Fahrenheit 464

In some ways these next sections of Ulmer's Internet Invention were pleasing, and in otherwise troublesome.  I was pleased to see Ulmer more explicitly lay out his line of thought from mystory to electracy (e.g., 42).  This work is more deliberately unfolded for the reader than say Electronic Monuments.  Let me begin by replicating the key components in his line of thought, if not even more explicitly:

Subjectivity is key to understanding images/imaging (i.e., Barthes punctum)

Natural State hinders imag-ination

Subjectivity/Social Location is key to (de)consulting (i.e., a bottom-up/multi-voice/creative approach)

Electracy requires use/understanding of image

Electracy is key to consultation

MyStory is a key for understanding/interrogating subjectivity/social location

MyStory is a key for understanding image

MyStory is thus key to electracy and consultation

I now see what Ulmer is claiming.  Why, though, is electracy necessary for consultation?  Is it as simple as Blogger allowing self-publishing?  I hope not.  Is it because the MyStory route provides this Utopian mechanism of freeing our minds such that new and amazing solutions will be produced?  I have a hard time getting on board with that... especially given what I see as a problematically (and ironically) reductionist perspective at work in the MyStory (an "Aptitude Test" ??!  p27)...  

But let's grant that everything Ulmer argues for is true.  What, though, are we risking in the pursuit of electracy?  Are we even pursuing the right ends?  Are we seeking what they sought, or are we seeking what Ulmer tells us to seek?


Are we putting too much stock in electracy?  AND is electracy only linked to the digital apparatus?  What if the digital/electronic world were to come toppling down?  There are plenty of fictional narratives about a world in which the electronic apparatai dominate (the EPIC movie posted by Lauren is a rather captivating example of such ---- give it a chance and you'll get drawn into it), but there are also equally as many reasonably-plausible narratives of a world in which the digital/electronic/electrately-capable no longer reigns supreme (or even survives).  


Some might say that we simply must harness the potential power of electracy - form it in its infancy - arguing that the technological genie is out of the bottle so now is the time to determine is productive value.  It is all to convenient and naive to simply say "I don't think the internet is going anywhere anytime soon."  Really?  So scenarios of an accidental war that obliterates infrastructure, successful aggression from a hostile nation that represses technology, economic downturn that by necessity or choice draws individuals away from technology, a shortage in fuel resources that results in power rationing, or a serious of legal victories that hampers the Net aren't enough?  (Ted Trainer, for instance, argues that de-development is inevitable; it's just a question of whether we want to go about it the hard way or the catastrophic way)


As such, is electracy necessary for (de)consultation?  I kind of hope not.  And given that Ulmer is speaking of (de)consulting within "the context of specialized knowledge" (41) even in his efforts to decrease disciplinarity (24), are we not inevitably setting up the same top-down system of experts?  Well, of course these are super-creative experts given their newly found subjective/introspective enlightenment...


I do not mean to be unnecessarily combative.  In fact, I don't even think I am necessarily completely right in the direction this line of inquiry clearly seems to be taking.  Yet, I find these questions to be quite important to consider.  


There have been countless numbers of ideas formulated in non-electrate fashions that have made impacts on cultures.  Take, for instance, the Tchantches puppets of Belgium.  By performing (a concept that is important to Ulmer - p38) narratives that highlighted the fragmented nature of the culture, the middle-lower class (the bulk of just about everyone) banded together in ways that effected real change.  Unity through a declaration of dis-unity.  (Now, of course, the government tried to coopt these efforts with some success, but that's another story). 

* * *
I happen to have grown up outside of and gone to school in the "Plastic Thermoforming Capital of the World."  464 Degrees Fahrenheit is the temperature at which the PolyStyrene your computer is made out of will melt.  If that happens, before or after we learn/create/explore electracy, what does that mean for us?  It seems like an important question...

Interesting "Work"...

I must say, I have found this last half of Rettberg's book to be quite interesting. I think it's because in the latter half of the book, we finally get past all of the perfunctory "what is blogging" stuff (stuff that was more necessary to write when she wrote the book, even only a couple years ago, and stuff that is more necessary for some who haven't blogged before). It's not that any of the individual concepts that she discusses are all that philosophically complex (such as blogs as episodic narratives), but the full range of interacting concepts is really intriguing - making the whole of the inquiry so much more than the sum of its parts.

One of those concepts - one that operates on a number of levels - that I kept thinking about during this latter half was WORK.  Work happens in a number of different ways with blogs, and Rettberg gets at that conversation through a variety of her examples.  Given the number of ways that it works and the rate at which my gears are trying to turn, I'll strive to be concise...   

Successful blogging takes many hours of work - limiting those who can do it well (e.g. "[Kottke] found blogging to be increasingly time-consuming and that it put a drain on other important parts of his life, so he had considered quitting" [136].") and the trade-off is not always worth it (e.g., Justin Hall [119] who quit blogging [final VideoBlog entry in '05], but is now married and blogging again).  Maintenance/Management of the blog can be quite intense as well, such as Slashdot's mechanisms ("registered users are assigned moderation duties on certain days" [104]).

