Publish Post
FINAL Creative Gallery
14 years ago
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
What is a Multimedia Author?
What is a multimedia author?
What are your thoughts at this point?
Write your own theory under the “influence” (a la Lethem) of Foucault and/or Barthes.
"It is language that speaks, not the author"
"The explanation of the work is always sought in the man who has produced it"
"The absent author: pre-exists their work, time/age is not a factor, what do we believe about the author... modern writer is: born simultaneously with his texts, exists with his text."
"It's source is not known, but texts are perfectly read because writing best correlates to reading"
These excerpts pulled frm Barthes "Death of an Author" were of best interest to me. When talking about a multimedia author I have always thought of someone who participates in some way in writing taking place on the internet. There are a lot of broad areas you can take multimedia authorship, EXA: collaborative, anonymous, published, personal, etc... In relation to my project, I'd say authorship in media is loosely used, and not always important to determine the meanings of the text. For example, the idea of an 'absent author' would be those people who give their input to websites like ..FML.com, textsfromlastnight.com, urbandictionary.com... These "authors" are completely anonymous, the only thing you know about them is what you read that they post/write. This is the idea of an absent author, but also a modern writer. Someone who does not exist in every aspect of the text, but does not pre-exist the text.
I like the saying "it is the language that speaks, not the author". This is true in many aspects of writing, because you can have no prior knowledge of an author but completely understand the meaning of their texts, its the language and the words that make the work come to life. After reading this article I feel like I have a better understanding of importance of an author, or lack thereof. It rose questions about when is it important to know the background of an author? Is the authors POV necessary to understand the text? Does the absence of an author (anonymity) effect the way text is interpreted?
My theory on authorship in multimedia aspects is heavily influenced the idea of how texts can still be perfectly read or interpreted despite an absent author. I think a good claim to make on authorship after reading these articles is that the voice of the author is never unknown even if the author is. You can interpret writing effectively despite knowing why the writing exists in the first place. Multimedia authors may not always be published or even named, however, the idea of an author will always become apparent upon reading their work.
What are your thoughts at this point?
Write your own theory under the “influence” (a la Lethem) of Foucault and/or Barthes.
"It is language that speaks, not the author"
"The explanation of the work is always sought in the man who has produced it"
"The absent author: pre-exists their work, time/age is not a factor, what do we believe about the author... modern writer is: born simultaneously with his texts, exists with his text."
"It's source is not known, but texts are perfectly read because writing best correlates to reading"
These excerpts pulled frm Barthes "Death of an Author" were of best interest to me. When talking about a multimedia author I have always thought of someone who participates in some way in writing taking place on the internet. There are a lot of broad areas you can take multimedia authorship, EXA: collaborative, anonymous, published, personal, etc... In relation to my project, I'd say authorship in media is loosely used, and not always important to determine the meanings of the text. For example, the idea of an 'absent author' would be those people who give their input to websites like ..FML.com, textsfromlastnight.com, urbandictionary.com... These "authors" are completely anonymous, the only thing you know about them is what you read that they post/write. This is the idea of an absent author, but also a modern writer. Someone who does not exist in every aspect of the text, but does not pre-exist the text.
I like the saying "it is the language that speaks, not the author". This is true in many aspects of writing, because you can have no prior knowledge of an author but completely understand the meaning of their texts, its the language and the words that make the work come to life. After reading this article I feel like I have a better understanding of importance of an author, or lack thereof. It rose questions about when is it important to know the background of an author? Is the authors POV necessary to understand the text? Does the absence of an author (anonymity) effect the way text is interpreted?
