From Warfare to Welfare is Jennifer Light's critique that urban planning was significantly impacted by United States defense planning. The book is well written, easy to read, and captivating. The pictures of urban development from the past few decades also really help to drive home her point.
My problem with reading books like this is that they're hard to critically engage. A lot of historical research was done, and I don't have enough of a background in American History to argue other points. For instance, there are so many different facets presented about the technologies that were used as roadmaps to promote urban dispersion that it is difficult to go back and uncover ulterior explanations.
Perhaps this is one of the problems with being a younger student. A good deal of what I end up believing needs to be taken at face value, and critiqued at a later point.
The rhetorical turn that I enjoyed was Light's realization that urban planning was only marginally effected by defense. That is, although the book focused on the interests of individuals like city planners and politicians to collaborate and work towards a common defense goal, it never materialized. It's a great bit of stake inoculation that makes the whole book more effective.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
More on archetypes within the Digital Sublime
Mosco identifies the trickster archetype within the rhetoric of internet myths. But what other archetypes can be discovered? For instance, I believe his trickster may have roots in Jungian psychoanalysis. If so, are there instances of the wise old man archetype or the earth mother?
I've been thinking about these questions for a while; I'm not sure of the answer. Perhaps these would be good questions for Mosco.
I've been thinking about these questions for a while; I'm not sure of the answer. Perhaps these would be good questions for Mosco.
Friday, April 20, 2007
The Trickster in the Digital Sublime
I really like the idea of a myth incorporating a trickster. It could also be a useful tool for analysis in the future. Identifying tricksters or mischief makers seems like it could be a useful tell for finding myths in society. For instance, some NexGen Librarians have come under fire for being upstarts within the profession. Using Mosco's myth analysis, what does this tell us about how the librarian profession views itself? What what ways are the NexGen librarians tricksters?
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
The Digital Sublime
Any time I hear the phrase "the end of," I'll think of the Digital Sublime. Mosco explores myths of cyberspace and discusses the rhetoric of authors who prolong the illusion of a technologically deterministic future. By discussing myths of cyberspace embodied by 'the end of history, geography, and politics' and also comparing cyberspace to past technologies like the telegraph, radio, telephone, and television, the reader is first galvanized to doubt the prolonged impact of the Internet, and then primed for Mosco's counterpoint; things really aren't all that different than they used to be.
I'm still trying to wrap my brain around this one. One problem that I have with the book is that it focuses on issues at the macro level. Yes, Mosco does make his point that the Internet won't change a whole lot of the social sphere, but I would have liked to see more inclusion of real individuals from within the social sphere. Instead of focusing so heavily on Fukuyama's End of History and Daniel Bell, how about some anecdotal evidence to coincide with the argument?
As an aside, the Thor myth that he uses to tie the book together was useful for keeping my attention through the entire book. Also, I found the myth sections of the book much easier to read that the final analysis of the socio-political events that contradict the cyberspace myths. Perhaps that is one of the main lessons I learned from the book. Myths are more alluring because they are easier to remember, more predictable, and more fun.
I'm still trying to wrap my brain around this one. One problem that I have with the book is that it focuses on issues at the macro level. Yes, Mosco does make his point that the Internet won't change a whole lot of the social sphere, but I would have liked to see more inclusion of real individuals from within the social sphere. Instead of focusing so heavily on Fukuyama's End of History and Daniel Bell, how about some anecdotal evidence to coincide with the argument?
As an aside, the Thor myth that he uses to tie the book together was useful for keeping my attention through the entire book. Also, I found the myth sections of the book much easier to read that the final analysis of the socio-political events that contradict the cyberspace myths. Perhaps that is one of the main lessons I learned from the book. Myths are more alluring because they are easier to remember, more predictable, and more fun.
Friday, April 6, 2007
Neff & Stark "Permanently Beta"
Neff wins my applause for combining a shitload of subjects that are interesting, fun, and relevant, and then combining them with rhetoric. The final article assigned for 810 this week is about the rhetoric of production in the Internet; specifically the never-ending beta stage, the community development rhetoric, and design in process product. Culture, technology, rhetoric...I'm envious of her work.
For her visit to class I'm interested in her academic background, how she became interested in the subjects she writes about, and what kind of support she gets from her department. Additionally, I'd like to know how she feels about the constructionist nature of her work. Any research is prone to criticism from others (that's an understatement), but it seems as though the type of work she does may draw more criticism towards its methods than other research. I'd really like to know how she defends herself against critics.
I'm really looking forward to the visit.
