You are invited to the launch of Rita Leistner’s unique bookLooking for Marshall McLuhan in Afghanistan: iProbes & iPhone Photographs
The Time: October 29, 5:30PM to 8:00 PM
The Place: Alumni Hall, Victoria College, University of Toronto
The Northrop Frye Centre, which is hosting the event, has asked that people rsvp if they can (so they will know how much food & drink to provide): http://www.vic.utoronto.ca/academics/Research_Centres/fryecentre/nfcrsvp2.htm
See website: http://www.lookingformarshallmcluhan.com/book/
From a recent review:-
This book is astonishing!
Rita has an MA in Comp Lit, and she has written essays for other people’s books on conflict photography, but here she gets philosophical and whimsical in ways that will surprise everyone. She really takes the idea of photography as a communication technology and runs with it.
Here is what the back of the book says better than I can paraphrase:
“In 2011, Rita Leistner embedded with U.S. Marines in Afghanistan as a team member of the experimental social media initiative Basetrack. What resulted is Looking for Marshall McLuhan in Afghanistan. In this insightful and provocative, playful and original merging of theory and practice, Leistner applies the pioneering Canadian media theorist’s ideas on language and technology to contemporary warfare and increasingly ubiquitous smartphones.” ( http://tinyurl.com/mnmafxu )
Originally posted on Miss Rosen:
“All the new media, including the press, are art forms which have the power of imposing, like poetry, their own assumption,” Marshall McLuhan observed. We live in a time when new media is so ubiquitous as to be omnipresent and the only escape from the world we’ve built is to be out of satellite range—or, even more difficult, to simply turn it off.
But we don’t because we won’t because, like the greatest pharmaceutical drugs, new media has rewired our brains to change the way in which we perceive ourselves and the world itself. The way in which we live has become so extreme that we are hard pressed to remember how we operated any other way. We take for granted the way in which these interactions create and define experience, allowing ourselves to fall under the spell, whether we want to or not. At a time when to…
View original 821 more words
Derrick, who used to work closely with Marshall McLuhan, is a Professor of the French Language department at the University of Toronto and of the Sociology department at the Federico II University in Naples, scientific director of the Italian magazine Mediaduemila and research director at the UOC. Derrick de Kerckhove [was] Director of the McLuhan Program in Culture & Technology and Professor in the Department of French at the University of Toronto. He was an associate of the Centre for Culture and Technology from 1972 to 1980 and worked with Marshall McLuhan for over ten years as translator, assistant and co-author. He co-edited the book The Alphabet and the Brain (Springer Verlag, 1988) with Charles Lumsden which scientifically assesses the impact of the Western alphabet on the physiology and the psychology of human cognition. Brainframes: Technology, Mind and Business (Bosch & Keuning, 1991) addresses the differences between the effects of television, computers and hypermedia on corporate culture, business practices and economic markets. The Skin of Culture (Somerville Press, 1995) is a collection of essays on the new electronic reality. Derrick’s latest book,Connected Intelligence (Somerville, 1997) was launched in 1997.
This is an edited English translation of a recent interview in Spain taken from http://tinyurl.com/dxnmwtq .
You started studying French language and Literature.
It was an accident. Actually, it wasn’t too bad. It cultivates your sensibility and you do become critically aware… you learn methods of looking and feeling. But I think I would have probably been a better architect. I loved being an architect, but I didn’t realize it was so good.
Afterwards you studied Sociology and new technologies.
That was an accident too. Now that I think of it, my life is nothing but a series of wonderful accidents. I was very much bored by French Literature and my wife, who was my fiancée then, said that if I was bored at the University of Toronto because you are only at the French department you are stupid. You should go and listen to the famous people here, who are really well-known around the world for being who they are. She gave the names of Marshall McLuhan, Northrop Frye and Robertson Davies. Robertson Davies was a writer, a novelist, and he was OK. Frye was a really famous literary critic, a big guy, but I didn’t find it that exciting. But McLuhan… that was amazing! I couldn’t understand anything he said. Maybe that’s why it was interesting! …..
Let’s talk a bit about Marshall McLuhan. You consider him your master.
Absolutely. Without him I wouldn’t be here.
He said that “the medium is the message”. Does this mean that everything is done and said and we cannot expect anything new to appear in arts or culture?
No, what is happening now is as big as the Renaissance, and it could be much bigger. It is a big change of being. It is not just a change of mood or politics, it is a change of being. Exactly where we are going I am not absolutely sure, but we are exploring possible ways of being. Cinema is a good example, I call it “Pinocchio 2.0”: Blade runner is one example of being a replicant, Tron is going inside the machine, Avatar is going 3D into the screen and beyond, The Truman show is being the focus of attention of the whole world not knowing that one is such… I used to throw away the American cinema because of the happy endings and so, but no, they are very intelligent and they know what they are looking for. I have always been fascinated by the way we project our image.
McLuhan wrote also about the “global village”, and it was in the sixties, when no one could even imagine internet. Was he like a 20th century Jules Verne?
No, it was different. He discovered that teaching Literature to young American students was hopeless, they didn’t get it. So he questioned which was their culture, and he saw this advertising. He wrote a book, The Mechanical Bride, where he was actually analyzing pictures and asking the people what did it say to them. They thought that was interesting. And that’s how he began studying culture as an object of analysis.
Derrick de Kerckhove lays the foundation for his provocative ideas by reviewing the roots of literacy. Starting with the emergence of the alphabet, the reader is taken on a journey of man’s quest to learn who he is and what he wants in an ever-changing universe. There is a full elaboration on the more recent developments. He places us in the transition from an age of broadcast technologies to that of a networked global environment. We are brought from the collective mind, as influenced by television, to the convergence of individuals being productive within a broader system. Empowerment, we are told, is now possible as a result of these new forms of consciousness.
In Laws of Media (1988) and The Global Village (1989), published posthumously, Marshall McLuhan summarized his thinking about technology in a concise tetrad of media effects. The tetrad is an analytical tool for considering the effects on society of any technology/medium, artifact, or idea (put another way: a means of explaining the social processes underlying the adoption of a technology, artifact or idea) by dividing its effects into four categories and displaying them simultaneously. McLuhan designed the tetrad as a pedagogical/analytical tool, offering his laws as questions to to be asked of any technology, artifact or idea:
- What does the artifact enhance?
- What does the artifact obsolesce?
- What does the artifact retrieve that had been obsolesced earlier?
- What does the artifact reverse or flip into when pushed to extremes?
The laws of the tetrad exist simultaneously, not successively or chronologically, and allow the questioner to explore the “grammar and syntax” of the “language” of media. By flip or reverse, McLuhan meant that a technology or artifact “overheats”, or reverses into an opposing state, when pushed to its extreme. (adapted from http://tinyurl.com/2p82l5 )
In this excerpt, innovation expert Jeff DeGraff applies the Laws of Media to the process of innovation, which illustrates how these laws can be applied to human processes or ideas:-
The late Marshall McLuhan, University of Toronto professor and cultural guru, suggested a functional definition for innovation that is easily recognizable by anyone in any type organization.
- Enhances something: Think about how Google was a late entrant into the search biz but lapped the field with its simple approach
- Eliminates [obsolesces] Something: Think about how Charles Schwab eliminated the need for stock brokers by connecting the back office of the trading house directly to the customer
- Returns Us to Something [Retrieves] in Our Past: Think about how the desire to have home cooked family meals has lead to the proliferation of underground dining and slow food restaurants
- Over Time Reverses [Flips] into Its Opposite: Think about how e-mail was going to set us all free but instead enslaved us with its ubiquitous and overwhelming demands
It is assumed that the more potent the innovation the more it embodies the four attributes and vice versa.
McLuhan understood that innovation was specific to the situation that gave rise to it or destroyed it. So he focused on its effects and not its causes. He warned that a one size fits all approach with its simple checklist would do more harm than good and lead to a form of intellectual and creative myopia.
