Twitter-pated August 16, 2008
Posted by kmiddleton in new media, pop culture.Tags: olympics, twitter
1 comment so far
I know people who simply lurve twitter. It’s the new cool thing! It’s a microblog! Follow your friends! It’s internet poetry! I wanted to get it, really, but it wasn’t quite working for me. What would be the circumstance wherein I’d want to read such short, of the minute posts? I like the lengthy, meandering blog post, after all. Preferably with pictures!!
But then (and you knew this was coming, right?), I happened upon Slate’s Olympic coverage via Twitter. You would think that there’s nothing else to be said about the Olympics right now. I love me some televised competitive swimming, but this is just getting ridiculous. The whole world knows Michael Phelps’ torso measurement, as well as what he has for breakfast—because it’s on CNN. Fashion magazines are covering beach volleyball; Perez Hilton is tracking medals and opening ceremony cover-ups, for crying out loud. In this climate of neverending sports-cum-nationalism information flow, what kind of coverage could we possibly be missing?
Enter the fabulous one-liner. A few choice quotes:
Slate’s coverage of Dara Torres informing the judges to wait for the Swedish swimmer to change her torn swimsuit; an event heralded as the apotheosis of sports ethics on NBC, merits this tweet: “Torres pointing out the Swede’s torn swimsuit is the greatest act of Olympic sportsmanship since Lochte gave Phelps half his sandwich.”
On the controversial win for Michael Phelps’, wherein he touched the wall 1/100 of a second before the Serbian swimmer. Some cry conspiracy, and Slate’s tweet reads: “No conspiracy, Phelps just has the ability to alter space-time. That’s what he’s doing with that dolphin kick.”
Suddenly, Twitter makes perfect sense to me. It’s the transcendental medium for the one-liner, and I prefer the ones that are sarcastic shots over the bow, capable of puncturing the balloon of teary-eyed national sentiment and/or athletic fetishism. In feed form, the tweets are reminiscent of those magical conversations with your smartest friends, whose reactions to absurd events reduce you to tears of laughter.
The Twitter folk position their application as one in which users answer the question “What are you doing?” I can help but wonder whether a better use might be to answer the question “What are you seeing?”
Read Only July 27, 2008
Posted by kmiddleton in new media, reading.Tags: internet, reading
3 comments
The NY Times today released the first part of a series dedicated to investigating “how the Internet and other technological and social forces are changing the way people read.” Hoo boy. Let the games begin.
On first read, I’d say that author Motoko Rich strives for an admirable balance between two factions dedicated to defending their particular reading practices. For every study of declining test scores and reading for pleasure, she cites online readers’ descriptions of their own practices or new literacy scholars.
From this format, we can see a surprising tone that both boosters and naysayers of digital reading share: a relatively consistent dismissal of alternate format. For instance, Rich cites Dana Gioia of the NEA:“Whatever the benefits of newer electronic media they provide no measurable substitute for the intellectual and personal development initiated and sustained by frequent reading.” At the same time, we have fluent digital readers who have this to say about print books: “The Web is more about a conversation. Books are more one-way.”
The article carefully cites the number of material factors to consider as we weigh a shift in reading habits: the socioeconomic benefits of print literacy, its deep integration into school curricula, the challenges it presents for students with learning differences. But these considerations are buried deep on page 3 of the article, in a way that suggests they’re simply fodder for the bigger issue–the deep psychological investment in the way that reading inflects our daily lives, and that no one is willing to be told that their preferred method is lacking in some way.
I find myself perched uncomfortably between these two ways of reading and the assumptions of superiority they promulgate. When Gioia says: “What we are losing in this country and presumably around the world is the sustained, focused, linear attention developed by reading,” a portion of my heart goes pitter pat. Does reading a novel require that sustained attention? Obviously. And I’m willing to believe (until a neuroscientist tells me different) that there’s a cognitive benefit to it, as well as a pleasure to be taken in it. But I’m also not willing to believe that all digital reading is the short-attention span theater that Gioia assumes and of which Rich provides examples. When Nadia is reading fan fiction stories that run “45 web pages,” we’re talking about focused attention, and we’d have to study Nadia’s reading practices to convince ourselves that it wasn’t sustained or linear. In addition, the statement ignores the sociality of reading a number of digital sources on a similar topic.
On the other side of the fence (here I am, perched on a cliche), I’m taken aback by the digital readers’ characterizations of books. At least two of the young people interviewed take issue with books’ unitary nature–either as a fixed plot structure or singularity of voice. This also seems to be a mis-characterization of what print readers love about books, wherein the process of interpretation makes a book an archive of alternatives. [This assumes, of course, that you include interpretation in your definition of reading, I suppose.]
