Topics in Media Theory

is this goodbye?

2005-12-03T11:46:00.000-08:00

The blogging experience was interesting experiment for me. At first I approached the blog like a reading response assignment. As I scan back and look at my earlier posts, they were quite stiff and structured, usually referring directly to the reading. I often went through the assigned texts, jotted down interesting tidbits and then wrote a couple paragraphs on MS Word. After proofreading and spellchecking it, I finally then copied it and posted it on my blog. I know...what a tedious process. As time went on, I realized that blogs weren't supposed to be formal pieces of writing. We are allowed to commit grammatical errors, misspell things, and even have random thoughts. There was definitely a period of adjustment before I could fully immerse myself in "blogging." Eventually I learned to be more free with my blogs and relate it the wider spectrum of new media and life in general. I really appreciate the amount of freedom that is associated with blogs, but at the same time I felt pressure to write something interesting for my blog. The publishing of blog within the community created this illusion of an audience. I unlearned my rigid approach to blogs. I felt I was able to connect the reading/theory to applications in real life, which made the material easier to understand and more relevant.

I liked having the aggregator page. It gave me a sense of what my classmates were thinking about in terms of new media theory. I liked reading the posts of other people in the class and finding points we agree/disagree on. I think someone mentioned that in theory blogging is suppose to continue the engaging classroom discussions. The blog was suppose to foster a sense of community, where we can post and answer questions/comments. I tried to comment and answer questions/issues raised by others, but I feel there there wasn't enough interest from others to continue the discussion and the anonymity seemed to prevent the continuation of discussion in real life. To make the interaction seem more concrete, maybe we should've revealed our anonymity to each other. Even though we met in class twice a week, I felt like I hardly knew anyone. I think when we dont know who we are responding to, it makes it difficult to engage with what the other person is saying. I see the other person as a faceless username. I feel there is a disconnect between the online self and the "real" self. I have no idea who I responded to online and I would have no way of continuing our conversation in person. As someone mentioned earlier "there was no real connection between my classmates and myself except for the fact that we were writing about the same material."

This is in resposne to defcahn's post

2005-11-26T12:57:00.000-08:00

Disclaimer: I'm by no means an expert on this topic and I'm just offering my few tidbits of knowledge.

For your first question: Who has legal jurisdiction over the internet?
It is true there are no borders on the internet, which is why some argue that the Internet is separate from national law. From wikipedia:

"In "Law and Borders -- The Rise of Law in Cyberspace," (Stanford Law Review, 1996) David Johnson and David Post describe the Internet as an unregulable entity, at least under current national law. Today's Internet transcends historical borders as bits are instantaneously routed from one country to another. Because of this extra-territorial nature, it becomes exceedingly difficult to enforce national laws which depend on clearly defined boundaries."

So therefore, they argue that the Internet must be ruled by a new set of laws not necessarily created by sovereign nations. This seems to suggest that the Internet effectively becomes its own nation.

Another interesting tidbit about internet gambling…Currently the internet operates in a chaotic and lawless space. It is a little know phenomenon that hackers often threaten gambling sites with “Denial of Service” attacks in exchange for a monetary sum, often referred to as a “security fee.” This is because gambling sites are extremely lucrative and every minute the site is down, it costs the gambling companies thousands of dollars, so they would rather pay hackers a comparatively small rather than lose precious operating time.

The US has passed a series of laws that limit users’ access to certain materials on the internet. However, these laws do not effectively filter and block user's access to the internet. The Communications Decency Act passed by Congress in 1996 that regulated pornography on the internet was later partly struck down as unconstitutional. Because of the vast size and transitory nature of the internet, it is very difficult to track all the illegal dealings that are happening on a daily basis. Many Asian and Middle Eastern nations use any number of combinations of code-based regulation to block material that their governments have deemed inappropriate for their citizens to view. For example, China has often been cited as a success in regulating its citizens' access to the internet. In order to truly regulate and enforce the internet, some democratic liberties such as freedom of speech must be compromised. Freedom of speech is protected under the First Amendment and this includes the internet, which is why effective regulation in the US will be especially difficult to achieve.

Life as Database Narrative

2005-11-26T12:36:00.000-08:00

While doing some research relating my final project, I came across Stephen Edinehart's blog. And I thought that database narratives were only used for random story tellings. He is working on an interactive " lifelog database"which basically incorporates his life using a database narrative structure.

According to his Abstract:

"Immersive lifelog; create a spatial representation of thought and allow lifelog entries to drift by as they are drawn from a database.

I want to swim through my gleaned media memories, and allow serendipity to bring them to my attention, as opposed to searching a temporal or meta-data driven database for them. Different spaces could be used to address various segments of life, family, spirituality, school, sex, music, etc; each themed with a different customizable experiential skin."

