PSFK Trends

It's always interesting to enter into a community of people that you do not necessarily consider yourself a part of, and find, upon entering, that you really fit in; that your interested in the things that they are interested in, that you have something relavent to say.

The trends on PSFK are incredibly fascinating to me. Sometimes the posts are almost humorous, for instance, there is a new luggage trend that Samsonite is creating that makes a suitcase into a wheel instead of a rectangular object. But the great part about the site is that there really is something for everybody.

There was some music-related trends that were really interesting to me. One dealt with a music site that had been shut down that had once allowed users to make their own mix tapes and have their own sites where the tapes could be listened to. The other was a post about a group of kids making musical instruments out of household products.

The fact that there could be a post about "iNap," an application that one can download on their iPhone to make sure they don't nap through their subway stop (something that I think would be very helpful for a lot people I know), next to an article about a man who has created and flown with man-made wings, next to a really interesting photography exhibit, proves how vast this community is; how there is a place for all interests.

Stepping In

In CNN.com's article, "Designers developing virtual-reality 'Cocoon,'" readers are introduced to the "Cocoon," a mechanism that allows users to literally step into another world, virtually at least. The machine would recognize the users' movements and accordingly, operate to move around with the users' motions. For the gaming world, this would mean being able to incorporate one's entire body into playing video games. The Cocoon could also be used to create virtual museums that one could literally walk through a museum instead of simply looking at pictures online when you were unable to go to a real museum. In terms of shopping, it would literally allow shoppers to walk around shops, pick up books from shelves, etc.

But this leads to the question of where this leaves the real world. If you can step into a bubble and be virtually anywhere you want, who is to say that you will ever really need to leave your house? Social networking can be done, shopping can be done, even cultural outings can be had, by simply inputting where you wish to go or what you wish to do. Would a machine like this, like the mind-reading headset, destroy human interaction and life in the real world?

Mind Reading

"So add that up: a wireless, remote, brain reading/writing device that can scan, interpret, and communicate with someone across the room, without them even knowing it. Connect that to the Internet... and talk about brainwashing possibilities. What if some hacker could figure out how to write viruses to people's brains? It's actually a little scary." - quote from the Article on CNN.com "The Future of Gaming is All in the Mind."

This may be the most unsetteling article I have read in a while. It sounds as though this electronic company's creation of a brain wave-reading machine that will ultimately allow gamers to play with their minds, not only their hands, is a little too Orson Welles for my taste. What does it say about our culture that this type of machine is being created -- a machine that can read people's minds and then direct virtual actions?

While it sounds intriguing in a science fiction project, Matrix-movie, time-traveling, kind of way, the implications of such a machine seem hard to ignore. While it may free up the hands of gamers and create a new way of looking at the gaming world, it would almost unarguably end up in the hands of dangerous people with dangerous ideas who would use such a machine to propogandize, or "brainwash" as the article notes.

Where is the line drawn between amazing technological advancement and disturbing, robotic-like, tools?

Issuu.com

As the Fashion Director of NYU's fashion magazine, NYCHIC, and as a magazine journalism concentration in Gallatin, I am always interested in seeing where the world of magazines, in light of major sales decline, is adjusting to a new, web-obsessed/dependent culture.  

This semester, after having a lot of financial problems with our last issue, I hesitantly suggested to the editorial board of NYChic that we start doing a website instead of a tangible publication.  I say hesitantly because I personally love magazines -- holding them in my hand, being able to rip things out, etc.  For some reason, I have always looked at the "Webzine" as a destroyer of journalism as we know it.

What's so great about issuu.com is that the magazines on the site were created solely for the internet, and this is where my train of thought changed.  Prior to knowing about this site, I had thought of online magazines as the final stages of a publication's fall.  Elle Girl couldn't cut it on the newsstands so they became a website. Teen Magazine, YM, etc., all faced the same crisis.  It just seemed like a lesser version of something that was not bringing in enough revenue for survival.

Looking at the various online magazines on the site, however, proved to me that, if you go into creating an online magazine knowing that it is for a specific audience, in a specific space, you aren't "giving up," rather you are thinking about magazines and journalism in a different way.  In a way, it's kind of a rebirthing of the way we are thinking about writing/magazines/etc.  

