inessentials as the number of references, the length of the paper, and a lot of to-do about pronominal constructs (not just the \"he\"/\"she\" controversy, but also the nuanced switching between the editorial \"we,\" the authorial \"I,\" and the autobiographical \"I\"). The only comments that can ever be helpful to the author are those that did not occur to him - obviously, the author is aware of the length of his submission, the length of his bibliography, and his choice of pronominal constructs. All too often, moreover, such unhelpful comments are delivered with a degree of invective made possible only by the blind-review process.Formerly, authors would often get a polite note of rejection from the editor, denying the paper further review. Sometimes, the short note would cite \"a scope of the journal\" issue, the number of submissions received compared with the number that could be accommodated, and the like. The next sentence usually informed the authors not to take such judgments as an indication of the worth of their own paper and may even have praised the paper, directly or indirectly. Since editorial review almost always precedes formal review by referees, it is essential for an author to understand what that last sentence means in his case: It may mean nothing, simple boilerplate, or it may mean a simple case of submitting to th","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"5-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69754897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pluralism-the incommensurability and, at times, incompatibility of objective ends-is not relativism, nor, a fortiori, subjectivism, nor the allegedly unbridgeable differences of emotional attitude on which some modern positivists, emotivists, existentialists, nationalists and, indeed, relativistic sociologists and anthropologists found their accounts.-Isaiah Berlin, 1990, p. 87... the agent is awash with many images, many excitements, merging fears and fantasies that dissolve into one another. To sort things out to a point at which they seem like an assembly of definite and identifiable voices is already an achievement.-Bernard Williams, 2002, p. 195The documentary easily lends itself to an exploitative attitude in which the director projects collective conceptions or subjective views on the world. On the other hand, the notion of the documentary alludes to an attitude in which the author is sensitive towards features, gestures and material traces that cannot be constructed or directed. The latter notion is similar to Theodor Adorno's (2004) idea of the aesthetics of materiality. Materiality, in the sense that Adorno uses the word, refers to two different aspects of depiction. First, materiality refers to the medium itself and the technique that is used. Film as a medium; the different technical operations, the apparatus and the different stages of production provide certain material conditions for depiction. Secondly, materiality refers to the material qualities of the object in the film -features, gestures and other material traces that are registered irrespective of the intentions of the author. In acknowledging these material aspects, Adorno expresses a certain understanding of the morality of depiction. This involves an ethic where the portrayer refrains from erasing the different material traces that reveal the mediating purpose of depiction. According to Adorno the artwork mediates by participating in the historical world; it does not communicate a ready made image of something beyond its boundaries (Sinha, 2000, p. 157). When the director preserves the material traces in the film recording that bear witness of a world beyond the intentions or conceptions of the author, he/she accepts that the cinematic space, just like the social and historical world, is not directly controllable or maneuverable.Contrary to the Aristotelian line of thought, the aesthetics of Adorno is not based on a relation of likeness between the representation and the object that is represented. In his reading of Adorno and Lacoue-Labarthe, Martin Jay (1997) notes that there is something contradictory or nonsensical in the notion of Aristotle's mimesis. On one hand, mimesis refers to the imitation of nature, a duplication that is based on the idea of the sufficiency of nature. Another meaning of mimesis is the substitution (recreation, simulation) of nature; this entails a change or a refinement of that which already exists. In the first case we can speak of reproducti
