Posts Tagged ‘twitter’

A Colorful Exchange

Monday, January 17th, 2011

I remember an exercise in my World History class freshmen year of High School. We were studying the Industrial Revolution and did a sort of game to understand the rapid rise in urban population which occurred in tandem with industrialization. Each student was given a piece of paper with a xeroxed hand drawn map of “London” on graph paper with a grid. Houses were one square, tenements 3×3, factories 5×5 and so on. The teacher would then say “Draw three houses” and we would outline three squares. Pretty soon the pace and scale of the requests got to be at the limit of our ability to draw. Needless to say everyone’s paper lost whatever semblance of order it had when they started. The lesson was that the rate of growth outpaced the ability to do any orderly urban planning.

This same problem, it seems, has plagued the manufacturers of lighting color media for the last several decades. The demand for new and increasingly precise color media has caused the companies to produce new and varied Gels at an alarming rate. Lee Filters, one of my favorites, solved their jumbled industrial revolution by switching from the Numeric Edition swatch book to the Designers Edition almost a decade ago.

The reasoning, which I fully understand, runs something like this: the colors in numeric order are such a jumble of red to blue to bastard amber to yellow to red to blue that it can be difficult to make sense of by browsing. Putting the items in numeric order places “Special Lavender” next to “Pale Green.” In an attempt to make the process more user friendly they devised the Designers Edition.

The Designers Edition solves the jumble problem by placing the colors along a chromatic scale. The reds gently flow into the ambers then to yellow then green, blue and finally into lavender and purple. It places L106 right next to L182 allowing for good comparisons.

Unfortunately this system is less than ideal for two reasons. The first is that I remember colors by number and not name. And my memory is imperfect. If I am under a tight schedule for a plot, sifting through the Designers Edition to confirm that it is L137 and not L138 that I want in my Box Booms takes too much time. The second reason, related to the first, is dealing with House Plots. When I get a hookup from a venue I just want to quickly find the numbers and see what the color is. I don’t want to cross reference a numeric listing to find the page the gel is on, sift through the book, and then double check that my conversion is right. I just want to look up the number.

The other week I was working on a plot. I was using my old and very beat up Numeric Edition swatch book which has many colors cut out for samples and tests or old scroller magic sheets and while it was in numeric order, it was more rundown than a derelict 19th century factory town. Being saddened by my inability to procure an up to date Numeric Edition swatch book for the better part of a decade I bemoaned my fate on Twitter and was quickly responded to by LeeFilters.

Less than a week later a small package arrived in the mail. Lee Filters has begun producing their Numeric Edition once again. Oh the joy! The rapture! The sheer ecstasy of this momentous event will cause the heavens to tremble.

The return of the Numeric Edition swatch book from Lee FIlters is a thing of beauty akin to the complete restoration of a beautiful old 19th Century Iron and Brick factory building. Now, as I write this, with swatch book laying beside me in the sunlight I feel a calm wash across me. The universe has come back into alignment. The imperfect beauty of the Lee swatch book has been returned to its Original form. Allowed to stand proud knowing that the colors contained therein are so strong and powerful they do not need the precise ordering of a chromatic scale.

If Brecht were alive today he would be twittering about Kanye

Monday, November 16th, 2009

One of the things that interests me about Brecht’s theoretical project is his focus on creating work that resonates strongly with contemporary audiences. The world as he knew it was one firmly rooted in “the scientific age” of modernist utopian possibilities. He saw theater as a tool to open up fracture points in contemporary society in order to make possible a transformation in class consciousness.

He writes in A Short Organum for the Theatre:

We need a type of theatre which not only releases the feelings, insights and impulses possible within the particular historical field of human relations in which the action takes place, but employs and encourages those thoughts and feelings which help transform the field itself.

Brecht’s work, to my reading, has always concerned itself with the extremes of society, the revolutionary consciousness and potential on the one hand and the reactionary counter-revolutionary forces on the other. But as he says in the above quote we must concern ourselves with the contemporary reality. We must use the system as it is, and through an exploitation of its fracture points, transform it into a more perfect world. He makes this second point more explicitly, a little earlier, when he states that “[t]he theatre has to become geared into reality if it is to be in a position to turn out effective representations of reality, and to be allowed to do so.”

Theatre, for Brecht, was to be an Event, in the Zizekian sense, an authentic experience which fundamentally alters the experience of events not only after its occurrence but alters the experience of the past as well. The theatrical Event was to be of such a magnitude that one’s whole orientation to the social experience would be fundamentally and irrevocably altered.

So what does this have to do with tweeting about Kanye West?

What I was thinking about specifically was the extreme of contemporary hip hop embodied in the radical political critique espoused by groups like Dead Prez or BDP (KRS-One) on the one hand and such acts as Kanye and Fergie on the other. Bling bling capitalism juxtaposed against social revolutionaries mediated through contemporary performative/artistic experience. How does Kanye’s Golddigger intersect with KRS-One’s Love is gonna get cha(Material Love)? But of more interest is the question: how does the technology through which these songs are experienced interact with the audience?

What twitter does, in a similar way to other social media like blogs, facebook, myspace and so forth, is to blur the distinction between life, audience, and performance. When surveillance is total, and everyone is on camera, then everyone is an actor. So then we have the consumption of culture as a performative act. We tweet about the song we are currently listening to and fold the performance of the song into the performance of subjectivity on-line in a way that presents it immediately as commodity and reifies the subjective performance.

