Lanham and Kohl- Digitization of the humanities

Sorry I didn't get this up yesterday, I hadn't finished the readings and did not want to write some B.S.

Most all of our readings have discussed the implications of the way the digital revolution changes the way we distribute, understand, and interpret information.  One big point made by these readings is the change in cultural authority and single authorship.  Books have been the unchangeable cultural authority since the renaissance.  This authority fades due to the transition to the screen, where type font is amendable, rewriteable, and reformatted in tangible ways that undermines the the relationship between author and authorship.  The line begins to blur as our blogs show.  One person authors a blog post while another authors a comment.  Then roles reverse as the author of the blog becomes audience of the blog commenter.  Some drastic changes are taking place here as the role of the author is altered.  I can experientially relate to the arts and letters explanation of how the "performance" of a piece of music resembles more so the writing of the tune then the actual professional concertizing.  Today more people have more music, so much so that they will never be able to listen to it all.  Just 10 years ago CD's were the major music distribution devices.  Not everybody had that much physical music, therefore the art of the concert and seeing it performed live were cherished more.  This could possibly be due to the rarity of music.  So now when someone thinks (at times, not all the time) of a musical performance, they think of it as through the medium of a cd, mp3 on the ipod, or youtube video, not as a actual live performance. 


One aspect of the article mentions the production and dissmination of fiction in participatory form.  Such as:  video games, theme parks, and museum simulations.  VIDEO GAMES!?!?!?! Finally someone recognizes the potential for a participatory fictional story as possible learning material in academic setting.  One video game I have recently played is Deus ex: Human Revolution.  The theme is set in 2027, where corporations are bigger than the government and augmentation technology is prevalent everywhere.  Basically the story plays out a type of transhumanist, darwinianesque control of our own evolution and the societal impacts of such technologies on class, morals, and ethics.    If plastic surgery is ok to reconstruct a perfectly normal face for cosmetic reasons, is it reasonable to tinker with human genes in the hopes of progessing science and humanity.  What are the ethics involved in such research?  All this packed in an interactive video game scenario where, in the final moments of the story you are in a unique position to either tell the truth, make up a lie, or propagate an ideology that affects the end scene. 

Another topic i found to be interesting was the literacy of digitalization.  How it affects youth in the critical stages of development and how it affects the structure and budget of the academic world.  This class is a wonderful example of the mixed media and interactivity we are reading about through out the weeks.  Like in Kohl's writing the history of text is really ever changing, such as in the wiki world.  One prime example is Julian Assange with his leaking of information wires between countries.  If he were to do this in book form I doubt it would have half the impact as it being instantaneously published online, with the ability to add to his body of leaks.  The same for wikipedia, the search for truth is constantly being added to by US! The internet is THEE book and the world is it's authors.  Cool analogy?

I know I spend more time disseminating and engrossing my self through the internet then through books.  Is this true for you?
 

Mishra and Wolf

These two readings were slightly difficult to trudge through.  On Mishra's article much of what we see in illustrations can be deceiving. One example is the color coded three dimensional figures used to represent a cell and it's organelles.  While these illustrations are useful in biology, the reality is a cell does not look so organized and color coded as people are taught through the illustrations.  People more often than not see an image in light of a passerby without much thought, which is quite different than the way we analyze texts, which is the meat of how information is interpreted in academic settings.  With t.v. and advertisements galore, people don't examine or think critically of how they are targeted as a consumer.  

The difference of the psychology of the arts and the sociology of sciences in Mishra's article was also interesting. I side with the psychology of arts interpretation, that individual cognition and how Arnheim "sees artistic activity as a form of reasoning, in which perceiving and thinking are indivisibly intertwined."  He goes on to state that laboratory demonstrations and diagrams found in text books are not scientific statements, but rather illustrations of scientific statements, whereas in are the image or illustration IS the statement. 

I tend to find my-self expression through my own experiences making the statements and my own response is the artistic creativity through reason and thought.  When it comes to the sociology of sciences it makes me think of just regurgitating everything we learn in a uniform and conformed way. 


One thing I thought was extraordinary was how many tests take place using simulations.  The fact that a pilot can receive a license without ever flying, or that cars were tested through a simulation, and even computers themselves are put through a simulation is fascinating on how this affects reality.  Will education become a simulation?  So many of our perceptional experiences are now being replaced by conceptual abstractions.  Are there inherent dangers involved in this switch?  Or is it just inevitable being in the midst of a digital revolution?  With a heavy reliance on computer simulations in institutions of industry, medicine, law, and science, the margin for error is slim, especially with human lives in the balance. 

Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the larger role computer simulations in our lives?

