/LANGOFNM

the interface (λανγθαγε οφ νες μεδια)

Blade runner 82- macintosh computer 84

MAC-GUI, remained true to the modernist values of clarity and funtionality

then customisation of guis

guis vision of the future articulation; clearly drawn lines between human and its techn. creations, decay not tolerated +In cyberspace we have to work to forget (activity invisible to the user)

all culture, past and present, came to be filtered through a computer with its particular human computer interface

STEPHEN JOHNSONs INTERFACE CULTURE makes a claim for the cultural siginficance of comp.interface

ine semiotic terms the comp interface acts as a code that carries cultureal messages in a variety of media. access of info-passes from the interface of the browser to the interface of the OS. in cultural communication a code is rarely a neutral transport mechanism, it usually affects the messages transmitted with its help

a code also provides its own model of the world,its own logical system or ideology, so subsequent cultural messages or whole languages created with this code will be limited to its accompanying model, system or ideology

.non-transparency of the code

whorf-sapir hypothesis: the human thinkins is limited by the code of natural language, the speakers of diff. languages perceive the world differently + GEORGE LAKOFFS cognitive lingustics

the interface shapes how the comp.user conceives the computer itself.it also determined how users think of anymedia object accessed via a computer

by organising data in particular ways the interface provides disctinkt models of the world.

for instance, a hierarchical file system assumes the world can be organised in a logical multilevel hierarchy. In contrast, a hypertext model of WWW arranges the world as a non hierarchical system rules by metonymy.

cut and paste : this operation renders insignificant the traditioan distinction between spatial and temporal media, it is also bling in traditional distinctions in scale (cutpaste a single pixel, a whole movie), but also between media

both work and leisure applications use the same tools and metaphors of GUI

industrial society- clear separation work-leisure inf. society- ;-

if the human comp interface becomes a key semiotic code of the inf. society as well as a meta-tool how does this affect the funxtion of cultural obj and art objects?.= > new media artwork-content and interface, 2 levels, old dichotomies- form//content and content//medium now content//interface. but this applies to visualisations of quantified data and so on, but modern artists assumed that content and form cant be separated, from abstraction of 10s to process of 60s artists continued to assure the impossibility of painting some preexisting content. paradox-many new media artworks= informational dimensions, experience include retrieving looking thinkign at quantified data. at the same time they have more traditional experiental or aeshetic dimensions which justify their status rather as art than inf.design. (dimensions include reconfiguration of space time and surface), a particular formal and material experience. To change the interface even slighlty is to change the work dramatically

in art the connection between content and form /interface is motivated (interface and content cant be separate levels, they merge into one entity)

THE LANGUAGE OF CULTURAL INTERFACES