Category: identity

Categories
discourse community/community of practice exam readings identity learning theory

Exam reading: Situated learning

Jean Lave & Etienne Wenger’s Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation is a foundational text for several key concepts.

Summary: Their main thesis is that learning occurs as “legitimate peripheral participation” in communities of practice: it’s not only situated/place-based (negotiated meanings, relational character of knowledge), but an integral part of the social fabric. Knowledge is comprehensive & activity-based (vs. received), and there’s a mutually constitutive relationship between actors, activities, and the world. The traditional approach of learning as internalization is too cerebral; they see learning as a process of increasing participation in the comm. of practice. Their focus is on the “person-in-world,” rather than the solitary learner or abstract knowledge domains. They also take a historical approach; e.g., comms. are constantly renewing themselves through the admission of newcomers and centripetal movement of newcomers into full participation. They discuss several aspects of traditional apprenticeships as case studies: technology use, recruitment, power relations, and organization of activity. The learning process is a set of steps of conferring legitimacy on the newcomer; learning starts as observation of community, who to emulate, etc., while doing peripheral tasks like running errands (core tasks come later.)

Comments: Authors suggest that more research is needed on defining “communities of practice” and power relations within communities. They summarize with a few ways their approach differs from traditional approaches: person becomes practitioner, situated learning becomes LPP in comm. of practice, knowing is inherent in identity transformation, and the social world is always reproducing itself while changing (there’s a conflict between continuity and shifting membership- “displacement contradiction”). They also discuss technology use: tech has both “invisible” (unproblematic/easily integrated use) and “visible” (salience/utility for task) components- these together create the degree of technological “transparency” (tech. that are both easy to use and the user can understand the significance of tech. within the community are transparent.) Their ideas tie into the idea of discourse community (and they do discuss language), but they’re more interested in language as a way to talk about the community than as a vehicle for information transmission.

Links to: foundational text for a lot of stuff…

Categories
exam readings identity information representation visuals

Exam reading: “Simulacra and simulation”

Jean Baudrillard’s “Simulacra and Simulation” is popular among a certain set of postmodern enthusiasts, including the Wachowski brothers. I won’t go into how this book influenced The Matrix- you can go elsewhere for that.

Here’s my summary:

Summary: Baudrillard’s main concern is for cultural impacts of mass/electronic media. Our culture of simulation has progressed to the point that simulation no longer refers to the real world- it is “hyperreal.” Reality has been replaced by nested systems of sighs, all referring to one another; he calls this “precession of simulacra.” Images began as reflections of reality, became masks for reality, then masks that mask the absence of reality, and are now not related to reality (but to other images). Examples include the Lascaux caves (we now only experience the simulation of Lascaux II) and Disneyland (an imaginary world, set up to mask the fact that America is itself only a simulation, in which people take on roles but never truly interact). In some sense, electronic media make everything a simulation (e.g., political scandals mask broader truths about the capitalist system, nuclear deterrence and how MAD means no one will ever have to use nukes since we know what will happen). He also discusses historical movies, which are more “real” than the reality was; history is no longer an active force-all cultures are congealing into one, and all that’s left is nostalgia. Takes “medium is the message” to extreme: e.g., culture (content) in museums is merely a support for the medium to operate (the visitor experience)- the point is to have visitors, not transmit the culture; also, advertising/propaganda are becoming the dominant features of mass media- publicity is all that matters (not ideas or meanings).

Comments: Briefly discusses how cloning & medical research are another expression of mass-production (reproducible, without aura)- rather than taking a cyborg approach, he links this phenomenon to Benjamin’s ideas. I’m glossing over education- says the only ways for non-conformists to not conform are either dropping out entirely or committing terrorism.

Links to: Benjamin (mass-produced society; body); McLuhan (medium)

Categories
exam readings identity knowledge work transparency

Exam reading: “Essential McLuhan”

This book includes selected works by Marshall McLuhan, a popular figure in cultural criticism:

Summary: McLuhan’s main thesis is that the media by which we communicate are powerful shapers of psychology and culture. Media are our ways of extending human sense organs into the environment. When new media technologies are introduced, the levels of different senses used by people shift (e.g., writing started to emphasize vision, and eventually print enabled logic, 3-D perception, and the individual ego). There’s a fundamental difference between vision (acts to separate people from their environment) and all other senses (immerse people in their environment). Non-literate cultures (he includes those using non-alphabetic writing in this group) exist in primarily auditory, tribal societies, while alphabet-using cultures are visual and civilized. Electronic media are in the process of making the entire world auditory and tribal; these media affect feeling, not thought. Media are more important than the message, in terms of influencing society. Even visual media are changing-the juxtaposition of multiple visual elements creates a symbolic landscape, in contrast to single linear chains of argument & evidence. Holistic/systems thinking is the new paradigm; we will no longer need specialists, because generalists immersed in the new sensory paradigm will be able to figure everything out.

