The neuro-image: a Deleuzian film-philosophy of digital screen culture

Theorising TikTok cultures: Neuro-images in the era of short videos

“…The former mainly deals with the 'matter' using our human 'coordinates of the sensory motor system', while the latter examines 'pure memory and spontaneous thought' (Deamer, 2016: 5). Inspired by Deleuze's film philosophy, Pisters proposes a theory of a third regime of images that belongs to the digital age: the 'neuro-images', characterised by the dominance of digital screens, the rhizomatic brain screen and the schizoanalytic nature of contemporary cinema (Pisters, 2012). In the films analysed by Pisters (2012), images have explicitly become the brain-screen, which 'present[s] us with the reality of illusions and in this sense might be better considered as machines of the invisible' (p. 20).…”

“…Inspired by Deleuze's film philosophy, Pisters proposes a theory of a third regime of images that belongs to the digital age: the 'neuro-images', characterised by the dominance of digital screens, the rhizomatic brain screen and the schizoanalytic nature of contemporary cinema (Pisters, 2012). In the films analysed by Pisters (2012), images have explicitly become the brain-screen, which 'present[s] us with the reality of illusions and in this sense might be better considered as machines of the invisible' (p. 20). Pisters is particularly concerned with the impact of digital media technology (especially Web 2.0 technology at the time of her writing) on image production: the ubiquitous digital screens, the surplus and overload of information, misinformation, highly affective news and the prevalent participatory culture.…”

“…More prominent on TikTok, however, is the implicit embedding, remixing and re-interpretation of cultural symbols and artefacts in short videos, including particular songs, movements, expressions and camera effects, and adapting them to make them fit users' everyday and cultural contexts. The associations between the videos in TikTok's taste communities are thus not necessarily centred around issues, but are primarily forged through parallel aesthetics and affects, similar to the loose associative functions of neural networks in the brain that Pisters (2012) describes.…”

“…To address these questions, this article proposes a framework that understands TikTok culture as constitutive of neuro-images, a concept originally developed by film theorist Patricia Pisters (2012) to characterise cinema in the digital age. We use the concept as a theoretical prism to approach TikTok as a cultural form.…”

“…TikTok's algorithmic computation of user behavioural data capacitates the simulation of our mind and brain. In comparison to the contemporary digital cinema analysed by Pisters (2012), TikTok and its backend algorithms turn pieces (short videos) of individual everyday experiences into an alternative database, designed according to their unique platform affordances and digital aesthetics. This database builds on a complicated machine-learning algorithms, as well as the mechanism of memefication and affective production: from different perspectives all of these deal with and work on our brain and mind and lead to a unique experience of time in TikTok culture.…”