Difference between revisions of "Main Page"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | <big>''' | + | <big>'''Zombie Interfaces'''</big> |
Consult the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software. | Consult the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| − | + | The figure of the zombie represents the uncanny split par excellence: neither living nor dead, familiar nor unfamiliar. The zombie presents an immeasurable proximal distance between the known and unknown. The zombie’s movements are human in resemblance (as is its physical form), and yet, in its single-minded determination, its constant pace, and its inability to manoeuvre around obstacles in its path, it is clearly inhuman. | |
| + | Is not the condition of the zombie also the condition of the modern practice-as-research academic? That is, current PAR can be described as existing within a state of ‘Zombomodernity,’ that post-postmodern state in which the ideas are not dead, but nor are they truly alive. Practice-as-research features a similar uncanny split: is it research or is it art? And the spectacle of the modern practice-as-research academic is analogous to that of the zombie in many ways: we’re single-minded, move slowly and bang our heads against the wall over and over again. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Can we find the antidote and liberate PaR from Zombomodernism or should we cut its head off and put to rest forever? What is the relationship between PaR and professional practice? Does PaR create new knowledge? Is the university the best place to make experimental practice? Can we stop asking ourselves if it’s ok and just get on with it? -- from the University of London | ||
Revision as of 18:05, 1 September 2009
Zombie Interfaces
Consult the User's Guide for information on using the wiki software.
Getting started
The figure of the zombie represents the uncanny split par excellence: neither living nor dead, familiar nor unfamiliar. The zombie presents an immeasurable proximal distance between the known and unknown. The zombie’s movements are human in resemblance (as is its physical form), and yet, in its single-minded determination, its constant pace, and its inability to manoeuvre around obstacles in its path, it is clearly inhuman.
Is not the condition of the zombie also the condition of the modern practice-as-research academic? That is, current PAR can be described as existing within a state of ‘Zombomodernity,’ that post-postmodern state in which the ideas are not dead, but nor are they truly alive. Practice-as-research features a similar uncanny split: is it research or is it art? And the spectacle of the modern practice-as-research academic is analogous to that of the zombie in many ways: we’re single-minded, move slowly and bang our heads against the wall over and over again.
Can we find the antidote and liberate PaR from Zombomodernism or should we cut its head off and put to rest forever? What is the relationship between PaR and professional practice? Does PaR create new knowledge? Is the university the best place to make experimental practice? Can we stop asking ourselves if it’s ok and just get on with it? -- from the University of London