From the diagram, it seems the structure of his project seems much more organized than Joyce's "Afternoon." However, when I took a look at his "portal," it was just as confusing. I'm not quite sure why there is this element of randomness always present in database narratives. Is it fitting for Edinehart's case because life itself is rather random or is there another element that I'm not seeing. For me, I would want some level of organization, at least grouping parts of my life into segments.

Matrix Misunderstood

2005-11-14T13:41:00.000-08:00

Shaviro criticizes that The Matrix wants to "condemn simulation" and simultaneously profit from it. It is true that Neo embraces virtual reality to enhance his training. What is wrong with using the technology and taking advantage of it for your own goals? Should we not use weapons to overthrow a corrupt dictator because he uses the same weapon against us? No of course not. That would be foolish. A gun is not inherently evil, it's how you use it that ultimately determines its value. We have to remember that Neo is merely using the machines' weapon against them. By adapting himself to both the virtually mediated world and the real world, he is able to combat the machines on both fronts. Neo is obviously thinking in Machiavellian terms when he decides to use the matrix against itself. He knows that the matrix is not real and it must be destroyed. Sure we can side with Shaviro and accuse The Matrix "celebrates false appearances, under the guise of condemning them," but we have to remember that the end justifies the means.

I think the problem is that Shaviro is analyzing the movie from a commercial aspect. It is true that the movie relies on digital special effects and "cool" scenes to impress the audience and thus garner a higher box office turnout. Shaviro needs to suspend his belief for a moment and put himself in the perspective of Neo, who has the onus of being the "one" and saving humanity. We must remember that Neo is battling the machines for the purpose of freeing mankind and not for some cheap thrill or to impress people. The program is at the center of the matrix and Neo is powerless to defeat it from the "real" world which is a "devastated, nearly uninhabitable wasteland." Therefore, Neo must "jack in" to the matrix and learn its ways to successfully terminate the program. Can we blame Neo for saving the world and looking cool at the same time? Would Shaviro rather see a haggard Neo who lacks basic fashion sense and has to run around on foot and fight the machine using organic weapons from the real world in order to not sell out?

quite an experience

2005-11-13T19:30:00.000-08:00

Not often do parents and their kids flock to an art exhibition about narcotics. The scene was more reminiscent of a theme park than a contemporary art museum as people waited in lines for their turn to experience an alternate conciousness. Art critics, kids, college students, and tourists converged at the Geffen Contemporary for the Ecstasy exhibit. The scene was bit absurd as visitors admired LSD fountain while a musuem personnel stood guard over various prescription pills that were scattered on the floor.

I remember earlier this semester when I first read Bolter and Grusin, I thought the idea of "remediation" had little merit. I stated that "I’m not convinced with our current technology that complete remediation can be experienced." Bolter and Grusin explained that "the medium itself should disappear and leave us, the viewer, in the presence of the thing represented. “ At the time I thought to myself that this was simply impossible... well I guess I proved myself wrong. Many of the artworks at the exhibition relied on simple optical illusions to immerse the viewer completely in the art. One artwork was a yellow pod, kind of like a space capsule made me realized that remediation was possible after all. When I stepped into the pod, I was completely immersed in a endless sphere of rhinestones that glittered a countless colors. Accompanying this mesmerizing spectacle was a female voice that softly whispered words and pharses. For a moment, I was made completely unaware of my surroundings as I let myself be absorbed into the experience. I think this exhibit served to highlight that narcotics aren't necessary for the human mind to experience an altered state. This exhibit allowed viewers to explore how human conciousness might be altered and the subsequent ramifications without actually having their thinking be hampered by narcotics.

In terms of recent new media we experienced in class, this exhibit was more like Pat O’Neill’s Tracing the Decay of Fiction than Manovich's Soft Cinema. Unlike Manovich's Soft Cinema, which claims interactivty through a randomly generated narrative, there is a element of control in O'Neill's DVD. That same element of control is extended to the viewer in many of the exhibits at Ecstasy. Although there are some artworks that are more difficult for the viewer to connect with, for the most part the viewer is invited to experience the artwork as a particpant rather than a mere spetactor observing from afar.

ECSTASY

2005-11-12T09:04:00.000-08:00

Going to an exhibit at the Geffen Contemporary today. Will report back shortly...

