What is editorialization?

Cet article présente les résultats de huit ans de travail sur le concept d’éditorialisation, réalisés dans le cadre du séminaire international « Écritures numériques et éditorialisation » que j’ai coorganisé avec Nicolas Sauret depuis 2008. Je propose de définir l’éditorialisation comme l’ensemble des dynamiques qui produisent l’espace numérique. Ces dynamiques peuvent être comprises comme les interactions d’actions individuelles et collectives avec un environnement numérique. À partir de cette définition je propose de décrire le fonctionnement des instances d’autorité dans l’espace numérique.This paper is the result of eight years of work on the concept of editorialization that was done in the context of the international seminar “Écritures numériques et éditorialisation”, which I have been co-organizing with Nicolas Sauret since 2008. I propose a definition of editorialization as the set of dynamics that produce and structure digital space. These dynamics can be understood as the interactions of individual and collective actions within a particular digital environment. Starting from this definition I try to describe how authority works in digital space

What is contemporary art?

The topic of the thesis is “What is contemporary art?”. While exploring contemporary art, its conceptions, characteristics and remarkable events related to it, I concentrate mainly on research of contemporary art as universal, particularly on such phenomena as multicultural art, postdramatic theater, audience interaction, as well as challenged aesthetics. This thesis also considers postmodern art, since contemporary art in its current form departed from postmodern art. I rely on and address the German language prose and drama, as well as visual arts. The work of Elfriede Jelinek, John von Düffel, Peter Handke, Kristof Magnusson, and multicultural artists Vladimir Kaminer, Feridun Zaimoglu are considered. This paper renders art as a blend of different arts, as well as synthesis of arts and different human activities. The thesis consists of five chapters. I rely in chapter I on the artwork of Rebecca Horn, Edith Meusnier, Andrea Polli as a sample of heterogeneity, appearing in unusual forms and places, blending together and erasing borders between different types of arts. Multicultural art as one of the forms of universal art is researched on samples of work by Vladimir Kaminer and Feridun Zaimoglu in chapter II. Chapter III concentrates on universal notions of postdramatic theater, supported by theoretical work of Hans-Thies Lehmann. In chapter IV, which is “Questioning Aesthetics”, I write about body fluids art, and include the work of Julia Kristeva, Rina Arya. Digital universality, one of the main characteristics of contemporary art, is a topic of chapter V. I render contemporary art as the pick of art evolution and cover such characteristics, events or occurrences in contemporary art as the inevitability of development, emergence of different mediums as a result of it, as well as more challenged aesthetics

What is the Avatar?

What are the characteristic features of avatar-based singleplayer videogames, from Super Mario Bros. to Grand Theft Auto? Rune Klevjer examines this question with a particular focus on issues of fictionality and realism, and their relation to cinema and Virtual Reality. Through close-up analysis and philosophical discussion, Klevjer argues that avatar-based gaming is a distinctive and dominant form of virtual self-embodiment in digital culture. This book is a revised edition of Rune Klevjer's pioneering work from 2007, featuring a new introduction by the author and afterword by Stephan Günzel, Jörg Sternagel, and Dieter Mersch

User-centred design of flexible hypermedia for a mobile guide: Reflections on the hyperaudio experience

A user-centred design approach involves end-users from the very beginning. Considering users at the early stages compels designers to think in terms of utility and usability and helps develop the system on what is actually needed. This paper discusses the case of HyperAudio, a context-sensitive adaptive and mobile guide to museums developed in the late 90s. User requirements were collected via a survey to understand visitors’ profiles and visit styles in Natural Science museums. The knowledge acquired supported the specification of system requirements, helping defining user model, data structure and adaptive behaviour of the system. User requirements guided the design decisions on what could be implemented by using simple adaptable triggers and what instead needed more sophisticated adaptive techniques, a fundamental choice when all the computation must be done on a PDA. Graphical and interactive environments for developing and testing complex adaptive systems are discussed as a further step towards an iterative design that considers the user interaction a central point. The paper discusses how such an environment allows designers and developers to experiment with different system’s behaviours and to widely test it under realistic conditions by simulation of the actual context evolving over time. The understanding gained in HyperAudio is then considered in the perspective of the developments that followed that first experience: our findings seem still valid despite the passed time

The Collective Building of Knowledge in Collaborative Learning Environments

The intention of this chapter is to investigate how collaborative learning environments (CLEs) can be used to elicit the collective building of knowledge. This work discusses CLEs as lively cognitive systems and looks at some strategies that might contribute to the improvement of significant pedagogical practices. The study is supported by rhizome principles, whose characteristics allow us to understand the process of selecting and connecting what is relevant and meaningful for the collective building of knowledge. A brief theoretical and conceptual approach is presented and major contributions and difficulties about collaborative learning environments are discussed. New questions and future trends about the collective building of knowledge are suggested

