[-empyre-] An "other" view of writing

Sat Oct 10 11:45:04 EST 2009

Hi Yvonne,

Thanks for your thought provoking posts.

I just want to interject that for us, the most important  
juxtaposition is not wiki/blog, but print book/net book. Yes, there  
are many problems regarding web 2.0 hype, but the possibilities  
offered by these technologies present alternative modes of writing,  
reading and publishing. Regardless of whether people choose to  
contribute their ideas to Networked, the fact that they have the  
option is a first step.

Furthermore, I don't think "encyclopaedic and factual" and "ongoing  
thought, theory in progress" are that clear cut. In my introductory  
post, I tried to make the point that what was encyclopaedic and  
factual for some was not so for the majority. Most people believe  
what they read in "nonfiction" books, so what passes as fact matters  
a lot. There's nothing scientific about selecting which artists  
should have a place in history, yet what passes into history is often  
given the same weight.

<<Are we moving towards  heterogenous cultures of different voices or  
are we shaped into becoming one global homogenous mass? And, where is  
our responsibility?>>

Compared to what? How much creative freedom do painters have with  
their materials: oil/acrylic/watercolor? linen/cotton canvas? Given  
all of the materials available in today's market, Ndbele women still  
use beads and thread in their crafts; it is tied to their tribal  
identity. Are they a mindless mass or are they simply insuring that  
their customs survive. Do they feel confined by the limits of their  
medium? I don't think so. In my opinion, WP blogs offer as much or   
more potential as paint/canvas, beads/thread.

Finally, one of the motivations for this discussion on -empyre- was  
to get the word out about Networked; I was becoming concerned that so  
few people were leaving their comments. What can we do to encourage  
people to get involved? How will we evaluate the project's success?  
How long should we wait before we decide that it's a failure?

Warm Regards,
Jo

On Oct 8, 2009, at 6:56 PM, Yvonne Martinsson wrote:

> Hi Anna,
>
> The reason I responded to the discussion was mainly that I thought it
> was sidetracked by whether to choose a wiki or a blog for the
> networked book. I find it more interesting to read the contributors
> response to what a networked book is and how they relate to
> collaborating on writing a text that is not encyclopaedic and factual
> but rather an ongoing thought, a theory in progress and so on.
> Networked  collaboration is, I'd say, another Web 2.0 hype which is
> why it's interesting to read real responses. The question is if it,
> in the final analysis, turns culture into a concensual homogeneity
> where the voices of the other cannot be heard.
>
> Same goes for templating and customization of web pages and, as you
> say, software shapes culture which is precisely why we have to have
> take a critical stance and not accept uncritical assumptions that
> turn into concensus that turns into truths. Who determines the shapes
> culture takes? We, that is the users, or the software engineers?
> Isn't it one of the great illusions of the internet that a bit of
> customization of templates contributes to cultural diversity and
> heterogeneity while we actually all learn to speak in one voice. As
> form is content, one could even claim that Mr Themes is our most
> prolific author.
>
> I have today implemented my first Wordpress install and it's a
> strange feeling being so at the mercy of a templating system. I apply
> a ready-made form that steeps us all into the same mould. There is
> not much room for creativity and hence for development, but it's we
> who should develop the internet and the shape writing and other
> cultural expressions take. Hence the software we choose matters,
> unless we want to reinvent the wheel and start from scratch by
> developing our own blog for instance.
>
> These two issues, how people respond to networked collaboration and
> how software not only shapes culture but also our thinking and modes
> of expression, are somehow interrelated. Are we moving towards
> heterogenous cultures of different voices or are we shaped into
> becoming one global homogenous mass? And, where is our responsibility?
>
> Best
> Yvonne
>
>
> 8 okt 2009 kl. 22.25 skrev Anna Munster:
>
>> Hi Yvonne,
>> thanks for your post. You are right to point out that the initial
>> attraction of wiki's was the 'real time' collaborative edit
>> function and you also stated that:
>>
>> <Both formats rely on the same technology.>
>>
>> That's possibly true as well but that's also like saying everything
>> on the web used to rely on HTML. That doesn't mean we had a
>> homogeneous web in terms of its architecture or 'technics'. I use
>> the word technics here as opposed to 'technology' because I am not
>> so much interested in the wiki or blog software per se. Rather I am
>> interested in the ways in which that software 'shapes' forms of
>> culture because the culture deploys it 'prosthetically'. Please
>> note I am scare-quoting these words because in the history of media
>> studies they  take on a deterministic flavour, which isn't what I
>> want to invoke. Instead I see technics as the ongoing
>> interrelations between cultures and technologies (shaping and
>> prostheses are processual rather than pre-formed actions and
>> things), out of which modes of doing media arise. So, the
>> interrelation between the architecture of wiki's (which is
>> sprawling at the back end of things), their uptake by, initially
>> small collaborative project-based groups
>>   and collectives, their 'capture' by an encyclopaedic urge
>> (Wikipedia), their sharing of a resource by a mass heterogenous
>> user base consisting of a meshwork of open and closed systems and
>> practices (again Wikipedia/media)....this constitutes the (ongoing)
>> technics of wikis.
>>
>> Blogs, on the other hand, have a very different technics and,
>> especially, their uptake due to the 'templatization' of the web
>> under web 2.0, would have to be one of their most salient aspects.
>> Olia Lialina's work on this is very good (http://www.contemporary-
>> home-computing.org/vernacular-web-2/), as is Geert Lovink's book
>> Zero Comments.
>>
>> Insofar as your comment goes:
>>
>> < It's an industry.>
>>
>> I couldn't agree more!!
>>
>> best Anna
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

Jo-Anne Green
Co-Director
New Radio and Performing Arts, Inc.
917.548.7780 or 617.522.3856
Turbulence: http://turbulence.org
Networked_Performance: http://turbulence.org/blog
Networked_Music_Review: http://turbulence.org/networked_music_review
Networked: http://networkedbook.org
New American Radio: http://somewhere.org
Upgrade! Boston: http://turbulence.org/upgrade_boston

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20091009/d5066880/attachment.html 