Can You Hear Me Now?
Podcast:
This Podcast examines the mobile phone and how it is becoming an unseen extention of the virtual world that may as well be a new body part. Looking through the lens of the Bay and Rickett article's treatment of Heidegger's ideas, I explore how cell phones (and other technologies) have merged with our dwelling space and become invisible connectors between the real and virtual worlds.
(15 votes)
Comments
"The Middle of Nowhere"
Hey Nate,
Nice synthesis of the Bay and Rickert and Fortunati articles. I was particularly intrigued by the way that, at the beginning of your podcast, you brought the mobile phone and the car into contact (2:05). It seems to me that there is a great deal to be said about the technologically complex situation you describe: about the mobility of the mobile phone versus that of the car, for example, or about the mundanity of those technologies in concert, or about the ethics of Heidegger’s “dwelling” and those of whatever other mode of being-in-the-world “wanderlust” might designate (2:07). But, for the sake of space, I want to focus my response here on just one sentence from your discussion. At 2:11, you say: “I got the phone to call AAA from the middle of nowhere, which is always the location of the failure of vital parts of motor cars.” A brilliant joke, I think, considering this week’s readings. Obviously, cars can break down anywhere—not necessarily in those places that we would otherwise describe as “the middle of nowhere.” But your one-liner suggests that the actual location of a breakdown hardly matters, that no matter where a breakdown occurs, that place becomes “the middle of nowhere.” In other words, the failure of technology divests whatever location we happen to be in of its sense of place; or, rather, divests us of our sense that we are meaningfully in that place—we become unsituated, unlocatable, find ourselves in some unmeaning “nowhere,” and, consequently, as Bay and Rickert might say, less sure of our presumed essential humanity. In short, the Heideggerian edge to your joke emphasizes—with far greater economy than Bay and Rickert’s essay—that “[w]e have always been gathered by things; [that] technology has always enframed us” insofar as we understand ourselves in the world (Bay and Rickert 218).
Ok, I’ve ruined the joke, so I’ll stop (although an analysis of the “fourfold” gathering of the car is tempting). I didn’t notice any glaring technical errors in your podcast. And I very much appreciated the conversational tone and tempo, not to mention the directness, of your delivery.
Again, nice work.
Best,
j.
new media's role in place identity formation
Hi Nate,
Your podcast, the Bay and Rickert reading, and J.’s comment have all sparked me to think more about role of new media in place identity formation. I have lately become interested in the ways that a physical, geographic location acquires a “place identity” and the power of a place identity to represent the population of a specific location.
“The middle of nowhere” might be one such identity attributed to a place. Does a cell phone signal now define for me “the middle of nowhere”? I tend to think where I don’t have service really must be out there. But what about places that are definitely not the middle of nowhere, like neighborhoods or even small sections of a town or city, yet still lack dependable cell service? Smart phones add another consideration. Without a smartphone, I might be looking at road signs to determine where I’m at, and looking for billboards to provide me with a sense of that place as I drive through it. If another passenger uses the phone or GPS to seek out local businesses, however, we discover that the place either has a lot more to offer, or confirms our middle-of-nowhere suspicions (though we may be further duped, as not all businesses have an online presence). This leads me to further consider the role of new media in place identity formation.
Obviously the meanings of places are not fixed, and different populations may engage in a turf war over the place’s identity. In the twenty-first century, the emergence of new media may allow for more democratic place identity formation—otherwise suppressed voices could gain opportunities to represent places. Websites such as Tripadvisor or Yelp invite participation from anyone with access to the virtual site and interest in the physical site. At the same time, this raises questions of regulation—who’s to say that I really ate at that restaurant, and that a mouse really scurried across the dining room?
You note that a person’s home or dwelling is defined increasingly through merging of new media and technology, which brings into question the apparent separation between virtual and real worlds. This separation, you observe, has become more and more invisible. I agree, and wonder further: what is real about a real place? When place is concerned, I think reality matters less than perception. And since new media contributes increasingly to our perceptions, how do new media shape and/or challenge the discourses that we use to construct our sense of home? Thus, I am interested in the same question Bay and Rickert ask on page 216 and discuss further on page 217: “To what extent does new media contribute to dwelling, to the making of a home?”
