To conclude, Roquet’s approach to ambient mediation provides a fresh and inspiring theoretical approach for media studies and offers a fruitful discussion of the spatio-temporal aspects of atmospheric immersion or ambient (non)mediation, describing it as something experienced as the synchronization of rhythm or the contingency of space. However, despite criticism of the commercialized version of ambient mediation (“ambient consumerism”?) and its relation to neoliberal self-care through healing (iyashi), the reader gets the impression that this critique is not at the center of Roquet’s book. What is at the center, at least in my opinion, are the attentive and brilliant descriptions of the various artistic forms of ambient mediation. To a certain extent, by focusing more on the artistic works than on the commercial side of ambient mediation and its neoliberal implications, Roquet’s way of engaging the phenomenon could qualify as “ambient criticism” itself. In fact, I would argue that even if they are critical of the phenomenon, such as in the case of Kurita’s novel, the artistic works reveal an uncritical pose. This assumption is based on the understanding indicated above of the concept of the medium. According to Brian Eno—one of the champions of ambient music—ambient media “must be as ignorable as it is interesting” (quoted on p. 169). Accordingly, ambient subjectivation— creating an interesting but ignorable experience of “unmediated mediation” between the self and the outside world—negates what in fact is essential for mediated criticism, namely, something that positions itself “between” the self and the outside world, thus creating distance instead of approximation. According to media philosopher Sybille Krämer, it is exactly the spatiotemporal distance created by the written language that was so essential for the development of critical discourse—something that in fact can also be true for fi lm, potentially evoking state of collective “chock” among the audience, as the two contemporaries Walter Benjamin and Nakai Masakazu have similarly described the critical potentiality of fi lm.

中文翻译：

---

明治日本的写作技术：日本现代文学和视觉文化的媒体史 塞思·雅各布维茨着

总而言之，Roquet 的环境中介方法为媒体研究提供了一种新鲜而鼓舞人心的理论方法，并提供了对大气沉浸或环境（非）中介的时空方面的富有成果的讨论，将其描述为某种体验为节奏同步或空间的偶然性。然而，尽管对环境调解的商业化版本（“环境消费主义”？）及其与通过治疗（iyashi）进行的新自由主义自我保健的关系提出了批评，但读者还是觉得这种批评并不是 Roquet 书的核心。至少在我看来，核心是对环境调解的各种艺术形式的细心和精彩描述。在某种程度上，通过更多地关注艺术作品而不是环境调解的商业方面及其新自由主义的影响，罗凯参与这种现象的方式本身就可以称为“环境批评”。事实上，我认为即使他们对这种现象持批评态度，例如栗田的小说，艺术作品也表现出一种不加批判的姿态。该假设基于上述对媒体概念的理解。根据环境音乐的拥护者之一布赖恩·伊诺 (Brian Eno) 的说法，环境媒体“必须既有趣又可忽略”（引自第 169 页）。因此，环境主观化——在自我和外部世界之间创造一种有趣但可忽略的“无中介中介”体验——否定了中介批评实际上必不可少的东西，即，某种将自己定位在自我和外部世界“之间”的东西，从而创造了距离而不是近似。根据媒体哲学家 Sybille Krämer 的说法，正是书面语言造成的时空距离对批判性话语的发展至关重要——事实上，这对电影也适用，可能会唤起人们之间集体“窒息”的状态。观众，正如同时代的沃尔特·本杰明和中井正和两位同时代人所描述的那样，电影的批判潜力也是如此。