Innovation has a transformative power for brief period of time when it produces the ability to create or destroy value. After that it becomes the standard, the norm and the ordinary. Like milk, it has a shelf life and goes sour over time. (Excerpted from http://tinyurl.com/kc6pskb )
Image 2: “Laws of Media: Mobile Phone”, Marshall McLuhan, from Laws of Media, 1988, page 153.
My apologies to subscribers; the beginning portion of this posting that you received earlier was unintentional; I accidentally hit the publish button instead of the preview one. As an example of Marshall McLuhan’s prophetic ability, discussed in the last posting, consider his perceptive comments about computers, at a time when only large mainframe computers existed, and his premonitions about a future technology that came to be the Internet. This excerpt is from Robert Logan’s 2013 book, McLuhan Misunderstood: Setting the Record Straight. Toronto: Key Publishing.
So many of McLuhan’s pronouncements about the effects of electric media are prophetic because it seems as though he was aware of the coming of the Net, the Web and other digital media. A simple example of his prescience is that he, in fact, through his writing foreshadowed the Internet. William Gibson, the author of Neuromancer, certainly deserves credit for coining the term cyberspace but long before Neuromancer was written or even conceived of, McLuhan (1967, p. 67) described the Internet in the following passage in response to being asked “How is the computer affecting education” McLuhan’s response was an almost exact description of the Internet:
“The computer in education is in a very tentative state but it does represent basically speeded up access to information and when it is applied to the telephone and to Xerox it permits access to the libraries of the world, almost immediately, without delay. And so the immediate effect of the computer is to pull up the walls of the subjects and divisions of knowledge in favor of over-all field, total awareness – Gestalt”.
McLuhan’s description of the Internet was complete with the exception of packet switching if you allow Xeroxing to represent the reproduction of a hard copy by a printer. And he opined this description two full years before the development of ARPANET in 1969, the forerunner of the Internet.
An even earlier remark by McLuhan (1962) in the Gutenberg Galaxy also foreshadows the Internet:
“A computer as a research and communication instrument could enhance retrieval, obsolesce mass library organization, retrieve individual encyclopedic function and flip into a private line to speedily tailored data of a saleable kind”.
One can also interpret without too much of a stretch the retrieval of “individual encyclopedic function” in the above quote as a foreshadowing of Wikipedia as Derrick de Kerckhove once did (the provided link doesn’t work).
McLuhan not only foreshadowed the Internet and Wikipedia, but he also foreshadowed Innocentive.com, a Web site that connects companies that have a problem to solve with experts that Innocentive has aggregated. They call the process “Open Innovation,” which they describe as follows:
“Open Innovation allows many people from different disciplines to tackle the same problem simultaneously and not sequentially. Anyone can participate with collaborative technology and Open Innovation training. When many minds are working on the same problem, it will take less time to solve it”.
McLuhan (1971) in a convocation address at the University of Alberta said:
The university and school of the future must be a means of total community participation, not in the consumption of available knowledge, but in the creation of completely unavailable insights. The overwhelming obstacle to such community participation in problem solving and research at the top levels, is the reluctance to admit, and to describe, in detail their difficulties and their ignorance. There is no kind of problem that baffles one or a dozen experts that cannot be solved at once by a million minds that are given a chance simultaneously to tackle a problem. The satisfaction of individual prestige, which we formerly derived from the possession of expertise, must now yield to the much greater satisfactions of dialogue and group discovery. The task yields to the task force.
McLuhan not only foreshadowed the development of the Internet and crowd sourcing he with his co-author George B. Leonard in an article in the popular magazine Look also explained why the digital media would be so compelling to young people and to a certain degree their elders. They suggested that the age of print and the fragmentation that it encouraged was over (McLuhan and Leonard, 1967).
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… 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.
He and Leonard (ibid.) also predicted that the relationship to humankind’s knowledge would change with electrically configured information as we are beginning to see in this the Internet Age.
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 past cultures as fully integrated systems that resonate on several levels and share the qualities of poetry and song.
Still another foreshadowing of McLuhan was that of the smart phone as described by his biographer Phillip Marchand (1989, p. 170).
“He told an audience in New York City shortly after the publication of Understanding Media that there might come a day when we would all have portable computers, about the size of a hearing aid, to help mesh our personal experiences with the experience of the great wired brain of the outer world.
What makes this prediction even more amazing is that there were no personal computers at the time, no cell phones and no Internet (i.e. ‘the great wired brain of the outer world’)”.
The notion of the need for keeping messages short and hence the power of the one-liner foreshadows in our digital era texting, instant messaging and Twitter.
Marchand, Philip. 1989. Marshall McLuhan: The Medium and the Messenger. Toronto: Random House.
McLuhan, Marshall. 1967. “The New Education.” The Basilian Teacher, Vol. 11 (2), pp. 66-73.
From: Marshall McLuhan Speaks
Marshall McLuhan has been called the prophet or oracle of the Electric Age before. In an era of futurists and prognosticators such as Toffler, Naisbitt and Bucky Fuller, the futurist label could well be applied to McLuhan too; however, he avoided it, claiming instead to be writing about the present: “The present is very difficult to see. It takes enormous energy, and most people don’t have enough energy to see anything, let alone the present. That’s why they talk about the future.” (The Book of Probes, p. 530). However, the following article calls him a “media futurist” and one can see why from his cited comments:-
“Ours is a brand-new world of allatonceness. “Time” has ceased, “space” has vanished. We now live in a global village…a simultaneous happening.” -Marshall McLuhan, The Medium Is The Massage (1967)
The fact that you are reading this not in a book or were spurned to read this through electrical circuitry through the expanse of Facebook or Twitter spills the irony water flow over the glass like Marshall McLuhan would have seen.
Our global connectiveness and the never ending stream of online perpetuity has created a world consciousness. Twenty four television, reality shows, streaming live data, cellular service, instant information, and the promotion of the Westernized world into every facet of reality on Earth has not stopped since Canada’s favorite futurist weirdo wrote his first book on media in 1951, The Mechanical Bride, an extensive examination of popular culture when popular culture was just starting to take off. Most people though have no idea who McLuhan is, and how his thoughts go hand in hand with what our “global village” has begun today.
To many Herbert Marshall McLuhan was an explorer of the word and language, a constant searcher of the meaning of our mediums. By 33, McLuhan had already compiled two sets of BA’s and MA’s from the University of Manitoba and Cambridge, finishing his PhD from Cambridge in 1942. He had began to teach English literature to students at the University of Wisconsin in the mid-1930s when he began his directions toward pop culture and used his thoughts on the advertising of the day to compare great literature to his bored American students. His critical analysis of the pop-up world his students lived in with cigarette billboards and vacuum radio jingles permeating their pathways enabled him to parallel his literature world to their world. McLuhan saw that there was no difference in the message world, only in the information that was being pushed.
“Because all media, from the phonetic alphabet to the computer, are extensions of man that cause deep and lasting changes in him and transform his environment,” McLuhan said in a 1969 Playboy magazine interview. “Such an extension is an intensification, an amplification of an organ…the central nervous system appears to institute a self-protective numbing of the affected area, insulating and anesthetizing it from conscious awareness of what’s happening to it. I call this peculiar form of self-hypnosis Narcissus narcosis, a syndrome whereby man remains as unaware of the psychic and social effects of his new technology as a fish of the water it swims in. As a result, precisely at the point where a new media-induced environment becomes all pervasive and transmogrifies our sensory balance, it also becomes invisible.”
If you have no idea what McLuhan is talking about, take a number. At the time of his numerous books, interviews, and television appearances, Marshall still could not be completely understood. His language spoke in code, and he himself seemed somewhat pleased to be the smartest person in the room. At his apex in the human media world in the late 1960s and early 1970s, McLuhan’s strange ideas drenched the same media culture he often lambasted. He basked in their glow while news men and television presenters just tried to get a hold of what he was talking about.
