Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 17, No. 587.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
Submit to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 08:58:16 +0000
From: email@example.com (Francois Lachance)
Subject: Re: 17.553 paradigm shift of textuality (fwd)
[The following apparently went astray. Apologies to all. --WM]
> From lachance Sat Jan 24 08:39:00 2004
> > Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 08:39:00 -0500 (EST)
> The deaf dishwasher ponders what will be left to say about paradigms,
> shifts or textuality (wonders who is forcing who to read what)?
> Ask the waiter.
> The waiter would explain that textuality does not reside in the material
> traces alone. Indeed that all texts can function as pretexts. Context
> determines use.
> The indexical nature of the menu can be apprehened as enabling the reader
> to ask questions. The menu not only guides the selection of a suitable
> dish to order it also guides the discourse about the selection.
> There is always more than one technique available to process a textual
> artefact. Whether a set of techniques are considered to be one or more
> technologies is a question to ask the cook.
> Amid the suds, the deaf dishwasher recalls that even in monocultural
> settings menus require translation. Indeed all textual artefact require
> translation. Textuality resides in the translating: that space between the
> source and the target. A rather intriguing space of freedom.
> The deaf dishwasher knows of great feats of coordination between several
> target and source sites. The deaf dishwasher recals how quickly the
> talking menu can be recoded to take into account that the raddishes didn't
> get delivered to the kitchen robots. The dishwasher dreams of going to
> coding school and creating menus that blink.
> > Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 17, No. 553.
> > Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
> > www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/
> > www.princeton.edu/humanist/
> > Submit to: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:27:23 +0000
> > From: Patrick Sahle <email@example.com>
> > Subject: Personal Experiences in the Paradigm Shift of
> > A (mediated = medialized) text is a machine or a user interface that
> > “behaves” in a certain way. So we expect the texts we face to behave in a
> > certain way. There is always ONE text technology that sets the standard.
> > Which socializes our notion of a text as the normal behaviour of that
> > Actually we are on the threshold of a new shift, undergoing continuing
> > technical (= mental) socialization. I experienced my own
> > “conversion”/”passover” when I visited an italian restaurant some days
> > Looking at the menu, my friend said: “I don’t know what I’m going to eat,
> > but it should be something with cream sauce. I will have to read all the
> > lists of ingredients”. And I thought: “yeah, that’s strange. The menu
> > doesn’t behave as it should. You can not press a Ctrl-F-Key and look for
> > ‘cream’ in all the dishes. The text doesn’t highlight all occurrences of
> > ‘cream’. The text doesn’t answer to my questions. This isn’t a normal
> > it’s not interactive, it doesn’t communicate. It’s a dead thing.”
> > To me, at that moment, it seemed to be an outdated, old-fashioned kind of
> > text, an antiquarian text, as from an archive. Surely the
> > printed-book-people had a similar experience for hundreds of years, when
> > they encountered manuscripts. They surely often will have thought: this
> > isn’t a normal text. It’s too hard to decipher and where is the table of
> > contents which directs me into the book and to some certain page numbers?
> > Where are the headlines and footnotes? Why is it so inconvenient to use
> > this kind of text?
> > Maybe some decades from now I will sit in an italian restaurant with my
> > son. And I will hear him talk to some menu: “What pasta with cream do you
> > have to offer?”, expecting it to answer in a clearly audible voice and
> > never even thinking about being forced to “read” a menu. What will be
> > to say about "textuality" then?
> > Comments?
-- Francois Lachance, Scholar-at-large http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~lachance
mnemonic is to analytic as mimetic is to synthetic </x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Mar 26 2004 - 11:19:40 EST