All this talk about authorial intent, and how easily is can be misconstrued reminded me of an article I read in film magazine Sight and Sound months ago. The article outlined a new film about Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining. The 2012 film Room 237 (directed by Rodney Ascher) is a documentary about some of the most outlandish theories on Kubrick’s classic. Five interviewees describe what they gleam from the film, each with a radical and seemingly unbelievable interpretation of his work. They each read props, cues, narrative and dialogue in different ways, bending them to match their point of view.

One claims The Shining is an allegory for the Holocaust. His evidence being: Nicholson uses a German typewriter, Danny (the son) wears a t-shirt with ’42’ on the front – apparently a direct reference to 1942, and all of the numbers shown in the film add to 42. Wow that’s some conclusive shit.

The intepretations only get better from there, with another asserting the film is clearly a confession from Kubrick that not only was the moon landing was faked, but that he was one of the megabrains behind it (this is based largely on Danny’s Apollo 11 sweater, oh and not to mention that “room” is almost an anagram of “moon”…). While another interviewee is adamant that no, it is a reference to the genocide of Native Americans.

Jesus, I’d hate to think what these people read into my blog posts.

For more info on each theory, check out The Daily Beast (S+S is a subscription website/magazine)

…Yes

The first thing that piqued my interest in the Murphy and Potts reading was that the term “technology” is one that has evolved, altered, and is shrouded in ambiguity. I don’t know if I’d call this ironic or hugely apt, but I did like that the word “technology” was experiencing similar changes to what it indexes.

The relationship between technology and culture is an important one to acknowledge – it informs us and helps us predict the way future technologies will impact us. The mention of the printing press jolted my memory into action and I suddenly remembered its interesting history and the repercussion that followed. In brief, the printing press (for text) was invented circa mid 15^th century If you’ve ever wondered why the English language is so “random”, why enough isn’t spelt “enuf”, why “rough” and “plough” are pronounced completely different despite their similar appearance, you pretty much have the printing press to thank. Before the printing press, there were many variations in spelling, often thanks to the variety of dialects in Britain. However, uniformity began to be enforced when texts were printed, so that different texts wouldn’t have to be printed for different regions. This led to a lot of mix and matching, taking certain words from a variety of areas and printing them – effectively cementing the spelling. This explains why we have so many exceptions to the rules in English, and why words often aren’t phonetic.

In summary, yes, technologies impact us a great deal.

The reading also asked from which cultural shifts do new technologies arise, and do these technologies bring new cultural possibilities into being? Thinking about this within the context of the course, we can look at both the nikis and the networked blogs. A shift to the online and the rise of digital media has surely led to these technologies being utilized as teaching/learning resources. In turn, the technology perpetuates our obsession with everything digital, and creates communities in an online space. New cultures are formed in the Networked Media sphere, the way we interact, the things we say, and who we say them to emerge the more literate we become.

Linking to outside the course, I thought about the relatively new dating app – Tinder (the straight version of Grindr, where you can find and chat with people in your area). One article I read asserted that this new technology encouraged a “college hook-up culture”. It says Tinder fuels an easy-sex mindset, allowing users to seek and largely find no-stings-attached relationships with minimal risk of rejection. The app encourages a culture where sex is one of the first topics put onto the table, and more often than not, practiced either in cyberspace or in real life. This is an example of a technology creating new cultural trends. But then the question of chicken and egg must be raised. Another articleproposes that the technology doesn’t encourage this culture, but instead caters to an already existing need/behaviour. According to this source, Tinder has been made to suit our busy, tech-oriented lives. Where time is precious and you don’t just happen to bump into the love of your life in a supermarket, like some sappy rom-coms make out. It also has a more positive view, saying that a technology that is tailored to our lives so effectively can lead to long-term relationships, not just a cesspit of teenage horniness.

Source: http://www.quickmeme.com/Tinder/?upcoming

Chris Anderson’s article on The Long Tail made arguments I could appreciate as I have seen them at work firsthand. Not only from my personal experiences of shopping, but also from a business perspective. Working in a bookshop (Jesus I swear to god I’m not trying to spruik my workplace on here, it just comes in handy for examples!), I see his theories at work in the store microcosm.

New releases tend to be what get people into the store, they account for a large number of our sales and store traffic. Although our new release section is a huge draw card, we also really try to push our backlist fiction – books that aren’t new releases, but that make our brand look credible and well stocked. If we only sold new releases I feel like we would look superficial, as though we had no real appreciation of literature.

