inspired by the symposium workshop w/kmmk
December 6th, 2007 ethereal
A Discussion Inspired Rant on Giant Hamburger Buildings and the Potential for Disaster in User Controlled Public Forums
Kelly Murdoch-Kitt noted that in “Individualism: No Exit” there was a passage from that “Individualism: no exit” article that is semi-untrue now because of the Internet.
“The Ancients, with some exceptions, imagined free and fulfilling activities as those of the public sphere and privacy as the “deprived” arena of daily necessity. Modern liberalism, building on elements within Christianity, insists that perhaps some of man’s most significant activities, perhaps the most significant ones, properly take place in a private sphere, an area free from any social interference. More real than the public self is an inner self, defined by personal beliefs, opinions, and relationships, which must be fenced off from public authority (Steinfels 6).”
Though this view may have been the status quo in the mid-1970s when Steinfels’ article was published, 21st century technology jumps this metaphorical fence. The Internet, with its proliferation of social networks, media communities and blogs has quickly reversed the meaning of “public” and “private” for a technology-savvy generation.
Ancient society made these spaces public, modern society made them private, and the internet—for a specific generation of people—is making them somewhat public again, for those who choose to participate in that way. Although the internet in terms of access behavior is primarily an individualist act, proposals for communal access points hold the potential to open it up to collectivist consumption through public interactive nodes. However, this notion is somewhat idealized. The following excerpt from a post on Slate exposes the potential for the dark side of public human behavior to surface in such formats:
The Moron Majority:
How is a voting booth like an internet chat board?
Compiled by Geoffrey Andersen
Updated Monday, Nov. 19, 2007, at 1:17 PM ET
If you ever decide to make your living reading internet posts, prepare yourself to reach some dark conclusions about human nature. While there’s a lot of brilliant and worthy material in the Fray, many posts are so toxic that just reading them gives one the urge to rinse the eyes with soapy water. In my darker moods, well-meaning optimists reassure me that the internet is a distorted lens for viewing the human condition—that people sheltering behind anonymity express very different views than they’d profess in the public sphere. But, if this argument is true, then one has to wonder about that lynchpin of modern democratic governance—the secret ballot. After all, in their secrecy and insulation from personal accountability the ballot box and the internet are very much alike. If voters are as nasty in the polls as posters can be on the boards, then democratic theory might need a re-think.
http://www.slate.com/id/2177824/fr/flyout
As the age of access to information charges forward, we have to consider that democracy is not always the kindest form of expression. And you know what … maybe its time to relinquish control of every image and every potentially offensive utterance and let dialogue emerged unfettered. Heaven forbid a political candidate practice this freedom in the upcoming election!
In our discussion session, Mark Heggen and the User Control advocate group proposed a Giant Hamburger Building for downtown Raleigh as part of revitalization and renewal effort. Will Temple and David Cabianca of the Designer Control group wrote “screw the user.” Perhaps somewhere in between there is a line of demarcation where the two groups can shake hands and both be pleased. However, in a post-post-modern society still recovering from modernist idealism, a louder voice and a little less kid-gloved restriction on the user voice may serve us well. Whoever “us” is … back to you, individualist reader.
Co-written by Kelly Murdoch-Kitt and myself