1. In “What is New Media?” Lev Manovich proposes 5 principles of new media: numerical representation, modularity, automation, variability, and transcoding. Choose an example that you consider to be “new media”, and describe it in terms of these principles. What implications do these principles have for narrative and play within interactive media?
According to Manovich’s definition, all media that is computerised is considered as new media. Ideally, they should consist of the five qualities that he had drawn out for them – numerical representation, modularity, automation, variability and transcoding.
I’ll start off by giving a brief description of Manovich’s five principles of new media. In his view, numerical representation and modularity are the two main characteristics of new media. Numerical representation refers to the digitization of the new media contents. Computer data is stored as a series of 1’s and 0’s; and through accessing these bit values, the computer is able to present the intended information in a way that humans can comprehend – pictures, text, sounds, video etc.. This is in essence what new media are all about – 1’s and 0’s. Bits, to a digitalized media, are analogous to the atoms and modules that make up our physical environment. Modularity, as mentioned in the article, is a “fractal structure of a new media”. Smaller independent objects combine to form a larger entity. The idea of modularity is not a new concept. The human body is a good example of modularity. We have all these different organs and limbs that are quite independent of one another in terms of their functions, and they group together to form a much larger entity. Other examples that can be seen are the different departments that form a company; or the different modular programming codes that form the larger software. The advantages of modularity are that efficiency, in that errors can be identified easily, and independency, in that one error would not cause the whole structure to break down completely.
Aside from the aforementioned, the next few points are just as important. Manovich thinks that they can be derived from the former two. Numerical representation can be said to be the essential basic characteristics of computerized content; automation, variability and transcoding can be said to be important by-products resulting from numerical representation and modularity. Automation refers to the ability of the computer to work by itself. The extent to which the user needs to interfere depends on the level of automation of the computer programs. Variability basically refers to the degree of customisability and personalization of the media content, resulting in a wide variation between the different versions of similar products. Lastly, transcoding means translating something from one form into another format. However, the author is taking the basic property of digitized media – storing data as binary bits and converting them code into a human-comprehensible format, to a higher level by suggesting that new media might have possible cultural impacts arising from interaction of computer and society as a whole.
An example that I think would fit this whole idea of “new media” is the website, Wikipedia. Being a digitized media content placed on the Internet, it definitely satisfies the notion of “numerical representation”. Basic concept of modularity is fulfilled as well. It is mainly made up of different independent components, such as pictures, links, search bar etc., which are fitted together to form such a webpage. However, Wikipedia has taken modularity to a higher level. It is well-known that the contents on Wikipedia are contributed to by various individuals around the world. The various articles can be modified by anyone with access to the website and the corrected content is made available once it has been approved. The individual writers definitely qualify as independent modules and their collaborative work results in the vast amount of Wikipedia information that we see now. In this sense, modularity is accomplished. Automation is seen to by the computer programs. We need only type certain keywords into the search bar to get a listing of related articles. Simple processes such as clicking of a link will make the computer load the relevant page for us automatically. Automation has freed us from tedious work of finding information and allowed us to engage in the more important knowledge transfer activities. However, it is to be noted that the level of automation in Wikipedia is of a low level. These are considered basic functions that digitalized media are expected to have. On the issue of variability, there is some customizability in Wikipedia in the form of personalized accounts; however, for the general public, they usually access the same information and hence variability is not as high for this example, as compared to blogs or emails. Lastly, as established previously, transcoding is present for all digitized media. The computer will attempt to translate the machine code into something we can comprehend according to the data stored as bits. However, something of interest that Manovich mentioned is “the computer layer will affect the cultural layer”. This occurs as we are restricted by the computer in that we are unable to fully display our ideas in the format that we truly want. Digitization places many restrictions on how we can display our content. Wikipedia, for example, has a certain format that the individual authors have to adhere to.
As aforementioned, new media is basically digitalized content. Most, if not all, computer contents could be called new media. Media is the means of communication that reaches out to the people in a way such that knowledge transfer activities can be undertaken.
After reading some 40 pages about new media, in my opinion, the term “new media” is a misnomer. While it is widely accepted that the phrase currently refers to digitalized media, I feel that there is a need to specify explicitly what it is referring to. While the computer is ground-breaking in that it has completely changed the way society works, the fundamental mission of media – to engage in knowledge transfer activities has not changed. The printing press in the 1500s and the television in the mid 20th century were both revolutionary and are considered new media during their time. The term “new” will continue to change with our perception and context, as our society continue to evolve.
2. Manovich questions the usefulness of the term interactivity, suggesting that “once an object is represented in a computer, it automatically becomes interactive. Therefore, to call computer media ‘interactive’ is meaningless – it simply means stating the most basic fact about computers.” In contrast, in “What exactly is Interactivity?” Chris Crawford proposes a much stricter definition of interactivity. Compare these differing views, with reference to your own experience of interactive media systems.
