[iDC] Re: notes on media remix
Ryan Griffis
ryan.griffis at gmail.com
Thu Apr 20 20:12:05 EDT 2006
i just came from a talk by Lev at the U of IL at Urbana-Champaign...
i didn't get a chance to ask a question nor meet Lev due to another
appointment (sorry about that, i would have really liked to meet you
Lev - also sorry about the turnout, which should have been more than it
was... it was poorly advertised within the school of art & design
unfortunately).
So anyway, i thought i could send my very unformulated
thoughts/questions here for Lev and the general list.
Concerning the notion of "remixability" that's being discussed, i
wonder what the difference is between it and homogenization. By that, i
mean that the ability to remix images, in the way Lev is talking about
with motion graphics, requires a flattening of input - all the stuff
being mixed must be standardized and made to conform to the dominate
language/methodology of contemporary computing. So, when it's said that
we have different media "types" now being channeled through one
"screen," it could be argued that it's a process of
homogenization/assimilation.
i think Lev even discussed the "simulation" of media (3d effects
applied to abstract spaces and type)... could it also be said that the
remix is a simulation of difference that actually requires
standardization?
Maybe i'm taking this in a totally unproductive, and obviously
irrelevant for some, direction, but it seems like our discussions of
the "remix" seem to keep the focus on an internal reading of
form/content. In other words, we're not really discussing the
implications of all of this input becoming "data" and
reformulated/archived/transmitted through one, dominant systemic
mechanism - even if that system includes the ability to reformat the
data along highly customizable lines (RSS, data visualizations, etc).
i'm wondering if there's something to consider in Galloway and
Thacker's work on notions of protocols and systems as a way to think
about the importance of the framing of all this remixing. And also
critiques of the notions of "hybridity" used in earlier post-colonial
theory seem relevant - the relationship between commodity fetishism and
80s-90s multiculturalism for example could be looked at in a parallel
manner to the fetishism of the remix.
(for Curt - is there really a difference between meaning derived from
"content" - your idea of remixing - really different from meaning
derived from "form" - what you call "hybridizing" [technical
appropriations like motion blurs]?)
Is the infrastructure/frame entirely covered by the shiny, bright
surface of the remix?
best,
ryan
More information about the iDC
mailing list