Technological mediation as a supposed barrier to authentic enjoyment

In recent discussion of some apps which have been developed to allow visitors to engage with historical sites, I encountered some resistance from some people who make the argument that this somehow ‘cheapens’ the experience. The argument goes that in having a cultural experience, however broadly this may be understood, there needs to be something approaching a one to one correspondence. Cultural artefact X plus individual Y combine to create authentic experience Z. This reminds me of the analysis offered by Susan Sontag in On Photography. 

In this she suggests that the Japanese tourist laden down with cameras (an example very much of its time) is an indictment of the inability to ‘clock-off’. This person – supposedly on holidays – has transported a work ethic into the time when they are meant to be relaxing. We are still being productive, though we are meant to be at rest. There are various ways by which one might possibly critique this critique. Should we so readily attribute a Japanese version of the Protestant work ethic to this ideal/anecdotal figure? If we update this example, and think of the phenomenon of taking photos of the food one is about to eat. The need to Instagram your dinner is roundly mocked, either overtly, or at a remove via protestations that say “I am such a hipster taking a picture of my dinner, but I can’t help it! I think I’ll use X-Pro II…”

The question we can ask is what is the alternative to this? Is there such a thing as total immersion in the moment? Is talking a distraction from this? How about using your imagination? If you fill in some extra details to whatever experience as you project from the present anticipation of this experience to the imagined, future process of experiencing itself, have you stepped outside the bounds of acceptable authenticity? Are we allowed to communicate with others, or must we commune with the moment? Of course, there are no rules, but the element which seems common to all of these – admittedly forced, reductio-style – questions is to be found in the idea of mediation. By using a technology to assist or facilitate engagement, it is held that we put up a barrier between ourselves and the aesthetic process. This criticism is built on the notion that there is a tabula rasa for the aesthetic, that there is a pure state, and that anything else is a deviation. It is pure philosophical Romanticism. Innocence is the ideal to be followed.

Youth of delight! come hither
And see the opening morn,
Image of Truth new-born.
Doubt is fled, and clouds of reason,
Dark disputes and artful teazing.
Folly is an endless maze;
Tangled roots perplex her ways;
How many have fallen there!
They stumble all night over bones of the dead;
And feel—they know not what but care;
And wish to lead others, when they should be led.

So says William Blake in ‘The Voice of the Ancient Bard’, the final poem in Songs of Experience. Truth is new-born. It is naked, pure, and hasn’t been led astray (yet) by reason, or any other artifice.

I do not accept this, and I charge our popular concept of mediation with naivety. Both the hermeneutics and the phenomenology of the aesthetic contradict such a simplistic idealization. All of our engagements with culture, art, and aesthetics are mediated. Being in a museum and imagining an object as it may have been to its contemporaries when it was in situ is an act of mediation. Walking around a castle, and envisioning how it appeared and functioned in different ages – this too is an act of mediation, effected by our imagination, our ability to project ourselves into a fantasy reconstruction of the past. Even being in an art gallery and experiencing countless objects of art in this environment is a mediation, experiencing paintings and sculpture in the relatively recent invention of a building as giant aesthetic-experiencing machine. All imagining is mediation, and all experiencing is mediated. The question then, for any new technique, tool, or technology is whether they assist in this work of mediation. As Deckard says to Rachael in Bladerunner, “Replicants are like any other machine – they’re either a benefit or a hazard. If they’re a benefit, it’s not my problem.” Mediation shouldn’t be regarded as a problem either.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Technological mediation as a supposed barrier to authentic enjoyment

  1. I really, really don’t know. Everything we have encountered about them so far is marketing. There are things that I am not convinced by, such as taking a photo. When we want to take a snap, we usually want to take it when we are ready – there’s an element of having a quick trigger-finger. That’s why SLR trumps a smartphone with a camera trumps having to say “ok glass, take a photo…when you want… any minute now.” The video recording and video-call seemed the most compelling arguments for something which would be enabling forms of mediation. I am thinking of right-on uses such as having expertise available to you from a distance, and so on.

    Then there are social and political questions. When somebody such as Steve Mann can get attacked for wearing a similar device (http://www.dvice.com/archives/2012/07/man-wearing-com.php), 22 years after the Cyborg Manifesto (and 18 years after Johnny Mnemonic) there’s reason to be concerned that it’ll simply freak some people out. Then what of the possibility for digital apartheid? We’re comfortably ensconced in our preeminence as inhabitants of knowledge economies and knowledge societies…is this going to be a tool for emancipation or for… y’know…business as usual?

    The best thing Google could possibly do is to make the glasses rootable, hackable,and open source. Then they should start running competitions/jams (or better still, not get in the way of other people doing this) for kids and students and musicians and artists to take them apart, fool around with them, and find new uses for them that we can’t even imagine. Make Google live up to “Don’t be evil”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s