media + technology
COURSE
SYLLABUS
about the course
THE COURSE AS IT IS
The course would explore and discuss theoretical approaches to media and technology. We are going to examine the texts of the key philosophers and scholars who touched on these subjects. Seminars will allow students to set their own goals and track their interests during the course.
We will start by outlining the very basic scheme that brings together the actions (as well as their theories), tools, invention and use, then go to scaling and transformation processes. We will also pay attention to such topics as the destruction of technologies and media, re-use and recycling.
The key aims and planned results of the course are:
- to get acquainted with different theoretical approaches and debates about technologies and media
- trace the interconnections between different theories
- apply the theories to contemporary problems and cases
- reflect own position and context and start working with academic identity
- reflect own position and context and start working with academic identity
graded tasks
GRADE FORMULA
At the end of the course, students will write an essay/letter and can also pass an exam if they wish.
The exam will be held in the form of a personal consultation. Exam grade has a weight of 0.2, which means, that any student can get an 8 for the course even without passing an exam. The exam is not obligatory and its purpose is mainly to help a student evaluate their progress at the end of the course.
Mfin = A (0,8) + E (0,2)
A1 — assignment 1
E — exam
The exam will be held in the form of a personal consultation. Exam grade has a weight of 0.2, which means, that any student can get an 8 for the course even without passing an exam. The exam is not obligatory and its purpose is mainly to help a student evaluate their progress at the end of the course.
Mfin = A (0,8) + E (0,2)
A1 — assignment 1
E — exam
assignments
A1
During the grading process eight characteristics will be assessed, where each has a weight of 0.1 in the final course grade:
0,1 — the technical/media object is well-described
0,1 — the history of the invention is analysed according to a chosen research/philosophical tradition, is done within a certain theoretical framework and references related historical research
0,1 — the way in which the object is used/interacted with is reconstructed
0,1 — there is a focus on at least one transformation of the object
0,1 — the description consists not just of a story but also includes theoretical framing
0,1 — the imaginary automatisation/algorithmization is also reflected on, e.g. what parts of the object can transform due to it, who is able to do it, and how it might influence the usage.
0,1 — the reflection on the possiblities to destruct/utilize of the object is proposedStudents can write the final assignment as an essay or as a letter to some theorist we have studied. The latter is preferable. A student will need to choose one key author to talk to. She/he will write also an answer.
The text is written step-by-step during the course, as all the themes are included in course tasks. At the end of each seminar teacher will suggests a small task that allows students to reflect on the object they have chosen and later to add this text to the assignment A1.
Possible objects to study in the assignment are: an alarm clock, a digital installation in a museum, a sewing machine, a solar battery, TV tower, a pin, a car navigator, a website, a particular musical instrument, a stylus for a tablet, etc. You can also craft your own object and invent a way of using it.
0,1 — the technical/media object is well-described
0,1 — the history of the invention is analysed according to a chosen research/philosophical tradition, is done within a certain theoretical framework and references related historical research
0,1 — the way in which the object is used/interacted with is reconstructed
0,1 — there is a focus on at least one transformation of the object
0,1 — the description consists not just of a story but also includes theoretical framing
0,1 — the imaginary automatisation/algorithmization is also reflected on, e.g. what parts of the object can transform due to it, who is able to do it, and how it might influence the usage.
0,1 — the reflection on the possiblities to destruct/utilize of the object is proposedStudents can write the final assignment as an essay or as a letter to some theorist we have studied. The latter is preferable. A student will need to choose one key author to talk to. She/he will write also an answer.
The text is written step-by-step during the course, as all the themes are included in course tasks. At the end of each seminar teacher will suggests a small task that allows students to reflect on the object they have chosen and later to add this text to the assignment A1.
Possible objects to study in the assignment are: an alarm clock, a digital installation in a museum, a sewing machine, a solar battery, TV tower, a pin, a car navigator, a website, a particular musical instrument, a stylus for a tablet, etc. You can also craft your own object and invent a way of using it.
Useful links and projects for your inspiration:
https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/
https://build.mmm.page/
Nicolas Collins (2006) Handmade Electronic Music: The Art of Hardware
EXAM
is a personal conversation between a student and a teacher, where students will provide a scheme of intellectual and social/political context that influences their academic identity.