ECSTASY

IN AND ABOUT ALTERED STATES

10.09.05 - 02.20.06

An international survey of work by approximately 30 artists exploring altered states and alternative modes of perception, Ecstasy features painting, sculpture, video, film, installation, photography, and new media by some of today's leading artists as well as the most promising work by the up-and-coming generation. Ecstasy presents recent and specially commissioned works that challenge notions of interactivity while generating a heightened aural and visual experience for the individual. Featured artists include Franz Ackermann, Eija-Liisa Ahtila, Francis Alÿs, Chiho Aoshima, assume vivid astro focus, Massimo Bartolini, Tatsurou Bashi, Glenn Brown, Janet Cardiff and Georges Bures Miller, Olafur Eliasson, Lara Favaretto, Sylvie Fleury, Tom Friedman, Rodney Graham, Jeppe Hein, Carsten Höller, Pierre Huyghe, Ann Veronica Janssens, Ann Lislegaard, Matt Mullican, Takashi Murakami, Paul Noble, Roxy Paine, Charles Ray, Erwin Redl, Pipilotti Rist, Paul Sietsema, Fred Tomaselli, and Klaus Weber. The exhibition is organized by Chief Curator Paul Schimmel with Gloria Sutton and is accompanied by a fully illustrated catalogue.

a walking contradiction

2005-11-09T13:33:00.000-08:00

I share Guillermo Gómez-Peña's sentiments regarding conversing with "phantasmagoric beings" online. However, I take it a step further than Mr. Gómez-Peña. Not only do I not converse with random people online, I dont even converse with people that I know in real life. Call me old-fashioned or more grounded in reality. It may seem like I am a walking contradiction, but I'm sure there is some way to explain my aversion to online chat programs. I'm an avid user and responder of emails, but I cant seem to make myself an avid online chatter. To me, there seems to be something too artificial about the whole online communique. Unlike emails, where I can just write a quick message and send it over, I have to sit awkwardly on the other side and wait for my friend to respond. I was a big fan of aim, and other online chat programs back in my youth. I rememeber spending hours on end, speaking to countless people. I felt a sense of excitement that I was able to get an immediate response and that I had the courage to say things online that I wouldnt dare say in real life. But ever since I got to college, I felt that online chatting just didnt seem real. Is it really the person they say they are? I cant distinguish what is real and what is false or when people are serious or joking. I cant seem to trust anything that people type online. It just seems like this fantasy wonderland, where people can assume any identity and anything they say is not too outlandish.

I have often been criticized by my friends for regressing towards tradtionalism and being technologically backwards. They always say, wouldnt it be great if I could just type you a quick message instead of calling your cell phone or walking down the hall and knocking on your door? My response to them is why cant you take those two steps to speak to me personally? In an age when technology is so readily avalible, humans unknowingly isolated themselves. There is such a great reliance on online digital technology that even real life interactions can be replaced. This reminds of the example that one student brought up in class about how his two suitemates have great conversations online but have nothing to say to each other in real life. I can only shake my head in disbelief and regret. Technology should benefit interactions between humans not handicap it.

i like it

2005-11-02T13:27:00.000-08:00

For me, Pat O’Neill’s Tracing the Decay of Fiction was more like a documentary than a story. The interview of the lady who grew up in the Ambassador Hotel echoes the same oral history narrative that is so common on the History Channel. I think that this is beneificial to the development of the "story." At least there is some cohesion. Regardless of real or fictional, a narrative is developed that the viewer can follow and understand. Unlike Manovich's Soft Cinema, which claims interactivty through a randomly generated narrative, there is a element of control in O'Neill's DVD. The user is responsible to some extent for the development of the narrative. Depending on where you click, or where you scroll over, the image moves and the video plays to further the story. Viewed as a interactive documentary, I am thoroughly impressed by O'Neils seamless style and continuity. The various ghostly figures and narrative seemed they belonged at one point or another to the Ambassador Hotel. They seemed like they could be reenactments of events that have happened in the past. This is true to a certain extent as O'Neill focuses on several historical events that happened at the Ambassaor Hotel as a background narrative. This included the Golden Globe Awards, a visit by Prince of Arabia, and Senator Kennedy's assassination. Or Maybe this is what exactly O'Neill intended for the audience, a feeling of belonging. They can be viewed as either fictional characters or maybe past hotel customers. There is a blurring of fiction and reality and that is what makes the Ambassador Hotel so intriguing.

work in progress

2005-10-30T20:11:00.000-08:00

Since stage 1 of the project is due tomorrow,like most people in the class I am frantically finishing and touching up details for this phase of the project. When we first brainstormed the idea of a hypermediated journey through a DVD, it seemed rather simple. We would have buttons, pictures, and texts that would allow the user to click on to advance their journey. However, incorporating the idea of a interconnected web of paths that connect all these locations together was a challenge. I was expecting to map out at least a good part of the possible paths that each user can take. I soon realized that this was utterly impossible because the possibilities are almost endless. Thinking back to the ridiculously complicated diagram of Michael Joyce's Afternoon, made everything clearer. So instead, we mapped out a sample journey that a user may take. Along with a detailed outline of some possible path for our hypermediated journey, we have shot a few scenes for our project. However, when were ready to edit this together on Final Cut Pro, we find out that the firewire port on our camera is completely destroyed. So this left us with no choice but to resort to pen and paper to sketch out a story board. In other good news, we finally got a hold of DVD studio pro. Let's hope stage 2 goes better.

