Hello, everyone! I'm Mike, an undergraduate university student with plenty to share to the world! For the next few months, I'll be updating this space with my thoughts on scholarly readings, alongside updates on a long-term project that's in the works! I hope to give y'all something memorable and entertaining to digest over this period, but you'll have to bear with me as a first-time blogger. It'll take time for me to get my feet wet, so this post (and my blog as a whole) may look quite primitive in the early goings. Perhaps this'll be an artifact of history ... like several of the sources that Marshall McLuhan digs up for his critical analysis! Basically, McLuhan argues that within a media context, "the medium is the message." Nope, apparently it isn't enough to say that the medium carries or enhances or distorts the message. Now the medium itself is a message that invokes some sort of change in human behavior or societal norms. A bit of an unconventional take, to say the least. But hey, let's give the man a fair chance to blow our minds here (or put us to sleep, whichever comes first). So first he cites the positive and negative effects of automation as different messages for machine operators to digest, and this definitely clears up some of my initial confusion surrounding his main point. Then he disputes the common misconception that objects lacking explicit content (e.g. speech being the content of writing) don't qualify as media, saying that even an electric light, of all things, can fall under this category because its message is "the change of scale or pace or pattern that it introduces into human affairs." Honestly it's hard for me to think that the "message" of a set of lights can be anything other than something explicit like "MERRY CHRISTMAS," yet I understand McLuhan's point that it's the societal impact of the innovation - not necessarily just the innovation by itself - that tells the story. (And as an advocate of word play, I definitely appreciate and concur with his initial sentiment that "the instance of the electric light may prove illuminating in this connection.") He allots much of the remainder of his piece to discussing excerpts and theories from various media forms and experts, respectively. For the most part this intrigues me greatly, but one thing that induces some heavy eye rolls from me is his indulgent implementation of Shakespeare. Now, before y'all scowl from behind your computer screens and close out this window, never to hear from me again, let me acknowledge that yes, Shakespeare's a literary icon who necessitates universal recognition. It's just that in comparison to all these other examples from less familiar authors and an array of historical periods, the tried-and-true standard-bearer doesn't grip me so much. Just don't make me feel like I'm being transported back to my twelfth grade English class, that's all I ask! I know that this is getting pretty long-winded, so I'll just note some highlights of this extensive exploration:
So, that's about all I have for you today! If you like what you've read (or you're just gravitated toward snarky little buggers like me), then please stay tuned for my future posts! I can't wait to see how this blog progresses over the coming weeks as I grow accustomed to this platform. Until next time, I'll leave you with a Melodramatic Mike Drop™!
0 Comments
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2019
Categories |