TY - JOUR
AU - Somaini,, Antonio
AB - The current interest in the environmental and ecological dimension of media invites us to reconsider the history of the very concept of ‘medium’. If approached through an archaeological perspective that analyses the interactions between discursive formations and artistic practices, such history appears to be characterized by the presence of multiple, intersecting genealogical lines. Among them – alongside discourses and practices in which ‘medium’ and ‘media’ are mainly conceived in technical and communicational terms – we find the longue durée of a tradition in which the concept of ‘medium’ was used in order to name the sensible environment, the surrounding atmosphere, the milieu or Umwelt in which human and non-human sensory experience takes place. German media scholars such as Stefan Hoffmann and Dieter Mersch, in books that deal in different ways with the history of the concept of medium, have described this particular interpretation of the medium as sensible environment as aisthetisch (aisthetic): that is, strictly correlated with a theory of aisthesis (perception) and its material and environmental conditions of possibility.1 During the last few years, authors such as Wolfgang Saitter and John Durham Peters2 have highlighted the importance of this tradition, inviting us to rediscover, as Durham Peters writes, ‘the older environmental meaning of medium’ and ‘the elemental legacy of the media concept’.3 In an essay based on the analysis of the different meanings of the German terms Medium and Apparat in the writings of Walter Benjamin,4 I have attempted to show how such legacy can be traced back to the Aristotelian concepts of metaxy and diaphanes, and how its traces can be found, during the 1920s and 1930s, in the writings of film theorists such as Béla Balázs and Walter Benjamin, film directors such as Sergei Eisenstein and Jean Epstein, as well as biologists, psychologists and philosophers such as Jakob von Uexküll, Fritz Heider, Erwin Straus and John Dewey. Considered together, the environmental meanings of the English term ‘medium’ and the German Medium – and of strictly related terms, such as the German Atmosphäre, Aura, Stimmung and Umwelt, the French milieu and ambiance, as well as the Russian sreda5 – that we find in the writings of this period are part of a broad interest in the environmental dimension of sensory experience. They are traces of an epoch heavily invested in trying to understand the aesthetic, epistemological and political implications of the way in which various art forms, engaged with the use of technical media such as photography and cinema, have contributed to the shaping of the living environment and to the organization of human and non-human sensory perception within it. An almost emblematic example of such an environmental understanding of the concept of medium and of its connection with the technical and environmental conditions of sensory experience can be found in the writings of László Moholy-Nagy. Throughout his essays and books, beginning in the early 1920s and ending with the posthumous Vision in Motion in 1947, he argued that light, both natural and artificial, is the fundamental artistic ‘medium’; at the same time, it is the material, the substance with which each art form is supposed to work, and the sensible environment, the milieu within which art operates. This idea led Moholy-Nagy to formulate the thesis according to which all art forms – painting, sculpture, photography, cinema, design, stage design or architecture – develop according to a teleologically oriented tendency that leads from stasis to motion, from opaqueness to transparency, and from different concrete materials towards a state of progressive dematerialization. Seen from this perspective, film played a crucial role for Moholy-Nagy. As an art form based on the recording and projection of natural and artificial light, film participates in, and even accelerates, the broader tendency of all art forms towards transparency and the dissolution of everything solid into the atmosphere. Such a tendency, according to Moholy-Nagy, affects film’s own spatial and technical dispositif, leading away from the enclosed space of the cinema and towards new forms of light projection that abandon the flat surface of the film screen and open up to the surrounding environment. Ultimately such new forms of light projection point, in his view, to a vision of the future as a condition in which all material structures and techniques, not just those of the filmic dispositif, will undergo a gradual process of dematerialization. Traditional