An open question was left at a former post : Reading Facts. which I wish to revisit. When knowledge is not valued over its ability to be fast or slow what does is become? The issue with fast or slow knowledge rests on the delivery form factor, ie through computation (kindle, ipad internet) or not. The ability for the message to be lost due to the form factor it becomes delivered through has change dramatically due to technology in the past 10 years. Marshall Mcluhan said “the medium is the message” This statement has become widely accepted when discussing media theory especially print material. We are acutely aware of how content delivery changes between tabloid news, newspaper news, and news Television, and that is only taking into account a line of similar content. As content types diversify the ability of the medium to affect the message is compounded. There is a lively debate in academia as to how new media devices are affecting education and to that extent society. The level of pervasiveness within technologies like the internet, smart phones, computation and the like are having on sectors of society across all economic positions remains a huge challenge from both a standard of living access point but also a society & educated populace stand point. Because of that, education is on the head of the technology spear. The ubiquitous nature of information technologies has forced the systems of education to reevaluate their methodologies for better or worse. However I believe there is a massive gaping hole in the collective thinking process of education when it comes to communication technologies. Ubiquitous computation is seen as a barrier to teaching methodologies due to the nature and speed at which computational devices alter and change and access of content especially the content that is attempting to be taught through the teacher. The 19th century education model still dominates a vast majority of theory of education system especially k-9.
I don’t teach in k-9 but I would imagine it would be super difficult to dish out lessons, mandated curriculum and dated textbooks when a majority of that content can be accessed, parsed and delivered at the touch of a mouse. I am not saying that the speed of the information age is a bad thing, I can only imagine how it throws a wrench in to the teaching methodologies of countless classrooms. Similarly I am not suggesting that there should be a free fore all on the Internets access and ubiquitous nature. Many have discussed the difficult bind to which education is in and me rambling on about it is not really the point especially when there are writers & educators like Sr. Ken Robinson. But education has to find a what to establish what it means to be educated in our modern times. Is this going to be based on the old model of memorization and specialization or will it me more the ability to ask the right question and be endlessly curious with the ability to use technology to not only find the answer but contribute back to how the questions are asked?
I do believe that the ubiquitous nature and speed of our current technology has had a profound impact on our ability to tell stories. It is arguable that we have more stories then ever before and I would agree with that, however, it is purely an outcome of access not quality. The saying quality over quantity has never been more appropriate than when speaking about the internet and the amount of content that is added to it knowledge bank daily (to which I am adding with this blog). Therefore I believe that a fundamental piece that is missing in education is truly great storytelling skills, conceptual thinking and lateral thinking methodologies and subsequent devices to assist those skills. The ubiquitous catch all nature of computers is, in my opinion, having a detrimental impact on thinking out side the computer and impacting the skills of students, designers, teachers, and businesses.
I recently took place with the generosity of the AIGA Los Angeles Organization in the Student Portfolio day as a reviewer. Although I did not review hundreds of portfolios, one thing that I was immensely disappointed in was the lack of storytelling when in came to presenting visual ideas and solutions. Students seemed to have a prescribed set of things in their somewhat unimpressive collections of work. It made me sit back and think about what it is that a designer does? In the 5 portfolios I looked at it felt as if I was looking at a predetermined script. It went something like this. 1 to 2 logos with 1 of those logos as a letterhead business card etc, 1 to 3 print posters (just the solutions no context), 1 to 4 ad campaigns (non of them a systems of ads just a single advertisement), 1 to 3 editorial spreads (no context), 1 package (a cd jewel case, no context), and 2 to 3 misc illustrations, photographs, or typography pieces (again no context). Each having between 12 and 15 pieces. Only one person had even the hint of digital competency with an overwhelmingly simple html site but I gave her some slack because she was only a sophomore as USC and I appreciated the gusto to get evaluated at such a early stage in her schooling. However the predicted procedural nature of the portfolios made me stand back for a second and say wait? Is this really how education views the role of designers? Has the system of curriculum’s and dated industrial needs reflected so poorly on the skill sets of designers? Can we as visual professionals be so quickly summed up. My frustration with the lack of story telling lead me to be quite harsh on my last review of the day. I told my student. “Yes you have the required 15 pieces of work that has some how been determined this makes you a designer, however I know nothing about you! You have not told me a single story or lead me along any thinking path that has convinced me that your visual solutions are the correct ones.” I followed it up with “a logo and business card are the baseline of designer however if you can not tell me a story or show me that you have a making and thinking methodology then I really don’t care about your work. Period. I want to know if you draw, how many images you collected how many versions you did, why you chose to do this the question you asked the things you were looking at and thinking about when you made it. If I was going to hire you which I am not, I would want you. Not a prescribed set of 5 to 8 baseline skills, yes they are necessary but not unteachable in industry. If I were you I would find a way to let your portfolio be a mirror of your passion and your ability to think and think as a designer not the curriculum of your design education” After going a bit of a rant I said I was sorry for being overly harsh but without it all the work becomes useless to which he disappointingly agreed.
