[-empyre-] eventuality: what categories could be used to think of current real time phenomena?

[Marcus Bastos]

hi -empyrians,

I am following the discussion on new media theory, and would like to contribute with a reflection on the concept of eventuality.  I've written a bit about it, so I am pasting pieces of an article to be presented in HCI2014, and would be interested in discussing aspects of the concept and possible applications. Summing up, the concept of eventuality should be broad enough to describe things that occur as a result of a real-time input, and I am using it to connect thinks small and trivial such as a comment on a social network and an uprising in public space, considering that an important aspect of both things are their "real-timeness", the fact that they happen in a situation in which immediate inputs and reaction are constantly rearranging their flow. I have been reflecting about the topic for a while, but my initial steps were more related with reading and discussing thinkers that coined concepts that could be used to analyze real-time phenomena from a broader perspective. My interest was to build a critical vocabulary to work with contemporary performance, etc, drawing from "external" theories as a way to find new angles to discuss it. On this process, I ended up reflecting a lot about the relationship of social media and public gatherings (which became unavoidable, in a sense, specially after SP17J in Brazil). So the topic of media in public space, which was a main focus of attention for several years, and this new topic of real-time events and related languages somehow converged to this broader category of "events" (that I borrowed from Moran and his concept of "evénement"). At the moment, I am working on the hypothesis that it would be possible to work on a concept of "eventuality" to describe a broader set of semiotic processes that are related with events and how they trigger flows (this can also include improvisation in music and audiovisual performance, or generative events). I am aware that this is considerably broad, and I am not necessarily interested in focusing on all phenonema that could be covered by this universe of "eventualities", but I think that identifying then in such heterogenous examples could be an indicative that the concept touches something essential to the current functioning of languages (considering that being "networked" and "digital" became default). I would be very interested in hearing comments and thoughts about the applicability of such a concept, and broadening relations of it with related concepts that go beyond this initial scope. Hoping to find others interest in related topics here!

................ excerpt 1 ................ 

Contemporary society is increasingly defined by real-time events. Auto-publication systems and other platforms that allow instant commenting and sharing of content allow processes of communication in which collective updating, contextual framing and immediate reactions result in environments which are constantly evolving. Such environments behave according to custom settings, that make then specifc to each and every user. User and location, among other variables, generate unique renderings of such systems. For that reason, they are not only acessed in real-time, but manifest that particular confguration only in that specifc moment and context. This is applicable to every forms of networked mediations, though particularities of photos, sounds or videos means that specialized systems have proper characteristics according to their emphasis (be it hosting a collection of posts, sharing sets of images, or mananing clips and playlists). Similiarly to Heraclitus famous quote, it could be said that nobody acess the same Facebook, Twitter, Youtube or Pininterest page twice. 

................ excerpt 2 ................ 
Events that occur in real time tend to be associated with immediacy. The word implies non-mediation, which might sound obvious but is worth mentioning, for the sake of the argument developed below. The diffculties of defning real-time will not be addressed on this article, since this would be material enough to generate a completely new one1. The existence of a shared, reasonably consensual, perception of a mutual and networked present that unfolds, as people interact with it, will be considered enough justifcation to discuss design possibilities to develop devices and interfaces that gather or edit data both on networks or wired cities. As Douglas Rushkoff puts it, in Present Shock, our “society has reoriented itself to the present moment. Everything is live, real time, and always-on. It's not a mere speeding up, however much our lifestyles and technologies have accelerated the rate at which we attemp to do things. It's more of a diminishment of anything that isn't happening right now — and the onslaught of everything that supposedly is”2.

This perception happens nowadays as a result of an over-mediated environment, and despite the fact that ancient and newer forms of transmission equally mediate language in real-time. Nothing happens out of the bubble of present, so there is a paradox not to be disconsidered when we put emphasis on the real-timeness of current media processes. A not so obvious example of real-time mediation is an instrument, that amplifes sound waves and transmits them in form of vibrations in the air. A more explicitly mediated one is the satellite, that codifes audiovisual signals and transmits them (again, in form of aerial waves!) to a TV set. On both situations, the moment in which the mediated element is generated (either the sound or the TV image) almost coincides with the moment in which it is perceived by its recipient (either the listener of the sound or the TV watcher). So, what are the differences on recente processes of mediation, that results in a valorization of real-time phenomenas and instantaneity?

