Electronic Monumentality

Summary disclosure: this is a long post
This article is an excerpt from the introduction from Ulmer’s book about electronic Monumentality. Ulmer conjectures and hypothesizes about the precursors and implications on creating monuments electronically that address, reach and impact individuals and societies. Ulmer suggests starting an internet consultancy (EmerAgency) to educate society about electronic monumentality and MEmorial to act as the implementation method.

Electracy is the literacy of new media and the internet and it makes individual and collective commemoration possible and facilitates the creation of new politics, ethics and education to recognize and address the dromosphere (the pollution of human thought and language (http://heuretics.wordpress.com/2008/11/09/internet-accident/) Ulmer claims that his application of MEmorial could potentially be to electracy as analytical writing is to literacy; a way to think critically and analyze dilemmas, the realm of electracy, in attempt to reach a solution or a puzzle piece to the solution.

He goes on to talk about the implications of apparati on individuals and socities;
- Orality; solved dilemmas by chance and religion. Aided individuals in identification of oneself as a spirit.
- Literacy; brought on the Enlightenment and the move toward science and knowledge. Literacy has helped aid in the identification of selfhood, however “has not done well ameliorating societal ignorance” (xxv)
- Electracy; Because it is a new apparatus (starting with photography in the 19th century) the ramifications are yet to be seen, however one of the main applications as of now appears to be entertainment. Ulmer later asserts that one of the goals of electracy is to “do for the community as a whole what literacy did for individuals.” – or rather give a framework for solving societal dilemmas.

One of the barriers, Ulmer states, for electracy to achieving its societal goal is that our era bases our knowledge/belief on literary testimony, meaning that a story/fact doesn’t have a great impact unless received testimonially and this is likely because of a numbing from exposure to much trauma. There are “concerns about “compassion fatigue” – the failure of citizens to be affected by or at least moved to action in response to the daily rehersal of worldwide misery”. This fatigue from trauma exposure makes electracy’s goal of societal identification and solution difficult.

He continues to layout how MEmorial would be an electracy application for individuals and societies to process, monumentalize, and solve dilemmas and trauma.

The audience is definitely academic peers that are familiar with various works and concepts that Ulmer’s arguments are built upon as it is replete with specific terms with little or no defining and quotes from several previous works. The language is quite sophisticated and the background understanding of this language assumed. Ulmer claims of his MEmorial format as a society problem solving tool and has much on stake. In a sense he is comparing himself to Socrates as he stated that Socrates had an oral application of a literacy mindset and Ulmer is claiming that electracy (in the form of MEmorial) is the way to solve not just individual but societal dilemmas. In projecting these arguments I think Ulmer has a lot at stake.

Personal Comments
In my opinion Ulmer greatly over-generalizes concepts that are not necessarily true. For Example, he claims that literacy has helped the individual identify themselves and process and solve dilemmas through knowledge and education. But how widely is this sense of “literacy” applied and is it always a fail-safe problem-solving self-identifying mode? How widely are any of the apparatus applied?

Also the creation and application of EmerAgency and MEmorial seems so abstract and inapplicable that I do not see how it could achieve the goal that it aims to achieve. Going back to the application of the apparatus, if only a few individuals pursue the application and utilization of apparatus

Inquiry
Below are some questions that I was left with;
1. Ulmer states that society can be ignorant (illustrated by Uncle Sam below) and electracy has the potential to solve this societal ignorance and “compassion fatigue”, however how true is this? In my opinion new media is more often than not abused and taken for granted and allows for individuals to become self-centric and with a sense of deserving (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk)
2. But how widely is this sense of “literacy” applied and is it always a fail-safe problem-solving self-identifying mode?
3. Aside from societal ignorance and compassion fatigue, what are other challenges that electracy will face in it’s attempts to achieve it’s goal of educating individuals and societies with the goal of creating new politics, ethics and education (thus making the world a better place)?