It was after the release of his third book, Understanding Media in 1964, that McLuhan thrust himself on the public domain that he wrote about. While the counterculture roared to find meaning past the turbulent 1960s, McLuhan rose as a messiah of the medium, a truth seeker whose hard to understand ideas fit nicely with live free mantra of that time. Everyone wanted to see and be seen with McLuhan as Warhol, John and Yoko, Dick Cavett, and many others all made their play for the man.
One could see why. He was exciting. He said crazy things. He always sounded like some guy from the future using terminology that you knew, but piecing phrasing together like no one could really quantify. Take a look at these quotes that I put next to things he knew nothing about to give you insight on where he thought we were going, and you be the judge of his prophetic ways:
Google and search engines: “Instead of buying a book, you will go to the telephone and describe you interests, your needs, and your problems…and all at once with the help of computers, they will xerox all your materials to you personally. (1966)
Facebook and Identity: “In the new electric world, where everybody is involved with everybody, where everybody is involved in complex processes, the old identity cards, the old means of finding out who am I, will not work. (1968)
The Connected World Information World: “The global village is not created by the motor car or by the airplane. It is created by electronic information movement.” (1968)
Retro-Revivals: “Because we ordinarily what we see in the present is in the rearview mirror. What we ordinarily think of as the present is really the past. Content is always the previous medium. It is impossible for man to look straight at the present because he is so terrified by it…and so revivals are everywhere today. Revivals of clothing, of dancing, of music, of shows, of everything, we live by the revival. It tells us who we are or were.” (1968)
24 Hour News, Twitter, and the Instantverse: “You no longer have to be everywhere in order to do everything. The same information is available at the same time in every part of the world. The world is now like a continuing sounding tribal drum where everybody gets the message every time. A princess gets married in England, boom, boom, boom, go the drums.” (1966)
McLuhan died in 1980 after a life as a trend predictor, future poet, educator, and even a provocateur. It’s a shame more people don’t know about him, or maybe, he was there all along, a phonetical resonance that remains for us to keep uncovering for another 100 years. (Source: http://www.houstonforesight.org/?p=501 )
The medium is *still* the message, I might add. This essay by Paul Hiebert underlines the continuing relevance of Marshall McLuhan’s ideas, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the publication of his most important book, “Understanding Media” (1964). McLuhan’s ideas were descriptive of media both of his own time and especially now, when much of what he wrote anticipated our New Media of today. Both Paul Levinson and yours truly are cited.
BY PAUL HIEBERT • September 30, 2014
He had a thing for clip-on neckties. He once said LSD was the lazy man’s form of Finnegans Wake. When deciding whether a book was worth reading, he’d flip through its table of contents then skip ahead to page 69. If page 69 offered no insight, he’d put the book down and move onto the next. In a 1951 letter to Ezra Pound, he described himself as an “intellectual thug.”
That man was eclectic Canadian media theorist Marshall McLuhan, who lived from 1911 to the very last day of 1980, the same year CNN launched. This year, however, marks the 50th anniversary of his famous work, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, which builds upon his famous aphorism: “The medium is the message.” Last April, the Journal of Visual Culture devoted an entire issue to exploring Understanding Media‘s enduring influence. Article titles include “I Sing the Senses Electric,” “Reading for the Noise,” and “Terrorphone.”
Along with the success of his 1962 book The Gutenberg Galaxy, which describes how changes in communication technologies (e.g. the printing press) fundamentally alter people’s orientation to the world, Understanding Media propelled McLuhan into the realm of pop-culture priesthood. He appeared on The Dick Cavett Show and the cover of Newsweek. Executives from General Electric and IBM arranged private meetings. In the New York Herald Tribune, Tom Wolfe wondered if McLuhan was the most important thinker since Newton, Darwin, Freud, and Einstein. A 1965 piece in Harper’s, titled “Marshall McLuhan: Canada’s Intellectual Comet,” states, “like it or not, he is on his way to becoming one of those annoying ‘seminal’ thinkers whose arguments you must adapt, incorporate, or dispose of before pressing ahead in his field or—as McLuhan clearly believes—into areas well beyond it.”
The most important part of this essay can be found at http://tinyurl.com/kvh5vqo .
Paul Hiebert is the editor of Ballast, a Canadian-centric Website about culture and politics. See http://ballastmag.com/ .
The content below is from the Whole Earth Catalog, 1968 – 1974 (see http://tinyurl.com/3lnfjy4 )
In Understanding Media, McLuhan surveys changes in perception affected by evolving media environments, from early print culture to modern television. For McLuhan, the media environment of the electronic age demanded radically new pedagogy to help young minds navigate these new conditions. Brand’s Whole Earth Catalog, influenced by McLuhan’s work, promoted experiments in new media as responsive to these shifts in culture, offering new possibilities for teaching and learning for an electronic age.
Marshall McLuhan. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (New American Library, 1964).
Advertisement for Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man in the Whole Earth Catalog
Victoria College, University of Toronto, the Northrop Frye Centre, the University of Toronto Press and Pages Unbound present -A multimedia presentation & B.W. Powe in conversation with Journalist and McLuhan Biographer Philip Marchand Wednesday, October 15, 5 – 8 PM FREE Alumni Hall, Victoria College University of Toronto 73 Queen’s Park Crescent East
Click below to view UofT’s poster for this event:
Peter Zhang, Grand Valley State UniversityABSTRACT This article explores under-examined resonances between I Ching and McLuhan’swork. It presents I Ching as a metamedium, shows that McLuhan’s four laws of the mediahave precursors in I Ching, and evaluates the relevance of I Ching in the age of digital media-tion. The article illustrates that studying I Ching in comparison with McLuhan’s work opensup numerous opportunities for mutual illumination between the two. RÉSUMÉ Cet article s’intéresse aux interrelations peu explorées entre le Yi-King (ou « Livredes transformations ») et l’œuvre de Marshall McLuhan. On y montre que le Yi-King peutêtre conçu comme un « métamédia » au cœur duquel il est possible d’identiﬁer des éléments paraissant anticiper les quatre lois des médias proposées par McLuhan. On s’y intéresseaussi à la pertinence du « Livre des transformations » à l’ère de la médiation numérique. Aubout du compte, cet article démontre qu’une étude comparative du Yi-King et de l’œuvre deMcLuhan ouvre la voie à plusieurs possibilités de correspondances mutuellementéclairantes. ***** “The East goes outer with our old hardware as fast as we go on the innercosmic trip of oriental fantasy with our new electric circuits and circuses.The West has ‘discovered’ the I Ching and a concern with theprocesses of hidden environments”. (McLuhan, Culture is Our Business, 1970, p. 20) Here is a short excerpt from this fascinating paper:- This inquiry is interological in the sense that it allows us to reexamine I Ching through the lens of McLuhan’s work, and vice versa. It has been a fruitful exercise so far. For one thing, we realize that the term “interology” captures a crucial dimension of McLuhan’s work, and media ecology in general. “Media ecology as interology” is a topic that deserves the space of a full-length article. It is a project I need to ﬁnish next. Furthermore, I would not have realized that I Ching is a metamedium if I had not started this inquiry. This emergent understanding sheds light on the DEW Line card deck, which embodies the modus operandi of McLuhanesque explorations. Although aligning “hot vs. cool” with “yang vs. yin” seems to be the most natural move to make, I would not have made the move if it were not for this project. Incidentally, although the subtitle of Laws of Media is “The New Science,” this inquiry shows that “The Book of Changes” may not be a bad alternative, after all, especially when the book is translated into Chinese. My attraction to McLuhan’s work dates back to graduate school, when I was pondering the notion of “looking at” communication as opposed to “looking through”communication. The “irritant” came from Dr. Robert Terrill, who sees McLuhan as one who “looks at” media instead of “looking through” media. As I found out later, this distinction comes from Richard Lanham, the rhetorician and media ecologist in disguise. My admiration for McLuhan has increased over the years as I become more familiar with his work. I appreciate his mental agility, poetic wisdom, encyclopedic knowledge, and his amazing capacity to encapsulate and repurpose the works of other people, dead or alive. Over the years, I have seen traces of Lao Tzu and Confucius in McLuhan’s work. Then, as I was studying Laws of Media (McLuhan & McLuhan, 1972), I suddenly recognized the I Ching in him, which led me to undertake this inquiry. …. I write this article for a multifold purpose—partly to satiate my own intellectual curiosity, partly to rekindle interest in I Ching in the international media ecology community, partly to suggest to like-minded scholars that there is an under articulated intellectual kinship between the immemorial I Ching and McLuhan, the metaphysician of media, and partly to put interology to practice. Yet the real stake that calls this inquiry into being is not theoretical, or intellectual, but ethical and existential, and hence the section on I Ching in the age of digital mediation and cybernetic control. I hope this comparative study or interological inquiry has created numerous opportunities for mutual illumination between I Ching and McLuhan’s work. The full article can be found in the Canadian Journal of Communication, 39.3, 2014, pp. 449-468, which subscribers can access at http://tinyurl.com/ost3m4c . The paper can also be accessed at Academia.edu here http://tinyurl.com/lapqcfd . “The Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line card deck, co-designed by McLuhan and Harley Parker and released in 1969, is more or less a derivative of the yarrow stalks and hexagrams used by I Ching -informed diviners …. The deck helps one to see around the corner, get unstuck, and overcome one’s psychological blind spot. The beneﬁt is a sense of “throughness …”
Russian futurologist and writer Andrey Miroshnichenko illustrates the value of Marshall McLuhan’s media concepts of extension, amputation and Narcissus Narcosis, when applied to today’s digital media, in this case, the photographic capabilities of smartphones. This excerpt is taken from his book Man as Media: The Emancipation of Authorship, published in Moscow this year, which I highly recommend……..AlexK
Correction, Sept. 22, 2014: Andrey, the author, has informed me that this essay is NOT from his book Man as Media; it is one essay from his ongoing blog focused on media located at http://human-as-media.com/2014/06/15/the-sequence-of-singularities/ . However, my recommendation for reading the book stands; it has some original ideas to contribute and deserves to be better known.Extension, amputation, alienation… Copying!
