Kinora and Double Kinora (Mutoscope)

The mutoscope is a cylindrical container ranging in size from a large, standing viewing station down to a smaller, more transportable unit. These machines hold hundreds of small cards with images printed on them attached to a circular core. This core is attached to an external crank which is turned by the viewer. The booklet turns, and the cards are held tensely bent into viewing position by a small metal piece. As the cards flip by, the rapid frame rate produces the illusion of a moving image (Rossell,Living Pictures, 96).

Magic Lantern Slides 2

According to Charles Musser, Huygens had two key innovations for his magic lantern: 1. Images painted on glass instead of etchings on mirrors. 2. An artificial light source was used instead of the reflection of sunlight. (20) Glass slides (often more than one) with hand drawn images are the standard aesthetic for these slides. They are then usually mounted in rectangular wooden frames approx. 4 x 7 inches with a 3 inch circular opening for the image. (Musser 30) The various mechanisms attached to the images are described in the Object Narrative section.

Magic Lantern Slides 4

According to Charles Musser, Huygens had two key innovations for his magic lantern: 1. Images painted on glass instead of etchings on mirrors. 2. An artificial light source was used instead of the reflection of sunlight. (20) Glass slides (often more than one) with hand drawn images are the standard aesthetic for these slides. They are then usually mounted in rectangular wooden frames approx. 4 x 7 inches with a 3 inch circular opening for the image. (Musser 30) The various mechanisms attached to the images are described in the Object Narrative section.

Magic Lantern Slides 1

According to Charles Musser, Huygens had two key innovations for his magic lantern: 1. Images painted on glass instead of etchings on mirrors. 2. An artificial light source was used instead of the reflection of sunlight. (20) Glass slides (often more than one) with hand drawn images are the standard aesthetic for these slides. They are then usually mounted in rectangular wooden frames approx. 4 x 7 inches with a 3 inch circular opening for the image. (Musser 30) The various mechanisms attached to the images are described in the Object Narrative section.

Magic Lantern Slides 3

According to Charles Musser, Huygens had two key innovations for his magic lantern: 1. Images painted on glass instead of etchings on mirrors. 2. An artificial light source was used instead of the reflection of sunlight. (20) Glass slides (often more than one) with hand drawn images are the standard aesthetic for these slides. They are then usually mounted in rectangular wooden frames approx. 4 x 7 inches with a 3 inch circular opening for the image. (Musser 30) The various mechanisms attached to the images are described in the Object Narrative section.

Thaumatrope (Magic Circle)

The thaumatrope consists of a circle of cardstock, 2.5 inches in diameter with 2 strings attached, one each at opposite points of the diameter. There were 2 images painted on the cardstock, one on each side, with their positions inverted. The outline of the image was usually printed and the color hand-painted in (Barnes 7).

Phenakistoscope

The object consists of a disc with 20 or so images of an object/person around the edges, each slightly in a different position and space. Extending from the edges of the disc is a shutter: there are slots that one looks through with a solid part in between that blocks some of our view when in rotation to give the illusion of movement. A mirror is also used with the device. The user spins the wheel, while looking at the mirror and seeing the reflection of the phenakistoscope. The shutter blocks some of the image so that what we see appears to be moving, or animated. (Leskosky, 178)

Stereoscope

Wheatstone’s stereoscope placed two mirrors on either side that were mounted at a right angle in order to view the two dissimilar drawings presented (Hankins 148). There are two identical monocular tubes that allow each eye to view the images (Hankins 148). Each eye views the image it was intended to see. The two eyes see slightly different images through this binocular vision (Hankins 148). The combination of the two images creates this illusion of depth and solidarity through their superimposition (Hankins 154). In order to view these images, the eyes were covered from all external light (Clay 152). The stereoscope was first seen as a philosophical toy along with other inventions such as the zoetrope, providing entertainment as well as scientific insight (Hankins 148). The stereoscope above is more similar to the “Holmes Stereoscope”, which transformed Wheatstone’s stereoscope into a handheld version that could be put on a stand (Hawkins 155). He replaced the retina of the eye with a sensitive plate; therefore, the lenses acted as the eyes (Silverman 738). In the video, an embellishment adorns the bottom of the stand that holds up the binocular lens and the images. The lenses are in a wooden frame that has an attached stand that holds the slides of images. There also is a knob on the side of the device that can adjust the lens on the two monocular tubes (Bokander 485).

Biunal Lantern

A biunial magic lantern is a wooden box with two lenses, one on top of the other. The lenses have shutters and slots to insert glass slides. The light source is placed inside the box and the images are projected through either of the two lenses. It works in the same way as traditional magic lanterns, but allows for dissolving images and special effects.

Where Stories Collide : Montage and the Short Story Cycle

This thesis uses Sergei Eisenstein’s filmic theories of montage to examine the modernist American short story cycle, a genre of independent short stories that work together to create a larger and interrelated whole. Similar to the shot-by-shot editing process of montage, the story cycle builds its intertextual meaning story-by-story from an aggregate of abrupt narrative transitions and juxtapositions. Eisenstein famously felt that montage, the editing together of film fragments, was not a process of linkage, but of collision –each radically different shot in a film should crash into the next shot, until audience members were intellectually provoked into synthesizing these collisions through dialectical processes. I offer montage as an interpretive strategy for negotiating the narrative collisions in story cycles such as Sherwood Anderson’s Winesburg, Ohio, William Faulkner’s Go Down, Moses, and Eudora Welty’s The Golden Apples. For Go Down, Moses, I argue that Eisenstein’s politically rendered “montage of attractions” provides a template for investigating the shock tactics behind Faulkner’s chronologically and racially entangled stories of whites and African Americans. For The Golden Apples, I consider the opposites and doubles in Welty’s fiction with Eisenstein’s similar belief in the “opposing passions” of the world. Not only, then, do I suggest that the modernist story cycle bears a cinematic influence, but I also offer Eisenstein’s theories of montage and collision as a heuristic for formal, thematic, and even political patterns in a genre infamous for its resistance to definition and classification.