For her visit to class I'm interested in her academic background, how she became interested in the subjects she writes about, and what kind of support she gets from her department. Additionally, I'd like to know how she feels about the constructionist nature of her work. Any research is prone to criticism from others (that's an understatement), but it seems as though the type of work she does may draw more criticism towards its methods than other research. I'd really like to know how she defends herself against critics.
I'm really looking forward to the visit.
Neff's Entrepreneurial Labor
Models and new media workers really are the same people. Neff, et al depict a great way to advance an academic career: pick two interesting, but seemingly unrelated subjects, then compare and contrast.
Again, as with Neff's last article, I'm forced to wonder if more is going on than meets the eye. Neff traces two rhetorics for employment and says they are the same. But are all new media entrepreneurial jobs like this?
Another thing that bothered me about this article was that the modeling occupation can become enveloped by new media content producers. They overlap in many ways, because although models aren't coders, they can provide the cultural content that these coders are developing. Neff also doesn't limit her analysis to new media workers as programmers, so it would be easy to see how models could belong to both industries simultaneously. I guess this isn't really so much of a problem, but I would have liked to see this angle built on.
Finally, how about comparing academics to these two occupations. We can see some overlap in the work between models, new media entrepreneurial labor, and academics. For instance, academics need to constantly keep reading and honing their skills in much the same way that programmers need to continue to learn new skills. The compulsory networking that Neff talks about is also vital for academic work. So in my mind, there is now another question that needs to be answered. How far do the categories that Neff draws about models and new media workers extend throughout the postindustrial workforce? For instance, is there glamour to be seen in working in the electronics department in Wal-Mart?
Again, as with Neff's last article, I'm forced to wonder if more is going on than meets the eye. Neff traces two rhetorics for employment and says they are the same. But are all new media entrepreneurial jobs like this?
Another thing that bothered me about this article was that the modeling occupation can become enveloped by new media content producers. They overlap in many ways, because although models aren't coders, they can provide the cultural content that these coders are developing. Neff also doesn't limit her analysis to new media workers as programmers, so it would be easy to see how models could belong to both industries simultaneously. I guess this isn't really so much of a problem, but I would have liked to see this angle built on.
Finally, how about comparing academics to these two occupations. We can see some overlap in the work between models, new media entrepreneurial labor, and academics. For instance, academics need to constantly keep reading and honing their skills in much the same way that programmers need to continue to learn new skills. The compulsory networking that Neff talks about is also vital for academic work. So in my mind, there is now another question that needs to be answered. How far do the categories that Neff draws about models and new media workers extend throughout the postindustrial workforce? For instance, is there glamour to be seen in working in the electronics department in Wal-Mart?
Neff's Changing Place of Corporate Culture
Who knew that new media was fueled by after-hours parties? Moreover, who knew that schmoozing and tabloids fueled the industry? Interestingly enough, Neff argues that after hour parties had a fundamental role for the growth and geographic space of new media.
I'm not entirely convinced. There seems to be something missing from this analysis. People working within the same industry attending similar events in nearby location. Are the parties really a key ingredient for the geography of new media, or is it possibly more of a side effect? I like the argument that creativity breeds creativity and that is a reason why these business that were 'liberated' by network technology remained geographically close. But this creativity would not only occur at parties. It seems as though the parties may be an ingredient in a bigger social phenomena.
Perhaps Neff isn't trying to argue that the parties are a driving force, but they should still be considered in the stew of industrial productivity. That is, the parties are driving industry, but are still an important part of the entire process.
I'm not entirely convinced. There seems to be something missing from this analysis. People working within the same industry attending similar events in nearby location. Are the parties really a key ingredient for the geography of new media, or is it possibly more of a side effect? I like the argument that creativity breeds creativity and that is a reason why these business that were 'liberated' by network technology remained geographically close. But this creativity would not only occur at parties. It seems as though the parties may be an ingredient in a bigger social phenomena.
Perhaps Neff isn't trying to argue that the parties are a driving force, but they should still be considered in the stew of industrial productivity. That is, the parties are driving industry, but are still an important part of the entire process.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Gordon's "The Work of Corporate Culture"
Gordon's article discusses culture, race, and diversity management. In short, it takes the following form.
This article seems like a reiteration of old ideas. Although the ideas presented seem important, what is being added to the current discussion that Avery is engaging? Repetition is important for the creation of social knowledge, but this article lacked a "so what?" factor for me.
- Diversity management has the power to de-emphasize racial and cultural discrimination. Because we will all be so busy working towards economic goals, we won't be able to worry about cultural differences. Hey, wait a minute...should our society really be focused so heavily on economic goals?
- Forget that idea because diversity management takes an ahistorical approach to diversity. Many current issues of diversity are rooted in tenets that are central to diversity management.