McLuhan wrote that the tools shape not only users and their needs, but the entire environment as well. Thus, the automobile has given rise to several industries, and a network of highways and roadside infrastructure, including motels, supermarkets, etc. Arguably, merchandising – the technology of supermarket shelving – was preordained by Ford-T, in the same way that the size of a ballistic missile can be traced back to the width of a Roman chariot. The tools determine the environment even when it comes to little details, where the links to the tools are not obvious, but the origin of these links is inescapable.
I was at an airport once when a young couple walked by. The guy was taking a selfie, holding his camera on a special stick to capture a larger image. Sticks have been used as holders before, but old tripod mounts were used to take pictures of other people. Now, the mount is turned at an angle that makes it possible to take selfies from a distance: that of an extended arm.
This stick extends the arm as perceptibly as a fishing pole, but with one major difference. A fishing pole extends the arm outward to ensure better control of the external world. The selfie stick extends the arm in order to apply the extended function to the operator. At this point, it occurred to me that, in fact, the entire course of technological development and of civilization has all been leading up to the creation of an environment for selfies.
However, the tools that create an environment are, in turn, subject to some outward global logic than that which that describes them. Nothing happens without a reason: even sheep wear sheepskins.
After all, all tools created by man over the course of history serve to gradually improve the ability of humans to copy their own selves through tool-assisted McLuhan body extension, or the amputation of functions (such as memory or writing) using external devices. Then (and this is happening already today) – through copying a rendered image (creating an improved person in social media or/ and selfie mania). All this amounts to an ever-accelerating and concentrating practice of copying skills, from cave paintings all the way through the Vitruvian Man.
Eventually, an ultimate copy should appear.
An ultimate copy would be a copy which, like myself, has its own will (See the chapter, The paradox of self-copying). The ultimate copying means extending the personality into the external material, to the point of complete amputation. It is the logical conclusion of McLuhan’s “narcissism.” The race of extensions leads to a set of amputations that results in the complete alienation of self. It is funny: the selfie is the harbinger of the alienation of self.
Well, the time has come to buy a camera stick: an arm extension for taking selfies. Now we extend our arms not with a spear, a fishing pole or a hoe, but with a selfie stick. This telescoping selfie armed arm represents the quintessence of the last 12,000 years that have elapsed since the beginning of the Neolithic Revolution.
My name is Andrey Miroshnichenko. I am a media futurologist, journalist, writer and public speaker. I have a PhD in Journalism and Linguistics, and am a coordinator for the Russian Association of Futurologists, a Fulbright-Kennan scholar (2012-13), and an author of a number of books. My blog is about old and new media. The new digital environment, and the future of humankind are also part of my interests. Actually, the drafts of my upcoming books are stored here to alienate them from myself and get an outside perspective. No decorations, just juice from the brain. My blog is here: http://human-as-media.com/ .
By MEL WATKINS – September 16, 2014
The great Canadian scholar Harold Innis fought and was wounded in the trenches in the First World War. The experience changed his life forever. So argues A. John Watson in his brilliant biography, Marginal Man: The Dark Vision of Harold Innis, on which this blog draws.
The title and the sub-title tell it all. Fighting under British command, Innis, coming from the margin — albeit privileged — of the British Empire, was compelled to encounter Canada’s colonial status. The experience was the genesis of Innis’s resolve to create Indigenous scholarship from his hinterland status. These are the roots of today’s Canadian Political Economy and Canadian Studies, and later of the Toronto School of Communications and the study of media. The war was also to make Innis suspicious of authority and give his scholarship a sharpness that was rare at the time.
Fighting in the trenches also subverted Innis’s Christian faith. When he went to war he had been seriously considering entering the Baptist ministry. In Europe, however, he saw the barbarism, and how each antagonist claimed God’s backing, and how the Germans looked no different from him close up. Rather than the clergy, he returned to do graduate work in economics at the University of Chicago and then to teaching at the University of Toronto, and the rest is history.
It has become a key part of the official narrative of the war that from it emerged Canadian nationalism — though not in Quebec — and the demand, not for independence (that would be so unCanadian) but for increased autonomy within the Empire. Read the rest at http://tinyurl.com/klan6rf .
See also Harold Innis: An Intellectual at the Edge of Empire by Mel Watkins: http://canadiandimension.com/articles/1842 .
Marshall McLuhan was fascinated by advertising in all its forms, though his opinion of it was ambiguous at best; likewise advertisers and marketers were fascinated by McLuhan from the start of his prominence. San Francisco’s Howard Gossage had a strong influence in making McLuhan’s ideas known during the 60s (see earlier posting on this blog http://tinyurl.com/pdsh8jc ). The following article is a reappraisal of McLuhan’s work and influence by a public relations professional.Marshall McLuhan: A media guru reconsidered
by Paul Seaman – 19 July 2012
Photo by Henri Dauman / The Estate of Marshall McLuhan/Life Magazine
Marshall McLuhan was born 101 years ago on 21 July 1911 and he’s been greatly missed since 1980. This piece dedicated to his memory was first published last year [in 2011]. It was the opener here in a series of profiles probing the legacy of important figures in the PR realm: Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud, Walter Lippmann and Daniel Boorstin and more. So to first-timers and old-timers reading this sketch, enjoy the ride.
There’s a lot to be admired about the “prophet of the electronic age” who said “if it works it’s obsolete.” Marshall McLuhan coined the term the “Global Village.” He also produced classic phrases such as “the medium is the message,” “the medium is the massage”, and the “Age of Anxiety.” And he’s credited with conjuring “turn on, tune in, drop out,” over lunch with the 1960s advocate of LSD trips, Timothy Leary [which is dismissed by those who knew him best.]
McLuhan was the archetypal-media studies guru. Not only was he an icon of the 1960s counterculture, he also went on to become the “patron saint” of the newly launched Wired Magazine in 1996. They identified with McLuhan’s vision of decentralized, personal, and liberating electronic technological development that transcends time and space. They warmed to his vision of how electronic media would wipe away contemporary society’s traditional values, attitudes and institutions.