After all the reviews were over the reviewers and educators gathered as a recap of the day. During the discussion a number of reviewers shared the same frustration with a lack of personality and passion and storytelling in their students work. I am convinced that this lack of story telling is based in the narrow minded approach most educational systems are equating to design. Design rather than a thinking approach is a determined set of skills. However the collection of design professionals siting in the room were disgusted with the lack of understanding of what industry is looking for out of our design education systems. It seemed to me the design education systems were looking to teach predetermined skills where industry was looking for creative visual thinkers. Somewhere there is a missing element in the teaching of skills to designers. I believe that skill is storytelling. Design is not making a logo, the logo is the culmination of visual problem solving that requires a huge set of skills including design research, anthropology, biology, visual taxonomy, system thinking, business, drawing, computer skills, history etc etc.
“Design is that area of human experience, skill and knowledge which is concerned with man’s ability to mould his environment to suit his material and spiritual needs.” _archer, B
This lack of story telling could be a vision problem of education to design or it could be something more systemic as I had mentioned at the beginning of this post. Regardless of the root of misbegotten storytelling, I think that until we as educators, designers, professionals, and thinkers articulate the importance of media specific storytelling methodologies and start charting changes in the education delivery systems to meet these new changes, our society will start to see the growing effects and missed opportunities from not teaching and learning from profound stories and storytelling processes.
It may come as a surprise to many but the idea of adding daily value to a digital object is a relatively untrodden landscape. Some would say its the beginning of the end for the newspaper, however this day has been long coming. Now don’t get me wrong, I like the physical newspaper it has an experience that is uniquely its own which I believe is a reason it has both dissipated and stayed beloved by many. The ritual of the morning paper sufficed generations of engaged and interested citizenry, but the fact of the matter is that ritual is no longer. A causality of a mediated and techno social world. However the content that exists on the pages of newspapers, some would say dieing media, is still relevant. I would argue more relevant then ever because the access of citizen journalism and the 24 hour news cycle has severely watered down the quality of content. Therefore the success of the “The daily” iPad app, which in my opinion took them way too long to launch, will rest on the quality of the content and subsequently the advertising.
In the feature laden demo, an emphasis is placed on the interactions with the content. The swipe, the carousel, the saving and sharing of content. However not one attribute or hint to how advertising infiltrates the content or coincides with the content is shown? Plus what kind of information will the daily know about their subscribers (With facebook connect they can know a whole lot) I believe the content is priced very reasonable. Low enough to make it worth a lark but also an amount that makes me wonder how Murdock is making ends meet? Since there was no inclination to the severity of advertising within the content then it is safe to presume that individualized use data is what he is hoping to mine! Similar to Facebook personalization of advertising is accessed through the tracking of users. What better way to track users then by giving them an app to read the news from every day. Now I am probably over reacting but it would be nice to know what kind of information “the daily” keeps track of? But this is the trade off for cheap content, right? Something has to give. Now I have no proof of this hypothesis but it is a logical explanation unless “the daily” is strangely populated with ads which very well could be the fact. Either way these new technologies allow for a much different level of interaction between content provider and company. The newspaper model was relatively simple before, deliver a paper into people’s hands and charge advertisers for that access. Similar is the iPad but now an advertiser can have proof of that delivery rather than a guess like that of a newspaper subscription. Now the burden of access is left to the trackers of that unique fact.
