Article 1

Overview and Summary

Why the Digital Computer is Dead – Chris Chesher

The information in this article is the perception of Chesher that the term digital is obsolete and we should instead consider “invocational media” because the new media is relating to the ability to gather information with the click of a mouse or as its termed, “call things up” (1).

Key Ideas

1) Personal choice, perception, decision of task from the person calling up the information, choices and the objectives are what determines the use of information once it is gotten from the context in which it was put together or “gathered.” Therefore, computer is “invocator.” The “invocator” is responsive to the direction, choice, and commands of its user.

2) Technology and magic is correlated and is described as the proof that the older, “non-modern” forms of culture exist but are now manifested in computerized presentation (7). The older forms of culture have taken on a newer more modern ambiance and this can be pulled up, examined, utilized, etc. with a click of a mouse (magic). All the attention is then placed on what information the user chooses to call up, not on how they got it. Just as in magic, it is said that, “the hand is quicker than the eye” (11).

3) The act of the “invocator” or user calling up the information brings with it a power to the person doing the clicking allowing them to determine how things will be and what the meaning and utilization for what is called up will be. They will take existing information and apply it to their own use, thus, reinventing, transforming, and changing what the original information may have been meant for. Each click of the mouse is a process, gathering, reading, interpreting, utilizing, and putting into action user perception and concept of what the information is for. This process converges the regular cultural ideologies and practices we have and utilize. The e-mail message is an example of this, it is a form of technology with communication (social cultural aspect) results.

4) Another important key is that “invocation” converges and utilizes culturally recognized materials and know how within its system. As explained by the author e-mail uses the idea of mailboxes, addresses, etc. like the post office. Another example would be text messaging which uses a language all its own, similar to the old idea of morse code or Indian code during the war.

Challenging Aspect

The most challenging aspect for me was to recognize and use the new terminology; to develop and reprogram my brain to this new way of thinking of something I haven’t given much thought to accept that it was always there and termed what I’ve always known it to be termed. This author in his/her own right was transforming what I normally and culturally expected to be used as terminology and references to a whole new word that took the process (which remains what I know it is) and transformed it into a new ambiance for me; out of my norm into another even though the norms of the process for me didn’t change. I think this was the whole idea of the article and it happened to me as I was reading it, very clever.

Questions

1. In what way, is this prevalent today especially among the younger generation who are growing up with different and more modern “invocations” of existing culturally driven medias?
2. Will this transformation of the old culturally accepted manifestations of language, etc. become the norm and will that diminish the art of language and the joy of the written word or will it always remain the foundation for new media.
3. Will this invocation become the foundation for the new generation because cultural “continuities” are modernized?
   
   Relation to Paper
   
   This article is actually directly related to the concept of my paper. My paper concerns leadership emergence and its cues in the virtual world. Here to, accepted cultural norms are transformed into a more modern usage; these norms are the leadership emergence cues that are found in face-to-face groups as they are presented in the world of the virtual group. They exist but take on new technological concepts within the process. It happens in my real world every day. My daughter texts me and the word and language I’m used to is presented in a shorter text language all its own; the meaning of the messages are the same, however, their appearance is different.
   
   Article 2 Overview and Summary
   
   The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical – Walter Benjamin
   
   The information in this article the transformation of art within the contexts of the technological and mechanical world; it is like the first article, however, looks at a different medium to describe it, (art). Art viewing becomes quantity at a click of a mouse, a click of a remote, a push of a button, however, the ambiance and cultural implications of its original place, originality, etc. is somehow lost in its technological manifestation of viewing.
   
   Key Ideas
   
   1) The nature of any kind of art is transformed when presented within the context and content of mechanical means, medias, etc.
   2) The audience of art forms identify with the mechanical median in which it is presented, not necessarily with the original intent of its creator.
   3) The new mechanical mediums allow normal everyday people to become artists in their own right (authors, if you think of blogging, directors and camera men if you think of Youtube).
   4) The nature of the beast is that newer and newer creations will appear and demands will carry them further and further and make them available to its public in an instant and provide art to the masses.
   5) The masses viewing the art reserves the right of perception as to why and how they are looking at it and the right to determine its meaning to them.
   6) The original art is preserved but its viewed and shared by the masses.
   
   Challenging Aspects
   
   The one challenge was reading this article, at first I was concerned with what it had to do with anything. Then as I got into it the challenge became what do I need to pull out of this thing. What I determined for myself was that the ideology presented was that anything is preserved in its original form but it is in the eye of the beholder as to the meaning it has for them. With the mechanical world allowing us, as part of the mass, to view and be exposed to art both on the viewing and creating end (blogs, Youtube, e-books, etc.) it is expanding arts perception and choice of meaning. Again a reaffirmation that convergence is transforming, changing and challenging our existing foundational cultural norms on a constant basis bringing them into the new world of consumer usage and control.
   
   Questions
   
   1) Does the presentation to masses preserve just the physical property and is something taken away from the artist’s original hopes for its meaning?
   2) Do societal demands of intact cultural foundations, wage its own war against this new technology?
   3) In what ways does society transform its thinking in order to gain insight and a glimpse of culture of art within the realms of viewing as part of the masses?
   
   Relation to Paper
   
   This article like the last incorporates the idea that societal foundations of cultural existence remain, however, its ideologies are presented to the masses, quickly, easily, and are open for interpretation. Again my paper looking at the existing foundational norms for leader emergence in a transformed way of virtual emergence is experiencing this same type of transformation. The foundation exists but is evolving to adapt to the technological world.