PRELUDE: DEFINITIONS
The Medium is the Message.
The Market tells you the Meaning of the Message.
Mathematics Maps Meanings.
Magic Manipulates Media.
SECTION 1: SKETCHING
1. I am writing from "Bob's Java Hut" on Lyndale Avenue at 27th
Street. It is May 27, 2008.
2. There are people talking right behind me, and I am forced to hear
their conversation.
3. Think about the things that are superimposed in this or any
sketch. What is the "difference" between this place, myself, what I
write, what I hear? For one thing, we might guess that these things
are listed in increasing order of evanescence.
4. However, there are various cases in this ordering seems to break
down. For example, I am now aware of the fact that the people who are
sitting behind me, whose faces I have never seen, are talking about
yoga. This fact is now "immortalized" in my writing. (Well, it is a
pretty weak sort of immortality, but nevertheless, it appears that I
have somewhat decreased the evanescence of their conversation.) I am
thinking about what "yoga" has to do with me, for example, I am
thinking now of a reference to a text called "Buddhist Yoga" in a book
by Thomas Cleary, who is a translator of books on Zen who I trust. I
don't know what "Buddhist Yoga" is, but I am all the more inclined to
look it up now that I am thinking about yoga, and am in a context that
is friendly to "looking things up".
5. So, I am influenced by this environment, and, when I am writing, I
am also influencing the environment. Of course, the influences I am
writing about are not extraordinary. Still, "magic", as I think about
it, is never extraordinary. Is there any magic in what I've just
done?
SECTION 2: ASSERTIONS
1. We should distinguish everything as much as possible but notice
commonalities between things too. For example, in physical terms, I
am not quite the same "thing" that was responsible for writing the
section above. In legal and social terms, I am not only the same
thing: I am the same person.
2. Although I want to keep in mind a physical view of the universe in
which humans and media objects are merely "things", subject to
physical forces (where agency does not exist), I am also required in
speak (and usually think) in terms of linguistic structures and all
the other human and media-oriented structures that enable me to
survive.
3. Each of these views threatens to exclude the other: at one
extreme, everything is "just physics"; at the other, everything is
"just media". I'll assume that the "physics" side of things is
understood; I'll sketch the "media" side as follows. If I look at
myself as an agent, I can use anything in my environment. A tree
planted in the median can easily be used as a symbol in my writing. A
person seated at another table can become an interlocutor. If it was
snowy outside, I could use my urine to write letters in the snow; as
it is, I'm going to have to go use the restroom!
4. The relationship of mathematics to physics is well known: we can
use math to describe the patterns in phenomena we experience. (That
of course includes patterns in phenomena we "cause", i.e., there's the
whole "repeatable" and "independently verifiable" aspect of science.)
The relationship of mathematics to media is perhaps a tad less well
known, but the word is: "programming". In computer programming, math
is right at the surface. In programs that don't involve computers
(e.g. exercise programs; news programs), there's typically still an
overt math aspect (e.g. amount of weight, number of reps; schedule of
broadcast, duration of reports). However, I want to use the word
"mathematics" to describe not relationships involving "number", but
relationships involving a more general "value". Mathematics is the
science of relationships between values.
5. Is there any room for "magic" with such a broad definition of
"mathematics"? I say "yes!" -- Indeed, the simplest approach would be
to say that, like engineering, "magic" is a sort of applied
mathematics. In other words: if I know the relationships between
certain values, I can use this knowledge to help achieve certain ends.
Historically, relationships and correspondences are "big" in magic.
However, I think this is only part of the picture.
SECTION 3: CRITIQUE OF VALUE-NEUTRAL MAGIC
1. If magic only worked when you knew what you're doing, it would be
way less fun. However, it is pretty clear that you can manipulate
values without knowing what the values are. This happens all the
time: in economics, consider the category of "externalities".
Economic actors (especially those acting in the real world!) cause all
sorts of "side-effects" that don't have any part in their theoretical
models. If you are going to "do" magic you may frequently be involved
with a "shoot first, ask questions later" approach. Roughly speaking,
this is the obverse side of the scientific method.
2. We could call magic that changes values without knowing what
values are changing "value-neutral". I'm suggesting that it is "fun"
and basically "necessary", but it is also something to struggle to get
beyond.
3. In a lot of "magical" writing, people talk about different ways of
focusing an intention. "Chaos magic" is full of techniques that
operate on this principle. The main thing to say on this subject is
that an intention is only one of many relevant values. Although I
haven't made a deep study by any means, my sense is that chaos magic
is "effective, but is close to value-neutral". This is almost the
same as saying it is not well understood (but not quite!).
4. This is why my thoughts about magic have so many arrows pointing
at other arrows. If A goes to B through C, there are certainly many
side-effects. "Internalizing externalities" is a lot of what I
consider my magical work to be about.
5. I define magic as "media manipulation" because that's what I think
it is. I want my definition to include most things that people call
magic, from stage magic (manipulating the audience by feats of
legerdemain) to magical realism (manipulating the audience by
manipulating narratives that manipulate standard symbols), and so
forth. I think magic is important at present because too many people
are accepting the media they've been handed in the default way.
Perhaps it's the same in any age: but today's technologies seem to
provide a variety of new opportunities for useful work in this area.
The reason I am critiquing "value-neutral magic" is that I think our
society is rife with it (e.g. advertising). It is important to
realize that this sort of manipulation is not "neutral" from the point
of view of the economic values or quantities that people are trying to
change -- but I consider it to be close to "magically neutral" because
the side-effects (i.e. media effects) are not well understood away
from a small target set. My idea of non-neutral magic is more like
what goes on in Douglas Adams's "Dirk Gently's Holographic Detective
Agency", where everything is taken into account to solve the case.
AFTERWARD
I've included "3 times 5" aphorisms as a nod to how I got started in
this area -- with 3X5 cards written as "captions" to my life. Comics
and magic often go together. I'm developing a series of hypertextual
works somewhere in the conceptual vicinity of comics and "interactive
fiction" that will hopefully make this all much more -- practical.
I've used several "magical" techniques in the process to date, but my
understanding of the topic is changing as my work continues. This
short summary is not intended to be a set of instructions -- but if it
inspires you in any way, I'd like to know about it!
REFERENCES
Pre First maxim due to Marshall McLuhan
2.1 "Science and Sanity" by Alfred T. Korzybski.
3.3 "Pop Magic!" by Grant Morrison
3.4 http://planetx.cc.vt.edu/~jcorneli/arxana/arxana.pdf
Aft "Promethea" by Alan Moore, "The Invisibles" by Grant Morrison
0 comments:
Post a Comment