My theory on authorship in multimedia aspects is heavily influenced the idea of how texts can still be perfectly read or interpreted despite an absent author. I think a good claim to make on authorship after reading these articles is that the voice of the author is never unknown even if the author is. You can interpret writing effectively despite knowing why the writing exists in the first place. Multimedia authors may not always be published or even named, however, the idea of an author will always become apparent upon reading their work.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Research Proposal
My research proposal is going to take another look at the idea of authorship in multimedia writing. The webpages I've bookmarked grow based solely on participation from its visitors. These websites allow anyone who visits the site to post information, music, or pictures. The sites I am looking at to support my research are the following:
-Pandora.com
-Twitter.com
-Facebook.com
-Myspace.com
-Urbandictionary.com
-Datpiff.com
-Textsfromlastnight.com
-FML.com
-Youtube.com
-Collegehumor.com
These types of sites all have one thing in common, they allow their audience to participate in originating the site. I think these web pages will provide an interesting relation to the idea of authorship in multimedia. When I think about authorship, two things come to mind, origin of an idea and execution of that idea. The sites listed above originate from one person's idea , and are then sculpted by the input of possibly millions of people. There is a very loose idea of authorship in these sites because anyone can put their own spin on the original thought. For example, Pandora allows a user to type in an artist and takes a "sounds like" approach to forming a radio station. Datpiff works similarly by allowing visitors to form their own CD playlists using songs from musicians and writing it off as their mixtape. The ideas behind TEXTS, FML, ad Youtube share the fact that it started with a broad idea, (EXA: post your texts from last night) and turned into whatever the "authors" of the site made it. Urban dictionary is another good example of visitors being able to 'define' a word in terms of how that word plays a role in their life, majority of the time they're slang. These sites I feel add to the idea of authorship, and support why I don't feel like remixing an original thought should be considered plagiarizing. They show how personal additions to a standing idea can be beneficial. Questions to ask based on my topic that would be good to research concern what the idea of multimedia authorhip really is:
-Are contributions to these sites mostly anonymous?
-Is money being made off of anything posted to these sites?
-Why do these sites exist?
-Is there room for plagiarism?
-Is there research done on these sites? What do they say about the posts made?
Bibliography
1.Urban Dictionary: http://www.urbandictionary.com/. September 8th, 2009.
2.Dat Piff: http://datpiff.com. September 8th, 2009.
3.F My Life: http://fml.com. September 1st, 2009.
4.Texts from Last Night: http://textsfromlastnight.com. September 8th, 2009.
5.Writings on the Stall: http://writingsonthestall.com. September 9th, 2009.
6.Pandora: http://pandora.com. September 3rd, 2009.
-Pandora.com
-Twitter.com
-Facebook.com
-Myspace.com
-Urbandictionary.com
-Datpiff.com
-Textsfromlastnight.com
-FML.com
-Youtube.com
-Collegehumor.com
These types of sites all have one thing in common, they allow their audience to participate in originating the site. I think these web pages will provide an interesting relation to the idea of authorship in multimedia. When I think about authorship, two things come to mind, origin of an idea and execution of that idea. The sites listed above originate from one person's idea , and are then sculpted by the input of possibly millions of people. There is a very loose idea of authorship in these sites because anyone can put their own spin on the original thought. For example, Pandora allows a user to type in an artist and takes a "sounds like" approach to forming a radio station. Datpiff works similarly by allowing visitors to form their own CD playlists using songs from musicians and writing it off as their mixtape. The ideas behind TEXTS, FML, ad Youtube share the fact that it started with a broad idea, (EXA: post your texts from last night) and turned into whatever the "authors" of the site made it. Urban dictionary is another good example of visitors being able to 'define' a word in terms of how that word plays a role in their life, majority of the time they're slang. These sites I feel add to the idea of authorship, and support why I don't feel like remixing an original thought should be considered plagiarizing. They show how personal additions to a standing idea can be beneficial. Questions to ask based on my topic that would be good to research concern what the idea of multimedia authorhip really is:
-Are contributions to these sites mostly anonymous?
-Is money being made off of anything posted to these sites?
-Why do these sites exist?
-Is there room for plagiarism?
-Is there research done on these sites? What do they say about the posts made?
Bibliography
1.Urban Dictionary: http://www.urbandictionary.com/. September 8th, 2009.
2.Dat Piff: http://datpiff.com. September 8th, 2009.
3.F My Life: http://fml.com. September 1st, 2009.
4.Texts from Last Night: http://textsfromlastnight.com. September 8th, 2009.
5.Writings on the Stall: http://writingsonthestall.com. September 9th, 2009.
6.Pandora: http://pandora.com. September 3rd, 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
