Day: August 16, 2016

Representation of Memories

“…that the past is not given, but must instead continually be re-constructed and re-presented” (Asrid Erll, 2008)

Memory is so much about the media, which express and disseminate contents of remembering. In our age of rapid changes, there are many ways to represent the memories. Archives, with and without a narrator, are tools for collective memories. We are recording visible and even non-visible data with the enabling technologies. The new technologies make the storage easily accessible and keep the cleanest archives because of its capacity of organisation and calculation make the fastest developments.


Even if Ernst insists on the epistemological nature of the media archaeologist as a reverse engineer (also literally, as elaborated later), his context for the ideas stems from a certain ontological understanding concerning technical media culture. In short, it is the calculation- and number logic–based ontology of technical (and especially computational) media through which cultural memory is articulated. This provides an alternative to the literary based narrativization that historians provide in their epistemological and ontological premises. Ernst’s position is aware of the materialist media grounding of contemporary archives that engage not only with images and sounds but nowadays increasingly with software-based cultural memory. The issue of digital memory is then less a matter of representation than of how to think through the algorithmic calculation– based ontology of a memory.

Kittler’s claim: technical media record not only meanings but also noise and the physicality of the world outside our human intentions or signifying structures.


The term ‘multilinear’ refers to a structure that facilitates the potential to have no definitive start and end point.

A multilinear documentary made up of separate parts does not need to be fixed or static, and can be changed into different configurations.

This type of documentaries does not necessarily rely on the established conventions
of traditional film and television documentary making.

In contrast to creating explicit relations between shots, indexing is used to create implicit relations using keywords (Davenport and Murtaugh 1997):

…simple keyword descriptions associated with media objects provide the crucial function of isolating authors from the process of defining explicit relationships and links between units of content. Instead, by connecting a material (story element) to a keyword, the author defines a potential connection between the material and others that share that keyword. By connecting each material to a set of keywords, the author enables a material to be related to other materials in more than one way. (p.452)

By  I began to explore the processes involved in creating a multilinear nonnarrative using an  taxonomy through indexing.

Open Structure

Plantinga’s concept of an ‘open structure’ (1997) proposes that:

In general, open structures are more episodic, meandering, and idiosyncratic than their formal counterparts, although no film can avoid formal structure all together. Formal structures are motivated by the requirements of conventions of composition. Open structure may be motivated in various ways, by the filmmaker’s associations while filming, by an anthropological experiment or a journey, or by pure chance. (1997 pp.145–6)


New Media audiovisual designer, producer and lecturer Dr. Seth Keen studied Plantinga’s concept of an ‘open structure’ within the networked architecture of the Internet. He was interested in using a multilinear structure to create a work that had no beginning, middle or end. According to his findings, open structures typically do not rely on narrative causality or establishing a logical ordering of events.

His question is “How can the affordances of video, computers and the network be used to facilitate a web of relations between shots, in a multilinear structure?”

New open source software allows other artists to use the software and by this way besides creating a new sequences or environments, they are experimenting of a new algorithmic of an archive and its expanded various usages. Open Source Video Archive

Screen Shot 2016-09-26 at 14.43.59.png

Software based digital video archives likely to be the most prospective field. Based on the developments in the computer learning This new way, as a categorical multilinear non-narrative, has vast potential. Certainly, the aesthetic of the digital, and postmodern comes to the front.

The audio visual archive can, for the first time, be organized not just by metadata but according to proper media inherent criteria – a sonic and visual memory in its own. Contrary to traditional semantic research in the history of ideas, such an endogenic audiovisual archive will no longer list sound and image sequences exclusively according to their authors , subjects, and time and space metadata of recording. Instead, digital data banks will allow audio-visual sequences to be systematised according to genuinely signal-paramethic notions (mediation rather than narrative topoi), revealing new insights into their informative qualities and aesthetics. (Jussi Parrika, Media Archaeology as a Transatlantic Bridge) is one of those digital video archive software, which was developed and maintained by Jan Gerber and Sebastian Lütgert at 0x2620 in Berlin and Sanjay Bhangar at CAMP in Bombay. It allows you to manage large, decentralised collections of video, to collaboratively create metadata and time-based annotations, and to serve your archive as a desktop-class web application. It is a free and open source.

The programme called consists the function of the computer having an attribution of being encyclopaedic, spatial, procedural, participatory and modular. The program involves small sufficient modules; scripts. The system allows its users find separate videos, in the form of shots and sequences and thus create a sequence out of them into different combinations. In other words, participants engage with a closed system, and access multiple clips stored in a database. The users, acting as a curator, select and assemble clips into different combinations, navigate within the database.

Programmers by sharing the program as an open source, which allows users/designers to build their own version, they give the opportunity to social context designer having a platform to digitalised, organise and frame the data easily. The software also allows users to become the creator of their own documentaries by containing the possibilities of combining different clips, as well as setting various relationships between all these by determined keywords—and it thus it develops the avant-garde idea of a documentary under the name of personal list as an abstract visual score to its logical end, and beyond. The software has the potential to bring a new level of objectivity and taste to the documentary culture. The line between archive and documentary becomes more blurred by this computer based new compositing points the next generation of narration, which puts the emphasis on behaviour, choice, and action rather than composition.

As programmers came to visit and gave lecture us into the class that I have taken from Andreas Treske, I thought “it would be the best point to use it.” Thanks to my dorm friend who is a continuing physics student we set up the programme. I started to upload videos from the festival archive each year as I have already separated and exported some of them in a right format.

The most important factor that made me experiment with the program is its usability. Usability is a buzzword for all types of software and applications. But of course what is significant as much as usability is usefulness. Traditionally, in art practice, the artists made a unique piece within a particular medium. There is no difference between the interface and the work that has done. In contemporary age, with the new media, there are new ways of collaborating while practising art. For instance, as a software, needs social context and an editor who enter the keywords to make the categorisation.

The most significant problem with the digital archive is a contingency. As a fact, digital archives can be instantaneously erased and this might be faster than any fire in the library at Alexandria. Like the all other new technologies, digital archives constantly required to keep it up to date.

System Theory and