I also attended the Futures of Digital Studies Conference with Francesca over this past weekend. As you have probably already read the conference was maligned by some technical problems, though from what I could tell not the fault of Digital Worlds, and in true new media theorist fashion the conference goers quickly re-appropriated these technical issues as grounds for further theorization.
As much as I enjoy the lofty discussions and theorization on what all this "digital stuff" means to us as a culture, in tongue and cheek, I came to the realization that anyone could write a critical discourse on new media by following this simple formula. 1)combine antithetical statements with 2) made up words and 3) sprinkle with digi- or techno- prefixes and suffixes.
To cope with the reverberating feedback coming over the speakers Francesca and I took turns adding words to a page to write our first discourse on New Media. Here it is:
We incorporate the incorporeal personal meta-verse through electro-plate tectonics with bipartisan unilateral machinic politics in order to augment dematerialized techno-cultural
holons. Technopaganism cross-polinates Norse-Luddism to create hypertextualility in
context of finitely disembodied passively proactive emotional cyber conversion. Ipso facto
digital genitalia converges stationary nomadism's radically pro-viral paleo-conservative
agenda with pseudo-Foucaultian phallic decentering.
Hope you all enjoy it and keep adding to it in the comments!
2 comments:
On the other hand, so called pseudo-domains of techno-modulated contexts are constantly digitizing our cyber-society in a way that cannot be easily duo-recognized by quasi-augmented realities of the "clouded" era.
Although your examples are really funny, sometimes it is difficult to wade through more subtle ans murky workings of devious minds.
There is a famous (or infamous) case involving the Social Text journal when Alan Sokal, a theoretical physicist at NY University decided to publish( an article in the said journal using satire to call attention to the bunch of bollocks that sometimes gets pretentiously published as fact.
He called his paper (which was accepted and published by Social Text) "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transormative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity"
You can read the whole nonsense HERE.
Post a Comment