Comments: McLuhan’s formulation of the relationship between media use & culture is strongly deterministic. Distinguishes between “hot” (aural, “hyperesthetic,” demand low participation by audence) and “cool” (visual, detached, demand high audience participation) media, but contradicts himself about which technologies are which and where writing fits in- I don’t find this formulation convincing (I’m sticking with the vision/other senses distinction, which at least he’s consistent about). Uses some questionable (from a sociology perspective) interpretations of examples from Africa and China to support his ideas about alphabetic literacy. McLuhan’s style of writing and futuristic bent is horoscope-like: it’s easy to pick out predictions that seem to have come true while ignoring those that have not.

Links to: Feenberg (technological determinism); Ong (more scholarly analysis of media & representation); Brown & Duguid (knowledge work cheerleader)

Categories
exam readings hypertext identity transparency visuals

Exam reading: “Writing space”

I’ve probably read at least parts of “Writing Space,” by Jay David Bolter, in three different courses so far. It’s clearly been an influential book in the T&T field (though of course some authors love it, while others use it to argue against):

Summary: Bolter explores the ways in which digital media are changing traditional “writing spaces:” the material & virtual fields of writing that are determined by both technology and the ways it’s used. One important way this happens is through remediation: a new medium taking the place of an older one while borrowing its conventions. For Bolter, one of the reasons new media are adopted is that they bring a greater sense of immediacy, derived from either increased transparency of the medium (“looking through”) or increased hypermediacy (awareness of the medium; “looking at”). Bolter focuses on the ways that the Internet, particularly hypertext, remediate older technologies (e.g., linking is a rhetorical tool that allows associational (non-linear) expression; lack of closure; increased participation from reader). One key feature is the use of visuals in online writing that are not constrained by the text; visuals may replace text or serve as visual puns, and text may try to become as vivid as visuals (ekphrasis). If writing is a metaphor for thought (and writing systems for our sense of self), then “multilinear” hypertext may be more like the associational mind thinks and reflect our postmodern identity. Writing spatializes time (i.e., speech)- going from print to hypertext is in some ways like returning to conversational modes of oral dialogue.

Comments: Bolter suggests that the increased use if visuals is an attempt to get rid of arbitrary symbol systems (i.e., the alphabet) and return to picture writing. However, modern picture writing differs from preliterate picture writing in that more abstraction can be expressed (e.g., icons). Also discusses semiosis (movement from one sign to another via reference); to read is to interpret semiotic meaning in the difference between the signs (e.g., intertextuality, linking).

Links to: Hayles (hypertext literature); Ong (writing systems and thought)

Categories
identity research methods/philosophy science studies

More on science, culture, and feminism

In my post yesterday about Donna Haraway’s book, “Cyborgs, simians, and women,” I talked about how it called for a rethinking of how primate research and human culture shape one another. More importantly, I argued that science doesn’t have to be anti-feminist just because it’s science. Here’s a timely example:

To illustrate how powerful the influence of culture can be for primate societies consider the most extreme example of a sexually coercive species: savanna baboons. Males have been known to viciously maul a female that has rejected their advances and the level of male aggression is strongly correlated with their mating success. However, in a unique natural experiment Stanford primatologist Robert Sapolsky observed what developed when the largest and most aggressive males died out in a group known as Forest Troop (because they were feeding at the contaminated dump site of a Western safari lodge). In the intervening years Forest Group developed a culture in which kindness was rewarded more than aggression and adolescent males who migrated into the troop adopted this culture themselves.

Read the rest of this post- it’s a great example of how scientific tools and methods are not necessarily tied to maintaining traditional, oppressive social frameworks, as suggested by Haraway.

Categories
exam readings identity knowledge work politics research methods/philosophy

Exam reading: “Cyborgs, simians, and women”

This book, by Donna Haraway, has some very influential ideas about identity and politics in an increasingly technologically-mediated world. Unfortunately, there’s a lot in here that I really can’t agree with- namely, her attack on science from a feminist/Marxist perspective. While I agree with her thesis that science often has been used to justify oppression of various sorts, my perspective is that this is a misappropriation of science for political purposes, rather than an unavoidable outcome of objective rationality.

I’m not arguing that scientists are pure, with no hidden biases and motivations for their research. Everyone has biases, but it seems that most scientists, when confronted with evidence of their biases, are willing to rethink their views. Are there systemic barriers to such change? In some cases, yes. But I feel that these are things that can be attacked without effectively throwing away our best system of tools for proving that bias exists, and that it’s inappropriate.

Summary: Three main sections: 1) exploration of the oppressive nature of objective science; 2) exploration of the impossibility of describing a single “women’s” or “women of color’s experience”; and 3) description of an emerging cyborg identity in which nature, culture, and technology intertwine to shape us. Subject/object distancing in science is implicated in oppression and patriarchal dominance politics (primate & human health research in particular are used to perpetuate repressive ideologies); what we need is a new situated objectivity that recognizes the limitations of our partial perspective and regards objects of knowledge as “material-semiotic actors” (constantly generating their own meanings). The cyborg concept can be seen either as the ultimate domination of nature by technology or as the fusion of nature, the human, and technology. Biological metaphors become cultural metaphors; for example, the postmodern view of no unitary identity has parallels in biology (different cell lines in immune system, women sometimes as fetus containers). She describes the information society as an “informatics of domination:” workers are becoming feminized- low job security, replaceable, shredding of the social safety net, cultural impoverishment.

