As critic Peter Lunenfeld says, we seem to be living in a state of ‘future present’ – the future appears to be alive in the present moment, happening simultaneously. We are always a step too late. Each time we stop to learn a new version of a software, a newer one is released that exceeds our knowledge.

In a way, Andrew Murphie and John Pott’s Culture and Technology operates as a ‘pause’ in the flow of information and new technologies, acting as a reminder that much in the past is illuminating in relation to the present and future.

Culture & Technology discusses number of important theoretical frameworks. Often contradictory and discontinuous, ranging from what Murphie and Potts describe as the technologically deterministic approaches of Baudrillard and McLuhan, to the cultural materialism of Raymond Williams and on to Deleuze, Guattari and Virilio. The breadth of the frameworks allows us to get a sense of the very multidisciplinary nature of the field of inquiry.

Without a doubt, technology drives culture. There is really no argument to it when we stop and think about how often we use technology. From taking the train to uni to being on your phone while on the train to uni to making a call while being on your phone. Technology is present everywhere, every second of our lives and we don’t really have a choice. It’s how the worlds progressed, its a vital part that make up this culture.

Although I am a bit on the fence about the whole technology = tools. What about finger painting? Indigenous art? Paint + our very own fingers does not involve technology and that still makes a form of art. So does many other tools that are made non-electronically. It seems to me that there is definitely a distinction between tools and technology.