CRDM 701

Week 10 - Nick

Much of this week's readings seemed to center around agency and identity, although it took Adams's explicit focus on that to drive it home for me.  When he spoke of how networks must exist because of agency because the technology needs the user to function appropriately, I had to sit back and consider the full implications of that.  It is such a simple statement, and it seems as though much of this week's readings toes the line between technovangelism and guarding against exactly that.  It is hard to ignore technology's influence and harder still not to speculate on how it will dramatically improve the way humanity goes about things.  Castells speaks of the Information Revolution, charactherized by the fact that users and doers are one and the same.  Information technologies must by their nature impact the way in which we view the self -- should we choose to use them (which we seem to invariably do).  This is part of Castells's major claim when he says, "Our societies are increasingly structured around a bipolar opposition between the net and the self." (p. 3) 

What does this mean for agency?  I think part of the answer can be found in Adams's piece concerning virtual place relationships.  His exploration of how virtual places are similar to physical places is an interesting one.  When we exert agency on technologies, we typically envision them in light of what we know of previous technologies.  In this case, it seems that when it comes to communication technologies, we envision them in light of previous communication technologies and methods of communication.  Adams calls these similarities 'archetypes' and I believe he hits the nail on the head.  We have certain archetypal modes of communicating that were developed long ago and continue to be relevent today.  What seems to seperate the internet as a communication technology from others such as radio and television is that it is a predominately two way form of communication.  Many to many, so to speak. 

Although his discussion goes much deeper than this, I wanted to reference Latour as I loved this article for the way in which it was written.  Latour demonstrates the agency inherent in our technologies.  They are designed as such to ease life, but even then they prescribe certain relationships upon humans between themselves and the technology and each other.  Some are even discriminated against, although Latour does not hit the technological divide as hard as others.  What I find important here is the process of inscription; agency must be inscribed on technology, which goes back to Adams discussion of the necessity of agency.  We simply cannot escape the fact that technology was made to be used.  By the same token, however, we are made to use technolgy by social forces outside our control.  This of course causes me to wonder if there are limits on agency, as it is hard to point to one person at the top who makes anyone do anything...yet that force is still there.  Hmm.

Posted at 04:10PM Oct 31, 2007 by nmtemple in Nick  |  Comments[1]