Kittler Online

http://www.electronicbookreview.com/thread/criticalecologies/future-anterior

Week7:::::::Group11

(Mazi, Ron, Ramy, Yung-Hoon)

We started our discussion with this question: whether the human-computer relation today is a symbiosis? Licklinder argues that in order to have a man-computer symbiosis we have to develop AI and computers must be able to participate in a real-time and formulative thinking. By what he describes as symbiosis we believe that today relation of man-computer is a symbiosis, as we both depend on each other, although AI is not developed they way that Licklinder describes. But we answered this with the fact that today’s computer is an extention of our senses as McLuhan described, thus it is not a dissimilar organism. But we must also consider this that when computers develop an AI to a level that it can be an organism of itself as it functions much faster than us, there is a chance of us being controlled by the machines of greater power.

At the end we drew a relation between the two text; in how they both describe a coded and computed way of activities, where Licklinder has a more emphasis on the physical activities and Flusser is more interested in the synthetic imagination and the zero dimentional process than can produce a 2D image or reproduce a 4D image in a 2D form.

Week7:::::::Group11

(Mazi, Ron, Ramy, Yung-Hoon)

We started our discussion with this question: whether the human-computer relation today is a symbiosis? Licklinder argues that in order to have a man-computer symbiosis we have to develop AI and computers must be able to participate in a real-time and formulative thinking. By what he describes as symbiosis we believe that today relation of man-computer is a symbiosis, as we both depend on each other, although AI is not developed they way that Licklinder describes. But we answered this with the fact that today’s computer is an extention of our senses as McLuhan described, thus it is not a dissimilar organism. But we must also consider this that when computers develop an AI to a level that it can be an organism of itself as it functions much faster than us, there is a chance of us being controlled by the machines of greater power.

At the end we drew a relation between the two text; in how they both describe a coded and computed way of activities, where Licklinder has a more emphesis on the physical activities and Flusser is more interested in the synthetic imagination and the zero dimentional process than can produce a 2D image or reproduce a 4D image in a 2D form.

Group 1 (Jason, Etienne, Bastien, Mohannad, Brent, & Jon)

The continuous development in computer technology has increasingly posed a significant change on modern man’s thought process and perception on visual culture. Through the availability of cost-effective steadfast processor machines, to almost every society in the world, has resulted in a significant change on how man approaches problems and interprets visual language. Having been written at a period where man-computer interaction was at a far more greater distance than of today, J.C.R. Licklider’s text Man-Computer Symbiosis, written in 1960, approaches the notion of man-computer cooperative interaction, in an optimistic and hyperactive fashion, outlining both the benefits the machines will provide to man’s work ethic, and as well as the problems this relation would potentially face in the future; particularly through conflicts between two separately structured languages. A more recent text authored by Jewish philosopher Vilem Flusser “A New Imagination”, discusses the considerable psychological effect digitzed images respond to our extended memory and imagination through an in depth discussion of involved gestures. The following collective response will react to the ideologies expressed in both texts by Licklidler and Flusser, focusing on the discussed themes of objective representation, imagination, language and interaction, and whether or not the given biased arguments reflect the opinions and views of our group.

Writing my reaction and interpretation of this week’s readings in textual language would be far more difficult and challenging through the “old fashioned” writing utensil and/or typewriter. Having the instant availability to digital online dictionaries, encyclopedias, thesauruses, word-processing integrated spell and grammar check, and of course this weeks assigned readings available through a query search, I am working faster and thinking less than I would have been two decades ago. Attempting to perform this task through the conventional pencil and paper, I would feel limited and illiberal with my sentiments and thoughts. In Licklider’s text, the author suggests that “one of the main aims of man-computer symbiosis is to bring the computing machine effectively into the formulative parts of technical problems.” (Licklider, 74, 1960) Through the given perspective of the benefits of word processing, this envisioned aim, of a relatively close relationship between man and machine, has certainly been achieved. Effectively coordinating the technical aspects of my ideas, I feel more liberal to express what I need to express and how to express it, recognizing that I have all these helpful and beneficial technologies instantly available to me. It seems evident that the cooperative interaction between man and a computer would greatly improve the thinking process. Intended to help man in almost any developmental practice, this ‘symbiotic’ relation is certainly a strong one, but not as robust as Licklider might have suggested in his thesis fourty-six years ago:
This cooperative “living together in intimate association, or even close union of two dissimilar organisms is called symbiosis … The resulting partnership will think as no human brain has ever thought and process data in a way not approached buy there information-handling machine we know today. (Licklider, pp. 75-76, 1960)