This is the world we are in. The “scientific age” has been passed by for the “information age” and we are no longer gears in the machine but statuses in the social group blog. So the audience/actor takes the stage and incorporates cultural commodities into the performative feedback loop. The subjective experience of identity shifts along the audience/actor continuum and becomes complicated as that experience gets mediated through various technologies. Is a retweet performative? Has the subjective experience then become another cultural object to be consumed or does it still contain the potential inherent in performance? Has the subject/object dichotomy been pulled out of the either/or world and brought into the light of both/and?

Brecht makes it clear that “[n]ot everything depends on the actor, even though nothing may be done without taking him into account. The ‘story’ is set out, brought forward and shown by the theatre as a whole.” I would argue that this extends to contemporary performative technologies.

While Brecht set out in his day to reconceive Theatre and Opera into a medium appropriate for his contemporary world I could easily imagine him shifting the very stage from the physical world to the digital world. Perhaps his performances would only appear in Second Life or as episodic narrative released via twitter.

Despite all this conjecture, the question still remains: how might these technologies be utilized to exploit fracture points in contemporary culture in order to unleash the revolutionary potential of the masses? Or to look at it a different way: is the very search for those points of fracture, and the desire for social revolution, an idea tied up with the modernist notions of a bygone era? Have the differences been so radically folded into one another that we no longer have such dichotomous existence but rather the uneasy experience of both/and?

I certainly don’t know the answers to those questions but I would love you to retweet this piece if you enjoyed it.

Why Networking Always Fails

Friday, August 21st, 2009

Networking and social media are the buzzwords of the day. It seems like even people with full time jobs as someone else’s employee are jumping on the bandwagon. It’s a marketing bubble, the hysteria has reached the masses and soon the bubble will burst.

Why will the bubble burst?

Because no one likes a marketer. No one enjoys having their dinner interrupted by someone calling to chat about the newest deal they can get on a credit card they don’t need. And if you don’t enjoy a phone call, why would you enjoy reading about someone’s newest venture when all you really want to do is catch up on the latest baby pictures your cousin just posted? You don’t. It’s that simple. No one does. Well, perhaps the marketers themselves but even many of the social media avant garde have called it enough. Twitter autobots are being mass unfollowed after being purged by the service itself. Because even the marketers don’t like the marketers. Soon all twitter will be is a series of robots marketing the latest book to each other on how to gain more twitter followers.

But I digress.

What I wanted to talk about here was networking. This is one of those words that used to make me cringe whenever I heard it because I had seen so many bad examples. I never “got it” and always thought there was some trick which I kept missing. I would hear people say “so and so is a good networker” or “you have to be good at networking to make it.” I always thought it was some specific set of tasks and actions that one had to do. All around me I saw example after example of “networkers” who literally turned my stomach. From the man who couldn’t be bothered to look at you if you were not “someone,” to the young woman who would quite literally turn away from you mid-sentence when someone more important came along, I found these “networkers” sickening.

And they were. They were playing the game. And the game works for some people. These people may well make far more money than I do. Obviously to the “important people” a lot of this behavior goes unnoticed as they receive only the funny, seemingly gracious, behavior. But I do believe it has an impact. The radical inauthenticity in this kind of behavior will eventually catch up with the people engaging in it. What good is money if you suddenly wake up at the age of 65 and realize your entire life has been a hollow lie? A deathbed conversion won’t do much to make up for a life ill spent.

So, while this particular brand of networking might fail in the short term and certainly fails in the long term, why does everyone recommend networking? Because the successful ones don’t “Network.” Successful networking is not about saying the right thing. It is not about telling people about the right projects you are working on. It is not even about talking to the right people.

Networking is about Authenticity. Networking is about utilizing one’s network to get work. The efficacy of that ability lies directly in the strength of the individual connections within the network. These individual connections are nothing more, nor less, than simple human relationships. Being false and inauthentic might gain you points with other false and inauthentic people, so if what you want is a group of friends, none of whom are real or expressing their true thoughts, feelings, and opinions, than you should continue networking in a forced and inauthentic manner. If what you want out of life is a robust group of friends and colleagues with whom you share strong personal connections, you should strive for authenticity.

The goal in life is not a goal at all. Life is about the journey, about living. There is no pinnacle of success. Human growth and self-development can always continue. We can always improve ourselves.

Along with authentic action, or right action as some refer to it, our next best tools are humor and good will. This is not, in any way, a matter of forced smiles. This is about being light and playful. Humor means not letting the work become so heavy that there is nothing beyond the weight of it. And humor goes far. It teaches others that we are not merely work machines, but real human beings with a rich emotional life. In the world of social networking, on-line or off, that real humanity is what sells, not some prescribed notion of being business-like.

So too does good will go far. If one is only around networking events, parties, facebook and so forth in order to sell, you quickly become a tele-marketer, that person that no one likes. If, however, you are not only asking for the occasional gig, or promoting your work, but more often providing value, helping people with problems and otherwise putting yourself out there as a source of use and value, the work will come to you. We are not playing “the game,” we are interacting with our fellow human beings.

For all the newsletters, facebook mentions, portfolio updates, blog posts and so on that I send out, every project I have ever worked on, with one notable exception came through a friend of mine who I was not mining for work. The people I help out, who I am friendly and authentic towards, are the ones that hire me or recommend me to someone new. Everything about networking that sickened me never got me work. Everything about spending time with interesting people, being authentic, funny and inquisitive, has not only brought me work, but brought me repeated work as well as new clients and collaborators.

The lessons of networking are like the lesson at the end of War Games, “The only way to win is not to play.” We need to throw out the rules and guidelines, if not the whole game, and simply be our authentic selves. Through authentic right action our network will provide us with the opportunities that we desire.


Creative Commons License

All text on this site, unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. All other rights reserved.