you got me Manovich

2005-10-27T20:44:00.000-07:00

In “the Operations,” Manovich points out that the spread of information technology has blurred the distinction between author and user. With the rise of user-friendly programs, the gap between author and user has been bridged. I was always a bit skeptical about this. I thought sure, the tools are available on the internet but how many people have the technical skills to accomplish this. The other day Mark Allen surprised our class by introducing Audacity, this nifty audio editor program, for our next project. I was a bit shocked at first. I was thinking to myself isn’t this a digital art class? Although I enjoyed listening to music, I have no experience in audio editing. I always thought that this technical process was somehow only reserved for professionals or audio enthusiasts. Despite my grumblings, we proceeded with our first project. I was pretty impressed with myself when I was able to compose a melody with a sine wave, a pluck sound, and a tone changer. I was even more amazed by the quality of the music the class created. So I guess I proved myself wrong and Manovich was right. The abundance of user friendly software these days definitely makes it more appealing and easier for the user to become the author. Now here I am, working on my second project, splicing dozens of songs to make a sound collage.

Speaking of user friendly author software/tool thingy, I want to introduce Comic Life to all the mac users out there. It’s a very easy and fun program that you can use to create your own comics. I had a blast and you can too. If you don’t think you are creative enough, there is even an auto-create function that puts the comic together for you when you specify a folder of images. I meant to post this back when we were reading Scott McCloud’s Reinventing Comics, but I guess late is better than never. The moral of the story: Lev knows me better than I know myself.

what is new media anyways?

2005-10-25T17:54:00.000-07:00

I applaud Manovich's valiant efforts at definining new media. He seems to trace its origins back to the early 1800's with the deguerreotype and Babbage's analytical machine. This seems to me to be such an arbitrary starting point. What about the movable type that allowed mass production of books. Or what about books themselves as new technology to transmit oral messages? Manovich seems to be thinking of new media as something that is new to us today. I wonder how this term will change as newer technologies and mediums develop. Would we still be in awe of the powers of the internet? Or would it be conisdered along with such mundane inventions as the photograph or the televsison. I find it especially hard to align with Manovich's notion of new media because it seems like he is not so sure of the term himself. Where do you draw a beginning? At one time or another, the technology we use was new. However, with the passage of time and rise of new innovations, what may be once considered complex machines are now considered simple and primitive objects.

Ironically, new media can only be defined by specifying what it is not. According to Manovich, he gives six bullet points to describe what new media is not. Yet he uses old media such as cinema to illustrate his examples further blurring the lines between what is old and what is new. It seems like such an abitrary designation.

Comics = $$$

2005-10-19T11:39:00.000-07:00

It seems that money is the main force behind the comic industry. Whether artists consider making money their main goal or not, the issue is unavoidable because it is profit that utimately drives the production of comics. In one panel on page 10, McCloud draws two comic artists sitting across from each other, working on their comics. One artist's thought bubble is filled with a lightbulb, while the other aritist's thought bubble is filled with a money sign. However, a third thought bubble with the comic symbol joins brings the two artists thoughts together. McCloud points out that although not all comic artists agree on their long term goals for the artform, there is still some common ground which is the continuation of the art form. Much like video games and the films before it, most new media forms are unsuprisingly powered by profit-seeking investors. So of course, they are going to promote the genre that is most marketable. In the case of comics, it seems that the super hero genre was the bread and butter of the industry. Although comic book artists like Will Esiner, produced "graphic novels," revolutionary comics like A Contract With God were still not the mainstream of the comic industry. Even McCloud concedes that the comic industry is recovering from a burst bubble. All the speculation of the 1980s and early 1990s had dried up and comic stores closed across the nation. He mentioned that some were so embittered by this downturn, that they left the industry altogether.

So with this bleak picture in front of us, how do we expect comics to make great strides and expand in the twelve directions that McCloud outlined in Reinventing Comics? I mean sure it would be nice that gender and minority equality is present in comics, but how realistic would that goal be? After all, the comic is still a struggling medium. From its conception in the US, it was associated with "Vaudevillians." Not the most serious art form by any means. So comics were ill-fated and doomed from the start. McCloud highlights that the comic is such a versatile medium that the artist can have complete control over, yet it is despised by critics and condemned as low-brow. I would love to see the transformation of comics become a legitimate artform, but how realistic is this? McCloud suggests that the only way to end the curse of comics is to bring new readers to support the adult (as in grown ups, not pornographic) comics and to bring the art form to a whole new level; a level that not just kids but adults can enjoy and appreciate.

global village is good for pirates

2005-10-09T21:32:00.004-07:00

Everyone's favorite media theorist Marshall "the medium is the message" McLuhan popped into my head while I was reading this LA Times article on Piracy and Bootlegging. It seemed that Sony's meticulous and overenthusiastic attempts to thawrt bootleggers from pirating Spider Man 2 was no match for the power of the "global village." Allow me to quote my favorite passage:

"Four hours after its premiere, a copy of "Spider-Man 2" was on the Internet. By morning, counterfeit DVDs showed up for sale in malls and makeshift stalls in the Philippines.