Collectively, as a group we feel the way Licklider’s forecasts man-computer symbiosis is a bit utopic, and at certain occasions, contradictory. This contradiction resides in the idea of creating a flexible dependence. All existing symbiosis are related to animal behaviours and in each case the survival of each specie depends on the other specie. When two species depend on each others, to the point that when one fails to do what it was suppose to do, both species will become extinct. This fact alone does not make any type of dependence of this kind very flexible. It is naïve to think that if we let the machines make 85% of the thinking process, that our dependence of the machines will be flexible. Even if the machines makes 85% of the researches linked to the thinking process, will the process be more valuable or will it only be done faster? Their is a certain relation between planet earth and the humans versus the humans and the machines. The planet is our creator and we are the parasite living off the resources of our planet to survive. In a similar way, the humans are the creators of the machines and to the present day the machines have been parasites living off human resources to survive. The issue at the forefront is not how intimate this relationship is, but how feasible can this utmost dependency to the machine be for the best interest of mankind. The dissimilarity and difficulties in language and analytical thinking between man and machine will always place the human being as primary and above, for now at least.

As discussed, the machine has played a significant role on our work habits, lifestyle, and the matters in which we communicate our ideas. Characterized in Vilem Flusser’s essay “A New Imagination”, computers and the ideologies behind post-modernism jointly have had a considerable effect on the way we digest and absorb images. Flusser argues that images are damaging toward the perception of ourselves and the world around us, casting doubts on whether what we see is an actual object or simply just a pure idea: “Images are to be prohibited, because they alienate the human being out of necessity, driving him into the madness of idolatry and magical behavior.” (Flusser, 112) Reacting to our compounded memory and imagination, we reflect on our previous memories and past personal experiences to understand the images presented before us. Flusser explains the use of our ‘magical’ imagination as intentional gestures, objectively placing ourselves into the eye of the photographers subjectivity. The author’s contrast to the primary image, as a representation of the life world and the secondary duplicate as a mathematical calculation, raises a convincing argument. The levels of abstraction and the absence of aura, transcended through the digitally modified duplicated image, can no longer depict objectivity. Opening space for imaginary thought, the ‘two-dimensional’ image (taken out of the the ‘four dimensional world’), reflects on the realistic and/or non-realistic facts of our disbelief. Comparing our physical identity to an emotionally striking subjective image, it is imaginable why a good sense of fashion is obligatory in urban societies.

Flusser Interview

Hi All,
Hope everyone had a restful break. For those struggling with Flusser, here is a good interview on line that he did with Miklos Pasternak who runs the C3 media center in Budapest:

http://www.c3.hu/events/97/flusser/participantstext/miklos-interview.html

Marc - Alex - Myles - Audrey - Romain

Marshall McLuhan:
“The Medium is the Message”


Marshall McLuhan begins “The Medium is the Message” by talking about the development of technology. As he elaborates his view of technology it becomes a bit aloof asides from his knowledge to the upcoming fact of economic growth and the inevitable job losses due to replacing machines. Marshall brakes technology into two different categories, technique of fragmentation (Production line machines – replaces simple single task workers) and automation Technology (ATM machines – replaces a bank teller with many different tasks). He doesn’t seem to be interested in whither or not this is a good or bad thing as he moves in his next idea.

Electric lights produces illumination a medium without a message. Several contents that lights are exploited give the illusion of medium but are all false. Marshall argues that the change from electric lights to modern halogen lights share the same medium illumination. Whether O.R. lights or spot lights which that neither could excites without the electric light is a proof of “the medium is the message”.

