McLuhan Centre Spring Program Week 1: Monday Night Seminar, April 4; Workshop, April 5; New Explorations Group, April 6
CASTING A VISION – Is the future of the future the present?
Inaugural Spring Season Seminar
MONDAY, 4 APRIL, 2016, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
With Marc Glassman, Roberto Dante Martella, David Rokeby
MARC GLASSMAN is an arts journalist, film programmer, teacher, bookseller and cultural impresario. The recipient of the Toronto Arts Award in literature in 2000 and the Tom Berner Prize for his support of independent filmmaking in 2003, he is an Adjunct Professor at Ryerson University’s Masters of Fine Arts in Documentary Media programme and the Artistic Director of the festival Pages UnBound as well as its fall and spring series (formerly This Is Not A Reading Series) a multidisciplinary project that explores the creative process in literature. @GlassmanMarc
ROBERTO DANTE MARTELLA is the owner of grano in Toronto. Over the years grano has been proclaimed by Toronto Life, as celebrating all things Italian from the language to the linguine, this latter the title of the Italian language classes which grano has offered for the past 25 years. He is a graduate of the University of Toronto with fluency in English, French and Italian and a working knowledge of Spanish. He has studied Japanese. Cultural initiatives at grano include the grano series, the grano sessions, Language and Linguine Italian Language Lessons, Ben McNally Authors’ Evening and numerous socio-cultural events. Cavaliere della Repubblica Italiana and a Jane Jacobs Prize recipient. @grano1986
DAVID ROKEBY is an artist who works with a variety of digital media to explore the impacts these media are having on contemporary human lives. Rokeby’s early work Very Nervous System (1982-1991) was a pioneering work of interactive art, translating physical gestures into interactive sound environments. He has exhibited and lectured extensively internationally and has received numerous international awards including a Governor General’s Award and the Prix Ars Electronica Golden Nica for Interactive Art. @Drokeby
Canadian artists Lewis Kaye and David Rokeby were commissioned to create site-specific works at the McLuhan Program in Culture and Technology. As the framework of the installation they drew from Marshall McLuhan’s book Through the Vanishing Point: Space in Poetry and Painting (coauthored by Harley Parker), 1968, which explores the way electronic media fragments the homogenous experience of space. Click on link to view the installation: http://www.vimeo.com/13743773
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
WORKSHOP – INTERACTIVE MEDIA LAB
TUESDAY, 5 APRIL, 6:00 – 9:00 PM
With Mark Chignell and Andrea Wilkinson, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto
Living with Dementia. Re-engaging through Ambient Augmenting Activities The Interactive Media Lab carries out innovative design informed by applied cognitive psychology and human factors engineering. How can redesign of environments and activities improve the quality of life for people living with dementia? In this workshop, we will explore the challenges of engaging people with dementia, managing their behaviours, and creating meaningful activities that they can participate in without continuous support. We will introduce some of the ambient activities developed with an industry partner (Ambient Activity), and discuss issues around designing for dementia. Our goal is to encourage an exchange of ideas and expertise between humanists, scientists, designers, and stakeholders.
This workshops is open to all within and outside academia. REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
NEW EXPLORATIONS GROUP
WEDNESDAY, 6 APRIL, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
NARCOTIC MEDIA: ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY AS THE “GENITAL STAGE” OF MEDIA EVOLUTION
How do we account for the contemporary western interest in the “body” and in various techniques of bodily and emotional equilibrium, which have come to supplement the new era of technological innovation with a “new age” of ancient consciousness? In this session, we enter a global YouTube community, which, through whispers, crinkle noises, and roleplaying,
seeks to engender the peculiar cognitive euphoria known as Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response (ASMR).
The above was quoted in “Marshall McLuhan, Author, Dies; Declared ‘Medium Is the Message'” by Alden Whitman, The New York Times, January 1, 1981
In an article titled “Canadian TV is a place of squalor and neglect”, Toronto Globe & Mail TV critic John Doyle laments the current sad state of Canadian television thus:-
“I’m surprised it took him [CRTC chairman Jean-Pierre Blais] so long to recognize that Canadian TV execs are extremely rich and don’t care much about fulfilling their mandated obligations to the Canadian culture. It’s a lucrative racket. If we see television as a landscape filled with a variety of buildings and edifices, then Canadian commercial TV execs are slum landlords, getting rich by bilking pitiful tenants. What they own and manage, in terms of Canadian content, is a place of squalor and neglect. A slum”. ( http://goo.gl/h2LY6G )
The situation was not always that bad and a recent Toronto Star article by Ed Conroy recalls “six great examples of trail-blazing Toronto TV shows which augured the internet age,” that “not only foretold much of what would come to pass, but also trained us how to best prepare for this new media revolution”. They were: Media Circus, TVOntario (which hosted intellectuals such as McLuhan and Northrop Frye); Free For All, Citytv (co-founded by Moses Znaimer, who was its CEO); Bits & Bytes, TVOntario; Speaker’s Corner, Citytv (a Moses Znaimer innovation); Prisoners of Gravity, TVOntario; streetNOISE, YTV (see https://goo.gl/mDs48C )
As the examples just listed suggest, Moses Znaimer was responsible for more than a little of the creative Canadian TV of the 1970s and ’80s and he was very much influenced and inspired by Marshall McLuhan’s commentaries on TV, which though not uncritical of the medium, nevertheless took it seriously as a medium worth studying and writing about, as comments like these suggest:-
- “The TV camera has no shutter. It does not deal with aspects or facets of objects in high resolution. It is a means of direct pick-up by the electrical groping over surfaces”. – Arts in society,Volume 3, 1964, p. 242
- “The inner trip is not the sole prerogative of the LSD traveler; it’s the universal experience of TV watchers”. – Playboy interview, 1969
- “The discarnate TV user lives in a world between fantasy and dream, and is in a typically hypnotic state, which is the ultimate form and level of participation”. – “A Last Look at the Tube.” New York Magazine, 17 March 1978, p. 45-48
- “TV is not good at covering single events. It needs a ritual, a rhythm, and a pattern…[TV] tends to foster patterns rather than events”. – The Education of Mike McManus, TVOntario, December 28 1977
- “The mosaic form of the TV image demands participation and involvement in depth, of the whole being, as does the sense of touch”. (p. 334, Understanding Media, 1964)
Far from becoming an obsolesced medium like radio, TV has evolved and still holds enormous influence, its reach having been extended by the Internet and streaming technologies. Some of McLuhan’s probes about TV are still useful.
Moses Znaimer as Television Innovator
There is no question that Moses Znaimer has been an innovative TV producer, entrepreneur and executive, though not much on the creative side as a TV actor, presenter or director, as this short, but incomplete bio, which does not cover his post-CITY career with Zoomer Media, tells us:
After graduation [McGill and Harvard] he accepted a job at the CBC, directing, producing, and hosting several shows from 1965 to 1969. Znaimer quit the CBC in 1969, and launched into private broadcasting. At that time all the VHF licenses in Toronto had been taken, so he founded the city’s first UHF channel, CITY, Channel 79 (later 57), in 1972. The unique programming of CITY has been Znaimer’s primary contribution to the world of broadcasting, and its influence has now been felt worldwide.
The success of CITY prompted Toronto media conglomerate CHUM to purchase the station in 1981. With a much larger budget, Znaimer went on to found several other television stations starting with MuchMusic in 1984, Canada’s first 24-hour music station. The idea was copied with a French-language station, MusiquePlus, based in Montréal, in 1986. Since the 1980s Znaimer has been instrumental in shaping the face of Canadian television, launching or helping to direct well over two dozen television stations in Canada and many other parts of the world. His unique style of broadcasting, the “Participatory, Interactive, Storefront, Studioless, Television Operating System”, sets all CHUM-CITY stations apart from more traditional media sources. It has always been Znaimer’s goal to create television that reflects those who watch it, and every station goes to great lengths to be able to include as many of the different cultural, ethnic, and diverse programs and personalities found in Toronto and all over Canada as possible. (Source: http://goo.gl/QjvSm1 )
There is also no question that he was influenced by Marshall McLuhan, as he has told the world many times. Where Znaimer has run into controversy and criticism is in his theorizing about TV in general, and especially with his comparisons of TV with print in his 3-hour epic manifesto “TVTV: The Television Revolution” (1995), which has been contested and mostly dismissed. This was a 3-part televised series by ChumCity Production in association with the CBC televised on CBC 1995. In it Znaimer summarized his theories of TV production thus:
- TV is the triumph of the image over the printed word.
- The true nature of television is flow, not show; process, not conclusion.
- As global television expands, the demand for local programming increases.
- The best TV tells me what happened to me, today.
- TV is as much about the people bringing you the story as the story itself.
- In the past, TV’s chief operating skill was political. In the future, it will have to be mastery of the craft itself.
- Print created illiteracy. TV is democratic. Everybody gets it.
- TV creates immediate consensus, subject to immediate change.
- There never was a mass audience, except by compulsion.
- Television is not a problem to be managed, but an instrument to be played. (Source: http://www.media-studies.ca/articles/znaimer.htm )
Marshall Soules on his media-studies.ca site discusses Znaimer’s ideas about TV and provides links to some of the criticisms of TVTV: The Television Revolution here: http://www.media-studies.ca/articles/znaimer.htm .
The following 3.5-minute video provides an overview of TVTV: The Television Revolution”, which was broadcast on CBC TV on Sunday, April 9, 1995. Interestingly, the opening sequence of the program imitates Kubrick’s Dawn of Man opening to his great film 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), but instead of discovering a mysterious black obelisk, the humanoid apes of the sequence discover an old-fashioned tube TV set from which the image and voice of Moses Znaimer soon emanates.