Within a week, street merchants were hawking pirated copies of "Spider-Man 2" in Scotland, Israel, Hong Kong, Peru and South Africa — and downtown Los Angeles. Within a month, Sony investigators had collected bootlegged "Spider-Man 2" DVDs from Australia, Southeast Asia, China, the Middle East, Europe, Africa, South America and the United States, nearly all of which traced back to the one copy made at the Loews Kips Bay.

"The lightning speed with which these copies spread around the planet was horrifying," Blake said. "No matter how much you spend on security or what precautions you take, the grim truth is once a film gets uploaded on the Internet, suddenly it's everywhere."

The global flight of "Spider-Man 2" illustrates one of the ugly byproducts of the digital transformation of entertainment. In addition to creating profitable new businesses, such as movie DVDs and downloadable music services, digital technology has created an unprecedented opportunity for leeching by commercial pirates."

Oh the wonders of the global village...I'm sure McLuhan is saying "I told you so" right now.

I think i m starting to understand.

2005-10-08T10:17:00.000-07:00

I along with most people in class had an initial reaction of frustration to Michael Joyce's Afternoon. Although the reader was given some element of control over the development of the plot, the subsequent clicking of the cards still seemed a bit hard to follow. The first time I read Afternoon, it did not seem to make any sense at all. I would click the word "simple" on a card expecting it to take me to something related about it. Not the case at all, instead I was taken to some completely unrelated card about someone reminiscing about winter. At first I just thought that the content of the cards were general enough that with a little stretching of the imagination anything could make sense. However, after we read it together as a class, the story seemed to make more sense. Maybe it was the appearance of some main characters. The recurring appearances of Nausicca helped me focus my attention around a central character. As we clicked on, the subsequent cards made some little reference to the preceding cards. Afternoon didn't exactly really make me crazy about hypertext. I thought to myself, if this is supposed to be the future of reading, then I'm really glad it didn't catch on.

However, after reading Landow's piece about hypertext, I'm beginning to appreciate the hypertext. Landow mentioned that before the advent of the hypertext, the book still contained elements of the hypertext. Although a crude predecessor, the use of endnotes and footnotes allowed the reader to find related information within the same text. It might take some flipping to the endnotes or looking down the page at the footnotes, it was still a useful addition to the reader's understanding of texts. The arrival of the hypertext changed all this. No longer did the reader have to physically flip through any pages, with one click of the mouse, the reader can instantly access the information. This made information more convenient and more immediately available. I would so say this is a step up from any book. Personally I really have no attachment to books. These cumbersome things really weigh the old backpack down and I would much prefer a handheld electronic reader and save some trees (yea I’m big on saving the rainforest, if you haven’t noticed yet).

So this relates perfectly to what I was referring to in my last post. The book like the hypertext is a merely a technology created by humans. There is nothing "natural" about the book that makes it superior or more deserving of praise. It is a product of society created by humans to disseminate information. So the hypertext in theory is supposed to better convey information to us because it improves the reader's access of information. If we think of hypertext not in the creative electronic novella sense a la Michael Joyce's Afternoon, but in the sense of more objective purposes such wikipedia, academic papers, basically any electronic information source, then yes by all means I would take the hypertext over the book any day.

Let's get digital

2005-10-03T11:35:00.000-07:00

Judging by the current technological trend, it seems inevitable that we are approaching the age of the portable digital book. Prices for microchips are constantly dropping while the technological capacity increasingly doubles; it seems like only a matter of time before we are doing our media studies reading out of our nifty little electronic readers. As Bolter pointed out that it is pretty common for books, magazines, and newspapers to be typed into a computer for easier copying and publishing. Since this information is already in an electronic form why regress and print it out on paper when it can be easily distributed digitally? Most major newspapers seem to be already predicting the next evolution of writing and have anticipated this event by simultaneously publishing their newspapers online. Furthermore, the electronic text allows the reader to search and find the relevant information rather than flip through endless pages of a physical book. So why not save a few (million) trees and read electronic texts?

