During the lecture on Monday, Professor Chun reiterated to us that learning is disconcerting. The approach we’ve taken to analyzing digital medias in class in my mind echoes Wark’s approach to becoming the tactical intellectual. We have used vectors to connect poststructuralist theory with analyses of the internet, with literature, with youtube videos, with cyberspace…
Cyberspace itself, as we have already acknowledged in class, reorganizes our conceptions of time and space. It is fitting then that we should reorganize our understanding of the way in which digital medias operate. Wark hints at the insufficiency of scholarship and its timing—a sad failure on the part of academia perhaps. Wark notes, “In an age when transnational media flows are running across all those academic specialties, perhaps it is time to construct a discourse that follows the flow of information (and power) across both the geographic and conceptual borders of discourse” (274).
Mary Shelley’s piece that we “read” or navigated through during lab last week asserted that form is now separate from content. In this way, we are not only learning new content—which is never really that disconcerting—but new forms. We are “running across all those academic specialties” in an attempt to relearn learning.
Digital medias, thus, not only change our understanding of the world but also the way in which we understand it. In many ways, Wark’s piece reminds me of Thomas Friedman’s The World is Flat in which Friedman points out that technology has flattened out space and made our world smaller. Friedman’s world is a grid onto which Wark maps vectors. How can a world made flatter become more complex? Is it because we now destroying the boundaries between Wedom and Theydom?