This article by Marshall McLuhan was co-authored by George B. Leonard and was published in LOOK magazine, February 21, 1967, pp. 23-25. It is remarkably prescient about the changes imposed on education by new electronic media at that time (TV, radio, movies, recordings in the 1960s) and still bears lessons for educators in the digital 21st century. Thanks to Dr. Norm Friesen for posting this on his blog.
The future of education: The class of 1989
BY MARSHALL McLUHAN AND GEORGE B. LEONARD
from: LOOK magazine, February 21, 1967. pp. 23-25.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS [from: p. 24]
Marshall McLuhan is perhaps the most provocative and controversial thinker of this generation. His books, such as Understanding Media, have challenged many established notions about man and civilization. Now director of the Center for Culture and Technology at the University of Toronto, Professor McLuhan next fall will take the $100,000-a-year Albert Schweitzer Chair in the Humanities at Fordham University in New York.
George B. Leonard, West Coast Editorial Manager and senior editor for LOOK, has received more national awards for education writing than anyone in the history of magazine journalism. Leonard often serves as an educational consultant on both the East and West Coast and has a book on education in progress. The authors’ present collaboration grew from a series of intensive discussions in San Francisco and Toronto.
[p. 23] THE TIME IS COMING, if it is not already here, when children can learn far more, far faster in the outside world than within schoolhouse walls. “Why should I go back to school and interrupt my education?” the high-school dropout asks. His question is impudent but to the point. The modern urban environment is packed with energy and information –diverse, insistent, compelling. Four-year-olds, as school innovators are fond of saying, may spend their playtimes discussing the speed, range and flight characteristics of jet aircraft, only to return to a classroom and “string some more of those old beads.” The 16-year-old who drops out of school may be risking his financial future, but he is not necessarily lacking in intelligence. One of the unexpected statistics of recent years comes from Dr. Louis Bright, Associate U.S. Commissioner of Education for Research. His studies show that, in large cities where figures are available, dropouts have higher average IQ scores than high-school graduates.
This danger signal is only one of many now flashing in school systems throughout the world. The signals say that something is out of phase, that most present-day schools may be lavishing vast and increasing amounts of time and energy preparing students for a world that no longer exists. Though this is a time of educational experiments, the real reforms that might be expected have as yet touched only a small proportion of our schools. In an age when even such staid institutions as banks and insurance companies have been altered almost beyond recognition, today’s typical classroom –in physical layout, method and content of instruction– still resembles the classroom of 30 or more years ago.
Resistance to change is understandable and perhaps unavoidable in an endeavor as complex as education, dealing as it does with human lives. But the status quo may not endure much longer. The demands, the very nature of this age of new technology and pervasive electric circuitry, barely perceived because so close at hand, will shape education’s future. By the time this year’s babies have become 1989’s graduates (if college “graduation” then exists), schooling as we now know it may be only a memory.
Mass education is a child of a [p. 25] mechanical [next page] age. It grew up along with the production line. It reached maturity just at that historical moment when Western civilization had attained its final extreme of fragmentation and specialization, and had mastered the linear technique of stamping out products in the mass.
It was this civilization’s genius to manipulate matter, energy and human life by breaking every useful process down into its functional parts, then producing any required number of each. Just as shaped pieces of metal became components of a locomotive, human specialists become components of the great social machine.
In this setting, education’s task was fairly simple: decide what the social machine needs, then turn out people who match those needs. The school’s function was not so much to encourage people to keep exploring, learning and, therefore, changing throughout life as to slow and control those very processes of personal growth and change. Providing useful career or job skills was only a small part of this educational matching game. All students, perhaps more so in the humanities than the sciences and technologies, were furnished standard “bodies of knowledge,” vocabularies, concepts and ways of viewing the world. Scholarly or trade journals generally held a close check on standard perceptions in each special field.
Specialization and standardization produced close resemblance and, therefore, hot competition between individuals. Normally, the only way a person could differentiate himself from the fellow specialists next to him was by doing the same thing better and faster. Competition, as a matter of fact, became the chief motive force in mass education, as in society, with grades and tests of all sorts gathering about them a power and glory all out of proportion to their quite limited function as learning aids.
Then, too, just as the old mechanical production line pressed physical materials into preset and unvarying molds, so mass education tended to treat students as objects to be shaped, manipulated. “Instruction” generally meant pressing information onto passive students. Lectures, the most common mode of instruction in mass education, called for very little student involvement. This mode, one of the least effective ever devised by man, served well enough in an age that demanded only a specified
fragment of each human being’s whole abilities. There was, however, no warranty on the human products of mass education.
That age has passed. More swiftly than we can realize, we are moving into an era dazzlingly different. Fragmentation, specialization and sameness will be replaced by wholeness, diversity and, above all, a deep involvement.
Already, mechanized production lines are yielding to electronically controlled, computerized devices that are quite capable of producing any number of varying things out of the same material. Even today, most U.S. automobiles are, in a sense, custom produced. Figuring all possible combinations of styles, options and colors available on a certain new family sports car, for example, a computer expert came up with 25 million different versions of it for a buyer. And that is only a beginning. When automated electronic production reaches full potential, it will be just about as cheap to turn out a million differing objects as a million exact duplicates. The only limits on production and consumption will be the human imagination.
Similarly, the new modes of instantaneous, long-distance human communication –radio, telephone, television–are linking the world’s people in a vast net of electric circuitry that creates a new depth and breadth of personal involvement in events and breaks down the old, traditional boundaries that made specialization possible.
The very technology that now cries out for a new mode of education creates means for getting it. But new educational devices, though important, are not as central to tomorrow’s schooling as are new roles for student and teacher. Citizens of the future will find much less need for sameness of function or vision. To the contrary, they will be rewarded for diversity and originality. Therefore, any real or imagined need for standardized classroom presentation may rapidly fade; the very first casualty of the present-day school system may well be the whole business of teacher-led instruction as we now know it.
Tomorrow’s educator will be able to set about the exciting task of creating a new kind of learning environment. Students will rove freely through this place of learning, be it contained in a room, a building, a cluster of buildings or (as we shall see later) an even larger schoolhouse. There will be no distinction between work and play in the new school, for the student will be totally involved. Responsibility for the effectiveness of learning will be shifted from student to teacher.
As it is now, the teacher has a ready-made audience. He is assured of a full house and a long run. Those students who don’t like the show get flunking grades. If students are free to move anywhere they please, however, there is an entirely new situation, and the quality of the experience called education will change drastically. The educator then will naturally have a high stake in generating interest and involvement for his students.
To be involved means to be drawn in, to interact. To go on interacting, the student must get some-where. In other words, the student and the learning environment (a person, a group of people, a book, a programmed course, an electronic learning console or whatever) must respond to each other in a pleasing and purposeful interplay. When a situation of involvement is set up, the student finds it hard to drag himself away.
The notion that free-roving students would loose chaos on a school comes only from thinking of education in the present mode –as teaching rather than learning– and from thinking of learning as some-thing that goes on mostly in classrooms. A good example of education by free interaction with a responsive environment already exists, right before our eyes. Watch a child learn to talk or, for an even more striking case, watch a five-year-old learn a new language. If the child moves to a foreign country and is allowed to play intensely and freely with neighborhood children-with no language “instruction” whatever-he will learn the new tongue, ac-cent free, in two or three months. if instruction is attempted, however, the child is in trouble.
Imagine, if you will, what would happen if we set the five-year-old down in a classroom, allowed him to leave his seat only at prescribed times, presented only a few new words at a sitting, made him learn each group before going on to the next, drilled him on pronunciation, corrected his “mistakes,” taught him grammar, gave him homework assignments, tested him and-wont of all-convinced him that the whole thing was work rather than play. In such a case, the child might learn the new language as slowly and painfully as do teenagers or adults. Should an adult try to learn a language by intense play and interaction, he would probably do much better than be would in a classroom, but still fall short of a young child’s performance. Why? The adult has already learned the lessons that the old schooling teaches so well: inhibition, self-consciousness, categorization, rigidity and the deep conviction that learning is hard and painful work.
Indeed, the old education gives us a sure-fire prescription for creating dislike of any type of human activity, no matter how appealing it might seem. To stop children from reading comic books (which might be ill-advised), you would only have to assign and test them on their content every week.
Learning a new language is a giant feat, compared to which mastering most of the present school curriculum should prove relatively simple. Long before 1989, all sorts of equipment will be available for producing responsive environments in all the subject matter now commonly taught, and more. Programmed instruction, for example, creates high involvement, since it draws the student along in a sort of dialogue, letting him respond at frequent intervals. Programming at its best lets the student learn commonly-agreed-upon cultural techniques and knowledge-reading, spelling, arithmetic, geography and the like-in his own time, at his own pace. But present-day programming may soon seem crude in light of current developments. Computers will be able to understand students’ written or spoken responses. (Already, they understand typed responses.) When these computers are hooked into learning consoles, the interplay between student and learning program can become even more intense.
When computers are properly used, in fact, they are almost certain to increase individual diversity. A worldwide network of computers will make all of mankind’s factual knowledge available to students everywhere in a matter of minutes or seconds. Then, the human brain will not have to serve as a repository of specific facts, and the uses of memory will shift in the new education, breaking the timeworn, rigid chains of memory may have greater priority than forging new links. New materials may be learned just as were the great myths of [p. 25] past cultures-as fully integrated systems that resonate on several levels and share the qualities of poetry and song.