Craft, quality, longevity, care, sustainable, informative. These words are associated with the experience of well designed books. As a majority of this blog has explored the ideas of design are essential to a experience. Experience is a word that has a wide range of use. It can be broad and specific shallow or deep and short and long. Experience design then has to deal with these binaries at every turn. The video above is an interview with @craigmod at http://www.craigmod.com an great blog and resource for opening the discussion when it comes to the publishing community. I agree with his premise that print material will never go away! and that for existing publishers to compete with digital media they need to reassess the design quality of books. Increasing the craft, quality, and experience which could increase the cost but would establish a different value for the user / readers.
Human beings are very astute creatures and the nuance of quality is probably our greatest skill. The perception of quality is a realm that advertising and design and media has been manipulating for 1000′s of years. Perception of quality is an outcome of communication and commerce. I don’t believe I need to talk about the value of design and quality in an economic system I believe Adam Smith layed it out just fine in wealth of nations. How ever the experience of quality is something that technology has a great impact on. Systems of manufacturing, production and distribution also impact the perception value of an object in society. When Gutenberg was first printing books there the value of such an object was so rare that is had great value this revolution allowed at wave of printing innovation that has made many millionaires and billionaires over through out time. However the advances in manufacturing and production has also degraded the perception of value of print material. Walk through any common book store and the weight of the complicated system that produces books is transparent. The whole system falls away and all that is left is a price tag. It is a huge problem for the perceived value of a book and its experience. This concept occurs in many other place in contemporary society including out modern grocery stores. Business practices of efficiency take the system and infrastructure as unimportant to the experience of an object for sale. However the entire system is the story the context for a book in this case to live in the world. The complication of these system are looked at as too complicated for the simplicity of marketing and advertising of objects. The idea that we only make decisions in the moment. However we know this not to be true! Objects especially well made books become way more interesting when their quality and production are evident on the surface. The most valuable book are those from the gutenberg press. There story and longeivity add to this quality but so does the system that kept their existence going ie libraries. Therefore the quality of a book is the sum of its entire experience. When a book shows up on a shelf is not the beginning of the story is is somewhere in the middle. The story needs to become more evident just as craig mod discusses. Marshall McLuhan once said “we become what we behold …. we shape our tools, and therefore after our tools shape us” for me I hope that that tool is a beautifully design well crafted well written book!
With the release of Apple’s iPad (joke with standing) there was the buzz of technological potential all around the interwebs. Apple has the potential to make game changing devices and with a track record of the iPod, iPhone, and iMac it is hard not to argue with their ability to produce and create a mobs of loyal and dedicated fans. The iPad may not be the replacement to the laptop which many in the Nerd-o-sphere hoped it would and a nice review has been posted by Phil Van Allen (http://www.philvanallen.com/news/its-not-a-laptop-what-people-are-missing-about-the-ipad/)
The iPad is a platform system one not to unfamiliar to the iPhone, the device becomes a conduit for the apps to which it runs. This is the success model that has produced revolution in mobile communication. As for the types of apps that the iPad will start to inherit, I believe that some will greatly enhance the user and engage at a much different experience level that a laptop ever could.
On the other hand, the iPad is still a screen a back lit screen with multitouch software based apps it is not a book, or a news paper, or a manual. Now matter how you cut or change the app it is still a pixel. Not to say that it is not a very effective and useful screen, no but to see or try and utilize it as if it were not a screen is a vast mistake.
Take the book store example that is highlighted in the images with in this post. The metaphor of a books and its physical attributes of paper are being replicated with in the experience of the screen interface. The book application starts to engage the user as if with in that particular app they are interacting with paper; however, this has missed the opportunity to engage the affordance of the screen. A screen is not a book and a book is not a screen. The ironic thing is that technologies as advanced as the iPad are trying to be a book instead of being what they really are, a screen.
