Multiple interfaces and affective connection: A postphenomen-ological reading of mediatized tourism

HUANG Peiying

Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2022, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (9) : 65-86.

PDF(1503 KB)
PDF(1503 KB)
Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2022, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (9) : 65-86.
Research Articles

Multiple interfaces and affective connection: A postphenomen-ological reading of mediatized tourism

Author information +
History +

Abstract

This article is dedicated to an interpretation of individuals’ different affective experience formed in their mediatized journeys from a postphenomenological perspective, discussing how the agents of media pilgrimages understand their relation to mutilple interfaces formed by mediated technologies and physical space. To further make sense of this phenomenon, this research, has conducted semi-structural interviews with 25 participants who had made media pilgrimages. During the interview, photo-elicitation was introduced and textual analysis was conducted to interpret relevant social media content posted by the participants. The empirical analysis suggests that the experience produced upon the encounters with media texts might become part of personalised memories, while raising desire for story attached to the physical space among media pilgrims who are guided by the media narratives. During their journey, the media pilgrims selectively accept the information or affective energy from the physical space, so as to maintain the boundary of interface between self and media texts. The media pilgrims also notice the differences between social media platforms and choose the one that might generate more affective connections to share their travel writing. However, the interface is multiple and indeterminate. Some interviewees may mobilize different corporeal senses and encounter people and things outside the media story, generating rich affective experience in the changing itinerary and adopting a playful attitude towards the spatial interface. Others are more ore less confined by the mobile interface, failing to establish deep affective connection with specific sites even through embodied participation. On this basis, this article also tries to compare the structuralist interpretation with the postphenomenological reading, in order to further explore the theory about the relationship among self, media and space through the conceptualization of “interface”.

Key words

interface / media pilgrimage / urban space / postphenomenology / travel writing

Cite this article

Download Citations
HUANG Peiying. Multiple interfaces and affective connection: A postphenomen-ological reading of mediatized tourism[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2022, 44(9): 65-86