(i hope they make computer simulations of video games...virtual reality that you actually have to run to run and use your physical body to move in the virtual world) 

Wysocki it to me baybay...(a pun on a movie line)

I really dug on Kant in the Wysocki article.  It was interesting how she labeled his philosophical tendencies as gendered, due to how he thought at the time, combined with how women were perceived as not being able to have universal judgments.  I frankly do not see his philosphy in this light.  Kant speaks of universals that are beautiful because they align with our nature and is formally inherent in the object.  I can't tell in the article if she is attacking Kant's philosophy of recognizing beauty or not.  I would have to say I disagree with Wysocki when she quotes the "irony" Mary Shelley points out  that Kant's freedom of aesthetics leaves no room for the family, love, or pleasure.  Families are the universal structure to life so how does it leave no room for the love or pleasure of the family.  One could walk down the street and see a family of six and see the beauty in the bonds they share.  I can understand her argument about the particularity that is lacking when an object is formally abstracted and generalized to some universal truth.  In these certain cases where she lists TV, magazines, ads, etc...I think she is missing the boat because what is portrayed in these advertisements of our day, in my opinion, is not a Kantian universal ideal of beauty. 

I can see where she is going with her argument towards the end, and in some cases I agree that a more particulate and temporal understanding of beauty takes place between two people can be more beneficial, rather than some distant abstract form that every person needs to be modeled around or is deemed faulty or imperfect. The abstract form is the perfect curvature and waistline combined with an unblemished face which is prioritized over the beauty found in the old person who has lived a life, or a not so perfect person who is trying their best to achieve their dreams.  I agree that our popular culture espouses the first mode of abstract perfectionism with it's models that must fit a certain category or a photo-shopped impeccable complexion.  I definitely think that Kant's universal truths found in nature are much more appreciative of true beauty and I feel like Wysocki confuses it with the current trends and fashions of our time, which tend to objectify women.


WHEW....! I hope i got some ideas across.  Now to Bernhart, whom I thought did a clear and concise job of telling me why the Wetlands paper was so eye catching, in a non-visual way of writing.  Very clever that he wrote of it so well in such a manner.  Interestingly at the end he noted how no english classes teach both ways of crafting documents and related how digital age media REQUIRES it!  With screens everywhere, especially portable ones, it is important to be able to get your point across in the amount of space you have with out having to scroll down.  That first eye catching glimpse of the screen will either captivate the viewer or the viewer will ignore the page and search for something else.  The diagram of Visual Organization of Written Texts is actually quite fascinating.  The importance of the visual Gestalts in both the visually and non-visually informativetexts  is almost like a Kantian universal!!! By that I mean most every professional visual and non-visual informative text are written or drafted with these understandings that if they form their texts these ways that they will captivate most any human audience.    Great articles!


Signing off now, CIAO!

P.s. Can anyone guess what movie my the quote in my title is a pun of?  Let me know if you need hints ; )

When reading Jones article I found myself relating his writings to my own experience, and alas what else would I blog about? The concept of "inter-activity" is how most all young people experience the multi-modal landscape of the web.  Having multiple browers up either all on the same line of thinking or totally different strains of thought.  How people are perceived and the actions they take are summed up in audience segregation, where as a person can tailor their post to their intended audience in order to be perceived in a communicative way.  I know that when I post a Ron Paul video on Facebook that a certain group of my friends will respond to that video and we can generate some form of conversation, whereas this video may alienate me from different groups of friends who would comment on a less political video.  This brings into light the Attention economy, the fact that the more attention your post or video can garner the more "credible" it is.  With Cognitive attention one can spread his attention span over through means of a computer, and the Social attention one must have in order to be able to communicate.  People will only respond to what they feel they can relate to, unfortunately it is the popular culture that people will respond to more often than not.  Most of the time when one's post contains intellectual qualities it will not garner the same amount of responses as the bit about popular culture.  It may receive as many posts, but from whom I would receive comments from would be a more narrow audience than if posting something about popular culture. 


Since I have begun to touch on Williams I have begun to notice how I view pages and summarizing who those people are based on what they post on their page.  The relationships I have online are superflous at times and also can be quite shallow.  The amount of people who see what I post online is quite strange in the fact that I haven't seen these people in years yet I can know, to some extent, what is going on in that person's life.  All the while they would have no idea that I had even visited their page.  It is akin to being a detective, a super-sleuth with access to the interpersonal relationships in peoples lives by simple clicks of the mouse.  Sometimes it is awkward to post on someones page you haven't spoken to for years, or for that matter to introduce yourself through facebook to a person. Are these going to be fruitful relationships?  Do the facebook friends take away from our relationship with our "physical" friends? I have experienced a strengthening of certain relationships and a strain or distance from others.  What I truly love about the social media aspect is the little intricacies it takes to get a point across with your own personality.  The fact that you are putting yourself out there within a context that is fully accessible to anyone with an opinion who can voice it on your page whether you like it or not.  This is a great!  Anyone can challenge anyone, or multiple, idea(s) at a time. 

How does facebook or other social media sites bolster your relationships with your friends? How does it help form your identity?


Someone please comment!