Journalistic and filter blogging (e.g., 135) has its own immense time requirements (e.g., CNN's iReport vetting process gives unwritten "rules" to follow along with standard journalistic practices - everyone over 18, aware of iReport intentions, etc.).

This work by bloggers can decrease the amount of work done by traditional media and consumers (e.g., provide a form of "survey" for the media [108] as well as a wealth of material such as in CNN's iReport; Filter blogs decrease prosumer work). 

Generating and Maintaining Readership/Followers takes work (e.g., "[Fictional high-school student with leukemia] Kaycee's creator put a lot of time and care into building and maintaining relationships with her readers" [124]; Explicit strategic work is sometimes necessary, such as when Allbritton [blogger traveling to Iraq] "placed [readers who donated to his trip] on an email list where they received his reports from teh field several hours earlier than regular blog readers" [102]; and the IMaLUCY YouTube channel has required further marketing and upkeep since its creation - including responding to messages and courting subscribers to elicit videos.)

A Rough Start to Ulmer

I do not mean to be intentionally critical or cranky.  In fact, academic discourse too easily turns to criticism - tracks/ruts that I want to avoid getting stuck in.  Yet, I can't help but start off this reading of Ulmer with a shaking of my head.  It's going to be work for met to get on board with this one.


I will begin by saying that there are some things in his work that I personally find neat - the whole notion of "inventing electracy" for instance is pretty compelling.  The big hangup I have right now, though, is the necessity of the MYSTORY to the whole enterprise.


To be honest, I do not think that the MyStory is an essential part of inventing the internet in particular or electracy in general.  I do not.  I'll even go so far as to say "It is not."  While creating one's MyStory may very well be an electrate way of imagerically composing and autobiography, it is simply not really a cornerstone to electracy.  Does Ulmer say that it is?  Well, certainly there is LOTS of the book left to go - don't get me wrong.  At this point, though, it seems that he is setting up the MyStory to be a part of his subjective, bottom-up approach to knowledge/solutions/expression/invention.  In Electronic Monuments, Ulmer makes clear his desire to have the EmerAgency work as a challenge to artificial institutional homogeneity/limitation of choices.  Electracy ideally will afford new, unique voices to be heard.  But WHY is the MyStory a critical component for this?  I really do not think that it is.


I am not saying that the MyStory is useless.  Certainly no.  In the context of Ulmer's pedagogy, it could be seen as one of any possible number of assignments, similar to the variety of assignments one might find assigned in a traditional, literate composition course.  Write a creative short story.  Write an expository essay.  Write an autobiography.  Now, write that autobiography with your new/emerging/developing electrate knowledge.  (Oh, and this electrate autobiography should be based on images -- a wide image/emblem, etc.).  This is beneficial.  In a composition course, a major goal is teaching the students to write - and the autiobiography is a vehicle for such.  The MyStory is a vehicle for getting us into electracy (and getting electracy out of us), but it is not an essential/necessary component of electracy.


Now, one might say that the subjectivity argument made above is why the MyStory is so critical to electracy.  That seems to embrace certain philosophical paradigms that have their own set of problems (and benefits, sure).  Even if one ascribes to such a philosophical position, a robust introspective examination explained through the wide image/emblem seems like definitely one creative idea, but not THE creative idea - and certainly not one that serves as any sort of lynchpin.  Ulmer argues that "identity behavior or subject formation is as much a part of an apparatus as are technology and institutions" (7), but the examples he gives at the end of the Intro and other examples like the ByStory do not seem to indicate this linkage that Ulmer hopes for in the context of the MyStory particularly.  I suspect that is because this linkage does not exist.  It seems that the Image is an artificially necessary element of the MyStory just as the MyStory is an artificially necessary component of inventing electracy.


Will this "increase my creativity" (8)?  Perhaps.  Actually, probably.  But so would an assignment that asked me to compose a fictional short story - and do it electrately.  AND that would not run up against all sorts of problems with a MyStory - like the desire NOT to Self-Disclose.  Or the limitation in choosing a pseudo-fixed image/emblem (I KNOW I am going to have an electrate version of Buyer's Remorse at every stage of this process). Ulmer says that "the unexamined life is not worth living" (8), but examination does not require composition or broadcasting of said examination.  


A couple last thoughts - First, I may be waaay overreading Ulmer's claims.  Perhaps he is not at all saying that this is a cornerstone to electracy.  Perhaps it's just one particular assignment that he finds profitable and uses as a way to get students engaged in electracy.  If that's the case, though, I do not understand why so much of the work is devoted to the MyStory instead of looking more directly at electracy.  Is the MyStory just his excuse to do psychoanalysis?


Second and finally, Ulmer seems to speak directly to folks like me in the Introduction, saying, "Students are not asked to "believe" but only to suspend their disbelief while trying the mystory as a genre for simulating the wide image" (8).  While that still leaves my question about the image being artificial as well, I guess I'll give it a whirl.  I will suspend my disbelief - but only insofar as it prevents activity.  I will not suspend its function as critical skeptic throughout the process.  I do not think that would even be possible.