Search results for "critical%20code%20studies%20working%20group"
| Results 421 - 430 of 1106
|
Page 43 of 111
|
|
Sorted by: Relevance | Sort by: Date
|
Results per-page: 10 | 20 | 50 | All
|
[…]David. M. Critical Theory and the Digital. London: Bloomsbury, 2014. Print. Berry, David and Anders Fagerjord. Digital Humanities: Knowledge and Critique in a Digital Age. London: Polity Press, 2017. Print. Broken English. “Memes.” http://brokenenglish.lol 23/8/2019 Flores, Leo. “Third Generation Electronic Literature” electronic book review. 4/7/19 http://electronicbookreview.com/essay/third-generation-electronic-literature/ Hayles, N. Katherine. Electronic Literature: New Horizons for the Literary. Indiana: Notre Dame UP, 2008. Print. Hight, Craig. (2008) “The field of digital documentary: A challenge to documentary theorists” Studies in Documentary Film 2:1, pp3-8 Keating, Abigail. “Video-making, Harlem Shaking: Theorizing the interactive amateur” New Cinemas 11.2+3 (2013): 99-110 Montfort, Nick. “A Web Reply […]
[…]flatness. Analogously, Christopher Funkhouser suggests in Prehistoric Digital Poetry (2007), poets working with code have long sought to create texts that “make their essence apparent,” (3) that make legible and unmistakable their algorithmic bones. A poem that passes a poetic Turing Test will have instead cleverly obscured its digital nature. Moreover, such tests often take as their standard the well-worn forms of literary inheritance – sonnets, haikus, etc. (This includes, we should note, the Neukom Institute’s “Turing Tests in the Creative Arts”; Rockmore founded this contest and Booten is a former competitor.) To add to Funkhouser’s observation about the modernist […]
[…]project”), where it has garnered a fanbase committed to ensuring that the IF continues to have working emulators (such as Gargoyle or Windows Frotz) on which to run. In view of this, it is possible to discuss the omission of Slouching from the three ELC volumes without chagrin or fear for the longevity of the work. As Joseph Tabbi level-headedly pointed out while setting a direction for the Electronic Literature Directory in 2007, [p]romoters of e-literature should avoid sounding too disappointed about the ‘loss’ of established works of e-lit whose platforms are now outdated […] the vast majority of past […]
[…]have seen the emergence and dynamic unfolding of new and overlapping transdisciplinary fields or critical methodologies (e.g. Cultural Ecology, Ecocriticism, and Environmental Humanities). Interdisciplinary and plural, combining a large array of multifaceted scholarly approaches (Rose et. al. 2012; Oppermann 2011; Gersdorf and Mayer 2006), the field has however a focal point: the need to reconceptualize environmental issues as social and human questions rather than mere technical ones, to be handled by experts or technocratic structures. Engaging with these ongoing critical discussions, this paper offers an eco-oriented reading of literary and artistic digital works. How do the contemporary digital art and […]
[…]and sentiments,” as well as evokes a “sense of how much one is like others” (78). While working on the first installment of his project, Brainard wrote in a letter to Anne Waldman that he felt I Remember “is about everybody else as much as it is about me” (qtd. in Padgett 171). However, he chose not to gloss over the memories which clearly mark out his experience from that of the majority of the book’s audience – his homosexuality: I remember one football player who wore very tight faded blue jeans, and the way he filled them. (19) I […]
[…]the business models of the Big Four, but also psychosocial energies—both of individuals and of groups—which, however, are thereby depleted. (Stiegler 2019: 7) Transformed into data providers, these entities (both the individuals and groups that the so-called “social” networks take apart and reconstitute according to new protocols of association) are stripped of their individuality: their own data, which constitute what we might call (drawing on Husserl’s phenomenology of temporality) their retentions, are then what allow them to be dispossessed of their own protentions – which is to say their own desires, expectations, volition, will, etc. (Stiegler 2019p: 7) By thus […]
[…]the wrong people the right questions, or he is asking the right people the wrong questions. This critical mésalliance, however, also often results in some of the strengths of the volume. The various negotiations of interviewers and interviewees, especially where the critical agenda is not fully received and accommodated by a deep allegiance to singular literary vision and craft, tend to open up the discussion in a way that I suspect will be appealing for most readers, and what emerges is an expansive and rich global literature focused in non-dogmatic ways on the productive intersections of history, personality, and storytelling. […]
[…]of collaboration, if either of your writing processes have changed over the years as a result of working together? Warren: Through the years since Dennis and I have collaborated he’s said that working with me has changed the way he writes, and he tends to think more visually because of it. I feel fortunate because a lot of poets are not going to let some other person mess with their stuff like this. At times Dennis would say hey you went too far, or you can’t break that line there. So there’s definitely negotiation in certain instances. I respect what […]
[…]the primacy of code to e-literary and digital humanities work, asserting “you don’t have to code to perform poetry with this code.” By building this inclusive model of code-play into her poetics, Strickland places Ringing the Changes firmly in conversation with feminist digital humanists, who have long argued that centering codework in digital humanities (and by extension, electronic literature) centers exclusionary, masculinist value systems that force women and BIPOC (Black, indigenous, people of color) out of the field. Within Strickland’s oeuvre, texts like True North (1997) and V:Vniverse (2002) reveal a poetic practice that has long been invested in bringing […]
[…]Schwenger draws a parallelism with another type of “global language,” expressly, “computer code” – though this comparison between the two does seem a little unbalanced, given that “computer code” already possesses its own disruptive and dysfunctional modes of expression. Chapter 2 presents yet another type of dialectic tension, specifically a dialogue between “three asemic ancestors” – Henri Michaux, Roland Barthes, and Cy Twombly, respectively – representational echoes of so many other artists/writers who practised “asemic writing” well before it was designated as such. As happens in other chapters, Schwenger does not provide an extensive list of artists or artworks (he […]