- For instance, utilizing the talents of a diverse culture is a main tenet of diversity management. Hmmm...economically poor cultures are really good at working for almost nothing...does diversity management condone this type of synergy?
- Thus, Gordon shows us that diversity management isn't all it's cracked up to be. His argument is more nuanced and robust than this, but the idea should be clear. He makes sense; any time the word management is used with the social, there may be a power issue.
- Nix that; he quotes Foucault; there has to be a power issue. :)
- He ends by saying that diversity management is happening in academic institutions as well as corporate society.
- Since he just demonstrated the problems with diversity management, it appears he's providing a warning to academia
This article seems like a reiteration of old ideas. Although the ideas presented seem important, what is being added to the current discussion that Avery is engaging? Repetition is important for the creation of social knowledge, but this article lacked a "so what?" factor for me.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Slaton's engineering article
Slaton's article presents two different stories of engineering and minority education. In the first section, a well meaning university president attempts to diversify an engineering program and create a strong school by capitalizing on skills and abilities of minorities. Unfortunately, his conservative approach leads to less-than-desirable results.
In this case, by resisting the introduction of remedial level classes in higher education, he effectively limited the potential of the school by not including students that had not received comparable training to non-minorities. Unfortunately, in many cases, the reasons for the lack of education prior to higher education is related directly or indirectly to events and environments that are intricately related with the minority culture.
In the second case, Slaton describes a story of a minority centered University flourishing because their main funding sources (CARR and NASA) allow enough time for the school to create an infrastructure that supports the research that these funding institutions desire. Slaton depicts this school as fundamentally different than the first school in her article. In this instance, the school makes little attempt to diversify, but time and resources are given to students, faculty, and staff in order to produce results that are valuable for the community.
I'm forced to wonder why this is a story that is intricately tied to racial diversity. The cases described could have occurred regardless of race. I believe the more important point may be that rationalistic control over education is not the one and only way to run a school. The cultures that created minority disadvantage in both cases are not specific to minority; they are specific to disadvantaged cultures. That is, power runs through discourse in any human environment; it may be more important to look for those that are suffering rather than those who are popularly seen as different.
In this case, by resisting the introduction of remedial level classes in higher education, he effectively limited the potential of the school by not including students that had not received comparable training to non-minorities. Unfortunately, in many cases, the reasons for the lack of education prior to higher education is related directly or indirectly to events and environments that are intricately related with the minority culture.
In the second case, Slaton describes a story of a minority centered University flourishing because their main funding sources (CARR and NASA) allow enough time for the school to create an infrastructure that supports the research that these funding institutions desire. Slaton depicts this school as fundamentally different than the first school in her article. In this instance, the school makes little attempt to diversify, but time and resources are given to students, faculty, and staff in order to produce results that are valuable for the community.
I'm forced to wonder why this is a story that is intricately tied to racial diversity. The cases described could have occurred regardless of race. I believe the more important point may be that rationalistic control over education is not the one and only way to run a school. The cultures that created minority disadvantage in both cases are not specific to minority; they are specific to disadvantaged cultures. That is, power runs through discourse in any human environment; it may be more important to look for those that are suffering rather than those who are popularly seen as different.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Bowker/Starr on ICD
Sorting Things Out contains an extensive section describing the classification of ICD. The factors that way heavily on its use and adoption are discussed through historical analysis. We're shown that the ICD is altered when its pragmatic to do so. That is, when recognition of a physical manifestation is useful to recognize, it is added to the ICD.
I particularly enjoyed the analysis of aging through the analysis of disease within the ICD. In summary, Bowker/Starr argue that the ICD depicts the human life as full of activity during the first moments of life, followed by a fairly uneventful and timeless life, and then death. Their point is that if we look at the ICD, we are given no clue that age effects health; the ICD is more concerned with acute description of disease. The reasoning they provide is that the ICD is used for identification of acute symptoms, not description of human health.
Bowker/Starr also discuss the space within the ICD: a characteristic they argue is present in any classification system. The discussion of the vermilion border of the lip describes the uncertainty of the ICD in describe the body, and some of its coping mechanisms. Frankly, this is an ingenious analysis. The space within a classification is difficult to describe because it is the absence of presence. Bowker and Starr do a fantastic job of providing an example.
In my previous post, I indicated that the book was easier reading than Memory Practices in the Sciences and it has turned out to be true for the rest of the book. The cases are interesting, and the analysis, although clever, is rarely difficult to understand.
I particularly enjoyed the analysis of aging through the analysis of disease within the ICD. In summary, Bowker/Starr argue that the ICD depicts the human life as full of activity during the first moments of life, followed by a fairly uneventful and timeless life, and then death. Their point is that if we look at the ICD, we are given no clue that age effects health; the ICD is more concerned with acute description of disease. The reasoning they provide is that the ICD is used for identification of acute symptoms, not description of human health.
