no shit

49
“Theory grows out of the observation of business practice.”

71f
“The barriers in business are social as well as economic, and those who feel their interests threatened will battle fiercely against innovation.”

73
“The foundation of capitalism, both economically and socially, is, therefore, the insatiability of wants that entrepreneurs have managed to induce consumers to see as needs.”

74
Capital = “accumulated wealth reproductively employed.” Oxford English Dictionary
Credit must be created out of nothing but future expectations, which is a basic reason why capitalism, of all economic systems, is so distinctly oriented toward the future.”
“The important players in this process are entrepreneurs and investment bankers, who generate “new purchasing power out of nothing.” The investment banker is not just a middleman standing between savers and users of capital; he is instead “a producer” of money and credit, “the capitalist par excellence.”"

110
“The crucial element was capitalism’s orientation toward the future; but when the future looked bleak, people were reluctant to take risks.”

164
“change is part and parcel of capitalism itself, and it comes from entrepreneurial behavior within the system.”

254
“Innovating firms do not arise evenly throughout the economy. Instead, groups of these firms emerge just after an organizational or technological breakthrough in a particular industry— either in that same industry or in others allied to it.”

255
“As a result, “the history of capitalism is studded with violent bursts and catastrophes.” It is no gentle process of adjustment but something “more like a series of explosions.” The building of a railroad where none had existed, for example, “upsets all conditions of location, all cost calculations, all production functions within its radius of influence.” Innovation, then, is very much a double-bladed sword.
“In the real world of business, “nobody ever is an entrepreneur all the time, and nobody can ever be only an entrepreneur.” Particularly in large firms, the entrepreneur often not only innovates but also carries out day-to-day management.”
Of all economic systems, capitalism alone enables people to become entrepreneurs before they possess the necessary funds to found an enterprise. In the end, “it is leadership rather than ownership that matters.“”
“”Risk bearing is no part of the entrepreneurial function. It is the capitalist who bears the risk. The entrepreneur does so only to the extent to which . . . he is also capitalist, but qua entrepreneur he loses other people’s money.”"

255f
“Schumpeter identifies entrepreneurial profit as the prime motivator—”the premium put upon successful innovation. When other participants in the same industry see the new level of high profit, they quickly try to imitate the innovation. The entrepreneur tries to preserve his high profit for as long as possible, through patents, further innovation, secret processes, and advertising—each move an act of “aggression directed against actual and would-be competitors.” These are forms of what Schumpeter would famously call “creative destruction” in Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy.”

256
“a new firm’s intrusion into an existing industry always entails “warring with an ‘old’ sphere,” which tries to prohibit, discredit, or otherwise restrict the advantage afforded to the new firm by its innovation. But whatever may happen in a particular case, every entrepreneur’s high profit is temporary, because competitors will copy the innovation, causing market prices to fall. This sequence of cutting prices, which Schumpeter calls “competing down,” is observable in all industries except those protected by government monopoly.”

257
“A major theme of Business Cycles is the extreme difficulty of changing traditional ways of doing things.”
“the only way to change them was through overwhelming economic defeat.”
“In response, British entrepreneurs often moved their factories out of guild-dominated towns. Operating in the countryside, they could proceed without the fetters of official repression and with the advantage of cheaper labor—although even here, in the new outposts, innovators had to “fix things” with local authorities.” -> Do entrepreneurs in film innovate far away from the traditional film industry so they don’t get in trouble with them? I think so. For example, shooting digitally is still a big topic/issue in feature films but standard in web series.

258
Besides innovating in production, entrepreneurs often had to change habits of consumption. Industrialists had to convince reluctant customers that they actually needed the new goods. Here Schumpeter places heavy emphasis on the role of marketing in mass consumption and in economic growth itself. “It was not enough to produce satisfactory soap,” he writes, “it was also necessary to induce people to wash—a social function of advertisement that is often inadequately appreciated.”"
From the perspective of producers and investors, it did not matter whether new wants were real necessities. “Needs,” says Schumpeter, “whatever they may be, are never more than conditioning factors, and in many cases mere products of entrepreneurial action.”"

