Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.63.0608102228060.21876@panix3.panix.com>
From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim@panix.com>
To: Cyb <cybermind@listserv.aol.com>, Wryting-L <WRYTING-L@listserv.wvu.edu>,
Cyberculture <cyberculture@zacha.org>
Subject: Re: [vel] GAM3R 7H30RY wikimonograph (fwd)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:28:19 -0400 (EDT)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:13:25 -0400 From: Lloyd Hoffman <llohoffman@adelphia.net> To: Frances L VanScoy <vanscoy@cs.wvu.edu>, dem@wvu.edu, kblaney@wvu.edu, rnakaishi@hotmail.com, jchandl1@mix.wvu.edu, Gayane Goltukhuhyan <gayane@cs.wvu.edu>, Brian Sowers <sowers@cs.wvu.edu>, Alberto Santiago <albertos@cs.wvu.edu>, delche@gmail.com, sondheim@panix.com, tim.mcgraw@mail.wvu.edu Cc: Frances L VanScoy <vanscoy@cs.wvu.edu> Subject: Re: [vel] GAM3R 7H30RY wikimonograph ALCON, This requires a reread and some thought. A couple of initial points in no particular order I would be happy to meet and discuss. 1. What are the psychological ramifications of the physical tangibility a printed book has over an electronic one? a. Beauty b. Physical mobility (no hardware required) c. Wacking a bug (harder to do with a device) d. Tangible nature of illustrations for study and enjoyment versus animation and sound potentials with a computer) 2. Is the issue a new publication form, or simply a new conversation form using blog vice verbal speech? 3. Definition of serious peer review? Lloyd ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frances L VanScoy" <vanscoy@cs.wvu.edu> To: <dem@wvu.edu>; <kblaney@wvu.edu>; <rnakaishi@hotmail.com>; <jchandl1@mix.wvu.edu>; "Gayane Goltukhuhyan" <gayane@cs.wvu.edu>; "Brian Sowers" <sowers@cs.wvu.edu>; "Alberto Santiago" <albertos@cs.wvu.edu>; <delche@gmail.com>; <sondheim@panix.com>; <llohoffman@adelphia.net>; <tim.mcgraw@mail.wvu.edu> Cc: "Frances L VanScoy" <vanscoy@cs.wvu.edu> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 4:16 PM Subject: [vel] GAM3R 7H30RY wikimonograph > From the issue dated July 28, 2006 > Book 2.0 > > Scholars turn monographs into digital conversations > > By JEFFREY R. YOUNG > > New York > > While most scholarly books are reviewed by a few carefully chosen experts > before publication, McKenzie Wark's latest monograph is getting line-by-line > critiques from hundreds of strangers in cyberspace, many of whom know > absolutely nothing about his academic field. > > Mr. Wark, a professor of media and cultural studies at New School University, > has put the draft of his latest book online in an experimental format > inspired by academic blogs and the free-for-all spirit of Wikipedia, the > popular online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Each paragraph of Mr. > Wark's book has its own Web page, and next to each of those paragraphs is a > box where anyone can comment > though readers are not permitted to alter the original text. > > The scholar says he looks forward to sitting down each day to read a new > batch of comments, some by colleagues whose names he recognizes and others by > people cloaked by pseudonyms. > > That input has persuaded him to sharpen the opening section, and he says he > will probably make other changes as well. But not all the online feedback has > been helpful, or kind. "This doesn't have substance," wrote someone > identified as "toad." "Take some time off, and teach a little." > > Mr. Wark is in the habit of responding publicly to just about every comment, > but that left him virtually speechless. "Harsh, dude," he replied. > > Welcome to what is either an expansive new future for the book in the digital > age, or a cacophonous morass that will turn scholarship into a series of > flame wars > or both. > > Scholars like Mr. Wark, who are as comfortable firing off comments on blogs > as they are pontificating at academic conferences, are beginning to question > whether the printed book is the best format for advancing scholarship and > communicating big ideas. > > In tenure and promotion, of course, the book is still king > the whole academic enterprise often revolves around it. But several scholars > are using digital means to challenge the current model of academic > publishing. > > Thanks to the Internet, they argue, the book should be dynamic rather than > fixed > not just a text, but a site of conversation. Printouts could still be made > and bound, but the real action would be online, and the commentary would form > a new kind of peer review. > > Even some publishers are experimenting, though so far the most ambitious > efforts have been at scholarly journals. Nature, for instance, started a > program this summer in which authors can opt to have articles they submit > made available immediately as electronic pre-prints that anyone can comment > on. Those papers are still reviewed the old-fashioned way, but the comments > by online users are also taken into