Central school computers can also help keep track of students as they move freely from one activity to another, whenever moment-by-moment or year-by-year records of students’ progress are needed. This will wipe out even the administrative justification for schedules and regular periods, with all their anti-educational effects, and will free teachers to get on with the real business of education. Even without computers, however, experimental schools (see The Moment of Learning, LOOK, December 27, 1966) are now finding that fixed schedules and restrictions on students’ movements are artificial and unnecessary.
Television will aid students in exploring and interacting with a wide-ranging environment. It will, for example, let them see into the atom or out into space; visualize their own brainwaves; create artistic patterns of light and sound; become involved with unfamiliar old or new ways of living, feeling, perceiving; communicate with other learners, wherever in the world they may be.
Television will be used for involvement, for two-way communication, whether with other people or other environmental systems. It will most certainly not be used to present conventional lectures, to imitate the old classroom. That lectures frequently do appear on educational television points up mankind’s common practice of driving pell-mell into the future with eyes fixed firmly on the rearview mirror. The content of each brand new medium thus far has always been the ordinary stuff of the past environment.
The student of the future will truly be an explorer, a researcher, a huntsman who ranges through the new educational world of electric circuitry and heightened human interaction just as the tribal huntsman ranged the wilds. Children, even little children, working alone or in groups, will seek their own solutions to problems that perhaps have never been solved or even conceived as problems. It is necessary here to distinguish this explore story activity from that of the so-called “discovery method,” championed by some theorists, which is simply a way of leading children around to standard perceptions and approved solutions.
Future educators will value, not fear, fresh approaches, new solutions. Among their first tasks, in fact, may be unlearning the old, unacknowledged taboos on true originality. After that, they may well pick up a new driving style in which they glance into the rearview mirror when guidance from the past is needed but spend far more time looking forward into the unfamiliar, untested country of the present and future.
In a sense, the mass-produced student of the present and past always turned out to be a commodity-replaceable, expendable. The new student who makes his own educational space, his own curriculum and even develops many of his own learning methods will be unique, irreplaceable.
What will motivate the new student? Wide variations between individuals will make competition as we now know it irrelevant and, indeed, impossible. Unstandardized life will not provide the narrow measures needed for tight competition, and schools will find it not only unnecessary but nearly impossible to give ordinary tests or grades. Motivation will come from accomplishment itself; no one has to be forced to play. Form and discipline will spring from the very nature of the matter being explored, just as it does in artistic creation. If the student of the future may be compared with the child at play, he also resembles the artist at work.The little red schoolhouse will become the little round schoolhouse.
A strange dilemma seems to arise: It appears that, with the new modes of learning, all the stuff of present-day education can be mastered much more quickly and easily than ever before. Right now, good programmed instruction is cutting the time for learning certain basic material by one-half or one-third. What will students do with all the time that is going to be gained? The problem is not a real one. With students constantly researching and exploring, each discovery will on up a new area for study. There is no limit on learning.
We are only beginning to realize what a tiny slice of human possibilities we now educate. In fragmenting all of existence, Western civilization hit upon one aspect, the literate and rational, to develop at the expense of the rest. Along with this went a lopsided development of one of the senses, the visual. Such personal and sensory specialization was useful in a mechanical age, but is fast becoming outmoded. Education will be more concerned with training the senses and perceptions than with stuffing brains. And this will be at no loss for the “intellect.” Studies show a high correlation between sensory, bodily development –now largely neglected– and intelligence.
Already, school experimenters are teaching written composition with tape recorders (just as students play with these marvelous devices) in an attempt to retrain the auditory sense, to recapture the neglected rhythms of speech. Already, experimental institutes are working out new ways to educate people’s neglected capacities to relate, to feel, to sense, to create. Future schooling may well move into many unexplored domains of human existence. People will learn much in 1989 that today does not even have a commonly accepted name.
Can we view this future, the hard and fast of it? Never, for it will always come around a corner we never noticed, take us by surprise. But studying the future helps us toward understanding the present. And the present offers us glimpses, just glimpses: Seven-year-olds (the slowest of them) sitting at electronic consoles finishing off, at their own pace, all they’ll ever need in the basic skills of reading, writing and the like: eight-year-olds playing games that teach what we might call math or logic in terms of, say, music and the sense of touch; nine-year-olds joining together in large plastic tents to build environments that give one the experience of living in the Stone Age or in a spaceship or in an even more exotic place-say, 19th-century America: ten-year-olds interacting with five-year olds, showing them the basics (now unknown) of human relations or of the relationships between physical movements and mental states. In all of this, the school –that is, an institution of learning confined to a building or buildings– can continue to hold a central position only if it changes fast enough to keep pace with the seemingly inevitable changes in the outside world. The school experience can well become so rich and compelling that there will be no dropouts, only determined drop-ins. Even so, the walls between school and world will continue to blur.
Already it is becoming clear that the main “work” of the future will be education. that people will not so much earn a living as learn a living. Close to 30 million people in the U.S. are now pursuing some form of adult education, and the number shoots skyward. Industry and the military, as well as the arts and sciences, are beginning to consider education their main business.
The university is fast becoming not an isolated bastion but an integral part of the community. Eventually, nearly every member of a community may be drawn into its affairs. The university of the future could offer several degrees of “membership,” from everyday full-time participation to subscriptions to its “news service,” which would be received in the home on electronic consoles.
Already, though not many journalists or college presidents realize it, the biggest news of our times is coming from research in the institutions of higher learning –new scientific discoveries, new ways of putting together the webs of past and current history, new means for apprehending and enjoying the stuff of sensory input, of interpersonal relations, of involvement with all of life.
The world communications net, the all-involving linkage of electric circuitry, will grow and become more sensitive. It will also develop new modes of feedback so that communication can become dialogue instead of monologue. It will breach the wall between “in” and “out” of school. It will join all people everywhere. When this has happened, we may at last realize that our place of learning is the world itself, the entire planet we live on. The little red schoolhouse is already well on its way toward becoming the little round schoolhouse.
Someday, all of us will spend our lives in our own school, the world. And education –in the sense of learning to love, to grow, to change– can become not the woeful preparation for some job that makes us less than we could be but the very essence, the joyful whole of existence itself. END
FULL CITATION: McLuhan, M., & Leonard, G. B. (1967). The future of education: The class of 1989. Look, February 21, 23-24. Online Source http://learningspaces.org/files/mcluhanfs.html
Toronto, October 14-16, 2016 CALL FOR PAPERS
Deadline for Submission: June 30, 2016
The Coach House Institute at the Faculty of Information (iSchool) University of Toronto invites proposals for the international conference “The Toronto School: Then | Now | Next”. The conference will be held at the University of Toronto, October 14-16, 2016.Main Theme Between the 1930s and 1970s, a community of intellectuals coalesced in the city of Toronto to discuss and investigate communication as a complex, interdisciplinary process that structures individuals, cultures, and societies. This scholarly community, that emerged in and around the University of Toronto achieved international recognition for its innovative and trans-disciplinary approaches to the evolving societal challenges. “The Toronto School: Then | Now | Next” Conference aims to bring together international scholars to engage in dialogue on the origins, rise, decline and the rebirth of the so-called Toronto School. Discussion will focus on its pioneers, champions but also its critics. It will examine the extent to which the Toronto School has provided a legacy that continues to offer insight on crucial and systemic issues facing contemporary society across various disciplines.
Suggested Topics for Paper Submissions General areas of interest include, but are not limited to, the following topics:
- New understandings, approaches, comparative assessments of the major figures associated with the golden age of the Toronto School, including for instance Eric Havelock, Harold Innis, Marshall McLuhan, Northrop Frye, Edmund Carpenter, Walter J. Ong, Tom Easterbrook, Jaqueline Tyrwhitt, Carl Williams, Glenn Gould, and Harley Parker.
- Innovative interpretations of theories in their historical context, and ideas emanating from the School and its intellectual tradition.
- Associations between core theories/ideas of the Toronto School of Communication and other schools/traditions, in the Humanities, in the Social Sciences and contemporary culture.
- Germination of media studies in 1950s Toronto.
- Canadian approaches to communications study and their impact on the twentieth-century intellectual debate internationally.
- Role of communication in the history of civilization, and in the structuring of human cultures and the mind.
- Time-biased and space-biased dialectical approaches applied to cultural ecology.
- Sensorial, cognitive, and behavioural implications of the medium.
- Interplay of orality and literacy in today’s media environment.
- Poetic, symbolic, and mythical thinking in contemporary cultures.
- Aesthetic forms as a mode of critique and interpretation of cultural artifacts.
- Interpretation, extension, and application of the theories central to thinkers from the Toronto School.
Guide for authors – Authors are invited to submit their abstracts by June 30, 2016 using exclusively Easychair at: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=torontoschool2016
Abstracts of between 1,000 and 1,500 words, in English, and presented in pdf format should be uploaded into EasyChair along with: title of proposed presentation, five keywords, and for each author their name, title, position, name affiliated institution and a short biographical statement (40-50 words each). In addition details for the corresponding author should be provided. In case of acceptance, author(s) will be asked also to provide a condensed abstract (200 words for inclusion in the program), and to present the paper at the Conference (see registration deadline for authors).
NB: The submission of an abstract must be on the understanding that if the paper is accepted at least one author will register for and attend the conference. The costs of attending the conference including registration fees, travel, accommodation and other expenses, are the responsibility of the presenter or their institutions. A condensed abstract of each paper and a biographical statement of presenting author(s) will be published in the Conference Program.