259
“”The making of the invention and the carrying out of the corresponding innovation are, economically and sociologically, two entirely different things.” Often the two interact, but they are never the same, and innovations are usually more important than inventions.”

262f
“”The more an innovation becomes established, the more it loses the character of an innovation and the more it begins to follow impulses, instead of giving them.”" The Internet today!

263
Railroadization makes the essential features of the evolutionary process more obvious than any other case: “Hundreds of innovations emerged, both large and small. Great sums of money changed hands, the speed of commerce leapt forward, and a vast array of new products reached national markets.”

264
“Still today, the most important advantages of the corporate form over the partnership are its permanence (it does not die when its founders die) and its limited liability (shareowners risk only their investments in that corporation, not their entire personal wealth).”

265
“From 1897 through 1904, 4,227 American companies merged into 257 large entities.”

266
Corporations “facilitated the “absolute optimum” way to commercialize new technology.”
“Entrepreneurial startups always emerge and grow uninterrupted alongside big businesses.”
To Schumpeter “it remained clear that innovations drove entire national economies forward and that long-term progress far outweighed short-term pain.”
Government regulation is very important, but requires “intelligent civil servants, tuning the engine of capitalism with a careful hand, lest they stifle entrepreneurship.”

267
“”Coincidence of high mortality and high profits ideally expresses this situation.”" Phases of creative destruction are cruel to entrepreneurs (high mortality), but the ones that survive make a lot of money (high profits).

269
“Much of the success enjoyed by individual entrepreneurs came down to their talent for seizing the opportunities of the moment.” Timing is EXTREMELY essential!

270
“”It should not be forgotten that in 1914 there were still above 40 firms fighting the losing fight of the electric automobile.”"
“”Capitalism is essentially a process of (endogenous) [sic] economic change.”" Two important aspects: endogenous + continuous change.
“Without innovations, no entrepreneurs; without entrepreneurial achievement, no capitalist returns and no capitalist propulsion. The atmosphere of industrial revolutions—of ‘progress’—is the only one in which capitalism can survive.” -> continuous change!
“”stabilized capitalism is a contradiction in terms.”" -> continuous change!

321
“”capitalism is not gentle to the capitalist”" Capitalism is cruel to most entrepreneurs and capitalists, but very rewarding to a few of them, benefiting everybody as an outcome.

345
“”God what suffering ‘writing’ means!”"

352
Definition creative destruction = the “”process of industrial mutation—if I may use that biological term—that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one.”"
“Since creative destruction is an evolutionary process, the performance of capitalism must be judged “over time, as it unfolds through decades or centuries.”"
“”the problem that is usually being visualized is how capitalism administers existing structures, whereas the relevant problem is how it creates and destroys them.”"
“Creative destruction constantly sweeps out old products, old enterprises, and old organizational forms, replacing them with new ones.”
Schumpeter coined the term and area of business strategey.

353
“”perfect competition is and always has been temporarily suspended whenever anything new is being introduced.”

355
“under modern capitalism, long-run cases of monopoly are almost nonexistent—even rarer than instances of perfect competition. Hence, high entrepreneurial profits are always temporary. And on balance, big business is unquestionably a positive force for innovation and growth.”

356
Entrepreneurship and technological progress are “”essentially one and the same thing,” the first being “the propelling force” of the second.”

356f
“when capitalism began to spread, persons of “supernormal ability and ambition” could now reach a much higher standard of living, provided they would pursue business careers.”

357
Capitalism freed people “to make a mess of their lives.” They now had sufficient “individualist rope” to hang themselves.”

358
“Employees take economic progress for granted, but they have little emotional attachment to the success of their companies, or of the capitalist system as a whole. As replaceable cogs in a large wheel of enterprise, they feel personally insecure.”
“In the larger sense, the emotional feelings of human beings are so complicated that there can be no assurance that people in general are “happier” or “better off” under industrial capitalism than they had been in medieval manors or villages. Economic efficiency is only one of many human goals, and not necessarily the most important to every individual. Thus the future of capitalism cannot be assured on the basis of its superior economic performance alone.

368
“”democracy is a political method” for arriving at legislative and administrative decisions. Hence democracy is “incapable of being an end in itself . . . and this must be the starting point of any attempt at defining it.”"

