Reactions to The Silent History, "Reagan Library" and "That Sweet Old Etcetera"

The Silent History - Various

An intriguing blend of storytelling, story-creating, and interactivity. This is possibly one of the best digital objects I've seen, from a production standpoint. The real-world feel of it as a narrative combined with the ability to both access field reports at certain locations written by others and to create reports of one's own for others to access is clever, allowing the underlying story to remain but be supplemented in as many ways as there are extra tidbits to read. Fully crowd-sourced fiction can be sporadic in quality, as in any collaborative project involving dissimilar people and styles thrown together, but the core narrative is amazing as a stand-alone. It's beautifully put together in a technical sense. The blend of traditional text and pseudo-presentation/documentary mixes well, lending it a credence beyond standard fiction. The sheer spectrum of options open to this medium adds something to the art of storytelling that print-only narratives cannot match. Not better, but as good, certainly, and with amazing potential.

"Reagan Library" - Stuart Moulthrop

This would have gone better, I think, if it were meant for a modern platform rather than IE 2 or Netscape. The description makes it sound like there was meant to be audio, forgive the phrase. Also, the point-and-click on objects to move thing didn't work, so hyperlink was the only way to navigate. Still, the ability to drag the screen around to get a 360-degree view was nice. Maybe because it was so silent but interactive, the object was interestingly creepy, and the randomly-generated text at points enhanced that. The feel of an odd systemic human/machine hybrid breakdown actually rather worked given the crippled abilities of the object itself. It feels a bit like this excellent passage from an excellent book. (from 301 to 302) What it didn't feel like was that it became more coherent (or sensible) as things progressed. Just more eloquently creepy/disassociative breakdown-y.

"That Sweet Old Etcetera" - Alison Clifford

This was a little bit beautiful. The medium made for an interesting and innovative illustration of the message. The interactivity, the musical tones, the lovely construction of the poems into a landscape...all brilliant. Hard to read at times, but in line with the spirit of Cummings' style. Can be a bit tricky to navigate without cheating using the tab button, or at least the swaying tree part was, but even that makes it a little playful, in keeping with the tone of the object. This is as much visual art as it is poetry, and it makes me think of the points brought up in Goldsmith's "It's Not Plagiarism. In the Digital Age, it's 'Repurposing.'" The core poetry may not be new, but the presentation of it certainly is, and all the better for being presented in a way commensurate with the message.

Reactions to the week's readings, praise and snark dispensed judiciously

"My Body a Wunderkammer" - Shelley Jackson

Clever and playful. Jackson's hyperlink-driven text reads like a series of narrative Wikipedia essays, in that the links come at random intervals within the context of the specific essay being read, but tie into the essay they link to. Her imagery is strong, personal, relatable, and gratifying. The idea of the body broken down to parts, with each not only having its own story, but tales that interweave with the other parts, just makes sense as a medium. After all, our pieces may have specific design purposes, but still rely on other parts. This piece is charming. As separate essays, each link stands alone well, and as a read-through/click-through whole, each integrates nicely. Any negative critiques I have are related to the coding, not the content, and never mind the hair-splitting about the coding being the content, etc. You know what I mean, and I see the two as distinctly separate. I'm old-fashioned that way.

"Index for X and the Origin of Fires" and "Neckdeep" - Ander Monson

I like the presentation of "Index" as its purported namesake. It disrupts the traditional narrative, but still lets you build a narrative from the individual "listings" that allows you to strike near the point. In this case, it also serves to make the experiences relayed more raw, harsher, since without the traditional predictable narrative it becomes harder to...well, predict...the incidents, and thus inure myself to it. Indices are presented at the end of something, which makes everything before, to which they are referenced, a series of memories, in effect. And memory is notorious in its lack of linear reliability. To relive a trauma, one doesn't generally get lead down a safe narrative path, but is presented with it bluntly, across the mental face, full force. This piece succeeds at conveying that. A pity about the pictures, though. Those are just unpleasantly distracting.

As for "Neckdeep,"...eh. It's a card catalog. Clever. But Monson's favorite subject seems to be himself, and while that's forgivable when presented well, it's less enjoyable when the favorite subject is indulged in with the degree of smug self-satisfaction that radiates from the entries in the clever catalog concept. It's this, without the charm of the inherent satire of the personality portrayed.

"88 Constellations" - David Clark

Constellations are the culturally-accepted patterning of stars around culturally-accepted stories that we tell ourselves to make sense out of a universe which too often seems uncaring, incomprehensible, or downright hostile. A different set of cultural experiences would redraw the lines, but the stories would reduce down to the same few we share across the world, with minor changes to suit the tastes of the teller and the audience. "88 Constellations" is a website patterning stories from a man's life around constellations. The stories of that life are generally accepted, and told to make sense of the life surrounding them, to make that life as comprehensible to us as something uncaring, incomprehensible, or downright hostile can be. Different people encountering the subject of said stories might have told them differently, but they'd break down to the same stories in essence. I like to think that that's what Clark had in mind in his design, which is why the whole thing takes on a slightly wry, knowing tone.

"Pieces of Herself" - Juliet Davis

Obnoxious. Riotously obnoxious. Possibly meant to be? Was that the point? I feel I missed the point. If I wanted to parse content while being assaulted by random audio, especially when it layers to the point of being unlistenable, I'd still be browsing Angelfire and Geocities webpages. With the sound off, maybe I could better discern the "exploration of feminine embodiment and identity" the piece purports to offer, but given the crucial role the sound is apparently supposed to play, that doesn't seem likely to aid my understanding. Maybe this is beyond me because it just isn't my area of interest, beyond the fact of it being a digital object. Any socio-gendered discourse above the level of terms like "privilege" is pretty much beyond me, so the message of societal inscription, yadda yadda, is lost and wasted on me. Which just leaves the evaluation of this as a digital object. See the first word of the paragraph. Maybe a great message, but given the obnoxious medium, I don't feel compelled to hear it.