References

[1]
贝尔纳·斯蒂格勒(2016). 《人类纪里的艺术:斯蒂格勒中国美院讲座》(陆兴华,许煜译). 重庆: 重庆大学出版社.
[2]
波里斯·葛罗伊斯(2008/2015). 《艺术力》(郭昭兰,刘文坤译).台北:艺术家.
[3]
常江, 田浩(2021). 生态革命:可供性与“数字新闻”的再定义. 《南京社会科学》,(5),109-117+127.
[4]
东浩纪(2001/2012). 《动物化的后现代:御宅族如何影响日本社会》(褚炫初译).台北:大鸿艺术股份有限公司.
[5]
格特·比斯塔(2006/2020). 《超越人本主义教育:与他者共存》(杨超,冯娜译). 北京: 北京师范大学出版社.
[6]
赫尔曼·施密茨(1990/2020). 《无穷尽的对象:哲学的基本特征》(庞学铨,冯芳译). 上海: 上海人民出版社.
[7]
吉尔·德勒兹(2002/2018). 《<荒岛>及其他文本:文本与访谈(1953-1974)》(董树宝,胡新宇,曹伟嘉译). 南京: 南京大学出版社.
[8]
吉尔·德勒兹(1978/2016). 德勒兹在万塞讷的斯宾诺莎课程(1978-1981)记录——1978年1月24日情动与观念.载汪民安,郭晓彦(主编),《生产第11辑:德勒兹与情动》(第3-22页). 南京: 江苏人民出版社.
[9]
姜宇辉(2007). 《德勒兹身体美学研究》. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
[10]
梁君健, 陈凯宁(2020). 从凝视到扫摄:手机摄影与旅游情境中观看方式的转变. 《新闻记者》,(9),47-62.
[11]
刘海龙, 束开荣(2019). 具身性与传播研究的身体观念——知觉现象学与认知科学的视角. 《兰州大学学报(社会科学版)》,(2),80-89.
[12]
卢鸿毅(2019). 跟我一起旅行:关于淑龄旅人的脸书书写. 《传播与社会学刊》(香港),(47),199-232.
[13]
罗贵祥(1997). 《德勒兹》.台北:东大图书公司.
[14]
罗玲玲(2020). 《技术与可供性》. 北京: 科学出版社.
[15]
马丁·海德格尔(1977/2018). 《林中路》(孙周兴译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
[16]
马丁·杰(1988/2020). 现代性的视觉政体.载唐宏峰(主编),《现代性的视觉政体: 视觉现代性读本》(第76-99页). 郑州: 河南大学出版社.
[17]
马汀·德·瓦尔(2014/2018). 《作为界面的城市——数字媒介如何改变城市》(毛磊,彭喆译). 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社.
[18]
米歇尔·福柯(1970/2008). 哲学剧场:论德勒兹. 载汪民安《主编》,《生产第五辑: 德勒兹机器》(第183-213页). 桂林: 广西师范大学出版社.
[19]
莫里斯·梅洛-庞蒂(1945/2001). 《知觉现象学》(姜志辉译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
[20]
莫里斯·梅洛-庞蒂(1948/2018). 《梅洛-庞蒂文集第4卷: 意义与无意义》(张颖译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
[21]
尼克·库尔德里(2003/2016). 《媒介仪式:一种批判的视角》(崔玺译). 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
[22]
皮埃尔·布尔迪厄(1972/2017). 《实践理论大纲》(高振华,李思宇译). 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
[23]
全美媛(2002/2021). 《接连不断:特定场域艺术与地方身份》(张钟萄译). 杭州: 中国美术学院出版社.
[24]
让·波德里亚(1986/2011). 《美国》(张生译). 南京: 南京大学出版社.
[25]
塞尔瓦托·玛丽亚·阿里洛蒂, 伊拉里亚·巴夫拉里, 马泰奥·坎迪迪(2014/2020). 多感官心理模拟与美学感知.载妮娜·莱文特, 阿尔瓦罗·帕斯夸尔-利昂(主编),《多感知博物馆:触摸、声音、嗅味、空间与记忆的跨学科视野》(第246-256页). 杭州: 浙江大学出版社.
[26]
斯科特·麦夸尔(2016/2019). 《地理媒介:网络化城市与公共空间的未来》(潘霁译). 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
[27]
孙玮(2018). 交流者的身体:传播与在场——意识主体、身体-主体、智能主体的演变. 《国际新闻界》,(12),83-103.
[28]
孙玮(2020). 我拍故我在我们打卡故城市在——短视频:赛博城市的大众影像实践. 《国际新闻界》,(6),6-22.
[29]
唐·伊德(1990/2012). 《技术与生活世界》(韩连庆译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
[30]
瓦尔特·本雅明(1936/2012). 《启迪:本雅明文选》(张旭东,王斑译). 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
[31]
杨大春(2014).《20世纪法国哲学的现象学之旅》. 北京: 社会科学文献出版社.
[32]
王海燕, 范吉琛(2021). 数字新闻的时间可供性:一个研究框架的提出. 《国际新闻界》(9),116-135.
[33]
约翰·厄里, 乔纳斯·拉森(2012/2016). 《游客的凝视》(黄宛瑜译)(第3版). 上海: 格致出版社、 上海人民出版社.
[34]
约翰·威利(2007/2021). 《地景》(王志弘等译). 新北: 群学出版有限公司.
[35]
曾丽红, 李家慧(2019). 互动仪式链视角下抖音旅游短视频的勃兴. 《传媒》,(16),44-46.
[36]
张尧均(2006). 《隐喻的身体:梅洛·庞蒂身体现象学研究》. 杭州: 中国美术学院出版社.
[37]
周逵(2018). 沉浸式传播中的身体经验: 以虚拟现实游戏的玩家研究为例. 《国际新闻界》,(5),6-26.
[38]
岡本健(2018). 《アニメ聖地巡礼の観光社会学》.京都:法律文化社.
[39]
前田愛(1992). 《都市空間のなかの文学》.东京:筑摩书房.
[40]
Barthes R. (1980). La Chambre Claire: Note sur la Photographie. Paris, FR: Gallimard/Seuil.
[41]
Beeton S. (2004). Rural tourism in Australia—has the gaze altered? Tracking rural images through film and tourism promotion. International Journal of Tourism research, 6(3), 125-135.
[42]
Crary J. (1992). Techniques of the Observer:On Vision and Modernity in the 19th Century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[43]
Deleuze G. (1990). The Logic of Sense. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
[44]
De Souza e Silva A. (2006). From cyber to hybrid: Mobile technologies as interfaces of hybrid spaces. Space and Culture, 9(3), 261-278.
Hybrid spaces arise when virtual communities (chats, multiuser domains, and massively multi-player online role-playing games), previously enacted in what was conceptualized as cyberspace, migrate to physical spaces because of the use of mobile technologies as interfaces. Mobile interfaces such as cell phones allow users to be constantly connected to the Internet while walking through urban spaces. This article defines hybrid spaces in the light of three major shifts in the interaction between mobile technology and spaces. First, it investigates how the use of mobile technologies as connection interfaces blurs the traditional borders between physical and digital spaces. Second, it argues that the shift from static to mobile interfaces brings social networks into physical spaces. Finally, it explores how urban spaces are reconfigured when they become hybrid spaces. For this purpose, hybrid spaces are conceptualized according to three distinct but overlapping trends: hybrid spaces as connected spaces, as mobile spaces, and as social spaces.
[45]
Frank A.W. (1991). For a sociology of the body:An analytical review. In Featherstone, M., HepworthM., & TurnerB. S.(Eds.). The Body:Social Process and Cultural Theory (pp.36-102). London, UK: Sage.
[46]
Galloway A.R. (2012). The Interface Effect. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
[47]
Grossberg L. (1992). We Gotta Get out of this Place: Popular Conservatism and Postmodern Culture. London, UK : Routledge.
[48]
Habuchi I. (2005). Accelerating reflexivity. In Ito, M., OkabeD., & MatsudaM. (Eds.). Personal, Portable, Pedestrian:Mobile Phones in Japanese Life (pp.165-182). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[49]
Hookway B. (2014). Interface. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
[50]
Johinke R. (2018). Take a walk on the wild side:Punk music walking tours in New York City. Tourist Studies, 18(3), 315-331.
[51]
Kim S. (2012). Audience involvement and film tourism experiences: Emotional places, emotional experiences. Tourism Management, 33(2), 387-396.
[52]
Kiran A.H. (2015). Four dimensions of technological mediation. In Rosenberger,R. & VerbeekP.P. (Eds.). Postphenomenological Investigations:Essays on Human-Technology Relations (pp.123-140). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
[53]
Kordel S. (2016). The production of spaces of the ‘good life’ -the case of lifestyle migrants in Spain. Leisure Studies, 35(2), 129-140.
[54]
Mcquire S. (2010). Rethinking media events: Large screens, public space broadcasting and beyond. New Media & Society, 12(4), 567-582.
The current deployment of large screens in city centre public spaces requires a substantial rethinking of our understanding of the relationship of media to urban space. Drawing on a case study of the Public Space Broadcasting project launched in the UK in 2003, this article argues that large screens have the potential to play a significant role in promoting public interaction. However, the realization of this potential requires a far-reaching investigation of the role of media in the construction of complex public spaces and diverse public cultures.
[55]
Meštrović S.G. (1997). Postemotional Society. London, UK: Sage.
[56]
Mirzoeff N. (2011). The Right to Look:A Counterhistory of Visuality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
[57]
Papacharissi Z. (2014). Affective Publics:Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
[58]
Richard V. M. & Lahman M.K.E. (2015). Photo-elicitation: Reflexivity on method, analysis, and graphic portraits. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 38(1), 3-22.
[59]
Schrock A.R.(2015). Communicative affordances of mobile media: Portability, availability, locatability, and multimediality. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1229-1246.
[60]
Smith D. (2015). Rewriting the constitution: A critique of ‘postphenomenology’. Philosophy & Technology, 28(4), 533-551.
[61]
Thrift N. (2007). Non-representational Theory: Space, Politics, Affect. London, UK: Routledge.
[62]
Verbeek P. P. (2006). The morality of things:A postphenomenological inquiry. In Selinger,E. (Ed.). Postphenomenology:A Critical Companion to Ihde (pp.117-128). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
[63]
Wylie J. (2005). A single day’s walking: Narrating self and landscape on the South West Coast Path. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30(2), 234-247.