However, as Chris says, you can’t have a brand that is only long tail either – you need to get a substantial volume of customers through in the first place. We often have sales in our backlist section to encourage people to browse older, loved or obscure (or both) titles. But the more effective method, as Chris notes, is to coax customers down the long tail using recommendations. When customers tell me “I’ve just read X, can you recommend something similar?” the easy answer would be pointing to the book next to them, that is the same genre and a big seller. But they could do that themselves, by stepping an inch to the left and reading the blurb of its neighbor. Same goes for classics, ie if they liked Kurt Vonnegut, I should recommend Joseph Heller. But instead, I might suggest The Good Soldier Švejk (Jaroslav Hašek, 1923. Awesome read), leading the customer to a different area in the shop and hopefully broadening their horizons. This recommendation has expanded what they are willing to read or browse, increasing the likelihood that they will browse more areas, and therefore successfully find a book to buy, in future. But more than that, they will return to the store to seek my advice. If I had simply recommended another well-known classic they could go to any other bookshop and browse the classics section, my advice would’ve been little more than that. Same goes for new releases, instead of recommending Sylvia Day for a fan of EL James (50 Shades, *shudder*), I would suggest Josephine Hart – a book in a different section they wouldn’t have located otherwise. I like to think the combination of the good book, with the personalized experience is what keeps customers coming back, and keeps online from overtaking bricks and mortar retail.

I overheard a woman on the train telling a friend about a little boy who only eats peanut butter.

Makes a nice change from all those kids with peanut allergies.

Did I miss the memo? Does every blog headline have to be a pun?

For our Niki page we have been assigned Alan Turing. He was a mathematician, computer scientist, code breaker, and played a vital role in the formation and understanding of artificial intelligence. He devised a test would differentiate man from machine, I thought it would be fun to go on to two separate chatrooms, one with an automated “bot” and the other with another person. I asked the same questions. I used IGod as the AI forum, and while it was impressive in some areas, it quickly became clear how strict the formatting of it was, and how it devised its answers. I found that speaking to a person changed the way I communicated, with IGod I had been mimicking the formal tone it used. But with the real person on Omegle, it was easy to speak colloquially – in fact it was hard not to.

This made me wonder why we are so fascinated with artificial intelligence. Is it because it allows us to understand what it is that makes us human? Is it the thought that it will aid us in the future? It’s a dangerous game wanting to create robot with human characteristics and intelligence, just how much autonomy do we want them to have because it’s a threat? Robots are far more powerful than us physically, pairing it with emotions is a risk.

When we were asked what we took away from the unlecture #3 all I could really answer was that Adrian doesn’t like questions that demean the course. While I understand his reaction, I thought the way he dealt with it contradicted some of the approaches we are being taught. The question, something along the lines of “Why should I come to the lecture if it doesn’t relate to the content in the tutes?” admittedly sounds curt. One positive thing that really resonated with me was Adrian’s response, “Why don’t you make it relevant?” That was a really clever way of turning the question back around, and asking the student to reevaluate what they want from their course, how they think they will achieve it, and how the can use the course so that it works for them.

However, I had a problem that Adrian tore shreds off this person for such a long time, despite saying he “appreciated” the question, and was “grateful”, that didn’t translate. At all. To me, it just seemed very hypocritical. We are being taught that we need to question the learning structures we are a part of. Why do we do essays? What is the point of the “system”? What are its inherent flaws? How does this structure aid us in our real lives? Or is it, in fact, more of a hindrance? This kind of critical thinking is something Adrian encourages and I think it is important to question the norms accept. I found it confronting that this critical thinking and questioning of the education system is really hammered into us, but this one person asks a (pretty relevant) question and they get attacked, for forty minutes. If I had been the person who had asked the question I think I would have said something.

I also found it harsh and a little close-minded to say this person wouldn’t get a job if they told their employer they had asked this question at university. I think it shows a deep level of critical thinking, a skill required in many job positions. I thought about how many employers would appreciate the bluntness of this person, and the fact that they thought outside the square. Why are we being told to reject the cookie-cutter style of learning when, apparently, we can’t be ourselves in the workplace/real world anyway? I also don’t agree with Adrian when he says people who do not appreciate this learning model are not suited to inventive positions that involve risk or leadership. Wasn’t this person taking a risk in asking such a controversial question? If someone likes a syllabus and instructions, that doesn’t make them weak, or unsuited to a leadership position. They could be even more suited to a leadership position because they are thorough and meticulous. The fact that they are questioning our current learning environment shows that they aren’t a follower, doesn’t it?

The way the question was handled made me uncomfortable because my blog revolves around working through questions I have based on the course and its material. Is this going to be an issue?

I’m a cynical person, on a good day. So when my relationship deteriorated I was left with another reason to hate things. Didn’t help that the guy was a cheating douchebag.

