1
Battles, Matthew. “commonplacing & the modern longue durée.” [Weblog entry.] library ad infinitum: the republic of letters & the storm called progress. 23 Dec. 2009. 23 Dec. 2009. <http://mbattles.posterous.com/commonplacing-and-the-modern-longue-duree>
Battles discusses why fragmentary reading practices of today (e. g. clicking, linking, blogging, and tweeting) “evoke patterns that made humanism possible.” In previewing his Barnes & Noble review of The Case of Books by Robert Darnton, Battles states:
What I find evocative in Darnton’s description of commonplacing is its striking similarity to some of the energies we like to think the web has created or unleashed…. Elsewhere in the chapter, he declares that early modern readers read “segmentally, by concentrating on small chunks of text and jumping from place to place and jumping from book to book…” does it sound familiar?
[Confession: I do admit to being a fragmentary reader (the Internet has made this more apparent) but I also make a ritual of reading some texts repeatedly. For example, I often re-read certain works by Jorge Luis Borges and parts of Species of Spaces and Other Pieces by Georges Perec.]
2
Borges, Jorge Luis. “Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote.” Labyrinths: Selected Stories & Other Writings. 13th ed. New York: New Directions Publishing Corp., 1964. Print.
In “Kafka and His Precursors,” Borges states:
The fact is that every writer creates his own precursors.
That is, every writer is a reader and thus writes, knowingly or unknowingly, under the influence of preceding texts. In the case of Pierre Menard, Borges once again depicts the reader-writer as palimpsest. Here, the process of reading is unraveled as the “subterranean” work of every writer. Unlike his “visible” works, Menard writes the Quixote by reading it and despite being exactly the same word-for-word as created by Cervantes, the text becomes enriched by Menard’s everyday reality and prior reading experiences. Borges describes Menard’s impossible quest to compose “the Quixote itself” in this manner:
To be, in some way, Cervantes and reach the Quixote seemed less arduous to him—and, consequently, less interesting—than to go on being Pierre Menard and reach the Quixote through the experiences of Pierre Menard.
[This is one of those “certain works of Jorge Luis Borges” that I often re-read and with each reading a different word or phrase catches my eye. What will I find ten years from now? Perhaps Borges will make me the fool. Perhaps not.]
3
lgnlgn, comp. kshpatel [Kush Patel]. #endofarchitecturetexts. [Twitter thread.] a.aaaarg.org. 21 Dec. 2009 – 30 Dec. 2009. 04 Jan. 2010 <http://a.aaaarg.org/node/8070>
This thread is about the state of architectural criticism at the beginning of the 21st century. It was the impetus behind the proposals for the Public School New York classes, The Page + the Screen: Siting Text in the Early 21st Century and Beyond and Texts + Textures: A Writing Workshop. It is also a formative document of the lgnlgn forum.
It is important to note that at the tail end of the thread, the discussion turned toward how conversations like these, which are distributed across multiple platforms, will eventually be archived and interpreted. Beyond this thread, there are still questions that loom. For example, with the introduction of newer technologies and their applications, what happens to the ways in which we read and write? In relation to Twitter and other social media, can these fragmented texts be defined as a form of criticism? If so, do they have the ability to stand alone as such? Where are they situated within a body of knowledge or canon?
[After participating in this thread, I came to this conclusion: Twitter is indexical in that it points toward larger conversations happening elsewhere.]
Here are excerpts from the latter part of the thread (To read chronologically, start from the bottom.). As noted within the thread, these fragments taken out of context may not have much of an impact here:
TommyManuel @kshpatel true. depends on the intent I suppose. dialog vs. a one-way dissemination of thought. #endofarchitecturetexts 5 days ago from Seesmic
kshpatel @TommyManuel or not ‘cause twitterings are descriptive and conversational, about exchange and emergence (?) #endofarchitecturetexts 5 days ago from web
TommyManuel @kshpatel I believed the 140 chrtr limit would have appealed to many past arch. manifesto writers. #endofarchitecturetexts 5 days ago from web
loudpaper Gillick 1972. 28 year later and we’ve lost the emerald pills. #endofarchitecturetexts http://twitpic.com/vhi3l 5 days ago from Echofon
kshpatel “To have an archi. theorist use twitter as an exclusive vehicle to communicate is totally conceivable” ~ Tschumi. #endofarchitecturetexts 5 days ago from web
sevensixfive … and all the more so when you’re talking about a tweet about a blog post, about an email, about an article … #endofarchitecturetexts 5 days ago from web
sevensixfive … saving links to delicious that were sent via twitter - how fragmented will this conversation look in five years? #endofarchitecturetexts 5 days ago from web
4
loud paper [Mimi Zeiger]. “blue lobsters.” Junk Jet #3, Flux Us, Flux You. [Weblog entry.] loud paper. 02 Mar. 2010. 02 Mar. 2010. <http://loudpaper.typepad.com/loudpaper/2010/03/blue.html>
Not unlike the era in which manuscript shifted to print, the digital age has brought with it a similar rise in hybrid or, what Zeiger calls, “mutant” publications. Today’s incunabula are half-analog, half-digital—a result of the proliferation of affordable Print-on-Demand (POD) technologies, online publishing platforms and social media. In this article, Zeiger focuses on small DIY architecture and art publications including The Holster (which she describes as “performative”), POD early adopter, the Situated Technologies Pamphlet Series, and her own blog-zine, loud paper. For those who feel that the Web killed print (and theory, for that matter), Zeiger provides this:
But given that experiments in other media could now be taken to define much of architectural practice, I prefer to call these half-breeds “mutants.” Living between paper and screen, mutants are part of publishing’s evolution, even if a specific characteristic proves too unwieldy to pass on to the next generation.
