and now the Share Festival and Casa Jasmina is asking, what if the endpoints look different, if they themselves are also treated as art in the domestic landscape? http://www.toshare.it/tshr/bando-concorso-share-prize-2015-house-guests/?lang=en
Get with the times, HasBros. Why are your toys gendered at all any more? Are they sex toys you need certain genitalia to use? And why are the shitty, sexed up, bullshit toys labeled for girls, while the cool Star Wars ones are labeled for boys? You’re literally setting artificial boundaries for the play time of children. Not cool.
For the record, Disney itself has done a better job at putting Rey out there. I was able to easily find a men’s shirt with Rey front and center on Disney’s online store, and they’ve consistently put Rey and Phasma toys out there — even if others, looking at you Target, have entire toy aisles devoid of female characters. The photo above? I couldn’t find one female character. Not One. (Seriously, knowing what we know now about Rey, take a closer look at the toy aisles and ask yourself if you could imagine Luke or Han toys being underrepresented or missing altogether in the ’80s. And don’t give me the “Oh, they were just waiting for the movie so as not to spoil it” line of defense. No, we’ve seen this over and over again. It’s no mistake. Girls get the shaft in the toy department, because toy company executives — and here they should be called out by name as the assholes they are — somehow can’t fathom that boys and girls can have the same interests and imaginations. Over and over again, girls are sold sex appeal. Boys are sold adventure and hero worship.)
all for Rey, and Rey for all
So I want to talk about two questions tonight. The first one is, is art a luxury? Is it only a luxury or does it do something for us beyond that? And the second question is, is there a way that you can create a situation in which the arts flourish. If you think they’re important, perhaps you should be encouraging them in some way. So those are the two things I’m going to address: now to address those I have to come round it in quite a long way around. Essentially I think we need to rethink how we talk about culture: rethink what we think it does for us and what it actually is. We have a complete confusion about that. It’s very interesting. If you talk to 20 scientists – and this is the experiment I’ve done by the way – and say to them, ‘what do you think science does?’, they pretty much all agree. You’ll get 20 versions of a very similar answer. It’s to do with understanding something about the world. If you talk to 20 artists and you say to them, ‘what do you think art does?’ you will probably get about fifteen different answers. And there’ll be a couple of repeats. So here we all are engaged in the creative industries, but at the centre of this is a subject that none of us really have a very clear idea about. What are we doing when we make art, and what are we doing when we consume it? So I’m going to start with a definition of culture. This is treading on very thin ice because a lot of people have attempted this and a lot have failed. So I’m going to make a quite narrow definition of culture. And I’m going to call culture the creative arts. But I’m going to make a very broad definition of what art is. And my definition is quite simply art is everything that you don’t have to do.
I recently received news that an incubator I worked on while on sabbatical in Colombia has gotten institutional support from the Universidad Sur Colombiana. this is great news. This means that the “let’s make a game” game can startup in the town where I was born. the first cohort is made up of first-year students who are not yet 18 years old. they have precious little support, and there are learning materials in spanish that I have to track down. it will give me a professional reason to keep visiting Colombia.
the students call my by the honorific “ingeniero” because the semillero is located within the engineering department. I’ve tried to get them to call me “diseñador” instead, which is my earned title.
“We’re the reason we can’t have nice things on the internet” is a must read article by Whitney Phillips about online harassment with suggestions on how to start solving the problem.
Be sure to also check out her book This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture
today, a google search with the search terms “internet of object oriented ontology things” revealed links to others who have been exploring this mashup. it will be interesting to read the thoughts of these authors to see how they compare to the ones I dreamed up for IoOOT. I’m tagging these as speculations for Casa Jasmina Teodor Mitew, Do Objects Dream of an Internet of Things? (2014) Abstract: …
today, a google search with the search terms “internet of object oriented ontology things” revealed links to others who have been exploring this mashup. it will be interesting to read the thoughts of these authors to see how they compare to the ones I dreamed up for IoOOT. I’m tagging these as speculations for Casa Jasmina
Teodor Mitew, Do Objects Dream of an Internet of Things? (2014) Abstract: This paper develops the notion of heteroclite sociable objects in the context of the emerging internet of things, and examines their transformative effect for understandings of sociability and agency. The notion of sociable objects attempts to capture the heterogeneous identity-shift occurring when heretofore obscure and mute objects ranging from toasters to thermostats acquire the agencies to leave semantically distinct traces online, and detour their human interlocutors into an object-mediated entanglement. Using a toolkit drawn from actor network theory and object oriented ontology, the paper discusses several examples illustrating the case for new parameters of sociability, better suited to a materiality acquiring conversational and anticipatory agencies.
Oliver Smith, IOOOO (Internet Of Object Oriented Ontologies), Introduction: What is the experience of a thermometer? If we take the ‘?’ outlined in ‘Alien Phenomenology, or What It’s Like To Be a Thing’ by Ian Bogost, we might say that it’s aware (in some sense) of the hook it’s hung on, or the wall or table it rests against or on, the temperature acting on its mercury (or other liquid) and the hands that touch it to angle it for reading. Localised experience, as with most ‘things’.Now, what is the experience of a thermometer that is part of the ‘Internet of Things’, the growing collection of sensors, processors and actuators networked together around the world? (e.g. http://sensorist.com/hardware) This would, assuming it had a similar form factor have a similar experience, although it’s unlikely to be touched to be read, or have a human readable display as part of it – this would be done remotely, over the network.
Eric Kingbury, The Internet of Things and Object Oriented Ontology (2014) Extract:Anyway, seemingly unrelated ideas and/or events that occur closely together in time are interesting. And often have connections. I have been thinking for some time about two contemporary ideas/events: the Internet of Things and Object-Oriented Ontology. I don’t know that they’ve ever been explicitly connected (certainly someone else has put two and two together?), but either way, it’s worth exploring.
the entry by Teodor Mitew is a long read, and is likely the most fruitful. they all serve to remind me that some ideas call out to be thought, and are not particular to, nor owned by any one person. they also serve to remind me that I’m not the first to have these thoughts, even if I arrived at them on my own.