NMA 2050

This piece by Lev Manovich discusses the language of new media across five principles.

First is numerical representation. According to Manovich, new media can be contained to algorithmic manipulation, mathematical form, and function. With the rise of emergent technologies, new media is deeply tied to computerization and digitized contexts.

Second is modularity, known as the “fractal structure of new media”. Elements of new media contain consistent, separate identities intact even when assembled or reassembled. In such way, modularity refers to the atoms that make up the greater picture, or the small independent parts that contribute to the whole but also stand on their own two feet. Notable examples include the World Wide Web (WWW), which extracts separate medias from one given browser.

The first and second principles bring us to our third, automation. Generation of variations, objects, layout, and web pages are some examples of automation taking hold. Although this removes some part of human intentionality, it always gives way for much for ideation and utility.

Variability is our fourth principle, the texts noting its “infinite versions” and iterations of new media arts. Another composite of the first and second principle, variability in medium exists as “production on demand”.

Lastly, transcoding is the fifth and final principle. Following a computer’s organization of data, new media develops through layers, lists, structures and further dimensions shaped by computers.

As told by these five principles, new media is largely influenced and shaped by computer science. The distinguishable trait that draws the line between new media studies and simply media studies is the power of software, and the new integration of tech into various mediums.

As someone who is always on the lookout for new music, I enjoyed the documentary. I am grateful that they introduced Girl Talk to me, and found it to be an enigmatic beginning to draw the viewer in.

As I pursue Transmedia Storytelling in a self-directed area of concentration in my undergraduate studies, I’ve become acutely aware of the copyrights, red tape and challenges that come into play with the exchange of ideas. In a digital era, we find ourselves interconnected but inundated, consumed by media. When ideas become intellectual property, it becomes difficult to express and share ideas. I find it especially ironic, when we live in a transformative moment in which everyone has the power to be a creator. To stomp out this creative flow by copyrights and litigative action impedes the very movement that began this. In relation to Transmedia Storytelling, I discovered concepts such as world building and expanding an interactive story to engage in its intended audience. To construct this fictional but very real world to fans is to borrow and build upon ideas already existing, and add unique creative twists and spins. When this interaction exists between the creator and the user, it blurs the lines between whether copyrights would be involved.

Therefore, I find the phrase culture jamming to be very fitting. As a vitriolic rebuttal against the war on creative rein, culture jamming attest to the mindset of people with shared interests and backgrounds – usually connected by closeness in age.

The intergenerational gap becomes much more clear when the musician was live-editing the remix via video chat to the older couple. The documentary is bias towards the “creator’s movement”, as the narrator wholeheartedly supports this sampling and repurposing of preexisting songs, melodies and notes. I also take his side, and completely disagree with the notion that if something samples (or borrows) bits and pieces from an outside source, then it isn’t “original”.

It brings up the question – what is original, and what isn’t? It could be easily argued that nothing is original, especially in the midst of this shift where consumers self generate their own content and can share it through interconnected channels (i.e., social media).

Many more interesting points were brought up. The most imminent and threatening of these, lifted from the Remixer’s Manifesto, is the third and final bullet: the future is becoming less free. This thought it insanely scary, as technology continues to develop so rapidly, I am curious to know how close to reality this idea foretells. With everything becoming a copyright and some form of creative license in one way or another, ideas are becoming shackled and held tightly by brands and corporations. Lawsuits seem to spring up left and right. Taylor Swift comes to mind, considering the multiple lawsuits that she has filed and also, lawsuits that were filed against her. Even the most common phrases like, “haters gonna hate” — a popularized meme and colloquial phrase, could be grounds for stealing intellectual property and for a potential, big money lawsuit.

In the midst of all of this, where do we draw the line?

After reading this excerpt, I took some time to critically consider the title, “Seeing the Brick”. After discussion about the history and context of animation and its role in the cinematic uproot, I thought about the almost synonymous nature of animation and Walt Disney. In consideration of the title, I linked the idea of an exposed brick symbolizing development or an un-retouched nature of something. For example the exposed brick of a café, that unrefined yet tasteful aesthetic of something that could have been more, but was left at default.