opaque walls will be replaced by the transparent surfaces of glass architecture, material volumes will be replaced by ‘virtual’ volumes produced by light and movement, while wire-based techniques of transmission will be replaced by the wireless radio diffusion of sounds, texts and images. Moholy-Nagy’s concept of light as the fundamental artistic medium is formulated explicitly for the first time in a short text entitled ‘Light: a medium of plastic expression’, published in English in 1923 in the avant-garde journal Broom.6 The text focuses on the need to explore the sensitivity to light of a chemically prepared surface – ‘the most important element in the photographic process’ – beyond the traditional dispositif of the photographic camera, in which the modulation of light is limited by ‘the demands of a camera obscura adjusted to the traditional laws of perspective’. Exploring light projection and light sensitivity beyond this strictly framed context would allow artists, according to Moholy-Nagy, to explore ‘phenomena imperceptible to the human eye […] thus perfecting the eye by means of photography’, that is, through a form of technical, non-human vision that is not bound to the way in which ‘our intellectual experience complements spatially and formally the optical phenomena perceived by the eye’.7 The new visual phenomena that artists should explore through the manipulation of light as ‘a perfectly new medium of expression’ should be tackled, according to Moholy-Nagy, through new optical dispositives (‘using apparatuses with lenses and mirror-arrangements which can cover their environment from all sides’),8 a new handling of natural and artificial materials (by passing light ‘through fluids like water, oil, acids, and crystal, metal, glass, tissue, etc’), and an emphasis on movement that would lead naturally towards film: ‘since these light effects almost always show themselves in motion, it is clear that the process reaches its highest development in the film’.9 During the following years, the idea that light is a ‘medium’ (in his texts in German Moholy-Nagy uses terms such as Faktor, Material or Mittel, the latter of which has often been used, historically, in the sense of an environmentally diffused medium, as in Goethe’s Theory of Colors)10 becomes one of the cornerstones of his vision of artistic Gestaltung (‘formation’ or ‘configuration’) and of its relation to nature and technology. According to books such as Malerei Fotografie Film (Painting Photography Film), Von Material zu Architektur (From Material to Architecture) and the posthumous Vision in Motion, for Moholy-Nagy light was the primary material of all artistic forms; and the main task for the different kinds of Lichtgestaltung or ‘light configuration’ was that of transforming the sensory environment and the conditions of perception within it. Like Benjamin, Moholy-Nagy was convinced that vision and sensory experience in general had a history, and one in which art forms had the possibility of actively intervening. The modulation of light, from this perspective, played a crucial role. In a 1939 review of Dolf Sternberger’s Panorama, or Views of the 19th Century (1938), Benjamin writes that ‘light impinges on human experience only in a manner permitted by the historical constellation’, emphasizing how the historicity of light conditions the historicity of vision.11 Moholy-Nagy too believed that the technical manipulation of light might have had an impact on the historical conditions of visibility. His entire work may be considered as an attempt to promote the advent of a ‘new vision’ (Neue Vision) and a new ‘optical culture’ (Schaukultur)12 through the modulation and the recording of natural and artificial light. This ‘new vision’ and new ‘optical culture’ are strictly related, in Moholy-Nagy’s writings, to the idea of a future characterized by the unfolding of a process of the gradual dematerialization of everything that is heavy, opaque and motionless into an atmospheric space made of energy, transparency and motion. Light was, for Moholy-Nagy, ‘a nearly insubstantial material’ – ‘ein fast wesenslos Material’, as it says in a text from 192913 – and working with light was a way of participating in ‘a quest for subduing or lightening material’ that could be felt throughout the entire field of the arts. The traces of this aesthetics of dematerialization appear throughout Moholy-Nagy’s main texts during the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s – from the years immediately preceding the invitation by Walter Gropius to teach at the Bauhaus in Weimar and then Dessau, to the founding