David Fried piece at the Sarah Tecchia Gallery

I absolutely adored this piece.  Aesthetically, the piece was very appealing to me.  As a highly organized person, I am instantly attracted to organized, clean things.  The balls that move around the square or rectangular block were very geometrical and very orderly.  Each of the balls, as Sarah Tecchia explained in her office, had a personality of its own, and this also was very appealing to me.  Especially in the piece in the gallery owner's office, which she said reminded her of "Skittles," really seemed almost pet-like.  Because of their vibrant colors, they really seemed to have their own personalities - some more sensitive than others, some drawn to other balls, some shier.  

Of course, there was the other layer of fascination regarding the technology that goes into the "kinetic interactive" piece.  Interestingly enough, there are no messy wires inside, which goes along perfectly with the exterior of the piece.  I'm sure a lot of people who see the piece want to know how it works -- how a collection of balls can just move around based on sound, without messy wires or having to be plugged into anything.  I, on the other hand, think part of the beauty of the piece, is that we don't know how it works.  It adds a level of mystery to the highly interesting piece of work.

Doug Aitken's "Migration" exhibit at 303 Gallery

I have never really been able to understand or enjoy video instillation.  I remember when the new MOMA opened a few years ago there was this whole video instillation exhibit in the back of one of the floors where a lot of the Warhol's hang.  I tried to sit and watch and get it, and I really didn't -- I couldn't get into it.  

After seeing the exhibit at 303 Gallery, my relationship with video instillation changed.  I found myself fascinated mostly by the format of the piece.  Seeing something on a screen that large and that close up had a huge effect on me.  I was able to really see the textures of the animals that were on the screen.  The "plot" of the video also fascinated me.  The concept of an animal as large as a moose could be in a hotel room, walking around, was truly absurd -- much in the same way that any Absurdist or Surrealist painter would include a strange object in an ordinary scene.

"Untethered" Exhibit at Eyebeam Gallery

I was extremely taken aback by the artist that showed us around Eyebeam.  Most significant out of the two works she had done in the exhibit, I was extremely interested in the "Gentrify" tape that was intended to be used to "rope off" areas that were being gentrified, in hopes of de-gentrifying them.  The artist, Geraldine Juarez, allows the tape to be distributed by anyone, virtually, in any amount.

As a New Yorker my entire life, issues of gentrification and urban planning have always fascinated me.  The idea of performing acts of social commentary through art in such a public space really interested me and sparked my curiosity.  

Aesthetically, it is a very catchy piece.  One is frequently drawn to "Caution" tape, aware that something had occurred in the space that is being roped off and wanting to know "why"?  The fact that there is a parallel being made by "cautioning" and "gentrifying" is a really important and interesting concept to ponder.

I also found that it went along very nicely with the entire aura of Eyebeam which really excited me.  Everything had an important meaning behind it:  Juarez's other piece that we saw, a money-donation machine instillation, was taking a look at issues of philanthropy and what it means to give to the arts without "getting" anything out of it.  The t-shirt design center was not only a chance for gallery goers to interact with art, but also helped AIDS research.  And this idea of the art being meaningful is also seen in the space itself, very communal and innovative.

The New Media Reader - Chapters 2-4

What struck me most about these chapters was the underlying theme of how far a computer can really go.  It is something that my father is always concerned about -- if you can talk to your friends on your blackberry, instantaneously, without actually having to hear their voice, what is happening to communication?  It goes back to the old argument about whether or not my middle school allowed spell check to be used on the school computers -- was it destroying our ability to learn how to spell?  And why, if I could use a calculator at any given time easily, do I have to learn math at this point in technological history?

In Bush's article, he claims that "[t]he world has arrived at an age of cheap complex devices of great reliability; and something is bound to come of it."  And this was said in 1945.  I wonder what Bush would have thought about the ease at which people can communicate, in a completely non face-to-face manner through text-messaging.  Would these technology proponents support a "memex" that valued the least amount of human interaction possible; like a blackberry, that not only allows an "encyclopedia" of information to be recorded in one place, but for that encyclopedia to be able to be held in our pockets?

.04 Men, Machines, and the World About - Norbert Wiener, 1954

-Wiener wanted to devise a science that dealt with the consequences of scientific work, cybernetic science -- this came after the war.  He was a strong proponent of social justice

-Wiener introduced the use of the prefix "cyber" into common use, not only highly technical

-Cybernetics studies "communication and control in the animal and the machine"

-While at war, the question came up as to how to make a machine simulate a gun pointer, and what the potential outcomes of this occurring may be.