Bowker/Starr also discuss the space within the ICD: a characteristic they argue is present in any classification system. The discussion of the vermilion border of the lip describes the uncertainty of the ICD in describe the body, and some of its coping mechanisms. Frankly, this is an ingenious analysis. The space within a classification is difficult to describe because it is the absence of presence. Bowker and Starr do a fantastic job of providing an example.
In my previous post, I indicated that the book was easier reading than Memory Practices in the Sciences and it has turned out to be true for the rest of the book. The cases are interesting, and the analysis, although clever, is rarely difficult to understand.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Bowker/Starr - Chapter One
In this chapter, the methods used by Bowker/Starr for analysis of existing infrastructure are laid out. The cases they provide make a strong case for the salience of the upcoming chapters. I have one reservation so far: They're analysis seems to way heavily on cognition (they claim pragmatism and cognition) and perception of reality and how this cognitive analysis leads to classification and standardization.
IMHO, perception is based largely on the pre-classification of things. The vocabulary that currently exists will lead toward what will be noticed and what will not be noticed. There case for the space in between classification where things 'don't exist,' seem to provide some grounding for this theory. Are the spaces in classification created by a lack of vocabulary? Is the classification that is created derived from existing vocabulary or bootstrapped from existing vocabulary? How do social lexicons and pidgin languages effect these classifications? I'll be looking for these questions to be addressed in the future.
On a side not, the asides continue to be amusing. The 'irate' passenger and the angry harley owners provide breaks in the text that keep the reading light and alluring. These are possibly good literary tools to think about for personal writing in the future.
IMHO, perception is based largely on the pre-classification of things. The vocabulary that currently exists will lead toward what will be noticed and what will not be noticed. There case for the space in between classification where things 'don't exist,' seem to provide some grounding for this theory. Are the spaces in classification created by a lack of vocabulary? Is the classification that is created derived from existing vocabulary or bootstrapped from existing vocabulary? How do social lexicons and pidgin languages effect these classifications? I'll be looking for these questions to be addressed in the future.
On a side not, the asides continue to be amusing. The 'irate' passenger and the angry harley owners provide breaks in the text that keep the reading light and alluring. These are possibly good literary tools to think about for personal writing in the future.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Bowker/Starr - Introduction
My first experience with a Bowker book was Memory Practices in the Sciences, which was a rather painful experience. Although informative, the book was difficult to read, and not always interesting. The introduction to Sorting Things Out, is very different: It was fun to read (especially the X-Files intro) and I'm looking forward to the rest of it.
Maybe a reason that it is more interesting is that the subject matter is largely about historical medical classification. For me at least, death and disease is morbidly more interesting than the documentary practices of geologists that was featured in Memory Practices. Perhaps another his co-author, Starr, adds a writing style that is more approachable. I'm looking forward to the rest of this book.
As a side note, I'm kind of hoping that there is a little more discussion about the historical death of the classification 'death by wolf.'
Maybe a reason that it is more interesting is that the subject matter is largely about historical medical classification. For me at least, death and disease is morbidly more interesting than the documentary practices of geologists that was featured in Memory Practices. Perhaps another his co-author, Starr, adds a writing style that is more approachable. I'm looking forward to the rest of this book.
As a side note, I'm kind of hoping that there is a little more discussion about the historical death of the classification 'death by wolf.'
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Retailers, Employers, and Consumers
Chapter five: The chapter where the video store becomes "Cheers."
Greenberg's book is tinged with nostalgia. His overview of the community that is built around an item like the video cassette is enlightening and provides a new way of examining historical artifacts, but the chapter is also heavily dependent on accounts of people that provide nostalgic accounts. I'm a little wary of the accounts: how could things have been so wonderful. When I think back on high school, I tend to forget a lot of the frustrating aspects of it, and I feel like this story might be missing another side (Again, perhaps related to the porn industry - see previous posts).
Greenberg's book is tinged with nostalgia. His overview of the community that is built around an item like the video cassette is enlightening and provides a new way of examining historical artifacts, but the chapter is also heavily dependent on accounts of people that provide nostalgic accounts. I'm a little wary of the accounts: how could things have been so wonderful. When I think back on high school, I tend to forget a lot of the frustrating aspects of it, and I feel like this story might be missing another side (Again, perhaps related to the porn industry - see previous posts).
