[iDC] Re: notes on media remix

[Ryan Griffis]

i just came from a talk by Lev at the U of IL at Urbana-Champaign...
i didn't get a chance to ask a question nor meet Lev due to another 
appointment (sorry about that, i would have really liked to meet you 
Lev - also sorry about the turnout, which should have been more than it 
was... it was poorly advertised within the school of art & design 
unfortunately).
So anyway, i thought i could send my very unformulated 
thoughts/questions here for Lev and the general list.
Concerning the notion of "remixability" that's being discussed, i 
wonder what the difference is between it and homogenization. By that, i 
mean that the ability to remix images, in the way Lev is talking about 
with motion graphics, requires a flattening of input - all the stuff 
being mixed must be standardized and made to conform to the dominate 
language/methodology of contemporary computing. So, when it's said that 
we have different media "types" now being channeled through one 
"screen," it could be argued that it's a process of 
homogenization/assimilation.
i think Lev even discussed the "simulation" of media (3d effects 
applied to abstract spaces and type)... could it also be said that the 
remix is a simulation of difference that actually requires 
standardization?
Maybe i'm taking this in a totally unproductive, and obviously 
irrelevant for some, direction, but it seems like our discussions of 
the "remix" seem to keep the focus on an internal reading of 
form/content. In other words, we're not really discussing the 
implications of all of this input becoming "data" and 
reformulated/archived/transmitted through one, dominant systemic 
mechanism - even if that system includes the ability to reformat the 
data along highly customizable lines (RSS, data visualizations, etc). 
i'm wondering if there's something to consider in Galloway and 
Thacker's work on notions of protocols and systems as a way to think 
about the importance of the framing of all this remixing. And also 
critiques of the notions of "hybridity" used in earlier post-colonial 
theory seem relevant - the relationship between commodity fetishism and 
80s-90s multiculturalism for example could be looked at in a parallel 
manner to the fetishism of the remix.
(for Curt - is there really a difference between meaning derived from 
"content" - your idea of remixing - really different from meaning 
derived from "form" - what you call "hybridizing" [technical 
appropriations like motion blurs]?)
Is the infrastructure/frame entirely covered by the shiny, bright 
surface of the remix?
best,
ryan