Page 17 [17]
OCR
Within and Across the Media Borders were there" (Rosenstone 1988: 1177). However, in each medium we encounter fictive elements, too (Ibid.: 1181). In visual representations we can trace a certain narration that is, nevertheless, related rather to the general way in which still images depict reality than to the specificity of the image. Each medium has its particular ways and strategies of depiction and it stresses different aspects of the represented reality. In our analysis of the Other, we focus on the grasping of the intermedial aspects of the depictions of alterity. We conceive media as part of a sociocultural reality and claim that they together—that is, caricatures, illustrations, photographs, and movies—constitute a visual cultural paradigm of the era. In the present volume the authors analyze a variety of visual media: caricatures (Buke; Detrez; Hristov; Nedelcheva; Ispan; Nazarska; Angelov; Halmesvirta), photography (Demski; Libera & Sztandara; Vaseva; Oroz; Czarnecka; Lorke; Seljamaa; Baraniecka-Olszewska), postcards and advertising pictures (Uzlowa; Gadjeva), drawings as illustrations or posters (Sz. Kristóf; Oroz; Sorescu-Marinkovic; Ispan; Chtopicki; Seljamaa; Periklieva & Markov), movies and cinema characters (Sz. Kristéf; Oroz; Kaser; Kassabova), television (Sorescu-Marinkovié), and monuments (Troeva; Periklieva & Markov). Each of the authors asks questions of the analyzed material and presents the selected visual medium from a different perspective. Since the content of the volume focuses on a variety of media, we would like to draw a few conclusions dealing with the characteristics of the latter and also their interpretation. When we look at the image through the lens of photography, “photo-text” can be both a tool for telling stories about the world and—thanks to the narrative techniques—a method for identifying meanings of the message (Michalowska 2012: 11). In this sense, photography is about the surrounding reality, and in the press photography or photojournalism this is even more evident, since it focuses mainly on showing characters and events. In contrast, film depicts motion and is created often as a “confrontation of characters” (Kassabova). Moreover, film endeavors to show individuals rather than groups. Television also has its own specificities. It can be regarded as distinct because it reduces distance from the audience, one of its typical means of expression, because it is first and foremost, as Sorlin wrote, a “talking medium” (Sorlin 1998). Our intention, however, is not to analyze each and every kind of medium and their respective particularities. We attempt rather to pinpoint certain characteristics of the selected epoch, which, in our opinion, is a persistent period of transition from experiencing a constantly growing amount of media to being dominated and overwhelmed by them—a similar phenomenon to what we experience these days. We close of our considerations just before the Internet enters private space. Thus, for us the most important task is the comparison of three media: photography, cinema, and television, which seem to be the key media of modernity. We are aware that we make a huge simplification here, but the comparison of the three selected forms of visual representations can provide us with information 15