-Negative feedback

-Machine can learn

03. Computing Machinery and Intelligence - Alan Turing, 1950

-Computers were initially viewed as "number-crunchers" before people realized that computer technology could incorporate language

-Alan Turing attempted to "decrypt encoded language"

-Turing asked:  Can a computer make a human believe that the computer is human.  

-Anticipated A.I.

-He describes the computer as a verbal device that could "operate on language"

-"Can a computer think?"

-Digital computers are consisted of: storing of information, executive unit, which carries out an array of operations, and control

Arguments against computers being able to think that interested me:

-"The Theological Objection" - since God did not create machines, they cannot think.

-"The Heads in the Sand Objection" - It is too scary to think about machines having the ability to think, so we should disregard the idea.

-"The Mathematical Objection" - Math proves that machines are limited

-"The Argument from Consciousness" - Machines cannot feel - so they can not think

-"Lady Lovelace Objection" - the machine cannot create anything of its own, on its own.

 

02. As We May Think - Vannevar Bush, 1945

-Bush was organizer of the Manhattan Project that created the bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

-Worked with President Eisenhower to create the "iron triangle" or the "military-industrial complex"

-Article was published in the Atlantic and Life after the attacks on Japan

-He asks: "What should scientists who have been working for the war do now that it is over?"

-Science has increased our control of the "material" world through communication, security, etc.  We have become reliant on these technologies.

-Bush described a "memex," a computer like futuristic instrument - something that would change "information" into "knowledge" -- one would easily be able to access information/records instantaneously.  This, in affect, anticipates the modern computer.

-He stresses his hope that advances in technology should help the world, not hurt it

Borges Documentary

I found the Borges Documentary to be a bit difficult to get through.  Had I had a better background of his life, or had read more of the stories that he wrote, which were referenced throughout the documentary, I think I would have gotten a lot more out of it.

Most interesting in the documentary to me was the way the director dealt with issues of space and time.  Usually, when one thinks of a documentary, especially about such a historical figure as Borges, it is assumed that the story will be told linearly.  In other words, I am used to viewing a person's history starting with their birth and eventually ending in their death, or if the figure is still living, his or her most recent accomplishments.

The director of the Borges documentary did not do this.  Rather, the documentary is sprinkled with various vignettes from Borges' childhood, adulthood, pieces of his stories, his thoughs, etc.  Instead of just learning about Borges, the viewer is able to imagine what it may have been like to live inside of his head.

Microcosmos

Ever since I was little I have been fascinated by the idea of other life-forms.  I was always reading about conspiracy theories about life on other planets, UFOs, information about foreign species that was being hidden from the public by the government.  Along with this came a fascination with the lives of those who were not able to verbalize their experiences.  I was always wondering what was going on that was unseen by the eye or unheard by the ear.  Did my dog communicate with the neighborhood canines when she barked?  What was the day in the life of the pigeon on the sidewalk of Broadway and 92nd Street?

What I loved about the Microcosmos video was two-fold.  The most obvious attraction to the video was aesthetic.  The vivid colors and textures that the camera was able to capture was so intensely interesting to look at that I felt I could pause the video at any given point and stare at a still for hours, and still not really see every detail.  It was beautifully edited, even down to the sometimes humorous background music that helped tell the stories of these strange and beautiful creatures.  

But what caught my attention that drew me back to my childhood fantasies of other "things'" lives, was the fact that the technology used to shoot the video literally showed a world that was never able to be seen before.  All of these creatures existed before the camera did.  Their everyday activities, like carrying food, reproducing, socializing -- all of this went on without humans knowing, without humans seeing.   The video showed what could be interpreted as their emotions, their eyes, we could see the way they interact with other insects and with their surroundings. This technology has allowed us to view an entire other world--the world of the minute insects, that have always, at least in my mind, been looked at as completely un-human-like.

Documentary on Internet History

If I had to picture in my mind the type of people that I could imagine "invented" the Internet and the tools that go along with it (email, etc.), previously to watching this documentary, I would have pictured scientific-looking people -- equipped with round glasses and perfectly pressed suits.  

If I were to describe these type of people, previous to watching the documentary, I probably could have guessed they would be entrepreneur types -- money obsessed and ultra competitive, boasting about their many accomplishments that have advanced almost every aspect of life.