多元主义——客观目的的不可通约性，有时是不相容性——不是相对主义，更不是主观主义，也不是一些现代实证主义者、情感主义者、存在主义者、民族主义者，甚至是相对主义的社会学家和人类学家所认为的不可逾越的情感态度差异。——以赛亚·伯林，1990年，第87页……代理人被许多意象、许多兴奋、融合在一起的恐惧和幻想所淹没。把事情整理出来，使它们看起来像一个明确的、可识别的声音的集合，这已经是一项成就。-Bernard Williams, 2002, p. 195纪录片很容易使自己倾向于一种剥削的态度，在这种态度中，导演投射出对世界的集体观念或主观观点。另一方面，纪录片的概念暗示了一种态度，即作者对无法构建或指导的特征，手势和物质痕迹敏感。后者的概念类似于阿多诺(Theodor Adorno, 2004)关于物质性美学的观点。物质性，在阿多诺使用这个词的意义上，指的是描写的两个不同方面。首先，物质性是指媒介本身和所使用的技术。作为媒介的电影;不同的技术操作、设备和不同的生产阶段为描绘提供了一定的物质条件。其次，物质性指的是影片中对象的物质品质——无论作者的意图如何，其特征、手势和其他物质痕迹都被记录下来。在承认这些物质方面时，阿多诺表达了对描写道德的某种理解。这涉及到一种伦理，即描绘者避免抹去揭示描绘的中介目的的不同物质痕迹。在阿多诺看来，艺术通过参与历史世界来进行调解;它没有传达一个现成的超越其边界的东西的形象(Sinha, 2000, p. 157)。当导演在电影记录中保留了一些物质痕迹，这些痕迹见证了一个超越作者意图或观念的世界，他/她就接受了电影空间和社会历史世界一样，是不能直接控制或操纵的。与亚里士多德的思想路线相反，阿多诺的美学不是建立在再现与被再现对象之间的相似关系之上的。马丁·杰伊(Martin Jay, 1997)在阅读阿多诺和拉库-拉巴特时指出，亚里士多德的模仿概念中存在一些矛盾或荒谬的东西。一方面，模仿指的是对自然的模仿，一种基于自然充分性观念的复制。mimesis的另一个含义是对自然的替代(再创造、模拟);这需要对已经存在的东西进行改变或改进。在第一种情况下，我们可以说再生产，在第二种情况下，我们可以说再生产。这种区别也可以被描述为模仿和替代之间的区别(Jay 1997，第39页)。美学中的问题是假设这两个方面可以被绝对地分开，例如在主观和客观或纪录片和小说的类别中。尽管阿多诺(2004)看到了艺术的潜力，因为它能够以一种超越我们个人预测或来自集体文化决定的意识形态的方式表达他者的他者性(p. 5)，但他意识到，不可能将艺术作品的内容减少到真实的本身。古典拟态艺术理解中的悖论在这个问题中得到了揭示;制作如何能给外观带来不是制作的结果;根据它自己的概念不是真的东西怎么可能是真的呢?(p。141)。尽管所谓的现实主义传统试图在画面中隐藏这些物质性的痕迹，但画面始终是物质性的，是生产的结果。…
{"title":"Documentary Film Beyond Intention and Re-Presentation: Trinh T. Minh-ha and the Aesthetics of Materiality","authors":"Antony Fredriksson","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.2.67","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.2.67","url":null,"abstract":"Pluralism-the incommensurability and, at times, incompatibility of objective ends-is not relativism, nor, a fortiori, subjectivism, nor the allegedly unbridgeable differences of emotional attitude on which some modern positivists, emotivists, existentialists, nationalists and, indeed, relativistic sociologists and anthropologists found their accounts.-Isaiah Berlin, 1990, p. 87... the agent is awash with many images, many excitements, merging fears and fantasies that dissolve into one another. To sort things out to a point at which they seem like an assembly of definite and identifiable voices is already an achievement.-Bernard Williams, 2002, p. 195The documentary easily lends itself to an exploitative attitude in which the director projects collective conceptions or subjective views on the world. On the other hand, the notion of the documentary alludes to an attitude in which the author is sensitive towards features, gestures and material traces that cannot be constructed or directed. The latter notion is similar to Theodor Adorno's (2004) idea of the aesthetics of materiality. Materiality, in the sense that Adorno uses the word, refers to two different aspects of depiction. First, materiality refers to the medium itself and the technique that is used. Film as a medium; the different technical operations, the apparatus and the different stages of production provide certain material conditions for depiction. Secondly, materiality refers to the material qualities of the object in the film -features, gestures and other material traces that are registered irrespective of the intentions of the author. In acknowledging these material aspects, Adorno expresses a certain understanding of the morality of depiction. This involves an ethic where the portrayer refrains from erasing the different material traces that reveal the mediating purpose of depiction. According to Adorno the artwork mediates by participating in the historical world; it does not communicate a ready made image of something beyond its boundaries (Sinha, 2000, p. 157). When the director preserves the material traces in the film recording that bear witness of a world beyond the intentions or conceptions of the author, he/she accepts that the cinematic space, just like the social and historical world, is not directly controllable or maneuverable.Contrary to the Aristotelian line of thought, the aesthetics of Adorno is not based on a relation of likeness between the representation and the object that is represented. In his reading of Adorno and Lacoue-Labarthe, Martin Jay (1997) notes that there is something contradictory or nonsensical in the notion of Aristotle's mimesis. On one hand, mimesis refers to the imitation of nature, a duplication that is based on the idea of the sufficiency of nature. Another meaning of mimesis is the substitution (recreation, simulation) of nature; this entails a change or a refinement of that which already exists. In the first case we can speak of reproducti","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"67-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69755259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Read for free online: this volume conceives a new history of copyright law. Privilege and Property is recommended in the Times Higher Education Textbook Guide (November, 2010).