consideration. > > Many academic publishers shrug off open-review e-books as simply the latest > technological fad, saying that the time-tested peer-review process should not > be replaced by bands of volunteers. > > Whether traditional publishers join in or not, there is no doubt that > academic discourse is increasingly occurring on blogs and other online > forums. So how can that energy be channeled into accepted forms of > scholarship? Is it time for the book to get a high-tech makeover? > > Game On > > Mr. Wark's book is called GAM3R 7H30RY (pronounced "Gamer Theory," and > rendered in a code-like language style popular among computer geeks). It > offers a cultural critique of video games and argues that popular culture > increasingly casts life itself as a kind of game > where you're only truly a survivor if you can avoid being voted off the > island. > > Mr. Wark originally planned on sticking with the old-fashioned peer-review > model > and he has, in fact, submitted the book for publication by a traditional > academic press (Harvard University Press). But as he was finishing a draft, > he was approached by Ben Vershbow, a researcher at the Institute for the > Future of the Book, an unusual academic center run by the University of > Southern California but based in Brooklyn. > > Mr. Vershbow is a fan of one of Mr. Wark's previous books, A Hacker Manifesto > (Harvard University Press), an excerpt of which the scholar placed online. So > Mr. Vershbow asked whether Mr. Wark would have been interested in having > users comment on that book while it was under production. > > "Hell, no," Mr. Wark responded > at least by his retelling, over brunch at a Brooklyn restaurant last month. > "That's one of those books where you sit alone on a mountaintop and not talk > to anybody. ... Not everything can be 'engage with the reader' every five > minutes." > > But he agreed to turn GAM3R 7H30RY into a conversation with his audience. So > he sat down with researchers from the center > a group whose work ethic blends long brainstorming meetings with bouts of > hands-on multimedia production > and helped design a format that would put both text and comments in the > foreground. In May they unveiled their creation and opened the rhetorical > floodgates. > > "The first thing I figured out about this is, you outsource the > proofreading," said Mr. Wark, noting that many of the comments have nitpicked > his text's grammar rather than confronting its substance. "I'm loving that > because I'm bad at it. I mean, structural things I can figure out, but, > particularly for a writer, it's hard to see tiny, tiny details." > > Thanks to mentions on some popular blogs, the e-book has also attracted video > gamers who have commented on the book. The problem, though, is that many of > those gamers have dissed it. "They're saying, This is a stereotype of what > gamers are like," said Mr. Wark. "And I'm trying to say, I flip it over, > that's the whole point of the first chapter; I start with the stereotype and > then I flip it over. But you've got to signal that earlier on, so people > aren't put off." > > He plans to make that change for the published version because he wants the > book to appeal to a broad audience. "The thing about scholarship is it tends > to create homogeneous readerships, so you write for the new-media-theory > crowd," he said. "I don't do High Theory, as it's called. I do Low Theory, > which is, Is there a way to bring a little bit of distance and reflection > into people's everyday experiences and lives?" > > Mr. Wark admits that he is not much of a gamer himself, though he did pick > his favorite games to write about, including the Sims, a popular simulation > where players control the social interactions of a suburban family. He > considers himself a writer foremost, and he sports the markings of an artist > with hipster-style sneakers and a sticker for an experimental art group on > his laptop. He says he chose to write about video games because he thought > the subject would appeal to today's students. > > "If you want to have conversations with 20-year-olds," he said, "one good way > is to start with their own common culture and make it unfamiliar." > > Though a few of the comments on the e-book have been cutting > one user said "Is this a textbook or a novel? I'm confused" > Mr. Wark notes that most of the responses have been thoughtful. (In fact, a > look at the more than 300 comments reveal that readers are examining the > book's argument closely and posting specific suggestions.) He doesn't remove > any of them, no matter how negative, though he does delete spam, postings > similar to the ads that clutter many e-mail boxes. > > "I'm meeting new people," he said, adding that the experiment is working. He > said he had interacted online with a range of people who had commented, > including a Derrida scholar, a fan of the video game Civilization, and a > middle-aged librarian. "To me that's