McCullough/Weiner Notes

McCullough

Malcolm McCullough is an associate professor at the University of Michigan where he teaches architecture and information design. He seems to be interested in" urban computing and place-based interactive design" since he has lectured extensively on those topics. He likes using his architect and technology background.

The first section of this article describes what exactly craft is. Tools and technologies working with the hand is the very general definition the author gives right off the bat. There are both differences and similarities between these types of work. "These motions are quick, small, and repetitive, as in much traditional handwork, but somehow they differ. For one thing, they are faster--in fact, their rates matter quite a bit" (1-2). The author then goes on to say that the digital artisan isn't focusing and looking on the hands; they look at the screen. Another part of craft is that it usually isn't talked about in regards to technology. However, the world is becoming more high-tech. "...the usual meaning opposes high-technology processes in which the hand plays a diminished role. Thus the proposal of craft in an electronic medium is somewhat of a paradox. But can we, here in the computer age, with fully optimistic and benevolent intent suggest that the word needs a more inclusive definition?" (2).

The next section goes into what direct manipulation is. "Direct manipulation is term coined in 1983 by software designer Ben Shneiderman to describe a principal that we now take for granted: pointing at our work with a mouse" (2). Although I'm still a bit confused on exactly what direct manipulation is, the text says that programs like MacPaint and MacDraw were some of the first programs to use direct manipulation. That makes me think that maybe direct manipulation is the act of using a mouse, clicking, etc. Haptic, a word which means the "exploratory and manipulative aspects of touch" is somewhat the next step after using the mouse for computer work. They talk about touch as being important. I agree that in regards to craft the sense of touching is vital. The hands are touching materials and working with fabrics, etc when doing traditional craft. With digital craft you cannot physically touch your work like traditional craft. In the last part of this article the author describes how the hands work together during digital craft, the pace matters, problems arise and they get fixed, etc. They way he describes this sounds so close to the descriptions of traditional craft. He also describes how eventually you can become a master of the computer, just like you can with a craft. All in all, he ends this article stating that digital craft is indeed real craft. The last paragraph explains that well.

QUESTIONS:

I'm a bit confused on what "direct manipulation" is. First, it says that direct manipulation is pointing at things with a mouse. However then it says that MacPaint and MacDraw were some of the first direct manipulations. Those programs are more than just pointing a mouse. What is a clear definition of direct manipulation?

Weiner

Norbert Weiner was a math professor at MIT. He contributed work to electronic engineering, electronic communication, and control system. He also created cybernetics.

Cybernetics has a lot to do with how machines think and how they interact with humans. From what I got out of it, it deals with the messages that machines send and humans send to each other to get an output. He describes the industrial revolution. On page one, he talks about how in the first revolution the "human arm is replaced by industrial machines" and in the modern industrial revolution is "devaluing the human mind".

A large part of this article was the point that messages no longer are sent from humans to humans. Electrical messages are sent all of the time. Turning on a coffee pot sends a message to a machine is just one example that Weiner gives in this article.

Then, Weiner compares older machines to newer ones. "The older machines, and in particular the older attempts to produce automata, did in fact work on a closed clockwork basis. On the other hand, the machines of the present day possess sense organs; that is, receptors for messages coming from the outside" (3). Chunks of the article like this almost give the article a sense that machines are taking over. That's the general feel I got from this article.

QUESTIONS:

I did not understand why the art of pilot and steersman and the "governor" was included in this article. (pg 2) It did not seem to add anything to the text but as a promotion for other ones of his books. Why was that paragraph in the article? I don't see what it does for the audience.

Gabriel/Wagmister and Barbrook/Schultz

Gabriel/Wagmister

Teshome H. Gabriel was a professor at UCLA in the Theater, Film, and Television department who focuses on Third World cinema. Teshome was not born in the United States; he was born in Ethiopia. Fabian Wagmister is a professor at UCLA and worked in the same department as Gabriel. He also is a filmmaker and created Hypermedia studios. He seems to be interested in technology across the globe as well. For both of the authors, I think connecting technology to other countries is important to them.

The main topic of the essay is comparing traditional weaving and new digital technologies like a computer or the world wide web. They talk about how digital technology is talked about in terms of looking towards the future and making a break with the past. This puts the Third World in a weird position because most of their life is centered on traditional cultures, like weaving.

