The article itself was informative and interesting but at times seemed to make sketchy connection between culture and something as simple and overlooked as GUI. Also the connection to Karl Marx's communist was poorly explained and rather unsettling.


My questions are...


1) What determines whether an interface behaves in a hierarchical manner or a hypertext manner, are they languages or merely constructs?


2) Is the medium of a media artist the program used of the code in which the art truly exists (i.e. Dream Weaver vs. HTML)?

Manovich 2 questions

1. Paragraph 5: The "non-transparency of the code" idea confuses me. Actually, the whole paragraph confuses me. Is cultural communication refering to the interface?

2. Paragraph 6: The cut and paste is "blind" to the traditional distinction between spatial and temporal media, scale and media. I don't understand what "renders insignificant distiction/blind" means in the "cut and paste" operation. What is a "temporal composition?"

Questions on the Interface...

I got through this reading aiight - even though it took forever to comprehend... and aside from some general questions about the purpose of this chapter, i think i understood most of it... but my 2 questions are:

• What does "meatspace" refer to?

• What is an example of a temporal composition, if temporal relates to time?- if thats even what temporal relates to.

[What would be an example of content preexisting interface anyway?]

the interface

my two questions are based on abbreviations in the reading that i didn't understand, and therefore, i had trouble understanding the text around it.

1) what does OS stand for, and how does it relate to the interface? it is mentioned twice, and in both areas i am confused by the context around it.
2) what does AI and AL stand for? the text around these abbrevations talks about the evolution paradigm which also confuses me, and i don't know how all of these terms relate.

Questions from Manovich reading

numero uno.
If digital works of art are capable of being altered depending on the interface they are presented in, does this lack of formal integrity compromise their validity as works of art? By which I mean, if the Mona Lisa could be presented in multiple formats, and thus altered in form, would it still be as appreciated?

numero dos.
In the case of the AL approach in computer programming, the artist/programmer gives the computer certain guidelines or rules, by which the computer generates media data. Doesn't this process create an unacceptable level of detachment between the artist and the work? Is there anything to be appreciated about an "artist" who chooses the most hands-off approach possible: devising the guidelines and leaving the work (the real art-making) up to a machine? To illustrate: if DaVinci had given an apprentice certain rules or guidelines, and set him to work within them, are we really to give credit to DaVinci for what transpires, and what results?

The Interface

Not as an official question but as a very unofficial one, "Did anyone else love the reference to Matthew Barney and if so did anyone else start to listen to Bjork immediately after reading the first paragraph of the chapter?" because that is exactly what I did.

Anyway down to the questions:

1. Does the creation of the interface and therefore the connection that the human-computer interface has to the "information" society vs. the "industrial" society by combinding "work" and "leisure" applications in one space lead to a greater divide between these two groups of society?

2. If the content an artist has created within a certain interface is then filtered through a different interface does the content retain it's value as art? If not does this therefore diminsh the validity of the piece as a work of art?

2 questions

why is there such a difference in work and recreation with the system?

at what point will a GUI became considered as art? would a informational web page be considered as art?