Narrative Complexity: I’m Lost

I began to think about the television shows I watch and why I watch them. What keeps me as a viewer intrigued enough to spend from 30 minutes to a couple of hours a day to watch something that isn’t even real. Narrative complexity keeps us enthralled and wondering, making us think about the show and get to know the characters little quirks and personality traits. In this blog I will explore the idea of narrative complexity and how is it used in this day and age.

The idea that we talked about in class was that cinema will normally follow a typical Hollywood story; balance, conflict and new balance. That is to say you will normally find a “good guy” and a “bad guy” either fighting for the affection of a girl, or waging war against each other for pride and glory. Television however is different. Storylines have to be far more complex to keep the viewer interested enough to remember what day it was on in order to watch the next episode a week later. By making it that you have to watch the previous episodes to understand what’s going on, it encourages the viewer to be more actively involved with the show, we call this encyclopaedic impulse. They do this with the introduction of new characters, plot twists and especially cliff-hangers.

One series which was especially prominent for this was “Lost”. Constant new information about where and who the characters were got viewers involved in the mysterious setting that was “the island”. I think the biggest mistake that the creators made was dragging it out for too long, so much so that viewers got bored and found it hard to follow. Jason Mittell mentions this in his article narrative complexity but I disagree with him in the sense that we as viewers are fickle. He says that these shows ask us to trust them and that in the end the explanation they give to us will pay off. To this day I still don’t know what that island was or why those people were on it!

Written by Ross Walsh

http://upperclassmonroe.blogs.wm.edu/2012/06/14/defining-narrative-complexity-an-intro-to-the-first-several-weeks-of-my-research/

Jason Mittell, ‘Narrative Complexity in Contemporary American Television‘, in: The Velvet Light Trap 8 (Fall 2006), pp. 29-40

Tastemakers

Viral videos are a strange phenomenon where someone uploads something online and its popularity seems to explode for no reason. We talked in class about the idea of “tastemakers” and how they affect the number of views a seemingly random video online becomes. Tastemakers are someone or a group of people who’s opinion we value and who will trust, most likely a celebrity, as we heard from Kevin Alloca with the “Double Rainbow” guy when Jimmy Kimmel tweeted about the video. This man who lived in Yosemite in the United states suddenly became known worldwide for his love of rainbows.

            I could give countless examples of viral videos that I’m sure you would have heard of but I think the most recent and prevalent one I can think of is by Korean singer Psy. At this stage I think most people around the world know of the song Gangnam Style which has reached over 1.5 billion hits on YouTube. Do you not think this is quite strange? For one it’s not a particularly good song in my opinion but yet it’s one of the most listened to songs in the world. In case you have not heard it before, here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bZkp7q19f0

            Again this sudden popularity is down to a tastemaker. The tastemaker in question is Justin Timberlake who  tweeted about this song commenting on the dance in which he does in the video. I think the idea that a celebrity has the ability to make someone so internationally well known is interesting but it also puts a huge amount of pressure on the person to sustain this popularity. We saw with Susan Boyle, of Britain’s Got Talent fame, that sometimes it can become too much to the point where they become mentally unwell.

            We talked in class about Boxxy and how she divided the internet’s opinion on her. With just one quirky video thousands of people responded to it, and not always in a positive way. People went to extreme lengths of hacking her account and getting it deleted. Parody videos were made, memes were created and fan clubs were set up, all for the sake of one video that a girl posted on the internet. Andy Warhol said that in the future we would all have get our 15 minutes of fame but I don’t think he foresaw the power of the Internet.

 

Burgess, J. (2008). “All Your Chocolate Rain Are Belong to Us”? Viral Video, YouTube and the Dynamics , 101-109.

 http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/academics/communications/research/vol2no1/08West.pdf

http://research.google.com/pubs/pub37650.html

Facebook: Behind the Screens

After reading the article “Boredom on Facebook” I began to think about how much time I actually spend sifting through my news feed that I take an active interest in. After testing my theory out I soon found out that it was very little indeed. From the picture of what some girl I met years ago on holiday ate for dinner to the abstract song lyrics that people post up to try and sound poetic I found myself wondering why they were doing this. Is it the feeling the need to interact with the outside world or is it more likely the need for attention.