369
“The farther removed an issue is from voters’ daily lives, the more remote its rationality be- comes to them. And the greater the distance from rationality, “the greater are the opportunities for groups with an ax to grind” to affect electoral outcomes through “psycho-technics.” Ultimately, the voters’ will is “largely not a genuine but a manufactured will . . . exactly analogous to the ways of commercial advertising.”"

373
“[Schumpeter] understood that multidisciplinary work runs a constant risk of dilettantism. But if the scholar does his or her homework, as Schumpeter always did, this danger can be transcended.”

374
“Above all, Schumpeter knew that at some point partial and general syntheses of the insights from all relevant disciplines become essential if people are going to make mature sense of the world.”

388
“big companies [lie] near the heart of advanced capitalist success.”

399
“He had learned, as all authors do, that books have unpredictable lives of their own.”

433
“capitalism is a continuous evolutionary process without an end-point.”
“On the issue of present enjoyment versus long-term economic growth, it was obvious to Schumpeter (as well as to Keynes and all other competent economists) that growth requires investment, and therefore some degree of deferred gratification. [...] laissez-faire economies solved this tradeoff in one way, socialism in another. But for in- between systems such as amphibial states, explicit policies were essential to discourage conspicuous consumption and steer resources toward investment.”
“Modern capitalism had become so productive that it was even possible to guarantee all citizens “a certain minimum annual income.”"

436
“capitalism was not an easy system to sustain. There was constant temptation to lay even more straws on the camel’s back, and real danger that the camel might collapse altogether. If this happened, then the socialist alternative would appear attractive even to those who had opposed it in the past.”

441
“the preservation of the American way of life (and of the British, French, German, Japanese, and all others operating under mixed economies) depended as heavily on government as on business.”

455
“all fundamental explanation must run” on the analysis of human feelings.
“psychology [moved implicitly] toward the center of economic thinking. Yet, he noted with regret, economists generally did not consult or work with professional psychologists. Instead, they preferred to invent their own assumptions about the mental processes of producers, consumers, and people in general.”
all human beings grow up having subconsciously developed a sense of how the world works. Everyone who writes on any subject, he says, has experienced “a preanalytic cognitive act that supplies the raw material for the analytic effort. In this book, this preanalytic cognitive act will be called Vision.”"
“Schumpeter says that all analysis begins with a distinct intuition that is almost inherently ideological. “It embodies the picture of things as we see them,” and usually our way of seeing them “can hardly be distinguished from the way in which we wish to see them.” This is a dangerous situation for researchers, because it tends to limit the generality of their conclusions.”
“On the other hand, the rules of scholarship typically correct almost all errors deriving from ideology. Different researchers begin with different visions and ideologies, and conflicting conclusions tend to cancel each other out.

456
“”The first thing a man will do for his ideals is lie.“”
The classical economists “vision became a real obstacle to progress, because it offered no explanation at all of the process of change, which Schumpeter regarded as the essence of capitalism.”
“The pessimists [such as Thomas Malthus, David Ricardo, and James Mill, father of John Stuart Mill] dwelled on limits to growth imposed by the pressures of increasing population and decreasing returns to agriculture. From these premises they inferred “falling net returns to industry, more or less constant real wages, and ever increasing (absolutely and relatively) rents of land.”"
“the touchstone of Schumpeter’s own theories of entrepreneurship and creative destruction” is the “”the element of personal initiative.”"

457
“First, the accuracy of an economic vision is not always commensurate with the analytical ability of those who hold it. Second, pessimistic visions about almost anything usually strike the public as more erudite than optimistic ones.”

458
“Today, in the twenty-first century, many economists add entrepreneurship to the three factors of production as traditionally conceived: land, labor, and capital.”
Entrepreneurship is very difficult to measure, and virtually impossible to express mathematically. It therefore does not easily fit into formal models. As Schumpeter noted, entrepreneurial gains do not tend “toward equalization” because they “are not permanent returns at all.” Instead, they emerge whenever an individual entrepreneur innovates in some important way—and then disappear as the innovation spreads. Meanwhile, they have contributed to general economic growth.”
“They have also made the entrepreneur rich, because “entrepreneurs’ gains will practically always bear some relation to monopolistic pricing. Whatever it is that produces these gains, it must of necessity be something that, for the moment at least, competitors cannot parallel.” The best example is the offering of a new product or a new brand. And temporarily, at least, “there are means available to the successful entrepreneur—patents, ‘strategy,’ and so on for pro- longing the life of his monopolistic or quasi-monopolistic position and for rendering it more difficult for competitors to close up on him.”"
The essence of strategy is “to affect the behavior of other firms or even their own industry.”