In the New York Times article Kevin Kelly lays out the arguement that culture is under going a paradigm shift.
“Now invention is again overthrowing the dominant media. A new distribution-and-display technology is nudging the book aside and catapulting images, and especially moving images, to the center of the culture. We are becoming people of the screen. The fluid and fleeting symbols on a screen pull us away from the classical notions of monumental authors and authority. On the screen, the subjective again trumps the objective. The past is a rush of data streams cut and rearranged into a new mashup, while truth is something you assemble yourself on your own screen as you jump from link to link. We are now in the middle of a second Gutenberg shift — from book fluency to screen fluency, from literacy to visuality.” Kevin Kelly
The ubiquity of screens is a force that is undisputable. The iphone alone sold 21.17 million in 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone). Now the access to screens and networked technology has unearthed a vast and unwealdy beast that has left entrenched media gasping for air. With many companies opting for abandoning ship rather then shifting or recognizing a location for improvement or cohabidance.
Capitalism thrives on competition and what better competition then between paradigms right? Kevin Kelly coments that in the age of computation we have entered that age of screen fluency, this in fact may be true but the line of thinking that book knowledge and screen knowledge or mutually exclusive undermines the ability of screen literacy to convey meaning. Oral culture may have been commodified by the literature and literature may be commodified by the motion picture and motion pictures may be commodified by screen and software but they are all connected. The separation from media type to media type is not fundimentally different. The two paradigms share the ability to convey knowledge through metaphor, storytelling and emotion. The difference is the speed and experience of that media.
Books are slow, pragmatic, (sometimes) linear and require exisiting visual experience to impact the narrative and comprehension, while screens are fast, hyper-linked, variable and use visual experience to impact. Books are quiet and blind, while screens are hyper and loud.
The Cronotope is a working prototype evolved from a methodology of thinking and design research which builds upon the book experience and ecology of book culture. The project rather then replacing the physical book with intangible data, incorporates the technological advances of networked pages, shared margin spaces, and physical interaction into the experience of the printed artifact as a way to explore the space between printed material and the screen.
Reading is uniquely a singular interaction but knowledge and comprehension are communal. The Cronotope is a system and design platform that incorporates the communal aspects of reflection, knowledge, and comprehension into the experience of the individual act of reading. As a system, the Cronotope will engage the social interaction and ecology of book clubs, study clubs, and educational groups. Through giving interaction to the physical pages of a book and building shared spaces for reflection, the engagement of comprehension becomes a shared event. When the margins of books and literature are shared what does the margin become, a communication space? A passive location to challenge a social exchange? A reflection space for many? A space to engage the content deeper with in a group?
The Cronotope is an outcome of seeing print material replaced and disregarded by its technological brethren. Print material including books, magazines, periodicals, newspapers, and comics have all come under the treat of being relegated to the trash due to networked screen technologies. Technologies such as the Kindle, Nook, future tablet PC’s and smart phones have greatly diminished the market share of print material. As technologies move forward and interaction with print material becomes lessened, the question should be how did this happen? it should be why has print material not adapted and become a link between ink and screen? The Cronotope is a system that uses prototyped conductive inks along with networking capabilities to explore and engage the experience of literature and its physicality as essential to its media type.
The Cronotope is named from the concept developed by Russian philologist and literary philosopher M.M. Bakhtin who used the term to designate the spatio-temporal matrix, which governs the base condition of all narratives and other linguistic acts. The term itself can be literally translated as “time-space.” The term is developed in Bakhtin’s essay published in English as “Forms of Time and of the Chronotope in the Novel.”
Knowledge is embodied in people gathered in communities and networks. The road to knowledge is via people, conversations, connections and relationships. Knowledge surfaces through dialog, all knowledge is socially mediated and access to knowledge is by connecting to people that know or know who to contact.