half the reason to write anyways, to > meet new people." > > One of Mr. Wark's inspirations for the e-book form is Wikipedia. > > "That is the literary work of our time," he said. "It's the Shakespeare of > 2006. It took a traditional form, which is an encyclopedia, and completely > rethought it. It rethought what authorship is. It rethought what > collaboration is. It rethought textual form." > > That sentiment is likely to rile other scholars, many of whom dismiss > Wikipedia as full of inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise flawed information > contributed by people of unknown background. But Mr. Wark argues that > Wikipedia's power is that it brings many thinkers together. And because > Wikipedia allows anyone to see the history of who has added what to each > entry, he said, it is self-correcting when errors do emerge. > > "Wikipedia is based in sound academic practices to do with peer review > it just changes who those peers are," he said. "They're not people who are > authorized by Ivy League degrees or anything like that. But there's more of > them, and they work faster." > > Pointing to a recent study in Nature that showed that Wikipedia entries are > about as accurate as entries in Encyclopaedia Britannica (though Britannica > disputes those findings, and the study's methods), he said these new > knowledge-makers are "not doing too badly." > > "You've really got to ask yourself," he said, "What have I got against free > knowledge produced by the people?" > > A New Kind of Publishing > > The Institute for the Future of the Book, which produced the GAM3R 7H30RY > e-book, is not your typical academic center. For one thing, it's located in a > row house in Brooklyn, just steps away from the residence of the institute's > founder and research director, Robert Stein. A tiny, hand-scrawled label on > the building's door buzzer is the only physical indication of its existence. > > The institute's five researchers often work in the same room, sitting with > their laptops around a large, funky conference table. If one of them needs to > make a phone call, he goes into one of two small meeting rooms and shuts the > door. If you want to know what is on their minds on any particular day, you > can visit the institute's blog, called If:book, where the group's members > post thoughtful riffs on digital publishing. > > On a recent afternoon, Mr. Stein, Mr. Vershbow, and the three other members > of the research team gathered around a table in the institute's yard to talk > about why they think academic publishing is broken. And, naturally, to talk > about the future of the book. > > Mr. Stein has been involved in e-book publishing longer than just about > anyone. He founded the Voyager Company in the 1980s, which produced > multimedia projects on CD-ROM; he worked on electronic-text projects for the > research division of Atari, the early video game company; and he founded > Night Kitchen, a company that developed multimedia publishing tools in the > late 1990s. At least, that's what the Wikipedia entry about Mr. Stein says. > (And those facts check out.) > > "For the first 20 years I was working in this field, I really thought the > main thing we were doing was putting audio and video in them," he said of > e-books. "In the last couple of years it's become clear that locating the > book inside of the network is fundamentally more important than adding > multimedia to it." > > What changed his thinking was an essay by a University of California at > Berkeley historian, Carla Hesse. The essay, "Books in Time," argued that the > idea of the author was a fairly recent invention, dating from only about the > 18th century. The implication: Books don't have to be so lonely. > > "I realized that this questioning that goes on while you read, that that > could happen sort of in real time and in a dynamic way," he said. "And best > of all would be if readers could talk to each other, and if readers could > talk to the author, because the reason for a book is to afford conversation > across space and time, and so why shouldn't some of that conversation take > place literally within the book itself?" > > Mr. Vershbow, who is newer to the field of e-publishing and does not yet have > a Wikipedia entry about his career, said the group is not advocating the > death of the physical book > though it is worth noting that there aren't many printed books visible in > the institute's offices. "This is not a proposition that every book should be > written in this way," he said. But the networked e-book is ideal for > scholarly books, or any work dealing with big ideas that might be difficult > for a lone author to tackle, he argued. > > In a way, he said, the institute seeks to apply the model of open-source > software development to scholarship. Open-source software, in which a > distributed group of volunteer programmers contribute to large software > projects, was also the inspiration for