Peer Review Process – All submissions will be reviewed by the Programme Committee (see Conference website for details).
Paper Awards – All accepted papers will be considered by the Programme Committee for one of three Outstanding Paper Awards (1,000 CAD $ each), including an award for Outstanding PhD Student Paper. Please indicate with your submission if the primary author is a PhD student. The Outstanding Paper Awards will be announced at the closing session of the Conference.
Panel Presentations – The language of the Conference is English. Accepted papers will grouped into sessions including 3 to 4 papers focused on similar themes. Each presentation must not exceed 20 minutes; each panel will include a 20-minute Q&A, following the last presentation.
Conference Proceedings – Full papers are not required in advance, but are invited for submission following the event to be considered for inclusion in the Conference Proceedings, which will be published in 2017. Final original unpublished papers between 5,000 and 6,000 words, should be submitted in English using U.S. spelling, in APA style, and in .doc or docx format, by December 15, 2016. All attendees will receive a copy of the Proceedings when it is published.
Registration Fees – Registration information will be available at the Conference website (www.thetorontoschool.ca). In order to be included in the final program the deadline for authors’ registration is August 30, 2016. Reduced hotel room rates will be available to conference attendees. Conference registration opens April 1, 2016.
Important Dates – Early Bird Registration Opens: April 1, 2016 Deadline for abstract submission: June 30,2016 Notification of acceptance: July 30, 2016 Draft Programme Published: August 1, 2016 Registration deadline for authors: August 30, 2016 Late registration begins: September 1, 2016 Final Programme Published: September 1, 2016
Information – Conference Coordinator, Dr. Paolo Granata (McLuhan Centenary Fellow, Visiting Professor University of Toronto). For more information about the Conference visit: www.thetorontoschool.ca . Send email correspondence to: firstname.lastname@example.org
We look forward to welcoming you to Toronto and “The Toronto School: Then | Now | Next” !
DOWNLOAD A PDF OF THIS CFP FROM: http://uoft.me/toronto-school
Written By MARCO ADRIA – Published: 24 February, 2016
How today’s modern advances might be seen through the eyes of Canada’s most famous media theorist
This is the year of augmented reality. In 2016, manufacturers, beginning with Microsoft, will offer products that will allow us to see virtual objects as if they were part of the material world. The uses of augmented reality for consumers are likely to include videogames and enhanced movies. But augmented reality will also allow businesses to test and adapt new products before final production. Imagine putting on a headset and viewing a new electric car from different angles and even starting it up for a virtual test drive — all before the car is manufactured.
Marshall McLuhan was an international media theory rock star, even managing to make his way into a Playboy feature interview and a Woody Allen movie over the course of his life. Born in Edmonton in 1911, he had much to say about new media. During his lifetime, the radio, television, and the computer all went from imaginative fancy to wide use. We consider Marshall’s insights about understanding and using media predictive, because they can be applied even to those media, including augmented reality, that were invented long after his death in 1980.
If Marshall were still with us, he might describe our time as a screen culture. Screens are all around us. We view and respond to hundreds of messages, both text and images, each day or, for some of us, each waking hour. Marshall often referred to the transition from a print culture, which began with the invention of the printing press in 1440, to a culture of electricity, which he judged to have begun with the invention of the telegraph in the 19th century. While a print culture was individualistic and critical, reflected in the practice of private and silent reading, an electric culture was characterized by speed, and by many things happening at once.
Marshall loved metaphors. They helped him to understand the ultimate meaning of a new medium. They also aided his public explanations. For example, for Marshall, the television screen could be understood as a mirror, and the mirror effect was first experienced by looking into still water. He reminded us that the reflection seen in water was first described in the story of the mythological figure of Narcissus. Narcissus sees his reflection in the water and believes it to be beautiful. He becomes enchanted and wants to possess this “other” person. So unsettling is the experience that he eventually kills himself by plunging a dagger into his chest.
“Narcissus oil” is still made and sold. It is a “narcotic,” a category of active components that we still use today and whose name originates from the root of the name Narcissus. The myth of Narcissus carries the lesson that observing our image in the mirror (and therefore in our screens) can have a mesmerizing effect. The effect can be psychological and neural. Narcissus has been smitten in both mind and body. Marshall describes the “numbing” effects of media in his bestselling book, Understanding Media:
“Narcissus mistook his own reflection in the water for another person. This extension of himself by mirror numbed his perceptions until he became the servomechanism of his own extended or repeated image. The nymph Echo tried to win his love with fragments of his own speech, but in vain. He was numb. He had adapted to his extension of himself and had become a closed system.” Read the rest of the article here http://goo.gl/dih4eP .
Marco Adria is Professor Emeritus, University of Alberta, and Visiting Professor, Tecnológico de Monterrey.
See Related Posts:-
Narcissus as Narcosis: A Contemporary Media Example – https://goo.gl/8PGkho
Extension, amputation, alienation & Narcissus Narcosis: McLuhan’s Concepts Applied to New Media – https://goo.gl/C2Wjs1
New Publication Announcement: The New Science of Communication: Reconsidering McLuhan’s Message for our Modern Moment
Anthony Wachs’ new book has been published and is shipping:-
By Anthony M. Wachs
November 2015 | paper | ISBN 978-0-8207-0487-6
Publisher: Duquesne University Press
“The medium is the message,” and we now live in a “global village” — much of Marshall McLuhan’s significant contributions to communication theory has been reduced to these well-known aphorisms. And while these catchphrases do indeed capture certain aspects of his thought, a fuller understanding of his vision remains remarkably incomplete. In this study, Anthony M. Wachs engages in an unconventional — and controversially orthodox — reading of McLuhan’s work on media and technology.
McLuhan proposed four laws to be used in evaluating any medium: What is enhanced or intensified? What is rendered obsolete? What is retrieved that was previously obsolesced? What happens when pressed to an extreme? In order to help the reader gain a better grasp of the problems of the “electric age,” Wachs details the connection between McLuhan’s views on technology, media, and communications, and the classical arts of grammar, logic, and rhetoric. He proposes that these laws have been understudied, misunderstood, and underutilized, and that, while they are indeed grounded in ancient modes of understanding that Bacon and Vico referred to as the “new science,” they are uniquely helpful in understanding our contemporary moment in time.
The New Science of Communication offers an original contribution to scholarship on McLuhan and media ecology, as scholars interested in the interactions of media with human feeling, thought, and behavior have forced modern presuppositions onto their readings of McLuhan. Wachs, however, corrects this misreading by uniquely combining communication and media, and restoring classical and medieval communication theory as an alternative to modern rationalist theories. He argues that this restoration provides a way to think through the implications of living in our own electronic age in a more balanced way, reestablishing the importance of humanities-based education within the twenty-first century. (Information source http://goo.gl/WFWj3t )
ANTHONY M. WACHS is assistant professor and director of forensics in the Department of Languages, Literature, and Communication Studies at Northern State University. He is the associate editor of Discourse: Journal of the Speech Communication Association of South Dakota, which received the Central States Communication Association’s Outstanding Journal Award for 2014.
By Peter Robb, The Ottawa Citizen
For three decades the University of Toronto was the home of two towering intellects: Marshall McLuhan and Northrop Frye.
It was, according to B.W. Powe, whose 2014 book Marshall McLuhan and Northrop Frye: Apocalypse and Alchemy (University of Toronto Press) followed their careers, a special time and place in Canadian intellectual life.
The two men, Powe said in an interview in advance of an event sponsored by the Ottawa International Writers Festival on March 8, were the yin and yang of Canadian cultural thought in the latter half of the 20th century. These days, Powe, who was born in Ottawa, teaches in the English Department at York University. He is a poet, novelist, essayist and critic. He is at work founding the McLuhan Initiative for the Study of Literacies at York and is also the university’s director of the creative writing program.
“They were two pivotal geniuses in the Canadian cultural landscape. They were at the same university at the same time through 30 years. Both recognized the other’s genius. Both knew the other one was doing something of landmark importance.”Northrop Frye
ADDENDUM: MARCH 6, 2016 – Bruce Powe has requested the following corrections to be made in this essay:-
There are two errors in the Ottawa Citizen piece on my book on Marshall McLuhan and Nothrop Frye and my presentation at Carlton University that very much need addressing:
One: I am not the Creative Writing Program Coordinator at York University. I haven’t been since July 2014. The CW Coordinator is Michael Helm, a well known and much respected novelist. He’s been doing a remarkable job, and deserves the acknowledgment.
Two: I would never have said (and could never have said) Marshall McLuhan didn’t read books. He read voraciously. What I said must have been this, “His preference was for the oral.” I talked about how he listened deeply to the voices in poems. I said that his primary sensory approaches were oral-audile-tactile. And that he encouraged us to listen to the books of the world.
I would never have perpetuated the cliche and misconception that McLuhan somehow didn’t read.
In fact, he was much more of an attentive practical literary critic (following in the I.A. Richards’ line) than was Frye. Frye tended to read poems in terms of how they fit his grand theoretical scheme. McLuhan always looked closely at a poem, instructing us on its tonalities, rhythms, forms and effects.
This is important to convey. I hope these necessary corrections will be printed in the paper.
Thank you, B.W. Powe”
Powe, who was a student of both men, says that McLuhan, who was not given to praising his colleagues, said that Frye was “working on the frontier, that he was a true frontiersman. That was always a high compliment for McLuhan. That meant you were out in the wilderness thinking on your own.”
