[Nguyen Yanping] Intersubjectivity: Digital inheritors and cultural heritage matters
Abstract: In the process of digital survival of cultural heritage, digital inheritors and cultural heritage matters communicate, dialogue and check each other, and the connotation of intersubjectivity is practiced in communication, dialogue and check.
Heritage is not the center, and digital inheritors are not the center.
They are two subjects that have eliminated opposition and are in an equal position of dialogue and exchange.
This kind of two-way communication and dialogue that dissolves the center makes true interaction possible.
To implement this two-way thinking, whether it is the people of the heritage site, local governments, or digital inheritors, they should keep in mind the subjectivity of the cultural heritage itself.
Keywords: inter-subject digital inheritors cultural heritage matters
At present, the craze for the inheritance and protection of cultural heritage is rising and rising, and digitalization is the most eye-catching one of these waves.
The digitization of cultural heritage is not a copying and simple reproduction, but a reinterpretation and expression of cultural heritage.
Different from traditional methods, people use digital technology to reconstruct and reproduce cultural heritage in a new way.
The transfer of carriers will inevitably affect the communication content itself, giving the cultural heritage content new vitality and having a more far-reaching impact.
In the modern inheritance of cultural heritage, a new type of inheritance subjects is emerging-they master and use digital technology to digitally process, process, reproduce, interpret, preserve, share and disseminate cultural heritage.
In this process of processing, processing, reproduction, interpretation and preservation, cultural heritage has been shared and disseminated unprecedentedly widely.
Even the originally unique, non-shareable and non-renewable material cultural heritage has become infinite, shareable and renewable.
Renewable.
Moreover, more importantly, the intervention of digital media technology has brought about a number of changes in people's understanding, concepts and inheritance of cultural heritage.
In Bosman's words,"Technological changes are not additional; they are ecological." A medium does not add anything, but changes everything."①Therefore, in this sense, digital inheritors are another new type of subject in the dissemination and survival of cultural heritage.
He is the formulator and implementer, gatekeeper and agenda setter of technical and expression norms in the process of digitalization of heritage.
He is also a meeting point in all aspects of the digital survival of national cultural heritage, closely interacting with various factors.
Specifically, documentary creators, digital photographers, website planners and producers, film and television animation directors, villagers and students who picked up DV...
regardless of their specific purposes and practices, as long as they play a leading role and objectively play a leading role in such activities, subjects who have carried out digital inheritance of cultural heritage can be included in the scope of the concept of digital inheritors discussed in this article.
Proposal of intersubjectivity
There was a significant turn in the development of aesthetics in the 20th century, from objectiveness (pre-subjectivity), subjectivity to intersubjectivity.
"Intersubjectivity" is the literal translation of English "intersubjectivity".
Many scholars believe that intersubjectivity, as a regulation of inter-subject relations, refers to the characteristics and relationships of mutual equality, mutual understanding and integration, two-way interaction, and active dialogue between subjects in terms of language and behavior.
It is the consensus among different subjects.
It is the consistency expressed by different subjects through consensus.
The transcendence of intersubjectivity over subjectivity is prominent in the understanding and treatment of the relationship model between subject and object.
Subjectivity simplifies the relationship between man and the external world into a one-way pattern of "subject-object" or "subject-intermediary-object".
The theory of intersubjectivity proposes the cognitive models of "subject-subject" and "subject-object-subject".
Putting subjectivity in the relationship of equality, integration and consistency between subjects and grasping it overcomes the limitations of the previous one-way thinking model to a certain extent and broadens human cognitive horizons.
The proposal of intersubjectivity allows aestheticians to break away from the historical limitations of enlightenment and rationalism from reflection theory to subjectivity theory, pay attention to the more essential aspect of existence-the relationship between subjects and subjects, and solve the free nature of existence.
The problem also solves the problem of how understanding is possible ②.
The core of intersubjectivity theory is the issue of subjectivity, so intersubjectivity is not anti-subjectivity, but focuses on and emphasizes the interaction between subjects.
In this case, the other who is opposite to the subject's self is given the status of equal dialogue and mutual communication with the subject.
