An Aesthetic of Astonishment

This article was great to read because it broke down and demystified the stereotypes of the “first audience” reactions to Arrival of a Train at the Station. What I found interesting was the many different takes that authors from then and now have on it. I particularly like Gorky’s interpretation that the viewers were experiencing doubt and belief at the same time. Last year professor Keathley made a great comparison to this mythic audience to people trying to touch holograms now. Like Gorky said, we know that these presentations are illusions however we are shocked at the event that is unfolding before us. The Trump l’oeil is active here and will continue to be active. If you think about it whenever we look at a representation such as film, photography, projections, etc. we are always looking at a representation of life. Aren’t these already manifestations that cause the viewer to judge based on realism? If we belief the image is in fact real because it was taken somewhere at some point in time aren’t we falling subject to believing everything we see, when in fact it is a real event that is altered by the photographer? It is he that is causing or allowing us to feel these feeling of thrill, joy, excitement, that we get from whatever medium we are consuming it through.

Kracauer, I believe, also explains the reason for 3D’s success during recessions. During recessions there is a general pessimism to life or negative outlook that causes a lack of excitement. People need to feel a thrill again and since narrative forms of media have shown to be what films are structured around now, it makes sense that people want to feel a thrill within these constructs.