Frye said McLuhan was the greatest improviser he had ever met and was a genuine prophetic visionary.
Powe, who became very close to McLuhan’s family over the years, went to the memorial service for McLuhan at U of T’s convocation hall and “third row from the front, there was Frye. He was deaf at that point and was leaning toward the podium trying to hear what was being said with a look of extraordinary sorrow on his face because he knew that the only other one on campus that could match him with a similar level of genius was McLuhan.”
McLuhan is, of course, the man whose vision seems to have predicted our current time. The dictionary of popular culture is replete with his aphorisms.
“He did say that newspapers and books and all those phenomena based on the page and privacy and solitude, and communication through the printed word, would disappear. And when he said that in 1959, everyone thought he was some kind of heretical crank. Now, in 2016, to say that is a banality. It’s so obvious.”
McLuhan’s phrase “Breakdown Leads to Breakthrough” seems particularly apt for a time of Uber and Reddit and Airbnb.
“It was one of the eerie things about him. It seemed like he was visiting from the future. Being around him, you had the sense, sometimes, that he was mainlining something that was not immediately apparent to everyone else.”
Frye, on the other hand, was all about the book.
“In that sense, it may seem on the outside that he was a more conventional figure, but in many ways he was not. He had a great prophetic vision, which was that all the works were one book.”
That began with the Bible and extended to the novels of the second half of the 20th century.
“Don’t forget he was a United Church minister,” Powe said. “He said ‘I marry and bury students’ when asked how being a minister fit into his life” as an academic.
For all their disagreements and their extraordinary differences in personality, Frye and McLuhan forged a visionary core for Canada’s intellectual legacy, Powe believes.
“They are so well known everywhere else. I’ve lived in Spain and the priest at my wedding said ‘the global village was there between the two of you.’
“In some ways, they are our most adventurous intellectual writers, there are very few that you can put in the same territory.”
When he began his book on the two men, there was no other book written about them both.
Today McLuhan is accepted in the university world, but Frye is not, perhaps because he was so focused on literature and the primacy of the printed word, Powe said.
“In class, McLuhan seemed like he was translating the future to us instantaneously. He had an incredible ability to produce a headline. It would come out spontaneously and then he’d fall asleep.”
Frye stayed awake. When Powe was attending Frye’s lectures, Frye was riding a wave of intense popularity. His classes were full and they were very respectful discussions about literary works.Marshall McLuhan. TORONTO SUN FILES
Both men had deep spiritual convictions. McLuhan was a devout Catholic convert.
“The global village could be seen as a catholic vision. It has implications of a new kind of communion in which we are sharing information and ideas.”
Powe’s McLuhan-Frye book was one he had thought about for many years. He was also teaching a course at York University on the two men.
The mark these two men made on Powe is still fresh. He remembers both men being very funny in their classes when he attended from 1978 to 1980.
McLuhan, for example, began all his classes with a series of jokes drawn from a file that he kept to hand.
“Looking back on that time, I thought that when I was a student of theirs, this is how it would always be. This utopian space was what university would always be like.”
McLuhan and Frye did butt heads, but in the beginning, Powe said, there was mutual admiration. One of the very first people McLuhan met when he came to U of T in 1946 was Frye at a meet-and-greet party.
Conflict began to arise in 1950s and ’60s when McLuhan became such a comet of success. Frye found McLuhan’s focus on pop culture trivial.
McLuhan saw that the TV screen was going to change consciousness itself.
McLuhan’s great discovery, Powe says, was that if you removed your personal opinions, suspend judgment and try to perceive the moment, you begin to see patterns forming.
Frye saw that at the heart of all literary writing is one great vision built around one seminal question: “Who Am I?” He believed the identity question is the key to understanding all human endeavour. He also believed in the honing of the imagination to learn heightened states of awareness.
He also thought that the Bible needed to be seen as a metaphor.
Powe believes Frye “wanted to revive comprehension of the Bible beyond literalism. He thought it was dangerous to see the Bible as history.”
Today that idea would be almost revolutionary in some political circles, particularly south of the border.
Both men could have taught somewhere else, but they chose to stay in the same English department for more than 30 years.
Neither man ever had a driver’s license. Their wives did the driving.
McLuhan didn’t like watching television or reading books. His primary medium was the radio, Powe said.
“He preferred to listen. He was grudging viewer of cinema.”
Frye prized his solitude and his library. “Even when he lectured, you got the sense he was talking to himself. McLuhan wanted us to go out into the streets and listen. To understand what the new is”.
“McLuhan would never remember your name, but he knew the face. I don’t think he never knew my first name. He just called me Mr. Powe.”
Writing the book was a bit of an exorcism and a measuring stick for Powe.
“It took me this long to feel that I could measure myself with them. Now I think I have taken them on board and will move onto new work.”
Powe’s latest book is poetry and is called Decoding Dust. It doesn’t mention either man at all.
McLuhan and Frye: A Reading by B.W. Powe
When: Tuesday, March 8, 7:30 p.m.
Where: Main Floor Reading Room, MacOdrum Library, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Carleton University
Free – Information: writersfestival.org
Article Source: http://goo.gl/6PcdyC
McLuhan and Frye: A Reading by B.W. Powe: Joint Carlton University/Ottawa Literary Festival, Ottawa, March 8
McLuhan Centre Winter Program Week 6: Monday Night Seminar, Mar 7; Video Lounge, Mar 8 – Picnic in Space
CULTURE IS OUR BUSINESS – Is culture the real business of the city?
MONDAY, 7 MARCH, 2016, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
With Chantal Pontbriand, Stephen Stohn & Linda Schuyler, Jini Stolk
CHANTAL PONTBRIAND is a contemporary art curator and critic whose work is based on the exploration of questions of globalization and artistic heterogeneity. She has curated numerous international contemporary art events: exhibitions, international festivals and international conferences, mainly in photography, video, performance, dance and multimedia installation. She was a founder of “Parachute”
contemporary art magazine in 1975. After curating several major performance events and festivals, she co-founded the FIND (Festival International de Nouvelle Danse), in Montreal and was president and director from 1982 to 2003. In 2015, she was appointed CEO of MOCCA, the Museum of Canadian Contemporary Art in Toronto. @chanpont
STEPHEN STOHN & LINDA SCHUYLER is an entertainment lawyer and television producer. He is currently the president of Epitome Pictures Inc., which he and his wife Linda Schuyler founded and which was sold to DHX Media in 2014. Stephen and Linda are best known as the producers of the teen drama series “Degrassi”. For nearly 20 years, until 2009, Stephen was executive producer of the telecast of Canada’s music awards show, The Juno Awards, and during that period was a director and then Chair of Canadian Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences. Linda Schuyler who began as a teacher, is the primary creator and force of the Degrassi series and Instant Star series of teen
JINI STOLK, Research Fellow at Toronto Arts Foundation and past Chair of the Ontario Nonprofit Network, has been a leader, connector and advocate in the arts and non-profit communities. She helped create powerful collaborative organizations like ONN and Creative Trust – which became a model for capacity building in the arts – and led major producing organizations (Toronto Dance Theatre) and membership organizations. She cofounded numerous advocacy campaigns and coalitions, and chaired and served on many boards, including Centre for
Social Innovation, Toronto Arts Council, and Toronto Artscape. She has won awards for her contributions to Toronto’s cultural life, and writes on boards, and on building capacity, audiences and space for the arts at www.creativetrust.ca. @TOArtsFdn
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
TUESDAY, 8 MARCH, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
‘Picnic in Space’ film still
Picnic in Space is a rare film featuring Marshall McLuhan and his long time collaborator, Harley Parker, a Canadian artist and scholar (1967).
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
Watch a 39 second trailer to Picnic in Space below:
Location: The Coach House, 39A Queen’s Park Crescent, St. Michael’s College, University of Toronto
McLuhan Centre Winter Program Week 5: Monday Night Seminar, Feb 29; Workshop, Mar 1; New Explorations Group, Mar 2
THE ART OF URBAN LIVING – Does Beauty Matter?
MONDAY, 29 FEBRUARY, 2016, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
With Sean Martindale, Elyse Parker, Lilie Zendel
SEAN MARTINDALE is an internationally recognized, Toronto-based, artist and designer. His interventions activate public spaces to encourage engagement, often focused on ecological and social issues. His playful works question and suggest alternate possibilities for existing spaces, infrastructures and materials found in urban environments. Frequently, Martindale uses salvaged goods and live plants in
unexpected ways that prompt conversations and interaction. His projects have been featured on countless prominent sites online, and in traditional media such as print, radio, broadcast television and film. Among recent projects was Martindale’s major installation for Nuit Blanche Toronto 2015, including video collaborations with JP King.
ELYSE PARKER is a landscape architect and urban designer with responsibility for the Toronto Street Furniture program, the Toronto Walking Strategy (52 actions to make Toronto a more walkable city, including OADA), neighbourhood improvement projects and the City’s Graffiti Management Plan and StART, Toronto’s street art program, which won a Canadian National Leadership award from the Institute of Public Administration in 2015. Her particular passion is “Everyday Urbanism”, the often small interventions and design moves that build and shape cities incrementally and have an extraordinary impact on the everyday lives of the public. @TorontoComms
LILIE ZENDEL has spent over 30 years translating vision into action in the Canadian arts and culture sector. With a background in theatre performance, Lilie began her career at Toronto’s Harbourfront, where by producing over 150 events including the celebrated international World Stage theatre festival, she helped grow this emerging cultural organization into one of the country’s most celebrated performing arts venues. For more than a decade, Lilie lived in New York City where she led the Cultural Affairs section at the Canadian Consulate General. Currently, as Manager of StreetARToronto (Start), Lilie has overseen the creation of six programs that have funded over 100 public murals. @LilieZendel
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
TUESDAY, 1 MARCH, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
SARA GRIMES Faculty of Information (iSchool), University of Toronto
Special guest Andrew Feenberg, School of Communication, Simon Fraser University
Rationalizing Play: A Critical Theory of Digital Gaming – Sara Grimes researches and teaches in the areas of children’s digital media culture(s), digital game studies, critical theories of technology and play. Her current research tracks the growing phenomenon of child generated digital content in digital games and online environments, focusing on what this development means for children’s cultural rights, existing regulatory frameworks and industry standards of practice. The workshop constructs a new framework for the study of games as sites of social rationalization, applying Feenberg’s critical theory of technology.