One of the most interesting comparisons they made was the fact that lots of vocabulary terms are used in both activities. Some of these terms include network, web, and texture. Tradition is another large part of the article. "...the Third World is represented as having a more ecological, more connected, (dare we say) more spiritual view of others and the world, computer technology tends to think of tradition in merely instrumental terms, something to help it designate tools, objects, and users -- all of which are ultimately and tacitly reincorporated in to a Western perspective." From that quote, it sounds as if technology in the Third World is trying to push them toward the more Western culture and ideals. Another thing that I thought was odd in the article was the fact that they said the spiritual is found in digital technologies a lot. The ad with the computer and the monk was mentioned as an example. However, I've never seen an ad or anything like that before in my life.

QUESTIONS:

I don't really understand when they were talking about weaving being digital because you work with digits. "Weaving is digital, in the sense that it relies on digits - on fingers - for its production." If this was true wouldn't almost all craft be digital?

Is weaving always connected to the spiritual world and the Great Mother in all cultures? I don't know if that would effect how different cultures would view the spiritual world in connection to weaving/computers.

Barbrook/Schultz

Richard Barbrook is from the UK and he's a huge critic of the "neo-liberal cyber-elite". He's worked with community radio-broadcasting, media regulations, and he has been the coordinator of the Hypermedia Research Center. This may be the same place that Gabriel worked on. Pit Schultz lives in Berlin. He's worked on radio projects that combine "old" and "new" radio together. He's also an artist, author, and computer professional.

This manifesto is a fake manifesto; almost satirical. It's sarcastic and the manifesto itself talks about his made up group called the digital artisans. The artisans are connected with old-school bourgeois-type social classes when it talks about the present moment. In the next section they talk about this group called EDAN which sounds like a union to me. Government is obviously linked with the unions in the manifesto just like it is in real life, at this time in the United States.

"No society can call itself truly democratic until all citizens can directly exercise their right to media freedom over the Net." This quote shows the link of government and union and also shows how sarcastic this piece is. I think in this section the authors are trying to say that technology represents moving forward to Western cultures and that kind of connects with democracy. Western societies think the only modern, great government can be democratic just like we see technology as more effective/modern than a traditional, simple way of life.

QUESTIONS:

I don't understand why the partying was a part of #17. I understand this is a fake manifesto, but is that a cultural thing for some people do with their unions? Or have people done that before and the authors don't agree with that practice? I feel like it's oddly placed.

Also I didn't fully understand how #20 was sarcastic, satirical, or fake. It seemed like a normal thing for a union to expect; education opportunities for the people who want to pursue that trade. Again, I'm just wondering if in the UK this is some cultural thing that I just don't understand? Are they trying to bash a certain digital/technological union that they have over there?

Digital Craft

In Class Photoshop 3/8

I cropped the picture a bit and just played around with brightness and contrast.

Jenkins- Chapter 6 and Conclusion

The largest part of Chapter 6 was simply the convergence between politics and social media. The focus was on the 2004 election and the use of photoshop, various websites, blogs, and people trying to report the how the election was going. Also, they looked into television. The mainstream news channels versus entertainment or comedy news like the Daily Show. It was really interesting that the people who watched the entertainment based shows actually knew more about the issues than the people who watched the news. I suppose that is because the ones who are watching the entertainment based programs look up more information on the issues while the people who watch mainstream news use that was their sole resource. Jenkins sees this cultural production as a means to promote politics I think. He saw Alphaville as a city where people could talk about democracy and the democratic process. It was a sort of debate between people of the city and a way for the people who participated in this online city to see the faults of democracy. Also, it gave young people in this country a way to participate in politics. I think this type of social media gives people a chance to share and participate in politics and spread their voices in ways that they couldn't before. I think the "vote naked" ads describe how regular people feel about politics. They are scared to talk about them because honestly, talking politics can cause fights and ruin relationships, people get yelled at for having certain views on things, etc. Other "regular people" could be young people who aren't able to vote; they can participate in things like the Sims game he talked about. These regular people can use social media to keep up on politics in the comfort of their own homes and become comfortable with politics becoming a larger part of their life (if they choose to). Jenkins also talks about the "Monitorial Citizen" which is a citizen who kind of just sits back and watches. Also in that section he talks about exactly what an "informed citizen" is. I think that is up to opinion; people get all their information from many different places. The Monitorial citizen can use this social media as another way to get information and use that information if need be. If I ever felt really attacked by politics I think I could see myself displaying that online or in other ways. However, usually I keep my views to myself instead of voicing my thoughts on politics. A lot of people out there get fired up about politics and then forget to respect other's opinions. I don't know if I live under a rock or am watching the wrong stuff, but I haven't seen much social media on the upcoming elections yet. There have been all these controversies with potential candidates, but I don't keep up on a lot of politics as it is so I haven't seen anything or participated in anything yet.

