Re: The Death of...Everything
- Stephen/mt ; By 2020, the fiction of "talent" will be dead, and a v. dirty word. Like
>the notion of a canon, it'sso-last-two- thousand- years. Start thinking big.
Please unpack this a bit for meThe printed book helped break the relatively rigid feudal hierarchy of society - and gave birth, putting it crudely, to an upwardly mobile middle class.The multimedia net is breaking the last remaining hierarchy in modern society - the hierarchy of "talented" individuals, (and the hierarchy of "creative" vs "uncreative" individuals). There are various forces at work - and it's a complex argument. But the broad impetus of the net - the end of authority (intellectual), everyone an author, the open source movement, massive extension of information, including professional information, to everyone - should be clear. (What probably won't be clear is that the equivalent of the printed book is the personal image file, which means that for the first time people can see what they're talking about, rather than getting lost in words).People were v. aware of the equalising forces of the printed book at the time. We should be and will be increasingly aware of the massive equalising forces of the net.So I'm arguing to Jeff: think ambitiously re both your students and the nature of future arts courses. Personally, I think the last 20 years since the Berlin Wall, have been a time of intellectual and idealistic deadness alongside extraordinary economic expansion. The next decade should be a time of extraordinary idealism when we come alive with what's happened and happening.
- Dear Mike,
The multimedia net is breaking the last remaining hierarchy in modern society - the hierarchy of "talented" individuals, (and the hierarchy of "creative" vs "uncreative" individuals). ...
Thanks. Very helpful clarification. I am assuming that you are NOT declaring an end to the social hierarchy, including the clear and extreme differences of talent that exist in human endeavors (altho your words imply that you are declaring such an end). I am interpreting your words as implying that the limitations on expression, the peer reviews and committees and editors that declare what is good and worthy of support/publication, will be more limited in their control and censorship. They will still determine, largely, elite status, but progressively the public will have a better shot at being final arbiters, even in the short run. (IMO, in the long run, the public has always tended to prevail. For example, look at Nobel Prize winners in literature from 1920-40, and see how many are still being read; not many.) But now the flood gates are opening on publishing/blogging personal knowledge/opinion.
Please correct me if I've interpreted you incorrectly.
- Stephen:I am assuming that you are NOT
declaring an end to the social hierarchy, including the clear and extreme
differences of talent that exist in human endeavors (altho your words imply
that you are declaring such an end).Yes, I am declaring that - i.e. just as feudal beliefs that everyone should know and stick to their station, collapsed with the printed book, so - but much faster - will contemporary beliefs that there is a natural hierarchy of talents, collapse with the multimedia internet.There will still be actual hierarchies of ability, but we won't have any illusions anymore that they have anything to do with fictional "talents" - rather than quantity and quality of work/practice. See the work of scientists like K. Anders Ericsson for a pointer to the future.The arts are particularly important because they are traditionally seen (wrongly) as the preserve of creativity and imagination, which are also still seen as exclusive to some. No, everyone can be an artist, or scientist, or technologist - creative or hack.
- Mike wrote:
No, everyone can be an artist, or scientist, or technologist - creative or hack.
Well, Mike, I think you're flat-out wrong. Everyone can't be, and everyone won't be. Same as it always was.