The grade for the exam consists of two parts:
0,1 — there is a scheme/map/short text about students' academic identity
0,1 — student participates in a conversation with the examiner
The key questions for the course reflection are:
- What are media and technology? What ways of theoretising are useful to define them? How are they different from each other?
- What is the context (historical, intellectual, technological) in each situation of theoretising? How does it influence the way of knowing/thinking?
- Do you treat media/technologies as a matter of conflict or/and conjunction in the particular text? What/who are the other subjects of these conjunctions/conflicts?
- How do you understand your own/particular critical position after reading this text?
We will be touching upon all four topics during the seminars, which should provide basic grounds for a further reflection during the exam.
The grade for the exam consists of two parts:
0,1 — there is a scheme/map/short text about students' academic identity
0,1 — student participates in a conversation with the examiner
The key questions for the course reflection are:
- What are media and technology? What ways of theoretising are useful to define them? How are they different from each other?
- What is the context (historical, intellectual, technological) in each situation of theoretising? How does it influence the way of knowing/thinking?
- Do you treat media/technologies as a matter of conflict or/and conjunction in the particular text? What/who are the other subjects of these conjunctions/conflicts?
- How do you understand your own/particular critical position after reading this text?
We will be touching upon all four topics during the seminars, which should provide basic grounds for a further reflection during the exam.
what happens during the course, day by day
06.09
We meet each other, and the teacher gives a short introductory lecture about the course, the role of different types of technological objects and media as well as different determinisms.
Each student draws a map of approaches she/he uses for understanding the media and technologies. We discuss the maps and explore the course structure and authors we are going to get acquainted with.
Each student draws a map of approaches she/he uses for understanding the media and technologies. We discuss the maps and explore the course structure and authors we are going to get acquainted with.
Intro.
Literature
basics:
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. John Benjamins.
also:
Latour, B. (2012). We have never been modern. Harvard university press.
Lovink, G. (2012). What is the social in social media. E-flux Journal, 40(12), 2012.
Gillespie, T., Boczkowski, P. J., & Foot, K. A. (Eds.). (2014). Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society. MIT Press.
basics:
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. John Benjamins.
also:
Latour, B. (2012). We have never been modern. Harvard university press.
Lovink, G. (2012). What is the social in social media. E-flux Journal, 40(12), 2012.
Gillespie, T., Boczkowski, P. J., & Foot, K. A. (Eds.). (2014). Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society. MIT Press.
17.09
We read Simondon "On the mode of existence of technical objects" + Wiener "Cybernetics" and focus on the power relations and ability to explore together human, machine and society.
Simondon + Wiener
18.00-19.30
24.09
We read Heidegger "The question concerning technology" + Haraway "Cyborg Manifesto" and discuss the relation between a person/human and extensions/technologies.
(human/technic/nature/being — basic problem areas and ways of criticising)
(human/technic/nature/being — basic problem areas and ways of criticising)
Heidegger + Haraway
18.00-19.30
01.10
We read McLuhan + Kittler on media and focus on the concept of "media" and the idea of media-determinism.
(how "media" is different from "technology"? Which approaches/problems do media inherit from other phenomena?)
(how "media" is different from "technology"? Which approaches/problems do media inherit from other phenomena?)
McLuhan + Kittler
18.00-19.30
09.10
PART 1
We read Marx about machinery and technology, Latour about the limits of critique and constructivism and focus on how critique can and should be performed, and what is the role of the critical researcher.
(what is 'transformation'? how do different groups and entities organise in order to enable knowledge and action towards technology/media?)
We read Marx about machinery and technology, Latour about the limits of critique and constructivism and focus on how critique can and should be performed, and what is the role of the critical researcher.
(what is 'transformation'? how do different groups and entities organise in order to enable knowledge and action towards technology/media?)
Marx + Latour
18.00-19.30
15.10
Systematization
We discuss how things go and try to systematize all the concepts.
We discuss how things go and try to systematize all the concepts.
Sum up of the first part
18.00-21.00
29.10
We discuss theories in contemporary + original context and plan the Make+Mend task
New part of the course
18.00-21.00
05.11
We read Marx + Haraway and continue the conversation with Alla Mitrofanova.
Guest: Alla Mitrofanova
Do critical approaches matter
18.10-21.00
(asynchronous)
(asynchronous)
12.11
We discuss Haraway, Latour and Simondon and try to work with the problem of everything connected (technology+media+nature etc)
Everything is hybrid
18.00-19.00
19.11
We revise Marx and Kittler and try to establish own ideas of determinism.