Bolter suggests that "if we combine the dynamic writing of the word processor with dynamic reading of the bulletin board or textual database and add the interactivity of computer-assisted instruction, then we do have a textual medium of a new order." This sentence if read out of context may seem like some conspiracy theory, but in context of his discussion of writing space it really makes sense. All this time we thought the word processor was revolutionary, when in reality it is merely a tool for "making perfect printed or typed copy." It seems like people are still hung up on the idea of the printed book. Is it because they want something tangible to hold in this increasingly digital society? Some people will inevitably believe in the idea that change is bad. However, it is only natural that the Old must make way for the New. Only by embracing the new can we progress towards the future.

The electronic text allows the reader to share in the dynamic process of writing. The idea of reader participation seems like it would benefit the writing process. Wikipedia for example illustrates the benefit of the multiple authorship principle perfectly. It allows anyone with an internet connection to edit texts and make entries regarding virtually any topic. Each participant can easily flow between the role of the reader and the writer. I think Bolter has made some pretty convincing predictions. After all, we are using electronic text to write responses to his essay. Personally I am pretty excited for the "fourth great technique of writing.”

At least his intentions were good...

2005-09-29T14:46:00.000-07:00

I was intrigued by the irony of the relatively peaceful proposal from Vannevar Bush in "As We May Think" despite the fact that he was in charge of the Manhattan Project and development of weapons technology. I guess making killing machines eventually got to him. Bush's article seems revolutionary for its time and he makes some reasonable arguments regarding the evolution of technology. Bush envisioned the trails of information as modeling human memory and this process can be replicated by what he calls the "memex."

Most people in the class seem to oppose the notion that the memex technology would "help" humans increase their own memory. I can see that if we think of the machine as an integral part of the human memory, it could pose a problem in the future. However, I don’t think that Bush argued that this machine was to replace cognitive abilities of the human brain; it was merely meant to supplement our limited memory capacity so we can concentrate on more pressing concerns. If we solely depend on the memex to replace our memory then yes it will most likely increase the "laziness of the literate human mind" as one student put it.

Machines like the memex and the modern computers are merely tools for humans. Bush states man "has built a civilization so complex that he needs to mechanize his records more fully if he is to push his experiment to its logical conclusion and not get bogged down part way there by overtax his limited memory." I don’t think that Bush when envisioning the memex set out to create an all powerful machine that would do the thinking for us. He clearly states that the point is to aid our thinking and make our "excursions more enjoyable." I actually think that the increasing amount of information available through the internet, television, and various other forms of media forces the viewer to more discerning and discriminating. As one student put it, the internet merely provides information and we must distinguish what is true and what is false to make this information become knowledge. We can no longer take anything written in a book as truth and we must question conventional wisdom. Our present media saturated society forces the viewer to be more involved in the medium, making active choices rather than simply letting the medium provide the information and manipulate reality.

what is remediation anyways?

2005-09-26T13:32:00.000-07:00

Gitelman makes some poignant agruments about the limitation and constraint of our futile attempts at organizing and consuming information. She doesn't seemed to be convinced that our present day technological innovations have the "revolutionary" power that we believe they possess. For example, the internet is as Nunberg describes it "a electronic equivalent of a gated suburban community." Despite what we may percieve as avalible to a wide spectrum of audiences, the internet in reality is restricted to those who either posses the "necessary economic resources or can politely associate themselves with the right insitutions." So what does this mean? Does this mean the next time somebody claims to be from the "hood," on a online message board, should we simply dismiss it as a surburban white teenager trying to stir things up?

Gitelman's argument makes more sense than most of the other theorists that we have read so far. I agree with her that our experiences of technology must depend upon on something much more than the habits of "end users." Unlike previous theorists who argue that all media is remediation and that each new form of media arises from an existing form, Gitelman wisely explains that it is a combination of social, historical, and personal constructs. So in other words, rememdiation is not as simple as we may think. It is really a messy web of interconnecting factors that influence and shape our media experience. It seems much too easy to connect the rise of the tv to the radio and the rise of the radio to the phonograph and so on in a infinite loop. We must go beyond the superficial similiarties to find the actual source and reasons for this remediation phenenmon. As Gitelman pointed it is due to a endless variety of reasons and minute factors that ultimately shape our experience.

you are not making sense Mcluhan

2005-09-19T11:59:00.000-07:00

I'm not sure if I completely agree with Mcluhan's argument that "the medium is the message." For me, the medium is simply a facilitator for the message. It is true that the message cannot be conveyed without the medium and hence is integral to the message. However, this does not equate to the medium is the message. Take for example, if the train was carrying nothing what would be the point of the train traveling all that distance? Without a message, the medium is devoid of meaing. Logically I cant imagine a medium that is devoid of a message. What's the use of a lightbulb if it doesnt aid in some sort of activity? So in theory the message and the medium are interwined and inseparable. I concede that "it is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action." It is true that the medium has a dramatic impact on the meaning of the message, but it is how the medium is used that ultimately determines its meaning. As I went on I find General David Sarnoff's comment especially agreeable. He points out that "the products of modern science are not in themselves good or bad; it is the way they are used that determines their value." This I can completely agree with. Mcluhan in trying to disprove Sarnoff's argument points out that the medium is able to "disseminate the Bibile and thoughts of seers and philosphers" as well in addition to generating trashy text. In recognizing this fact, Mculhan seems to be contradicting himself and asserting Sarnoff's view that it is in fact the content or how the medium is used that affects their value.