The Extra-National and Everyone in the Middle of Nowhere
Nate,
Great job on the podcast: very clear diction, well-formed argument, and high-quality audio. To say just "until" is particularly Heideggerian.
I love the direction (pun!) that the conversation has taken around this podcast, so I'll try to stay along these same lines. I agree with much of what you say about cell phones: that they extend the body and that their connection to the Internet is a significant change. I think we can even go further based on the argument you make here in terms of how individuals interact with particular nations. This in part speaks to what Kristen was saying about place identity: our ability to identify with a particular nation and the way that nations are constructed is changed by mobile, global communication.
I can't think of cell phones anymore without thinking of Arjun Appadurai's work with globalization. He argues that as globalization increases through mass mediation and migration, individuals are likely to form diasporic public spheres: they form a public consciousness apart from the public sphere of a particular nation. Because mass mediation and migration are now present in a single device, the cell phone, which is increasingly integrated with body, it can be said that diasporic public spheres are constantly being formed and reformed as a result of our global cellular world.
Which brings us back to what my classmates are saying about the middle of nowhere that you mention. The concept of "nowhere" is by its nature paradoxical: as long as we are corporeal we have a physical location. We locate "nowhere", as Kristen was saying, as a place devoid of community or contact, an extra-communal and extra-national space in which we feel the the void of the disconnect. But the nature of globalization and cellular connection, as Appadurai would say, brings us all into this extra-national space all the time. If we are all always everywhere, then we're also always nowhere. And thanks to cell phones, it turns out that the middle of nowhere isn't such a boring place after all.
Hi Nate, Great job on your
Hi Nate,
Great job on your final podcast! To jump into the conversation...
I thought the comment you made about the cell phone and its constant connection to the virtual world changing the way we define "home" was really interesting, especially in light of the ways in which the boundaries between virtual and real are blurred. In this case, though, the cell phone doesn't just blur the distinctions between virtual and real but also "home"and "away,"particularly in regards to work.
Going to work used to be separate from being on a bus or eating in a restaurant or being at home, but now everything has merged together -- if you have your iPhone/Blackberry/Android you're contactable and therefore work-able. Taking work home with you when you're really swamped is outmoded -- as long as your phone is in your pocket, work is at home or in the car or on vacation with you, and it makes for an unpleasant companion. Bosses can demand updates or assign new tasks or expect a certain amount of productivity when you're not in the office, and claiming that you didn't receive the information (even if your excuse is justifiable) is just like telling someone your dog ate your homework. There are no boundaries between your house and the internet, so there are no boundaries between you and your boss or anyone else who wants to get in touch with you.
It's interesting to think that in a lot of ways technologies like the internet are distancing people from each other, but are more and more frequently opening doors for constant communication between people. Maybe you won't see your boss in person for a few weeks, but as long as your email address is functional you'll be hearing from him. And it goes both ways -- when you always have your phone with you, despite your dislike of doing work when you're not at work, the temptation to keep checking your email, to double check with other people on your task team is overwhelming. How many times have you known that someone was going to email you something you don't want to deal with wherever you are (say, dinner with your friends at a nice restaurant) but masochistically and maniacally keep refreshing your inbox? The whole culture of communication is changing, not only in the physical/virtual sharing of information, but also in the ways we approach the sharing, and the hours or places we consider the right time to receive or send the information.
Your car may have broken down in the middle of nowhere, but while you waited for a tow truck you could probably squeeze in an hour or so of returning your emails for work.
I love to be the sparkstone
Hey all
Thank you so much for your comments. I am tempted to respond to each of them, but due to my busy conference paper/journal work, I'm afraid time is quite the commodity for me right now. All the same your responses/reactions underline my point that cell phones have become universal in that everyone has and/or relates to them. The discussions of home and location are exactly what I hoped this podcast would spark, and incidently are also the main thrusts of my conference paper. Again thanks for the comments, I'm glad this humble podcast got its audience's minds working.
Nate