Paul D. Found / Lecture 1

The Borges piece actually left me with more questions than answers but that counts as reflection too.

The first thing that struck me was - why? Why write a review of a work that does not exist, by a person who does not exist? Was it a piece intended as a "joke" just to amuse Borges himself, or was the intention to hoodwink people into believing Menard and his version of Quixote? Was it doing this that amused Borges?

Was Borges just mocking those who believed what he wrote to be true, or those who take what they are told or read at face value? A modern parallel that came to mind was the start of their film Fargo, which states it is "Based On A True Story" even though it is not.

Was Borges being satirical by attacking critic's pretentiousness, or was in attacking the power critics have to decide what is valid art?

With regard to Digital Cultures, perhaps Borges was suggesting that the imitation or fake version of a work becomes "the thing" rather than the original. This could apply to remakes of films, cover versions of songs, and to digitally created and reproduced artworks. This questions the authorship of the original creative work.

Is Borges commenting on the context of the work being most important? Would Don Quixote still be regarded as a masterpiece if it was written "now"?

Addendum

I still stand by everything I said. Barthes' "Death of the Author" says the same thing much better...

Max Armstrong: Lecture 1

Although the reading is a piece of fiction, it is written as an authentic account of the author Menard’s rewriting of the ‘Don Quixote’ story, that even includes fictional references from aristocratic sources. But Borges writes with authority, as if he respectfully knows and is familiar with both the author and the writing process of the fictional account. Borges suggests that Menard’s story is superior to the original, as it was more difficult to write, but the quotes are exactly the same. It suggests that a piece of literature needs to be read in context of when it was written and when it is read.

I actually found it quite difficult to read as I found it very confusing. As I read it I felt that I should be looking up these references even though I knew they were fictional.

In the context of digitalisation it made me question whether the digitalisation of a piece of artwork, for example a painting, could be considered a new artwork, or only a copy, or perhaps a facsimile of the original. I can only suggest that it depends on the context. If a print is considered an artwork in its own right, what about a digital artefact? Digital copies of old masters can reveal details lost to the naked eye, so does that add or detract from the painting?

My interpretation has changed a little, understanding the wider context helps my understanding. Knowing that the joke is not just on me helps.

Amanda Moffat / Lecture 1

After reading 'Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote' (1939) by Jorge Luis Borges (1899-1986), my initial thoughts were that it was a confusing text to read, with very elaborate, highly academic and in places contradictory language, that seemed to be trying to disguise the truth. The mention of two members of the aristocracy that have supposedly verified this work adds to the deception, giving his story additional authority and authenticity. In addition, you are led to believe that the narrator/reviewer knows the writer personally as he includes quotes from direct correspondence to support his claims.

The truth is that this review is fiction and the work he is discussing - written by Menard, a fictitious 20th Century French writer - is a direct copy of the original 'Don Quixote' (1605 & 1615) by 17th Century Spanish novelist, Miguel De Cervantes (1547-1616). Borges implies that Menard has brought something of himself and of his historical context to the 'translation' and, in so doing, has made it somehow superior. This irony is highlighted by his humorous comparison of two identical passages.

Borges is clearly interested in Menard's interpretation of the text, suggesting that history and context will always change a text's meaning. Although the words are the same, Menard's version is unique because he brings something different to the 'rudimentary art of reading' - as does every new reading - thus giving centrality to 'reader-response' and raising questions over authorship...

Lecture 1: Introduction to Digital Cultures

Welcome to the first session of the Digital Cultures module on the IOCT Masters. I hope everyone enjoyed a good break and are ready for 2009.


Following our discussion in class, I'd like you to adress the following issues in regards to analogue/digital devices/objects here in the comments.

Remember to include:

• a list of features
• an overview of what the device is and how it works
• why it is important
• why people use or don't use it

Assignment for next week:

Read "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote" by Jorge Luis Borges (1899-1986) (this was handed out in class).



Please write a reflective blog post on your reading. I have added you all as an author to this module blog so please sign in and choose to "create" a new post. Be sure to include your name and "Lecture 1" in the title of the blog post.

Some things to consider:

• role of representation of identity
• trickery of language
• authenticity
• dissemination
• production
• readership
• authorship

try to contextualise this alongside what we discussed today about digital culture.

If you like Borges do check out some of his fiction including the very well know "Garden of Forking Paths" included in this collection.

Welcome to the 2009 Digital Cultures Module

Ok, it's not quite 2009 yet but I know you are all eager to get started over the Christmas break.

So, here is a project for you.

I would like you to craft an annotated bibliography of at least 10 texts that we should read as part of our Digital Cultures curriculum, feel free to add more than ten sources. In your annotation please include the following information:

• Main focus or purpose of the work
• Intended audience for the work
• Special features of the work that were unique or helpful
• Background and credibility of the author

Obviously you haven't yet read the work so you won't be able to include the author's or your own conclusions. You can however include why you think we ought to use your chosen resource. Perhaps it presents an unusual point of view or provokes dissidence, but do include a reason.

Since we're talking about digital cultures, try to include ONLY online resources. There is an amazing array of excellent academic research available online - either in journals through the DMU library subscriptions or via open access journals, blogs, newspapers and other websites. Even on Amazon some text is available (see last year's reading list in the right hand column of this blog). You don't have to include an entire book but you can refer to chapters or individual blog posts.

One possible resource might include Lev Manovich's latest which he "published" during his talk at our Future of Creative Technologies conference on 20th November 2008.

Some print books that we will be referring to throughout the module include:

• George Landow, Hypertext 3.0: Critical Theory and New Media in a Global Era
• Roland Barthes, Image, Music, Text
• Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus
• Rosi Braidotti, Nomadic Subjects
• Luce Irigaray, This Sex Which is Not One
• Rosi Braidotti, Cyberfeminism with a Difference and Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory

Also very important is that each of you have a twitter and facebook and delicious account, if you don't already. I'm JessL on all of the above. Please start a blog as we'll be using that in our lecture sessions too along with flickr.

Please tag all the suggested course reading materials with "digitalcultures09" and please send them me too: http://delicious.com/jessl.

Things to keep in mind when you're choosing texts:

• they should align with our topics of feminism, postmodernism, poststructuralism, cyberculture, creative technologies, critical literacy, digital literacy
• be sure to look at the suggested reading on the blog from last year's course
  
• use any reference style (MLA, Harvard, etc...) but remain consistent

If you know of any web 2.0-type tools/applications that you would like to use (think of tools to facilitate podcasting, videos and other communication) include them in your annotated bibliography (but they don't form part of your ten items to read).


Let me know if you have any questions, concerns or thoughts by adding a comment here or e-mailing me.

Course Work

Reminder that course work (essay) is due on the 30th of January!

Week 11: Rhizome

Rhizome

Implies everything is geographically linked so while anything can connect to anything else, once it is connected it is there.

Paul: everything is all connected to everything else but if something gets broken it is already reset that it will reform. Why can't the connections stop, why are there no dead-ends?

Andy: for something to exist it must be connected.

Andrew: the problem is once you bring in a structure how do you talk about rhizomes?

Read: The Logic of Sense: Deleuze on Lewis Carroll

Can't bring conventional logic to come to bear on this model of rhizome

Paul: Not only does all information exist in the same place at the same time, but is equally accessible from any point. There is no sense that you can go back.

Andrew: ides that you can do "derive" - unstructured wandering, directed in an undirected way like walking around Paris with a map from Berlin, strategies to remove all sense of culture. The idea was to remove valued of art and culture. Repetition and difference all the time.

CONTEXT: This is a vision of a world (before computers)

Provides a conceptual model


Niecthze - his ideas were taken and then rewritten by the Nazis, it was taken up because one of his key notions was: "God is dead." Nightmareish vision of the world because God once was... He saw Wagner as an Übermensch. In his wake come important ideas like good and evil being subjective rather than absolutes.

Another idea is that all human's are driven by one's desire to have power, to overcome and be superior to.

Deleuze picks up on these ideas, reinterprets them, he is addressing these concepts. He is trying to negate most of them. The notion of the will to power is something that Deleuze critiques. For him, the world should be a flat or horizontal structure, you cannot rise above. That actually in a rhizomatic world, everything is equivalent, remaining a nomad and changing your point of view.

You're in a perpetual state of becoming, you are constantly in transit. Fits as a metaphor for the internet age. You are all equivalent, your computer is either online or offline.

The importance of a social desire. He says there is no distinction between the individual desire and social world, we are simply an expression of a larger social consciousness. Highly post-Marxist reading of the world, anti-individualist. Interesting from the perspective on web 2.0. We make everythign configurable to what we like (think amazon, ebay home page etc...) but Deleuze would say that it isn't really an individual choice but what society desires.

Jess: So wonder how Deleuze would see the long tail? There is only the long tail, we are all on the horizontal line. Anything vertical is redundant/hierarchical.

Extremely radical ideas.

Their idea is creative and different for philosophy, you can always move on and find something different. And empowering for the individual no matter who you are.

Andy: thinking about everything being connected...there are online archives in which you can get back to the past.

The idea of a library, and dictionary is about keeping in the good words and keeping out the bad words but really all words are equivalent.

Andy: Redgreen theory of evolution - idea is from looking glass, you have to run as fast as you can to be whoever you are, to kep the same positions: like constantly becoming.

Andrew: Old movies there are those old wagon wheels, but they appear to be static because the frame rate and actual rate differ.

Andy: also looking at car wheels turning, the appear to go backwards.

Paul: Indicator of change - playing Halo with friends over the internet ends up being a nice way to have a conversation...


XKCD - maps of online communities



Digital interpretation of is God Dead?:



This is also an example of manipulating a platform rather than creating it (like in Second Life)


Andy: technology is a generational thing

Paul and Jess: no!!!

Paul: one of the important changes is that technology seems to be more accessible, everyone has a tv

Convergence!!!

Usage will change. So people who might not have been interested in taking photos could start developing an interest because their new mobile has a camera.

Andrew: This convergence of technology could have existed some time ago. Because of how the market works etc...there is an incremental change.

One of the most interesting developments in creative technologies is the way they are used is not necessarily what it was made for (think of text messaging)

Have a look at Howard Rheingold's Smart Mobs (back to Deleuze's social desire).