Reactions to Understanding Media and "Mr. Plimpton's Revenge"

His magnum opus

Dinty Moore’s Google Maps essay, “Mr. Plimpton’s Revenge,” is a novel and interesting use/subversion of the mapping technology. While maintaining a traditional narrative structure (assuming one clicks through in the order presented), the use of Google Maps adds an element of interactivity I found appealing. Being able to pinpoint the specific locations of the story adds a degree of narrative immediacy and context to what would otherwise be a semi-charming/amusing story told over cocktails.

 

The world's newest supervillain

After reading the selection from McLuhan’s Understanding Media, two concepts stood out as salient. The first, regarding the medium being the message, is harder to wrap my head around as presented. The TV is not what’s on the TV, YouTube is not what’s on YouTube, and so on, surely. I am not what I say, the singer is not what she sings. Then I took a step back, mentally, after hearing about something where the medium literally is the message. The pleasant scent of freshly-cut grass is actually a cry for help, a Bat (Bug) Signal if you will, meant to summon assistance from predatory insects for the beleaguered blades, saving them from the ravages of ruthless fauna. In this case, the medium (smell) is the message itself (help me, Bugman!), the two inextricably bound together. This fact served a useful purpose (aside from reconfirming my sense of moral superiority for never mowing) in that it gave me a platform from which to grasp the concept as applied to us.

Scaling that up and through the lenses of abstraction and self-interest that help define human motivation, I can see the truth in that how we present information can be as important, and say as much, as the actual information presented. How we offer something can inform or define what we’re offering, be it a speech, a sales pitch, a web-based show, etc. Simple marketing theory, right? I’d just clarify and say that the medium isn’t the whole of the message, but is a necessary part of it.

 

Gravitas

Let’s take the Netflix show, House of Cards. The simple message is the show itself, an American political drama. But the medium, the vehicle by which that message is conveyed, tells us more. First, the fact that it is a show original* to Netflix, not simply a re-airing of network television, is Netflix saying “Look, we can create new content! We’re relevant! Eat it, RedBox!” Second, the use of headliner Kevin Spacey reasserts the claim, telling us, “Hey, we got that American Beauty guy! We’re a serious entertainment contender, not some YouTube-haunting kitten video stalker!” And of course Kevin Spacey is himself letting us know that, “Hey, I can still get acting jobs, even after K-Pax! I’m still relevant! Did you know I’m a Serious Actor? I play the POTUS, for crissake!”

 

Suck Dynasty

The second concept, of hot vs. cold media, I can agree with, though McLuhan’s application of those labels shows the age of the work. TV may have been a cold medium in the 50’s, but these days, with the diversity of messages to be found, the TV itself is lukewarm, with the non-medium-messages being hot or cold, depending on intent and content. It can be argued that much of the available programming today leaves very little to the imagination, indeed shoving so much irrelevant crap at us (looking at you, reality television) that we drown in the banality of it. Or maybe that’s just my old age. Now get off my unmown lawn.

*By original, I mean a Netflix reboot of an originally English show which was actually originally a book. But still, not network.

Digital Humanities - A Loose Personal Working Defintion

What is "Digital Humanities," as a field of study? A simple answer from my beginner's perspective is the confluence of human expression and a digital medium. To elaborate on the first part, I would consider the fields inherently thought of as "humanities," notably communication/rhetoric, philosophy, language, art, music, literature...essentially, the ways in which we, as self-aware beings, try to reflect our awareness within and upon the world. As for the digital part, I interpret it to be the overall medium by and through which the other, more-traditional media are viewed, with an important note that in my view, the originating medium can be digital itself, or the various non-digital media, if the intended method of taking in the object is digital.

An example discussed in class, the animated gifs of Miley Cyrus twerking on (to?) various works of traditional art, comes to mind. While a crucial part of the piece is that artwork ("The Scream," for example), and that artwork originates in realspace (i.e. exists, was created in, and was meant to be viewed in the flesh-and-blood analog world), the electronic addition of Miley to the pictures creates a new object, one that offers a new perspective, or subtly or significantly subverts an established perspective. In short, the new thing created is human expression conveying an implicit or explicit commentary through an ultimately digital medium, and meant to be viewed as such.

                Another example that seems relevant is the e-book, or at least those available on the Amazon Kindle. Users can highlight passages, quotes, etc., and the Kindle will show those highlighted sections to others reading the same book. This creates a subtextual narrative beyond the scope of the book itself, as it reveals (or at least alludes to) the thoughts of another person on the book, telling us in an interactive way something of what they feel or think. Thus a digitized object becomes a digital object. Something new is created that takes place exclusively on a digital platform.



            It is easy to perceive that such a movement may and will have its detractors, especially amongst those deeming themselves traditional academics. It appears to be a new discipline, and that can be frightening and disruptive to the scholarly status quo. I feel that, however, that rather than being a new discipline, the field is better thought of as the same discipline, expanded slightly, utilizing new tools. Human expression, as a whole, has not changed. The vehicle for it may, but the urge remains regardless of the means. Co-opting a thought from Robert Heinlein’s The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, “can’t see it matters whether paths are protein or platinum.”