I also feel that animation is still reduced to an exclusively children’s audience, although its application extends far past that. The overall perception of animation is limited and disparaged by critics and outside forces that deem it an unsuitable medium. I am curious to know how this came to be, the opponents to animation and why it has gained traction and notoriety as a sub-par medium. I wonder if the rise of animation had fallen into another set of hands, if animation could be viewed as a violent or surreal medium for explicit content rather than its innocuous assignment that currently exists. As the text implies the unreal and imaginative flexibility of animation, the uses for animation could quite literally be endless.

Another point that stuck out to me was the conception of incoherent cinema, and its adaptation into Little Nemo, the wildly successful Pixar animated piece. The descriptors attributed to incoherent cinema sound exciting, progressive and liquid, but yet I found myself unable to visualize the actual integration into animation. I wonder how the introduction of disjointed pieces add to the narrative in a clean and consistent manner, and would benefit from seeing examples of such technique.

Digital Technologies as Tool examines digital manipulation as a powerful force that permanently alters our process and outlook on art moving forward.

Walter Benjamin brings up the point technology allows for greater accessibility for manipulation, opening opportunities to reproduce and reinvent images. Authenticity is now becoming more relevant and valued in our eyes – we shun those that are fake or insincere, and it carries a heavy weight of stigma in our mass produced media, pop culture and in our social interactions. But when everything becomes so accessible to the point of repetition, how can we remain original in our attempts? The quote, “Everything is a copy of a copy of a copy,” comes to mind.

I am curious about the process of Csuri’s SineScrape piece, which employs mathematical functions of waves applied by procedure to produce digital imagery. I am unsure of what this process entails, but am impressed with its modern day use to compose composites for missing persons.

As the text shift focus to advertising, I pay extra careful attention as I intend to enter this industry. In discussing digital image manipulation with branding and the conception of art agencies, the text discusses the power of association coming into play. This reminds me of the importance of branding, and how it can be so powerful that, if done effectively, the smallest associations can be connotative of a brand. For example, the trademarked robin egg blue color associated with luxury retailer Tiffany & Co. branding is pervasive. It is ubiquitous, aggressive even, and is served best when universally recognized. The overall tone of the text implies an unescapable and interconnected quality of art in tech and digital manipulation, with Tiffany & Co. being just one example of such power. As the text also includes, this prompts a sense of hyper awareness from its viewers — us, as the intended audience.

“The major advances in civilization are processes that all but wreck the societies in which they occur.”

– A.N. Whitehead

In reading “The Medium is the Massage”, my first instinct was to understand the piece as a uniform whole, or at least to capture the underlying themes of the texts to help me digest the reading. Immediately, I am thrown off by the title — my eyes glazed over the title, and I had mistakenly processed “massage” as “message“. This subtlety is significant, as I began to notice the allusions to hand, touch, and individualism through the various imagery that I connected to massages. The text delves deeper as a “collide-oscope” of electrical information.

The text as a whole speaks to me, which is no surprise since it very directly relates to my Millennial upbringing. As a digital native born into an intensely, technologically advanced culture, it’s difficult for me to realize just how much information is out there, and at such ease to access. I have been conditioned to unabashedly share information about myself — not seriously considering the fact that this information no longer belongs to me, as it now forever floats through the internet. My family, my neighborhood, my education… The text implies a warped meaning to these words, a stark cut away from the traditional definitions of convention. A particularly poignant redefinition is of the “child”, a so-called invention of the 17th century. Although I am a tiny bit more grown than a child, crawling at 19 years old and in college, I see myself in this reinvention of the word. Drawing parallels between the child of this absurd, electric world and the child of the “adult” world, the threat of growing up has always haunted me. Besides the obvious loss of innocence and the sole responsibility of child’s play, that expectation of getting myself together is terrifying, partly because I don’t know how to and mostly because I don’t want to.

“Mere instruction will not suffice.”

Extending the theme past education brings us to our government, the next topic that caught my attention. McLuhan is quick to compare the old versus the new, referring to the new state of obsoletism in tradition. I am conflicted as to what the author wants us to think – is the government an outdated force that has spun itself astray? “Ineffectual” and “passive entertainment” are striking ways to describe the political administration therein where our consent lies. Towards the participatory and democratic role of we as the people, it makes me wonder about what newfound powers we hold in our increasingly connected and digitized era. Social movements have been easier to reach wider audiences, some for example include the outcries in the #BlackLivesMatter movement, advocating against police brutality, stop and frisk, lenient gun control laws among many other related issues.