In Matthew
Engelke’s essay Religion and the Media
Turn he examines recent collections of essays that investigate the “media
turn” in religious studies. They focus on the idea of religion as essentially
mediation, which involves a turn away from belief toward materiality and
practice. While this movement is not organized and “nobody is yet passing out
membership cards”, there is an emerging body of solid literature that
demonstrates how religion is not returning, but returning to focus.
Religion
needs material practice. A focus on practice facilitates a shift from concentrating
purely on the message of a text, image, or sound (transmission view?) to
considering the medium in its many dimensions (ritual view?). Considerations like
who controls it, to which human sense is it directed, what does its audience do
with its messages, how are religious dispositions transformed by these media,
etc. This results in movement away from belief and toward materiality, away
from formalism and toward practice.
Culture
is not a thing but a process. However, we can only measure it by its material
“things”. Much of human life involves rending the invisible, or mediating it
into our sphere of perception. Mediation scholars can learn from religious
scholars in continuing to create corpus on the subject. Two concerns that may
assist their study are “relations to” and “relations of”.
“Relations
to” have to do with “how mediation positions people and their gods in relation
to one another. They are concerned with distance and, often, presence” (376).
The nature of a medium can factor into calibrating the proper distance between
the human and divine. Technology can close the gap in some cases, but it also
transforms the “aura” of a text. Distance and proximity also relate to control:
the more widely disseminated a text is, the harder it is for its sender to
control its distribution, reception, etc. This seems to be increasing
exponentially from the days of Guttenberg (where one person controlled a certain
printing press and thus every bible that came from it, to contemporary digital
media where remix, bricolage, and transmedia dictate that most cultural texts
are a sort of “leftover stew” made up of other cultural bits and pieces.
“Relations
of” power and empowerment have to do with whether a particular medium or text
is a path to freedom or enslavement, to authentic devotion or debilitating
hypocrisy? This will also help us understand how religious mediation differs
from other kinds of mediation (political, economic, etc.). It mediation as a
concept a solid, objective tool that can be applied where we wish? If we
examine how stained glass windows affected and moved (spiritually or
emotionally) medieval folk, would our findings help us understand how television
does the same thing today?
AMERICAN ETHNOLOGIST, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 371–379, ISSN 0094-0496, online ISSN 1548-1425.
No comments:
Post a Comment