yes, right, i am sorry about confusing threads and authors, Gregory, that was a mistake. the text i had difficulties with was Patrick's....
>>whether he should be there genealogically or not but rather what we might
>>have forgotten about him. So, in the below quote what I think is also
>>important but tends to get overlooked when we make him the precedent for the
>>open 'e-text' (in the prosumer context at any rate), is the sense of
>>temporality embedded in his ideas.>>
This last one, of course, is Anna's response to Patrick, and her dialog about
"the networked author/producer/reader/consumer network" -- which i am not sure
needs, genealogically or otherwise, Roland Barthes as a predecessor figure
amongst all the other limited structuralist/poststructuralist theoretical
positions that, I tried to remind myself, are from a particular,
historical/geographical context-specific euro/north american theory canon that
-- presumably? -- had already been partly displaced in the 90s and after.
(Incidentally, it was a revelation to hear Paul Gilroy, author of "Black
Atlantic", speak at a recent gathering ("Reintroducing Humanity into the
World", keynote at the 2009 IAPL meeting) and curiuosly, he said that the
author of that important book was dead). Was he riffing on the old
post-structuralist jokes. But is hip hop dead too?
it is interesting to hear claims about context shifts, internationalism or
globalized/democratized network_art culture when academic context
parameterization seems not to have shifted too much. here I naturally agree
with Patrick when he asks: >>how does one determine the framing mechanism for
conversation without applying filters, and what filters are appropriate? >>
this makes me wonder, Helen, what or who (which engine of the future?) decides
how to know what is "unrelated" - how you filter out , and how you protect
the "vulnerable" networked networkculturewriting..
How can it not be not invulnerable, according to the claims being made to its
proliferating & delayed openness?
(>>comment sections on blogs are very vulnerable to unintended use such as
gambling, sex, profanity and just plain stupidity. A recent
look at one of Michael Mandiberg's works on turbulence that allowed for
comments showed a collection over time of 2000 unrelated comments, all of
which had to be
removed.>>)
regards
Johannes Birringer
>>>
From: empyre-boun...@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au on behalf of Gregory Ulmer
Sent: Thu 10/22/2009 10:58 PM
Johannes Birringer wrote:
> hello all
>
> this last longer post by Gregory Ulmer was not easy to read, and partly i
clarification: Gregory Ulmer has not yet submitted a long post to this
list. Maybe next week.
Greg
> began to stop, reading, and then went back to a post a few days ago, by Ian
> M Clothier -- about contexts and context shifts.
> Did not also several commentators bring up the issue of "time" again, and the
> simultaneities of (different) threads at some same time?
> this month i cannot seem to focus, although the subject appears to be clear
> ---- networked_book, collaborative/participatory writing...
>>>>
<<winmail.dat>>
_______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
