2.11.2004
Manovich talks about how postindustial logic ("production on demand", individuality over conformity) effects new media. He details how we can customize our lifestlyes (hyperlinks, variability) to not feel programmed, but as programmer. He goes on to exhibit the cyclic nature of new media. First, computer culture is created in the context of current postindustrial logic. Next, he displays how computer culture/logic goes on to significantly effect traditional cultural logic. On pg. 61 he explains how cinema and fashion ask us to identify with someone elses body, while interactive media asks us to identify with someone elses mental structure. Whose mental structure?
What I wonder is where is his political analysis? As much as this arguement is logical, it leaves out capitalism's effect on technology, computer culture, and cultural assumptions. Another project we looked at, Grasping @ Bits(Walker cite), demonstrates some analysis of how big business shapes the type of interatction we have with new media in important ways. Another example is the eToy story. The capitalist globalized culture that new media is being developed in shapes the mental structure we are to see through. However, progressive net art presents alternatives modes to see. Net_Condition states that all of this changes how we play, communicate, remember, gain knowledge. Net art becomes a new form to display, to be a representation of this new reality.
I personally enjoyed Vadim Fishkin and Tanja Vujinovic's art at the Slovenian link. Both used superimposed image on image to depict a another idea. His self -potrait and photosynthesis project rawked. Her fairy tale and projections did, too. Most of the net art I came across was political. Most of the stuff at the Walker cite was really political too (Airworld was super Marxist). Returning to my orginal example, Voyd's Grasping @ Bits, we see an experiment in information design. It clearly illustrates this point of thinking through someone elses mental structure. He creates five simultaneous modes to think through. Furthermore, its outside of postindustrial logic, thus political; breaking boundries in how we think/see.
(ps sorry i cant be in class: soopah ill: see ya'll next week)
What I wonder is where is his political analysis? As much as this arguement is logical, it leaves out capitalism's effect on technology, computer culture, and cultural assumptions. Another project we looked at, Grasping @ Bits(Walker cite), demonstrates some analysis of how big business shapes the type of interatction we have with new media in important ways. Another example is the eToy story. The capitalist globalized culture that new media is being developed in shapes the mental structure we are to see through. However, progressive net art presents alternatives modes to see. Net_Condition states that all of this changes how we play, communicate, remember, gain knowledge. Net art becomes a new form to display, to be a representation of this new reality.
I personally enjoyed Vadim Fishkin and Tanja Vujinovic's art at the Slovenian link. Both used superimposed image on image to depict a another idea. His self -potrait and photosynthesis project rawked. Her fairy tale and projections did, too. Most of the net art I came across was political. Most of the stuff at the Walker cite was really political too (Airworld was super Marxist). Returning to my orginal example, Voyd's Grasping @ Bits, we see an experiment in information design. It clearly illustrates this point of thinking through someone elses mental structure. He creates five simultaneous modes to think through. Furthermore, its outside of postindustrial logic, thus political; breaking boundries in how we think/see.
(ps sorry i cant be in class: soopah ill: see ya'll next week)