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
NEW EXPLORATIONS GROUP
WEDNESDAY, 2 MARCH, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
(UN)POPULAR MUSIC: ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLE AND SUB-CULTURE IN ACOUSTIC SPACE
Join us with your acoustic or electric guitar, bass, keyboard, drums, bongos, etc. (or if “unmusical” just bring yourself!) to probe the nether regions of existence, wrought of the escape from the bounds of logical, visual space. This will be a night of satire, performance of the burlesque and the bizarre, and consideration of the potential for genuine counter-cultural activity in the new media environment of late capital, which itself thrives on cultural appropriation and transgression.
During the 1930’s and 1940’s two scholars working at the University of Toronto began to outline a new theory of the role played by media of communication in shaping consciousness. English-born and trained classicist Eric Havelock studied ancient Greece’s transition from an oral to a literate culture and the changes in mentality this brought about. Harold Innis, in Empire and Communications, linked the rise and fall of empires to the media they had employed – from stone and clay to papyrus, parchment and paper. In a second book published after his death, The Bias of Communication, Innis broadened his theory andproposed fundamental questions such as: What assumptions do communications media take from society and what assumptions do they contribute? What forms of power do they encourage? Marshall McLuhan, then a young English professor at the University of Toronto, was inspired by Innis and took up these questions. After he published The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man in 1962, he modestly said that his celebrated book was but a “footnote” to Innis. A series of influential works followed, notably Understanding Media, and McLuhan’s reputation spread. The University of Toronto established the Centre for Culture and Technology to further his work and keep him in Toronto. After McLuhan’s death in 1980, the university tried to close the centre, but protests from around the world and a determined local effort by McLuhan’s inheritors kept it open.
In 1987 two of these inheritors, David Olson and Derrick de Kerckhove, convened a major conference on “Orality and Literacy,” bringing together many of the scholars who had contributed to the school of thought that Havelock, Innis and McLuhan had founded. Eric Havelock was there in what proved to be the last year of his life. Walter Ong, another major contributor to this school, was expected but had to withdraw at the last minute. I attended for Ideas, establishing a temporary studio in the basement of Emmanuel College, where the conference was held, and interviewing the speakers in whatever intervals the proceedings upstairs allowed. The result was a three part Ideas series, broadcast in 1988, which I called Literacy: The Medium and the Message. “Orality and Literacy,” the conference’s title, would have better represented its contents, but I was afraid that orality might be an unfamiliar term to some listeners, and more apt to evoke thumb-sucking than non-literate ways of life. Read the rest of the commentary here: http://goo.gl/vDOkl2 ).
Thanks to Agnes Kruchio for alerting me to the availability of this newly published material on the Internet.
The participants in the programmes are as follows:
Part One: David Olson, Eric Havelock, Jan Swearingen, Derrick de Kerckhove, Jerome Bruner, Carole Feldman, Rangaswamy Narasimhan, Ann Bennet
Part Two: Brian Stock, Ivan Illich, Paul Saenger, David Olson Barry Sanders, Derrick de Kerckhove
Part Three: Eric Havelock, Ivan Illich, David Olson, David Patanayak, Suzanne de Castell, Jan Swearingen, Barry Sanders, Derrick de Kerckhove
Literacy Part One: Download NowLiteracy: The Medium and the Message Part Two
This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now
By Evan Boudreau, The Catholic Register, Feb. 19, 2016
TORONTO – Thanks to the Internet today’s youth have the power to influence systemic change on an international scale, Toronto students heard from an award-winning Filipino journalist.
“They have a bigger voice now because of the Internet,” Joseph Morong told students at Toronto’s Marshall McLuhan Catholic Secondary School Feb. 11. “So they have the power to change perspectives.”
The Internet, he said, is a way for youth to have a more powerful presence in the world than their parents were able.
“When you are young you are a little bit more open,” he said. “You don’t have a lot of prejudices that probably your parents would have.”
Morong is no stranger to prejudice. He’s spent the past three years extensively covering attempts to establish peace in the Philippines’ Mindanao region, which was originally established in the 1960s as a safe haven for the country’s Muslim population.
Morong’s work earned him the Marshall McLuhan Fellowship for his investigative reporting. Launched in 1997, the award encourages investigative journalism in the Philippines with the belief that a strong media is essential for a strong democratic society. It is named after McLuhan, the Canadian Catholic communications theorist who explored media and communication in our culture. The fellowship is granted annually by the Canadian embassy in Manila to one journalist nominated and chosen by their peers.
The peace efforts were on the verge of bearing fruit in the form of the Bangsamoro Basic Law, legislation seeking to establish an autonomous political party known as the Bangsamoro, said Morong. But the bill failed to garner the endorsement of 145 of the 240 in the Philippines’ congress needed to pass when put forward in the house on Jan. 27.
“Peace talks… are back to square one,” he said. “It is going to be a very difficult process.” Morong has a strong opinion as to what caused the bill’s demise.
“The congress of the Philippines failed to pass the (bill) … because it is election season and there is a lot of prejudice still against Moro (Muslim) Filipinos,” he told the McLuhan student body.
Michael McLuhan, Marshal’s youngest son, who joined Morong for the final stop of his visit to Canada, told the students that not only do they have the power to tell stories, they also have a role in influencing what stories reporters like Morong cover.
“Making peace a topic of conversation in the press rather than war, that is up to the consumer of the media,” said McLuhan. “That is not the responsibility of the reporters. You have to make it known that those are the stories you want to hear.”
Morong wishes more would answer that call.
“The peace process in journalism is not a sexy topic,” he said. “I wish more people would get more excited when they hear about it. Many times I have asked myself is it just easier to report on war than on peace because peace is boring.”
There are those who yearn to hear about peace. Daniel Licuan, a 17-year-old Marshall McLuhan student originally from the northern region of the Philippines, is one.
“It feels great that someone, a journalist, is making a move against the corruption towards peace with his work,” he said. “He’s trying to make a solution to the corruption.”
For Morong that’s one down, countless more youth to go.
“They have a lot in their hands, the opportunity to change things … (by) highlighting all these stories from their perspective,” he said. “The way to counter that prejudice is through education, through repeating their history from their point of view.”
Marshall McLuhan Catholic Secondary School, 1107 Avenue Road, Toronto,ON
McLuhan Centre Winter Program Week 4: Monday Night Seminar, Feb 22; Workshop, Feb 23; Book Salon, Feb 24
PEOPLE, PLACE & IMAGINATION – How does the city learn?
MONDAY, 22 FEBRUARY, 2016, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
With Misha Glouberman, Kate Marshall, Robert J. Sawyer
MISHA GLOUBERMAN does many things. He is the host of the always-sold-out Trampoline Hall Lectures, a monthly non-expert barroom lecture series. He is the author, with Sheila Heti, of The Chairs Are Where The People Go, which the New Yorker described as a “a triumph of conversational philosophy”. He teaches a course called “How to Talk to People About Things” which helps people be better at coming to agreements and resolving differences. @mishaglouberman
KATE MARSHALL has spent her professional career in a variety of advertising and marketing roles. Over the course of her career she has worked in ad agencies in Toronto, London, New York and China. Client-side, Kate has worked in marketing roles at RBC, Habitat for Humanity Canada, and since 2013 at Ted Rogers School of Management at Ryerson University as Director of Marketing & Communications. Her passion and enthusiasm for Toronto and its stories led Kate to join Heritage Toronto as a volunteer Walk Assistant in 2006, and the Heritage Toronto Board in 2011, where she is the current Chair. @kmbmarshall
ROBERT J. SAWYER the only Canadian to have won all three of the top international science fiction awards: the Nebula Award, Hugo Award and John W. Campbell Award. He has published over 20 novels, including Triggers and the novels of the WWW trilogy. His novel Flashforward was adapted for an ABC TV series of the same name. A passionate advocate for science fiction, Sawyer teaches creative writing and appears frequently in the media to discuss his genre. He prefers the label “philosophical fiction,” and in no way sees himself as a predictor of the future. @RobertJSawyer
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
TUESDAY, 23 FEBRUARY, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
ALESSANDRO DELFANTI ICCIT, University of Toronto Mississauga
Participation and non-participation in digital media Can we draw a lesson from Melville’s novel “Bartleby” that applies to contemporary digital politics? Perhaps, if we explore non-participation as a form of mediated political action rather than as mere passivity. We generally conceive of participation in a positive sense, as a means for empowerment and a condition for democracy. However, digital participation is not the only way to achieve political goals, and practices aimed at abandoning or blocking participatory platforms can be seen as equally politically significant and relevant. In this workshop we will analyze how the technologies and practices that compose the digital sphere force us to reconsider the concept of political participation itself.
