The Present Reading Response by Cathy Hwang

1. In the beginning of The Present, Kern uses the example of the Titanic to introduce the “magical powers” of wireless technology. Even though it is ironic that the wreckage of the grandest invention built by man around the turn of the century glorified the advent of wireless age, Kern nonetheless succeeds in transitioning his discussion to wireless technology and its implications. He believes that this new tool can overcome the shortcomings of human senses: “what the eyes and ears of man could not perceive the wireless could receive over vast distance and through darkness and fog” (35). But more importantly, wireless transmissions bring people of remote distances together to share the tragic news of the Titanic. Kern seems to be fascinated with this aspect of expanded range of experience, or what he later calls the simultaneity of distant events, that is made possible by wireless technology. The awareness of the simultaneity is treated as universal by Kern when he said, “this rescue effort was particularly highlighted because so many were aware of the tragedy” (35). However, the perception of the present varies greatly among the people who are informed of the accident. Survivors watching the ship from life boats would surely have a different observation of the present than people who read about the incident from the newspaper. Even though both parties receive the simultaneity of the distant event, in this case the sinking of the boat, Kern’s treatment of these two perceptions as if they were equal is inadequate. Even among different sources of wireless means, the experience of the present would be distinct. A person who receives a telephone call regarding a death in the family would perceive the “present” very differently than radio listeners learning about the “present”. Differentiation among the perceptions of simultaneous distant events is an element that Kern fails to address throughout the passage.

2. In order to expand the concept of simultaneity, Kern presents many artistic expressions that utilize different techniques to achieve the simultaneous present. Films can further the sense of present by showing “several noncontiguous events” or “showing one event from a variety of perspectives.” Through the uses of double exposure, the montage balloon, and parallel editing, filmmakers are able to pioneer the expansion of the present: “cinema could appear to take the viewer from one place to another instantly and achieve the effect of his being ‘simultaneously here and there’” (37). Audiences are trained to adapt the continuity between lapsed sequences as simultaneously occurring events, in order to experience the tension and suspense of the climax that followed. Contrary to the direct attempts of representing simultaneity by film directors, poets are more subtle in this endeavor. Kern points out that, “past poets expressed the voices of a successive universe; the contemporary poet ought to express them all at once as they are perceived by senses and magnified by technology” (38). Verbal montages are ultimately used to achieve the same effect in film but to a lesser extent, as temporal and spatial simultaneity could be represented more readily through film than through words. Kern considers music as “the model for simultaneous art and poetry” (39). The sense of intensity and urgency can be achieved by having two or more voices “sing different words at the same time” (39). Kern elaborates on each artistic form: film, poetry, and music, in great detail to show that viewers, readers, and audiences can be trained to perceive simultaneity when events are only seemingly occurring concurrently. Even though Kern later on presents scientific argument to refute this representation of simultaneity, Kern seems to identify with the artistic interpretation of simultaneity through his extended analyses of these mediums.

3. In the last portion of the passage, Kern discusses the concept of simultaneity and thickened present. Although both terms have relevance to the perception of the present, Kern distinguishes the two by stating, “simultaneity was the more directly influenced by technology, because electronic communication made it possible for the first time to be in a sense in two places at once, while temporal thickening derived from a theory of experience that could have been articulated in any age’ (46). These two disparate views are then put into the same context through the discussion of cinema. Using different cinematic technique, simultaneity could be represented by “bringing together an unprecedented variety of visual images and arrange them coherently in a unified whole” (46); thickened present could be achieved by splicing during the editing process of the film. Kern concludes the paragraph without a clear implication of which concept is more relevant since the nascence of wireless transmissions; however, the last paragraph states, “the new technology changed the dimensions of experience so rapidly that the future seemed to rush toward the present” (46). The association of technology and simultaneity mentioned earlier in this context seems to imply human’s inquisitive nature of looking into the future, and looking at “present” elsewhere as the main motivator for technological advances. I wonder if Kern overlooked the human desire to seize the present that could also contribute to the science of time travel.