Abstract
Scholars have been debating the interrelations of the arts for centuries. Now, in the age of electronic and digital media, the focus of the argumentation has somewhat shifted to the intermedial relations between various arts and media. One important move has been to acknowledge fully the materiality of the arts: like other media, they are dependent on mediating substances. For this reason, there is a point in not isolating the arts as something ethereal but rather in seeing them as aesthetically developed forms of media. Still, most of the issues discussed within the interart paradigm are also highly relevant to intermedial studies. One such classical locus of the interart debate concerns the relation between the arts of time (music, literature, film) and the arts of space (the visual arts). In the eighteenth century, Gotthold Ephraim Lessing argued famously in Laocoön that there are, or rather should be, clear differences between poetry and painting,1 but for the moment there is a tendency rather to deconstruct the dissimilarities of various arts and media. W. J. T. Mitchell is perhaps the most influential contemporary critic of attempts to find clear boundaries between arts and media. Many important distinctions have thus been made, and then successfully erased; much taxonomy has been construed, and then torn down, and this process has led to many valuable insights — Is that not enough? What is the problem?
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Cf., for instance, Jörg Helbig’s recent taxonomy of intra, inter, trans and multimedial relations in J. Helbig (2008) ‘Intermedialität–eine spezifische Form des Medienkontakts oder globaler Oberbegriff? Neue Überlegungen zur Systematik intersemiotischer Beziehungen’ in J. E. Müller (ed.) Media Encounters and Media Theories (Münster: Nodus Publikationen).
See the very comprehensive overview of the development of the research field intermedial studies in C. Clüver (2007) ‘Intermediality and Interarts Studies’ in J. Arvidson, M. Askander, J. Bruhn and H. Führer (eds) Changing Borders: Contemporary Positions in Intermediality (Lund: Intermedia Studies Press), pp. 19–37.
J. Veltrusky (1981) ‘Comparative Semiotics of Art’ in W. Steiner (ed.) Image and Code (Ann Arbor: Michigan Studies in the Humanities).
Cf. J. Frank (1991) ‘Spatial Form in Modern Literature’ [1945] in The Idea ofSpa-tial Form (New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press), pp. 5–66.
Cf. the much broader notion of remediation in J. D. Bolter and R. Grusin (1999) Remediation: UnderstandingNew Media (Cambridge MA and London: MIT Press).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2010 Lars Elleström
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Elleström, L. (2010). The Modalities of Media: A Model for Understanding Intermedial Relations. In: Elleström, L. (eds) Media Borders, Multimodality and Intermediality. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230275201_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230275201_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-31572-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-27520-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Media & Culture CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)