of the New Bauhaus in Chicago – and are strictly related to his vision of the future of cinematic dispositif. In the short manifesto entitled ‘Dynamisch-konstruktives Kraftsystem’, published in German in 1922 by Moholy-Nagy and Alfred Kemény in the journal Der Sturm,14 we read that ‘vital constructivity’ needs to take the form of an ‘activation of space by means of dynamic-constructive systems of forces’ that participate in a ‘dynamic principle of universal life’.15 Within such systems, the material, rather than being treated as a static entity, is treated as a ‘carrier of forces’ (Kraftträger) capable of leading the spectator to experience ‘a heightening of his faculties’, becoming ‘an active partner with the forces unfolding themselves’.16 Sculptures freely hanging in space and films conceived as ‘projected movement in space’ are here presented as emblematic examples of such a new artistic approach to the interplay between matter, space and energy. This is an approach that, according to Moholy-Nagy scholar Oliver Botar, could have been influenced by the energeticist vision of reality developed by the chemist and philosopher Wilhelm Ostwald under the name of Energetik or Energetismus: a monist philosophy that influenced Alexander Bogdanov’s ‘tectology’, and stated that the essential component of reality was not matter but energy, a constantly flowing energy that manifests itself in various visible forms, including light. According to Ostwald and Bogdanov, whose writings were well known to Kemény, the co-author of ‘Dynamisch-konstruktives Kraftsystem’, light was what lies farthest from matter, and closest to pure energy.17 In Malerei Fotografie Film, Moholy-Nagy begins by highlighting the importance of moving ‘from painting with pigments to projected light plays’:18 that is, from the materiality of colour pigment to the ‘nearly insubstantial material’ of light. The idea of a gradual tendency towards transparency and dematerialization occurs repeatedly throughout the book. It is found in the pages that underline the cultural importance of X-rays as a new form of visual representation, one which opens up the field of vision onto a new, weightless and transparent space, just as happens with Moholy-Nagy’s own camera-less ‘photograms’ (Fotogrammen), which in the book are presented side by side with X-rays, as if to emphasize that both were contributing to the same kind of dematerialization. This process involves the filmic dispositif itself. In the chapter entitled ‘Simultaneous cinema or polycinema’, Moholy-Nagy presents a way of transforming the traditional projection format by introducing a new, semi-spherical screen within which multiple films could be projected at once, pointing towards a future in which one could project ‘films in all dimensions, outside the film theatre too’, turning cinema in to a form of ‘light-space articulation’19 within the environment. The book then ends with two pages showing examples of new forms of ‘wireless’ (drahtlos) transmission of filmic and photographic images, the first signs of a future in which images will circulate across the ether through a new kind of ‘radio picture service’ (Radiobilderdienst).20 This idea of a future characterized by light, transparency, weightlessness and dematerialization is at the centre also of Von Material zu Architektur, and its English version The New Vision, a book in which Moholy-Nagy, summing up the contents of the ‘preliminary course’ he taught at the Bauhaus between 1923 and 1928, presents an overview of artistic Gestaltung as a teleologically oriented process moving gradually away from static, solid, heavy, opaque and impenetrable volumes. After an introduction dedicated to a series of general pedagogical questions, the section of the book dedicated to ‘The material (surface treatment, painting)’ presents a trajectory that moves from coloured pigment to light, pointing to a future transformation of the canvas in a ‘projection screen’ for the ‘manipulation of moving, refracted light’ and for the use of ‘flowing, oscillating, prismatic light, in lieu of pigments’.21 Along this path, the ‘photogram’ is presented as an art form in which ‘the surface becomes a part of the atmosphere, of the atmospheric background, [and] sucks up the light phenomena produced outside itself’.22 The next section of the book, entitled ‘Volume (sculpture)’, moves across the different stages of the development of sculpture, highlighting a line of development in which materials are not only modeled, perforated and set in movement, but also ‘almost overcome’ (beinahe überwunden) or subjected to a kind of ‘sublimation’ (Sublimierung), with opacity and weight being replaced by the ‘virtual volumes’ produced by kinetic sculptures23 and by new forms of light projections directed towards the sky and the atmosphere. In the final section on ‘Space (architecture)’, Moholy-Nagy traces a path that leads towards the future of an entirely transparent and weightless glass architecture capable of dissolving any strict separation between inside and outside, and of allowing the free flow of fluctuating and mutally intersecting ‘space energies’ (Raumenergien) and ‘force fields’ (Kraftfelder).24 This new kind of luminous, fluid, weightless, free-floating architecture – represented in the last image of Von Material zu Architektur through a negative photographic image made of multiple exposures, a traditional technique capable of turning opaqueness into a diaphanous transparency – was for Moholy-Nagy the expression of what he calls, in a later text, ‘a passion for transparency [that] is one of the most spectacular features of our time’.25 At the end of the third section of Von Material zu Architektur, Moholy-Nagy presents a synthesis on how this tendency towards dematerialization was taking place during the 1920s throughout the entire spectrum of the arts, producing different kinds of transformations that showed a common tendency towards a ‘dispersion’ (Auflockerung), a ‘dematerialization’ (Entmaterialisierung), an ‘overcoming’ (Überwinden) or a ‘sublimation’ (Sublimieren) of concrete materials and substances. Following a line of development that was already manifest in the historical development of artworks using water as a ‘medium of expression’ (Mittel des Ausdrucks) – from the tranquil, dark mass of water ponds in Baroque gardens, to ‘the dissolution of an almost weightless substance’ that one could find in the gushing fountains and the flowing cascades of Rococo palaces – the art of the 1920s seemed to Moholy-Nagy to be characterized by a similar tendency towards motion, light, the ether and the atmosphere, as highlighted by the recent invention of ‘ether wave music’, that is, the Theremin.26 Everything, he adds, ‘strives towards light and air, towards a liberating vastness’.27 In later texts such as ‘From pigment to light’, published in Hungarian in 1933 and then again in 1936 in the multilingual publication Telehor, this striving ‘towards light and air’ will give place to the vision of new forms of ‘light configuration’, consisting of projections of light not from the atmosphere towards the framed, rectangular space of a photosensitive paper, as happens in the ‘photograms’, but from the ground towards the atmosphere itself: a future in which light displays of any desired quality and magnitude will suddenly blaze up, and multicolored floodlights with transparent sheaths of fire will project a constant flow of immaterial, evanescent images into space by the simple manipulation of switches.28 As revealed in the ‘Letter to František Kalivoda’ and in ‘Problems of the modern film’, both published in Telehor, the desire to replace older forms of representation with a ‘monumental architecture of light’29 was to lead light projections beyond the physical boundaries of the cinematic dispositif, the film theatre, and away from ‘the rectangular canvas or metal screen of our cinemas’, in order to project light ‘on to gaseous formations, such as smoke clouds, or by the interplay of multiform luminous cones’.30 These same ideas run also across Vision in Motion, in which Moholy-Nagy presents light once more as ‘a new medium’ and invites artists to explore the ‘manifold possibilities’ of light spectrum, including ‘floodlight, luminescence, phosphorescence, ultraviolet, infrared, polarized light, cathode and X-rays’.31 Light, like water, is here an environmental medium whose plasticity facilitates that ‘quest for subduing or lightening material’ that appears ‘in many different forms of human expression’.32 The film Ein Lichtspiel: schwarz weiss grau/A Lightplay: Black White Grey (1930–32), shot by Moholy-Nagy using a kinetic sculpture first called Light-Prop for an Electric Stage and then posthumously named Light-Space Modulator, is here presented as the sixth part of a broader film project that begins with a series of visions of natural and artificial light radiating across the environment (‘Light crosses sky. Lightning. […] Lights at night. Clouds, moving, dissolving, reappearing. Play of searchlight beams […] Moonlight, shadow of twigs on hills and mounds…’) and ends with a scene in which ‘all concrete shapes dissolve in light’.33 The association between light and dematerialization that we find in the