The main focus on how humans and machines interact when it comes to electrical or digital pieces are that there has to be a way for humans to tell the machine how to do something. Obviously that was, well, obvious! One example I can give is how people use adobe Flash in order to have information portrayed as an animation. Code that humans wrote can be input into a software program which humans also wrote in order to produce a computer generated animation which the machine wrote with our guidance.
Most of the time it's something we wrote that needs to be portrayed but sometimes, with the help of machines, we can take something and portray it in a way completely different than it was initially intended. Using programs that understand a bit of language, for example being able to distinguish between verbs and nouns, you can create an article out of an article but without any of the nouns it initially had. A person can do it sure, but a machine can do it faster.
I honestly think most electronic literature out there now is something any person can do physically but in order to distribute to the masses, which is another good reason that this interaction needs to take place, we use the computer and the internet. It's with the internet that we are allowed to share most of our pieces of art that we created with the aid of computers.
It's because of our basic understanding of computers that we can also see art created by others. Internet has connected us in a way that nothing else can reproduce. I can see something created across the globe in seconds thanks to my internet connection. Without machines, that wouldn't be possible.
It's also because of this that there are an uncountable amount of works which means that no ONE piece will be the greatest. Or at least, there has yet to be one named the best internet piece ever. But I have a nominee... the internet itself. I feel the internet is the greatest electronic work of art ever created. Everyone gets a different story from it and everyone is allowed to use and share knowledge through it.
There's an infinite amount of answers waiting to be asked and found and an infinite amount of ways we can view the answers, as imagery text, video, audio etc. What is the internet if not one huge interactive story?
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Let's play a game shall we?
When it comes to reading a book, is there a specific way to read it? Is there a correct way, or an incorrect way? Sure there is. When the author of said book is writing a book, there is an intent to have it read a specific way. In most of our class assignments and things we see on the internet, the rules are stated to us at the beginning. Most pieces of literature are meant to be read the old school way, from page 1 to the end of the book. However there are other forms of literature, namely ergodic. In this sense, there are rules that you don't exactly have to read a text from page 1 to the end, in fact you may not even read pages 2-10. Does that mean it's not reading? No it doesn't, because you are, and there is a narrative. Its just different because the way we perceive it will be different.
There is then this question of advancement. With the Ipad releasing books on it's kindle in forms that we are used to, are we advancing or sticking with the old? Honestly, I'd say it's merely baby steps. We're in a time period where self esteem is fairly high regarded. No one wants to look bad because everyone wants to fit in. However with all these new inventions and games being played with the way we normally do something, it becomes difficult to say whether or not we want to join that fad.
One example given was the music aps that are out there and still use the typical nob to show turning or changing of a sound. Why use a nob? Because it allows us to relate to it. We get to become imaginative DJ's playing with our own personal soundboard that's on our Ipads/Ipods/laptops/etc. There is a certain fear of looking weird that people aren't willing to step out of their safe zone, and would rather turn a nob than click a limb or some other provocative image. By doing something new, we essentially commit to that idea and can be judged by it, but since we are using something that everyone else is used to, the nob, and we are given the rule that we have to turn that nob, then it's alright if it doesn't turn out great because we followed a set of rules that led us a stray rather than thought of that dreadful idea ourselves.
I feel that eventually, we will get into a form of writing where narrative doesn't require order as much. Where finding out the finale of a series won't ruin how we watch the entire show from the middle. Essentially, comedic shows are acceptable in the sense that the episodes themselves will be funny even if you see them out of order. Family guy comes to mind. The reasons critiques are so skeptical is because they are used to old rules, where you need a beginning middle and end, where sequence and linear facts aid in the story. Soon, the story will just be a narrative of interchangeable events that give us what we want to know.
There is also a connection to the cybertextual reader being a gamer. I couldn't agree more! In that respect, we must first identify what a game is.. and from Websters dictionary it's a amusement, or a past time. What is reading? Basically the same thing, unless you're like me and read because you have to not because you want to.. hah. But yes, adding these new rules of how to read will only aid in making reading more fun. A story with multiple endings will always trump a story that has one ending... why doe DiCaprio have to die in Titanic! I say he pulls her into the water and takes her raft..
There is then this question of advancement. With the Ipad releasing books on it's kindle in forms that we are used to, are we advancing or sticking with the old? Honestly, I'd say it's merely baby steps. We're in a time period where self esteem is fairly high regarded. No one wants to look bad because everyone wants to fit in. However with all these new inventions and games being played with the way we normally do something, it becomes difficult to say whether or not we want to join that fad.
One example given was the music aps that are out there and still use the typical nob to show turning or changing of a sound. Why use a nob? Because it allows us to relate to it. We get to become imaginative DJ's playing with our own personal soundboard that's on our Ipads/Ipods/laptops/etc. There is a certain fear of looking weird that people aren't willing to step out of their safe zone, and would rather turn a nob than click a limb or some other provocative image. By doing something new, we essentially commit to that idea and can be judged by it, but since we are using something that everyone else is used to, the nob, and we are given the rule that we have to turn that nob, then it's alright if it doesn't turn out great because we followed a set of rules that led us a stray rather than thought of that dreadful idea ourselves.
I feel that eventually, we will get into a form of writing where narrative doesn't require order as much. Where finding out the finale of a series won't ruin how we watch the entire show from the middle. Essentially, comedic shows are acceptable in the sense that the episodes themselves will be funny even if you see them out of order. Family guy comes to mind. The reasons critiques are so skeptical is because they are used to old rules, where you need a beginning middle and end, where sequence and linear facts aid in the story. Soon, the story will just be a narrative of interchangeable events that give us what we want to know.
There is also a connection to the cybertextual reader being a gamer. I couldn't agree more! In that respect, we must first identify what a game is.. and from Websters dictionary it's a amusement, or a past time. What is reading? Basically the same thing, unless you're like me and read because you have to not because you want to.. hah. But yes, adding these new rules of how to read will only aid in making reading more fun. A story with multiple endings will always trump a story that has one ending... why doe DiCaprio have to die in Titanic! I say he pulls her into the water and takes her raft..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)