“…Rather, it is also about not just seeing, and about ‘visuality as … indivisible from a wider bodily sensorium’ (MacDonald et al . , 6). The visual is the predominant sense through which the state's legitimacy is secured, and is afforded an inherent credibility not found in the tactile or aural senses (Amoore ; Jay ).…”
Section: Geopolitics and Observant Practice At British Military Airshowsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, as MacDonald et al . (, 2) argue, the ability of states, militaries and media elites to render visible realities around ‘the conduct of war and peace … as well as the competition of state sovereignty’ has become vital if these realities are to ‘enter into the calculus of geopolitical negotiation’. As a ‘tactical form of knowledge’ (Ó Tuathail , 68), however, critical geopolitics seeks alternatives in thatIts visions … are visions that seek to put vision in question; its seeing, a seeing that tries to reveal the unseen of seeing; its displays, dissident playings with practices of displaying; its insight, the insight that comes from the investigation of the infrastructure of sight.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reliant upon a ‘messier, affect‐orientated understanding of visuality’ (MacDonald et al . , 4; Hozić ), observant practice seeks to understand seeing‐as‐it‐happens ‘in more specific empirical terms’ (MacDonald , 272). Distinguished from the concept of ‘spectacle’, whereby ‘the hegemonic values of an elite are foisted on an deluded mass public’ (Ley and Olds , 81; Daniels and Cosgrove ), observant practice considers how registers of seeing – ‘gazing, glancing, peeking, gawking, looking away’ (MacDonald , 274) – might, or might not , leave visual subjects ‘open to control and annexation by external agencies’ (Crary , 5).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, rather than philosophical questions of visualism‐as‐metaphor and the scripting of global space, inquiring into observant practice is to ask what it means to see, and how the politics of observant practices ‘are put to work, to what end, and with what technical apparatus’ (MacDonald et al . , 4).…”
This paper demonstrates how visual cultures of militarism take shape as part of a 'thick' geopolitics of being-inplace. It draws on historical accounts of, and empirical observations at, British military airshows, which it interprets via the concept of 'observant practice'. The paper argues that the imaginative and rhetorical force of military spectacle and popular militarism are tied to its markedly enclavic spatiality, i.e. to seeing and doing in-place. By taking seriously the spatial and sensory experience of British airshows, the paper extends recent work in critical geopolitics that questions the spatialised politics of experience, and brings them into dialogue with cultural geographies of tourism. It provides a brief history of the spectacular origins of aviation and of the use of airshows to the practice of statecraft, and demonstrates how airshows are an important element in the cultural phenomenon of militarisation. The paper takes forward debates around 'the vision thing' in critical geopolitics by illustrating why the notion of observant practice should not be dissociated from consideration of the spaces in and through which militaries become the object of visual curiosity. It expands, therefore, the potential of observant practice as a critique of popular military cultures.
“…Rather, it is also about not just seeing, and about ‘visuality as … indivisible from a wider bodily sensorium’ (MacDonald et al . , 6). The visual is the predominant sense through which the state's legitimacy is secured, and is afforded an inherent credibility not found in the tactile or aural senses (Amoore ; Jay ).…”
Section: Geopolitics and Observant Practice At British Military Airshowsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, as MacDonald et al . (, 2) argue, the ability of states, militaries and media elites to render visible realities around ‘the conduct of war and peace … as well as the competition of state sovereignty’ has become vital if these realities are to ‘enter into the calculus of geopolitical negotiation’. As a ‘tactical form of knowledge’ (Ó Tuathail , 68), however, critical geopolitics seeks alternatives in thatIts visions … are visions that seek to put vision in question; its seeing, a seeing that tries to reveal the unseen of seeing; its displays, dissident playings with practices of displaying; its insight, the insight that comes from the investigation of the infrastructure of sight.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reliant upon a ‘messier, affect‐orientated understanding of visuality’ (MacDonald et al . , 4; Hozić ), observant practice seeks to understand seeing‐as‐it‐happens ‘in more specific empirical terms’ (MacDonald , 272). Distinguished from the concept of ‘spectacle’, whereby ‘the hegemonic values of an elite are foisted on an deluded mass public’ (Ley and Olds , 81; Daniels and Cosgrove ), observant practice considers how registers of seeing – ‘gazing, glancing, peeking, gawking, looking away’ (MacDonald , 274) – might, or might not , leave visual subjects ‘open to control and annexation by external agencies’ (Crary , 5).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, rather than philosophical questions of visualism‐as‐metaphor and the scripting of global space, inquiring into observant practice is to ask what it means to see, and how the politics of observant practices ‘are put to work, to what end, and with what technical apparatus’ (MacDonald et al . , 4).…”
This paper demonstrates how visual cultures of militarism take shape as part of a 'thick' geopolitics of being-inplace. It draws on historical accounts of, and empirical observations at, British military airshows, which it interprets via the concept of 'observant practice'. The paper argues that the imaginative and rhetorical force of military spectacle and popular militarism are tied to its markedly enclavic spatiality, i.e. to seeing and doing in-place. By taking seriously the spatial and sensory experience of British airshows, the paper extends recent work in critical geopolitics that questions the spatialised politics of experience, and brings them into dialogue with cultural geographies of tourism. It provides a brief history of the spectacular origins of aviation and of the use of airshows to the practice of statecraft, and demonstrates how airshows are an important element in the cultural phenomenon of militarisation. The paper takes forward debates around 'the vision thing' in critical geopolitics by illustrating why the notion of observant practice should not be dissociated from consideration of the spaces in and through which militaries become the object of visual curiosity. It expands, therefore, the potential of observant practice as a critique of popular military cultures.
“…Or, as Roger Stahl phrases it, "the line between war and entertainment has always been permeable and negotiable" (Stahl, 2010: 4). The conduct of war and peace itself is becoming dependent on visual media's aid in comprehending and representing our world, resulting in a coconstitutive relationship between geopolitics and visual culture (MacDonald, et al, 2009). Film, however, also holds a critical promise for a disruptive intervention in our Five Kurosawas 2 traditional models of political thinking, ones rooted in nationalist geopolitics and the antagonist policy making that follows (Shapiro, 2009).…”
In 1959, UNESCO published a catalogue of Eastern films suitable for Western audiences, titled ‘Orient. A Survey of Films Produced in Countries of Arab and Asian Culture’. The aim of the catalogue was to familiarise Western audiences with Eastern cultures through cinema. The catalogue lists seven general characteristics of Eastern cinema to distinguish it from its Western counterpart and to provide ready-made interpretations of the essential characteristics of the Eastern world. Of the 139 feature films listed in the catalogue, five were directed by Kurosawa Akira – the biggest number of films by a single director. This article provides an analysis of the five Kurosawa films within the frame provided by the characterisations in the catalogue in the political framework of World War II and its aftermath. Reading the cultural differences listed in the catalogue as a means of constructing the East in Western eyes, the article suggests UNESCO’s world was defined neither in terms of the contemporaneous geopolitical polarisation of the Cold War nor the ongoing decolonisation process. Instead, the catalogue served the purpose of proposing a cultural intervention in geopolitics, providing a reimagining of political realities constructed on a cultural basis and given a concrete form through cinema.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