Mediapolis: an introduction

The organisation of this workshop has been prompted by concerns with the way media so often seem to get left out of writing on cities and urban politics (rather than vice-versa). We agree with Iveson’s (2007) argument that urban and media studies have much more in the way of shared concerns when it comes to politics than is conventionally thought to be the case. As a result, we are hoping this workshop will create an occasion for urban scholars to meet those studying media, to explore what difference it makes to explicitly consider the place of media practices in making a politics of cities, and conversely, to consider what is left out when such practices are relegated to the background. In certain ways, we are suggesting a contemporary return to something like Robert Park’s inclination in relation to cities and media. In his seminal essay on the natural history of the newspaper, for example (Park, 1925), Park exhibits a style which does not generally seem to distinguish between or oppose the urban and the media when studying politics and democracy. This surely has something to do with Park’s own intellectual period, and the absence of established disciplines in media or urban studies. Yet this is also precisely the point of the workshop: an opportunity for engagement and discussion through a similar sort of pre-disciplinary spirit

Toward an Aesthetics of New-Media Environments

In this paper I suggest that, over and above the need to explore and understand the technological newness of computer art works, there is a need to address the aesthetic significance of the changes and effects that such technological newness brings about, considering the whole environmental transaction pertaining to new media, including what they can or do offer and what users do or can do with such offerings, and how this whole package is integrated into our living spaces and activities. I argue that, given the primacy of computer-based interaction in the new-media, the notion of ‘ornamentality’ indicates the ground-floor aesthetics of new-media environments. I locate ornamentality not only in the logically constitutive principles of the new-media (hypertextuality and interactivity) but also in their multiform cultural embodiments (decoration as cultural interface). I utilize Kendall Walton’s theory of ornamentality in order to construe a puzzle pertaining to the ornamental erosion of information in new-media environments. I argue that insofar as we consider new-media to be conduits of ‘real-life’, the excessive density of ornamental devices prevalent in certain new-media environments forces us to conduct our inquiries under conditions of neustic uncertainty, that is, uncertainty concerning the kind of relationship that we, the users, have to the propositional content mediated. I conclude that this puzzle calls our attention to a peculiar interrogatory complexity inherent in any game of knowledge-seeking conducted across the infosphere, which is not restricted to the simplest form of data retrieval, especially in mixed-reality environments and when the knowledge sought is embodied mimetically

Literature as a technique of recollection

There is a caricature of Marcel Proust in which the despairing writer is consoled by a friend saying, 'Aber, aber, mon cher Marcel, nun versuchen Sie sich doch zu erinnern, wo Sie die Zeit verloren haben.' Literature in general, not only A La Recherche du Temps Perdu, deals with a different form of memory than that of mnemonics, in which the hints of places lead to a retrieval of what has been stored there before. Nevertheless it is difficult to pinpoint the criteria that make this difference. How does literature transcend the technologically limited sense of memory in terms of a storage and retrieval system? ..

Just Writing Center Work in the Digital Age: De Facto Multiliteracy Centers in Dialogue with Questions of Social Justice

Multiliteracy, new media writing, and multimodality: in some form or another, the kind of sleek, technological world these terms conjure emerges as a subject of conversation in current writing center work. When I began teaching a writing center theory course at the University of Michigan’s Sweetland Center for Writing, I scheduled about three-days worth of formal space for the stuff of multiliteracy. Among other essays, students read David Sheridan’s “Words, Images, Sounds: Writing Centers as Multiliteracy Centers,” a piece about how Sheridan helped start a “technology-rich” multiliteracy center staffed by tech- and multimodal-rhetoric-savvy consultants at the University of Michigan (“Words, Images, Sounds” 341). I was met with what I soon learned was a typical response to the essay: “So, where is it? Where’s the multiliteracy center?” “Gone,” was my answer, and in an official sense, it was: it dissipated after only a few years,1 and, what remains, among other Sweetland services, is the Peer Tutoring Center, an apparently far cry from the futuristic spaces that visions like Sheridan’s evoke. With computers too old and too few in number, our windowless, underground tutoring space looks like days of writing center past, not writing center future. And despite an understanding of our own institutional privilege, our collective affect resembles that of colleagues at less privileged institutions: many of us still feel like we are a long way off from the kind of cutting-edge multiliteracy center that Sheridan describes.University Writing Cente