David Scheck, Andrew L. Shapiro, and Steven Johnson, “Technorealism. Get Real! A Manifesto from a New Generation of Cultural Critics”
This article serves as a sobering wake-up call to all technophiles, as well as a reassurance to technophobes. In opposition to some of the other “digital manifestos” read this week (particularly John Perry Barlow’s “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace”) “Technorealism…” seeks to dispel digital idealist thoughts. The article professes that there is inequity built into all aspects of technology, and by no means is the Internet a signifier of utopian progress. Equally divisive is the piece’s open stance on government intervention, declaring that online jurisdiction of some sort is necessary and natural.
Regardless of slant, the articles read this week share a common thread in recognizing technology—principally the Internet—as not only an extension of society, but a highly influential, sovereign body. The lines regarding regulation, conduct, and control are highly blurred (as one article mentions, “moving with the technology”).
In regard to the copyright issues discussed this week, “Technorealism…” makes a very clear distinction between information and knowledge. To me this signifies a difference between the knowledge it requires to create a mash-up such as the .mp3 example I brought to class (which you can listen to here.) and the actual information the pieces of said mash-up came from (technically songs, which require a different type of knowledge to create). As technology proliferates and information moves faster throughout the globe in a number of different mediums, this new art movement seems only natural; especially to the United States, a nation that has struggled for a cultural identity for some time. Perhaps this mash-up culture is our culture, a sort of digital melting pot if you will.
The article on guerilla advertising reminded me of the recent “bomb” scare in Boston. Watch it here:
3 comments:
I have to say this article was by far my favorite from this block of assigned readings. Waht I noticed that made this selection significant was that, considering none of the days readings were particularly well rounded or backed up with empirical evidence, this was the only article that did not take an extreme viewpoint but rather a middle groud. YEs, it is still something of a manifesto and the concept of Tenchorealism is almost revolutionary given the number of websites out there suggesting nothing but good things from the Internet but it does reads far more reasonably than lets say, the articles by Negativland becuase it states its expectations and beliefs clearly and succinctly without demanding alliegance from the reader. It is a rant the does something other than rage against the machine.
Which is not to say that other authors didn't have points too. I for one agree that with the advent of file sharing and bit torrent technology, copyright laws must be revised and ideas of ownership revisited because things can never go back to the way they were,in my opinion, now that information can be exchanged so easily.
I am also of the opinion that government controls of the internet are preferable to allowing the free market to determine all the legalities of all issues on the internet. They are bad people out there that need policing and the free market would allow them to continue their behavior as long as it profits someone.
I would agree that this seems the most coherent of our readings this week. It trumps "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace." I like how it strikes a nice balance, never suggesting that the internet be completely restrained by laws and government, but guided enough to where an "errant citizen or fraudulent corporation," can be prevented or dealt with. It is a nice response to the "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace," which is entirley anti-government.
I also saw this as a response to Hacktivism, and the delineation between political terrorist hackers who destroy or block information and systems versus true Hacktivists who attempt to open information and free systems. This article encapsulated a number of thoughts I've had throughout the semester about the fact that many people see the internet as Utopia or Armegeddon. I felt that these views were too fringe. The internet simply IS. It's prbably not going to save the world and probably not going to destroy it. Some of it is good, some of it is bad. Some of it is clever and useful and beautiful, some of it mundane and useless. I'll join the Technorealism camp. And by the way...Hallelujah: Information is DEFINITELY NOT knowledge! I'm gonna have that statement framed and up on my wall by the end of the week.
Post a Comment