apparently contradictory sion, is a means that stands in the way of direct communication. It gets in the way of what is by definition immediate. Traditional media study makes a basic distinction between direct communication and mediated or indirect communication. The first takes place face to face, that is, with the physical presence - in the same spatio-temporal context - of the sender and the receiver, and, consequently, without intermediaries; on the other hand, the second occurs remotely and, therefore, to be able to take place it must use the mediation of any type of technical object. John B. Thompson then introduces, together with face-to-face interaction and mediated interaction (of which he gives the post or telephone as an example), another that he calls “quasi-mediated interaction”, that it corresponds more or less with the communication carried out through the mass media: unidirectional rather than dialogic; for an indefinite set of potential recipients rather than for particular recipients1. Regarding this tripartite division, clothing is undoubtedly situated in the face-to-face communication field, since it performs a communicative function only within a common space-time context, or only insofar as it is physically seen by the recipient. At the same time, clothing cannot be reduced, in relation to bodily communication, to the function of a simple “material substrate of symbolic forms” 2, such as the aria that conducts sound waves and thus makes oral communication possible. Every form of communication, Thompson rightly stresses, needs a material substrate to take place. This also applies to body communication, whether or not through clothing, which uses light waves as a support for visible messages. Clothing is, therefore, an authentic means of communication that behaves enriching and not only transmitting communication.
No comments:
Post a Comment