Railways were not the means of simple point to point transportation but a larger add to the growth of cities and views of time and distance. Marshall says that in this way airplanes are not in the same but “tend to dissolve the railway form” But how an airplane is just an increased rate of speed in respects of railways form underrates the sheer amount of growth city’s and people both evolved to contrasted by the railway revolution. Keeping the population of mid 1800’s in mind to the population of the introduction to world wide airplane travel the growth and economic value though might have been proportional the impacts were not. The times of international travel has connected the globe in ways land restricted railways could never have done. Where Marshall sees a dissolved idea of form I see just an increase of range of that initial ideal.

With almost an Optus action of the West purring these new mediums of technology and the full forms of their contents to deprive and developing countries just estrange these people and us as well. One example is the Bedouin with his battery radio on board the camel J.C. Carothers. And rightly so that us the makes of such “alien” goods have become lost. Yet the boom of technology and commercialized nature of goods within weeks after production worldwide hasn’t technology itself become a means of fusion. The 20th century has been saturated in new technology after another to the point where post literacy even semi literacy has become yesterday’s tradition. No longer are people concerted for the spoken or unspoken word and typography when these are no longer necessary let alone recognized. Technology as knowledge has even invaded the most basic of words. In our own world as we become more aware of the scale of technology on psychic formation and manifestation, we are losing all understanding in our right to assign guilt J. M. Synge. An easy example of this can be found every few months in the US where many musical icons get sued due to their lyric content. But according to Marshall Lyrics or typography is a division of speech and as speech is a by-product of though then how could anyone be prosecuted for thoughts or is it that the medium is the culprit? If the medium is the scapegoat to the form of the action then what is said about mirrored crimes in countries without mass media such as radios and televisions? A man is not free if he cannot see where he is going, even if he has a gun to help him get there. For each of the media is also a powerful weapon with which to clobber other media and other groups A. J. Liebling.
As Marshall concludes he brings up a very good point. In the ways that obvious needs of society such as cotton and fish as will be TV and Internet some day. Progression is the brother of change but with such a synthetic life style what are we changing into?


Bertolt Brecht:
“The Radio as an Apparatus of Communication”

Bertolt begins talking about relative means for growing technology. He brings up the Radio as his example of a revolutionary technology being limited by the imagination of consumers. He sees the expansion of the radio to a more interactive form aside from its traditional role, a tool for users to not only receive information but to send and compile it.
The radio would be the finest possible communication apparatus in public life, a vast network of pipe Bertolt Brecht.
Brecht saw the need for a larger means of data sharing and envisioned something that would take years to materialize, the internet. Bertolt had already been board enough with the radio, since its ignition modern use in 1895 just 3 years before Bertolt birth, that he felt it was time for its discontentment or evolvement. Living throw both world wars Bertolt was aware of the growing uses and range of mass media capable by radio and began to worry about its misuse. On this principle the radio should step out of the supply business and organize its liseners as suppliers Bertolt Brecht.

Medium is the Message! ::::::::G11

(Maziar, Ron, Rammy, Yung-Hoon)

We asked each other, why is the medium the message? And the more we tried to disprove it the more we supported it. One of us was saying that because different mediums can convey the same message and different messages can be conveyed with a medium therefore this is not true, but we argued that even this, shows the relation of the medium and the message and how actually medium is the message.

In relation to the second text, we believe that the radio is a great example where the radio itself as an object doesn’t have any message, it is a tool! But it is when the medium is distributed through it that it broadcasts a message! It gains a message and if the same program was transmitted through TV it would have had a different one. We also talked about how different mediums can create different perception, where most of this is depended on the receiver and the transmitter.
We discussed today’s issues like the cartoons of the prophet Mohammad and how it would have had a different message if another medium, rather than “Cartoons” were used.