466
“Short-run inequity is the price that must be paid by the masses for the rising living standards that capitalism can achieve.”
Schumpeter regretted that capitalism distributed its fruits so disproportionately—but in much the same way that he regretted that everyone has to die. He simply thought it an inevitable concurrent of capitalism’s efficiency over the long run.”
“one of the commonest errors of economic thinking by masses of people “is the belief that the majority of people is poor because a minority is rich.”"

467
“”Keynes’s influence not only encouraged governments to take a short-run point of view, but it helped to free them from the major traditional restraints on short-run action.”"

468
“Compared to Keynes, Schumpeter had no reason to think that life was something a person could expect to enjoy automatically. It was one thing to grow up in Britain—stable, prosperous, and ever-victorious in its many wars— and quite another to be a child of the vanquished, and now vanished, Austria of Schumpeter’s youth.”
“Schumpeter was one of the greatest intellectual innovators in the history of social science.”

474
“if an economy, an industry, or a firm reacts to a significant change in its environment by merely adjusting its existing practice, “we shall speak of adaptive response. And whenever the economy or an industry or some firms in an industry do something … outside of the range of existing practice, we shall speak of creative response.”
A creative response, which can never be predicted and is therefore indeterminate, shapes long-run outcomes in a country, industry, or firm. It often depends on the leadership of specific individuals, and, Schumpeter argued, it “changes social and economic situations for good.” It creates new conditions that would never have developed without it. “This is why creative response is an essential element in the historical process: no deterministic credo avails against this.”"

474f
“”I believe that there is an incessant give and take between historical and theoretical analysis and that, though for the investigation of individual questions it may be necessary to sail for a time on one tack only, yet on principle the two should never lose sight of each other.” The combination of narrative, numbers, and theory could exercise a power that none of the three could do alone. Theories are stylized stories; but without real stories and statistics to back them up, they lose much of their force. Schumpeter concluded one of his papers with a sentence that has often been quoted and still resonates in academic life to this day: “Economic historians and economic theorists can make an important and socially valuable journey together, if they will.”"
=> That’s what I have to do!

475
“Because of time and chance, no “deterministic credo,” as Schumpeter called it, could ever be correct.”

476
Schumpeter wanted to create “exact economics” (referenced everywhere throughout the book), but finally understood that it’s impossible.
“And over the next generation, “Science and Ideology” became a famous statement of a fundamental truth that characterizes all social sciences, including economics, no matter how “scientific” its pretensions.”
All our research is always based on our basic ideological bias.

477
“Model building “consists in picking out certain facts rather than others,” then working to refine the chosen facts, to adjust them in light of opposing evidence, and to place them all in a theoretical framework.” -> And we chose the facts based on our “vision” which is based on our ideology.

483
“”And so—though we proceed slowly because of our ideologies, we might not proceed at all without them.“” Ideologies are what makes us do what we do -> I love film -> that’s why I do what I do -> without my ideology I wouldn’t do it and EAs might never come into existence and the world wouldn’t change how I hope it will.

488
“One of the few lucky events of Joseph Schumpeter’s life was the manner of his leaving it. As he had written at the time of Franklin Roosevelt’s death, which also came suddenly from a cerebral hemorrhage, “lucky man: to die in fullness of power.”"
In 1950 Schumpeter was the most illustrious economist in the world—more famous at the time of his death than at any other period in his life, and at a moment when he probably cared least about his own celebrity.

495f
Schumpeter’s signature legacy is his insight that innovation in the form of creative destruction is the driving force not only of capitalism but of material progress in general. Almost all businesses, no matter how strong they seem to be at a given moment, ultimately fail—and almost always because they failed to innovate. Competitors are relentlessly striving to overtake the leader, no matter how big the lead. Responsible businesspeople know that they ignore this lesson at their peril. Every day they feel themselves, as Schumpeter put it in Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, “in a situation that is sure to change presently.” They are “standing on ground that is crumbling beneath their feet.”