There is after all, as Andrew Keen has pointed out, much in common between the wired generation’s utopianism and the communal ideals of the hippies. As McLuhan told Playboy Magazine in 1968:
“The computer thus holds out the promise of a technologically engendered state of universal understanding and unity, a state of absorption in the logos that could knit mankind into one family and create a perpetuity of collective harmony and peace.”
McLuhan: still Wired
Still, for some good reasons, McLuhan remains an inspirational thinker to a new generation of youth. He appeals to those who want to break free from looking at the present in the rear-view mirror. He appeals to those who wish to create something completely different to what’s gone before and to those, including corporations and politicians, who wish to appear “in touch” and “cool.” In McLuhan’s words:
“These kids are fed up with jobs and goals [traditional ones, anyway], and are determined to forget their own roles and involvement in society. They want nothing to do with our fragmented and specialist consumer society. Living in the transitional identity vacuum between two great antithetical cultures, they are desperately trying to discover themselves and fashion a mode of existence attuned to their new values; thus the stress on developing an “alternate life style.”
In Wired‘s launch issue interview with a virtual McLuhan, whose consciousness they said had been preserved in a programmed bot, he says that the real message of media today is ubiquity. It is not something that we do. Rather it is something we are part of from the outside that excites all our senses. It is, he said through Wired‘s medium, as if we have amputated not our ears or our eyes, but ourselves, and then established a total prosthesis – an automaton – in our place. He (ok, his cyber-ghost) adds:
“Postindustrial man has a network identity, or a net-ID. The role is now a temporary shift of state produced by a combination of environmental factors, like in a neural network. This possibility has always been latent in the concept of role, but in the machine age this was perceived as a danger, while today it is simply a game – we no longer see shifting roles as dangerous and taboo and therefore theatrically compelling. Rather, we follow these shifts as if we were doing a puzzle or kibitzing a chess game. Yes, the medium is the message, but this does not mean and never meant that the content of the medium is a conscious reflection on itself. The medium is the message because it creates the audience most suited to it. Electronic media create an audience whose shifting moods are as impersonal as the weather.”
So, regardless that McLuhan’s name is no longer household fare (unlike, say, Warhol’s), his influence remains as significant among cyber-nerds as it was among beatniks. In fact his thinking is arguably more significant today, given the amount of hype that surrounds the cyberspace, Web 2.0 world.
So what was he really about? (Read the rest at http://tinyurl.com/odxf9ef )
Marshall McLuhan on Advertising:-
“Advertising is a vast military operation, intended, openly and brashly to conquer the human spirit. The critics of advertising miss the bus entirely by complaining about false claims. Nothing could be less important than the false claims of advertising. It is the total icon-making activity that matters, and in the degree that these men are icon-makers, they, certainly, these agency men, they certainly have the right to call themselves creative artists; whether they perform a good, benign social function is open to question, but as creators of tremendous effects, they are artists. Remember an artist is primarily concerned with getting your attention; whether he is a poet or a musician, his first wish and hope is to trap your attention. This is the first hope and wish of every advertiser. He is an artist certainly to that extent. He wants to shape your attention, to shape your sensibilities, to create an effect upon you. Whether you believe a word he says couldn’t matter less to him; he is interested only in effects, and not in changing your opinions or thoughts about anything. And this is also true of a poet; couldn’t care less about what you thought or felt about him or anything, as long as he gets his effect across.” - Marshall McLuhan, CBC Radio Broadcast “Ideas”, 1960s
“The objective of advertising men is the manipulation, exploitation, and control of the individual” (McLuhan, The Mechanical bride, 1951, p. 21)
“Advertising is the greatest art form of the 20th century.” – Marshall McLuhan
“The modern Little Red Riding Hood, reared on singing commercials, has no objection to being eaten by the wolf.” – Marshall McLuhan
“Historians and archaeologists will one day discover that the ads of our time are the richest and most faithful reflections that any society ever made of its entire range of activities.” –Marshall McLuhan
“Madison Avenue is a very powerful aggression against private consciousness. A demand that you yield your private consciousness to public manipulation.” – Marshall McLuhan (1964, Understanding Media, p. 232)
“The historians and archeologists will one day discover that the ads of our time are the richest and most faithful daily reflections that any society ever made of its entire range of activities.”
This longish critical essay by Drew Reed is about both TV & the Internet. The author is right. McLuhan said that obsolesced media are re-purposed and become art forms, as for example TV obsolesced movies and legitimized them as art, and movies did the same to theatre. Now the Internet is doing that to TV, which by happenstance is experiencing a new “golden age”, while the Internet has become the medium of choice for stupidity. This is a short excerpt from the article that prominently mentions Marshall McLuhan and castigates the stupidization of the Internet, partly attributing it to the removal of gatekeepers like editors, directors and producers. Anyone can publish or upload anything to the Internet and the content that ends up there is mostly crap; finding the good stuff is a necessary skill and constitutes a part of information literacy. I have added my comments to the excerpt below in square backets [ ].
Howard Beale (played by Peter Finch) in the movie Network (1976)Waiting for the Internet’s ‘Mad as Hell’ Moment Now that TV is the place for serious people with long attention spans, we’re really in trouble – by Drew Reed
[Marshall McLuhan] was a professor from Canada who was famous for his landmark 1964 book, Understanding Media, about TV and other media. In the title of the first chapter of the book, which has become probably the most famous chapter title ever, he stated that “the medium is the message” — in other words, technology shapes human life. He also distinguished between “hot” and “cool” media: hot media exclude participation, cool media prompt higher levels of participation.
After devising this intriguing and potentially very useful system of media classification, he then uses it to analyze television in a perplexing, Freakonomics-y way: he calls it a “cool” medium. Why, Marshall, why? His case is a bit shaky. For instance, in relation to film (a hot medium, of course) the television image is lower quality. Therefore, TV is a cool medium. Huh? What happens when we invent the UHDTV 48 years later? His response is that the higher quality would make it a different medium. There you have it, folks. The TV you’re watching today isn’t really TV. [No - you said it yourself; it's UHDTV, arguably a different medium created by different technologies. "The medium is the message!"]
McLuhan felt that television and “the electric age” brought people together, unlike writing — as well as earlier electronic media — which isolated and divided, and were therefore hot. TV, a cool medium, would foster greater participation (apparently the ability to channel surf counts as “greater participation”) [No Web 2.0 applications, especially social media, create greater participation.] and turn us all into one big happy global village. [No, "the global village makes maximum disagreement and creative dialog inevitable". - McLuhan in the Playboy interview, 1969] Okay, so he wasn’t that sappy about it, but that was the basic idea.
But if “the medium is the message”, and technology controls our collective fate, would television really steer us toward greater participation in the societal decision making process? Or would it merely deliver bread and circuses, or at least just circuses, to our households at light speed? [How about both?]
Then, in the 1976 movie Network, Howard Beale (played by Peter Finch) issued the line that’s been stuck in your head since you looked at the opening photo of this article: “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore!” Why was he mad? Because he was “a human being, goddammit!” And he wanted everyone watching his show to shout out their windows that they were “mad as hell” too. If you don’t get the references, just click through the link above to watch the original clip.
Now, to be fair, the counter-cultural-ness of this was called into question somewhat by the fact that it was released by a major movie studio. But nonetheless, it struck a chord. A good chunk of the American people realized that by that point, the purpose of TV in practice was not to educate so much as to stupefy.
We’ve come full circle — or should I say say, full circus. The internet, the biggest revolution in written text since Gutenberg’s printing press, has perhaps undone much of the progress the printing press has made. There’s a universe of information at our fingertips, yet we seem nearly as susceptible to “bread and circuses” as we were in Roman times, when most people couldn’t even read.
Is the medium really the message? Are we masters of our fates, or is our course predetermined by our technological milieu? The answer is, as it has been throughout this essay, a little bit of both. Perhaps Rome would not have been taken over by Augustus if there had been a hashtag #EtTuBruti. Or perhaps people would be too busy tweeting about gladiator matches to care.
