Paper:

Deck, Andy C. (1999) “In Search of Meaningful Events: Curatorial Algorithms
and Malleable Aesthetics.” In D. Bearman & J. Trant (Eds.), Museums
and the Web 1999, Archives & Museum Informatics, Pittsburgh, PA, available
at: http://artcontext.org/crit/essays/cur_al/

1. what did you find (articulate
the answers in your own words)

1.1. interesting about the article?

I thought the most
interesting piece of the article was the small part about censorship towards
the end. Pointing out that software constraints are a form of censorship was
something that I have never really considered before. The analogy to the newspaper
helped clear up his relation earlier to the curator of a museum and the curatorial
algorithm.

1.2. not interesting about the article?

I felt like at points
it was a little wordy and that sometimes unnecessary vocabulary was used to
make a statement. Towards the end, the concepts began to make sense though.


2. what does the author mean by curatorial algorithms?

The author means
the programming and design decisions determine what may be produced with software.

3. what does the author mean by malleable aesthetics?

The term refers to
the ability to accumulate not only statements, or data, but also the structural
changes brought about by users of the system.

4. what do you consider the main message of the article?

I think the author
is trying to say that internet art needs to be more ambitious in developing
alternatives to design and that it is important to try and take advantage of
the power that software has to help people learn and produce.

5. Please comment on the following claim: “As an artist using the Internet,
the question of how to involve people in meaningful events is paramount. Inspiring
participation in something useful or fun, or enlightening is okay. But better
still is orchestrating contributions to something good that lasts longer the
event itself…”.

5.1. agree / disagree?

agree

5.2. which are the personal consequences which you draw from this statement?

I think that it is
important when designing that you consider the longevity of your system and
how it will/could be used far into the future. If you can accomplish this in
a design, the impact your design will have will be far reaching. For instance,
in our senior project (the location-based spatial wiki), we are developing a
system that is attempting to inspire participation now, but also looking for
a way to have it orchestrate contributions long after we graduate. This way,
the community sort of takes on a life of it's own, long past its deployment.

5.3. are the educational programs you are involved addressing this claim?

Yes, my senior project,
and I also think the Swiki for this class is in the same category. Wikis seem
like they are really trying to address the claim in this statement.

6. Please comment on the following claim: “Due to the manipulative capacity
of interactive systems, designs should be open to revision and debate…
The term “malleable aesthetics” as I mean it refers to the ability
to accumulate not only statements, or data, but also the structural changes
brought by users of the system. Incompatible with forced enclosure, the purest
forms of this category of production are licensed to assure that programming
code remains in the public domain”.

6.1. agree / disagree?

agree

6.2. which are the personal consequences which you draw from this statement?

I think it is important
for learning and design that some systems remain open for the public. However,
the public also needs to be responsible in their use of the open system. If
the concept of open systems is to work at its best, the theory of "you
scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" needs to be followed. Obviously, everyday
users can benefit from an open system, but I think people far less often realize
that system developers can learn something from users of an open system in return.


6.3. are the educational programs you are involved addressing this claim?

Again, I think this
class addresses this claim in that we are allowed to manipulate the Swiki and
read and analyze all its content. In turn, the resulting system is much better
than if content was only populated by a few administrators.

7. Do you feel that the “Design, Learning, and Collaboration” course
addresses these two claims?

Yes, as stated in the reasons above.

Previous Assignments