            I found that the vast majority of statuses that were posted were people who were just looking for a response. Whether it be the classic “Could this day get any worse?” or the even more blatant “How could he say that to me?”. It made me think why they didn’t just call a close friend as opposed to announcing it to the world.

 

“The impulse to take a picture of your lunch and post it to Facebook or Twitter only

makes sense when we view this as an invitation to participate in a shared asynchronous

experience at a distance.” (Wittkower, 2013)

            I think this principal applies to these kind of statuses. People have a need for social interaction and by asking these sort of open questions on Facebook this provides the perfect platform for response.

“The thing that we are trying to do at Facebook, is just help people connect and communicate more efficiently.” Mark Zuckerberg

            We talked in class about how we are constantly connected to each other and how the need to be “social” is forever increasing. I feel that the increase in websites and apps is counterproductive and that in order to be social physical contact is extremely important. It’s easy to say you have over 400 friends on Facebook  but in reality how many of those people would you stop and talk to on the street let alone acknowledge. I think it’s very sad that children these days are being raised in this type of culture and maybe this social change isn’t for the best.

Written by Ross Walsh

  http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1644040,00.html              

 

Wittkower, D. (2013). Boredom on Facebook. Unlike Us Reader. Social Media Monopolies and Their Alternatives. , 185.

 

 

Talking or Facebooking, why do we have phones?

In this day and age I often ask myself why do I have a phone? Is it so there’s a two way communication between me and my peers or is it so I can check my Facebook/Instagram/Twitter every five minutes when I’m bored.

In the early 90’s when mobile’s began to get popular they were simply used as a medium of connecting people in two separate places away from a landline, however today, I use my phone a lot more for social networking than for calling or texting. In de Souza e Silva’s publication ‘Re-Conceptualizing the Mobile Phone’ she states that “youngest users (between 14 and 18) have the most distinct profile, using the cell phone as an expressive medium for social purposes.” I don’t entirely agree with this statement, yes it is 100% true the younger generation do solely rely on their phones for social networking but I see people in the 18+ age bracket doing the exact same.

Cameras are slowly becoming things of the past on a night out for young people, why bother when you have a phone that has a 10megapixel camera? There is not a night out that you don’t hear someone say ‘Oh! Take a pic for Facebook’ or ‘Don’t you dare put that on Facebook!’ , have our lives really become that shallow and closed minded that everything revolves around social media? As much as I hate to say it but in some ways I think they have. In one way we’re a bit like social networking guinea pigs, we’re the generation that has never been before, to me I feel if we are this deep in connecting through cyber space what is the future for others going to hold?

So you’re in a famous tourist spot? ‘Check us in on Facebook’, want minute updates on current affairs ‘Sure just check Twitter’, a picture doesn’t look so good? ‘Instragram it.’

The latest phenomena at the moment is ‘Snapchat’, Snapchat is a photo messaging application developed by four Stanford University students. Using the app, users can take photos, record videos, add text and drawings, and send them to a controlled list of recipients. Users set a time limit for how long recipients can view their photos, up to 10 seconds, after which they will be hidden from the recipient’s device and deleted from the company’s servers.

The use of mobile phones is forever changing. Originally regarded as mobile telephones, these devices can now be increasingly compared to micro-computers, 14 remote controls and collective social devices. Because mobile devices create a more dynamic relationship with the Internet, thereby embedding it in everyday outdoor activities, we can no longer address the disconnection between physical and digital spaces. Silva declares this new type of space, hybrid spaces.

We started out we games of Tetris and Snake and monophonic ringtones, we then had Snake2 and polyphonic ringtones. As time went on buttons began to disappear and smart phones were the norm, today having an iPhone or a Samsung Galaxy is more a social status than anything else. Every time a new phone is announced I don’t think it can get any better or more advanced but I’m always proved wrong so who knows what the future holds.

• Re-Conceptualizing the Mobile Phone – From Telephone to Collective Interfaces by Adriana de Souza e Silva
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapchat

Rebecca Drew

Digital Revolution

Without doubt there has, and more than likely, always will be the question of ‘What is art?’ however with the digital revolution that question has become even more obscure. Many ask is it a whole new way of ‘art’ or is it the continuity of former arts revolutionizing as one? It’s not only technology based but in many ways it captures modern living in a new way.