Working in an open plan office, the radio constantly plays the same pop shit on repeat, giving me not only another excuse to hate the world, but also another thing to project my bitterness on to. Those songs that once would’ve been interpreted with some happy Tess-in-a-relationship filter are now completely twisted by the fuck-the-world-especially-men headspace. I’d thought I’d give you a look at my top three examples, and yes, there is a bit of bad language, and if you have an issue with it you haven’t had your heart broken before.

The main offenders on the Top Singles list:

(Another reason for me to hate the term “single”)

P!nk: True Love

In love Tess : *selective deafness for all the lines about why she hates her husband* blah blah something TRUEEE LOVVEE. Yes, that’s what I have. Mmm true love. Did she say something about him being an asshole? Haha I don’t think so. If he is an asshole it’s not true love. What was that? “I want to wrap my hands around your neck”? Hmm I guess if I wanted a piggyback I would technically have to do that but… Seems unnecessary. I think the problem here is that P!nk thinks true love means that you have a love-hate relationship. None of that here, thank you very much!! All just good, yummy scrummy love over here!

Me now: If I fucking hear this song one more time I’m going to stab myself in the eye with a mug. Don’t even ask how. I just will. “You’re an asshole, but I love you”? I can tell you now that sentence is four words too long. Chop it half and we’re getting there, except for the fact that “asshole” is still a little kind. The guy is an asshole and you hate him, therefore it must be true love? Yeah, or you stop sugarcoating it and you’re just as unhappy with your shitty little life as everyone else. Stop throwing in this “love” crap at the end. There is no such thing as “true love”. You just try and hang in there for the most attractive person who fucks you off the least.

Jason Derulo: Talk Dirty

Soppy Tess: “’Cause I know what the girls them need, New York to Haiti”? Yes Jason, they need a loving and committed relationship, not you carrying on like a eunuch wailing about all the herpes you’re spreading internationally. “Your booty don’t need explaining”? Jason one of the key aspects of any good relationship is a healthy discourse, communication. All this sleeping around might seem like what you want now, but you’ll thirty and realise you’ve just wasted so much of your time filling a hole in you by filling a hole in someone else. Temporary pleasure when you could’ve been building a lifetime of happiness with your other half. I guess I just feel blessed that the person that completes me has come into my life already.

Shitty Tess: Fuck you Jason Derulo. “Our conversations aren’t long but you know what is”? The extent of your stupidity? And just how lax are we getting on this “talk dirty” thing? Because I actually think I’d be alright, pretty good even. Because I could certainly reel off a lot of sentences involving “fuck” and “you know where you can put that?”. Does it still count if I’m yelling it at an ex? Oh, Jason, you’re a massive manwhore? That’s attractive. If girls love this so much I’m amazed that I didn’t enjoy finding out my boyfriend shared similar hobbies. “Sold out arenas, you can suck my penis”? Like, it’s not like I had any faith in the human race before that, but seriously? Single or not that’s just abysmal.

Daft Punk: Get Lucky 

Smitten: I guess the sad thing is that my single friends think this song is like, their anthem. What they don’t realize is that in a committed relationship you can so-called “get lucky” every single night. Sex is so much better with someone you love, it’s that real connection with someone special to you. Listening to this song kind of makes me depressed because people think that “getting lucky” is meeting someone in da club and scoring. But, what it means to be truly lucky is to be with the person you love, have someone to come home to and take you out for dinner and tell you you’re beautiful and that you’re their world.

Spitting: I’m horny.

Earlier in the week I read an article about a Dutch scientist who has spent the last 5 years “growing” a burger in a lab. He claimed that incorporating lab grown foods into our diets would be beneficial for several reasons; sustainability (about 70% of the world’s “blue water withdrawals” go towards irrigation, often for the sake of animal farming), to stop widespread animal cruelty, and help provide food to third world countries, eliminating famine. This ties in neatly with what we are learning; it sounds like something from science fiction, and for so long would have been design fiction. But now the product has been designed and in a few years could be commercially marketed and become a household product. This encouraged me to think on other inventions that seem sci-fi inspired, inventions that seem too good to be true – yet have made it in the world. Things like spray on skin.

This led me to think about some other creations from science fiction and which ones are at the top of my want list:

Number Three: Dream Recorder. In comparison to the others I guess this one seems kind of trivial. The concept is simple, a machine that does the equivalent of filming your dreams so they are crisp, clear, unfragmented and rewatchable. I am in no way a spiritual or superstitious person. I don’t read horoscopes or crap my dacks when a black cat saunters past, but I am fascinated by dreaming. From a psychological position, they are captivating. They are something that we all experience but don’t have a definitive answer for. Dreams have a huge impact on the way I view my environment and how I feel in myself. Sometimes the dreams are so vivid, or strange, or emotional that I don’t know how they could be ignored.