Aesthetics is the abstraction of art, and communication is the abstraction of behavior.
The proposal of intersubjectivity also allows us to see this deeper solution in the study of digital inheritance of cultural heritage: the introduction of intersubjectivity has given new meaning to the relationship between the original subject and object-they are no longer literally the relationship between subject and object, but two symbiotic, equal and communicating subjects in communication activities.
In communication, intersubjectivity is a revision of the relationship between the two on a new basis and a modern revision of subjectivity ③.
The introduction of intersubjectivity has also given new significance to the relationship between digital inheritors and cultural heritage.
Digital inheritors can be members of the people of the heritage site who have mastered digital technology, or they can come from foreign countries (in fact, most professional digital inheritors currently come from foreign countries), such as media practitioners, such as research groups with certain financial backgrounds and corresponding positions, such as planning and creative personnel of commercial companies.
Generally speaking, the current digital inheritors can be divided into four categories: one is government officials and relevant staff of public institutions; the other is media workers such as television stations.
The digitization of traditional media is a gradual process, and we put this continuous process into the inspection field; the third is planning and creative personnel in commercial companies; and the fourth is the people in heritage sites, including villagers and students who have mastered certain digital technologies and skills.
These people may have some preliminary interests or needs for understanding of a certain cultural heritage, or they may have no understanding of it.
The same thing is that in the process of continuous "dialogue" and "communication" with cultural heritage, they gradually form a schema about the cultural heritage in their minds, and constantly enrich and improve it, which in turn produces the impulse to express "no need to speak" and start digital inheritance activities.
Digital inheritors are often "supported" and looked up to by the people of heritage sites and even local governments at all levels because of their extensive knowledge and deep understanding of heritage research.
Their opinions play a decisive role.
Many researchers have a deep understanding of this in field work.
The so-called "you know Pu 'er better than Pu' er people" and "you know how to use people more than Huize people" mean that these digital inheritors are recognized and praised by local people in the heritage site.
One of the inevitable results is that the heritage matters themselves have undergone major or small changes, hidden or present changes in such attitudes and positions.
Such changes are often approved by cultural heritage holders.
A more important role of digital inheritors is to directly or indirectly (help) discover the contemporary growth points of cultural heritage based on a deep understanding of the meaning of heritage and the wishes of local people.
An important indicator of whether a cultural heritage still has vitality today is its relationship with contemporary life.
If there is still close connection, it will have strong vitality.
If there is a better or more economic alternative, it will lose the vitality of life, but does it just say goodbye? Mr.
Fei Xiaotong once said,"Death and living in culture are different from the birth and death of organisms.
Elements in culture, whether material or spiritual, are alive when they function on people, but cannot be said to be dead when they no longer function.
Because in the material world, death cannot be resurrected, but in the cultural world or in the humanistic world, the functions of a cultural relic or a system can change, from meeting this need to meeting another need, and cultural relics and systems that have lost their functions for a while can also play a role in another period and be resurrected again."④ This "other period" or "other need" is very likely to be another bloom of cultural heritage.
The current "tourism-based survival" of cultural heritage has a direct relationship with the digital inheritors.
The creators of these documentaries and DC images have seen the wonderful cultural heritage with their digital eyes that are good at discovering, and introduced them to more people.
With more eyes, the daily life and scenes that the local people ignore are used to meet the function of improving people's living standards and increasing local GDP.
Professor Qi Qingfu believes that the "inheritors" of intangible cultural heritage should be: in the process of inheriting intangible cultural heritage of important value, they represent the profound national and folk cultural traditions of a certain heritage, master outstanding technologies, skills, and serve as an influential figure recognized by communities, groups, and ethnic groups.
To complete an outstanding cultural heritage work, a digital inheritor must not only understand his own digital media technology and skills, but also comprehensively grasp the cultural heritage content to be expressed, the psychology and cognition of the people in the heritage site, not only Pay attention to heritage matters, but also pay attention to its survival and development like locals.