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
WEDNESDAY, 24 February, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
MELENTIE PANDILOVSKI, TOM KOHUT (Eds.)
Marshall McLuhan + Vilém Flusser’s Communication + Aesthetic Theories Revisited
Video Pool Media Arts Centre, 2015
This book includes discussions McLuhan and Flusser’s influence on media and communication theory as it applies to contemporary and new media art, film, philosophy and politics, and this book would be of immediate interest to readers and researchers interested in: distributed consciousness and telematics; cinema and causality; collective evolution; media and theology; digital culture; Occupy Wall Street and other political movements; cybernetics; contemporary technological art; the ideologies of clinical practice; asemic writing; institutional critique and many other topics.
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
Father Walter J. Ong (1912 – 2003)
Professor Thomas Farrell posted the following unpublished letter from Marshall McLuhan to his former student Walter Ong, dated Sept. 3, 1976, to the listserv of the Media Ecology Association on Feb. 11, 2015. The original letter is in the Walter J. Ong Archive at Saint Louis University. For the latter see http://goo.gl/hI12Gp . The letter is republished here by permission of Dr. Farrell and the Walter J. Ong Archive at SLU:
As some of you may know, fifteen letters that Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980) sent his former graduate student and friend Walter Ong, S.J. (1912-2003), between 1944 and 1962, have been published in *Letters of Marshall McLuhan* (1987: 162, 185-87, 188-89, 190-91, 215-16, 234, 236-38, 243-44, 251, 280-81, 282, 283, 284, 285, and 285-86). Young McLuhan taught English at Saint Louis University from 1937 to 1944, with a leave of absence one year during which he returned to Cambridge University to work further on his 1943 doctoral dissertation. As part of Ong’s Jesuit training, he did graduate studies in philosophy and English at Saint Louis University from 1938 to 1941. I have 0btained from the Ong archives at Saint Louis University a copy of McLuhan’s unpublished letter to Ong dated September 3, 1976, that is worth quoting here in its entirety:
“The enclosures [a copy of which I do not have] may help you to follow my
work more easily. For thirty years at least [in 1944, McLuhan left Saint
Louis University, where Ong had known him from 1939 to 1941], I have [in
effect] been using the two hemispheres approach under the names of the
*written* and the *oral*, the *visual* and the *acoustic*, the *hot* and
the *cool*, the *medium* and the *message*, *figure* and *ground*, and so
on [but he does not refer specifically to any of his publications in the
1940s in which he explicitly uses any of these binary terms]. Now it turns
out that medicine has been building a great beach-head for this approach
with its new understanding of the two hemispheres of the [human] brain. If
you look at the traits of the left hemisphere, you will discover the
lineaments of the First world – the literate and industrial world – and, on
the other hand, in the right hemisphere you will perceive the
characteristics of the Third world – the world without the phonetic
“During the past century, while the knowledge of the two hemispheres has
been growing, there has also been a new electronic milieu or environment
which automatically pushes the right hemisphere into a more dominant
position than it has held in the Western world since the invention of the
phonetic alphabet. The two hemispheres naturally respond to the milieu or
total surround in which people live and work. *My work has been a dialogue
between the two hemispheres in which the characteristics of the right
hemisphere are given so much recognition that I have been unintelligible to
the left hemisphere people. It happens that the left hemisphere people are
completely out of touch with the results and the formal characteristics of
their own new electric technologies*” (emphasis added).
I have no idea if there are any other unpublished letters from McLuhan to Ong, or if there are any letters from Ong to McLuhan in the Ong archives at Saint Louis University. If Ong sent McLuhan a reply letter, it is not in the Ong archives at Saint Louis University. However, in his 1982 book *Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word* (29-30), Ong briefly discusses the two hemispheres of the human brain in connection with Julian Jaynes’ 1976 book *The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind*.
In *McLuhan Misunderstood: Setting the Record Straight* (2013: 95), Bob Logan reports that McLuhan also wrote letters dated September 14, 1976 (to Jim Striegel), and November 10, 1976 (to Edwin C. Garvey), in which he also discusses the two hemispheres of the human brain in connection with his own work. Those two letters may be available from the McLuhan archives at the National Archives of Canada.
In the latter part of his massively researched 2009 book about the two hemispheres of the human brain, *The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World*, Iain McGilchrist constructs a sweeping account of the ascendancy of the left hemisphere in the prestige culture of our Western cultural history. His account of the left hemisphere’s dominance in our Western cultural history supports McLuhan’s claim about the dominance of the left hemisphere in our Western cultural history.
Thomas J. Farrell
Department of Writing Studies
University of Minnesota Duluth
Marshall McLuhan (centre) & Walter Ong (to his right, seated) at SLU
Palais de L’ Electricite (Electricity Palace) at the 1900 Expo.
“All media are extensions of some human faculty—psychic or physical.” —Marshall McLuhan, The Medium is The Massage
In front of the Eiffel Tower the main attraction of the 1900 world’s fair in Paris was the Palais de l’Electricité. Lit with thousands of electrical lights, it presented electricity to a large consumer market and a new era took off. In the century to come, a form of energy nobody quite expected made mankind’s ideas of the ultimate extension of the human faculty lift off in record time. At the same time, the world went through several radical cycles in society, from bright moments of insight to dark periods to a multitude of fights for freedom. As one of the few students who used coding as a tool I was aware of Marshall McLuhan’s notion of the Mass Age when I graduated in 1997 from the Design Academy in The Netherlands.
“Earthrise” taken on December 24, 1968
In the nearly 20 years since my graduation, technological developments have taken off even more. Looking back from now one could imagine that since the Palais de l’Electricité we’re about halfway to actually knowing where this evolution will truly lead us to. Along with the scientific progress, how will information and stories fluidly move from one medium to the next? What will we filter out along the way? Will we only share and like what can be bought, or also what is not for sale? What do we choose to see, or who is the one that makes that choice? And will borders between the digital and physical completely vanish when VR and AR are becoming consumer products in 2016? An Internet of Humans in between reality and delusion? Or would the extension eventually become the replacement of what is was supposed to extend?
As Cedric Price asked himself: “Technology is the answer, but what was the question?” Maybe it’s about time to formulate the question. We should use the hyperconnected knowledge as a find-engine to create a new human process of self-generated thoughts about the future. Let us use technology as a tool to take us from doubt to a curiosity driven by an idealistic observation. We have reached the point where a long series of smaller changes in cybernetics became significant enough to cause a larger, more important change. We are the tipping-point generation.
Data as an extension of the superorganism of all mankind’s thought.
See photo here: http://goo.gl/fNhBeY
Dimitri Nieuwenhuizen is a visual philosopher in art, design and technology. He studied at the Technical University of Delft and the Design Academy Eindhoven. Within his autonomous and applied work he researches from the perspective of several disciplines the affect and effect of digital culture with the aim of humanizing the unhuman and exploring the missing links between the digital and the physical. Besides giving talks at numerous places around the world, he teaches at several art academies including Sandberg Institute Amsterdam, curates and initiates exhibitions, symposia, thinktanks, and hackathons, and is one of the supervisors of the Sandberg@Mediafonds masterclass. He is co-director of the multidisciplinary design studio LUST and the research-based art and technology laboratory LUSTlab. Here new pathways for art and design are explored on the cutting edge where new media, information technologies, performance, architecture, urban systems, graphic and industrial design overlap. (Source: http://goo.gl/T1wcEZ )
On February 11, 2016 Lance Strate informed the Media Ecology Association of the passing of Elizabeth Eisenstein with the following:-
I have heard from a few different sources that Elizabeth Eisenstein, author of The Printing Press as an Agent of Change, and the abridged version, The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, as well as The First Professional Revolutionist: Fillippo Michele Buonarroti; Grub Street Abroad: Aspects of the French Cosmopolitan Press from the Age of Louis XIV to the French Revolution; and Divine Art, Infernal Machine: The Reception of Printing in the West, passed away suddenly and unexpectedly on January 31st.
Her work on the history of printing stands as one of the great achievements in media ecology scholarship, and exemplifies historical research in a media ecological mode. I first heard her speak at one of Neil Postman’s media ecology conferences back in the 80s, she gave the keynote address at the MEA’s 3rd annual convention at Marymount Manhattan College, and was a featured speaker at our 6th meeting at Boston College.
By the way, she was also a helluva tennis player. Just thought it worth mentioning. She will most certainly be missed within the media ecology community.
A Short Biography
Eisenstein, one of America’s most distinguished historians, achieved worldwide recognition while serving as the Alice Freeman Palmer Professor of History at U-Michigan, a position she held from 1975 until her retirement in 1988.Eisenstein (Photo courtesy Elizabeth L. Eisenstein)
Since the time she completed her doctorate at Radcliffe College in 1953, Eisenstein’s scholarship has demonstrated three qualities that only rarely come together: meticulous original research, analysis that has become a focus of historical debate and interpretations that are adopted across many scholarly fields.
Her early work examined the emergence of the professional revolutionary as a new historical type and challenged the dominant view of the French Revolution as a middle-class rebellion in a way so fundamental and stimulating that her work became the focus of several influential symposia and special issues of scholarly journals.
Her subsequent research included the 1979 study “The Printing Press as an Agent of Change,” which has had international influence. Based on massive research in many languages, it examines the conditions in Western Europe that encouraged the spread of printing and demonstrates the crucial role of printing in the dissemination of Renaissance culture, the disruption of Western Christendom and the rise of modern science.