On Determinism
18.00-19.00
26.11
We discuss whether we need these Dead (and alive) White men (and women) and canon approaches and what is critique
At the workshop part we try to demonstrate our own technologies and media and analyze how it does (not work) and how do we feel about it and how can we transform this.
Critique + Mend
18.00-21.00
persons + texts
Friedrich
Kittler
Kittler
The history of communication media. Communication theory, 7-30.
+ (additional) Towards an ontology of media.
+ (additional) Towards an ontology of media.
1. please scroll through the book (if it is big) or an article. what seems important and touching for you from the first glance? what is it about? what do you expect from the text? write it down.
2. focus on the paper recommended for the reading. is its problem and aim clear for you? do you understand it? what is the intrigue of the text?
(write these first ideas as well)
3. read the paper from the beginning to the end. please mark what you consider to be important, complicated, weird, wonderful, etc. use different colours to mark it and make a draft of your sum up.
4. make a sum up that you can use to recover the text for yourself and peers. make it clear and use footnotes to explain what cannot be clear.
5. choose the passage you suggest to read at class. it can be the most obscure or fascinating, or what you feel problematic to read alone.
6. paste the passage to the file, the most cited passage will be read at the class.
2. focus on the paper recommended for the reading. is its problem and aim clear for you? do you understand it? what is the intrigue of the text?
(write these first ideas as well)
3. read the paper from the beginning to the end. please mark what you consider to be important, complicated, weird, wonderful, etc. use different colours to mark it and make a draft of your sum up.
4. make a sum up that you can use to recover the text for yourself and peers. make it clear and use footnotes to explain what cannot be clear.
5. choose the passage you suggest to read at class. it can be the most obscure or fascinating, or what you feel problematic to read alone.
6. paste the passage to the file, the most cited passage will be read at the class.
literature
Context
- Mitchell, W. J. T., & Hansen, M. B. (Eds.). (2010). Critical terms for media studies. University of Chicago Press.
- Latour, B. (2012). We have never been modern. Harvard university press.
- Suchman, L. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. Cambridge university press.
- Stiegler, Bernard, and Irit Rogoff. 2009. Transindividuation. https://www.e-flux.com/journal/14/61314/transindividuation/
- Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics?. Daedalus, 121-136.
- Winthrop-Young, G., & Gane, N. (2006). Friedrich Kittler: an introduction. Theory, Culture & Society, 23(7-8), 5-16.
- Braidotti, R. (1996). Cyberfeminism with a difference. Futures of critical theory: Dreams of difference, 239-259.
- Hui, Y. (2012). What is a digital object?. Metaphilosophy, 43(4), 380-395.
- Lovink, G. (2012). What is the social in social media. E-flux Journal, 40(12), 2012.
- Morozov, E. (2012) To Save Everything, Click Here.
- Mumford, L. (1971). Technics and human development: the myth of the machine, vol. I (pp. 381-410). Harvest Books.
- Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism. John Wiley & Sons.
- Geert Lovink and Yuk Hui - Digital Objects and Metadata Scheme (to read together with Heidegger and Simondon)
- Geert Lovink - Cybernetics for the Twenty-First Century: An Interview with Philosopher Yuk Hui
- Patarakin, E., Shevchuk, Yu., (1997) Отражение учебного процесса в зеркале новых технологий. Педагогическая информатика N1,. 51 - 63
- Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects.
- Gillespie, T., Boczkowski, P. J., & Foot, K. A. (Eds.). (2014). Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society. MIT Press.
- Grint, K., & Woolgar, S. (1997). Configuring the user: inventing new technologies. The machine at work: Technology, work and organization, 65-94.
- Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social studies of science, 14(3), 399-441.
- Wyatt, S. Technological Determinism Is Dead; Long Live Technological Determinism
- Wyatt, S. Non-users also matter: The construction of users and non-users of the Internet.
- Olia Lialina. A Vernacular web. Indigenous and Barbarians.
- Sneakernet
- Garlic=Rich Air project
- Low tech magazine
- Hot Ninja by ::vtol::
- Decentralisation projects, like https://solid.mit.edu/.
- Interface alternatives, e.g. internet without browser.