What fascinating me most about the documentary was not necessarily the actual history of the Internet, which I did find interesting.  Rather, the way these brilliant inventors looks and acted -- their responses, or rather lack their of, to their major accomplishments.  For the most part, these men were laid back, taking little responsibility personally for the creation of the Internet.  Rather, each of them felt part of a major collaboration -- everyone was part of a group and no one individual was praised for anything specific.  

The reason, the documentary implied, that the Internet became so important was because it was opened up for anyone to use, regardless of computer expertise.  Virtually, anyone can buy a domain, create a website, and post basically anything they like.  The very core of the creation of the Internet is, too, deeply embedded with this sharing of information -- the idea that in order for something to be whole/successful, it needs to be a project of collaboration, full of a multitude of different ideas.

"Ryan" animation and "Bingo" animation

When "Ryan" and "Bingo" were first put on in class, I was amazed by the artwork.  The intricacy that was given to even the most seemingly minute detail caught my attention - the hairs on Ryan's head, the makeup on one of the clowns.  I wondered how the artists could possibly have remembered to put all of those details in -- how long it took them to do it -- and how many different times they had to go over and over again to make sure everything looked absolutely perfect.

While attention to detail occupied my mind for much of the viewing, what really stuck with me was the emotional attachment that both "Ryan" and "Bingo" gave off.  After watching "Bingo" much of the class, as well as myself, remarked how creepy it was.  There was fear in the eyes of the man who is being called Bingo -- the eyes of the little clown-girl are still vivid in my mind days later.  In "Ryan" especially, there was an enormous amount of a emotionality.  The animation left me feeling attached to Ryan's character, feeling bad for him -- something that I would not necessarily have considered feeling toward a cartoon. 

Engine Room and T.V. Web Serials

In her article on web serials, Virginia Heffernan discusses the rising trend of web-based shorts that seem to keep appearing.  She discusses these low-budget, often humorous series, some of which have cult-like followings reminiscent of the gamers love for The Guild in the series discussed last week.  

Most interesting to me in this article was Heffernan's idea of what exactly causes these low-budget serials to attract such a following.  Many of these popular web serials seem effortlessly made -- all one needs is a web-cab, something to say, and a few hits on a site.  Heffernan's explanation made a lot of sense to me, and really resinated with why I think I was so hooked after watching a few of the episodes of The Guild in class.  There is a constant level of not knowing if another one is going to be made -- there is little reliability in the web-based world and such anonymity that a fan of a web serial can never really know if another episode will be made.  If a site goes down, there is little a fan can really do.  If a site goes down, there is a little a fan can really do -- there is no powerful television network to contact, sometimes the creators are not known by anything more than a screen name or email address.  What keeps you hooked is not necessarily the content, but thew ay the content is delivered -- in short spurts that keep you wanting more.

"Engine Room" is a web-based reality competition created by MTV and Hewlett-Packard.  The series follows four teams of four people (each representing their prospective parts of the world) for seven weeks as they create various works of digital art using Hewlett-Packard products.  Each episode, according the the New York Times article, will last about seven minutes.  

There's a ton of stuff that interests me about this series.  Going back to the second introduction in the text, the whole idea of new media art really fascinates me.  I'm really interested to see what these teams are creating.  But in relation to Heffernan's idea of the "keep you wanting more" approach to these web-serials, "Engine Room" fits nicely into her train of thought.  MTV has been producing tons of reality based competitions stemming directly from the first real reality show -- The Real World.  As ratings drop for shows like The Challenge, a guilty pleasure I personally once engaged in, MTV is trying a new outlet, an outlet that caters towards a generation of instant gratification.  Instead of having to wait an hour, through tedious amounts of commercials, all of the product placement-inspired competition is condensed into seven minutes -- only a few hundreds of seconds.

The first episode was constructed in the same style as many of MTV's other reality/competition shows -- there is already a possible love interest, a party girl, etc.  Each contestant seems to have his or her own character -- each team their own drive.  The attributes that draw the public to reality television -- the idea that you get to watch people like yourself on television -- apply to Engine Room.  But while I look forward to seeing how they do on their HP commercial (the first challenge of the series), I find myself finding the whole thing a little less legitimate than I would a longer series.  Maybe because it is on the web, maybe because it is so short, maybe because my Internet has been spotty so I had to restart the webisode a few times, maybe because the host's voice cuts out half a second too early -- I worry that I may not feel as invested in these "characters" had the series been televised.