I’m anxious to see how others perceive the coverage in the Times. For now, however, I’m struck by the gulf between readers, and the very little coverage (and study?) of how omnivorous readers characterize pleasure, benefit and drawbacks of their reading practices across media
Stop the Press! July 24, 2008
Posted by kmiddleton in new media.Tags: iphone, itouch
add a comment
Sweet fancy Moses, apparently I can now blog from my ITouch, thanks to a WordPress app that comes via the new suite of iPhone 2.0 software. Hot diggety? Now no subject is safe from my critical eye? Every piece of pop culture shall know my wrath?
Will this make me a more consistent blogger? My guess is no, probably just one with fewer excuses and thus more guilt about my spotty blogging schedule. Of course, if this post is any indication, the new app may well turn me into a one-fingered typist. So long, carpal tunnel syndrome—and good riddance!
Stay tuned for further updates, gentle readers.
Fluff on Spoon July 8, 2008
Posted by kmiddleton in new media, pop culture.Tags: Add new tag, peeps, you tube
1 comment so far
When you spend a good couple of hours in the morning searching for fan videos on YouTube, it’s almost unbelievable what you’ll happen upon. Somehow, this morning, I ended up watching a video of the Keepon rhythmic robot dancing to a song by Spoon.
According to this article on the PBS site (courtesy of Wired Science), the video was a viral YouTube hit in 2007. So sue me; I’m a year behind. Regardless, see if you aren’t mesmerized by his little yellow groove. Don’t be surprised if you find yourself unconsciously imitating his moves, either.
Fantastic, no? I find that I think I’m done about 30 seconds in, but then I keep coming back to it. Is it the blank stare? the mellow, spongy rump-shakin’? [There's something in the Keepon's motions and expression that bear a faint resemblance to audience members at a Phish show.] Apparently, the little guy was designed to work with autistic kids. But what about his little, unacknowledged friend, the Peepon? Oh god do I love a good video response. Take a look-see for yourself:
Equally as mesmerizing, but somehow also a bit nauseating, no? All of that gelatinized sugar. To quote one of the best comments about the video from RustiSwordz, “Its Jabba the Hutt’s funky cousin.” Hi-Larious.
This is now the second post I’ve written about Peeps in the last two years, and I’m a bit disturbed by that.
Back to work now. Get out and get your groove on.
Fistful of Film Techniques May 13, 2008
Posted by kmiddleton in film, new media, pedagogy.Tags: pedagogy, YouTube
add a comment
M. and I are hard at work on our summer workshop, which we’re privately thinking of as “Personal Essay Filmmaking, 2.0.” Last year at this time, we were trying to guide our students through the incredibly complex task of crafting a short personal essay film in two weeks. This was complicated by any number of factors: mis-advertised course times and dates and lack of lab space being two of the unexpected ones. On top of that, there were all of the difficulties of teaching a class for the first time, and team-teaching for the first time, to boot. In short, it’s amazing that we—and the students—made it out alive.
This time around, however, we’ve streamlined the class considerably. Based on our recent research, we’re also actively thinking about YouTube as a space in which personal essay films already exist, in a variety of manifestations. For the last two days, we’ve been reading personal essays with the class, and using the written text as a starting place to discuss genre, and then we’ve moved on to examining a number of YouTube videos. We’re keeping Jenkins and Juhasz in mind here, but we’re also asking our students to take seriously the potential to produce a personal film with larger societal/cultural meaning. As if that isn’t setting the bar, try this one: they only have two weeks to do it. (!)
My job in class tomorrow is to provide for them a handful of filmmaking techniques that will spur their creative process, and give them some ideas about the visual and aural possibilities available to them. I’ve been assembling clips for the past hour, trying to decide which might be the most relevant to the types of stories they want to tell, but let’s face it: the language of film is infinite, and our time in class is shockingly limited. The task of giving them an abbreviated toolbox of film techniques (and by this, I’m thinking particularly about shots, editing effects, etc.) is a bit like asking someone to build a house, but being told that they can only have three tools with which to do it. A hammer, nails, and a saw? A wrench, pliers, and PVC pipe? Point of view camera, or low angle shot? Non-diegetic sound, or discontinuity editing?
I can’t help but be reminded of the advice of dissertation advisors everywhere: you should have three different versions of your project on tap at any given moment—the 500 word version, the 200 word version, and the 25 word version. Tomorrow, by necessity, we’ll be going with the 25 word version of film techniques. Perhaps there will be time at the end of the week for a longer version.
I Knew It Was Only a Matter of Time… March 9, 2008
Posted by kmiddleton in new media, pop culture, research.6 comments
No, this isn’t a post about the havoc wreaked by Daylight Saving Time (although there is a considerable amount of that), neither is it a confession that I stayed in New York past my allotted time (although I was very, very tempted, camped outside the Magnolia Bakery, eating cupcakes and watching the person wearing a giant chipmunk suit dancing around in the Marc Jacobs window. God, I love New York!). Instead, it’s a post about fan fiction.