{"title":"Privilege and Property: Essays on the History of Copyright","authors":"R. Deazley, M. Kretschmer, L. Bently","doi":"10.11647/OBP.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0007","url":null,"abstract":"Read for free online: this volume conceives a new history of copyright law. Privilege and Property is recommended in the Times Higher Education Textbook Guide (November, 2010).","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"64769626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
IntroductionThe world is on fire. Societies all over the world struggle incessantly and aggressively over the control of information to shape commonly held understandings of the present and the meaning to be derived from the past. These constructions and reconstructions have the potential to both legitimate and operate in opposition to structures of domination and injustice. Such dynamics feature regularly in the mass media. Consider the following:* Scholarly access to the world's largest Holocaust archives- the International Tracing Service (ITS)-had, until recently, been denied for over sixty years. This is remarkable given that these files were likely to reveal the names of unknown victims and shed new light on the structure and administration of forced labor and extermination camps.* Japan's ongoing struggles to remove from its high school textbooks long acknowledged responsibility for major war crimes committed by the Imperial Army during World War II.* How political considerations regularly confound attempts in the U.S. to formally recognize the Armenian genocide of the early twentieth century. Turkey continues to forcefully deny its responsibility for this genocide, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and uses its geostrategic importance to the U.S. to defeat recognition.* Key portions of Serbia's military archives from the Bosnian war were withheld from the International Court of Justice, leading several insiders to comment that such secrecy helped to absolve Serbia from charges of genocide and exempt it from monetary reparations.* Access to Bulgaria's cold war intelligence archives was contested amidst charges that they would identify current political and business leaders as collaborators with the communist era security services.* Brown University recently mined its archives as part of an effort to investigate its historical culpability in slavery and the slave trade. It launched a series of public events to stimulate discussion on institutional responses to the relationship between the present and past injustices.* In 2006, a U.S. National Archives audit found that up to one-third of 25,000 documents secretly removed from public access at its facilities since 1999 were inappropriately re-classified by various agencies.What is striking from these examples is not isolated to their profound nature. Equally remarkable is their ordinariness. A myriad of similar struggles could have easily been highlighted. The intersection among archives, professional ethics, archival praxis, the agency of individual archivists, and struggles for social justice is constantly at play across the globe. In such settings, archives and archivists can serve as instruments for sustaining, undermining, and challenging power and injustice. Yet, normative discussions of archival ethics largely evade these issues, and the promulgation of professional codes of ethics provides little value for understanding and reacting to these complexities.Given these evasi
世界着火了。世界各地的社会都在不断地激烈地争夺对信息的控制，以形成对现在和从过去得来的意义的普遍理解。这些建构和重建有可能使统治和不公正的结构合法化，并与之相对立。这种动态经常出现在大众传媒中。考虑以下情况:*直到最近，60多年来，学者们一直无法进入世界上最大的大屠杀档案——国际寻人服务处(ITS)。这些文件很有可能公开不知名受害者的姓名，并揭示强制劳动和灭绝营的结构和管理，因此值得关注。*日本正在努力从高中教科书中删除日本皇军在第二次世界大战期间犯下的重大战争罪行。*在美国，政治考虑如何经常使正式承认20世纪初亚美尼亚种族灭绝的尝试陷入混乱。尽管有压倒性的证据表明事实恰恰相反，但土耳其继续强烈否认对这场种族灭绝负有责任，并利用其对美国的地缘战略重要性来挫败承认。*塞尔维亚波斯尼亚战争时期军事档案的关键部分向国际法院(International Court of Justice)隐瞒，导致几位内部人士评论说，这种保密有助于免除塞尔维亚的种族灭绝指控，并使其免于货币赔偿。*查阅保加利亚冷战时期的情报档案引发争议，有人指控这些档案会将当前的政治和商业领袖视为共产主义时期安全部门的合作者。*布朗大学最近挖掘了它的档案，作为调查它在奴隶制和奴隶贸易方面的历史罪责的一部分。它发起了一系列公共活动，以激发对当前和过去不公正之间关系的制度反应的讨论。* 2006年，美国国家档案馆的一项审计发现，自1999年以来，在其设施内秘密移出的2.5万份文件中，有多达三分之一被不同机构不当地重新分类。这些例子的惊人之处并不孤立于它们深刻的本质。同样引人注目的是它们的平凡。无数类似的挣扎本可以很容易地被强调出来。档案、职业道德、档案实践、个人档案工作者的代理和争取社会正义之间的交集在全球范围内不断发挥作用。在这种情况下，档案和档案工作者可以作为维持、破坏和挑战权力和不公正的工具。然而，档案伦理的规范性讨论在很大程度上回避了这些问题，而职业道德规范的颁布对于理解和应对这些复杂性几乎没有价值。鉴于这些回避，本文考察了档案馆外部学科中的声音如何将自己的职业道德作为阐明这些更深层次问题的手段。它注意到他们是如何通过认识和承认职业道德是一个比规范结构所允许的复杂和困难得多的领域来做到这一点的。虽然我指出，在人类学、社会学、商学、医学、生命伦理学、哲学、传播学、历史学、后现代主义，甚至是成熟的伦理学实践者职业中，职业道德都出现了这种问题，但我并没有把他们的见解直接类比为档案背景本身。相反，我认为这些文献和话语可以帮助档案行业深化和丰富其职业道德的建设和重建。这些知识和见解是沿着一些关键主题组织的:专业精神;职业道德规范;职业和个人心理联系;对历史的分析，以及对社会正义的努力，这些都得到了持续的治疗。…
