- Integrates multiple media forms (such as print and image or audio and video) to create representations.
- Incorporates existing media objects into a new, digitally constructed object that means something different than the original object(s).
- Allows the user/reader to partially construct its meaning through interactive features.
Update, 9/8/08: Lots of discussion happening on the comments for this post, plus some of my own explanation behind this definition. Enjoy.
7 comments:
Jen, this is actually a response to your question about my blog on our readings last week. I hope I didn't give the impression that my broadcast students were not enthusiastic. It was only the writing (planning, scripting, etc.) that they were not very enthusiastic about. They tended to be more fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants kind of kids -- "hey let's grab a camera and make a music video." They had tremendous enthusiasm for videography and post-production (and for seeing their names and faces on the weekly editions).
That's the general feeling I got from your post. But your response here got me thinking: what kinds of students decide to enroll in classes like Writing with Video? Are they interested in the planning and scripting, or are they more interested in just grabbing a camera? And is one of these methods preferable in an approach that embraces new media?
I'm intrigued by the "always/sometimes" qualifier at the top of your definition. Does this mean that new media exists on some kind of continuum or that some kinds of texts people might consider new media actually aren't?
My intention with the "always/sometimes" qualifier was to illustrate that not all of these criteria have to be present for something to be considered new media. (Also, I'm still working through the concept, so I'm leaving qualifiers in at this point.) So...yes, I guess that means it's on a continuum.
I'm not sure what kinds of objects I wouldn't consider "new media." I can think of ways where everything (even a printed book) could be considered under the definition...don't we need some criterion that eliminates certain objects?
Jen-
I am loving your "troubled" definition of new media. I notice that you do not include "computerized" or "digital" as part of your definition. Do you agree with Manovich and others that those things are requirements of new media? Also, I am wondering about the importance of intent in new media versus multimedia. Seems like one might be more purposefully created than the other.
PS-There's a lot of jen on this blog. I love it.
I'm not sure whether I agree with Manovich yet. I'm a little hesitant to say that new media is restricted to digital media, most likely because I'm still hung up on the access issue. If only those with access to digital technologies can create new media, it narrows the possibilities a bit. I might think (I'm not sure yet) that new media is something a little more political, something that might not require digitization in order to be effective.
Some things I'm questioning myself about:
1) Is magnetic poetry "new media"?
2) How about a collage made of magazine photos and text? (I recently made one that, even though it's made of glue and paper, required the use of my scanner to reproduce an image I wanted to repeat...new media?)
3) Recut movie trailers? (See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T5_0AGdFic)
Jen,
I like what you said about "Incorporating existing media objects into a new object that means something different than the original object(s)". what is really interesting about new media is that it allows us to create new objects with having the possibility of modifying these objects to serve our own purposes.
Seee you
Post a Comment