Emerging New Wave of Software Studies

In Geert Lovink's interview:"On the Culture of Software", of Christopher Kelty, the author of Two Bits, Christ is responding with Geert's mentioning about "a new wave of software studies":

...I do think there is a new wave of software studies emerging and it represents a kind of generational shift away from the quick and dirty explanations towards sustained research questions that seek not only to explain FLOSS as such, but to challenge existing theory in different disciplines — whether that's public goods and collective action theory in political science and economics or theories of technology and culture in anthropology. Much of the earliest work on FLOSS lacked depth because it was so new and responded so quickly to the phenomenon. But with sustained attention, I think some of the deeper issues have started to become clearer. A new generation of "software studies" might be able to move beyond the logic of newness that dominates the world of IT and software; it could be a chance to identify a "longer duree" of political, economic and cultural issues of which each new generation of cool tools and "new" ideas are seen to be expressions. That might allow scholars to gain purchase on this sense of rapid change and simultaneously to become more authentically critical of the claims of each new generation of toys. That would be a real achievement.

如何捕捉動態的對象？ M. Fuller 的《軟體研究：一個辭典》

Software Studies: A Lexicon,By Matthew Fuller, ed. Reviewed by Anne Helmond, Amsterdam.

Fuller has not gone as far as to attempt to start a new field of study but instead Software Studies calls for new theorizations of software from areas that “have not historically 'owned' software” such as media studies. The fields that are currently concerned with culture and media could contribute to a new approach to software with their critical perspectives on politics, society and matter.

Fuller states that he has chosen the form of a lexicon because it is provisional, scalable and contains pathways. It is provisional because it serves for the time being because software is not a static object and is therefore hard to pin down. Relations in
and around software are constantly changing and a lexicon can serve as a temporary overview. Unlike a dictionary a lexicon is scalable and it does not strive to be complete and this incompleteness is “a virtue” according to Fuller. The entries can be seen as different pathways into software that do not strive to depict a whole. Connections between these pathways are made by the various authors but can also be constituted by the reader itself. In short, both software studies and the Software Studies lexicon can be seen as a specific approach whereby each entry is a pathway into thinking about software.

...This is both the strength and weakness of Software Studies: at times the lexicon seems uneven with an overemphasis on computing which is a neglected aspect of software according to Fuller. However, in order to bring back this neglected aspect too many entries fall in the lexicon back on Turing et. al.

...Fuller argues that software can be seen as a synthesis, a form of amalgamation or assemblage, of different layers that do not imply a static whole. This dynamic synthesis is also the subject of Fuller's book Media Ecologies that uses a materialistic
approach to identify three forces of objects in media ecologies: affordances, material substrates and memes. In a sense, software is described as having a vitality; it derives its energy from these forces that cause collision, (dis)connection and interaction underwriting their unstable and dynamic nature.

...Lev Manovich previously addressed the importance of studying software in The Language of New Media in 2001. He states that media have become programmable and that we need a new field of study to address the issues that arise from this turn in
our culture. Not only has software quietly penetrated our daily life but it has also become invisible. The ubiquity and so-called transparency of software renders it invisible but at the same time it points out the importance of studying it.

地理觀點的限制

第一章：「文明」和「文化」概念的社會起源；第一部分：「文明」與「文化」概念的對立在德國的社會起源。「說明德國中等階層知識分子與宮廷貴族之間關係的文學例子」，p.91，《文明的進程》，Nobert Elias著，1976年德國。

...這些（歌德 1827年 5 月 3日的）論述使我們在回顧歷史時非常清楚地看到，德國政治上的分裂是怎麼造成了德國知識分子階層的獨特結構及其獨特的行為方式和思想狀況。在法國，知識分子都聚集在一個地方，都在一個或多或少統一的和集中的上流社會圈子裡交往；而在德國，首府多，卻都很小，沒有一個集中統一的上流社會。知識分子又分散在全國各地。在法國，閒聊始終是一種重要的交際手段，並且幾個世紀以來以成為一種藝術；而在德國，最重要的交際手段是書本，因而，德國知識分子所發展更多的是一種統一的書面語言，而不是統一的口語。在法國，年輕人便已經處於一種豐富、活躍的精神氛圍之中；而在德國，出身於中等階層的年輕人則必須單獨去奮鬥、去探索。兩者上升的途徑截然不同。

很明顯地，這裡所謂的「德國政治上的分裂」指的是德國政治中心地理位置分布的分散化，而非法國式的集中化；Nobert Elias 在此透過一種地理上的集中與分散趨勢，來描述知識分子階層的形成與演化。地理作為骨架，細緻的改變作為血肉。而 Nobert Elias 所用的「上升的途徑」，不由得不讓我們想起 Benedict Anderson 在《想像的共同體》之中，描述那些殖民地官員的職業人生旅程。

事實上，「文化」和「教養」是這個從人民中上升的為數不多的中等階層的口號與特徵。人們很難理解這些精英的努力，不僅是凌駕於他們之上的人數不多的貴族階層，就是位於他們之下的廣大民眾也是如此。

Review of "Just Don't Go!"