The work of Art in the age of Mechanical reproduction / The culture industry -- Group 7

Dominic, Andrea and Alex

The first text, ‘’The work of art in the age of the mechanical reproduction’’ by Walter Benjamin explore the different changes the capitalist and highly mechanized society have imposed on art. Benjamin compare the ‘’new art’’ (video, photograph) with classical art piece and put in contrast important difference. For once, the mechanized way of production of this ‘’new art’’ is one of the main source of difference. While classical art piece clearly have aura, he poses the question whether we can say the same of the ‘’new art’’. For our team, the text raised important issues as to the impact of a mechanized society on the production of art. We agreed strongly that both the nature of the capitalist society and the mechanized mean of production had profound impact on the art pieces. With capitalism, art as opened-up to a broader audience, sometime with a loss importance given to the quality and integrity of the art pieces. However, we believe this opening as good aspect as it both the viewing and creation of the art to a broader audience then a intellectual elite. Also, because of the nature of the new media and their close relation with a mechanical production, the resulting experience of the art piece by a public is totally different. New media are more immersive and change the perception of the viewer of the art piece from active to passive. All in all however, contrary to the author who seems to consider the new medias superficial and cause of the low quality arts, after some discussions, it was agreed that the media was not necessarily the cause of the problem and that art piece as good and comparable to classical art pieces were also produced with the new media.

The second text, ‘’The Culture of Industry: Enlightenment of Mass Deception’’ by Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno presented the ultimate worst case of a capitalist society where culture is a controlled product. It must be said that members of the group did not like the reading. We found the text to dense and not well written in general. Also, we found the authors often made generalization which lowered the quality of their reflexion. In the pessimistic text, everyone is depicted as a victim and cause of a culture industry. While we agree that there is a culture of industry, we believe it only goes to a certain level as of today. Just in the province of Quebec for example, syndicalist hold high ground against the government are a good symbol of the freedom of the citizen. Through a diversified culture and openness to the world, citizen still appear to us as free of a culture industry in total control. This is even more evident when we compare our situation to 100 years ago when it was clearly the catholic church that controlled culture through a discipline system.

In conclusion, we do agree with some point of the first reading. The mechanization of society and the expansion of a capitalist society as made important changes to art. Changes of the media and it consumption can have negative aspect but all in all, they also give access to art to a much wider public. Currently, the public is often receiving the media very passively. Will individual sense need to be ‘’educated’’ to take the best out of this new art and culture mix? Seems similar to a Marx lecture…

useful new media theory resources

http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/

http://www.mediaarthistory.org/navbar-links/Contact.htm

L’oeuvre d’art à l’époque de sa reproduction mécanique et la culture industrielle représentation d’une déception de masse.

Audrey, Myles,Marc-André, Alex, Romain

L’oeuvre d’art à l’époque de sa reproduction mécanique et la culture industrielle représentation d’une déception de masse.

Benjamin Walter écrivain, essayiste et traducteur conjugua la théologie, la philosophie du langage et le Marxisme. Sa thèse sur l’œuvre d’art à l’époque de sa reproduction mécanique décrit l’évolution d’un changement majeur au point de vue social, celle de l’accessibilité universelle. Le développement de la photographie est interprété comme un point culminant dans la démocratisation de la culture. L’accessibilité à l’information s’effectua sous diverses formes au cours de l’histoire du monde, comme par exemple la gravure, le dessin, l’estampe, la lithographie, mais jamais elle ne fût autant répandue que par la photographie, l’enregistrement du son et du film. Le film en lui-même représente un agent puissant de communication qui prendra une signification sociale déterminante.

Ces découvertes offrent non seulement de nouvelles opportunités pour le prolétariat, mais aussi poussent à se questionner sur le sens propre de l’art. En déplaçant l’image de sa position initiale, on place l’unique existence d’un objet à une existence en série. La standardisation de l’unique par la reproduction de l’œuvre a, en quelque sorte, instauré la déchéance de l’aura si longtemps admirée dans l’art. En d’autres mots, la perte de l’importance face à l’authenticité d’une œuvre et de sa symbolique renverse la fonction sociale de l’art.

Le mode de perception de l’art a subit durant l’histoire diverses métamorphoses qui ont par intervalles créées des bouleversements sociales. Pendant très longtemps l’art fût réservé aux cultes religieux, aux rituels magiques ou aux formes profanes de la beauté.

Benjamin Walter discute d’une relation intéressante entre cet hommage rendu aux divinités et le culte du public crée aujourd’hui dans l’industrie du film, par cette vénération accordée aux stars. Face à cette réflexion, peut-on ainsi accorder une valeur artistique à l’industrie du film ou simplement l’associer à un produit de consommation ou une production culturel?

