Lyotard

11Sep09

The first time I read this book was for my master’s thesis. At the time, I was focused on the representation of information and knowledge since that was the topic of the paper and my interest.  At that time hypertext was the dominant “new” concept in information retrieval.  It was so new that the implications for information retrieval were viewed as predominantly negative; not to mention the implications for thinking and narrative forms.  Tim Berners Lee was among the very few who evangelized the form.  He created the scripting language and protocol to further the connection among minds and allow serendipitous discovery instead of the much more structured classification systems created for print and journal indexes.

Instead of external creations of records to represent complete work like journal citations, book records etc.; the works themselves “contained” other works through links and references.

The database no longer contained representations of works, but the actual works, in a variety of formats for anyone with internet access to view and interpret as they saw fit. People no longer need access to libraries and experts to learn about things, they have access and can create their own narratives.

I am not sure that “the question of knowledge is now more than ever a question of government.” is as relevant. The web has made more information available to more people than ever and transparency is ascendant for the moment. The text of the torture investigation is available in PDF from the Justice Department’s web site. Constant news stories discuss technological ingenuity in getting around government’s attempted restriction of technology in more outwardly restrictive countries like Iran and China. The “noise” is extreme and I lack the background to understand exactly what Lyotard meant by the statement, but it does seem that governments and corporations are losing control of information as often as they are wrestling it back.

Information ownership and dissemination is as commodified as he says, at the same time it is more transparent, at least in access to the information. The information landscape seems to be plethora of ideas, effluvia, pointless information that becomes a cultural touchstone of small groups of people. (My current favorite is http://twitter.com/shitmydadsays If postmodernism is “incredulity” toward the metanarrative, we have that.

The question of the knower and learner are more complex than I know how to address, but the roles have changed. The users of information and the suppliers do have a relationship but the commodifiers are not as powerful as they were.

The Firefox browser, LINUX operating system, Public Library of Science, GNU licensing, Wikipedia are all examples of structures to keep information and knowledge as close to free as possible. US copyright law, digital media ownership lawsuits and attempts to provide better internet service to partners have all failed to keep the information away from users. Journalism has opened to the masses with blogs and comment sections. Blogs have broken stories that more mainstream media do not believe useful. The attorney general scandal was broken by a blog. Smaller and louder groups of people can control discourse and political debate merely by being relentless and rude like the death panel discussion and the indefatigable people arguing about bike laws on the Tribune message boards.

Filed under: Uncategorized   |  Leave a Comment