The succession of Media and the Recursion of Human subjectivity: Kittler’s thought and reflection on Media Ontology

GUO Xiaoan, ZHAO Haiming

Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (6) : 38-54.

PDF(1775 KB)
PDF(1775 KB)
Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (6) : 38-54.
Communication Research

The succession of Media and the Recursion of Human subjectivity: Kittler’s thought and reflection on Media Ontology

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Kittler’s media thought provides rich imagination for us to reflect on the current situation that emphasize content over media of mainstream communication and to re-understand media, and also provides enough warning for the technical hidden worry in the digital survival era. Kittler's subtle investigation of the power structure contained in the computer chip architecture, continuation of Foucault’s view of power, provides a new way to study power issues in political philosophy and understand social power in the digital media era. Adhering to the view of media materialism and the theoretical analysis method of media archaeology, Kittler examined the process of dynamic interweaving among media technology, media materiality, relations and situations in the process of historical changes. He puts forward the “reflexive recursion” of media and attaches importance to the storage function of media and the effect of sensory “fracture” caused by media. it provides knowledge experience for enriching the theory of media philosophy. He put forward that “Media determine our situation”, while human is the object or reference of the recursive of media, and internalized as the other in the structure of media technology, the independent evolution of media is accompanied by the process of the gradually disappearance of human subjectivity, which reflects the media thought of Kittler’s “de-anthropocentrism”. Kittler’s points out that media is not only an intermediary tool for people to understand and transform the world, but also the relationship between human and the media “co-existing” in the world. people should put down anthropocentrism and take the perspective of “things” and are in the relationship between “man and (media) things” with an equal and humbly attitude, the value and significance of human existence can be highlighted, and human can correctly deal with the world on which they live, and achieve the ideal state of harmonious coexistence of man, media and nature by the recursion of human subjectivity.

Key words

Friedrich Kittler / media autonomy / subjective recursion / relational ontology / post-humanism

Cite this article

Download Citations
GUO Xiaoan , ZHAO Haiming. The succession of Media and the Recursion of Human subjectivity: Kittler’s thought and reflection on Media Ontology[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2021, 43(6): 38-54

References

[1]
埃尔基·胡塔莫, 尤西·帕里卡(2011/2020). 《媒介考古学:方法、路径与意涵》(唐海江译). 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
[2]
车致新(2019). 《媒介技术话语的谱系——基特勒思想研究》. 北京: 北京大学出版社.
[3]
戴宇辰(2016). 走向媒介中心的社会本体论?——对欧洲“媒介化学派”的一个批判性考察. 《新闻与传播研究》,(5),47-57+127.
[4]
戴宇辰(2018). “在媒介之世存有”:麦克卢汉与技术现象学. 《新闻与传播研究》,(10),82-96+127-128.
[5]
雷吉斯·德布雷(2000/2014). 《媒介学引论》(刘文玲译). 北京: 中国传媒大学出版社.
[6]
弗里德里希·基特勒(1986/2017). 《留声机电影打字机》(邢春丽译). 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
[7]
黄顺星(2017). 媒介史的末世预言:基德勒与麦克鲁汉论媒介技术. 《传播研究与实践》(台湾),(2),63-92.
[8]
杰弗里·温斯洛普-扬(2011/2019). 《基特勒论媒介》(张昱辰译). 北京: 中国传媒大学出版社.
[9]
刘海龙(2018). 传播中的身体问题与传播研究的未来. 《国际新闻界》,(2),37-46.
[10]
马丁·海德格尔(2005). 对技术的追问.载孙周兴(主编),《演讲与论文集》(第3-37页). 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
[11]
米歇尔·福柯(1966/2001). 《词与物——人文科学考古学》(莫伟民译). 上海: 上海三联书店.
[12]
唐士哲(2017). 作为文化技术的媒介:基德勒的媒介理论初探. 《传播研究与实践》(台湾),(2),5-32.
[13]
瓦尔特·本雅明(1973/1992). 《发达资本主义时代的抒情诗人》(张旭东,魏文生译). 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
[14]
王继周(2020). 文化技艺:德国文化与媒介研究前沿——对话媒介哲学家杰弗里•温斯洛普-扬. 《国际新闻界》,(5),51-60.
[15]
吴璟薇, 曾国华, 吴余劲(2019). 人类、技术与媒介主体性——麦克卢汉、基特勒与克莱默尔媒介理论评析. 《全球传媒学刊》,(1),3-17.
[16]
许煜(2019/2020). 《递归与偶然》(苏子滢译). 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
[17]
张磊(2020). 社会减速与媒介时间性. 《全球传媒学刊》,(2),4-20.
[18]
张昱辰(2014). 走向后人文主义的媒介技术论——弗里德里希·基特勒媒介思想解读. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(9),22-25.
[19]
Deuze M. (2011). Media Life. Media, Culture & Society, 33(1), 137-148.
[20]
Gane N. (2005). Radical post-humanism: Friedrich Kittler and the primacy of technology. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(3), 25-41.
[21]
Heidegger M. (1992). Parmenides. Trams. A. Schuwer and R. Rojcewicz. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 转引自:杰弗里·温斯洛普-扬(2011/2019).《基特勒论媒介》(张昱辰译).北京:中国传媒大学出版社
[22]
Kittler F. (1997) Literature, media, information systemsed. by John Johnston. Amsterdam: OPA.
[23]
Kittler F. (1980). Austreibung des Geistes aus den Geisteswissenschaften: Programme des Poststrukturalismus. Paderborn, Germany: Ferdinand Schöningh.
[24]
Kittler F. (1985/1990). Discourse networks 1800/1900.(Michael Metteer. Trans.). Chris Cullens, Stanford, CA: Stanford UP.
[25]
Kittler F. (1995). There is no software. ctheory, 10-18.
[26]
Kittler F., & Griffin M. (1996). The City Is a Medium. New Literary History, 27(4), 717-729.
[27]
Kittler F. (2001). Computer graphics: a semi-technical introduction. Grey Room, 30-45.
[28]
Kittler F. (2002/2010). Optical media: berlin lectures 1999.(Anthony Enns trans.). Malden: Polity Press.
[29]
Kittler F. (2009). Towards an ontology of media. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(2-3), 23-31.
[30]
Kittler, F. (2013/2014). Protected mode.In Gumbrecht, HU. (Eds.). The Truth of the technological world: Essays on the genealogy of presence.(pp.212).(Erik Butler trans). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
[31]
Montaña R. C., & Vagt C. (2018). Constructing the invisible-computer graphics and the end of optical media. communication+ 1, 7(1), 2.
[32]
Parikka J. (2012). New materialism as media theory: Medianatures and dirty matter. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 9(1), 95-100.
[33]
Partington G. (2006). Friedrich Kittler’s “Aufschreibsystem”. Science Fiction Studies, 53-67.
[34]
Peters J.D. (2015). The marvelous clouds: Toward a philosophy of elemental media. University of Chicago Press.
[35]
Sale S., & Salisbury L. (2015). Kittler now: Current perspectives in Kittler studies. John Wiley & Sons. London: Polity Press.

Footnotes

1. 基特勒所指的“文化技艺”涵盖了自古希腊以来的“技术物”到现代观念上的“媒介”,概念意涵丰富。但本文的“文化技艺”范围有所限定,仅用来特指前现代(premodern)的“媒介”,以区别于现代意义上的媒介。参见:于成(2020年4月1日)。“文化技艺”带来媒介考古学新发展。《中国社会科学报》,007。

Funding

Interdisciplinary Research Project of Humanities and Social Sciences of Chongqing University(2018CDJSK07WK08)
PDF(1775 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/