The two creative principles established by the famous Japanese documentary director Shinsuke Ogawa from the documentary films of the "Mirisuka" series (First, the method of long-term filming is integrated with the subject; second, the "supporter" theory, the camera must stand in the subject's position) can be said to be an outstanding example of this kind of attention-13 years of rural life,"During his years in Kamiyama City, Yamagata Prefecture, Ogawa lived like a real old farmer.
His daily life was growing rice, transplanting rice seedlings, raising sericulture, picking, chatting with fellow villagers, discussing rural affairs with everyone, etc.; Walking on the road, he would greet everyone seriously, without any airs of a social elite; in Ogawa's rented house, many local people would gather to drink until dawn every day; when members of the film crew were transplanting seedlings, the dragonflies actually stayed on them for a long time.
This is a phenomenon that only occurs among experienced farmers."④ Excellent digital inheritors should be those who fully master heritage technical skills and skills.
Especially in the era of gradual digitalization of mass media, the role played by media and excellent digital inheritors is not insignificant, and their influence has been recognized by the whole society.
Cultural heritage is not monolithic.
Taking intangible cultural heritage as an example, on the one hand, it refers to "those traditional cultural matters of knowledge, skills and skills that have been created by humans in history and passed down in a living way to this day."(The Cultural Property Protection Law promulgated by Japan in 1950) ③ is a historical existence with relatively stable connotation and extension; on the other hand, it must be generated in specific people's lives in a specific history.
Therefore, every intangible cultural heritage is stamped with the cultural mark of a specific era and historical stage.
As Clyde Woods said,"In all social and cultural systems, change is a constant." 8.
The factors of change come from many aspects.
In addition to the characteristics of the heritage itself, changes in people's lifestyles, perspectives on issues (including heritage), and even the promotion of digital technology, such as the popularization of the Internet, will affect the current cultural heritage.
Changes in the times.
Therefore, the introduction of intersubjectivity has become a high probability event in the development of the contemporary relationship between cultural heritage and digital inheritors.
The subjectivity of cultural heritage matters
In the perspective of intersubjectivity research, the subjectivity of objects (especially objects as natural objects) is still a thorny issue.
Cultural heritage is different from pure natural objects, but it also has the transitional nature between people and natural objects, with two characteristics.
Therefore, it is of certain theoretical significance to discuss its subjectivity.
On the one hand, cultural heritage, as a concrete existence, is a place, tool and means of human life, and is largely controlled by human beings.
However, it is not purely passive and objective existence.
To borrow Professor Cui Baoguo's metaphor for media, it is "a fish", a living system with its own life law 9, and also a subjective existence.
It does not exist and develop completely according to human will, but has its own characteristics, requirements and specific ecological development laws.
There is a complicated relationship between it and its development environment, including human culture.
Cultural heritage, on the other hand, has cultural characteristics, as the poet, playwright, and literary critic T.
S.
Eliot likened culture to a tree: "You cannot make a tree; you can only plant a sapling, care for it carefully, and wait for it to grow into a tree; and when it grows, you cannot complain if you find that an acorn has grown into an oak instead of an elm." Culture is a tree, not a machine, not the result of design.
Cultural heritage is also a process of development and its outcome, with inherent genetic lineages and vital capacities, linked to and in dialogue with external conditions.
As digital inheritors of "people", there is no doubt that they have their own subjectivity in their relationship with cultural heritage, such as consciousness, autonomy, initiative, creation and other characteristics, which will not be repeated here.
What should be emphasized here is that in his relationship with the media, people are not only restricted by his own qualifications, organization, environment, the public and other conditions, but also by media-related conditions such as impressions of the media, characteristics of media symbols, mastery of media technology, media content, media public image, etc.
In this relationship, he is not a soldier or commander holding bullets, but a role that guides and obeys, is both proactive and not selfish.
The emergence of digital platforms has more clearly highlighted this subjectivity of cultural heritage, allowing dialogue and communication to be realized smoothly.
Digital inheritors and cultural heritage matters are two inter-subjects in this relationship.
In this way, heritage is not the center, and digital inheritors are not the center.
They are two subjects that have eliminated opposition and are in equal dialogue and exchange positions.
This kind of two-way communication and dialogue that eliminates the center makes true interaction possible.