Wikipedia. > > "We're kind of talking about open-source development of big-idea books > that go into more depth than a Wikipedia article would, obviously, and that > are more perhaps original and more provocative and are less balanced than a > Wikipedia article is trying to be." > > Mr. Stein chimed back in: "We are suggesting a new idea of peer review that > is fundamentally similar, in that it is an exchange among peers, but that is > in the open," he said. As it stands, most scholarly presses, and journal > publishers for that matter, keep the peer-review process private and > anonymous. "We think that the way that peer review in theory enacts > scholarship is actually of value, and it's worth being seen, and it might > spark further discussion and further critical engagement," Mr. Stein said. > > But how can five guys sitting around a table in Brooklyn revamp the > peer-review process? > > That's the question that is driving them lately as they have organized a > series of daylong meetings with well-known bloggers and other prominent > scholars. > > The answer, they have decided, is to start their own scholarly press. It's a > relatively modest step, as it will focus only on the discipline of media > studies. The tentative name is Media Commons, and the plan is to publish more > academic books like GAM3R 7H30RY, as well as scholarly articles, and even > blogs > all of which will be subject to a public, open peer review. The institute > unveiled initial plans for the project last week. > > "We decided we're going to publish really fabulous stuff, we're going to let > anybody comment, and the editorial board will take the responsibility of > vetting commenters as peers," said Mr. Stein, though he noted that the > details are still being worked out. "We think we can do such a good job of > publishing, and have such a high level of comments and discussion, that we > think it will suddenly become prestigious to be published here. And that's > how precedent gets set." > > War Over Words > > For that project, the institute found another collaborator eager to buck the > publishing establishment. > > Kathleen Fitzpatrick, an associate professor of English and media studies at > Pomona College, said she started thinking critically about academic > publishing after a maddeningly long struggle to find a publisher for her own > book, about depictions of television in literature > > The short version of her story, as she tells it: Several publishers told her > that her book was great, but that budgets were too tight to print it because > it was not seen as of broad enough interest to be a big seller. When she > finally found a willing press, and after the book was favorably reviewed > twice and nearly accepted for publication, the marketing department still > pulled the plug because it felt the book wouldn't sell enough copies. Ms. > Fitzpatrick wondered why she couldn't take the book's text, and the two > scholarly reviews, and just post it all online herself. But she knew that > would not impress her tenure committee. > > What she did end up publishing, on a blog, was a series of manifestos on > scholarly publishing. And even though her book did eventually find a > publisher (Vanderbilt University Press), and she did get tenure, she says > change is needed. > > "The entire system right now of academic publishing, especially in the > humanities, is broken," she said in an interview. It should not take years > for a monograph to find an audience, she said, and too much pressure is > placed on book publishing in the tenure-and-promotion process. > > "The process of communicating one's research through a book or through an > article has become more about markers of individual success > lines on a CV" > than it is about convincing other scholars of ideas or arguments, she said. > > She said she hopes that the Media Commons Web-publishing effort will bring > more voices into peer review and turn the process into a valuable > contribution to discourse. > > "It will be more inclusive, and it will be basically community-regulated > rather than regulated by a small editorial board," she said. > > Though the details are still being determined, she described one possible > model: Though anyone would be able to comment on manuscripts in the Media > Commons, some users would be chosen by the board as official "peer > reviewers." A professor whose book has been reviewed could then take the top > 10 reviews from official reviewers and submit those to a tenure committee. > > "The promotion-and-tenure committee will have to do a little more work > actually looking at what peer reviewers said rather than simply at whether > they voted yes or no," Ms. Fitzpatrick said. > > But leaders of traditional scholarly presses wonder how people will know what > to make of the reviews conducted in an open-review model. > > "How do you know about the quality of people doing the peer review online?" > asked Alex Holzman, director