這篇文章因為跟「上學去」主題很近，所以我在這邊再貼一次。 :)

Thanks SavageMinds.org, I happened to encounter this article "To Grad or Note to Grad?" of reviewing the suggestion: "Just Don't Go (to graduate school)!". It's quite worth reading especially for my classmates in grad school.

And what happens when you’re done (grad school)? For an indeterminate period, you will likely be underpaid and underemployed, while paying back student loans and trying to find a job. If I had had any substantial student debt at all, I simply could not have afforded to work in academia for the four years following the completion of my degree. I could not have supported my family, and I would have left the discipline, not out of a lack of ability, but simply out of a lack of funds to continue the search in a tight job market. And the market is ALWAYS tight.

灌氣與心理治療

中午的時候，我再次跟 J 聊天，但是其實是請他幫我作灌氣兼心理治療。關於念書與博士班的繼續前行這件事情。不敢說已經擺脫了籠罩的烏雲，但是紮實地找到了一些寫作的動力。人文社會科學要往前繼續走，竟然就是要練就一番「心無罣礙」的功力啊！

在討論當中，我說了自己感興趣的兩個論點：Lev Manovich 的「分層」（layerized）與我自己的「頻寬」（bandwidth），並且試著作初步的釐清，整理它們與社會學所關心議題之間的關連。我另外一個想要闡述的論點，是「私版權軟體」與「自由軟體」之間的「耦合關係」。下一篇文章就要試著把這些寫清楚。

經營

姚人多老師兩週前上歐陽泰的《福爾摩沙如何變成台灣府？》（How Taiwan Became Chinese?）的時候，說到一個好的研究問題需要經營，而現在的學生很少懂得這個道理（並且去實踐）。今天上課的時候讀《番頭家》（The Aboriginal Landlord）時，我們在討論這本書何以是社會學著作；柯志明老師的作品從政治史、歷史學的角度也可以是一種風景與視野，然而所謂的「社會學著作」，意味著從社會學的關懷出發，可以審視他所深入探討的熟番地權演變，其背後的行動者與制度之間的關係。從一個政治學、歷史學的題目，轉個角度成為社會學的問題、看見社會學所關切的風景與理論視野，其實也就是經營的意思。

我自己在想的是我所關心的自由軟體/開放源碼議題：這些現象也許是資訊應用、也許是協同分享科技的問題，能否也有可能轉個角度，變成社會學的問題，看見社會學感興趣的景緻與理論視野？以往碩士班時期所習得的對話方式，以大量主觀的描述性語言，取代讀者/觀眾所在意的客觀事實敘述，以及敘事中對論證的掌握；這些與姚人多提醒的「經營」兩字相比，顯得喧囂與過於自我。靜下心來，從讀者所熟知的現象開始奮鬥，也許我可以透過增加許多盟友來更能掌握溝通，聽到更多的意見回饋聲音 :)

Pure gaze 純粹的凝視

布爾迪厄（Pierre Bourdieu）的 Distinction 的導論中，關於 pure gaze 的段落：

The pure gaze implies a break with the ordinary attitude towards the world, which, given the conditions in which it is performed, is also a social separation. Ortega y Gasset can be believed when he attributes to modern art a systematic refusal of all that is 'human', i.e., generic, common-as opposed to-distinctive, or distinguished-namely, the passions, emotions and feelings which 'ordinary' people invest in their 'ordinary' lives. It is as if the 'popular aesthetic' (the quotation marks are there to indicate that this is an aesthetic 'in itself' not 'for itself') were based on the affirmation of the continuity between art and life, which implies the subordination of form to function. This is seen clearly in the ease of the novel and especially the theater where the working-class audience refuses any sort of formal experimentation and all the effects which, by introducing a distance from the accepted conventions (as regards scenery, plot etc.), tend to distance the spectator, preventing him from getting involved and fully identifying with the characters ( I am thinking of Brechtian 'alienation' or the disruption of plot in the nouveau roman). In contrast to detachment and disinterestedness which aesthetic theory regards as the only way of recognizing the work of art for what it is, i.e., autonomous, selbstandig, the 'popular aesthetic' ignores or refuses the refusal of 'facile' involvement and 'vulgar' enjoyment, a refusal which is the basis of the taste for formal experiment. And popular judgements of paintings or photographs spring from an 'aesthetic' (in feet it is an ethos) which is the exact opposite of the Kantian aesthetic. Whereas, in order to grasp the specificity of the aesthetic judgement, Kant strove to distinguish that which pleases from that which gratifies and, more generally, to distinguish disinterestedness, the sole guarantor of the specifically aesthetic quality of contemplation, from the interest of reason which defines the Good, working-class people expect every image to explicitly perform a function, if only that of a sign, and their judgements make reference, often explicitly, to the norms of morality or agreeableness. Whether rejecting or praising, their appreciation always has an ethical basis. (Distinction: Introduction, Pierre Bourdieu)

純粹的凝視暗示著與面對世界的日常態度選擇斷裂....