496
Only through innovation and entrepreneurship can any business except a government-sponsored monopoly survive over the long term. Schumpeter, of course, is the chief proponent and popularizer of the word “entrepreneur,” which appeared in the 1934 English edition of his Theory of Economic Development. (In the original German edition of 1911, he had used the German Unternehmer, which never caught on, partly because its literal meaning is “undertaker.”)”
“Beginning in the late 1920s Schumpeter made it clear that entrepreneurship could occur within large and medium-sized firms as well as in small ones, despite bureaucratic obstacles. By the mid-twentieth century, he was arguing that innovation “within the shell of existing corporations offers a much more convenient access to the entrepreneurial functions than existed in the world of owner-managed firms. Many a would-be entrepreneur of today does not found a firm, not because he could not do so but simply because he prefers the other method.”"
Entrepreneurs were still recognizable personal types, but innovation could also be—and, given the large size of some companies, sometimes had to be—performed by teams of people.

497
“Schumpeter’s central preoccupations [were] innovation, entrepreneurship, and credit creation”

498
There is a “need for eternal vigilance and timely action by government regulators,” which Schumpeter “persistently underestimated.”

499
“the mixed economy has tended to flatten the business cycle.” Therefore business cycles are a less pressing issue today.

500
“For professors in economics departments at most major universities, particularly in the United States and Britain, a focus on these favorite issues of Schumpeter’s has become a quick ticket out of a job. This development arose from a self-generated isolation of academic economics from history, sociology, and the other social sciences.
“What is it, for example, that drives innovation? Is it just the prospect of making money? Or, as Schumpeter had argued early in his career, is it something more than “motivation of the hedonist kind”? Schumpeter believed that the innovator-entrepreneur also had a “will to conquer … Our type [a revealing choice of words that seems to include himself] seeks out difficulties, changes in order to change, delights in ventures.“”

501
“capitalism’s creative elements outweigh its destructive ones. Destruction, however painful, is the necessary price of creative progress toward a better material life. But the correct sequence is vital: creative innovation first, then the destruction of obstacles that lie in its way.

502
“Schumpeter regarded inequality of opportunity as unacceptable, but he also held that the results produced by inequality of effort were deserved.”
“”The importance of inequality within the highest income brackets should be particularly noticed. A single spectacular success may draw far more brains and means into an industry than would be attracted to it by the same sum if more equally divided.“”

502f
the benefits to society of important innovations, and the lavish profits accruing to winning entrepreneurs, must be measured against the total costs of time and money invested in the same industry by unsuccessful entrepreneurs as well. They receive no return for their efforts, but their competitive pressure spurs the winners to victory—to the great benefit of society. That the winners receive all the rewards is a mere detail—and a temporary one at that, since the “competing-down” element eventually diminishes that profit, as imitators copy the innovation.”

504f
“Perhaps more than any other top economic theorist, Schumpeter humanized his discipline. After a lifelong struggle, he concluded that exact economics can no more be achieved than exact history, because no human story with a foreordained plot can be anything but fiction. Because of the infinite mixture of influences on human behavior, no two real economic situations are ever exactly alike. Thus, economics does not lend itself to deterministic laws or experiments, as the physical sciences do. The best mathematics in the world cannot produce a satisfactory economic proof wholly comparable to those in physics or pure mathematics. There are too many variables, because indeterminate human behavior is always involved. As the Nobel Laureate in Economics Douglass North remarked in 1994, “The price you pay for precision is inability to deal with real-world questions.“”

505
Often the best alternative for expressing what one knows about the world is not an equation but a narrative—a story with real characters facing some kind of dilemma.

Has a good short introduction to evolutionary economics!

5 generations of innovation

Innovation complexity

Potentially good investor! See end of article.

[The entertainment industry] must begin to create a product that is not simply a static digital file that can be easily copied and distributed, but rather view media as a dynamic [iTunes type] “application” with extensions via the web. This howl is the future evolution of the media industry.”