I'm not sure this makes complete sense but I feel that Mcluhan is trying to make a far fetched argument by selectively presenting examples that favor his argument. Furthermore, he points out that "Cubism by seizing an instant total awareness, suddenly annoucned that the medium is the message." By highlighting this perspective, he is sidestepping the fact that cubism is merely another style of painting that is confined to the medium of the "colored canvas." It is the painting style or the content in this case that determines the meaning of the medium. Mcluhan makes it seem that it is completely natural that "the medium is the message" when in fact it is the opposite. Maybe I'm completely missing the point of Mcluhan's argument but I'm simply not seeing how his theory can possibly make sense.

orality and literacy in other classes? unbelievable!

2005-09-13T22:03:00.000-07:00

I know this might seem a little obscure for most media studies people but I was pretty excited to find that my reading for my anthropology class related to Ong's thoughts on orality and literacy. We discussed the standariation of Gods in late imperial China. Most Gods in china originated through a oral tradition, however once these Gods were canonized their stories were written down and standarized to serve the purpose of the state. As mentioned in class on Monday, one result of the difference between orality and literacy is that it creates a power dynamic. We all seemed to agree that writing based cultures seemed to have power over primarily oral cultures. "Writings gives a grapholect a power far exceeding that of any purely oral dialect." (Ong 8). As Ong mentioned literacy is absolutely neccesary for the development of complex ideas. In this case, writing was employed to establish the local diety into a national God.

During late imperial China, literally thousands of deities were wroshipped in temples throughout the empire but only a select few were included in the national pantheon. Tien Hou was a local diety from the southern region of China that was inducted into the national pantheon by the Imperial Board of Rites as a poltical tool to control the region during times of unrest. Originally Tien hou was a local deity who was believed to have guided lost sailors to safety. The intervention of the state and the literate elite ultimately transformed her into the Empress of Heaven (Tien Hou) in which people all across China worshipped. However, it is interesting to note that the people at the top of the social hierachy accept the standard written version of the myth as "true" while the uneducated and illiterate are oblivious to any but the oral versions. So this shows that although the belief in Tien Hou originated through oral traditions, it is obviously the written versions prevailed as the official ideology.

orality and literacy and even some remediation

2005-09-11T21:49:00.000-07:00

It was interesting that to the ancient Greeks, writing was not meant to replace orality but enhance it. However, once the speech was written down, it was studied as a written text and not as speech. Ong points out that literates view the separation of words from writing as psychologically threatening. Once we become so accustomed to encyclopedias, dictionaries, grammar rules, and punctuation, it seems that we can’t live without them. However, I question is this vast knowledge "real"? If we can only retain this knowledge by relying on a written form, it seems like we are inevitably doomed if something should happen to our stored knowledge. Would it be better to have a small pool of knowledge associated with the oral tradition that we can all recall if needed? It seems like orality and literacy have a love/hate relationship. One can’t exist without the other. Although the oral tradition is slowly losing ground, it still can’t be completely eradicated. Although the oral tradition gave rise to literacy, we are reminded that humans can’t achieve their full potential without writing.

Ong raises the possibility that literacy can be used to "reconstruct...the pristine human consciousness which was not literate at all." This suggestion seems to echo the notion of remediation. He argues that this consciousness before we are aware of literacy can be reconstructed pretty well, though not perfectly. I'm always a bit skeptical about remediation and Ong himself even admits that it is impossible to forget all of our present knowledge to reconstruct a past in its "full integrity." So in this regard, remediation is not possible because we are too perceptive of our current existence and can’t forget or would not forget the knowledge to experience the "pristine human consciousness." Applying this to other forms of remediation, I can see that there always this tendency for humans to hang on to reality or something familiar that prevents complete remediation.

On page 31 Ong discusses the difficulty it takes fully literate persons to imagine what a primarily oral culture is like. It is indeed very difficult for someone who has used words all their life to imagine what a culture with no knowledge of writing or even the possibility of it. They can no longer rely on written dictionaries to look up anything. This reminds me of a relevant problem with technology. Take for example, Sony's newest gaming device, the PSP. It has already gone through multiple versions of firmware upgrades. The newest hype surrounding the PSP is its version 1.5 firmware which allows the user to load various emulators to play older games. However, most newly released PSPs are version 2.0 which have remedied this loophole to prevent this. Similar to the problem of the literate masses, users with version 2.0 like literate persons cant "imagine" what it is like to have the power of the emulators.