Or maybe technology is bad. Maybe today, without the mind-melting combination of TV and the internet, we’d be less distracted, and able to come up with more effective solutions to climate change and the fact that our society is founded on the physical impossibility of perpetual growth. Maybe we need just the right kind of technology; after all, no one complained about the printing press killing attention spans, but everyone complains about TV and the internet doing so. Or it could be that, no matter what kind of media we use, we’re subject to the same greed and ambition that eventually brought down the Roman Empire. All the technology in the world — or none of it — will never change the fact that we’re human, all too human.
Nevertheless, I still have a few shreds of hope left. Despite the TV/internet death cycle and absurdities like #catfish, humanity can get better, we can confront its long term issues, and technology has a role to play. But the internet needs a “mad as hell” moment. People need to be shaken out of their hashtags and convinced to pay attention to the things that matter.
It’s something so important that we might need to say it with old media, the way Network used film to comment on television. How about a TV show? After all, TV’s having a “golden age” right now, and the internet most certainly isn’t.
But somehow I have a feeling that the best we can hope for is a GIF file, or maybe a couple of tweets. Oh well. At least it makes for a catchy tagline: “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m going to tweet about it!”
Read the full article at medium.com here: http://tinyurl.com/m7npdc4
“Nothing is inevitable provided we are prepared to pay attention.” – Marshall McLuhan
Invitation to Book Launch: B.W. Powe’s Marshall McLuhan & Northrop Frye: Apocalypse & Alchemy , York University, Toronto
Room 305 (Senior Common Room), Founder’s College, York University, Toronto
(see York U map here http://www.yorku.ca/web/maps/KEELE_Map.pdf )
The Date & Time:
Thursday, September 18, 2014 – 3:00 to 5:00 PM
Everyone welcome! Refreshments will be served.
Our World – The World’s First Ever Live Satellite TV Broadcast (1967) Included The Beatles & Marshall McLuhan
“Our World” Satellite TV Broadcast, June 25, 1967
25th June 1967 is a monumental date in the history of television, both for Europe and the world. The Eurovision programme “Our World” was the first live international television production, and it was a two-hour broadcast, around the globe, between 9pm and 11pm CET on a warm Sunday evening, 47 years ago.
It was an undertaking of incredible complexity, involving control rooms around the world, three geostationary communication satellites (Intelsat I, Intelsat II and ATS-1), over 1.5 million km of cable and ten thousand technicians and programme staff. The programme concept was to link up the world, to demonstrate that we are all part of “our world” – all brothers and sisters. The ground rules for the show included that everything had to be live, and that no politicians or heads of state must be seen.
Four days before the broadcast, five of the participating countries dropped out. The Eastern block countries were protesting at the West’s response to the “Six day War” in the Middle East. But the show went on, with an offer to do it again with them – if ever the Eastern block countries could agree to take part. (Source: http://tinyurl.com/qffhb4z )
The show began with the Vienna Boys Choir singing its theme song in 22 different languages, then switched to Canada for a live interview with media pundit Marshall McLuhan. The program moved to the U.S. and Glassboro, New Jersey, where American and Soviet leaders were meeting, then back to Canada for a rancher and his cattle, followed by segments from a subway construction project in Tokyo, Japan, and a tram station in Melbourne, Australia.
Then the show returned to London for its final segment: Seated on stools were The Beatles, surrounded by a small orchestra and a group of friends and acquaintances sitting on the floor (including Mick Jagger and The Who’s Keith Moon). They sang All You Need Is Love to a prerecorded instrumental and percussion track. After some studio work thereafter — Lennon was never happy with his voice and re-recorded his verses while Ringo Starr overdubbed drums — the song was released as a single on July 7 and was number one on the UK charts for three weeks. It appeared on the albums Magical Mystery Tour and Yellow Submarine. Regular international satellite commercial TV broadcasts would become common in the 1970s. No subsequent special programs were conceived, let alone performed. But for two and a half hours one evening in 1967, it was a big deal. (Source: http://tinyurl.com/p3vx726 )
Rolling Stone has just published a detailed article about The Beatles’ remarkable performance on that first-ever live satellite broadcast:-
The Beatles agreed to perform a new song as the representatives of the United Kingdom. “It was the first worldwide satellite broadcast ever,” Ringo Starr said years later. “It’s a standard thing that people do now, but then, when we did it, it was a first. That was exciting – we were doing a lot of firsts.
“Engineer Geoff Emerick remembered, “I don’t know if they had prepared any ideas, but they left it very late to write the song. John said, ‘Oh God, is it that close? I suppose we’d better write something.'” Paul McCartney proposed his composition Hello, Goodbye, which got released as a single five months later, but the group opted instead for John Lennon’s All You Need Is Love. They started recording the song on June 14th, with Lennon on harpsichord, McCartney on double bass with a bow, George Harrison on violin (for the first time in his life!) and Starr on drums.
The Beatles did 33 takes on June 14th, picked take 10 as the best, and in the following days, overdubbed vocals, piano (played by producer George Martin) and banjo (Lennon), plus guitar and some orchestral passages. Only on June 24th, the day before the broadcast, did they decide that they would release “All You Need Is Love” as a single – meaning that the world would be watching them cut their next record. Read the entire article here: http://tinyurl.com/mzb59tc . Here are The Beatles performing All You Need is Love for the first time ever on that historic occasion:-
See over 1.5 hours of the full Our World program here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H9IhSJ6ZjA
Here is Part 1 of Marshall McLuhan being interviewed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), giving his take on the significance of this historic TV transmission, prior to the event:-
And here is Part 2 of that CBC interview:-
A recent online article provides a short history of metaphors for the Internet ( http://tinyurl.com/pnofxro ) and offers an incomplete list of Net metaphors, which includes: information superhighway, infobahn, cyberspace, web, cloud and yes – global village. Metaphors are figures of speech that are especially useful to help us understand new phenomena, especially new technologies, but their usefulness often wanes over time, as familiarity either confirms or disproves their applicability. The Internet is not at all like a superhighway, and so that metaphor has lost its usefulness.
In The Gutenberg Galaxy (1962) Marshall McLuhan provided this definition of global village: “The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the image of a global village” (p. 31). And Marshall McLuhan’s “global village” metaphor has been used with increasing frequency since the arrival of the Internet and especially its social media like virtual communities, Facebook and Twitter. Indeed, arguably the phrase global village has transcended its metaphoric status and has become a meme, which, as applied to the Internet, the OED defines as “an image, video, piece of text, etc., typically humorous in nature, that is copied and spread rapidly by Internet users, often with slight variations” ( http://tinyurl.com/ndthm2x ).
The following article by Dr. Adam Earnheardt is republished here by permission:-
Realizing the global village
Published Sun, August 24, 2014
It’s difficult for me to imagine life without the Internet and social media. While it’s not the same as looking someone in the eye and having a conversation, in a broader way, I feel more connected to people from all over the world.
After all, we live in a global village.
At some point in your life, you’ve probably heard or used that phrase “global village.” You may have heard it used in reference to the Internet.
The first email you sent must have been exciting. You didn’t have to wait days for someone to get a letter in the mail. And more importantly, the response was usually a lot quicker.
More recently, you may hear “global village” used at the launch of a new social-media app, or in reference to being able to have real-time video chats with people in different countries.
What might surprise you, however, is that the person who is credited with coining “global village” did so in the 1960s — decades before the Internet and social media.
How could he have possibly known about a global village in the 1960s?
Marshall McLuhan, a Canadian philosopher who became a bit of a social icon in the mid-20th century (he had a cameo in the movie “Annie Hall”), predicted this brave new world of email, websites and social media long before the first computers were linked.“Global village” was a way to explain the extensions we have to other people all over the world through various channels and technologies. In 1962, he said: “The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the image of a global village.”
OK, I know this sounds like something some old, boring, stodgy professor-type would say. But underneath all of this is a prediction. In a sense, he predicted the Internet and, more specifically, social media.
