Regardless of Lindstroem’s true political stance, the images featured on the poster provokes the viewer to self-reflect and ask questions. The above image which features on the poster, could be argued as one of the most exciting visuals in the film. The narrative features exactly halfway through the film, which may have been done purposely to signify a pinnacle point. As for what is being portrayed, I have two theories; the man is recording the fire behind him or the man is unaware of the fire due to being immersed in his phone. I’m also left questioning who started the fire? I can recognise similarities between the above image and the 2003 mural by political street artist Banksy. 

[Figure 6] Banksy, (2003) Flower Thrower [graffiti] At: Jerusalem: West Bank Wall [online]. Available from: https://www.michaeloart.com/banksy-his-most-powerful-pieces/ [Accessed 18 March 2018].

Both men wear black, a colour affiliated with protest. The fire in the background in Lindstroem’s work could also reference rioting. There is also a juxtaposition between unrest and calmness prevalent in both images. In Banksy’s work, the flowers are a symbol for peace, whereas the man’s relaxed posture in Lindstroem’s work suggests nonaggression. It is possible that Lindstroem could’ve been influenced by Banksy, however this could also be said about many other artists that contain a political undertone. Nonetheless, I think it’s interesting to compare both images. 

The Hyperreal

​

During an interview with Claude Thibaut in 1996 on the topic of new technology, Baudrillard states that it is plausible “for the machine to metabolise the mind” [3] Baudrillard, 1996. Two years prior, Baudrillard wrote explicitly on the hyperreal in his book entitled “Simulacra and Simulation”. The term Simulacra derives from “Simulacrum”, which means to make a fake copy of something. According to Baudrillard’s theory, living in a heavily mediated culture distorts our view of the world because we’re retaining most of our information from virtual means (simulacra). This ultimately leaves us with simulations of reality; we’re not authentically experiencing anything. Our actions and reactions are almost always influenced by technology and those around us.

[Figure 7] TRUTH OR DARE – 21 Performances (2017) [online]. 0:26 [screenshot]. Directed by Jonas Lindstroem. Germany: Jonas Lindstroem Official Webpage. Available from: http://jlindstroem.com/ [Accessed 18 March 2018].

This theory could explain why the man in Figure 5’s possesses an unphased attitude to the fire behind him. As a viewer, this desensitisation is applied to us when looking at Figure 7. The image is presented artistically, which could be argued to trivialise the topic. The screen we view from distances us greatly from the tragedy. Would we pull out our phones at the sight of a man falling to his death in real life, or would it evoke a different reaction from us?

Conclusion 

​

Whilst retaining Medina’s writings on the way our brain absorbs material in relation to imagery, as well as Lindstroem’s own comments on what he thinks consumers want, there’s strong evidence to suggest that he’s fuelling the internet habits of those who watch his film. Unfortunately, this also happens to be the most effective way in distributing information, as people are scientifically more likely to engage with visual work. Lindstroem as a result is hypocritical, but any artist who’d create work in a similar way would be too. In conclusion, I’m left with one final question; does the message he conveys outweigh his contribution to the problem? I think yes, because he seems to demonstrate a genuine interest in the social issues he discusses in his film, so his intentions are coming from a place of sincerity. In Lindstroem’s own words, “The truth only matters anymore if people click on it.”