The premise of extending the media experience to the cloud is a core necessity for the survival and growth of the media industry. It is the only way to for media companies to weather the coming tsunami of increased bandwidth and the ever open web. Hybrid media packaging with both files and an application layer in the cloud is core to a lucrative future.”

A complete experience will unfold that will be interactive and convert to new revenue streams. Not just a purchase of a track but of an app that pulls consumers into an experience and further promotes user engagement and virality. Media becomes a platform with a funnel of traffic and conversions to alternative revenue streams.”

“If you are a media exec and you look at your product and at the end of the day it’s a digital file that can be copied, then you have a serious problem with your format.”

“That level of engagement will directly map to reduction in piracy as consumers will pay for this experience and wont be able to copy it. Sell access and experiences, not media files.

1
“broadcast TV cannot wipe out cinema any more than cinema was able to wipe out theatre.” But every next generation is bigger: theatre is tiny, cinema bigger, TV huge

10
“Sophisticated new technology always seems to provoke a flurry of wild and naive speculation about its effects.”

11f
The technology alone does not create the use to which it is put: technology is implemented (or, as with most inventions, never implemented) according to the prevailing patterns of use into which it can be fitted, and according to the emerging forms of social organisation with which it can align itself.”

12
“TV lines up with (and inflects) the increasing domestic use of technology, the emphasis on home and family as site of consumption; cinema lined up with (and superseded) public forms of entertainment like vaudeville and music hall, the sites of public enjoyment and of the development of non-religious mass ideologies.”

16
TV & newspapers feed off each other.

24f
“The form of the entertainment film is one reason for the confusion between cinema and broadcast TV. The entertainment film can be broadcast on TV, hence it seems as though there is little real difference between the two media. Two immediate objections can be made to this assumption. First, a film on TV yields a very different experience to its viewer, unless that viewer is able to suspend the sense of watching TV and imagine instead the sense of being in a cinema. Second, it is not possible to show broadcast TV material in a cinema in the way that it is possible to show films on TV. Broadcast TV has developed its own forms, those of the serial and the series, which resist showing in the ‘single work’ form that cinema imposes.”

25f
Cinema marketing sells two rather distinct things: the single film in its uniqueness and its similarity to other films; and the experience of cinema itself. Cinema and film are both sold at the same point, at the point of sale of an admission ticket. It is not the film that is sold at this point, it is the possibility of viewing a film or films; it is not cinema as an object that is sold, but cinema as an anticipated experience.”

26
“tickets are sold [...] on the expectation of pleasure.”
“What is bought in the cinema is the possibility of a pleasurable performance: the performance of a particular film and the performance of cinema itself, both together.”

26f
Cinema in this way becomes a very precise urban experience, that of the crowd with its sense of belonging and of loneliness. Alternatively, cinema in smaller communities tends to perform a different function when most of the audience are acquainted with each other. Here the entertainment is related to particular characteristics of individuals or of the place itself. The film comes from outside, the cinema belongs to the particular place. However, such group experiences of cinema are becoming more and more rare, and cinema is now characteristically an urban phenomenon, [especially in Britain].”

27
“‘picture palaces’ [are] now the subject of nostalgic photo-books: simple brick shells decorated in bizarre and rich styles, and usually of a massive size to emphasise the grandeur of the cinematic experience.”

28
1920s: “The couple visiting the cinema during this period experienced cinema as an integrated succession of entertainments that went far beyond the simple experience of viewing a film together in a more or less anonymous crowd.”

30
“An idea of the film is widely circulated and promoted, an idea which can be called the ‘narrative image’ of the film, the cinema industry’s anticipatory reply to the question ‘What is this film like?’” => The narrative image is the promise -> the film is the realisation of that promise.
“Payment for a ticket is not an endorsement of a film, nor is it an endorsement of a particular performance of a film in a particular place. It is an endorsement of the narrative image of the film, together with the general sense of the cinematic experience.”
“Cinema demands single films, complete in themselves and distinct from other films.”

37
“The experience offered is one in which an individual film will complete the enigma of the narrative image. The experience of cinema that is offered is one of the public viewing of images with their supporting sounds. These images and sounds, viewed in the particular circumstances of the cinema, produce a particular kind of spectating that is intense and sustained.” Is this any different from TV / home cinema nowadays?

