Ruminations about hermeneutics, theology, theory, politics, ecclesiastical life… and exercise.
Thanks to David, I just encountered yet another brilliant Michael Wesch visualization (someone’s going to string these together one of these days and make a captivating illustration of the techno-cultural moment) — this one illustrating David’s point that everything is miscellaneous.
Next Thursday, I’ll lead a discussion with the Anglican/Episcopal House of Studies at Duke, on the topic of digital technology. I’ll show them Wesch clips (don’t look ahead, if you’re an AEHS Duke student!) and urge my case that students who are preparing for church leadership may opt to prepare for a cultural environment that flourished in the 1950’s, began to age unbecomingly in the 60’s and 70’s, and now has one foot in the grave — or they can prepare for very different circumstances that already prevail in many quarters, and seem likely to overtake the rest of the world sooner than later.
I have to refrain from expounding my whole megillah “Meaning, Communication, Hermeneutics, Homiletics, Pastoral Practice, Sound Theology, and Everything Else” understanding of how they might best gird themselves for ministry in a pervasively digital cultural ecology, but I do want to leave a note here in case there’s something very important that readers may want to remind me to include.
My thoughts are, for the time being, overshadowed by the heartbreaking news that an old friend’s wife died. Margaret and I feel the shock and weight of her death vividly; several bonds of circumstance intensify our sympathy.
While we’re processing, I commend to the attention of teachers and technology fans this recording of Michael “The Machine Is Us/ing Us” Wesch’s presentation at the University of Manitoba.
David links to the year-end summary of the favorite online videos from twelve webby marketers; I was delighted to see that he chose Michael Wesch’s “Web 2.0. . . The Machine Is Us/ing Us” (and Seth Godin chose Wesch’s follow-up video).
And Doc points out that David Isenberg has wrangled another year’s-worth of F2C, his annual “Freedom to Connect” conference. It’s a pivotal meeting at a pivotal moment in the trajectory of U.S. participation in cultivating the digital dimension of our common life, and I hope some legislative types (maybe even some candidates) pay attention to what develops there.
From Bob Carlton, this follow-up video by Michael (“The Machine Is Us/ing Us”) Wesch; and from Stephen Downes, a slide presentation of “Web 2.0” using Web 2.0 tools. Change is happening, and it will overtake our institutions willy-nilly. I’m inclined to argue that by paying attention and getting involved, they’re more likely to experience that change as productive and invigorating, whereas by ignoring and resisting change , they’ll experience it as threatening and destructive.
This afternoon, my colleague John and I talked with the Dean about what it would mean for Seabury to become indigenous to the Net. We went over a variety of points — Seabury teaching the church; Seabury changing from a static, bounded community to transient, open community; Seabury changing from curriculum-and-units-driven learning toward something more like home schooling; and Seabury changing from degree recognition based on a credit count to recognition based on performance evaluation (my summaries, not John’s more elegant formulations). As we left, I urged the Dean to spend more time with the Net, to explore what’s going on there.
Among the points of reference that came up in our conversation, or that pertain to the kinds of topic we introduced:
• The presentation version of my “What Theological Educators Need to Learn From Napster,” a refined version of which was later published in Teaching Theology and Religion.
• The presentation video clip for Charlie and Rebecca Nesson’s Harvard Law course “CyberOne: Law in the Court of Public Opinion”
• Michael Wesch’s “Web 2.0: The Machine is Us/ing Us”
• The Cluetrain Manifesto (and with tip of my snow hood to David Weinberger, “Introducing The Book”)
Just for starters. Throw in “Blogumentary,” spend some time playing with Flickr, play Second Life for a while. I wish I could refer him to the Game Neverending, but alas, it has gone the way of all bits. (This is my house from GNE. . . .)
[Added later: Lawrence Lessig’s “Five-Point Proposal” for safeguarding the Internet, and his “Open Spectrum” presentation. He clearly stands out as a brilliant interpreter of law, but we shouldn’t let that distract us from his brilliance as a communicator of ideas.)
(Also later: Darn! I’d intended to point to the Democracy Player open source video device. Imagine a Seabury DTV channel — wouldn’t that transform our public identity (and with it, our own practice as teachers and learners) just by itself?!)
When I first saw pointers to Michael Wesch’s “Web 2.0. . . The Machine Is Us/ing Us” video, I put off looking at it. The “Web 2.0” tag deterred me, and its trendy allure provoked my “I don’t need to see that” reflex. I was very wrong.
The video is terrific, suggestive (not in that way!), and it strikes me as very sound. I was especially impressed by the concluding section:
Well, that bit about family and love aren’t necessarily of the same order as the others, but the far-reaching changes in other fields will inevitably impinge on family and love, so I acknowledge even those two.
That video arrives at the same time Steve Jobs says DRM should go by the boards. Micah asked me what I think about that, and I respond that Jobs is manifestly disingenuous and self-serving on a number of levels (to start with, the iTunes Music Store still imposes DRM on music selections whose performers ask that they be sold without such restrictions)— but that nonetheless, he’s right. Others (who don’t have executive authority over the biggest legit distribution system for downloading music online) have said as much before, but it does make a difference when Jobs says it. If you drop the DRM and price appropriately, volume will more than make up for what you lose on file-sharing. Way more. Way, way more.
Continue reading “In Which The Trend-Resister Is Shown Up”