I connect with family members who have passed away, see the most picturesque landscapes and have cryptic messages repeated. I remember once I had a dream I lived my whole life, the years passing like seconds until I was old. That must be significant. I have no theory for what it means, I don’t think it is prophetic or even reflective of any emotion present in me. But I am still so interested in it, and it was something I spent a long time reflecting on. Other times I have dreamt I am talking with my late grandfather, and a lot of the time he is very sick, which is difficult, but there is always some positivity in the experience. I also have a lot of dreams that I am being chased or there are plots to murder me. I feel like if I could replay these moments, rewind and pause and rewatch the dreams I would feel more connected to my subconscious (that sounds like hippy bullshit I know) and could perhaps pin down the meaning, or at least study them without the dream fading quickly as it so often does. But this brings me back to the time remote control, is there a danger of becoming trapped in the past, obsessed with rewatching things that have already happened? I feel like that would defeat the purpose of design fiction, where the point of designing is to be forward-looking.

Number Two: A remote control that can pause or rewind time.

sourced from http://www.popcornreel.com/jpgimg/CLICK_Dom_C-289A_wb03_comp_v5_hd_vd8_0046_r.jpg

This idea has been explored in a number of different story lines, but perhaps most memorably in Adam Sandler’s Click. Shame such a good idea is communicated in such a poor format. Whenever anyone asks what “superpower” I would most like (admittedly this conversation doesn’t come up that much) I always think that the ability to control time would be the best. However, it is the kind of tool that I would only want me to possess. I love the idea that I could mess up as tragically as I could and erase it, rewind and start again.

But for me there are so many problems with this. It seems intrinsic to human life that we make mistakes and learn from them, and a huge part of this is doing it in a public forum. You need that external judgment for it to be a real learning experience. Having this device would make every moment seem like a dress rehearsal rather than real life. When I dissect why this appeals to me, I realise the rewind function would be more to preserve memories, have the ability to rewatch moments of my past; my first word, my first kiss, first day of school, the last moments with my grandfather. But then where do you draw the line? At what point does the past fully possess you and you become lost in it?

I also like the idea of pausing time, taking a break from it all. There is the relaxation aspect of it, but also the sense that you are doing something deliciously illicit. I feel like wanting to pause time and walk around in a suspended scene alone is such an only-child desire. Craving that solitary time that I’m used to. I feel like there is something vaguely (VAGUELY) poetic in that but most of all its just sad. Who wants to feel alone in a crowded room? Maybe this is the point of design fiction, to create something seemingly fantastical, but feel free to criticize it too, seeing if it we can realistically envision it in the real world.

Number one: The Point of View Gun from the Hitchhiker’s Guide.

sourced from http://www.empireonline.com/features/absurdly-cool-movie-weapons/p12

The Hitchhiker’s guide is one of my favorite books and its inventions and ideas could give me enough material to fill up the blog for the rest of the year. The knife that toasts your bread as it butters it, the Babel fish that, once inserted in the ear, allows you to understand any language (a concept adapted in Dr Who), and the real-life thinking cap (from in the film). As Adams describes, the Point of View Gun “conveniently, does precisely as its name suggests”, and allows whoever fires it to transfer their viewpoint onto someone else. As I look back over this blog, the majority of posts are me grappling with ideas outlined by Adrian, trying to understand where he is coming from. One zap from the gun and everything about the course would be clarified for me, and vice versa, he could see why I have issues with certain comments.

I’ve had relationships disintegrate from not being able to see inside the other person’s head, desperately wanting to build trust and convey feelings, but so many things getting lost in translation. I love the idea of wordless communication, a ‘weapon’ that allows someone to enter into your mindset immediately, like an automatic clarification and empathy trigger. Imagine how much easier pitches, relationships, assignments, negotiations would be if this kind of technology existed? I guess the flipside is, seeing things from someone else’s viewpoint doesn’t always make you empathise with them.

Things that didn’t quite make the list are the neuralyzer from Men in Black (for all those moments you get foot-in-mouth or make a bad impression, and you rewrite history so that, according the to others present, it never happened. Or, take the Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind approach and wipe your own memory, eradicating all those unpleasant memories a break up leaves you with), the invisibility cloak, the “dinner pill”, which tastes and feels like a full meal but is just one pill, with none of the carbs the meal would usually have, teleportation, and cryogenic freezing that actually works. These have been left off my list because they are problematic for many reasons, but perhaps I can explore those at a later date.

Looking at the top three designs that would exist in my utopian world, I find it a little disturbing 2 of 3 encourage perpetuating solidarity, or obsessed with the past. Maybe these products don’t exist for a reason.