of Temple University Press. "I'd really want to > know who's commenting, and why." > > Ken Wissoker, editorial director for Duke University Press, said the current > system of peer review works well for identifying the best books in each > discipline. > > "We have a very demanding peer review," he said of his own press, and > "reviewers might go through several rounds of revision. > > "You'd have a really different situation when what someone did with the > reviews was optional, or where it was continuous > where it's more like going to a writing group," he said. > > Rice University announced this month that it would start the first > all-digital university press, focusing on art history and other disciplines > in the humanities. But even that effort will conduct peer review in the > traditional way, said Charles J. Henry, vice provost and university librarian > at Rice. "It's extremely important that the press establish its authority > from the start," he said, noting that many scholars are likely to be > skeptical of the quality of a book publisher that does not actually print > books. > > The new Rice University Press does plan to use the online medium to encourage > discussion of the books it publishes. Mr. Henry said it would put up > something like a blog with each of its books, where readers and the authors > could have a public dialogue, and authors can better learn how their books > are being used in class and in research. > > The idea of replacing printed books with networked texts recently attracted > the attention > and derision > of John Updike. > > "Yes, there is a ton of information on the Web, but much of it is egregiously > inaccurate, unedited, unattributed, and juvenile," he said, addressing the > topic at length this summer at BookExpo America in Washington, an event > sponsored by the American Booksellers Association and the Association of > American Publishers. > > "The printed, bound, and paid-for book was > still is for the moment > more exacting, more demanding of its producer and consumer both," Mr. Updike > said. "It was the encounter, in silence, of two minds, one following in the > other's steps but invited to imagine, to argue, to concur on a level of > reflection beyond that of personal encounter." > > Mr. Updike essentially argued that what books achieve transcends and improves > on conversation, and that reducing the book to simple chatter would harm > scholarship and discourse. > > Ending his remarks, which were met with enthusiastic applause, Mr. Updike > urged his colleagues to resist letting the network subsume the printed word. > "Booksellers, defend your lonely forts. ... For some of us, books are > intrinsic to our human identity." > > Blogs Have the Last Word > > On the Institute for the Future of the Book's blog, Mr. Vershbow responded to > Mr. Updike's much-quoted speech. > > Calling Mr. Updike a "nostalgic elitist," he said it was unfortunate that the > author was helping shape the popular conversation about e-books, and he > criticized The New York Times for giving the remarks so much ink. > > In a comment posted on the blog in response, a user with the nickname "renee" > agreed with Mr. Vershbow. "Regardless of what Updike thinks or wants, the new > Renaissance is under way," she wrote. > > Another reader of the blog quickly jumped in to defend Mr. Updike, however: > "I think he is simply acknowledging the changes to the book, and I think he > has an honest concern of what might [be] lost in the transition of moving > ideas to the Web, especially from someone whose life has been about books," > wrote Eddie A. Tejeda, a computer consultant who helped the institute build > the GAM3R 7H30RY e-book. "I think it's fair to lament what might be lost." > > The discussion continues in the blogosphere. > > WEB RESOURCES MENTIONED IN THIS ARTICLE > > GAM3R 7H30RY, an e-book by McKenzie Wark, a professor of media and cultural > studies at New School University, in which readers are invited to comment on > every paragraph. > http://www.futureofthebook.org/gamertheory > > If:book, a blog run by researchers at the Institute for the Future of the > Book. > http://www.futureofthebook.org/blog > > An online essay, "On the Future of Academic Publishing, Peer Review, and > Tenure Requirements," by Kathleen Fitzpatrick, an associate professor of > English and media studies at Pomona College, arguing that academic publishing > needs major changes. > http://www.thevalve.org/go/valve/article/on_the_future_of_academic_publishing_peer_review_and_tenure_requirements_or > > An audio recording of a speech by John Updike criticizing aspects of the > shift from printed to networked books. > http://www.bookexpocast.com/wp-podcasts/JohnUpdikePodcast.mp3 > > Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia to which anyone can contribute. > http://en.wikipedia.org > > > http://chronicle.com > Section: Information Technology > Volume 52, Issue 47, Page A20 > > >