“Electracy,” is a neologism, then, to give a name to the apparatus of the emerging digital epoch.
The emerAgency is a virtual distributed online consultancy, whose purpose is to deconstruct instrumentalist approaches to applied problem-solving by placing them in the context of electracy.
I think that one reason that many web artists and hypermedia writers spend so much time these days talking about “reading” and “the page” is that they are positioned at something of a fulcrum between the literate and the electrate.
Interesting things to note in the interview:
Likening of literacy to an “apparatus” to name “the matrix of a language machine.” This kind of appellation is reminiscent of the kind of machines Deleuze and Guattari write about in A Thousand Plateaus . More on this in a second.
Observations of analysis and synthesis. Ulmer describes how theorists, philosophers, and scientists, “break the object of study down into its constituent parts and reassemble according to the principles of logic in order to make something intelligible.” He points out how some things are unobservable using this method as they do not come into existence until converging with other parts somewhere in the assemblage.
Ulmer notes how Golden Ages (Grecian and Renaissance) coincide with an significant advance in method of communication or technological advance which in turn demands a shift in perception/use of communication/language.
Access to massive data in uncountable fields leads to specializations without peripheral experiences and knowledge, possible loss of context and application. As Ulmer says, “The institutional expression of splintering of learning into highly specialized sub-domains, to the point that our society is a kind of collective “idiot savant.” we have a command of isolated areas of amazing learning without the ability to grasp the consequences collectively of the synthesis of what happens when we implement our specialized knowledge.”
Ulmer suggests a kind of standardized approach to research/learning/application.
Aesthetic will be the controlling trait of electracy.
A Williams influenced philosophy when applying the “whatever”: What “meaning” is to words, “whatever” is to photographs. “No whatever without a lens” (Agamben). William Carlos Williams asserted “No ideas but in things.”
A couple of points I’d like to address:
The first bullet needs to be reflected on as a whole, even as the very term being used would suggest. The literacy matrix machine, in idea, resembles the D & G machine concept. To D & G, the machine is a representation of subtle interaction between its constituent parts. Those parts can be part of other machines, related to other machines, or driven by other machines, all of which have their constituent parts. When stepping back to observe, or closer, whichever seems more appropriate, the vast nature of multiplicity can be observed in the interaction of the machines, or even just a single machine in action. The language machine, then, would be a vast machine composed of all kinds of constituent machines (which would be too difficult to begin to name, but we can have fun coming up with some in the seminar). These machines are represented everywhere on the net, and more importantly, outside of the net. The electrate age, the electrate machine, then, is not wholly electric, and therefore probably the term is somewhat misleading.
Ulmer, in a way, asserts that with the move from orality to literacy we had access to all the oral work prior, that from literacy to printing we had distribution, and now we have amalgamation. I, for one, don’t think the move was, or is, necessarily that fast. From orality to literacy there had to have been a period of learning, transition, and cataloging. The existing works in the oral tradition would have taken plenty of time to be cataloged in the first place, not withstanding what was being created in the wake of a new medium and the working out of the use of that medium. Keep in mind that few were literate even though from Plato to Gutenberg was a 1500 year difference. The priests (primarily) and nobles were the ones who could actually read. When printing comes around literacy starts becoming more widespread. It’s at this point access grows. Ulmer does place special emphasis on the printed word. Even so, access is limited, although creativity gets another shot in the arm. It is when we get to the industrial age that access expands tremendously. Basically, access was limited by the distribution machine, which made leaps of growth in the past two hundred years, and which is a major machine on which electracy is truly based.
Electracy, as a word to describe the current trend language/communication/expression/reading/etc., seems lacking somehow after reviewing the ages of orality, literacy, and print. The combination of distribution (transportation and now through the massive access of the internet) and the various forms of media available (sound, text, image, and movie) would seem to imply a different word blending: mediacy. In Ulmer’s tradition, this word can be seen as being comprised of media and literacy at the core, but also containing the suggestion of immediate, or immediacy; mediate is also a big part of this blending as there are so many types of media contributing to meaning and perspective; the “edia” can be seen as part of the Greek paideia (you’ll recognize it as being a part of “encyclopedia”) which Wikipedia defines as “the process of educating man into his true form, the real and genuine human nature,” and also as “culture” and “cultural heritage”; media also contains I and me , which the self, or individual experience within the context of the social experience, seems to be emphasized in this age.
http://web.nwe.ufl.edu/~gulmer/
http://web.nwe.ufl.edu/~gulmer/course/popcycle1.html
http://web.nwe.ufl.edu/~gulmer/sb-99/whatever.html
http://web.nwe.ufl.edu/~gulmer/monumentality.html
http://www.nwe.ufl.edu/elf/agency/imaging.html
http://web.nwe.ufl.edu/~gulmer/curriculum.html