New Media Reader Intro 2

In his article, Lev Manovich discusses, amongst other topics, the new media art in relation to the more conservative art world of museums and galleries.  New media art, he explained, had difficulty attracting attention because of opposing agendas of the two worlds:  that of the typical art world and that of the new media world.

I found this point very interesting.  While reading the text, it made perfect sense.  I consider myself to be a relatively creative person -- much more artistically inclined than scientifically.  When I hear the words "computer" or "hypertext," I usually automatically assume that I will have difficulty understanding what will come next -- the computer science world is intimidating without even actually knowing what it really means.  When I hear art-related words, I feel more at home.  I can easily attach meaning to "installation art" or "exhibition." 

The idea of these conflicting fields -- the conservative art world vs. the new media art world is something I'm looking forward to continuing to examine.

One of Manovich's other points which I found interesting among the conflicting agenda's of the traditional art world vs. the new media art world is the issue of authorship.  My sister, who works in the post-war and contemporary department at Christie's auction house, always talks about the increasing difficulty of selling Warhol's.  Many of Warhol's paintings were done by his studio, which means that one is never truly certain whether Warhol himself created the art by hand or whether one of his friends, in his studio, was the person who applied the paint.  Because of this, it is extremely difficult to appraise his work.  Authorship in the art world is, many times, all that matters.  If it has a good name, it will sell for more, whether or not the piece of art is necessarily aesthetically pleasing to the collector.  

In the digital age, authorship, as Manovich explains, is relatively non-existent.  While working as an intern at Seventeen Magazine, I frequently posted small articles in their "Buzz" section in the website.  Never was my name put on the articles I wrote, never was there a way to prove that I wrote it.

Introduction to The New Media Reader

Most of the textbooks I have read both in high school and at university have been hundreds, sometimes thousands, of pages of well-researched fat.  History textbooks have informed me of  what happened hundreds of thousands of years ago and how it affected countries years after.  Science textbooks have shown me how developed our knowledge of biology or chemistry has become since the days of Galileo and the like.

The New Media Reader, on the other hand, is doing something different, as apparent in the introduction.  Instead of giving a historical, permanent account of a subject, it is collecting ideas on a developing subject, one with an vast array of opinion and thought.  

In one of my Gallatin classes, Objectivity and the Politics of the Journalistic Revolution, the professor said that one of the most fascinating things when thinking about all of this new media that continuously becomes more and more developed, is that for one of the first times in history, the younger generations know more about what is going on than the older generations do.  "...[T]he term 'new media' is a sign of our current confusion about where...efforts are leading and...[the] breathless...pace of change..." (3).

Everything from Internet development to the mass production of the iPod has significantly effected my generation, and those younger and older than me.  IN my opinion, this is predominantly because, as a result of the time period in which I was born, I have been able to escape more frequently, get out of difficult situation, etc., because of the constant developments in technology.  My mother always used to tell me that she was amazed at how much we spoke to one another after I went to college.  When she was in college, she would tell me, there was one phone --in the hallway of her dorm -- and you were lucky if you had the chance to use it, and even luckier if you managed to get a message.

The introduction to the text talks about the computer as a physical place, one that can be entered--and as seen in the Guild series, this idea is widely accepted.  While I don't personally play online games, I can relate to using technology to enter into a different realm -- non-face-to-face.  Frequently, I can be found during high stress times listening to my iPod on high volume, consciously trying to look unavailable to those around me even if I am physically in the room.  The ability to carry around a small device with good sound that can hold every one of my favorite, stress-reducing, songs, has enabled me to virtually carry around my other world in my school-bag, and as long as it is charged, I can disappear for a little.

The Guild

The Guild is a webisode series about a group of very different people, all of whom participate heavily, humorously so, on an interactive online game.  In class, we watched a series of short episodes, all of which joked about the individual gamer's dependency on the game, as well as each characters' dependence on this virtual group that they seem to be a part of.  

Felicia Day, both the creator and main character of the web series, has done a terrific job of showing people outside the gaming circle what these kind of relationships are like.  For me, someone who does not even accept Facebook requests from people I do not know, let alone talk to strangers online, I was really interested not only in the humor of the series, but they way it touched on the way the group communicated with one another -- how their personalities were conveyed through their avatar, the experienced each of them felt when they met in person.