Comments on: BIOLOGICAL REMIX: Project draft http://www.multiplum.com/mostly/storyboard/biological-remix-project-draft/10/2009/ MOSTLY MASTER STORY Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:55:49 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: jill/txt » remix culture: pulling it all togehter http://www.multiplum.com/mostly/storyboard/biological-remix-project-draft/10/2009/comment-page-1/#comment-203 jill/txt » remix culture: pulling it all togehter Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:10:35 +0000 http://www.multiplum.com/mostly/storyboard/?p=167#comment-203 [...] [...] [...] [...]

]]> By: Jill Walker Rettberg http://www.multiplum.com/mostly/storyboard/biological-remix-project-draft/10/2009/comment-page-1/#comment-200 Jill Walker Rettberg Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:18:06 +0000 http://www.multiplum.com/mostly/storyboard/?p=167#comment-200 Did you see that Kac's latest book is available as an ebook at UBB? http://ask.bibsys.no/ask/action/show?pid=090064410&kid=biblio Did you see that Kac’s latest book is available as an ebook at UBB?
http://ask.bibsys.no/ask/action/show?pid=090064410&kid=biblio

]]> By: Jill Walker Rettberg http://www.multiplum.com/mostly/storyboard/biological-remix-project-draft/10/2009/comment-page-1/#comment-199 Jill Walker Rettberg Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:49:18 +0000 http://www.multiplum.com/mostly/storyboard/?p=167#comment-199 Looks like you have lots of ideas and a really good starting point here. A few small notes: - "deconstruction" - I see how you mean it and it works well with the "reconstruction" you're using it with, but given that deconstruction is/was a major theoretical school of literary and art criticism, I think you'll at least need a footnote to point out that you're aware of that and you're using it in a different sense. - take a look at <a href="http://digitalcultureadventure.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/political-remix-video-and-remix-culture-positive-and-negative-issues/" rel="nofollow">Thais' blog post from this week</a> - I think perhaps what she writes about Ruben Diaz's ideas is relevant for you? - spreadability - there's the fecundity of the organism, as you note, but also the fecundity of the IDEA. To the extent that it's art (and obviously a lot of biological "remixing" isn't) a lot of the point is that people are attracted to the concept, that people talk about it, write about it, are inspired by it, and perhaps make their own remix that's somehow based on it. Would that also be a kind of spreadability you'd want to talk about? Let me know whether you'd prefer to do your presentation on Tue 27 or Thurs 29 of October :) Looks like you have lots of ideas and a really good starting point here. A few small notes:
- “deconstruction” – I see how you mean it and it works well with the “reconstruction” you’re using it with, but given that deconstruction is/was a major theoretical school of literary and art criticism, I think you’ll at least need a footnote to point out that you’re aware of that and you’re using it in a different sense.
- take a look at Thais’ blog post from this week – I think perhaps what she writes about Ruben Diaz’s ideas is relevant for you?
- spreadability – there’s the fecundity of the organism, as you note, but also the fecundity of the IDEA. To the extent that it’s art (and obviously a lot of biological “remixing” isn’t) a lot of the point is that people are attracted to the concept, that people talk about it, write about it, are inspired by it, and perhaps make their own remix that’s somehow based on it. Would that also be a kind of spreadability you’d want to talk about?

Let me know whether you’d prefer to do your presentation on Tue 27 or Thurs 29 of October :)

]]>