Footnotes

1. 近年来部分互联网用户甚至用“圣地巡礼”称呼这种行为。“圣地巡礼”一词更多指向与日本影视文化取景地有关的旅行,这一术语较早用于描述九十年代日本的动漫粉丝前往喜爱的作品中出现的地方的打卡行为(岡本健,2018)。

2. “affect”的翻译并不统一,有译为“感受”或“情感”的,而本文更多是采用目前学界讨论德勒兹思想常见的译法“情动”,凸显德勒兹强调的生成性与转变的动态。而感性(sensibility)这一概念有时也会被译为感受力。本文的“感受力”建基于“情动”(affect)。相对于可被分类、展示的情感和感受,情动更多被理解为一种在特定时空语境中人们感受到的处于生成中的情感能量强弱(Papacharissi, 2014),而且这种情感变化如从愉悦到悲苦的流变会以增强和削弱人的形式使得人的行动力也处于一种连续流变状态中(德勒兹,1978/2016)。相对来说,感性(sensibility)这一概念更多是从文本的效果形态与运作方式出发,讨论不同文本及文化实践如何被体验,以及如何对受众产生不同的效果,如数字技术带来的感性变化——我们对世界的感知日益仰赖平台中叙述和分享的故事(Papacharissi, 2014)。简而言之,“感性”大致相当于一种结构化的力量并以某种效果呈现,而情动更多是联结个体的身体状态与这种感性“效果”的桥梁。而“情动”与“感性”大致而言绕不开讨论人如何以感知经验把握事物的现象学问题。

3. 可供性(affordance)这一概念本是由吉布森(James Gibson)于70年代提出,用以阐释动物在感知并适应生态环境时展示的协调能力并随之带来的环境变化,但是如今“可供性”已经广泛出现于不同学科的讨论中。近年来传播学界亦多见用此概念探讨媒介技术环境与行动者之间的激发与约束的互动关系(罗玲玲,2020;常江、田浩,2021;王海燕、范吉琛,2021)。

Funding

This project, Media pilgrimage and fandom, is sponsored by the Research Foundation of Shantou University(STF19018)
PDF(1503 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/