Lost.In.Translation.

Two weeks ago in class, we watched the movie Lost in Translation. I had never seen it before and was excited to actually watch a popular movie in class. Although the movie was different and did not follow normal movie "guidelines" (predictable ending, predictable plot, etc.), I still was intrigued by it. The movie could be related to places vs. non-places, like we discussed in class. Much of the movie had scenes of people just sitting around, which would correlate to non-places. Also, it seemed that the two main characters might have in fact viewed Tokyo as a non-place, as they did not have any history in it and seemed to just be "drifting" around in it.
In class, we also discussed the possibility of turning a non-place into a place. We asked if someone spends a certain amount of time in a non-place and establishes relations, does this qualify as a place? I think that a non-place turns into a place as soon as the characteristics of a place (has history, has relationships, etc.) appear in the alleged "non-place". In addition, we felt that the language barrier in the movie presented a challenge for the two main characters to change Tokyo from a non-place to a place.

Non-places Part II

Last week's reading about places and non-places by Auge really interested me. Initially, I was skeptical of and confused by the term "non-place". I thought, "Isn't everything a place in some sense?". However, once I understood Auge's criteria for non-places, everything became clearer. Auge believes that non-places are spaces we merely visit. They most likely have an element of commercialization and anonymity. Also, non-places deal with travel and distancing. Examples of non-places could be a bus, an elevator, a big lecture hall, an airport, a bank, a hotel, or a mall. In this context, the idea of non-places began to make more sense to me. Places, on the other hand, have a historical context and are concerned with identity. Examples could be a town square, a church, and a long-term job. People generally spend more time in places than non-places. I realized that I visit non-places just as much as I visit places on a daily basis. Auge also points out that a person's daily routine is a continuous shift between places and non-places, which is certainly true in my case. On an average day, I might get up in the morning and leave my dorm (place), some days attend a large lecture (non-place), get money from the ATM (non-place), meet friends for lunch at the cafeteria (place), take the bus (non-place) to work, spend time at work (place), take the bus (non-place) home, go to the library (place) to work on homework, and finally sleep at home (place). Another point that was brought up in our class was that defining a certain space to be a non-place or place is very subjective. A coffee shop for some people may be a place to grab a quick cup of coffee. For others, it may be a place to meet friends every Tuesday night. Auge's discussion of places and non-places shed new light on a topic containing familiar elements but new ideas.

Non-places???

I chose a bus for my non-place. I observed the people and surroundings on my way to work one afternoon, and here's what happened:
First of all, I recognized a sense of solitude and anonymity as I waited for the bus with about fifteen strangers. Some people were waiting with friends, but the majority of us were standing alone. Most of us were listening to iPods or talking on cell phones, which also symbolized a loss of a relationship with the people around us (even though we might be expressing our relationship with someone on the phone).
When the bus came, we all gathered in a group and headed onto the bus. The bus driver seemed to be "counting" us as we stepped on, as he pushed a button for each new passenger. This gave me a sense that I was literally "just a number" in the world of the Metro bus line.
However, sometimes when I take the bus, I spot a co-worker and begin to talk. In this way, the bus seems to be transferred into a "place" because we are "regulars" of that schedule and bus, thus making a history.
A couple major components of non-places are the feelings of being in motion and traveling. This is pretty self-explanantory for a vehicle such as a bus, for it literally took us from one place to the next. However, it would not be considered a "place" because it was involved in the in between stage.
While on the bus, strangers sat next to strangers for the most part. Since many people use Bus 80 on campus, there was a good chance the person sitting next to someone would be a stranger. Everyone was simply using the bus to get somewhere-a "real" place.
One more characteristic of a non-place is the idea that people "use it and leave". This is certainly true of a bus or other public transportation system.

My experience with a non-place fit pretty well with Auge's definition of one, although there were some exceptions.

Spring Break

Alright, I am going to be cliche and talk about my upcoming Spring Break. Even though I'm not going anywhere exotic, I'm excited to get away from school and everything that goes along with it. I will be heading home to Kenosha to visit family and friends. Because our Spring Break is so late, not very many of my college friends will be home, but luckily there will be a couple. One thing I'm really looking forward to is seeing my nephew. After all, I haven't seen him since he was born, and he is now about 2 1/2 months old! Another aspect I'm looking forward to is not having to work for a full week! Even though I love my job, it will be nice to take a break from the sometimes-screaming kids for awhile. I will also be meeting my new dog for the first time. His name is Rocky, and he's a full-grown Chocolate Lab. We have 2 other small dogs and a small house, so this situation should be interesting. I plan on renting lots of movies, going shopping in Milwaukee/Chicago, and SLEEPING! However, I did just realize how much is due the week after Spring Break, so I guuess a little studying might be in order, but not too much!

