Frank Hartmann (by way of pit@contrib.de (Pit Schultz)) on Wed, 5 Mar 97 04:41 MET |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
nettime: Communication Materiel / on the position of F.A. Kittler |
Communication Matriel Frank Hartmann Towards a philosophy of media? The position of leading german media theorist Friedrich Kittler - a critical orientation. (These notes were originally prepared for a public discussion with Kittler held in Berlin, Oct. 1996, and will be printed in Bastard Magazine / Arkzin, Zagreb-Vienna) A literary scholar trained both in German and Romance approaches, Kittler escaped in his intellectual career, as he himself put it, "Freiburg University's Heideggerianism" by having access to the original writings of Jacques Lacan and Michel Foucault of the late sixties and early seventies. Furthermore, he refused to submit to the negativism of the Frankfurt School, favoured reading Hegel over Marx, and enthusiastically plunged into the psychodelic music of Pink Floyd and Jimi Hendrix. Through discourse analysis inspired by the post-structuralism of the seventies, Kittler developed an objectivity of some technical argumentation which is strictly set against the "making sense" of German hermeneutics: neither intentions, feelings nor sayings should be the objectives of humanities, but the underlying structures which, as the conditions of hardware, are of purely a technical nature. Discourse analysis becomes materialistic in doing justice to the standards of the second Industrial Revolution, by accepting "information" as its paradigm as well as "labour" and "energy". In consequence for theorizing, the clearing work Kittler practices as a structural activity under technical manners decodes the modern enigmas of communication. This is the starting point for his analysis. Neither subjects nor their consciousness, but wirings determine what is real and culture is to be seen as data processing. Therefore, a methodical transgression from literary to a comprehensive media analysis was to be established. Without making the technical realm (in which storing, broadcasting and computing takes place) any topic of their discussion, traditional philosophical theories nowadays would simply turn euphemistic. Philosophy as Kittler suggests it, on the other hand, is not committed to enlightenment, but rather to demystification; he proposes the perhaps last possible form of a critique of metaphysics by reconciling cultural theory with the technical order of things. Provocating the philosophical guild, Kittler introduces Aquinās "Summa Theologiae" as historically well placed word processing, or Hegelās "Phenemonology of Mind" as a mere transcription, consciously covering up the traces left behind by the philosopher's encyclopedic excerpts collection. According to his approach, the "Gelehrtenrepublik" - the scholarly universe - forms itself through crucial, yet hidden technical operations: any humanist's text tends to make the involved media technology disappear. Only the feedback loop of a repeated lecture reveals what any great Philosophical text owes to material conditions, the traces of which are consciously and continuously erased. Therefore, the scholarly discourse can be demystified as an endless circulation of texts or an "Aufschreibesystem" (= scriptorial system) which, without even any conscious producers or consumers involved, circulates words in and by itself. And its products, right at the front: books, are media, not carriers of some metaphysical value. Furthermore, this system exists with the unbearable burden of meaning, that is with the promise of an understanding, which plays the role of a supervisor in the discourse itself. As if that ultimate state of understanding could be achieved and not just effects of programming were taking place. In other words, the written always states itself as an effect of what, on whose or whatever grounds should be written. Yet how could one become aware of this essentially hidden normativity? In terms of book culture, the normativity is an already broken one. Since we know that "our writing tools are assisting to our thoughts", as Friedrich Nietzsche already stated, if any, then this is the leitmotif to Kittlerās study "Grammophon, Film, Typewriter", published in the mid-eighties. Humanities as well as literature, as Kittler elaborates, have built up their autonomy by fading out the technical condition for any potential of knowledge. Whilst these conditions are being transformed with the innovative leap of the digital computer (Alan Turings universal discrete machine), there is a possibility for critical reflection, a chance for media philosophy. But let us be cautious here - not philosophy in the academic sense of a discipline, but research on the technical conditions of electronically mediated communication is Kittlerās achievement, for which I think the term media- archaeology would be best appropriate. The theoretical influence of Jacques Derrida crops up here and there; Kittler is criticizing Philosophy for accepting the pseudo-humanism in the notion of "thought" without reflecting on the aspects of its mediation, wherein "script" playes a major role versus any purity of thought. What claims validity in Philosophy as an argument, a proof or a quote owes a lot to the technical difference, to the context of its own hidden material reference. Hence, any philosophy of media should start off with the media of Philosophy. With this, Kittler not only took serious Marshall McLuhanās slogan of the medium being a message in itself, but radicalized it as such. While the prerequisites of communications engineering are systematically ignored by Philosophers, these form the true schematism of perception. Not messages or contents make the reality of media, but their assembled hardware. (Kittler holds it against the so-called computer community that they tend to hide hardware behind software aspects, or electronic signifiers behind interfaces.) After disassembling the world into letters and numbers, frames and pixels, only the hardware system still keeps it all together. Now this clearly is a variation to the rhetorics of the "death of the subject" (Foucault); just because the analogue communications process of storage and broadcasting also replace human sense organs (as prosthetic devices, which Norbert Wiener recognized in the context of wartime conditions), this fact fosters our illusion that there still is something "human" to it. European Philosophy is to be blamed for the omission of noticing the hardware of thought (such as papyrus, or city structures, or the silicium microchip). Whilst considering the relationship between body and mind like the one between hardware and software, Philosophy is not able to acknowledge thought detached from a body, thus leading to a final, corporeal objection against technology. Now Kittler's approach rather works on the the question of how media technology has shaped the human and cultural-historical dispositions. Within this view, metaphysical problems like those concerning consciousness simply disappear, because they reveal themselves as effects of technology - not as bodily functions, but as discourse strategies which are, again, determined by media. Here we might ask why such an approach is hardly to be found in the reflections of philosophers so far. Kittler argues that there never was need for a theory of mediality, simply because within traditional theory, symbolic action necessarily meant writing. The necessity of media theory derives