“‘Electracy‘ is a neologism coined by [Gregory] Ulmer to describe a new skill set that is emerging alongside oral and print literacies. In a term that describes new forms of ‘writing,’ ‘reading,’ and ‘research’ that are currently taking form in the age of digital communications” (Martin Ryder, University of Colorado at Denver).
If the first epoch is characterized by orality (made practical by oral discourse) and the second epoch is characterized by literacy (made practical by the invention of the alphabet and written discourse), then the third epoch can be characterized by electracy (in which digital imaging supports extensive complexes of mood atmospheres beyond organic capacity, much the same way that alphabetic writing supports long complex chains of reasoning possible to sustain within the organic mind). Electracy is to digital media what literacy is to print. According to Gregory Ulmer, “what literacy is to the analytical mind, electracy is to the affective body: a prosthesis that enhances and augments a natural or organic human potential” (Internet Invention).
“Electracy is an image apparatus, keeping in mind that ‘images’ are made with words as well as with pictures” (Ulmer, Internet Invention, 2).
3 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
[...] course) with Dr. Byron Hawk, four months that introduced me to Gregory Ulmer whose theories of electracy and emeragency could make your head [...]
[...] “So what differentiates cyberception from perception and conception?” Ascott asks. “The answer lies in our new understanding of pattern, of seeing the whole, of flowing with the rhythms of process and system” (2). This supports the extensive complexes of mood atmospheres beyond organic capacity Ulmer speaks of (see electracy). [...]
The visual representation of any object as image in cyberspace, I think is best considered in terms of a tri-partite paradigm of logos, mythos, and leitourgia, for there, the performance in introduced to the rational mind, the culture (beliefs, values, practices, icons), and performance.
What do you think? Agree? Disagree? Expand on your notion of Ulmer here, for visual mapping is nothing new; perhaps, the introduction of the “felt” under the same methodology works?