1) Over the long term, what do you think the roles of books in society will become? Since the beginning of the 20th century, we have seen a massive shift in what purpose books serve, do you think they will continue the trend towards being an artifact of nostalgia, or, given that generation z is perhaps the last to grow up with book ever being a large part of their life, they will become even less relevant?
2) What are your thoughts on the death of the author? How does this function in a world where we feel obligated to hold creators accountable for their work, but also give value to free interpretation? At what point does a harmful interpretation become the responsibility of the creator and at what point is it only the responsibility of the reader?
3) At what point does the means and medium become a text itself? It feels like the way we think about books and multimedia has taken on a life not too dissimilar to the actual work presented by those mediums. How can we analyze our relationships with forms and what can we gain from treating those relationships as text?
1) Concerning “The Hollow” do you think that this perspective of viewing certain books as relics or “artifacts” of their own time could be marketable on a small or large scale? Could this be the next hipster thing to do, acquire books that seem stuck in their time and laugh at them?
2) Concerning the “five observable structuring affordances of the traditional book” set out by Matthew Kirschenbaum, are there certain limitations that you believe don’t apply to some books, specifically the finite and bounded observation? Are there any changes you would make to the list? (Not including e-books)
3) Concerning The House of Her, would it be possible to compose a narrative using a platform like twitter in an effective enough way as to draw in public interest? What would need to be done for it to happen? Do things like this exist today, but maybe not in a way that most people are expecting?
1.) In the case of The Hollow it would be easy for a reader to miss mot of the plot should they not cut open the book. If someone where to not discover this aspect of the work but finished feeling satisfied, could they be considered wrong? On page 90 it is mentioned how many readers like to set the mood when they open a book, are some moods better than others? Is there a right way to experience a book?
2.) MaKey MaKey offers very interesting addition to print media in its ability to deepen or enhance the reading experience. However, some of these additions, though optional in their usage can be seen as distracting. Do you view such augments distracting from the original text? or simply as a way of enhancing the experience?
3.) On page 94 Samuel and McGan are quoted as saying “the interpretive question is not ‘what does the poem mean?’ but ‘how do we release or expose the poem’s possibilities of meaning?’” Do you believe that any one work can have a single meaning?
1. Once these specific methods of rendering books (and other objects) to produce alterity relation have become commonplace and standardized, won’t the books go back to creating embodiment and hermeneutic relations? Does the innovation need to be constant in order for the creation of alterity relations to continue?
2. Is Holl-Jensen’s book something that only needs to be seen and read once, furthering the reader’s understanding of not just that text but of how to look at future texts? Or does this method of helping the reader break down the text need to become present in more(or all) texts?
3. Since time is finite and we don’t have a comprehensive guide, which aspects of technological manipulation would you suggest we (students) focus on so that we can approach fluency?
Reflective design also highlights beauty as part of the equation in design (76). But how does beauty provide a different interpretation, and can it be practical rather than just for aesthetic purposes in technology? Moreover, is it possible for the aspect of ‘beauty’ in reflective design help resolve technological issues?
On page 76, technological fluency is defined as “the capability to understand, use, and assess technology beyond its rote application.” How can different perspectives help address the flaws of technology that are observed in its common application?
To what extent is the original interpretation of the work lost in order to construct new interpretations? Also, is it possible that in this pursuit, the author’s perspective and intent in the text is compromised?
1. Will books aided and enhanced by interactive technology replace books as we know them today in the traditional ink-on-paper format?
2. Is it possible that enhancements added to books, such as the audio component to Mozafari’s “Kubla Khan,” will distract from the core feeling and meaning of the text? Is it crucial to have an initial feeling to a text by itself before diving into its context, or is it more important to understand where a text comes from before reading it?
3. We see a classic piece of literature molded into a microblog in Hancock and Skutlin’s The House of Her. Is there a future where original microblogs could be considered literature? Where Tweets are turned into novels, or held to the same level of literary importance?
On page 82, Holl-Jensen explains the idea of an open book that doesn’t allow access to all of the pages. If the reader decides not to cut into the book, they are getting a very different story than if they had decided to. How does this relate to technology and how we view eBooks, online articles, etc.? Should authors think about this while writing?
On page 84 Holl-Jensen claims some books are looked at as artifacts while other books with the same content are looked at as mere objects that contain text? How does form contribute to the way a book is viewed?
On page 90, Alyson Fielding states that “a digital book shouldn’t mean we need to let go of the emotional connection to a physical object, and combining books with technology doesn’t have to mean a device with a screen”. Why does the form of a book relate to how we feel about the book? If a paper book and a digital book share the same content, why do they affect us in different ways?
1. Technological fluency is “the capability to understand, use, and assess technology beyond its rote application” (76). If technology is really meant to be built upon and altered, who is to say what the “rote application” of an object really is?
2. One page 83, Kraus discusses the meanings of books and their inaccessibility. While it is true that in order for a book to be successful it needs to be accessible to readers, interpretations can still vary wildly. Even if the book is widely read, does the implied message ever indefinitely make it across to all readers? In this case, should authors ever strive for their works to be more selective towards those who will get the meaning right away?
3. I agree with sentiments expressed on page 87. The effect some text has is lost between the various mediums in which to read them. Kraus mentions how the Kindle only can view one page at a time. Although this can hurt an author (if the author wanted to present both pages at the same time like in a normal book in order to get the reader to see broader) can it not also help? What if the author wanted to create dramatic effect and leave a cliffhanger on one page that gets resolved on the next? How much does the physical manifestations of text affect the way we read?
-
The way students engage in studying, I would venture to say, is less reliant upon reading actual books since much of the relevant information can be found online. As you have detailed that “the quest for book knowledge enlists all our sense”, does the quest for electronic knowledge lessen the experience of reading and retaining information, does the transformation of “programmable media” affect this in any way?
- From looking at the different paradigms of design, reflective, visceral, and behavioral, can technology still be regarded as beautiful if it cannot be used? For example, “Norman’s so called ‘masochistic’ teapot” (76)
- Do you think the relationship between form and content is one that should be explored further, as it was with Carlea Holl-Jensen’s book, or should technologies that work today be left unaltered? Why?
What do you think the role of beauty is in technology? How do you think beauty interacts with reflective, visceral, and behavioral design orientation? Or rather what is the function of beauty in each one.
Kevin Kelly cites beauty as something technology wants, but it is also something that society desires. How do you think our notion of what is beautiful is formed? Additionally do you think we can manipulate this perception?
While form dictates meaning, how do you think society’s class structure brings meaning to the way in which we perceive our relationships to others?
NYU Gallatin First-Year Writing Seminar, Fall 2014