from beyond the priviledges of the book culture as the organisational principle of social knowledge. As the modern media development manifests, even language proves to be a historically contingent storage medium. At present, with microprocessing, script retreats into the machines, which not only makes its perceptability in time and space disappear but also the act of writing as such. The hardware engineers of Intel corporation, Kittler states in his recent "Technical Writings", may have performed the last historical act of writing in the late seventies in designing the architecture of their first integrated microprocessor on 64mu of tracing paper to prepare the engravings in a silicon microchip. This diagnosis of the disappearance of script radicalizes, in consequence to the new technical order of things at the end of the industrial revolution - the vanishing of the human, as Foucault put it. While transcending lingual codes, computer technology turns out to be more than a mere infrastructure for knowledge. Kittler still pursues a technological hermeneutics of sorts, which implies a decoding of the social process which has written itself into media technology. Current media culture indicates a communicative transformation perceived as liberating at the one hand, yet industrialising consciousness on the other (as the Frankfurt School approach suggests). Obviously, Kittler does not even attempt to pursue the quest for a "critical task" any more. Instead, he suggests that the technical order of things remains to be re-written as hardware theory, although this seems to be a bit of a performative contradiction. Where some (in the sense of democratising the access to information) tend to see useful graphical interfaces, Kittler decovers acts of concealing - of those acts of writing which remain inevitable for programming, producing user interfaces by which "a whole machine is being withdrawn from its user". In the end, what can we know about those information machines themselves? This question reveals a fundamental difficulty: the novelty with technical data processing is the phenomenon that electronic media networks no longer function as mere "technical ampifiers of verbal communication" (as defined by Jrgen Habermas in his "Theory of Communicative Action"). With the new media culture, Kittler claims, the human factor stopped making sense, for it functions not on the basis of languages, but algorithms, causing effects which paradoxically no speech will sufficiently be able to describe. Furthermore, Kittler also dissociates himself from any metaphysics of numbers (i.e. digitised information): numbers as well as letters exist not by and in themselves, but as historical aprioris, under operative, hence mediated conditions. Since under conditions of progressive technologies there is no subject in complete control anymore, this provokes the question of the role of experts and of intellectuals. Will their knowledge and critical reflection be taken over by some universal machine memory, the surrection of which seeming to be the aim of human existence? Humanist ethics or well-intended media literacy efforts, still dealing with the human subject, become an abstract criticism in the face of technical media transformation, forgetting about technology as a knowledge which firstly grants power and control. If Philosophy bars itself from the questions of media theory (as it traditionally does at large), its fate will be the abhorrent edifying discourse, enforcing its actual loss in socio-political relevance, which then will be taken over by scientists and engineers. Critique, in this case, seems to be at grasp depending on the level of consciousness by which the difference between "word text" as a decisive derivate and the "clear text" of programming language may become a topic after all. Not the difference between information rich and information poor, but between programmers and programmed determines future media reality. Supported by the silence of the engineers within the socio- political discourse, it may seem adroit to quarrel about computer technology and its functions: after all, itās "only a tool". And yet, an immanent critique of instrumental reason has to admit that these "tools" themselves have become deeply symbolic. Therefore, computers a more than plain tools. Kittler now dares the contention that "there is no software", on the grounds that somehow software is always an effect of the existing hardware: a theory of hardware then becomes a paradox, because it stresses a matter of expression which again would systematically conceal its own technical implementation. Kittler makes his point with a subversive seriousness, always staying within the frame of know how for technical installations on which he practiced himself - at least in miniature editions. This goes as a criticism of an intellectual abstraction, which supports a discourse completely off the existing media reality. His readings, aiming at a level of circuit diagrams beneath user interfaces and practiced in the hacker-form of trial and error, seem more like a securing of evidence than a second-level form of technical hermeneutics. One could argue against this that the technological foundations are not necessarily revealing the social impact of any technology. The Internet recently has developed as a social phenomenon and not as a purely technical one, owing its existence not solely to the conditions of hardware (of computer architecture). However, such technical products contain some subversive potential which allows usage of power against their producers; this is an insight against which Kittlers position probably would have no good reason to object. His theoretical position is plausible as a coming to an end of the structuralist approach, and yet is specifically determined. Kittler places too much implicit trust into technologies as a revolutionary subject of sorts, and its pseudo-nature of progress puts an automatism into history which, by the way, makes any media theory itself superfluous. The communication matriel does not reveal any semantics and moreover, the abundantly troubled facticity of war puts the social process, which gave essential shape to media development, into oblivion. If it really would be about technology running wild, then the dismissal of the human subject would not have to be celebrated with such propagandistic enthusiasm, left alone in technical writings. Frank Hartmann runs the Forum Sozialforschung (http://www.ad.or.at/fsf ), an association membered by non-university research institutes in Vienna, and lectures on media theory at the university of Vienna. He recently published "Cyber.Philosophy - Medientheoretische Auslotungen" Wien: Passagen Verlag 1996 (in German) http://www.fsf.adis.at/fsf/public/cyberphilosophy.html Friedrich A. Kittler teaches at the Humboldt University Berlin. The article "There is no software" is available at http://ctheory.com/a32-no_software.html other (english) sources: Discourse Networks, 1800/1900; Friedrich A. Kittler, Michael Metteer Systems Networks 1900-2000 : Literature, Media, Information (Critical Voices); Friedrich A. Kittler, John Johnston; (Not Yet Published) -- * distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission * <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, * collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets * more info: majordomo@is.in-berlin.de and "info nettime" in the msg body * URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner@is.in-berlin.de