To implement this two-way thinking, whether it is the people of the heritage site, local governments, or digital inheritors, they should keep in mind the cultural heritage matter itself.
subjectivity.
As Shinsuke Ogawa said: "Whether it is a feature film or a documentary, when you film the other person, you are actually filming the relationship between you and the other person." You must "feel the breath of the soul of the worker." Some people concluded that "Sanlituzuka 8 years, Makino 13 years, the long-term living and shooting life, and the 'world created jointly by the photographer and the subject' that Ogawa strives to pursue may be difficult for anyone to achieve or surpass in the future." Spiritual height ", which is actually a height that we should always keep in mind during the digitization of cultural heritage.
Practicalization of intersubjectivity
There is an inter-subjective practical process taking place in the inheritance of cultural heritage (including digital inheritance).
On the one hand, digital inheritors will give full play to their own subjectivity and initiative in this process, selecting and processing many heritage materials in the process of dissemination; on the other hand, cultural heritage itself constrains and restricts its own characteristics and life characteristics.
The behavior of digital inheritors affects their dissemination effect.
Scholar Peng Zhaorong said,"Heritage is actually just the product of selective division, subjective description, empirical interpretation and purposeful publicity carried out by people in different historical contexts according to different classification principles and standards." This includes the control of horizontal dissemination and vertical inheritance of heritage by entities including digital inheritors.
The extensive list of cultural heritage is the most intuitive result of checks by entities at all levels from all walks of life.Whether a certain heritage is not listed, what level of directory is listed, and how and how it is listed on the directory, all go through a number of "gatekeepers" and "gatekeepers" links no less than the selection of news materials.
Digital inheritors mainly involve the selection and presentation of cultural heritage digital representation.
The cultural heritage in front of us is as numerous as a crucian carp crossing the river.
In particular, the living characteristics of intangible cultural heritage make its existence appear diversified.
Being able to enter the high-level list means a series of corresponding "GDP-based" follow-up behaviors.
Therefore, in the process of "division","description","explanation" and "publicity" mentioned above, the "choice","subjectivity","experience" and "purpose" of protecting and inheriting the subject becomes the criterion for control.
Under this standard, digital inheritors strive to make their digital works a powerful driving force for realizing this "choice" and "purpose".
Therefore, digital inheritors from mass media should be "good-looking"(which is closely related to ratings and box office), digital inheritors from research groups should be "complete"(which is a research need), and villagers and students should rely more on intuition ("I like" and "you like" are originally "people share the same heart and the same heart").
Of course, this standard will undergo some specific changes at different stages of digitalization, such as shooting and editing.
In this process, digital inheritors select and present heritage matters based on their own educational background, abilities, interests and hobbies, with foresight (or prejudice), use audio-visual language with distinctive personal characteristics, and adopt unique narrative strategies inevitably and more or less add personal understanding and interpretation of heritage matters, and serve as an important gatekeeper in the dissemination of cultural heritage.
Another aspect of the problem is that cultural heritage matters also have their own unique existence methods and patterns.
They are a subjective existence.
They do not survive and develop completely in accordance with human will.
They have their own relatively independent and special ecological development laws and have certain subjectivity.
Moreover, different cultural heritage matters have different characteristics, especially activities and visual characteristics.
This makes cultural heritage matters themselves act as another subject in the choice of various digital equipment, means, methods, and even digital inheritors.
As the famous female director Peng Xiaolian said,"Many times, in order to accurately express images, I will start with the equipment." Digital photography, video photography, computer graphics, the Internet...
various digital equipment, means and methods have their own uniqueness in their technologies, symbols, and markets, and have certain selectivity in the expression and reproduction capabilities of various types of cultural heritage.
Even under certain requirements, today when digitalization has become a trend and trend, some non-digital methods, such as film photography, still retain their own space.
In this regard, factors such as the subjectivity of digital inheritors have played a leading role.
However, the subjectivity of cultural heritage matters itself cannot be ignored.
The obvious connection between certain themes and specific digital inheritors is also a noteworthy phenomenon in the digitization of cultural heritage.