5
Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. 4th ed. New York: Methuen & Co. in association with Methuen, Inc., 1987. Print.
This book discusses human culture’s shift from primary orality to secondary orality. The earlier represents the stage in which words were purely sounds, when humans communicated mainly through speech while the latter is representative of culture after writing and print; primarily after the introduction of electronics such as the radio, TV and the computer. Ong argues that new technologies (in this case, writing, print and electronics) restructure the human consciousness. He goes on to explain that although this is true, characteristics of the earlier culture remain embedded (interiorized/embodied) in the newer processes of communication.
[A few notes after re-reading this book, but this time from the middle to the end then back again through the beginning:
As new technology emerges, old technology becomes interiorized/embodied. At that point, more reflective criticism of older technologies may also emerge. Criticism takes place from a distance.
In primary oral culture, the word was sound, event and action.
In chirographic culture, and more evidently in typographic/print culture, the word became visual, static and enclosed. The knower was separated from the known. The author became distanced from the reader and vice versa. Network culture allows the opportunity to close the gap (or not).
In network culture, the word becomes linked into action.
Screen logic encourages us to forever be in beta mode. Change is the constant.
With search engine mentality, we dip into, out of, and back again into real-time flow to aggregate many-platformed interactions, objects, texts, and experiences.
Network culture is reliant on organizational methods and tools. Thus, the roles of curator and editor are ever popular.]
6
“Reading (In) the Future.” The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Prod. Wodek Szemberg. [Web Video.] TVO. 16 Dec. 2009. 21 Dec. 2009. <http://www.tvo.org/cfmx/tvoorg/theagenda/index.cfm?page_id=7&bpn=779675&ts=2009-12-16%2020:00:00.0>
Done in conjunction with TVO series, Empire of the Word, this broadcast features among its guests, Bob Stein, founder and Co-Director of The Institute for the Future of the Book (and TPSNY Page + Screen facilitator). Topics include reading as a discipline, what we read vs. how we read, writing and technology, collaborative reading and writing, the economic and ecological impact of new technologies within the publishing industry, and new models for publishing.
+++++++++++++++++
The Page + The Screen Ann-o-tated Bibliography is a limited edition unbound pamphlet published by The Public School New York. It will be available for purchase at The Public School Benefit Party on May 22. After the event, copies will be on sale at Dexter Sinister.
Thinking for a Living is an online publication that is both thoughtfully edited and designed. Issue 2, according to founder Duane King, is “iPad optimized, swipe enabled.”
Contributions include:
Horizontalism and Readability
By Frank Chimero
Six Prototypes for a Screensaver: A Retroactive History, Part 1
Six Prototypes for a Screensaver: A Retroactive History, Part 2
By David Reinfurt
Serial Series, Part 2
By Rob Giampietro
The Thinking for a Living Network is built on friendship, passion, and a dedication to the craft of design. The Network is an alliance of like-minded individuals who are experimenting with publishing and spreading ideas through a series of topic specific sites, conferences, workshops and publications.
Those interested in a Serial Series will surely enjoy this episode of NPR’s On the Media, which came out just days after the The First/Last Newspaper concluded—one of those “in the air” kind of moments.
The episode begins by quoting a historian from 1685 who worries there are simply too…
On March 2, 2010, the first workshop for The Page + The Screen: Siting Text in the Early 21st Century and Beyond | Session 3 took place at The Reanimation Library at 543 Union Street in Brooklyn. Andrew Beccone, the founder and librarian, facilitated.
This is our work-in-progress.
