Search results for "critical code studies working group"
| Results 901 - 910 of 1114
|
Page 91 of 112
|
|
Sorted by: Relevance | Sort by: Date
|
Results per-page: 10 | 20 | 50 | All
|
[…]impulse, as well as by the hybrid forms emerging from women writers of radical representation working today. The methodological field which I would like to project has at its center a reading body. In place of citations I have cast quotes from others as reverbs within the play of the text. Reverb Gertrude Stein: The only thing that is different from one time to another is what is seen and what is seen depends upon how everybody is doing everything. This makes the thing we are looking at very different and this makes what those who describe it make of […]
[…]Yet my point of contention is that Jaffe’s solution to this crisis, his attempts to illustrate critical, cultural resistance when reading a text – and then seduce the reader into doing the same – only works if and when the reader is made aware of the political underpinnings of his quite strategic textual moves, and the stories in this collection (what can rightfully be described as the articulation of his ideology in a fictional form), do not reveal enough about the author’s intentions to carry their desired weight, to produce any sort of ideological effect at all. The stories written […]
[…]of removing from cognition itself “the multiple, variant approaches to social reality encoded in the many thousands of human languages over time.” Similarly: Matt Kirschenbaum ‘s study of the rise and fall of VRML provides a focused instance of the linguistic and cognitive paucity of actual networked experience. As Paul Smith observes, the process of global capitalist dominion produces a “third world” within the First, and a “first world” within the Third, a southern hemisphere of “underdevelopment” within the borders of industrialized liberal democratic Northern-hemisphere nations, and a slice of northern-hemisphere liberal democratic lifeways in the global South. This means, […]
[…]in larger rivers or split into deltas. (34) Cultural and technological convergence requires critical and theoretical convergence and the above passage is a kind of manifesto in miniature for Culture and Technology. Its supple and interlacing critique makes a decisive incursion into the philosophy of the contemporary. What at first appears to be a review of familiar debates, theorists, and ideas converges into applied analyses of the signature themes associated with cyberculture. But even here, discussions of digital art, virtuality, cyberspace, and the networked society extend previous and ongoing academic discussions to a broader, meta-critical space, in which cybercultural concepts […]
[…]let this pass. Commerce is commerce. From Adobe to Chank Diesel, most creators of typefaces were working in the commercial sector when last I looked. I fail to see how banner advertising protects the “free” status of electronic publishing. By this analysis, network television is “free.” Felix tasks me particularly for not providing “a specific economic framework for… new media paradigms.” This too is perplexing, since it seems that Felix’s entire critique stems from his objection to a very specific economic framework – access to electronic texts by subscription. To be sure, Felix does not like the model I advocate. […]
[…]and the journal will also be, in large part, a review of electronic books: CD-ROMS, hypertexts, critical art ensembles, archived talk lists – whatever comes to be written (and not just typed and slung around) in digital and electronic environments. So yes, this suggests that ebr, in title and in spirit, does like to have it both ways. In the contour essay, I can say that my attempt was to speak more as a contributor than as an editor. Regardless, these remarks by Tabbi constitute “the casting vote.” [For more on ebr ‘s evolution, in particular in contrast to that […]
[…]resources over the long term. But there’s no need to suggest that PMC ‘s fate is the fate of critical content on the Internet, be that content peer-reviewed or not. I doubt that Moulthrop was intending the anti-advertising quote as an interdiction on would-be electronic-scholars, but extra care should be taken to ward off such an implication, especially from an editor at the very influential PMC. For the record, I too know the particular difficulties of editing hypertexts, contrary to Moulthrop’s suggestion. ebr 5, which I guest edited, includes two, one of which is authored by John Cayley, whom ebr […]
[…]and choice dominate the inflated rhetoric of addiction that sells so many self-help books, groups, experts, and luxury rehab centers. Sedgwick’s Foucauldian subjects’ discursive genealogy has culminated in a postmodern consumer paradox; exhorted to muster moral fiber – “just say no” – the universe of addicts responds by accelerating their consumption of therapies. Incidentally, the subjectified revolving door of responsibility and compulsion protects producers like tobacco companies from misleading, obsolete, oversimplified reifications like “addictive substance.” Compulsion, a “force” that couples body with object, and in turn keeps alive the system of social flows that structures and supports this coupling, translates […]
[…]the potential for radical change can go unrealized for centuries. The shift from parchment roll to codex form, for example, did not result immediately in the production of large codexes containing a large number of diverse texts; rather, “[d]uring the first centuries of existence, the codex remained of modest size, composed of fewer than one hundred fifty sheets.” In addition, among non-Christians, “mastery and use of the possibilities gained ground only slowly. It appears to have been adopted by readers who were not part of the educated elite…and initially it was texts outside the literary canon (such as scholarly texts, […]
[…]unity. It falls victim to overambition, missing attainable goals in the pursuit of a new ecocritical understanding. The first section of the book examines the history and future of wilderness and features essays by R. Edward Grumbine, Denis Cosgrove, and Max Oelschlaeger. Each writer treats the dual concepts of “wilderness” and “wildness” but there is little common ground among them as to definitions or methodology. As a result, the authors’ collective efforts to illuminate these terms serves instead to obfuscate an already vexing issue of terminology. Differentiating between wilderness and wildness forms a crucial subtext throughout the book, but only […]