{"title":"Locating Agency: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Professional Ethics and Archival Morality","authors":"D. Wallace","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.1.172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.1.172","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionThe world is on fire. Societies all over the world struggle incessantly and aggressively over the control of information to shape commonly held understandings of the present and the meaning to be derived from the past. These constructions and reconstructions have the potential to both legitimate and operate in opposition to structures of domination and injustice. Such dynamics feature regularly in the mass media. Consider the following:* Scholarly access to the world's largest Holocaust archives- the International Tracing Service (ITS)-had, until recently, been denied for over sixty years. This is remarkable given that these files were likely to reveal the names of unknown victims and shed new light on the structure and administration of forced labor and extermination camps.* Japan's ongoing struggles to remove from its high school textbooks long acknowledged responsibility for major war crimes committed by the Imperial Army during World War II.* How political considerations regularly confound attempts in the U.S. to formally recognize the Armenian genocide of the early twentieth century. Turkey continues to forcefully deny its responsibility for this genocide, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and uses its geostrategic importance to the U.S. to defeat recognition.* Key portions of Serbia's military archives from the Bosnian war were withheld from the International Court of Justice, leading several insiders to comment that such secrecy helped to absolve Serbia from charges of genocide and exempt it from monetary reparations.* Access to Bulgaria's cold war intelligence archives was contested amidst charges that they would identify current political and business leaders as collaborators with the communist era security services.* Brown University recently mined its archives as part of an effort to investigate its historical culpability in slavery and the slave trade. It launched a series of public events to stimulate discussion on institutional responses to the relationship between the present and past injustices.* In 2006, a U.S. National Archives audit found that up to one-third of 25,000 documents secretly removed from public access at its facilities since 1999 were inappropriately re-classified by various agencies.What is striking from these examples is not isolated to their profound nature. Equally remarkable is their ordinariness. A myriad of similar struggles could have easily been highlighted. The intersection among archives, professional ethics, archival praxis, the agency of individual archivists, and struggles for social justice is constantly at play across the globe. In such settings, archives and archivists can serve as instruments for sustaining, undermining, and challenging power and injustice. Yet, normative discussions of archival ethics largely evade these issues, and the promulgation of professional codes of ethics provides little value for understanding and reacting to these complexities.Given these evasi","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"172-189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69754436","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
IntroductionTraditionally, information ethics focuses on the moral questions relating to the life cycle of information as it pertains to its generation, gathering, organization, storage, retrieval, and use. As a field it broadly examines issues related to privacy, security, access to information, intellectual freedom, quality and integrity of information, as well as intellectual property rights. In addition, the broader domain of professional ethics is of import, encompassing the ways we as professionals engage with, and respond and react to those ethical issues. The main stakeholders impacted by this array of ethical issues can be divided into three groups. These are the creators/distributors of information products and services, information mediators, including librarians, and the information users. Information and communication technology (ICT) supports the different information life cycle activities and plays a pivotal role in the shaping, understanding, and defining of information ethics.The development of modern ICT has profoundly changed the information and knowledge landscape, and as a result, has fundamentally impacted the field of information ethics. In this article we will examine this impact and illustrate how modern ICT has changed the scope and application of information ethics in the discipline of library and information science, and consider the implications for embedding information ethics squarely within and across an LIS curriculum, in an immersive fashion. We thus structure the article in the following manner: We introduce the topic by outlining