NTNTNT and Bookchin

2005-09-09T11:38:00.000-07:00

So I was reading NTNTNT for my digital art class, which is a convoluted history of art and activism on the net, based on conversations among the participants of Natalie Bookchin's . There was a part about the transitory nature of any culture that relies on technology that was relevant what we were discussing in class. In order to keep up with a constantly modernizing society and a world where we all try outdo each other, it is only natural that technology be replaced at a increasingly rapid rate. For a recent example who longs for the days of big floppy disks that can barely fit one mp3. Though the reading may suggest that there are those diehards out there who use forsaken technology for the retro and novelty effect, but honestly, how many of us really want such to use such archaic technology? Living in this dynamic world and witnessing the constant change of technology and the burst of the cyber bubble, I'm prepared for not just digital art but even life itself to stop "working."

In a sense digital art can reach a status of immortality. As long as there are computer servers in cyberspace transmitting the digital art, it remains intact and holds on to its existence. Compared to traditional art forms, where the lifespan of the artwork is only long as the lifespan of the medium it was created with. However, traditional art retains a sense of uniqueness with each piece that is created. No two artworks are exactly the same. Where as digital art and media can be copied and multiplied with the single click of a mouse. Digital art is able to be preserved and transmitted on to the next generation of art patrons. So in evolutionary terms, digital art is able to adapt itself to such a widespread network and continue replicating itself in order to survive. I believe the whole point of digital art is for it to remain digital. For example, I’m not sure if the 2000 Whitney Biennial web-based art show would have had the same effect if the art was printed out and mounted in the gallery. One major advantage of digital art is hypermediation. It allows the viewer access to an array of interactive mechanisms, images, and sounds at the click of a mouse. To me there is something mystical about an art form that is so malleable yet so ephemeral and intangible.

2005-09-07T08:58:00.000-07:00

Chapter 1 of Bolter & Grusin argues that the photograph is

remediation

2005-09-05T01:03:00.000-07:00

What better way to start off the new school year than by playing some flash games for your homework. However, The Intruder was anything but what I expected from a simple flash game. In order for the story to progress, the viewer has to successfully navigate through level after level of sensory overload. This was one time when losing a video game did matter. Therefore the viewer is compelled to participate in the development of the story. However, the various mini games cluttered the screen and made the main story difficult to follow. The sound effects often distorted the voice of the narrator. In some parts, the game play distracted the viewer from the story. On top of this, the story seemed too serious for its medium. Words of immense consequence were accompanied by oversimplified images and sound effects. As a result, the viewer isn't sure what to make of the playful violence and trivial killing that occurs throughout the game. The Intruder, however, did demonstrate the hypermediation phenomenon that we so see often today. Like the "hypermediated web page" described in the reading, The Intruder provides an array of interactive mechanisms to immerse the viewer within the story. Similar to how Hollywood blockbusters combine live action footage with computer generated graphics, the Intruder utilizes moving images and combine them with the recitation of the story. However, in the case of the Intruder, much meaning is lost due to the clashing and overloading of sound and image. In a time not long ago, I feel like this game would be laughed off as low brow. But now it acts as a perfect allegory of the advanced technological world we live in. The line between high art and low brow is blurred and all is considered art within the digital medium.

I agree with Bolter and Grusin that hypermediation has increased dramatically within our society. It is true that most television these days all try to outdo each other in terms of sensory overload in hopes of catching the viewers’ attention. The constant barrage of outrageous and shocking images in the media has desensitized viewers to much of what is being broadcasted. I guess it is only natural that the media readjusts itself to better exploit our ever shortening attention spans. However, I’m not sure all this media bombardment is good for the mind or the body for that matter. But I do recall that the average time spent watching an ad is three seconds. Whether hypermediation is positive for society, I’ll leave this up to my readers to debate.

There is a constant desire within our media saturated society to experience hyperreality and achieve remediation. Remediation seems like such a straightforward and simple idea. “The medium itself should disappear and leave us, the viewer, in the presence of the thing represented. “ Despite the constant desire to achieve remediation, its actualization remains distant. I’m not convinced with our current technology that complete remediation can be experienced. For example the flight simulator example doesn’t take into account the danger of flying or the possibility of a crashing. It is true that, the simulator can emulate and show users “what it is like to be” a pilot, however it doesn’t show the negative aspects or possibilities that come with being a pilot. For me, without the negative aspects , the positive incentives seem unreal.

the first entry

2005-08-31T21:33:00.000-07:00