U-Haul
U-Haul was selling video tapes. The chapters for this week just keep getting better and better. I wonder if the next chapter reveals that the porn industry is connected to U-Haul distributors. :)
Porn and Video
Rather than take action through the legal system, however, the film’s financiers (who were connected with organized crime) simply had their “associates” visit theaters where bootleg copies of the movie were playing, offering theater owners the chance to continue showing the film for half of the box office receipts. As Eric Schlosser notes, “Few theater owners refused this offer.” [pg. 72]
If only the rest of the retail industry worked as dynamically as the porn industry. These are people who know how to push their product (not that they really need much help) and capitalize as much as possible.
If only the rest of the retail industry worked as dynamically as the porn industry. These are people who know how to push their product (not that they really need much help) and capitalize as much as possible.
Hobbyist Culture
"This seems to be the fate of most enthusiast cultures – they carry within themselves the seeds of their own irrelevance to mainstream culture." [pg. 53]
That's an interesting idea. The groups that pride themselves in their difference, by virtue of being drawn together in this manner, also destruct themselves by their difference. They either become too esoteric, out-dated, or they lose interest in the tie that binds once other groups pick up on the thing that made them special.
That's an interesting idea. The groups that pride themselves in their difference, by virtue of being drawn together in this manner, also destruct themselves by their difference. They either become too esoteric, out-dated, or they lose interest in the tie that binds once other groups pick up on the thing that made them special.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Computer Programmers and "Black Magic"
This week the 810 readings were all written by Nathan Ensmenger and all about the history of computer programmers from the 1940s to present.
I hadn't realized that the earliest forms of programming created a separation between a planner and coder, and that the coding aspect was considered menial labor. Ensmenger says that the transistion from coder to programmer was partially the result of the coders needing to rework the planner's work in order to make computer software run.
He uses this theme as a launching pad to discuss the idea of programmers as practitioners of 'black magic.' According to Ensmenger programmers were seen as highly creative individuals (at least in the late 50s and early 60s) who were irreplaceable. They practiced a black magic by doing a job that no one else could do. Cool shit.
Later, as the shortage of decent programmers was recognized, managers tried to 'dumb down' the profession and create ways in which they could train anyone to program (easier computer languages, training sessions, etc.), essentially taking the 'black magic' out of the profession. Ensmenger states that this tactic didn't work, and that the organizations that did this ended up with a lot of sub par programmers.
Which leads into the next major motif of Ensmenger's papers. What makes a good programmer? Apparently, extensive psychological testing and recruitment efforts have been made by industry to obtain good programmers in the past. Again, according to Ensmenger this has had less than efficient results. Although I haven't read all of his (Ensmenger's) work, it appears that there was never really a good solution for hiring or recruitment of programmers.
Finally, in an effort I'm leery of, Ensmenger tries to create a niche for technicians and programmers existing in limbo between white and blue collar workers. He advocates looking at these professionals with a different lens than other workers in order to provide another lens for industry in general. In order for me to buy this, I need more reasons why programmers are more individualistic than any other niche of worker, what exactly qualifies as a programmer, and how we are to look at this programmer niche historically.
All good readings, and very interesting. The 'black magic' bit and psychological testing aspects of the readings made them fun to read.
I hadn't realized that the earliest forms of programming created a separation between a planner and coder, and that the coding aspect was considered menial labor. Ensmenger says that the transistion from coder to programmer was partially the result of the coders needing to rework the planner's work in order to make computer software run.
He uses this theme as a launching pad to discuss the idea of programmers as practitioners of 'black magic.' According to Ensmenger programmers were seen as highly creative individuals (at least in the late 50s and early 60s) who were irreplaceable. They practiced a black magic by doing a job that no one else could do. Cool shit.
Later, as the shortage of decent programmers was recognized, managers tried to 'dumb down' the profession and create ways in which they could train anyone to program (easier computer languages, training sessions, etc.), essentially taking the 'black magic' out of the profession. Ensmenger states that this tactic didn't work, and that the organizations that did this ended up with a lot of sub par programmers.
Which leads into the next major motif of Ensmenger's papers. What makes a good programmer? Apparently, extensive psychological testing and recruitment efforts have been made by industry to obtain good programmers in the past. Again, according to Ensmenger this has had less than efficient results. Although I haven't read all of his (Ensmenger's) work, it appears that there was never really a good solution for hiring or recruitment of programmers.
Finally, in an effort I'm leery of, Ensmenger tries to create a niche for technicians and programmers existing in limbo between white and blue collar workers. He advocates looking at these professionals with a different lens than other workers in order to provide another lens for industry in general. In order for me to buy this, I need more reasons why programmers are more individualistic than any other niche of worker, what exactly qualifies as a programmer, and how we are to look at this programmer niche historically.