38-61
Ellis uses psychoanalysis to describe the relationship between cinema & viewer? Interesting, but I don’t agree.

38
Cinema is constructed in another time & place => absent from the place in which the viewing takes place => yet it is (very) present.

40
“Commercial cinema, in increasing its scale and scope as far as possible, tries to standardise its audiences to the same kinds of attention to the screen.”
In cinema everybody is alone and in near-darkness => particular kind of mental state: “a concentration of psychic activity into a state of hyper-receptivity”: dream-like, close to sleep => “what is seen is not subject to the usual expectations of plausibility that we apply to everyday life.”

41f
Cinema provokes identification with:

  1. apparatus of projection (beam of light from projector = imagined beam of light from spectators’ eyes),
  2. narcissistic identification with any figure on screen.

42
“[the] partial suspension of the judging function of the ego [is] necessary for the activities of day-dreaming and the construction of fantasies.” The ghost and the shell are not unified anymore -> one looks at oneself from the outside.

43
“Both dreaming and fantasy deal with fragmented and contradictory representations of figures” (oneself)

45
The spectator is looking at something that doesn’t look back at him = voyeurism.

47
Voyeurism is what constitutes the pleasure & fascination with cinema. I don’t agree, it’s about story.

50
Gazing is the constitutive activity of cinema. Broadcast TV demands a rather different kind of looking: that of the glance. Gazing at the TV is a sign of intensity of attention that is usually considered slightly inappropriate to the medium.”
“As the conventions for the depiction of reality change, so audiences tend to deride what once was taken as ‘the real’ as being spectacular or a fake.” Perhaps why I don’t like classic films that much?

51
“entertainment cinema has been concerned [...] to play between the [spectacle and reality], to make the real spectacular and the spectacle plausible.”

53
“The cinema image is routinely more elaborate and detailed than the TV image.”

15
“Hyper narrative interactive cinema refers to the possibility for users or “interactors” to shift at different points in an evolving film narrative to other film narrative trajectories.”

16
“we strive to construct out of a given audiovisual flow a causal goal oriented trajectory that starts at some point and reaches somewhere.”

17
“Cognitive constructivist narrative film theory maintains that narrative films deeply engage and sustain the attention of viewers/listeners since they allow them to construct coherent narratives leading to closure. That is why an overall continuous editing style, synchronized or otherwise cohering audiovisual formations, spatial constructions arranged around the logic of the narrative succession, narrative re-centering and closure have become tropes of popular mass film artifacts.”

21
“It is only because texts offer you a notion that they are going somewhere that you are willing to follow.” PoMos say there is no constant => that’s why PoMo books/films are frustrating to read/watch.

23
“avant-garde modernists presumed a centered self whose confidence they wished to reassess through alienating worldviews and respective textual strategies, whereas post-modernists often presume a computer determined de-centered and split self, whose non-confidence, distraction and alienation they reassure through neutralized split narratives projecting neutralized and inconsequential split worldviews.”

29
“Just like television, computerized interactive films need not replicate cinematic narrative strategies to engage attention.”
“Based upon constructivist narrative film viewing theories, I contend that for non-game, complex, multi-narrative aspiring, audiovisual interactive texts to be deeply engaging, the computerized ‘hyper-linked nature’ from which these works spring has to be consonant with, rather than alien to human cognitive, affective and sensual faculties.”
“For digital based films to generate deep cognitive, affective and sensual engagement rather than shallow distraction, the human cognitive strive for coherence must be taken into account.”

30
Major hyper-narrative split-attention stumbling blocks:

  1. non-restriction of narrative threads,
  2. incoherent transitions within and between different narrative threads,
  3. non resolution of multi-threaded narratives.

31
“while the calculative power of computers may generate endless forking story possibilities, and while the philosophical, social or scientific implications of such narrative idea are intriguing, attempts to actually devise such a labyrinth will divert the viewer’s or interactors’ attention towards memorizing and puzzle-solving cognitive activities.” Films should not turn into puzzles!
“for hyper-narratives to be comprehensible, coherence within narrative threads and between them must be maintained.”

