E lit. Module 5
rock n roll
Module5.docxModule 5- Readings/Viewings
Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries, AH [ Flash version | Video version ]
http://www.yhchang.com/AH.html
Hito Steyerl, How Not to be Seen: A Fucking Didactic Educational .MOV File
N. Katherine Hayles, "Virtual Bodies and Flickering Signifiers" (from her 1999 book How We Became Posthuman)
Part A: WRITE YOUR THOUGHT (500 words) Please consider the two pieces in terms of ideas we've raised so far, as well as what Hayles articulates in her essay. We are circling us around the concept of the black box. Remember this symbol is associated with that which can be seen, and seen in action, but not seen inside. The outside is visible, but the interior is closed, locked, encrypted. The aim for us to eventually explore how this symbol, and literary approaches that resemble or resonate with it, can help us think about the electronic black boxes of our time -- like our phones, with their hidden software processes, or like the shady methods by which oligarchs and certain presidents hide their wealth in real estate. I'm more interested in the symbol because it feels resonant with this moment in history than I am just because I like nonsense. ( Though I do. )
Please incorporate specific quotes and references from the work as examples to support your ideas and observations. I don't want to see posts without specific examples, or claims made without evidence. (Note that claims are different from questions.) Failure to include examples will result in a significantly lowered grade. In addition, please revisit the syllabus for my grading policy on discussion and workshop posts.
Part B: RESPONSE YOUR 2 PEERS (250 WORDS EACH X 2=500 WORDS)
Student A
Okay so watching Hito Steyerl, How Not to be Seen: A Fucking Didactic Educational .MOV File, 2013, I really didn’t know what to expect, but I REALLY did not expect to see this. At first I thought it was hysterical and was laughing, but as it went on it was kinda eerie. I was half expecting something to jump out to scare me. The robotic voice that slowly talks about hiding and the creepy music, made it all seem as though someone was talking about ways to hide away from life. As if it someone going through depression. But, then it begins to state things that are invisible; war, love, and capitalism. The robotic monotone voice lacks the ability to add expression in its voice so some words were less clear. It lists things very blatantly then goes on to talk about history and shows you photograph resolutions. Honestly I am really confused as to what the point of this video is, not saying it is not a very interesting art piece it’s just…… very different. Closer to the end of the video it repeats lesson one and to be honest I felt as if I was going crazy. Then suddenly it turns into a music video!! WHY?! After watching the full video for some reason I feel weird. Anyone else?
Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries, AH , so this one I thought was amazing, but when I went to describe it to my friend, I couldn't. I feel it is something you have to watch and decipher yourself because it seem as though it has more than one meaning. I loved that it seemed like a conversation you were directly having with someone like a rant.I did find myself wondering when it was going to end though. It felt like it was going on forever and started to repeat what the artist had already said. VIRTUAL BODIES AND FLICKERING SIGNIFIERS, I found very boring. It felt as though I was reading from one of my science textbooks or psych textbook. In all fairness after the two videos, the wild eerie and the ranty why am I always that guy, this piece fell flat and I found it hard to focus on it. SO maybe I should have read this one first then watched the two videos. “In societies enmeshed within information networks, as the U.S. and other first world societies are, these examples can be multiplied a thousandfold.” I just found this piece to sate facts that I had a hard time understanding. Please help, I need an explanation for this piece.Sorry if this post seems too expressive or like I'm losing my mind, but those videos kinda made it hard to not focus on them.I want to know what the writers were thinking at the time of making them. Was the first one intentionally supposed to make you feel at first depressed then later as if you were losing your mind? Were they supposed to have a lasting effect on me like this as well?
Student B
Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries' AH, appears to be straightforward. It's a story of a man who gets singled out and detained while onlookers observe this wrongdoing and do nothing lest they be inconvenienced (the ending shifts to an lost love story and, like a lot of things in this class, confused me). I will admit that I may have been one of those uninvolved observers at one time or another, so I feel guilty as sin now. The first connection that I made to previous discussions was to the idea of randomness, as the routine search was supposedly "random." The narrative disclaims my connection since it was never truly random as there are several "good boys" who never get pulled out of line. In a metatextual or a format view of the piece, another connection I saw was to cybertext, but only in the loosest of terms. One would think that AH, a piece put on the web that uses Flash, would be a prime example of cybertext, however there is a lack of reader agency in order to fully consider this cybertext or even consider it at all. The idea of infinity seems to fit the bill on this one. If I recall correctly (I watched the Flash version so I don't know if this was actually said), the circular nature of this was stated in the piece meaning that this dialogue has happened, is happening now, and will happen until something is done to stop the bureaucracy and prejudice that perpetuates these actions. *That might be a stretch, but stretching is necessary in thought exercises. Hito Steyerl's How Not to be Seen was...interesting. I suppose the irony of being seen most of the time was on purpose, or perhaps it's portraying the idea of being invisible only by cameras, which is harder to do now than before because of high resolution cameras. Or perhaps the idea is that certain people are inherently invisible and this video explains the ease of being marginalized by those who hold the camera? I'm unsure. The content of the piece is seems very nonsensical (though we've discussed subjective meaning before) and aligns itself with Borges' Babel story. If this story is actually about marginalization (which is a stretch but see *), then it coincides with AH in the blindness of struggle of those with authority like cops or the military/people with access to aerial cameras (which is anyone who can afford a drone nowadays), all of which involve a kind of infinite loop of effects as I've stated before. The Hayles article is confusing to me (I know, big shock, Al's confused). So is posthumanization purely a shift from absent/present to random/pattern? Furthermore, what do those things mean in the context of the article? Is it just we've as a people transcended beyond mere physical restrictions and now pursue something ethereal? The flickering signifiers means the entry line (which I'm seeing right now as I'm typing), and I understand the difference in text from a digital source like this Sakai box and a book, but is that actually represent the dichotomy of absent/present or random/pattern? I'm not sure. So the common theme in these readings is my own bewilderment. Someone smarter than me, please explain to me the meaning to these works. I am but a dumb, little man who cannot connect this to black boxes.
RUBRICS
· Post comprehensively addresses the topic, adds value to discussion with stimulating posts
· Posts in-depth, incisive reflections that demonstrate critical thinking; shares real-world experiences and examples
· Well-written posts made within required timeframe; no grammar/spelling errors
· Original thinking: making complex connections between multiple readings (from multiple weeks), larger culture and technology and power issues, and the themes of the course. It's a good idea to give me the impression that you're doing all the readings, not just one a week.
· Bringing up hard questions or contradictions, and really trying to unpack and think through them in depth.
· Thoughtful antipathy. You don't have to like things just because I like them, but if you hate a piece, I want you to think through why exactly you hate it. Dismissing a piece as "boring" will not impress me.