All good readings, and very interesting. The 'black magic' bit and psychological testing aspects of the readings made them fun to read.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Uncovering Labour in Information Revolutions, 1750-2000
The readings for class this week covered less abstract topics and looked at four case studies about "information labor." The following is a short recap.
Hands and Minds: Clerical Work in the First ‘Information Society’ Eve Rosenhaft
German clerical workers from the 19th century go bonkers when their workload skyrockets. Divorce, mental illness, and arthritis make this an interesting read.
Compressing Time and Constraining Space: The Contradictory Effects of ICT and Containerisation on International Shipping Labour Helen Sampson and Bin Wu
Sailors go bonkers when ICTs alter industrial shipping by decreasing shore leave and providing a window an outside world that they can't take part in.
‘Computers in the Wild’: Guilds and Next Generation Unionism in the Information Revolution Chris Benner
Chris Benner compares Silicon valley 'guilds' to medieval guilds, professional associations, and unionism and attempts to show that the new guilds are a result of an increasingly volatile work environment in a network world.
Emerging Sources of Labor on the Internet: The Case of America Online Volunteers Hector Postigo
AOL volunteers go postal when the company tries to reorganize its business. AOL takes away many of the benefits that it gives volunteers and expects things to just be 'OK' (like the soda of yore). Lawsuits ensue.
There was also an introduction by Aad Block and a conclusion by former information laborer (and instructor of LIS 810) Greg Downey which provided a theoretical framework and some suggestions for future research. My main problem with the reading for this week is the ambiguous definition of information labor. In all the cases presented we see hidden labor problems, but why is this labor necessarily information labor? The idea of information labor is so general case that it could be taken to mean anything that involves human communication (information). I feel like someone hung up a piece of Velcro, labeled it as information, and started tossing garbage at it; Anything that sticks qualifies as information labor.
Other than that minor complaint, the material was a fun read. Maybe it's the nerd in me, but I liked the comparison of the new tech guilds with old medieval craft guilds. The other readings were equally nerd friendly, and should make for interesting discussion in class.
Hands and Minds: Clerical Work in the First ‘Information Society’ Eve Rosenhaft
German clerical workers from the 19th century go bonkers when their workload skyrockets. Divorce, mental illness, and arthritis make this an interesting read.
Compressing Time and Constraining Space: The Contradictory Effects of ICT and Containerisation on International Shipping Labour Helen Sampson and Bin Wu
Sailors go bonkers when ICTs alter industrial shipping by decreasing shore leave and providing a window an outside world that they can't take part in.
‘Computers in the Wild’: Guilds and Next Generation Unionism in the Information Revolution Chris Benner
Chris Benner compares Silicon valley 'guilds' to medieval guilds, professional associations, and unionism and attempts to show that the new guilds are a result of an increasingly volatile work environment in a network world.
Emerging Sources of Labor on the Internet: The Case of America Online Volunteers Hector Postigo
AOL volunteers go postal when the company tries to reorganize its business. AOL takes away many of the benefits that it gives volunteers and expects things to just be 'OK' (like the soda of yore). Lawsuits ensue.
There was also an introduction by Aad Block and a conclusion by former information laborer (and instructor of LIS 810) Greg Downey which provided a theoretical framework and some suggestions for future research. My main problem with the reading for this week is the ambiguous definition of information labor. In all the cases presented we see hidden labor problems, but why is this labor necessarily information labor? The idea of information labor is so general case that it could be taken to mean anything that involves human communication (information). I feel like someone hung up a piece of Velcro, labeled it as information, and started tossing garbage at it; Anything that sticks qualifies as information labor.
Other than that minor complaint, the material was a fun read. Maybe it's the nerd in me, but I liked the comparison of the new tech guilds with old medieval craft guilds. The other readings were equally nerd friendly, and should make for interesting discussion in class.
Saturday, February 3, 2007
Reading Stalder's Castells
After gritting my teeth through the first five chapters of the book, it became clear that chapter six is the payoff chapter. Chapters one through five read like a gigantic catalog and present Castells's ideas in autonomous modules. After the short background section it seemed like Stalder just started naming off ideas that Castell's has thought up, and that he was leaving out the connecting themes.
In essence, he describes a compendium of 'nodes.' We start off reading about what Castell's believes is happening in distinct social spheres, move on to his ideas about social movements, and then later to his thoughts of space and time. In the way that the 'nodes' are presented, they come off as distinct identities that aren't described as interactive, and we are left with a handful of chess pieces with no rules or playing space.
So in retrospect, chapter six is the 'aha' chapter. Stalder finally tells us how to play the game with the pieces that he has given us, and presents Castells's major theory of networks. In a way, the arrangement of the text helps to understand Castells's network theory. Because the theory depends on modules that may drop in or out of the theory at any time, yet depends on each module for its overall presence at any moment in time, the presentation of the nodes before the connecting theme was a useful way to write the book.