The thought was that all the different technologies and mediums we use to connect with others and learn about the world would eventually exist in one place. He saw the telephone, television, radio, books, newspapers, and primitive versions of the computer as the heart of the global village.
McLuhan knew what was coming next. We’re used to hearing predictions of doom and gloom (see Nostradamus), but McLuhan’s predictions were (and are), for the most part, hopeful and exciting.
For example, he once said, “The next medium … will transform television into an art form.”
Now think about the way television has evolved in the past five years. Think of the volumes of videos we now access on Facebook, Twitter, Vine and other social-media apps that serve entertain and educate us.
Think of binge-watching and streaming TV shows that features rich characters and complex stories. This is yet another of his predictions in the process of being realized through the creation of new technologies.
Of course, we’re still witnessing McLuhan’s predictions. And although he died in 1980, I wish he were here to tell us what was next.
Maybe he has.
If you’re brave enough and have the time to wade through his dense yet artful prose — it took me five weeks to read McLuhan’s “Understanding Media” — maybe you’ll find the next great prediction. And maybe that prediction will lead you to create the next great invention, and create stronger connections for the global village.
Dr. Adam Earnheardt is chairman of the department of communication at Youngstown State University. (Source: http://tinyurl.com/q8ar3dj )
Beatles, ‘Life’ magazine, August 1964.
1964 was the year that Marshall McLuhan’s most important book – Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man – was published. After that, his best work lay behind him and he was increasingly met with growing criticism, misunderstanding and hostility. It might be useful to recall what else was happening in the world in 1964 to provide the context or ground out of which Understanding Media emerged. Marshall McLuhan and Understanding Media are very much part of the warp and woof of that revolutionary decade of social and political change.
A May 27, 2014 article in The Atlantic recalls that year in America 50 years ago:-
1964 was an eventful year — a half-century ago, humans were making strides toward space travel beyond the Earth’s orbit, and Tokyo hosted the 18th Summer Olympics. The Beatles took America by storm, as Race Riots gripped big cities — and the the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed into law. Boxer Cassius Clay became Muhammad Ali and the heavyweight champion of the world. Cyprus devolved into civil war between Turks and Greeks, and President Lyndon Johnson escalated U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. (Source: http://tinyurl.com/nqhvzjc )
One is tempted to say, plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. This article by Stephen Hume comments on Canada in 1964:-It was 1964 and Boomers began coming of age
I was among them, part of a generation that changed the world — but at the time we rode the wave without really noticing the depth of the changes
‘When I was 17, it was a very good year,” sang those harmonious, well-groomed, early-’60s coffee house folkies, The Kingston Trio, their lyrics’ fame later amplified by a Frank Sinatra cover. I turned 17 in 1964, one of the teenage multitudes at the leading edge of that Baby Boom we hear so much griping about; the one that my war-weary parents had passionately helped launch in 1946. There were more than 8.5 million Baby Boomers born in Canada. The simple demographics of those pent-up Second World War desires transformed society. The so-called pig moved through the population python, creating demand by demand for bigger houses, bigger suburbs, bigger cars, more schools, more shopping malls, more fast food outlets, and so on.
But 1964 was also the year in which Boomers began to separate from the careful, conformist, Silent Generation that had created its gigantic successor.
That’s what adolescents approaching adulthood do — and have always done. They challenge assumptions and expectations, rebel against social norms, define themselves in the world by emphasizing not their inherited similarities but their invented differences from exasperated parents.
So 1964 marked the beginning of an era of tumultuous change that would transform political, social and cultural institutions for the province, the country and the continent.
Canada would get a new flag, the red maple leaf on a white bar, shedding its colonial ensign and beginning a discussion about patriating the constitution from Britain. In Vancouver, the Indian Centre Society would open on West Broadway to serve its youth, the first in Canada to have an all-First Nations board of directors.
In 1964, the Boomer vanguard was about to leave the family and make its own way in universities and the workforce. For the United States, it meant a whole generation arriving at the age that made it eligible for military conscription into an emerging war that much of that generation rejected.
We were also entering adulthood in a society scarred by social injustices: racial segregation, religious bigotry, class and gender discrimination — and we reacted with the civil rights movement, Black Power, Red Power, Gay Power, Flower Power, Women’s Lib, the development of a counter-culture.
It was the year that Clint Eastwood became a star with the wry, genre-spoofing spaghetti western A Fistful of Dollars but it was also the year of Mary Poppins and My Fair Lady. Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, offered a bitter satirical antidote to Goldfinger, the latest in the James Bond franchise.
In Ontario, the legislature abolished a 114-year-old law permitting segregated schools. In the U.S., the Ku Klux Klan — including a local sheriff and his deputy — greeted President Lyndon Johnson’s Civil Rights Bill by murdering three young men registering black voters. A few months later, the first schools in Mississippi were integrated but there were riots in Harlem, a harbinger of the 1965 riot in Los Angeles that would leave 34 dead and $40 million in damage.
Yet, really, what teenager actually thinks deeply about political portents?
I was playing for a very good small town high school basketball team and writing sports stories not just for the school paper but for the small town weekly, selling the occasional squib for 25-cents-an-inch to a big city daily and so, as the song says, for me, when I was 17, “it was a very good year for small town girls,” too.
Who’d have thought then that the Kingston Trio were among the musical tremors that preceded a pop culture upheaval. Few of us actually noticed in the moment but those tremors would banish pop chart sensations of a few years before to the easy listening lounge. Move over, Old Blue Eyes, here come The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Animals, Bob Dylan, Joan Baez and Peter, Paul and Mary.
It’s like that with a lot of these immense social trends. We ride the wave but we never really notice until much later how Bobby Vinton, the gold record heartthrob of those girls on the school bus a few years earlier, was suddenly clinging by his fingernails to Billboard’s Top 100 list for 1964 while British Invasion bands like The Beatles and The Dave Clark Five dominated the top 20.
The communications visionary Marshall McLuhan saw what was coming in his book Understanding Media: the extension of man, advising us that “the medium is the message” but it didn’t make my reading list until university.
In 1964, as with many teenage boys, what commanded my attention were sports, cars and girls — and by a kind of self-interested default, the music that interested girls — not necessarily in that order.
Read the rest of this article at http://tinyurl.com/nu4s4ju .
Exactly 45 years ago this weekend [August 2], Paul Hoffert and the Canadian rock band Lighthouse were playing at the Atlantic City Pop Festival.
They shared the bill with Jefferson Airplane, Creedence Clearwater, The Crazy World of Arthur Brown, B.B.King, Tim Buckley, Byrds, Hugh Masekela and American Dream.
Keyboardist Hoffert and drummer Skip Prokop, of Paupers fame, had just formed the rock band with horns and strings, playing their first gig at the Rock Pile in Toronto, May 14, 1969 and Carnegie Hall 11 days later.This weekend, Hoffert is flying home from Los Angeles where he is on the advisory board of a music company. Sunday will be a family day spent with his wife of 50 years, Brenda, before participating in a conference on intellectual property in Kingston.
And then it’s off to class. The University of Toronto has just cross-appointed him to three different faculties: music, information and law. (He received an honorary degree from U of T two years ago.)
“He’s the ideal guy to plunk into that mix,” says Don McLean, dean of music. “We will use him as a mentor, a catalyst for research discussions, to teach in some cases.”While Lighthouse has been part of Hoffert’s life off and on for years, the physicist has wandered many paths, dipping his toe in scientific research, law, music composition and filmmaking.
He is an expert on intellectual property who taught at Harvard’s law school.
He helped invent the algorithm that makes music files smaller, when he was director of Digital Home Jukebox.
The Juno winner got media guru Marshall McLuhan to write the liner notes for his award-winning classical album, Hoffert Violin Concerto .
Hoffert, who composed the music in the Canadian film Outrageous , founded the Screen Composers Guild of Canada and numerous other Canadian arts organizations.
He received the Order of Canada in 2004 for achievement in and service to the arts.