As mentioned, Manovich thinks that to call computer media “interactive” is meaningless as it is simply starting the most basic fact about computers. On the other hand, Crawford feels that interaction is a cyclic process in which two actors alternately listen, think and speak, with the simplest form of interaction being conversation. Any activity that lacks the three properties is not interactive in his opinion.
Before the lesson on Thursday (24th August), I would have disagreed with both authors altogether. I felt that interactivity is not just about listening, thinking and speaking. There is a deeper activity going on – learning. The Alice bot, that Mr. Mitchell showed the class before, cannot seriously be called interactive. There is no learning process. The most it can be said about “her” is that “she” is responsive to what I typed, and reacts according to a set of instructions previously inputted by the programmer. While the bot reacts to what I type, “she” does not really understand what it is that I’m typing. Understanding does not simply mean the meaning of the words. There is also “human” emotion, for a lack of a better phrase (this is not restricted to humans only as animals have emotions too), associated with them. Without understanding, there is no learning. In this sense, a bot is never truly interactive as the “interaction” ensued is not two-way commutative. As such, no computer media is interactive.
However, after Thursday’s discussion, I’m more inclined towards Manovich’s idea. This stemmed from the discussion regarding adventure books. Someone asked where the interaction was taking place? In the book? In the air? In the brain? It spurred me to think on the meaning of interaction. What is interaction? What do software programmers mean when they say a program is interactive? What is the underlying motivation for making something interactive? In my opinion, they wish to make the program more fun and entertaining; or to put it simply, interactivity is to cause a greater reaction in a person. This definition is certainly something Crawford would disagree with, since he feels that reaction is not interaction.
If I talk to a person and he replies, there is certainly interaction between us. However, if I talk to him and he ignores me… Is this interaction? I would say yes, because there will be emotions involved, which are a kind of bodily reaction, and this is what I would call passive interaction, namely me being pissed, or you being annoyed, or something along that line. Taking this analogy further… If I was to talk to a rock and the rock ignores me (duhz… If it talks back, you better call the police… Or better yet… Run), is there interaction? I would certainly be pissed, which could lead me to smashing the rock up and resulting in a happier me. In a way, there is some form of interaction between me and the rock, and hence anything can be interactive. Hence, I think Manovich’s idea of describing interactivity according to its degree of interaction sounds like a better idea.
3. Narrative, interactivity and play – how does Run Lola Run reflect these concerns? How does this relate to Manovich’s concept of transcoding?
Run Lola Run is a movie about our heroine, Lola, who needs to somehow get $100,000 and pass it to her boyfriend, Mammi, within a short period of time in 20 minutes. The interesting thing to this movie is that it is actually comprised of three short stories all revolving around this same storyline. The three stories are all narrating the same plot; however, they differ in minor details, such as Lola jumping over her neighbour’s dog instead of running past them. Initially, these minor actions didn’t seem to have much significance, but they manifest themselves later on in the story, resulting in a series of different outcomes.
In the first story, Lola failed to gather the required amount and was late in arriving to meet Mammi, resulting in Mammi robbing the nearby supermarket and her dying from an accidental bully as the police rounded them up. There is a sense of play here as the movie next shows her starting all over again as she refused to accept the failed mission. In the second story, it ended with Mammi being dead instead. In the last story, by further tweaking the small details, Lola was able to get the required amount by winning at a casino, while incidentally Mammi managed to find his money back and hence we have a happy ending.
We can easily identify the narrative aspect of the movie. It is simply the depiction of the storyline. In this movie, we have 3 different storylines, depending on the actions of our protagonist.
Interactivity is slightly more tricky. In my opinion, there are 2 aspects of interaction. Firstly, it is the interaction between the different characters in the movie. The 3 conclusions are testament to this fact. Due to the different interaction of the characters, we have 3 totally different outcomes. The second kind of interactivity is between the characters and the audience. At first glance, the audience does not seem to have any sense of participation in the movie. However, having the scene replay a couple of times seems to give the audience an illusion of control. I’m sure it is a common phenomenon in games for people to restart a certain scene whenever things do not go their way (or maybe it’s just me). In this movie, this idea is demonstrated as bad scenes were replayed and we finally end with a successful ending. In this manner, there is a certain degree of interaction between the audience and the movie.
On the topic of “play”, as mentioned, the movie is staged like a game, where we can always restart the game if it was unsuccessful and proceed to change certain details in hopes that it will lead to a more desirable outcome.
In conclusion, the movie is presented in a game-like structure, (or if you prefer, the game is presented as a movie-like structure) and Manovich’s transcoding occurs in the sense that the 2 aspects are sort of fused together and presented to the audience. It looks like a movie staged like a game, or it could easily have been a recording of a game played by a person and broadcasted to the audience.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment