Response to "Blogging, the nihilist impulse"

One of the most important issues that Geert Lovink touches on in his article about blogging is the impact that this writing technology has on the mainstream media. While Lovink asserts that the negative impact blogging has on traditional journalism is intentional, I would not go that far. However, I am in undoubted agreement with Lovink that blogging and other forms of Web 2.0 technologies have definitely reduced the influence and popularity of the mainstream media as a whole.

The ease of use of technologies such as blogging and YouTube has clearly brought the influence of traditional media organizations down. Anyone with access to a functioning computer and internet connection has the ability to upload their thoughts and ideas almost instantaneously to a potentially worldwide audience. In addition, ordinary citizens have the ability to become journalists in their own right. This is possible partially through their ability to post videos of something they have witnessed or to create a blog post about something they have seen, heard, or witnessed. Therefore, these technologies definitely put more power into the hands of ordinary people on a daily basis.

The effects of this upswing in the use of Web 2.0 technologies in conjunction with the ongoing economic crisis have clearly had an effect on the financial success of many of the traditional news outlets. In the past few months, several newspapers such as the Rocky Mountain News in Denver have closed their doors and no longer publish their newspapers. In addition, major newspapers including the New York Times, while not yet shutting down operations, are experiencing huge financial problems. There can be no doubt that blogging, in particular, is encouraging this trend.

While Lovink appears to believe that this would be a preferred product of bloggers, I tend to disagree. Firstly, I do not think that bloggers set out to destroy traditional media outlets, I think they simply set out to challenge them and potentially change them. Secondly, I think that bloggers partially depend on these traditional media outlets as sources of information and controversy. While it is true that ordinary people now have the ability to become “pajama journalists” this does not give them the capacity to follow and cover news stories in a way that traditional media outlets do. For example, someone who works a 9 to 5 job in New York but also maintains a political blog, does not have the ability to attend rallies and travel around the country with political candidates. In addition, blogs depend on mainstream media outlets as a source of controversy and linking to these traditional outlets with some commentary can lead to many hits for certain bloggers. An example of this practice can also be seen in, but is not limited to, the political realm. Both sides of the political aisle have websites that utilize Web 2.0 to criticize media outlets that they deem to have a bias towards either conservatism or liberalism. The conservatives have the Media Research Center which criticizes traditional media outlets such as the New York Times or NBC News and the liberals have Media Matters which criticizes media outlets such as Fox News and the Wall Street Journal. Thus, it is clear that some blogs depend on the existence and partial success of traditional media outlets such as newspapers and network news as a means for their own success.

4-20-09 Freewrite

The disagreement between N. Katherine Hayles and Peter Shillinsburg concerning the value of a text that goes through the process of media translation leads to a difficult and complicated discussion. The process of media translation could conceivably take on many different forms depending on the type of text and the choice of methods by the person/s that "translate" the text. In some methods of media translation, a text can become more difficult to read. For example, a scanned document could appear somewhat faded or blurry on a computer. This would definitely take something away from the text. However, other forms of media translation could make a text easier to read. An example of this could include someone retyping a printed text using a word processing program. This specific example could allow for a printed document that is difficult to read to be translated into an electronic document that is clear and easy to read. These simple examples prove that the process of media translation has the potential to both better and worsen a text in some way, shape, or form. However, it is clear that regardless of whether a text gains something or loses something, the text will be changed.

Response to Reading for 4-20-09

The discussion we had in class last week in combination with this week’s reading definitely got me thinking about the differences between printed text and electronic text. Our class discussion last week was largely centered on the concept of the “integrity” of books. We discussed the act of tearing pages out of books for any purpose and surprisingly, this act was meant with vehement opposition by some and support by others. With this discussion still in my mind, I began the reading assigned for this week which discussed the differences between printed texts, such as books, and electronic texts. This immediately got me to thinking about the different ways that both forms of texts are treated and the amount of respect accorded to each.

It was clear to me from last week’s discussion about books, that many people attribute an enormous amount of respect toward books. Some people would refuse to tear pages from books or to damage them in any significant way because of their tremendous respect for books and the benefits that they could potentially bring to others. In addition, some said that they would not throw away their books and I found myself, for the most part, in agreement with this stance. While I may not always reread (or even read the first time) some of the books in my possession, I cannot see myself disposing of very many books in that fashion.

From this point, I began considering how much “respect” is given to electronic texts. It immediately occurred to me that the type of respect given to printed texts, particularly books, was not present for electronic texts. We frequently “virtually discard” of these texts in several fashions. One example of this could be deleting a PDF file or other document that contains electronic text from a PC hard drive, essentially throwing it away to the recycle bin. Another example of “virtually discarding” a electronic text could be observed through permanently deleting a section of text from a web page or blog. While the site or blog would undoubtedly by cached somewhere on the internet, the document that appears when loading the page, I would consider this the real document, would be forever changed. While these examples may seem a little bit outside of the box or extreme, I would posit that they are similar in nature to the acts of tearing out a page of a book or discarding a book entirely.

The readings make clear that there are significant differences in the way that digital texts and printed texts are created by their writers and viewed by their readers. I believe that this is unquestionably true, at least in my own personal experience, and that is demonstrated in the different ways that I utilize each of the formats. I prefer to read and study from the printed form of text but often find that it is easier and quicker to read and study the same text in electronic form. Additionally, I often prefer to at least part of my papers, even if it is just an outline, in handwriting. Mentally, this helps me to better formulate ideas. However, in the end, the bulk of my writing is done electronically by virtue of its readability and speed.

In closing, it is undoubtedly true that there are differences between digital texts and printed texts and one of these differences that should be further explored is the amount of “respect” that is assigned to each.

Example of Technotext

http://www.yhchang.com/THE_STRUGGLE_CONTINUES.html

The example of a technotext that I chose is “The Struggle Continues” from the Young Hae Chang Heavy Industries website. While watching the technotext itself proved that it was a great example in and of itself, I also found validity in this opinion through the fact that this collection was linked on several of the websites included in the suggested sites for this assignment. I believe that it is a great example because it is relatively simple but includes multiple features. If watched in its entirety, it is very long and includes fast and intermittent motion, multiple colors in the form of background and text combinations, and includes text that is clearly technical in its nature. An example of this is the 0 with the slash through it, this, in my mind, is a prime example of typical technical text. In addition, the Young Hae Chang Heavy Industries website was referenced by one of our guest presenters a few weeks ago, Bonnie Jones.

Response to Reading for 4-13-09

When beginning this week’s reading of Writing Machines, I was initially intrigued by the concept of the humument. Much like the process of uncreative writing, this form of writing allows a writer to take someone else’s work and create something out of it that becomes his or her own. This process allows writers to exert extreme control over their message or it can allow them to exert virtually no control and to randomly change a text in the creation of a new page or new writing. In essence, this process allows for people to be as creative or uncreative as they wish but in the end, they are still able to create a new message out of an existing page or writing. In an overall sense, this process allows for writers to come up with creative new takes on past works.
I was particularly fascinated with two examples from this book. Firstly, I thought that the example on page one 89, which shows page 165 of A Human Document was extremely intriguing. While it is clear that the text of this page, although still visible, does not play a significant role in the artist’s reproduction but the art plays a particularly important role. I thought that this demonstrated a unique interpretation of the work through the artist’s placement of a human face on the page, clearly playing on the “human document” aspect. In addition, the artist could be making a statement about human nature through the different shades of the two sides of the persons face and the unique shape of his or her face. Secondly, I thought the example on page 93 was also extremely interesting. This rendition turns the original page into what appears what to be an indoor garden of some sort. This example is particularly interesting because the picture and the text that is left in both appear to play an equal part. In addition, both the text and the picture play off of each, picturing walls and a landscape while featuring both words in the text.
Johanna Drucker’s book also brings up important points concerning this method of art/writing. One of the most illuminating examples of this form came through her discussion of William Blake. Blake clearly took an interesting and innovative approach to his work, especially when you consider the technological constraints he face compared to modern times. I was particularly fascinated with his technique of illuminated printing and the amount of skill and effort it must have taken to complete a work in such a fashion. This became extremely apparent in my mind after I had completed my creative assignment for this week. In order to complete this assignment, I was able to utilize such modern tools as Google Images and Microsoft Paint. In this light, I was particularly impressed with Blake’s work as well as the work of others in similar time periods. However, it was clear that Blake took a uniquely innovative approach that allowed him to lucidly present his personal beliefs along with his personal artistic vision. Clearly, Blake’s work has had a lasting impact on the work of other Artists’ books.

4-6-09 Freewrite

The process of removing all creativity from literature and other art forms seems somewhat counterproductive in my mind. While I would not argue that an uncreative writing cannot be considered to be "literature" or "writing" I think that it loses a lot of value. This involves a probable loss of interest from a large amount of people. Many of these uncreative works, in my opinion, are pretty boring to read, which is essentially of the purpose of its lack of creativity. Additionally, if one disagrees with Goldsmith's premise that creativity is essentially dead, writing in this fashion does not allow for new ideas to be brought about by writers.

Response to Uncreative Writing

I immediately found the concept of uncreative writing to be an interesting topic to read about but more so the ideas behind it, rather than the uncreative writings themselves. The most interesting thing about the whole process was the encouragement of plagiarism and the unapologetic stealing of the work of others. At a university which places a heavy value on its honor code, Mason students are constantly bombarded by threats of consequences for plagiarism. I’ve even heard cases of students who truly did not plagiarize a certain assignment but were accused of doing so by their professors and were faced with a serious threat to their academic careers. That is why the idea that Kenneth Goldsmith and the process of uncreative writing encourage you to copy from other peoples’ work was so shocking to me.

However, it is apparent that the process of taking others’ work without permission and using it for whatever purposes the “theft” wishes could be a relatively constant practice in our society. This is clearly the case with the use of file sharing through computers and the internet. Uncreative writing can employ the stealing of a news article or other written work and subsequently create something entirely different but not new from it, all while using this written work in a manner that is inconsistent with its author’s intent. This same process can be seen with something such as music or movies obtained through file sharing. Someone could take a song or film and reedit it to create something that is, again, something entirely different but not necessarily anything new or creative. Essentially, both could have the same result: using someone else’s work to create something that someone else calls their own work.

Additionally, I found Goldsmith’s discussion of the current state of creativity to be very interesting but only somewhat accurate. I tend to think that that his notion that creativity is dead is not entirely correct. He makes a valid point that the themes and ideas that we see in movies, books, etc. are recycled. However, these major themes and ideas are usually redeveloped and have small but still new components. I strongly believe that people get tired of seeing/hearing/reading the same things over and over again and even though new pieces of film or music or writing may contain similar themes or frameworks to those that preceded them, they must contain some new elements, otherwise few or no people would choose to make use of them.

Goldsmith’s statement that it is hard for students to rid themselves of their creativity seems to be entirely true to me. Many of the assignments that we have completed in this class thus far this semester have required at least some level of creativity. With things like flarf and spoetry, the topic of choice and the ordering of words can allow for great use of creativity. In the production of uncreative writing, it is interesting to see how much a person can remove their personality and reduce their amount of creativity. In essence, the goal of this process of uncreative writing is to work against everything we have been taught in our prior courses involving writing. This uncreative process wants us to be as boring as we possibly can.