This work shows how printing altered the meaning of memory and conceptions of time and history, and it has been the subject of countless symposia, conferences, scholarly articles and entire books that reflect on the “Eisenstein theory.”
Eisenstein’s professional honors include election to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society. She also served as a Guggenheim Fellow and in 2002 received the Award for Scholarly Distinction from the American Historical Association. (Source: http://goo.gl/CQzkOy )
In the following 9-minute video Elizabeth Eisenstein discusses From scribal scarcity to the disruptive text.
A Recent Review of The Global Village: Transformations In World Life & Media In The 21st Century (1989) by Bruce Powers, Marshall McLuhan
Marshall McLuhan’s collaboratively-written books, especially the ones published after his death in 1980, do not receive the review and critical attention they deserve, which needs to change. Therefore it was a pleasure to read the following Kirkus Review which, though short, is well-considered, which was published in print in 1989 but only online in 2012. My thanks to Martin Starr for bringing this to my attention………Alex
THE GLOBAL VILLAGE Transformations In World Life And Media In The 21st Century by Bruce Powers, Marshall McLuhan KIRKUS REVIEW A quarter century ago, media guru McLuhan (d. 1980) wrote his famous Understanding Media. Now, in a posthumous volume cowritten by McLuhan’s friend Powers (Communications Studies/Niagara U.), the premises of that work are updated. This collaboration stems from research undertaken by the authors at the Centre for Culture and Technology in Toronto. Their analysis of the worldwide impact of video-related technologies takes the myth of Narcissus (central to Understanding Media) a step further. McLuhan was struck by the fact that when men first went to the moon, we expected photographs of craters but, instead, the quintessential symbol of that adventure was the dramatic picture of earth–ourselves: “All of us who were watching had an enormous reflexive response. We ‘outered’ and ‘innered’ at the same time. We were on earth and the moon simultaneously.” The authors refer to this kind of moment as a “resonating interval”–“the true action in the event was not on earth or on the moon, but rather in the airless void between. . .” In their analysis, this resonating interval represents an invisible borderline between visual and acoustic space. The distinction between the two “spaces” marks the major premise here, with visual space representing the old traditions of Western Civilization–left-brain-oriented, linear, quantitative reasoning–and acoustic space representing right-brain, pattern-producing, qualitative reasoning. Because of electronic communications, the authors believe, these two mind-sets are “slamming into each other at the speed of light.” While most societies view themselves through the past, usually a century behind, present-day changes occur so rapidly that this “rearview mirror” doesn’t work anymore. By use of what they call the “tetrad,” the authors contend that they can postulate four stages in any invention or trend to determine what the final result will be–what it will “flip over” into (e.g., money flipped over to credit cards; the telephone to “ominpresence.” as in teleconferencing; cable TV should flip over to home broadcasting; electronic-funds transfer should flip over to “an intense state of credit-worthiness as pure status”). Dense, heavily technological writing–but with the occasional insight that reminds us of what once brought such renown to McLuhan. Source: https://goo.gl/k1gqdk Pub Date: April 1st, 1989 – ISBN: 0195079108 – Page count: 244 pp – Publisher: Oxford University Press – Review Posted Online: May 21st, 2012 – Kirkus Reviews Issue: March 15th, 1989 Earthrise is a photograph of the Earth taken by astronaut William Anders in 1968, during the Apollo 8 mission. Nature photographer Galen Rowell declared it “the most influential environmental photograph ever taken”. Created: December 24, 1968
McLuhan Centre Winter Program Week 3: Monday Night Seminar, Feb 8; Video Lounge, Feb 9; Book Salon, Feb 10
THE COMMUNITY SPEAKS – How do we decide what matters in the city?
MONDAY, 8 FEBRUARY, 2016, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
With Mary Donohue, David Miller, Richard Stursberg
MARY DONOHUE was mamed as one of the 18 Outstanding Women In Tech, 2015, and Diversity MBA’s top 50 under 50 in 2015. Dr. Donohue is a passionate advocate of revolutionizing today’s workforce training through technology and developing internal talent. Her book with Jack Canfield became a best seller on Amazon in the both the US and Canada in September 2015. As Founder of the Donohue Learning Systems™, she designs technologies that provide people with a roadmap to achieve a better work/life balance. Dr. Mary is a world-renowned speaker and TEDX presenter, television personality and columnist. Her work appears in the Huffington Post and Financial Post.
DAVID MILLER is a former politician in Ontario, Canada. He was the 63rd Mayor of Toronto who served from 2003 to 2010. He entered politics as a member of the New Democratic Party, although his mayoral campaign and terms in office were without any formal party affiliation. He did not renew his party membership in 2007. In 2011, Miller assumed a position with the World Bank as an advisor on urban issues. In 2013, he was appointed as president and CEO of WWFCanada, the Canadian division of the international World Wildlife
RICHARD STURSBERG is a Canadian Media Executive. He has been head of all English services at the CBC, Executive Director of Telefilm Canada, Chairman of the Canadian Television Fund, President of Starchoice and Cancom (now Shaw Direct), President of the Canadian Cable Television Association and Assistant Deputy Minister of Culture and Broadcasting for the Government of Canada. He is currently President of Aljess, a boutique consulting firm. He is the author of The Tower of Babble (2012), named one of the best books of the year by the Globe and Mail.
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
TUESDAY, 9 FEBRUARY, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
A screening program showcases some rare films and documentaries that feature McLuhan’s intellectual influence during the Sixties and Seventies. A panel discussion follows the screening.
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
WEDNESDAY, 10 FEBRUARY, 6:00 – 8:00 PM
J. MCLEOD ROGERS, T. WHALEN, C.G. TAYLOR (Eds.)
Finding McLuhan: The Mind / The Man / The Message
University of Regina Press, 2015
With Gary Genosko, Adam Lauder, Jaqueline McLeod Rogers
In 1965, Tom Wolfe famously asked of Marshall McLuhan: “Suppose he is the oracle of the modern times: what if he is right?” Fifty years later, McLuhan’s biographer Douglas Coupland, McLuhan’s sons, and sixteen scholars explore the many ways in which McLuhan’s predictions have come true. Engaging with McLuhan’s remarkable legacy and responding to his call to participate actively in understanding technologies, Finding McLuhan offers relevant and timely insights for readers encountering him for the first time and for those re-encountering and re-evaluating him.
REGISTER NOW at http://goo.gl/HLTziB
Logan, Robert K. / McLuhan, MarshallThe Future of the Library: From Electric Media to Digital Media
PETER LANG: New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt am Main, Oxford, Wien, 2016. XVI, 238 pp., num. b/w ill.
ISBN 978-1-4331-3264-3 pb. (Softcover) – See http://goo.gl/nD7WKZ
Originally written in the late 1970s, this book was untouched for more than 35 years. McLuhan passed away before it went to press, but Logan always intended to finish it. Even though much has changed in the three decades since work on the project was halted, many of the points that McLuhan and Logan made in the era of ‘electric media’ are highly cogent in the era of ‘digital media.’
Looking at the future of the library from the perspective of McLuhan’s original vision, Logan has carefully updated the text to address the impact of the Internet and other digital technologies on the library. McLuhan prophetically foreshadowed the transformative effect that computing would have on «mass library organization,» saying it would become obsolescent. It is perhaps no coincidence that a key theme of the book is that libraries must strive to create context given today’s hyper information overload. The authors believe this task can be achieved by putting together a compact library of books providing an overview of human culture and scholarship.
This book is based on the original text that McLuhan and Logan wrote. Logan’s updates are integrated in the main text and clearly identified by markers. This preserves the flow of the original text and at the same time provides updates in the context of the original study. Other significant updates include two new chapters: Chapter 6 provides a LOM (Laws of the Media) treatment of the new post-McLuhan digital media, and Chapter 7 discusses the impact of these media on today’s library. A second part to the concluding Chapter has been added to update some of the conclusions reached in 1979, and there is also a new preface.
Contents: A Note to Readers – The Library: The Physical Extension of Man’s Memory – (Mother of the Muses) – A Study of Media – Alphabet, Mother of Invention – The Library: A Figure in Many Different – Understanding the New Ground of the Library – Laws of the Media (Lom) and the Library – The Impact of Electricity and Modern Technology on the Library – Laws of the Media for Post-McLuhan Digital Media – The Impact of Digital Technology on the Library – Book Glut, Information Overload, and Pattern Recognition – The Compact Library and Human Scale – The Public Library: Past, Present, and Future Trends – The Library and Education – Future of the Book – Library Futures: Summing Up.About the author(s)/editor(s)
Robert K. Logan (PhD., MIT, 1965) is Professor Emeritus of Physics and St. Michael’s College Fellow at the University of Toronto. He is the Chief Scientist of sLab at OCAD University. He is the author of many books and articles including Understanding New Media: Extending Marshall McLuhan (Peter Lang, 2010). The book follows on from their joint authorship of Alphabet, mother of invention (1977).
Marshall McLuhan (PhD Cambridge, 1943) was a Professor of English at St. Michael’s College at the University of Toronto from 1946 to his passing in 1980. He was the founder of the field of media ecology and author of many revolutionary books and articles including The Gutenberg Galaxy, Understanding Media and The Medium is the Massage. He is the originator of such iconic phrases as «the global village» and «the medium is the message.»
Series Understanding Media Ecology. Vol. 3 – General Editor: Lance Strate
An excerpt from the original McLuhan-Logan manuscript was originally published on this blog in April of 2015. You can read that excerpt here: https://goo.gl/5lxRQf
Thomas Fisher Rare Book Libary (part of Robarts Libary at U of Toronto)