I think
that the central argument that Bolter and Grusin make throughout “Remediation:
Understanding New Media” is that remediation is a process of cultural
recycling—maybe even better described through the remediated term “upcycling”.
While technology develops within our society, rather than it being an
autonomous or organic creation, it is rather an updated version of what we have
been using for centuries as media. As the authors state, it is “the formal
logic by which new media technologies refashion prior media forms” (273). In
other words, it’s technologically upcycled.
Bolter and Grusin use Renaissance
art and mathematics fairly often in their introduction to emphasize the idea of
linear perspective in relation to remediation, transparency, immediacy, and
hypermediation. I liked this analogy a lot in terms of relating their notion
that we wish to have technology fade into the landscape (as is what the media
literally does when an artist uses linear perspective and vanishing points). I
thought this related well to the idea Selfe presented of how once technology
becomes pervasive enough, it blends in, and it has to almost be pointed out to
us for us to realize it’s there. Because they were writing about this issue at
relatively the same time, I’m curious if Selfe, Bolter, and Grusin ever
interacted as colleagues and/or peers, or if this topic was just one of the big
items in terms of incorporating the digital humanities.
I think that this model could be
helpful in the classroom, but I feel less confident about how I might implement
it than I have with other proposed pedagogies thus far. For instance, I think
that hypermediation could possibly be an answer to Selfe’s urge in making
students think about the implications and social constructions of technology.
I’m not sure how you could construct a lesson plan or model a course around
this goal. Perhaps those of you who have taught already might have a more
tangible idea of how this would play out in the classroom. My other thought on
how to incorporate the ideas in Remediation is by using it as a platform for
the “self-justification” paper that we have been discussing off and on
throughout the semester so far. Perhaps by giving students the terms and
examples in this book, it will provide them with the vocabulary to create a
self-justification in a more lucid way, especially if we are requiring students
to use multimodality and manipulate technology to best represent their
thesis/goal/purpose in the project.
Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteI like how you made these connections with art. Although I think I know what your referring to (linear perspective and vanishing points), I'm not totally sure. Pretending that I am though, the comparison that you draw makes complete sense, but since I'm not well versed in art I will avoid trying to give an example (but I have one in my head).
I like how you draw on Selfe and the pervasiveness of technology, as this is what seems to be going on in our own culture. Do you think though, that there is a possibility of being overly widespread? Or is this possibly why technology is always advancing/remediating?
Hey I surely liked how you tied together the linear perspective perspective to wittily remark on how the goal is for one to look through their medium instead of at it (To take from Lanham). That is definitely the idea behind fading off into the distance. Also, your inclusion of self-justification with the ideas in B&G really made sense for me.I agree that if students are made aware of the differing perspective they can bring to any medium, then they can better understand their reasoning behind the ways they remediate things. Once this thought process begins, the desired results automatically start taking place in the form of critical thinking through the rudimentary steps of creation that are often taken as a part of one's doxa (to take from someone we read...).
ReplyDeleteIndeed your thoughts were lucid,
Kerry
Hey, I just checked out your timeline and i really liked it. I liked the portrayals of the "pioneers" of the car phone and I was even wondering, is the picture of the first car phone an actual shot of the very first call made or just a similar portrayal?
ReplyDeleteOtherwise, you make a strong connection and argument overall and make many connections between individual technological components and their progression towards what we now enjoy in contemporary settings in our classrooms and lives altogether.
Your mediation, like the Mr. monopoly slide for the 1970 FCC cell phone ruling was clever and i think you make a strong case for the template, as you use dipity inside wix masterfully. I like how dipity allows for multiple view of the same information. I am just supremely happy we don't have to deal with computing on a Kenbak-1. Well done.