Dans le texte sur la culture industrielle : représentation d’une déception de masse, Adorno et Horkheimer parlent du capitalisme et de notre société basée sur le travail et le plaisir. Ils portent un regard critique sur le pouvoir aliénant nos attitudes de consommation et notre condition humaine manipulée par la grande force des médias, versus ceux qui ont l’argent pour la faire vivre.

Ils parlent d’une culture de commodité qui nous suggère à intervalle régulier le rythme de vie à obtenir pour être heureux. Nos croyances et valeurs sont ainsi basées sur cette culture industrielle. La notion de liberté humaine ne semble plus exister qu’aux profits des entreprises.

En parallèle avec cette commodité au fétichisme, comme toutes nouvelles inventions au point de vue technologique, de nouvelles formes d’interprétation sont requises et de nouvelles formes d’art sont créées.

Group 2 - Benji, Hork & Ador

OF RITUALS AND COMMODITY

by Anthony, Elio, Raed and Sabine

Benjamin talks of about the transition of art into the world of “Mechanical Reproduction”, i.e. photography, and film. He specifies that Classical Art existed as an expression to reinforce ritualistic notions in early cultures. The value attributed to the work by cults such as one of beauty enforced a certain authenticity into it which placed it in a certain time and place. This piece of art had an aura, it was pure and was there to be admired for the sake of art, and offered no social function. Yet, when we talk of photography, it is impossible to talk about an “authentic” copy, and the piece itself looses it’s “aura”. It is left behind through the multiple reproductions and through the diffusion of the print. Even today, the original “aura” of painting has lost it essence because the art is being shown through “art” institutions and that it’s “aura” has been altered by the objectives imposed on it.

The incapability of a painting to be shown to the large masses pushes it lessens it connections to the individual of wants to experience it. One must get close and experience this piece one at a time, as to reinforce its value. “Painting is simply is in no position to present an object for simultaneous collective experience”. On the other hand, film by the means of the camera (or cameras) may simulate a more truthful reality that may be diffused to a larger audience. Where a group of “social” beings may gather and be distracted by the work. The person may not admire it because, “contemplation [is] a school of asocial behavior”. “The public is an examiner, but an absent-minded one”.

This idea of the absent-minded social being is pursued by Horkheimer and Adorno. They talk of the standardized society where the “whole worl is made to pass through the filter of the Culture Industry”. This phenomenon is experienced through the rituals of Capitalism where the being is alienated from himself/herself through the idea that all should conform to a norm akin to the ones found in the Industry : production, reproduction, and diffusion of commodities. One is told what he or she needs, opposed to what one “really” wants. All media produced goes through this system of standardization, where “art”, photography, film and all media are made in a mold that guaranties that any spectator will loves and should love it. These creations should not challenge our thoughts nor should they aid in our progression in our studies of “art” or science. We are caught in a vicious circle of “dullness”. We are tricked to think that some forms of media may differ in its pattern, but any form of originality has been calculated and analyzed so as not to defy the Industry. Everything is “rendered powerless, economically and therefore spiritually”. The individual which has become a sort of product / consumer must conform to this idea of sameness and is domesticated by the Industry. The being is fooled into thinking that he or she is happy and through this notion of pleasure and laughter is constantly kept in this ritual of objectification. Depressing as it may seem, it does emulate in some way our reality. The Industry become such a harsh monopole that any being is unable to fathom the idea of becoming an outsider and try to compete with it or society and accepts this cultural commodity of “averageness”.

It is felt that the aura of the individual himself is lost and without the feeling of self validation and existence, how can a person create anything original? The idea of a society of equality differs from one of conformity, where a being is no longer part of the equation, but is molded into a product that can be easily be brought up or pushed back down. To affirm that one is an artist would consequently mean that he or she is not part of society?