Reading Notes #6

Last week, we read Andy Clark’s “Natural Born Cyborgs”, which focused on the proposition that all humans are inherently part human and part machine. Clark believes that we will become “human-technology symbionts” that will think with both a biological and non-biological mind. His proposition that people are “natural born cyborgs” stems from his belief that reason derived from the human mind cannot be attached to the body. As time goes on, he says, the “mind is just less and less in the head” (181). The human brain is good at physical feats but performs poorly in areas of logic.
Clark also believes that humans naturally have minds that were “made for mergers” (182). He even goes so far as to call us “Tools-R-Us” (182). As society becomes more technologically advanced, so do our tools. This explains our ability to interact with tools (in order of increasing complexity) such as pens, paper, and computers.
An everyday illustration of a human cyborg-like behavior is the use of cell phones. Almost everyone nowadays owns one, and many do not let it leave their sides. It is, in some sense, “attached at the hip” of many people. Text messaging is becoming increasingly popular. Clark sees this behavior as an “extension of the hand” (183). He also believes that when people purchase new phones, they are simply buying “mindware upgrades” (183). The non-biological machinery combines with the biological brain as users learn more about the technology.
Clark does make a point that we “aren’t ourselves” in some manner (184). There are questions of the extent to which technology will become a part of us. This is a very valid question, but the answer lies in the future, and is thus unknown.
In class, we discussed the pros and cons of the concept of cyborgs. Initially, many people react with the “ick” factor, or technophobia. Some worry that technology will ultimately take over and machines will become superior to humans. Fears of this are illustrated in many science fiction movies, such as The Matrix. However, some technological advances can be seen as beneficial. For example, in the Turkle article, a woman who had lost a limb finds comfort in creating an online identity before creating a real-life one. The Internet provides anonymousness as well as an outlet for creativity.
In conclusion, “Natural Born Cyborgs” illustrates humans’ ability to utilize resources and tools while at the same time acknowledges fears of reliance and dependence on these same tools.

Reading Notes #5

Jeff Rice’s Chapter 7 (Popular Culture and Cool) centered around how modes (music, electronic writing, literacy etc.) of “cool” affects current popular culture. Rice believes that the development of new media technologies directly relates to literacy growth, and I have to agree. He points out that “before the 1500’s, few people knew how to read and write, and, consequently, the ability to produce written texts was a limited activity” (126). After the invention of the printing press, however, many people were able to both write and read text in public and private spaces. Computers and related technologies have furthered these abilities. People are now even more able to connect with a large number of people or work in solitude. For the purposes of this class, I believe the focus should be on the large-scale connectedness that results from new media developments. Rice thinks that developments of literacy and technology are intertwined. A key term Rice mentions is “computer literacy” (127). The traditional notion of these words is one that focuses on one’s ability to turn on and use a computer’s components. As mentioned in previous blogs, I would say I am not very “computer literate” using this definition. However, Rice points out that the true definition of computer literacy” streches beyond the traditional one. “Computer literacy” also encompasses one’s ability to “create discourse with computers...and rhetorically be persuasive” (127). I’ve realized that new media is developing rapidly, and that in order to be fully competent in all aspects of society, one needs to keep up with and adapt to these developments. In this sense, I believe I am slowly beginning to improve my “computer literacy”.

After reading all of the articles by Barabasi, Rice, and Gladwell, I’ve been a bit more aware of “cool” people around me. I recently heard my roommate talking about certain people called “hipsters”. I didn’t really know what this term meant, so of course I turned to Urban Dictionary. Their definition is as follows: One who possesses tastes, social attitudes, and opinions deemed cool by the cool. The Hipster walks among the masses in daily life but is not a part of them and shuns or reduces to kitsch anything held dear by the mainstream.” Apparently, hipsters are what most of the above authors would call the “innovators”, the first people to start a trend or fad. The part of the definition that says the hipsters “walk among the masses in daily life” also gives a sense of mystery and disconnectedness. In order for these people to be considered “cool”, their overall ways of life must reach a hub, who must “spread the word” and influence many other people. If these trends catch on, they are accepted by other “cool” people.
Also, the fact that the hipsters “walk among the masses” seem to connote that they are difficult to spot. Gladwell would agree with this notion, and would say that it is actually impossible to truly observe “cool” kids because “the quicker the chase, the quicker the flight”. Just as “cool” is being accepted and becoming the norm, another hipster or innovator is producing some other “cool” trend.
Overall, I think the idea of “catching cool” is tired and somewhat impossible. There are always new ideas being formed and new people to accept them. Although I admire the effort of cool hunters like Baysie and DeeDee, who ultimately record random observations, I don’t think I could base my job on something so unstable.