31f
Only give consumers choice at crucial points, points that have moral, survival, or emotional consequences (shoot or not, betray loving husband or not, etc.).

39-58
Interaction in hyper-narratives should not be an end in itself (like in many games which concentrate on skill acquisition) but be used to deepen the consumers’ engagement. Strategies to achieve that:

  • primacy & recency
  • interaction limited to crucial “what if” or “if only” moments
  • look up

39ff
Contrary to psychoanalysis viewers do not identify themselves with protagonists, but empathise with them.

44f
“beyond restless distraction inhering in the possibility of change at will, why should the interactor care to change ‘at will’ if unpredicted change or the entertainment of ‘what if’ possibilities are what fascinates him/her in non-interactive narratives to begin with? Moreover, narrative change, when pre-meditated by the author, deeply engages the viewer, whereas if change is given into the hands of the interactor or the ‘poacher’, who cannot himself devise complex cohering trajectories, whether for lack of talent, knowledge, experience or time, the result will most certainly be shallow, distracting and game-like.”

46ff
Ben Shaul says that Jenkins says that film (narrative) & gaming are combinable, but that this would then lead to films comparable to slapstick or Bruce Lee where story only serves to link gags or fighting scenes. But perhaps Jenkins is not talking about the successor of film, but an additional genre/form?

50
“It seems therefore that interactive hyper-narratives should pay little attention to skill acquisition for that enhances a shallow gaming attitude, avoid automating interaction for that enhances redundancy, and refrain from offering intermittent gaming transitions between behavioral interaction and cognitive construction, for that arrests the engagement that dramatic narrative succession engenders.”

47
“environmental storytelling” -> Ben Shaul’s or Jenkins’ idea from First Person?

49
split attention = “[the] split between mastering the skills needed to perform effective interventions and his/her cognitive construction of the narrative trajectories.”

69
“what sustains our engagement and attention in narratives is a dramatic succession underlined by causal logic and a sense of moving towards a goal rather than spatial immersion.” 3D is nice, but not necessary for a narrative (film) to be successful. Yes, perhaps, but if you see cinema as an experience, then offering more may be better.
“amazement counters deep emotional and cognitive narrative engagement and generates split attention” Not sure about that!

78
“for reciprocal interfaces to be hyper- narrative engaging, they should lead to unexpected protagonist reactions and narrative developments.”

84
“Based upon a cognitive-constructivist approach to narrative and the viewer’s activity it has been suggested that film narrative is designed in such a manner that it rewardingly plays with the viewers’ strive to construct a cohering, intelligible, goal oriented trajectory out of the film’s audiovisual flow, by introducing surprises, distractions, diversions and postponements along the way. Moreover, cognitive and emotional viewer engagement results from the cumulative effect achieved by the narrative’s temporal dramatic succession of events that leads to closure.”

84f
“The book identified the points at which interactive hyper-narratives threaten narrative coherence, dramatic succession and closure. It then suggested feasible ways to turn these deficiencies into advantages. Hence, rather than allowing for the computer-enabled design of many intersecting narrative threads that lead to interactor cognitive confusion and disengagement, it has been suggested, following Bordwell’s analysis of ‘forking path’ narrative films (e.g., Run Lola Run), that optional narrative threads be restricted, and that transitions between narrative threads be confined to crucial decision points, arrived at after a causal coherent dramatic build-up and followed by a causal coherently built narrative thread. Moreover, the viewer should be allowed to construe meaningful interrelations between different threads, evoked through inter-narrative-thread temporal, spatial, action and character recurrence, parallelism or variation. Also, in order to overcome the disengagement and confusion posed by hyper-narrative transitions between options that lead to different outcomes, it has been suggested that the maintenance of a cumulative effect derived from a narrative temporal dramatic succession that leads to closure, can be achieved through the use of repetition and return to scenes where temporal constrains are introduced, and through using primacy and recency effects.”

85
“a rewarding and narrative-engaging design of the relation between the interactor’s behavioral action and its audiovisual figuration may be achieved when there is a coherent reciprocal correspondence between the figured audiovisual evolution and the type of behavioral action applied to this figuration.” Depending on how the consumer interacts with device/narrative, the narrative evolves/reacts differently.