Manovich makes some very interesting arguments that try to demonstrates historical continuities between cinema, which he calls the “…key cultural form of the twentieth century-cinema” (9), which is not proved, and new media. One could argue that radio and television were just as important but he really does these technologies short shrift. His focus is on high culture creators of content and the high end commercial market content creators, as a result, he seems to miss many other types of media creators. (home movie, independent shorts, industrial, governmental, porn industry to name a few) By choosing to write about this subject on such a high-level he necessarily loses sight of how real people use and experience technological change. Manovich refuses to recognize the impact of the market-place upon the development of these tools. Instead, he can bloviate about culture without actually having to contextualize the experiences of people while they use new media tools. He seems to see the individualistic choice that new media provides as an illusion. This illusion fools the masses in believing that they are operating in an environment of choice but they are in fact being duped. Enter your favorite dystopian nightmare here. This is a very interesting idea because it contradicts the belief in individuality and liberalism that most in the west see from new media technologies.

Manovich makes very cogent arguments about the idea of telepresence and how the subject can control not just the virtual world but physical reality itself. This is a very important concept and breakthrough.  Nevertheless, he unnecessarily overstates his arguments by writing that an operators body is “transmitted” to a site or that they are “teleported.” I get the gist…that a person can use some object to act as a surrogate for their own physical actions. I also get that this is important, and to be honest, I hadn’t really thought about this before. At the same time, I think that we should be clear that this is not Star Trek. We are not teleporting or transmitting our bodies to remote locations.

I was struck by the post of a colleague that commented on the primacy of sight and it reminded me of a book that I recently read,  Leigh Eric Schmidt, Hearing Things: Religion, Illusion, and the American Enlightenment (Camnbridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000), that had some very well thought out points on the importance of hearing in American religion. This is starting to be recognized as an important aspect of the human experience. Manovich certainly seems to privilege sight and the visual medium. Even his choice of Man with a Movie Camera, a silent film, demonstrates this preference. He touches on this but it seems to me that the most important elements of New Media is the convergence of tools and the perceived  impact on a variety of senses.

In the end, this post makes it seem like I hate the book but I don’t. I don’t have time to do his work justice.  I look forward to hearing, as well as seeing, what the class thinks of the work. Off to read the three other books that must be done for tomorrow. Enjoy your Labor Day.