Contemporary technologies are more explicitly perceived as real-time mediations because they depend on user agency. Simultaneity seems to be more easily identifed in processes that happens by means of shared actions, where the passive position is non existant. That happens because the idea of presence is culturally associated with body participation: one is present when its body testifes an occurency or interferes on it. And bodily actions are usually understood as distinct from device based actions: the body is perceived as immediate, devices are perceived as mediators. This understanding of presence as a bodily positioning endures, despite experiences such as that of a phone call. Since the 19th century people interact from a distance. Yet, the several forms of telepresence known throughout history did not radically change the assumption of presence as a bodily feature, until very recently.

The effect of augmented proximity produced by superimposing body, architecture and technology is enhanced by the experience of using interfaces that change, according to context and user profle. Environments that act in conformity with contextual parameters resemble organisms, in their capacity to adjust to situations. Technologies such as VOIP and social networks amplify the effect of a body that is, at the same time, remote and present. These mediated modes of presence reconfgure oral modes of communication, recursively mirroring through technological effects of sharing experiences in modes that were more akin to oral culture and its communal rituals of conversational exchanges. When touching a screen becomes as personal as talking with someone, people on the other side of the planet become more intimate than neighbours. With the aid of screens that transport (visual and sonore) fragments of a living room through high bandwith connections, over there can become closer than right here. 


ps. If there is further interest in the topic, I could also post a bit about the authors and concepts wich I am using to build up a "state of art" of "eventualities (examples are Morin, Deleuze, Atlan, but also authors that thought more explicity about languages in real time, such Auslander and Salter)

.............
http://contradiccoes.net

On 17/05/2014, at 00:55, Renate Terese Ferro <rferro at cornell.edu> wrote:

> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> During the last week or so we have using the writing of Geert Lovink, Alex Galloway, Ken Wark, and Eugene Thacker to consider new approaches to media theory. Lovink in his blog post in the journal e-flux cynically brands the three authors of Excommunication as “the New York three.” Galloway is Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at NYU’s Steinhardt School, while Wark and Thacker both have appointments at the New School in media related programs.  Despite their similar geographic location Lovink insists that it is not necessary or important to parse new media theories through comparative geographic distributions. 
> 
> Interestingly in the same university as Thacker and Wark is Anne Balsamo, Dean of the School of Media Studies.  Anne Balsamo with T.L. Cowan and Veronica Paredes also at the New School, Lisa Nakamura from the University of Michigan and Liz Losh of UC Irvine join a collective of over a hundred feminist media artists, theorists, and scholars named FemTechNet. FemTechNet is currently planning a workshop in June at simultaneous sites in NYC, Ann Arbor, and Santa Monica.  Organizers will also include online participants.  
> 
> This collective is rethinking not only new pedagogical possibilities but how looking at the historically rich past of science and technology with a feminist lens can formulate new and innovative theories of making and teaching.  Not grounded in the hierarchical structures that universities often are modeled, this collective uses  collaborations in discussions, writing, and teaching. Can those theorizing media today take a lesson from feminist traditions?  This collective seems to think so and insists that women have long been outspoken promoters of cultural, ethical, and socially engaged developments and innovations in science, technology, and media. 
> 
> I give the “New York three” credit for proposing a novel way to consider media but the X in Excommunication must not X out gender and race issues.  FemTechNet have published this statement as to why their task is vital. 
> 
> “As technology remakes academia and the arts, critical analysis of gender, sexualities, and race have been absent in much of this re-thinking of disciplines and practices. Since the early years of Internet availability, cyberfeminists have explored the use of the Internet for dialogue and participation across various socio-economic contexts.  Access and skills for women and people from economically and technologically underserved communities (such as populations from the developing world and inner cities of the U.S.) were central concerns for feminists in developing distributed and participatory environments for learning, training and information exchange.  Since the mid 1990s, cyberfeminists have developed and refined methods for inclusive teaching. But well before then, dating back centuries, women and feminists have been actively engaged in the creation of technological innovations and have been vocal advocates for the development of socially responsible, ethical, and culturally-attuned technological development and deployment.”
> 
> Politically, socially, ethically, culturally engaged media making, teaching, and theorizing is critical in this era after Edward Snowden's revelations. It was almost one year ago on June 5, 2013 that Snowden launched the first of his security breaches.  It will be on June 9th that FemTechNet meets collectively to consider what might be ahead. 
> 
> Renate
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140517/91dd7981/attachment.htm>