the impact of modern ICT on nearly all human activities. We, furthermore, elaborate on the profound change that modern ICT brings about with regards to the unbundling, distribution, reproduction, and manipulation of information. To gain a clear understanding of how ICT impacted information ethics it is important to understand the relationship between technology and society. We discuss this relationship briefly in the next part of the article. Based on this relationship we illustrate in the final section how modern ICT has influenced the field of information ethics, and how we as LIS educators must consider this impact. This first column sets the context for a deeper consideration of information ethics pedagogy, which will be explored further in subsequent issues of JIE.Everything Is InformationModern information and communication technology, which is defined by Preston (2004, p. 35) as "the cluster or interrelated systems of technological innovations in the fields of microelectronics, computing, electronic communications including broadcasting and the Internet," bring about a profound transformation in the information and knowledge landscape and has radically changed most of our way of living and the way in which we do things. As such it is seen as ubiquitous, invading most facets of our existence. It has created a new and unprecedented form of dependence and most organizations and ins
{"title":"Ethics from the Bottom Up? Immersive Ethics and the LIS Curriculum","authors":"J. Britz, E. Buchanan","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.1.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.1.12","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionTraditionally, information ethics focuses on the moral questions relating to the life cycle of information as it pertains to its generation, gathering, organization, storage, retrieval, and use. As a field it broadly examines issues related to privacy, security, access to information, intellectual freedom, quality and integrity of information, as well as intellectual property rights. In addition, the broader domain of professional ethics is of import, encompassing the ways we as professionals engage with, and respond and react to those ethical issues. The main stakeholders impacted by this array of ethical issues can be divided into three groups. These are the creators/distributors of information products and services, information mediators, including librarians, and the information users. Information and communication technology (ICT) supports the different information life cycle activities and plays a pivotal role in the shaping, understanding, and defining of information ethics.The development of modern ICT has profoundly changed the information and knowledge landscape, and as a result, has fundamentally impacted the field of information ethics. In this article we will examine this impact and illustrate how modern ICT has changed the scope and application of information ethics in the discipline of library and information science, and consider the implications for embedding information ethics squarely within and across an LIS curriculum, in an immersive fashion. We thus structure the article in the following manner: We introduce the topic by outlining the impact of modern ICT on nearly all human activities. We, furthermore, elaborate on the profound change that modern ICT brings about with regards to the unbundling, distribution, reproduction, and manipulation of information. To gain a clear understanding of how ICT impacted information ethics it is important to understand the relationship between technology and society. We discuss this relationship briefly in the next part of the article. Based on this relationship we illustrate in the final section how modern ICT has influenced the field of information ethics, and how we as LIS educators must consider this impact. This first column sets the context for a deeper consideration of information ethics pedagogy, which will be explored further in subsequent issues of JIE.Everything Is InformationModern information and communication technology, which is defined by Preston (2004, p. 35) as \"the cluster or interrelated systems of technological innovations in the fields of microelectronics, computing, electronic communications including broadcasting and the Internet,\" bring about a profound transformation in the information and knowledge landscape and has radically changed most of our way of living and the way in which we do things. As such it is seen as ubiquitous, invading most facets of our existence. It has created a new and unprecedented form of dependence and most organizations and ins","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"70 1","pages":"12-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69754644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：