'Digital Folklore' by Olia Lialina & Dragan Espenschied [LINK]
An interesting point that may form the Bradford project ideas... That the history of the internet has focused on the medium, not so much the users, coining the term 'digital folklore'. Also a slight mention of education, which perhaps fits into your suggestions, Katy..
As the first book of its kind, this reader contains essays and projects investigating many different facets of Digital Folklore: online amateur culture, DIY electronics, dirtstyle, typo-nihilism, memes, teapots, penis enlargement …
...today's school children are educated as "Real Users." They learn how to use Microsoft Office to type business letters and design PowerPoint presentations, before they learn how to make a game or even spell IKEMZDOL ("I könnte mich zu Tode lachen", the German version of ROFL or LOL) correctly. Users must understand their integral role in the process, demand comprehensible systems, work for better computer education and begin to see themselves as developers again. Studying Digital Folklore can do this, and help give back users the power they have earned and deserve.
The domain of the digital must belong to people, not computers. The personal computer must be regarded as a medium with a cultural history shaped more by its users and less by its inventors. In February 2009, speaking at TED conference, Sir Tim Bernes-Lee stated that he invented the web 20 years ago. Though officially he has the right to claim this, the web is in fact 16 years old, because that is when people started to use it.
Henry Jenkins wrote in his 2002 article "Blog This!"(8): "We learned in the history books about Samuel Morse's invention of the telegraph, but not about the thousands of operators who shaped the circulation of message." To rephrase him, we could say that we have studied the history of hypertext, but not the history of Metallica fan web rings or web rings in general. This book is an attempt to fill this gap.
1 comment:
This post and also reference is pretty interesting cause highlights the need,the importance and main role of the user in the Interactive art.
I cannot avoid comparing this relation between user-installation, with those movie with amazing visual effects...(I know the relation between a movie and the spectator is not interactive precisely). When I watch them I am thinking yeah "wow" factor, but then after one hour I have just forgotten about it. However in the case of other maybe simpler movies(talking about effects) the concept remains forever.
What I am trying to say its when we are creating we get stunned about the whole piece, interaction, effects and might forget, or not realize of the good or bad interactive-interface-usage design aimed to the users. However, this only can be learn by the error premises, as if we were scientists.
In general I found really interesting these books:
Digital Performance: A History of New Media in Theater, Dance, Performance Art, and Installation.
Steve Dixon.
And then this is other nice book, despite is too focused on gestural interfaces, however I believe it´s pretty useful, above all in page 19, where analysis the characteristics of good gestural interfaces (they can be applied to all interactive art installations).
http://books.google.com/books?id=iTsZ5cg7gegC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Designing+interactive+interfaces&hl=en&ei=jozZTLaKCJOKhQfOquDPAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Designing%20interactive%20interfaces&f=false
And this other book is Designing Social Interfaces:
http://books.google.com/books?id=BGb7jcHpPtYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Designing+Social+Interfaces&hl=en&src=bmrr&ei=wY_ZTMb0OMKYhQezyODRAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-thumbnail&resnum=1&ved=0CCYQ6wEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
I think they got interesting points.
Hope not to be boring ^^
Post a Comment