writings and works of Moholy-Nagy is not an isolated case. Such association appears both before and after, in a series of artists’ movements and in some of the founding texts of contemporary media theory. During the 1910s, before Moholy-Nagy began his artistic trajectory, we find this association in the Italian Futurists’ vision of a modern world in which ‘movement and light destroy the materiality of bodies’,34 in the Russian Rayonists’ attempt to visualize a world essentially composed by intersecting invisible rays, and more broadly in the cultural tendency to reduce solid matter to energies and forces radiating across the ether, with natural and artificial light being one of their manifold manifestations.35 During the 1960s it can be found in Marshall McLuhan’s understanding of electric light as ‘a medium without a message’36 – as Mersch writes, ‘a pure mediality without materiality’37 – and of the ‘electric age’ as one characterized by a ‘fusion or implosion’:38 at the same time it is described as an extension of the senses and a ‘contraction’ of space that promotes new forms of deep involvement, and a new condition of ‘instant, total field-awareness’.39 The entire history of media, according to McLuhan, unfolds under the sign of a progressive dematerialization promoted by electricity, and traces of such a Hegelian, teleological vision of media history can be found also in a profoundly anti-McLuhanian book such as Friedrich Kittler’s Gramophone Film Typewriter, in which we read that ‘a total media link (Medienverbund) on a digital base will erase the very concept of medium. Instead of writing people and technologies, absolute knowledge (das absolute Wissen) will run as an endless loop.’40 Considered from the perspective of a reflection on ‘cinema’s natural histories’ and on a ‘historical ontology of screen media’,41 Moholy-Nagy’s aesthetics of dematerialization may be interpreted from yet another perspective: as a way of striving towards a profound transformation of both the cinematic dispositif and the film screen, drawing the ultimate conclusions from the idea that light is art’s fundamental ‘medium’. In Moholy-Nagy’s work, film’s inherent affinity with light is raised to a higher level. Rather than simply recording light onto the light-sensitive support of celluloid and projecting light onto the flat, opaque surface of the screen, the new forms of light projection envisioned by Moholy-Nagy were supposed to dissolve the materiality of both the spatial dispositif and of the film screen into the surrounding atmosphere, opening up to the ‘liberating vastness’ of a sensible environment that art could directly transform rather than simply represent. Footnotes 1 On the history of the concept of Medium up to the beginning of the twentieth century, see Stefan Hoffmann, Geschichte des Medienbegriffs (Hamburg: Meiner, 2002), and ‘Medienbegriff’, in Jens Schröter (ed.), Handbuch Medienwissenschaft, Stuttgar (Weimar: Metzler, 2014), pp.13–20. See also Dieter Mersch, Medientheorie. Zur Einführung (Hamburg: Junius, 2010); rev. edn in French, Théorie des médias: Une introduction (Dijon: Les Presses du réel, 2018). Unless otherwise noted, all translations in this essay are mine. 2 Walter Saitter, Physik der Medien: Materialien, Apparaten, Präsentierungen (Weimar: Verlag und Datenbank für Geisteswissenschaften, 2002). John Durham Peters, The Marvelous Clouds: Toward a Philosophy of Elemental Media (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2015). 3 Durham Peters, The Marvelous Clouds, p. 3. 4 Antonio Somaini, ‘Walter Benjamin’s media theory: the Medium and the Apparat’, Grey Room, no. 62 (2016), pp. 6–41. 5 On the history of the notions of medium, milieu and ambiance, see Leo Spitzer, ‘Milieu and ambiance: an essay in historical semantics’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 3, no. 1 (1942), pp. 1–42, and vol. 3, no. 2 (1942), pp. 169–218. 6 László Moholy-Nagy, ‘Light: a medium of plastic expression’, Broom, no. 4 (1923), pp. 283–84. 7 Ibid., p. 283. 8 Ibid., p. 284. On the question of the reference, in film and media theories of the 1920s, to the ‘non-human’ gaze of the camera, see Antonio Somaini, ‘Enregistrer, élaborer, transmettre, organiser: Dziga Vertov et la théorie des médias’, in François Albera, Antonio Somaini and Irina Tcherneva (eds), Dziga Vertov, Le Ciné-Œil de la Révolution: Écrits sur le cinema (Dijon: Les Presses du Réel/Dziga Vertov Collection of the Österreichisches Filmmuseum, 2019), pp. 718–41. 9 Moholy-Nagy, ‘Light: a medium of plastic expression’, p. 283. 