So if you’ve had the unfortunate luck to be around me for any amount of time at all this year, you’ve probably heard me wax rhapsodic about the joys and wonders of fan fiction. Really. No sarcasm at all here. Over the summer, I bought the Buffy the Vampire Slayer box set on DVD on a lark, started watching it as a break from the hard work at DMAC, and randomly looked around online for “what was out there.” Nine months later and I’m contracted to write an article about Buffy fan video. Stay tuned. [What I actually said to myself was "gee, this will be so far from work that it will be a mental vacation. It will be great to watch something that I don't feel like I'm ever going to write about." Oh, life-irony. You're so clever. Joke's on me, I suppose. Har har.]
The point of this is that I’ve been reading a LOT of fan fiction in my spare time. Is there some dreck out there? Sure. Does it bring up all kinds of questions about copyright? Perhaps. Is it a totally impressive, renewing-my-faith-in-the-human-desire-to-create, deeply communal practice engaged in by hundreds of people? Yup. Sure is. Let’s not forget: Buffy went off the air in 2003. Whedon stopped writing her life then, but the fans continue on. Not a week goes by that I don’t read something in the Buffyverse that blows my mind, either because of the author’s inventiveness, or the careful and considered feedback given to her, or the characterizations and/or re-imagining of the “canonical” episodes. [In fact, this week I'm fascinated by the inscription of feminine sexuality---but that's another story.] And when you have this experience, over and over again, you begin to realize that it’s not an isolated event—this is an amazing phenomenon, period. These communities are both deep and broad; the authors slip between the fictional and the personal, the fecundity of their imaginations allow them to slip even across fandoms and to take their readers with them. For the record? Lots of loyal Buffy fans also dig Supernatural and Veronica Mars. Who knew? [And a better question: what's the connecting point across these shows?]
So there I am, poking around on LiveJournal communities, reading from story to story, and I see it: heads up, Kate L! Torchwood fan fiction, complete with icons. In retrospect, it’s totally obvious: cult BBC show with lots and lots of ambiguous sexual behavior? It’s practically a set-up for fan fic authors—the equivalent of popcult catnip. And since Torchwood is pulling both plot points and images from Buffy (not to mention actors, as the appearance of James Marsters–a.k.a. Spike in the Buffyverse–in the first episode of season two), it shouldn’t surprise me that this is a combination that appeared early, and I expect to see it more and more often.
However, isn’t it amazing how fast a fandom is born? Torchwood is about halfway through it’s second season in the U.S., and we’re about a year behind the Brits. So, at most, we’re talking about a two year television phenomenon, yet a quick google search for “Torchwood fan fiction” yields 485,000 hits. ?!!!
I’d love to see someone track the scatter pattern of a particular fandom from patient zero onward. How many episodes before the first fic emerges? How fast do communities form? Are they largely comprised of fans from other shows? At what point do questions of canon emerge?
Video Argument, Ms. Pac-Man Edition February 26, 2008
Posted by kmiddleton in film, new media, politics, pop culture.1 comment so far
Apparently, I’m all about reposting other people’s content here. However, this video is up on Feministe this morn, and it’s taken from Pandagon, so I’ll just imagine that I’m sharing the love. You TOTALLY have to get over your initial reaction to hurl invective at the screen shot figure here—suffice to say that it’s a terrible representation of the yummy goodness (yummy pretzel goodness, to be exact) that comes after it, which, I’d like to say, is making me think about the rhetorics of argument via video.
I’m no rhetorical expert, and I’m sure that the peeps in comp/rhet could run circles around me here (and I encourage them to do so, both for the public service of greater knowledge, and because it’s good for their health), but there are several things that are working in this video. First: the tone is, while a bit outre, also right on for the subject. It’s colloquial, it’s entertaining, and it fits the subject matter completely (can you imagine this as a “straight” reading of the cultural value of Ms. Pac-Man? Please. What’s the point?). Second, while I’m almost always dismissive of still images, the editing in this piece is fab. The juxtaposition of picture of Gloria Steinem and Shirley Chisholm(?) with Margaret Thatcher and Nancy Reagan; the Ken Burns effect on the initial image of Ms. PM—it’s as entertaining as the voiceover and the nostalgic kick of the A-Ha song in the background. What I’m most impressed by, here, is the way in which the producers have integrated information and cultural analysis: reading of symbolism, parallels to the contemporaneous social and economic milieu, a short history of the origin of the names. It’s delightful, it’s informative, it’s convincing, it’s making me want to find chapters 1-3 immediately. How does a video argument differ from a textual one? How does it make the most of the particular affordances of its medium? Here are some ways to start thinking about it.
This, my friends, is a keeper. And one that offers up some real-world criteria for video argument assignments.
