[-empyre-] Welcome to Week 3 on -empyre-: Internet/Online Representation

Murat Nemet-Nejat muratnn at gmail.com
Wed Apr 22 22:51:37 AEST 2015

Ben, I have read the Schwitzgebel essay. As a piece of analysis, it has so
many holes that I do not know where to begin. First, the variations among
statistical results, even among studies done during the same period, are so
big that they are basically meaningless. The similarities may lie in the
eye of the beholder.

Second hole is in the term "black-and-white movies." Who says black and
white movies are black and white? They are made with multiple, in the good
ones endless, varieties of shades between these two (purely black or purely
white is very rarely the color of a black-and-white movies). Very often,
they are these subtle gradations that create the quality (one might say the
aura) of black and white movies. "Film noir" are not films with no colors,
only that their color palette is more austere. Purely based on this fact,
the question "do people dream in color or not" by connecting them to the
history of film is based on a false analogy, seduced by the incidental fact
that these thirties and earlier films (and photographs) are called "black
and white." The mind plays the addictional (a revealing typo here) trick
and forgets that "black" and "white" themselves are colors.

This brings me to the third point. We talk of dreams with words; that is
what we have of them. In a very perceptive comment in the essay, someone
says, for example, that one may say that he/she dreamt of his/her sister
without what is dreamt looking at all like the sister. What we have, and
call dream, is the word "sister" that feels true. The word (what we have)
is separated from the dream that remains elusive, unreachable, equally true.


On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:41 PM, B. Bogart <ben at ekran.org> wrote:

> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> Hello Soraya,
> Phantasmal Media looks very interesting, thanks for mentioning it. I
> have many questions now after this brief introduction and perusing the
> book description on the MIT press website. By virtue of computational
> media being "expressive" does not also imply it's imbued with ideology?
> Personally, I see computation as any other media, imbued with
> affordances that privilege particular uses. (This is getting close to
> another -empyre- topic on tools.) The notion of "phantasms" is very
> resonant in the context of my interest in mind wandering and dreaming as
> processes of internal simulation (imagining oneself in different
> scenarios). I have wondered whether all media are externalizations of
> these processes of internal simulation. This is especially interesting
> when one considers the links between black and white narrative media and
> dreams (for details, see footnote *). It seems reasonable that identity
> would play into this, as we could even consider self itself as a
> function of social interactions and the sense of other as other and not
> environment.
> There is clearly an issue with diversity of viewpoints and values in
> computation and I have often wondered about how operating systems would
> be designed if computers originated outside of the western world.
> * Schwitzgebel, E. (2002). Why did we think we dreamed in black and
> white? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 33(4),
> 649–660. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/267/1/dreamb&w010430.pdf
> Ben
> On 15-04-21 02:43 PM, Soraya Murray wrote:
> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space---------------------- Thanks to
> > Anna and Ben for jumping in and engaging so much!
> >
> > I hope for more of this -- and of course there is much room for
> > vigorous debate, especially in such an interdisciplinary gathering.
> > And, insofar as new media is concerned, learning what the key debates
> > around the interstices of identity are—and how to even give adequate
> > expression to them—is still in process. I'm excited that -empyre- is
> > supporting this, and encourage other listeners to join in.
> >
> > One of the recent texts I've been chewing on, as regards the
> > relationship between computer science and specific subjectivities is
> > D. Fox Harrell's recent work, Phantasmal Media (2013). Though I am in
> > a different discipline, and it is clearly directed toward a computer
> > science audience, I'm very interested in the way it asserts that all
> > media (including computational) are expressive, and that they
> > construct and manifest "phantasms". He describes phantasms not as
> > specters, but as "combinations of mental images and and ideology
> > constructed  by embodied, distributed, and situated cognitive
> > processes" (343) and "cognitive phenomena that include sense of self,
> > metaphors, social categories, narrative, and poetic thinking— [that]
> > influence almost all our everyday experiences."  (from the book
> > description) Among his many arguments, he seems to advocate for
> > considering the centrality of this while a computational system is
> > being developed, to allow for expanded potentials around how we think
> > about and include a broader range of cultural norms and capacities.
> > This strikes me as a direct and also very unabashed statement about
> > the cultural narrowness of existing systems, and a call to do
> > better-- but it's all within the language of computational science.
> >
> > As someone in visual studies, this is an approach that differs from
> > how I might come at it. In my own discipline, we've long since
> > understood how subjectivity plays its role in and through expressions
> > within our own objects of study (though we may debate the degree to
> > which it should inform our understanding). But Harrell's work seems
> > to represent an intervention into issues of representation and
> > identity politics at play in computational media. At the very least,
> > he puts ideology at the center of a conversation that usually places
> > it at the activist fringe.  It's not my intention to "cheerlead" for
> > this text, and it may be that this intervention has been made in
> > other areas of software studies. However, my experience of software
> > studies theorization (except, perhaps, Wendy Chun) definitely falls
> > squarely into formal discussion.
> >
> > Soraya
> >
> >
> > ___________________________ Soraya Murray, Ph.D. Assistant Professor
> >  Film + Digital Media Department University of California, Santa
> > Cruz
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________ empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au http://empyre.library.cornell.edu
> >
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au
> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20150422/a556ecc1/attachment.html>

More information about the empyre mailing list