For example, Hani themes are related to Meng Jiazong, such as the horse gang film and Hao Yuejun.
Since participating in the creation of the TV series "Hani Girl" in the mid-1990s, Meng Jiazong has successively planned and created the films "Ruoma's Seventeen Years Old","The Flower Waisted Bride","Red River" and the 22-episode feature film "The Nation of Carving Mountains", and the 40-episode TV series "A Bowl in the World"(Cooperation) and a number of works focusing on ethnic minorities, especially the Hani people.
Meng Jiazong grew up in Luxi County, Honghe Prefecture, Yunnan Province.
He began to engage in creative activities in junior high school and has a deep understanding and deep attachment to the land where he grew up.
He said,"I am very interested in national culture.
Every successful writer has his own living base.
Since I was young, I have used Honghe as my living base and learned from the ethnic groups living in this land, especially the Hani and Yi people.
My works must truly reflect the gods of the nation, not the shapes."
conclusion
The relationship between digital inheritors and cultural heritage matters is not exactly the subject-object relationship between protection and protection, inheritance and inheritance as we initially thought.
In the process of digital survival of cultural heritage, they communicate and exchange with each other.
Dialogue and check each other, practicing the connotation of intersubjectivity in communication, dialogue and check.
In the context of intersubjectivity, heritage is not the center, nor are digital inheritors.
They are two intersubjects who have eliminated opposition and are in equal dialogue and communication.
This kind of two-way communication and dialogue that dissolves the center and makes true interaction possible.
To implement this two-way thinking, whether it is the people of the heritage site, local governments, or digital inheritors, they should keep in mind the subjectivity of cultural heritage itself.
Improving heritage matters and the people's right to speak as the main body is the foundation for the sustainable development of national cultural heritage and the significance of popularizing digital technology in cultural heritage undertakings.
This article is the phased achievement of the Yunnan Province Philosophical Society planning project "Research on the Digital Survival of Yunnan Ethnic Cultural Heritage from the Perspective of Communication Ecology", project number: YB2009043)(The author is a doctoral candidate at the School of Journalism and Communication of Xiamen University, associate professor and master's supervisor at the School of Media of Yunnan Normal University)
Notes:
① Li Mingwei: "Survival of Media-Knowing People-An Introduction to Media Environment", Beijing: Peking University Press, 2010 edition, p.
52.
②③ Yang Chunshi: "Towards Post-Practical Aesthetics", Anhui Education Press, 2008 edition, pages 260, 262.
④ Fang Lili: Jingdezhen Civilian Kiln, Beijing: People's Fine Arts Publishing House, 2002 edition, p.
7.
③ Qi Qingfu: "On Inheritance and Inheritors in the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage","Northwest Ethnic Studies", 2006 (3).
④ Cheng Xiaoyun and Zhi Fina: "Poetic Records of Those Present Remembering Japanese Director Shinsuke Ogawa", http://ent.sina.com.cn/m/f/2008-04-03/12131973316.shtml, 2010-08-14.
④ Yuan Li: "A Course in Intangible Cultural Heritage", edited by the International Asian Folklore Society, 2008 (1).
By Clyde Woods [Mei], translated by Shi Weida and Hu Huasheng: Cultural Changes, Kunming: Yunnan Education Press, 1989 edition, p.
1.
Cui Baoguo: "Media is a Fish-Understanding Media Ecology", http://academic.mediachina.net/article.php? id=4327，2008-04-28.
By T.
S.
Eliot, translated by Yang Minsheng and Chen Changjin: Christianity and Culture, Chengdu: Sichuan People's Publishing House, 1989 edition, p.
3.
Peng Xiaolian: "The Puzzle of Idealism", Shanghai: East China Normal University Press, 2007 edition, pp.
229, 157, 189.
Peng Zhaorong: Heritage: Reflection and Interpretation, Yunnan Education Press, 2008 edition, p.
20.
Sheng Xuemei, Wen Jian, and Meng Jiazong: "Hometown Affinity Makes the" Red River Trilogy ", http://paper.yntv.cn/category/3100302/2009/09/14/2009-09-14_770413_3100302.shtml, 2010-08-13.