3.02.2004
Reax to Lovink's Dark Fiber
Essay on Speculative Media Theory:
This chapter is very informational, if frustrating. Lovink makes numerous good points the nature of "new" media and how theory have affected its progress. However, Lovink does an awful job of clearly spelling out what German media theory is, what its relation to theory and cultural studies are, exactly what effect Heidegger, Foucault, Lacan, Nietzche and the rest are having on modern day media. On numerous occasions, Lovink appeared to be on the brink of a very interesting explanation of some the above mentioned (for example, Lacan and the question of language); but instead he added just one or two more semi-explanatory sentences before moving on to some tangential thought on pop culture or Siemens salesmen. In short, I was interested, buy wanted to hear a lot more.
The Virtual Intellectual:
I take issue with Lovink's criticism of Said's notion of the intellectual's role. I agree with the author's contention that "What is missing [in Said's argument] is an analysis of the dramatic changes in the public sphere itself" (33). He goes on to describe a domain formerly considered "public" consisting of streets, squares, parks, et cetera, that are no longer public because they are constantly under surveillance. Even if this is true (which is extremely debatable), the role of Said's intellectual as a "moral agent" is not depleted. It can, if one wishes it to be, be enhanced. The intellectual can serve a more important role to grow the debate between the constantly observed citizen and the state, which has a monopoly on aggressive observation and other forms of force. And by the way, please explain to me exactly how the days of Foucault's discursive regimes are over. I'd love to hear about it. In sum, 99% of what Lovink says in this chapter is incredibly provocative, but he is to forceful in his arguments ("The fact is that the intellectual as opinion leader is losing ground") and fails to supply sufficient evidence to back himself up. If the VI is so hell-bent on not representing the off-line population (The Other) then there is clearly room left in this tiny world for the traditional intellectual.
The Digital City:
Lovink's anecdote about the internet and public access media in Amsterdam in this chapter is informational, but continues Dark Fiber's trend of focusing on media culture in a small corner of the world called northern Europe. All the more reason for the traditional intellectual to exist: to represent the rest of the world. Again he makes good points, but in a parochial framework. Tell me about the Middle East, Africa, India, Asia, Latin America, the Balkans. Tell me about "The Other." If Lovink wants to focus the study on one singular and specific plot of land, that's fine, but he should also qualify his sweeping generalizations as such. Now that I'm through with that rant, I should, in fairness, says the DDS story was extremely telling and a great case study on new forms of (and potential for) democracy.
Moderation:
I honestly got little out of the first 10 pages or so of this chapter. It seemed a bit self-indulgent on Lovink's part. However, on page 83, when he began talking of a mailing list as a "grey zone" in which information is not being published per se (because it is not a website), but rather circulated. His talk of authors pre-publishing essays was new to me. "Copyright is not the must urgent issue here, but the buildup of trust between subscribers. This bond is based on face to face contacts and mutual friendships" (84). If only life with EMI were this simple.
This chapter is very informational, if frustrating. Lovink makes numerous good points the nature of "new" media and how theory have affected its progress. However, Lovink does an awful job of clearly spelling out what German media theory is, what its relation to theory and cultural studies are, exactly what effect Heidegger, Foucault, Lacan, Nietzche and the rest are having on modern day media. On numerous occasions, Lovink appeared to be on the brink of a very interesting explanation of some the above mentioned (for example, Lacan and the question of language); but instead he added just one or two more semi-explanatory sentences before moving on to some tangential thought on pop culture or Siemens salesmen. In short, I was interested, buy wanted to hear a lot more.
The Virtual Intellectual:
I take issue with Lovink's criticism of Said's notion of the intellectual's role. I agree with the author's contention that "What is missing [in Said's argument] is an analysis of the dramatic changes in the public sphere itself" (33). He goes on to describe a domain formerly considered "public" consisting of streets, squares, parks, et cetera, that are no longer public because they are constantly under surveillance. Even if this is true (which is extremely debatable), the role of Said's intellectual as a "moral agent" is not depleted. It can, if one wishes it to be, be enhanced. The intellectual can serve a more important role to grow the debate between the constantly observed citizen and the state, which has a monopoly on aggressive observation and other forms of force. And by the way, please explain to me exactly how the days of Foucault's discursive regimes are over. I'd love to hear about it. In sum, 99% of what Lovink says in this chapter is incredibly provocative, but he is to forceful in his arguments ("The fact is that the intellectual as opinion leader is losing ground") and fails to supply sufficient evidence to back himself up. If the VI is so hell-bent on not representing the off-line population (The Other) then there is clearly room left in this tiny world for the traditional intellectual.
The Digital City:
Lovink's anecdote about the internet and public access media in Amsterdam in this chapter is informational, but continues Dark Fiber's trend of focusing on media culture in a small corner of the world called northern Europe. All the more reason for the traditional intellectual to exist: to represent the rest of the world. Again he makes good points, but in a parochial framework. Tell me about the Middle East, Africa, India, Asia, Latin America, the Balkans. Tell me about "The Other." If Lovink wants to focus the study on one singular and specific plot of land, that's fine, but he should also qualify his sweeping generalizations as such. Now that I'm through with that rant, I should, in fairness, says the DDS story was extremely telling and a great case study on new forms of (and potential for) democracy.
Moderation:
I honestly got little out of the first 10 pages or so of this chapter. It seemed a bit self-indulgent on Lovink's part. However, on page 83, when he began talking of a mailing list as a "grey zone" in which information is not being published per se (because it is not a website), but rather circulated. His talk of authors pre-publishing essays was new to me. "Copyright is not the must urgent issue here, but the buildup of trust between subscribers. This bond is based on face to face contacts and mutual friendships" (84). If only life with EMI were this simple.
