Electracy

Electracy: Provisional Definition and Pedagogical Value

Electracy is more than media literacy.The electrate self, in the midst of an apparatus shift, is not caught up in the aims of the previous apparatuses of orality (belief) or literacy (science). The self is experiencing a new identity formation, where the self is the both subject and object of writing. I am writing to myself and for myself, to change my own mind or to persuade myself.

And writing is not quite writing amidst this shift, but no neologism or portmanteau has been invented for this new kind of writing yet. So, we still think of it as [electrate] writing, thinking of it analogously (and perhaps erroneously). By this I don’t mean to insinuate that electracy makes a complete break from previous apparatuses – that would be a statement easy to undermine historically, technologically and ideologically. Nevertheless, there will come a time where we will need to think of electracy in distinct terms. Unfortunately, I’m not sure what that means yet, I will edit this page when I am. But I do know that I’m not referring to just issues of  terminology and definition here. (EDIT: Oh, I think I somewhat touch on it 3 paragraphs down)

Since the apparatus is still in the process of shifting, it means that the transition has not fully been made. And, with the advances in technology, this shift may never stabilize. Therefore, this on-going shift must be acknowledged as part of the new subject formation of the self.

If we are still in the process of shifting from one apparatus to the next, then the potential of  heuretics (the use of theory for the invention of new texts) has not yet reached its full capacity within the apparatus of the digital. That, to me, is part of its mystique and appeal: the potential to experiment with something new in inventive ways.

Gregory Ulmer defines apparatus as “a social machine (part technological, part ideological, part metaphysical).” I would like to focus a bit on the technological aspect right now, as that is a central concern in my own academic inquiry. What does it mean to be electrate, from the technological aspect of the electracy apparatus? Surely, there must be different levels of electracy, just as there are different levels of literacy. Does being electrate (again, technologically speaking) mean just “reading” the language of the new apparatus? Does it mean both reading and writing it? Or, does it also involve the technical aspect of it, such as being familiar with coding and algorithms? This is an example where thinking of electracy in terms analogous to literacy becomes counterproductive.

* PEDAGOGY *

Electracy in Cyberspace: The internet is the academy & the playground

One person’s webjunk is not always another person’s treasure.  The Internet is an infinite space with endless democratizing possibilities. But is it too unregulated? Anyone can throw their “junk” in cyberspace and hope it sticks.  It is so easy to avoid responsibility for what the part of myself that I put out there. So how do we sort through the junk to get to what we want? How do we filter in order to get to the “substance” we are looking for? Well, perhaps the junk is part of that substance. But how do we teach students to use electracy in productive ways? What qualifies as “productive” and what is considered “junk”?

Electrate writing works by synthesis. I’m not just talking in terms of code and composition. The synthesis of digital images, videos, and writing works to some extent by (or through) analogy, theory, allegory, and juxtaposition – literary devices that become electrate, but – non-paradoxically – not through appropriation. If we want to teach students how to utilize the new apparatus, how should we approach digital technology in a pedagogical manner? Should we teach them how to use the tools in order to write? Should we also teach them how to produce the “alphabet” (e.g.  how to write in HTML, how to create and post videos, how to photoshop images)? What LEVEL of electracy are we aiming for when it comes to pedagogy?

Ok, let’s think about self-pedagogy for a moment. I would like to be electrate in every possible way; that refers to the production aspect, consumption, “prosumption”*,  ideology-wise, metaphysically, etc.  Composing this blog has shown me that I can intuitively teach myself the basics of blogging, including utilizing the blogging tools at my disposal (hyperlinks, fonts, embedding etc).  However, when I think about it, I probably have this intitutiveness towards this kind of electrate writing because I have been using Microsoft Word and other writing software for so long, so I just learn the basics of blogging analogously.

In some ways, it seems to me that electrate modes of prosumption is reverting back to a pre-copyright era where artists would freely borrow ideas from each other and incorporate them into their own work. Chaucer, Marlowe, Shakespeare & Co. would all be considered plagiarists by today’s literate standards. Naturally, though, sharing is never free. Even the Creative Commons mentality comes with a Some Rights Reserved stipulation. But the point is that taking credit for one’s work and being in control of one’s thoughts gets harder when creativity takes place in cyberspace (unless of course there is restricted access).  That is, of course, assuming that we still want to take credit for our work…

Returning to electrate pedagogy, can electracy create an equal playing field for students and teachers? This is where electrate contribution will not only be measured on the basis of intellect, scholarly experience, and academic qualifications. It will also be measured on the level of specialization, at least to some extent. Just as “prosumption” does not necessarily point the way towards a fully democratized participatory culture, electracy does not necessarily guarantee an equal playing field for collaborative thinking between educators and students -  at least at this point. However, students might be more specialized in technical aspects of electracy, so they might actually be the ones “translating” their teachers’ electrate thinking into writing. By saying all this, I don’t mean to undermine the inventive potential of – and for – electracy. I’m just trying to warn against overestimating electracy’s democratizing potential and participatory principles…

* “Prosumption” is a portmantau of the words production and consumption. This is a problematic term in that it unproblematically fuses together the two terms, without acknowledging the fact that production output and consumption input are never equal. Nevertheless, this term will have to do for now.

Conceiving Ada (Lynn Hershman, 1997)