Search results for "critical code studies working group"
| Results 161 - 170 of 1106
|
Page 17 of 111
|
|
Sorted by: Relevance | Sort by: Date
|
Results per-page: 10 | 20 | 50 | All
|
[…]or Books without End? U. Michigan Press, 2003. Eskelinen, Markku. “The Gaming Situation.” Game Studies 1:1. http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/eskelinen/. Accessed 01-12-2010. Eskelinen, Markku. Travels in Cybertextuality: The Challenge of Cybertext Theory and Ludology to Literary Theory. Doctoral dissertation, University of Jyväskylä, 2009. Grusin, Richard. Premediation: Affect and Mediality After 9/11. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Holeton,Richard. Figurski at Findhorn on Acid. Eastgate Systems, 2001. Jackson, Shelley. Patchwork Girl. Eastgate Systems, 1995. Johnson, Steven. Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today’s Popular Culture is Actually Making Us Smarter. Riverhead, 2006. Joyce, Michael. afternoon, a story. Eastgate Systems, 1987. Manovich, Lev. The Language of New […]
[…]as well as the comments by this volume’s editors. What is most interesting to me about the critical praise deservedly lavished on The Wire is not how it may or may not yield an increase in viewership but how the critical consensus seems to situate the show distinctly within the frame of another medium. For many critics, bloggers, fans, and even creator David Simon himself, The Wire is best understood not as a television series but as a “visual novel.” As a television scholar, this cross-media metaphor bristles – not because I don’t like novels but because I love television. […]
[…]dialectical promiscuity seems at times to chime with her own ambitions as a writer. In “Critical Fiction / Critical Self,” a 1991 essay outlining her aesthetic principles, her “House of Fiction,” Tillman explained her attraction to the novel and story in terms that evoke Warhol even as they name Bahtkin. one of the reasons I choose to write fiction is that . . . ambiguity and ambivalence can find its way into a story or into that complex cultural unit called a novel, where, as Bakhtin put it, a “struggle between one’s own and another’s word is being waged,” and […]
[…]and critique. As Helmling puts it, “A chronic ambition of critique has been to get outside the critical object, to achieve ‘objectivity’ about it, or ‘critical distance’ from it. Both in its Kantian and its Marxist senses, critique has turned on issues of inside/outside; and the pursuit of the inside track has largely belonged to ‘hermeneutic,’ as opposed to ‘critique'” (99 original emphasis). In contrast, “‘[h]ermaneutic’ sanctions the interpreter’s sympathy, or even identity with the object – precisely the stance ‘critique’ rejects as imperiling objectivity” (99). Unlike transcendental criticism that insists on the “outside” as the only legitimate vantage point […]
[…]– can do full justice to the under-language of Watchmen. As indicated, this comic delivers not a working timepiece but something more like a catastrophe simulator, an open-ended experiment that the reader is invited or expected to perform. Understanding Watchmen in this light makes it seem distinctly avant la lettre, something impossible to describe in traditional terms. More than the relic of an older, spatial way of seeing, it prefigures and perhaps inaugurates the next thing in sign systems. In this century we are beginning to build on our technologies of recording and inscription new media and new language that […]
[…]on a remediated world literature, Emily Apter asserts that “ideally, one would redesign literary studies to respond critically and in real time to cartographies of emergent world-systems” (581). Insofar as every work of electronic literature represents a creative and often critical appropriation of our unevenly globalizing society’s most powerful means of meaning production, it more than deserves a place in such a revitalized and, I would argue, now unavoidably comparative discipline. For our part, we should think more about electronic literature’s engagements (and complicities) with monolingualism and with the operations of global capitalism not only out of a high-minded sense […]
[…]rejecting the claim that only computer software and hardware are covered by the term – platform studies might show us a new way of engaging in the dense analysis that gives us everything media studies once gave us (that is, retaining Moulthrop’s many insights) but within a richer framework. One challenge facing the new approach is that the metaphor of a “platform” has already accumulated multiple valences that are, as Tarleton Gillespie has shown, quite complex, but still primarily associated with hardware and software systems. But a platform studies perspective on Watchmen and its many fearful symmetries would account for […]
[…]copyrighted and write-protected: the notes, the links, the generous, freely offered historical and critical scholarship with which we had meant to begin, are all stripped from the commercial versions. Nietzsche discussion groups abound. I have tried to describe a feeling which has often enough tormented me: I take revenge on this feeling when I expose it to the general public. For this work is to set down why, in the spirit of Goethe’s words, we must in all seriousness despise new media textual production, knowledge which enervates activity, and new media as an expensive surplus of knowledge and a luxury, […]
[…]of print are indistinct, one can perceive a relative desire for manipulability at the level of the codex, the verse, the word, and the letter. While it is critical to note the integral role of computation in the restitution of the digital text, it is difficult to dispute the embedded ideal of analytical manipulation present, for instance, in this relatively conventional scholarly format. Citations and references, arranged and controlled, performing the work of analysis in a manner that aspires towards its hypothetical restitution in the minds of others. And it would, perhaps, be a mistake to overlook the function of […]
[…]I might use to explicate our relationship. Within a spectrum bounded at one end by the New Critical emphasis on textual autonomy and at the other by the “virtual” text that emerges necessarily as a correspondence between author and audience in reader-response theory, I do not know where I stand. With Galatea’s invocation, I am aware that I have been identified and can therefore no longer maintain the convenient illusion of being, as a reader, either ideal or implied. I have been specified. The “text,” such as it is, has called me out. The spectrum I have identified here is, […]