At the same time, I feel like this is a weakness in the theory. Stalder also speaks about this in the book. If a phenomena cannot be adequately explained by Castell's Network Theory, it can too easily be explained away as another autonomous 'node.' Still, I have to throw out mad props to a guy (Castells) who essentially says (pg. 34-38) if my theory don't work for you, don't use it: It's only as good as the insight that it provides to the user.
In essence, he describes a compendium of 'nodes.' We start off reading about what Castell's believes is happening in distinct social spheres, move on to his ideas about social movements, and then later to his thoughts of space and time. In the way that the 'nodes' are presented, they come off as distinct identities that aren't described as interactive, and we are left with a handful of chess pieces with no rules or playing space.
So in retrospect, chapter six is the 'aha' chapter. Stalder finally tells us how to play the game with the pieces that he has given us, and presents Castells's major theory of networks. In a way, the arrangement of the text helps to understand Castells's network theory. Because the theory depends on modules that may drop in or out of the theory at any time, yet depends on each module for its overall presence at any moment in time, the presentation of the nodes before the connecting theme was a useful way to write the book.
At the same time, I feel like this is a weakness in the theory. Stalder also speaks about this in the book. If a phenomena cannot be adequately explained by Castell's Network Theory, it can too easily be explained away as another autonomous 'node.' Still, I have to throw out mad props to a guy (Castells) who essentially says (pg. 34-38) if my theory don't work for you, don't use it: It's only as good as the insight that it provides to the user.
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Micro/Meso/Macro Analysis in Modernity and Technology
I started to think about the theme of micro/meso/macro level analysis and the relation to modernity theory, technology studies, and Heidegger's ideas of Dasein and resoluteness.
It seems to me that often the micro level and technological disturbances of modernity theory are caused by dasein that have achieved a greater level of resoluteness. That is, those that have realized that a piece of their reality is ungrounded and that there is no reason for it to be the way that it is. Actors that have realized that certain technologies can be radically rethought have altered the Dasein of our existence by working along the frays of intelligibility.
Likewise, the reverse could be true. Modernity theory could be explained as the appropriation of Dasein by theorists exerting control over the whole of existence. That is, the categorizations, correlations, and causalities that have been described as harbingers of the modern age are just the work of dasein who have become resolute enough to describe a previously unfounded depiction of reality and re-align the entirety of the collective Dasein.
So are we seeing incommesurability between those dasein that work at the edge of ungroundedness in theory and those in technology?
I'd be interested in talking about this in class, as I don't think a blog post is the best platform for this idea.
It seems to me that often the micro level and technological disturbances of modernity theory are caused by dasein that have achieved a greater level of resoluteness. That is, those that have realized that a piece of their reality is ungrounded and that there is no reason for it to be the way that it is. Actors that have realized that certain technologies can be radically rethought have altered the Dasein of our existence by working along the frays of intelligibility.
Likewise, the reverse could be true. Modernity theory could be explained as the appropriation of Dasein by theorists exerting control over the whole of existence. That is, the categorizations, correlations, and causalities that have been described as harbingers of the modern age are just the work of dasein who have become resolute enough to describe a previously unfounded depiction of reality and re-align the entirety of the collective Dasein.
So are we seeing incommesurability between those dasein that work at the edge of ungroundedness in theory and those in technology?
I'd be interested in talking about this in class, as I don't think a blog post is the best platform for this idea.
Modernity and Technology: Initial thoughts on its entirety
The editors did eventually cover my initial questions: Namely, why are we created niches for studying modernity and technology, and why is it important to unite these two fields?
Arie Rip probably states it most simply: This type of analysis provides a window into the human condition and let us 'see' something that we didn't perceive before. In addition, these insights can provide fodder for the bootstrapping mechanisms of hermeneutics that were described in chapter three and was also advocated as a way to enhance our understanding of reality.*
I still don't know if I am entirely convinced of the theoretical trajectories of technology studies provided in this book. It seems as if part of the problem with merging the two fields is created via the definitions in which technology is understood. Several authors mentioned in the book have taken stances that advocate that a more 'cyborg' oriented vision of humanity and technology may be useful for understanding technology. This may be interpreted as positing the idea that technologies should be looked at as vital components of humans and modern infrastructures, not as extensions of them. Donna Haraway's A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century takes a more integrated look at technology, as does Heidegger's writing in general. Perhaps by viewing technology as a given, an author could open a window that more effectively joins modernity and technology theories. I would have liked to see the book explore this definition of technology and reality to a greater degree.