I see his convergence culture as different digital medias not focusing on one sole media but instead going across multiple medias. Star Wars was a really good example of that. It was originally shot as a movie, but then expanded into a video game, action figures, t shirts, etc. Also, I think convergence is participatory based. The mixture between large corporations and fans/participants is another large part of culture. Collectively and together these two parts can make up a better whole; a more intelligent whole. By having participants different areas of culture expands and gains more fans because they feel closer to the particular part of culture. I see it connecting with DIY on a few levels. The participants of convergence are usually making things, like movies. They use their hands and brains to create just like DIY crafters. The one thing that I feel is different between DIY and convergence culture is that with DIY they are usually activists against corporations and on some level convergence culture is trying to work with big corporations. I'm not saying that participants of convergence culture and corporations don't bump heads, but the goal is to eventually have a good relationship with each other and use each other in their own works. I think a lot of what Jenkins describes is digital craft like I said before. His article did change how I felt about digital craft. Previously, I felt like digital craft felt and sounded a lot like work. However, the people participating in this digital craft are making things because they love to make it. They are crazy fans of the things they participate in. That isn't work, that's leisure.

Jenkins- Intro and Chapter 4 and Midtern Project Updates

Henry Jenkins earned his PhD at UW-Madison in Communication Arts. He enjoys studying fan cultures, "world-making", and the relationship between text and reader. In the introduction I think his main argument is that convergence is coming whether people are ready for it or not. Companies need to be ready to give away a little bit of their creative freedom to whoever or whatever medium they have to eventually work with. Also, he talks about consumer and corporate relationships. He describes it as "both a top-down corporate-driven process and a bottom-up consumer-driven process. Going off of that, he talks about how grassroots participation and corporate media interact. The major key terms he uses are convergence, participation, and collective intelligence. He also uses franchise, corporate, grassroots, and consumer quite a lot. He sees a lot changing. He talks about how the consumer is changing; they're louder, more migratory, and more social. He also talks about the medium changing but media staying the same; he lists a ton of examples. In Chapter 4, Jenkins talks extensively about how fans of Star Wars participate in the Star Wars culture by making their own movies. Mostly, he discusses the relationship between these fans and their work and Lucasfilm the company who made Star Wars. He talks about how the relationship has changed; the company is more strict on what fans make and sometimes less strict. He does talk about how Lucasfilm has been very tolerant of their fans and I think that's part of why it is so successful. They have a positive convergence. Star Wars is heavily participated in by the consumers and most of the time, its taken very well by Lucas and his company. His company actually watches some of the movies and recognizes what they consider to be well-made amateur films. At the same time, Lucasfilm does put certain restraints on their work. I think that their success comes from the perfect balance between these restraints and the participation that they allow their fans. Jenkins also discusses how fans and their participation differ when it comes to video games. It seems like their is much more room for fans to participate and express themselves in this medium. Koster, the guy in charge of making video games for Star Wars, sees fan participation in the video game world as really important. He advocates expression.

I think Jenkins is asking us to see DIY as a way to express ourselves, but with some limitations. That seems to be a core subject of his book. Also, I think he might be trying to say that collaboration is a good idea. DIY people and big corporations may be able to work together at some point if fans and huge film corporations can. In regards to craft, he only really talks about digital craft so I think he sees digital craft as a real craft. He sees it as a real way of self expression. I definitely agree with him. I think some people see digital craft as more work than craft. Some people express themselves and use the digital world everyday. Digital work can have purpose just like normal craft can.

MIDTERM REFLECTION:

Well my progress on my dishcloths has been pretty slow. I had to look up a lot more things on knitting and try much more techniques than I originally thought I would have to. I spent hours doing this. Then, whenever I would mess up my knitting I wouldn't know how to fix it so I would just start over again. The second picture is an example of that. I got this far plenty of times and then had to start over again. This took awhile because I didn't have any technique down and I wasn't fast or good at knitting by any means. This was all VERY frustrating for me. I made progress and then had nothing to show for it basically. The most surprising part of this project for me is just how difficult knitting honestly is for me. I didn't know there was so much to it. The only thing I'm altering about my project is the number of dishcloths I'm going to be making. I hope to finish two of them. I had originally guessed that I'd finish four, but didn't really put much thought into the amount of time looking information up and teaching myself to knit would take up (which was A TON of time). However, I am proud of myself with how much I've learned and done all on my own.