Denham Grey
Apple is selling record numbers of downloadable games for the iPhone and iPod Touch. This is attracting publishers because the lack of physical media is better economically for both consumers and video game creators (November 12)
Microsoft is set to open up the XBox 360 to user-generated games on November 19, all of which will only be available via download – there will be no DVDs (October 30)
The bullet list is a few examples of technologies and media delivery platforms that currently or will in the future deminish print media’s market share or potentially eliminate it all together. Print Media platformes of books, magazines, posters, etc etc are talked about in term of being Tangible Media.
The description of tangible is defined as capable of being perceived especially by the sense of touch.
The materiality of paper and ink in all is variety from newsprint to gompy has earned print media the use of that terminology with in its description. Media delivery devices like the kindle, the iphone etc are tangible. To suggest that they are not assumes that the ability to touch a screen ie a pixel is not equal with that of prior physical object (artifacts) like books for instance.
The reasoning behind referencing print material as “Tangible Media” and technologies like the Kindle as being something different is really located with in the process of experience. Tangible when describing a book is referencing the experience a user has engage with that media type for the time they were a child to current interactions. Paper has texture, color, smell, it can be flooded and imprinted or debossed the list goes on and on. Tangible becomes a catch all for the experience of turning pages in a seqential artifact and emcompasses the notions of age, use and variety. When tangible is used for the iPhone, Kindle or technologies, it is used more as a description of functionality of the interface. Because a screen is just pixels that can be anything, the experience of that tangible experience is fundimentally different then that of the experience with print media, and rightly so!
The issue is then the expectation that a book can be on a screen and contain the same experience? There is a compromise when “tangible media” is traded for “tangible pixel”, the experience of the can only be mimicked or hinted at through acknologment in either direction. The ability to have animated turning pages in a pdf is an example of a media type not sure how to accept its “pixel” nature because a pixel can never be a piece of paper.
“What writing is all about is what happens on the page between the reader and the page…What I want is a collaboration, really, with the reader on the page where the reader is also making an effort, is putting something of himself into it in the way of understanding, in the way of helping to construct the fiction that I am giving him.” -William Gaddis
Similarly I believe the design and technological advances might increase a reader’s access and process in the collaboration with fiction. When the interaction of a reader is considered in not just the generation of fiction but also in the access of delivery, an alternative arises for a new form of meaning making. The design of the artifact that is the book can be given an alternative meaning besides just delivering the words and ideas on the page.
The attempt to give the book interactive and responsive conditions allows an author and designer an interesting outcome that would be a collaboration from the start rather than the out come of an author writing words and a designer making those words explode on the page through typography, page layout and conceptualization of ideas. The hybrid of design outcomes being considered in the formulation of literature might produce engaging and experience based out comes that would push a readers knowledge and understanding. The possibilities of designed literature might lead to a 3rd outcome that is neither a book or an e-book screen replacement, but rather a combination of both. An outcome that might result in the best of what the traditional print artifact possesses in its tangibility and distribution through institutional data banks of libraries and commercial entities of book stores and the contemporary screen book technological conveniences of size, space, and access.
The attempt to give narrative sequential fiction and non fiction a set of new or previously unused tools might produce new forms of writing outcomes and productions that might engage tech savy clientel who are interested in no only reading but being engaged with physical artifacts. Book whose pages are self aware, switches that are embedded into content, and spaces that are effected by those interactions will engage readers in experiences the literature on the page for a different more media influenced atmosphere that will engage the reader / user in interesting exchanges that are controlled or left open by the narrative and author/designer team.
In the process of looking at printing material and contemplating the possibility of the end of print where a screen replaces all print material, I was struck by something that to date has not really been handled by screen based technologies. The Margin! Margins in technology since are locations for buttons, actions, and tools associated with the particular application that is being used.
Since the margin has excuse my pun been marginalized by technologies, I decided to do a number of explorations in to the potential of the margin when given a computational aspect and affordance. In order for me to get a good grasp on the design nature of margins with in printed matter, I have taken 9 of my books ranging from design porn to technical textbooks, I have done an analysis of the margin and implied usage and created a piece of relevant print material describing each examples margin design and use as associated with grid, layout and space.
The idea revolves around the notion of marginalia and the use of margins with in written content in order to apply notes, reflections and sketches.