* I realize that statement is a circular argument, but I'm not sure I care at this point. Additionally, hermeneutics admits to being a circular activity. Here's a bit of reasoning that I could refute, but won't.
Arie Rip probably states it most simply: This type of analysis provides a window into the human condition and let us 'see' something that we didn't perceive before. In addition, these insights can provide fodder for the bootstrapping mechanisms of hermeneutics that were described in chapter three and was also advocated as a way to enhance our understanding of reality.*
I still don't know if I am entirely convinced of the theoretical trajectories of technology studies provided in this book. It seems as if part of the problem with merging the two fields is created via the definitions in which technology is understood. Several authors mentioned in the book have taken stances that advocate that a more 'cyborg' oriented vision of humanity and technology may be useful for understanding technology. This may be interpreted as positing the idea that technologies should be looked at as vital components of humans and modern infrastructures, not as extensions of them. Donna Haraway's A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century takes a more integrated look at technology, as does Heidegger's writing in general. Perhaps by viewing technology as a given, an author could open a window that more effectively joins modernity and technology theories. I would have liked to see the book explore this definition of technology and reality to a greater degree.
* I realize that statement is a circular argument, but I'm not sure I care at this point. Additionally, hermeneutics admits to being a circular activity. Here's a bit of reasoning that I could refute, but won't.
Why are we studying modernity and technology inI guess it may be a question of why do we care to have these windows into the human condition.
tandem? To understand our
reality.
Then how do we enhance our understanding of reality? By
bootstrapping from existing understandings of reality.
So we already
understand reality? Yes, in some way we
already understand reality.
So why do we want to understand reality when we already have
an
understanding of reality?
Friday, January 26, 2007
Modernity and Technology, pgs. 1-73
Chapter One describes what will be later covered in the entire book. Written by Misa, it mentions a few important theorists that will later be discussed and outlines the chapters from other contributing writers. Misa lays out four proposals that are worth recounting (pgs. 5-15).
1. The concepts of "technology" and "modernity" have a tangled past.
2. Technology may be the truly distinctive feature of modernity.
3. Modernization theory missed what was modern about technology.
4. Post-modernism no less and no more than modernism is tangled up with technology (His phrasing, not mine).
At this point the reader should know what's about to be crammed down his or her respective maw, and also the ideological starting points of Misa and company.
Chapter Two outlines how the authors define modernity theory and technology studies. Good thing, because the introduction failed to do so. Without blowing the chapter for other readers, this is my take. Brey, the author of this chapter, makes an attempt to validate how modernity theories and technology theories operating on both the macro and micro level should augment each other and lead researchers to a more middling understanding of reality. My questions: Why do we care about a middling ground between technology studies and modernity? It seems that if a theorist would like to merge theory there are many other spheres to choose from besides these two. I'm not discrediting the relevance of Brey's project, I just want to know why.
Second question: The ways in which modernity and technology are defined can be recursively deconstructed until they mean almost nothing. I would have liked a more thorough explanation of why Brey feels the definitional boundaries that he sets for himself are important for his project. Is he just standing on the shoulders of other theorists that have set these boundaries for him? If so, why does he respect their opinions?
Overall, the second chapter sets a nice backdrop for the continued invention of the book. The definitions provided were essential for my reading, and there was a good discussion ofhistorical thought in both modernity and technology studies.
1. The concepts of "technology" and "modernity" have a tangled past.
2. Technology may be the truly distinctive feature of modernity.
3. Modernization theory missed what was modern about technology.
4. Post-modernism no less and no more than modernism is tangled up with technology (His phrasing, not mine).
At this point the reader should know what's about to be crammed down his or her respective maw, and also the ideological starting points of Misa and company.
Chapter Two outlines how the authors define modernity theory and technology studies. Good thing, because the introduction failed to do so. Without blowing the chapter for other readers, this is my take. Brey, the author of this chapter, makes an attempt to validate how modernity theories and technology theories operating on both the macro and micro level should augment each other and lead researchers to a more middling understanding of reality. My questions: Why do we care about a middling ground between technology studies and modernity? It seems that if a theorist would like to merge theory there are many other spheres to choose from besides these two. I'm not discrediting the relevance of Brey's project, I just want to know why.
Second question: The ways in which modernity and technology are defined can be recursively deconstructed until they mean almost nothing. I would have liked a more thorough explanation of why Brey feels the definitional boundaries that he sets for himself are important for his project. Is he just standing on the shoulders of other theorists that have set these boundaries for him? If so, why does he respect their opinions?
Overall, the second chapter sets a nice backdrop for the continued invention of the book. The definitions provided were essential for my reading, and there was a good discussion of
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)