For me I personally can’t find a medium between old and new although I know for many its common practice. I’m not saying digital art and traditional art are worlds apart, yes of course digital art is a skill and may need practice just as is traditional art but for me there is something much more nostalgic and creative to be able to hold a pencil or a brush and create a piece of art of to sculpt a sculpture compared to sitting at a desk staring at a computer screen bringing objects, texts and coding together to form this new generation of ‘’art work’’.

I think it’s safe to say I definitely fall under the big ‘R’ of von Driel’s ARIA model, a part of that large group of people resisting this digital revolution, looking at the new medium as if it’s both threatening and nonsensical.

Can we really compare these 

  to ‘new’ art like these?

Von Driel classifies his ARIA model as 

• Amazement
• Resistance
• Imitate
• Authentic  

With digital art I never seem to find myself amazed by it , just having more of a dislike and distaste to what I see, I don’t find it to be imitating traditional art or in anyway authentic. However with all new technologies and ways of life I always feel the need to resist at first and shy away from what is new so who knows, maybe over time I will slowly begin to appreciate this new type of ‘art’.

 

Rebecca Drew

 

‘Sharing is Caring’

In 2012 Derek Khanna wrote a brief on what he called the ‘Three Myths’ of copyright issues, just like we discussed in class, his question was has copyright empowerment become too favourable for the copyright holders rather than the public? During the industrial revolution the rise of industrial capitalism became massive with individuals cashing in from profits rather than the state, something a bit similar to the area surrounding copyright issues right now as well as these are also guided by current economics as well as other influences.

Myth 1 – Khanna basically states he thinks that the focus should be on ‘productivity and innovation’ rather than awarding merit with finances and to side from the view that the purpose behind copyright is to compensate the creator of the content involved.

Myth 2 – He feels that copyright is not free market capitalism, but rather “a guaranteed, government instituted, government subsidized content-monopoly.”

Myth 3 – ‘Khanna considers the current copyright regime ill-crafted to maximize innovation and creativity because he believes copyright terms outlive the period necessary to create incentive. Additionally, he emphasizes that the expansive current regime promotes “rent-seeking” behaviour that ultimately interferes with innovation.’ (1)

Of course these are just the views of Derek Khanna and the ongoing question is what is and what isn’t correct? Terry Hart, the Director of Legal Policy for the Copyright Alliance and creator of the legal blog Copy Hype criticises Khanna immensely, when comparing the two there is not only a disagreement but also contradiction on the direction in which copyright reform should take. (2)

In Philippe Aigrian’s ‘Sharing – Culture and Economy in the Internet Age’ his main question is ‘if we recognize that individuals have a right to share digital works between themselves, how can we make sure that many will be fairly financed and rewarded for producing these works?’ There is a massive divide surrounding the topic of the internet and file sharing, all mainly based on individual artists versus individual profits, in recent years we’ve seen sites such as Napster and Limewire being shut down for copyright violation but when one goes it just gives another an opportunity to start up. Countries such as France are forever making new laws yet if there’s a will there’s a way and people will ensure they get the content they want whether it’s legal or illegal.

I feel how or if copyright infringement will ever cease is a question that definitely cannot be answered right now and not in the near future either…

—————————————————– Anonymous ——————————————————

Anonymous is a loosely associated network of hacktivists. A website associated with the group describes it as “an internet gathering” with “a very loose and decentralized command structure that operates on ideas rather than directives”.The group became known for a series of well-publicized hacks attacks on government, religious, and corporate websites. Anonymous fights for a type of ‘freedom of speech’ online and the right for the internet user to pass documents freely as well as informing them of topics certain organisations try to hide from the public. (4)

  

Anonymous graffiti, Budapest Hungary, June 2013

(1)    http://btlj.org/2013/04/11/the-purpose-of-copyright-examining-the-retracted-republican-study-committee-brief/

(2)    http://www.copyhype.com/about-me/

(3)    Philippe Aigrian’s – ‘Sharing – Culture and Economy in the Internet Age’ pages 22-25.

(4)    http://wn.com/anonymous_(group)

Rebecca Drew