An American who moved here at age 14, he was struck by the lack of agencies promoting culture and worked at getting them set up.
“I attribute my strong Canadian nationalism to my lifelong travels abroad and my immigrant background. It’s hard not to be proud of Canada,” he says.
At the age of 19, Hoffert was already an accomplished musician, stepping in for ill vibraphonist Peter Appleyard at one show. That’s also when he married Brenda, who was 18, at Toronto City Hall, a baby on the way.
They moved in with his father while Hoffert continued his music and studies in physics and chemistry at U of T during the day.
“When you are young, the possibilities are exciting,” says Brenda, a visual artist and lyricist who also manages Lighthouse. “We embrace whatever is out there, good and bad. That’s the situation, let’s figure it out.”“We were childhood sweethearts,” says Hoffert, sitting beside his spouse on the couch.
He practically dresses in a uniform: black clothing, some colour on the sneakers and a pigtail under his fedora. He explains the pigtail as “all I have left” adding, “After I left the rock scene I became tired of being hassled by customs officials at the borders.
“I kept the tail as symbol of rebellion that officials only see after I’ve passed through customs.”
Gradually he stopped touring with Lighthouse to spend more time with the family and the band disbanded only to reform again.
He earned his daily bread in the science world. Hoffert founded CulTech, an innovative research program at York University, and worked on projects like delivering information via videophone and video-conferencing (this was back in 1995).
Science and music have intersected constantly throughout his career.
“I really didn’t want to spend the rest of my life in technology,” says Hoffert, interviewed in his art-bedecked Lawrence Manor home.
The first thing you see is a giant painting of fellow musician and good friend Don Francks by Michael Crayden.
The three Juno Awards won by Lighthouse (Album of the Year, 1971 to ’73) and his personal award for Classical Album of the Year (1978) are lined up on a shelf. The walls are covered with Brenda’s colourful photographs and their entranceway has been turned into an enchanted forest by a scene painter (who would only paint plants indigenous to Canada when Hoffert wanted more exotic flora).
Read the rest of this article at http://tinyurl.com/oq36s2h .
Commemorating the 50th Anniversary of Marshall McLuhan’s Groundbreaking Book, Understanding Media (1964)
The Baylor Libraries Symposium highlights research and scholarship at Baylor by recognizing the major anniversary of a significant publication. Each year a particular work is chosen based on its cross-disciplinary appeal in the humanities, arts and/or sciences.2014 Baylor Libraries Symposium
September 25-26, 2014 The 2014 Baylor Libraries Symposium marks the 50th anniversary of Marshall McLuhan’s Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. In his influential and controversial book, McLuhan asserts that every medium is an extension of our human systems and can have a profound effect on our bodies, senses, perceptions, and understanding. McLuhan’s challenging work has influenced such diverse fields as the creative arts, technology, philosophy, business, communications, and politics.
Dr. Paul Levinson of Fordham University will deliver the symposium’s keynote presentation on Thursday, September 25, 2014, at 7:00 p.m. in Packard Auditorium of the Marrs-McLean Science Building. Dr. Levinson is a professor of communication and new media, prominent media commentator, and author. His award-winning book, Digital McLuhan, explores the implications of McLuhan’s insights for the Internet and the next horizon of digital media.
Abstract for Paul Levinson’s Keynote Address:
The Medium of the Book: Fifty Years after Understanding Media
A half century after the publication of McLuhan’s Understanding Media seems like a good time to examine the recent evolution of the book itself as a medium. In Understanding Media, McLuhan quotes the French poet Alphonse de Lamartine’s circa 1830 observation that “the book arrives too late”. Today, in a revolution as important as the introduction of Gutenberg’s press, books can arrive instantly anywhere in the world, via Kindles and other ebooks. But the most significant part of this development may pertain not to readers but authors, who can now publish books without a publisher and within an hour or less after the book has been written. The advantages and disadvantages of this bypassing of the traditional gatekeeper for authors and the world at large will be explored — they are mostly advantages — as well as the decline of gatekeeping in other media. Current conflicts, such as the dispute between Amazon and the traditional publisher Hachette will be examined. Connections between the evolution of the book and other facets of writing on the Web will be traced, including the capacity of readers to communicate directly and easily with authors, in modes akin to the “intelligent writing” that Socrates yearned for in the Phaedrus.
Metropolitan State University of Denver, Auraria Campus, Denver, Colorado
Kaleidoscope of Media and Community
Call for Papers
Thursday, June 11 – Sunday, June 14, 2015
Metropolitan State University of Denver Denver, Colorado
The KEYNOTE SPEAKER is Nicholas Carr influential author and thinker on culture and technology. His writing includes The Shallows (NY Times bestseller), The Big Switch, Does IT matter, and The Glass Cage. Finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.
See Nicholas Carr’s website at nicholascarr.com .
Metropolitan State University of Denver (MSU Denver) is proud to host the 16th Annual Convention of the Media Ecology Association. MSU Denver is Colorado’s land grant university and educates the most diverse student body of any institution in the state. The University is an epicenter for urban impact, transforming lives, communities and higher education. It is with this perspective of dynamic diversity, transformation, and community engagement that we aim to explore the concept of “Kaleidoscope of Media and Community” as the convention theme.
The term “kaleidoscope” means the observation of beautiful forms. When we look through a kaleidoscope, we see a multitude of shapes, colors, and textures combine to create beautiful patterns. With every turn of the kaleidoscope, the patterns shift and change, yet still combine to create a whole image. As abolitionist and clergyman Henry Ward Beecher said, “Our days are a kaleidoscope. Every instant a change takes place in the contents. New harmonies, new contrasts, new combinations of every sort. The most familiar people stand each moment in some new relation to each other, to their work, to surrounding objects. The most tranquil house, with the most serene inhabitants, living upon the utmost regularity of system, is yet exemplifying infinite diversities.” This conference looks at the recursive relationships of media and community as a pattern of continuously shifting, adapting parts combining in an infinite array of possibilities within mediated environments.
The field of Media Ecology is multi-disciplinary in nature, bringing together a broad collection of specialties, perspectives and expertise. This year’s theme of community offers the possibility to think about communities as part of media’s ecology and its technologies. Community opens our discourse to human interaction that is face-to-face, urban, rural, central, remote, online, hybrid, historical, fictional, human, animal, functional, dysfunctional, young, old, diverse, educated, oral, literate, digital and linked to the technology and media in its environment.
The 16th Annual Convention of the Media Ecology Association invites papers, panels, workshop sessions, short film and video works, and creative projects that explore the convention theme. Submissions on any topic of interest to Media Ecology are also encouraged. Authors who want their papers considered for the Top Paper or Top Student Paper award must indicate this on their submissions. All submissions will be acknowledged.
The convention site at MSU Denver is located in the heart of downtown Denver on the Auraria Campus. There is a wide range of hotels, restaurants, and entertainment options within easy walking or biking distance from campus.
Rental bicycles are readily available through the city’s program. Discounted rooms will be available at our state of the art on-campus, student-run hotel, as well as the SpringHill Suites at Marriott. An excursion to the mountains is planned for Friday evening. Additional information about lodging, logistics, and events will be forthcoming.
Guidelines for Submission
For Manuscripts (for MEA award submissions):
- Manuscripts should be 4,000-6,000 words (approximately 15 to 25 double-spaced pages).
- Include a cover page (or e-submission page) with your academic or professional affiliation and other contact information.
- Include a 150 word abstract, with the title. Use APA, MLA, or Chicago style.
For Paper and Panel Proposals:
- Include title, abstract, and contact information with your proposal.
- Outline, as relevant, how your paper or panel will fit with the convention
- Submission Deadline: December 15, 2014
Inquiries: Convention Coordinators – Dr. Karen Lollar, MSU Denver, email@example.com, (303) 556-8583 or Jacqueline Kirby, MSU Denver, firstname.lastname@example.org, (303) 352-7116 For more information on the Media Ecology Association and updated convention details, visit www.media-ecology.org.