WALTER BENJAMIN ET AL --> :: GROUP 1 - Bastien, Etienne, Jonathan Kebe, Brent, Jason, Mohannad

Walter Benjamin tells us about the perception of works of art by the people before the “Mechanical Reproduction”. He introduces the concept of “aura” which is the uniqueness that is given off by an original work; that is before the mechanical reproduction. Originated from the Greek word 'aer', the term aura describes the "distinctive atmosphere or quality associated with someone or something".
Before works were printed by the hundreds, and seen by everybody in magazines immediately and so easily, what made the aura what it is, is the fact that people would go through the trouble of finding the work, whether in the country or not, to finally appreciate it. The anticipation of seeing a work of art, and knowing that it is the only one made, which can only be found in one place at a certain time is what makes this work of art even more unique.

The aura of artworks is decaying, an example of his theory is supported with a newer art like photography, he argues that personal photographs cannot have aura as it's "subject matter forbids it.” The photographic image is resistant to accumulated associations because it presents the past only as the past. They do not present the “time and space” that a previous works of arts presented. They are just witnesses of past actions and situations, they serve as memory, not as history.

Art now is viewed as a simple good that is being fed to you; all new arts like big production movies look alike because they follow similar patterns. Artists are now producers of commodities.
The type of work students are exploring in Concordia University's Computation Arts program has no significance to the loss of aura as the original does not exist. It's availability of infinite reproducibility in time and space, and the physical closeness the mainstream art form projects to the user, clearly signifies their rejection towards traditional modernist mediums. "From a photographic negative, for example, one canmake any number of prints; to ask for the "authentic" print makes no sense"(53)
This leads to the next text, where Adorno and Horkheimer discuss their vision on what they call the “Culture Industry”. They believe that the mass is manipulated into passivity by factories because of the production of standardized cultural goods, which they call the popular culture. The popular culture is a very clever name for the manipulation of the masses. People don’t like too much to be seen as different from others, therefore, whoever wants to make money makes sure that everybody susceptible of buying their product feel alike and connected. But this is marketing….To get back to what A&H are saying, people loose their identity and individual taste, they are being told what they like and they consume what is given to them repeatedly through commercials until they convince themselves they like it. What is given to them is what the industry can produce. What is being produced is a basic good which gives an easy pleasure, a false need; needs created and satisfied by capitalism. A&H say that our true needs are freedom, creativity and genuine happiness. The mass market is compared as the mass production, the people are as interchangeable as the products themselves.
“ Anyone who resists can only survive by fitting. Once his particular brand of deviation from the norm has been noted by the industry.”

This is how the industry evolves, by telling the mass market what to do, they control the flow of people their way in order to keep them in check constantly, to make sure they will buy so much and keep buying regularly.

The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction::::::G11

(Maziar, Ron, Yung-Hoon, Ramy)

Walter Benjamin explains that the new techniques of reproduction have decreased the value of the original object, thus eliminating any traditional importance it may have had. By increasing the number of copies, a phenomenon of mass production is perceived for any original object created only once. Any work of art has always been reproducible; however the new mechanical methods have harmed the work of arts aura. Since any work of art can be replicated, the original has lost its unique existence and the reason to its physical presence. The destruction of the aura by the mechanical reproduction points out the passage from the artwork as a form of cult to the artwork as an exhibit. The future of mechanical reproduction is to be able to reproduce images in an increasingly detailed way, where quantity is transmuted into quality: “The greatly increased mass of participants has produced a change in the mode of participation.”

In The Culture Industry it is mentioned that today’s art is more like a business or factory that rotates one product after another. There is a reproduction that occurs rather then an original creation of art. Horkheimer and Adorno criticizism of film, music, and print materials seem to hold true even in today’s society. Mechanically reproduced cultural products such as radio and film created for entertainment purposes, were blinding consumers of their real desires. The entertainment business created a virtual reality for political or economic interests, thus becoming a manipulating marketing scheme built to influence as many people as possible.

Group 5, week 4

"A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Freminist in the Late Twentieth Century"

In our group we had a discussion about a quote at the end of the author’s text, “I would rather be a cyborg than a goddess”. (Haraway, p.28) The Cyborg is the preferred being of the writer because he is evolved. She means it in the sense that he is smart, cultured, and aware. The cyborg is a conscious being. He is aware of different groups of people, and cultures.

A “goddess” to her (In our view point), seems to be a made-up theme, a stereotyped organic role. Haraway may rather be a “cutting edge” character than being a stereotypical organic role.