10 Moholy-Nagy describes light as a Gestaltungsfaktor (factor of configuration) and as a Gestaltungsmittel (medium, or means of configuration), in Malerei Photographie Film (1927), ed. H. M. Wingler (Berlin: G. Mann, 2000), pp. 5, 30. On the notion of trübes Mittel in Goethe’s colour theory, see Johann Wolfgang Goethe, Farbenlehre (Stuttgart: Verlag Freies Geistesleben, 2003), pp. 104–07. 11 Walter Benjamin, ‘Review of Sternberger’s Panorama’, in Selected Writings Volume 4 (1938–1940), ed. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003), p. 146. 12 Moholy-Nagy, Malerei Fotografie Film, p. 31. 13 László Moholy-Nagy, ‘Fotogramm und Grenzgebiete’ (Photogram and frontier zones), Die Form, vol. 4, no. 10 (1929), p. 259. 14 László Moholy-Nagy and Alfred Kemény, ‘Dynamisch-konstruktives Kraftsystem’, Der Sturm, vol. 13, no. 12 (1922), p. 186; published in English as ‘Dynamic-constructive system of forces’, in Krisztina Passuth, Moholy-Nagy (London: Thames and Hudson, 1985), p. 290. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 On the influence of Ostwald and Bogdanov on Kemény, co-author with Moholy-Nagy of the manifesto ‘Dynamisch-konstruktives Kraftsystem’ in 1922, see Oliver Botar, Sensing the Future: Moholy-Nagy, Media and the Arts (Zürich: Lars Müller, 2014), pp. 67, 81. 18 László Moholy-Nagy, Malerei Fotografie Film, p. 9. 19 Ibid., pp. 9, 21 20 Ibid., p. 23. 21 László Moholy-Nagy, The New Vision and Abstract of an Artist (New York, NY: Wittenborn, Schultz, 1947), p. 41. 22 Ibid., p. 39. 23 Ibid., pp. 167, 46. 24 László Moholy-Nagy, Von Material zu Architektur (1929), ed. H. M. Wingler (Berlin: G. Mann, 2001), pp. 200, 211; published in English as The New Vision (1932, rev. edn 1938, 1947). The aesthetic characteristic and the utopian connotations of glass architecture had a strong impact onto the filmic imaginary during the 1920s. One of the most interesting examples can be found in Sergei Eisenstein’s unrealized film project Glass House (1926–30, 1947), on which see Antonio Somaini, La Glass House de Sergei Eisenstein (Paris: B2, 2017). 25 László Moholy-Nagy, ‘Space-time problems in the arts’ (1940), in Vision in Motion (Chicago, IL: Theobald, 1947), p. 252. 26 Moholy-Nagy, Von Material zu Architektur, pp. 169–74. 27 Ibid., p. 206. 28 László Moholy-Nagy, ‘From pigment to light’, Telehor, vol. 1, no. 2 (1936), p. 34; rpt edn, ed. Klemens Gruber and Oliver Botar (Baden: Lars Müller Publishers, 2011). 29 László Moholy-Nagy, ‘Letter to František Kalivoda’, Telehor, vol. 1, no. 2 (1936), p. 30. 30 László Moholy-Nagy, ‘Problems of the modern film’, in Telehor, vol. 1, no. 2 (1936), p. 40. It should be noted that Tatlin’s proposal for the Monument to the Third International included light and word projections aimed towards the sky. See Camilla Gray, The Russian Experiment in Art 1863–1922, ed. Marian Burleigh-Motley (New York, NY: Thames and Hudson, 1986), p. 226. 31 Moholy-Nagy, Vision in Motion, pp. 163–67. 32 Ibid., p. 219. 33 Ibid., pp. 288–89. 34 Umberto Boccioni, Carlo Carrà, Luigi Russolo, Giacomo Balla and Gino Severini, La Pittura futurista: Manifesto tecnico (Milano: Poesia, 1910). 35 See Christoph Asendorf, Ströme und Strahlen: Das langsame Verschwinden der Materie um 1900 (Gießen: Anabas, 1989); Anne Hoormann, Lichtspiele: Zur Medienreflexion der Avantgarde in der Weimarer Republik (München: Fink, 2002), pp. 60–74. 36 Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (1964) (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994), p. 8. 37 Mersch, Théorie des médias, p. 132. 38 McLuhan, Understanding Media, p. 50. 39 Ibid., pp. 43, 5, 47. 40 Friedrich Kittler, Gramophone Film Typewriter, trans. and ed. Geoffrey Winthrop-Young and Michael Wutz (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1999), p. 2. 41 On the history of the screen as a medium, see Craig Buckley, Rudiger Campe and Francesco Casetti (eds), Screen Genealogies: From Optical Device to Environmental Medium (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2019). Acknowledgement I would like to thank Noam Elcott and the two editors of this dossier on Cinema’s Natural Histories, Cassandra Guan and Adam O’Brien, for their very useful comments. © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Screen. All rights reserved This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
TI - ‘The surface becomes a part of the atmosphere’: light as medium in László Moholy-Nagy’s aesthetics of dematerialization
JF - Screen
DO - 10.1093/screen/hjaa027
DA - 2020-06-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/the-surface-becomes-a-part-of-the-atmosphere-light-as-medium-in-l-szl-ofPHstw4iM
SP - 288
VL - 61
IS - 2
DP - DeepDyve
ER -