Comments: After reading this book, and a few other papers on the subject, I’m still unsure what “feminist science” would entail. I see a possible continuum in Haraway’s book ranging from using standard scientific methods to investigate consistent bias within a field (e.g., asking questions about female kinship patterns in apes, rather than the traditional focus on male aggression), to a separate set of standards of evidence (and a new epistemology) for feminist science vs. mainstream science (e.g., admission of folk medicine as science because it’s a deeply-held belief), to the idea that all science is just rhetoric, used to construct social reality. While Haraway explicitly rejects that third view, she is vague about the specifics of what she wants to see. So, she does provide specific examples of the 1st view, so maybe this type of criticism is sufficient for her, but also places a lot of weight on redefining objectivity, which would seem to indicate that she wants a new epistemology. I absolutely agree with the first view, and absolutely disagree with the latter two.

Links to: Liu (politics of info economy); Hayles (top-down vs. emergent systems theory-H. book is older, so perhaps she addresses this in later work?)

Categories
exam readings geekery hypertext identity

Exam reading: “Hamlet on the holodeck”

Janet Murray’s “Hamlet on the Holodeck” is a 1997 book that tries to reconcile “good” storytelling with not-fully-realized new media. Yes, there are several Star Trek references. Unfortunately, most are to Voyager…

Summary: Murray explores how narrative may change in stories based in new interactive media. For her, the key to avoiding fears of VR addiction and culturally-depauperate stories is to concentrate on meaningful storytelling. She begins by describing storytelling in new media genres (MUDs, 3-D movies, simulators, etc.), the boundaries of which will eventually blur. There are four characteristics of digital environments that make them new: procedural construction, participation, spatial dimension, and encyclopediac scope (the first two = interactivity). Because of these characteristics, new media environments can: satisfy the desire for immersion in virtual worlds, give audiences agency (ability to take meaningful action), and offer a mutable environment that allows transformation of traditional storylines. She also outlines several possible “cyberdrama” formats, some of which are now in use: “hyperserials” (TV shows with added online dimension), “mobile perspective” programs, and virtual worlds for roleplaying. Meaningful storytelling in new media should seem true to the human condition. It could use stock formulas or characters in new ways- example of bardic performances that vary stock elements to create new compositions. Or it could explore possibilities of telling stories with expanded scope (a system perspective), or just explore world-building possibilities.

Comments: Since my focus is not on the narrative properties of new media, I’m skipping a lot of detail in that area (e.g., ways to create plot in a non-linear setting, game goals vs. plot-driven goals, ways to create responsive & believable virtual characters using AI). Provides some good links between more traditional ways to construct stories and ways to use new technologies. World-building ideas make me think of MMORPGs.

Links to: Hayles (e-lit & narrative); Turkle (psychology of interactive environments & AI characters); Manovich (components of interactivity)

I’ll add this analysis of the Holodeck as a narrative device (rather than Turkle’s Holodeck-as-technology):

Categories
exam readings identity learning theory

Exam reading: “Life on the screen”

In “Life on the Screen,” Sherry Turkle builds on many interviews with MOO participants (which really is a step back in time) to look at the psychology of computer use:

Summary: Turkle explores ideas about the computer both as a new medium of interaction and as a model for the human mind. The computer provides spaces to explore our own identities: taking on virtual personae and different genders, forming online relationships, and working through psychological problems in a virtual space. For Turkle, computers are an iconic postmodern technology, providing us “objects to think with” and simulate reality (in contrast to earlier notions of the computer as a modernist, hierarchically-programmed tool). Additive models for computer programming (complexity emerges from lower-level parts) have been incorporated into ideas of how the human mind works (“connectionism”). Acceptance of this decentralized mindset is leading us from ideas of the unitary self to a more multiple, fluid self-identity (e.g., there are blurry boundaries between avatars and our real-life personae). We see computers as capable of intention and intelligence, but still draw a sharp line at calling them living. Our comfort at describing ourselves in machine terms and computers in human terms is helping mainstream the idea that humans are programmed “meat machines.” She also discusses drawbacks of increasing virtual experience: loss of the public sphere, devaluation of real experience, and privacy and accountability issues.

Comments: Discussion of specific programs (esp. MUDs), technologies, and trends in AI research is obviously dated, but many of her general observations still apply. Other authors touch on the drawbacks of virtual space more fully; Turkle’s emphasis is on the psychology of computers & virtual spaces.

Links to: Hayles (model of mind); Haraway (multiple identities); Gee (learning by exploration)