Comments for Clinamen

Comment on A Role for Rhetoric in Software Studies, Part 1 by Clinamen » A Role for Rhetoric in Software Studies, Part 2

Clinamen » A Role for Rhetoric in Software Studies, Part 2 — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:37:14 +0000

[...] thuswise to swerve Skip to content HomeAboutCurriculum VitaeBlogrollRSS « [...]

Comment on Graduate Seminar: New Media Interfaces and Infrastructures by Jim

Jim — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:09:52 +0000

Thanks for these ideas, Quinn. All of the examples you provide will be great examples for student projects. I’m hoping that many students will choose an interface (10gui, ipod, etc.) as an object of study. Though, I’m also hoping that folks will move beyond “reading” interfaces and think about how they might “design” them. Now, I recognize that these people will not be engineers, but this is why I think the grant proposal could be a great final project. I’d love to see students pair up with a designer/programmer and look into creating a new interface.

As for materiality…my hope is that the texts I’m considering will show how important materiality is becoming in new media studies. Hayles’ work has shifted in this direction recently, and the Kirschenbaum book is a paradigmatic example of this.

Thanks. This is great feedback.

Oh, and I’ll do my best to work in Minority Report.

Comment on Graduate Seminar: New Media Interfaces and Infrastructures by Quinn

Quinn — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:44:27 +0000

This sounds like a great seminar, Jim. I really like the idea of connecting theoretical pieces with primary sources like Nelson and Bush. Other possibilities: Tim Berners-Lee’s original draft of the HTML spec., or Apple’s early patent filings for the iPod (or the iMac). You could also look at some proposals for next-generation interfaces, like the Windows “Surface” table-top computer, or the recent 10gui.com video that’s been making the rounds this week. The theoretical pieces will be absolutely essential (this is a grad seminar, after all), but I think theoretical pieces can sometimes overlook or downplay the material realities of creating, patenting, marketing, and maintaining new interfaces and infrastructures. It would be great if students could spend some serious time investigating patents, W3C drafts, etc., to see what really went into creating the interfaces that we now take for granted.

Oh, and don’t forget to spend a class period watching Minority Report.

Comment on Graduate Seminar: New Media Interfaces and Infrastructures by Jim

Jim — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 01:57:13 +0000

Yep, I’d love to have you. Once the syllabus is put together, you can pick which texts you want to read/discuss with us.

Comment on Graduate Seminar: New Media Interfaces and Infrastructures by Michael McGinnis

Michael McGinnis — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:18:17 +0000

Looks pretty sweet, JB. Hope you don’t mind if I sit in once or twice?

Comment on So. Clinamen. Why the name change? by Jim

Jim — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 15:42:58 +0000

It’s not my “intention,” but I can see that it’s a by-product.

But on a more serious note: I’d imagine that a blog post about the ins and outs of your profession would read like stereo instructions to me. So, is there really much of a difference? Why is it surprising that a disciplinary conversation in English or Rhetoric or Philosophy seems extremely technical and confusing to an outsider? I wouldn’t expect to understand an extremely technical discussion of servers or circuits…

I actually think a large portion of my audience understood 99% of what I just said. I’m not trying to be overly complex. I’m just trying to be part of an ongoing scholarly discussion…and sometimes that requires technical language and difficult ideas.

Comment on So. Clinamen. Why the name change? by TJ

TJ — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 02:14:37 +0000

Is it your intention to write where 99% of people can’t understand what you just said?