weaving responses to the art of produsage

We advanced a lot this week thanks to the wealth of information that has been exchanged in you reflective responses to etivity 1: from production to produsage“.

The task was double or had 2 objectives:

1-the first was to comment on the feasibility of the produsage model to reflect on knowledge production in the post-industrial age;

2- the second was to reflect on its implications for artistic practice and the way artist-teachers-students can work together in academic setting.

The following points have been raised:

1. -the narrowness of produsage’s theoretical scope, lacking the participatory characteristics of other theoretical projects, (counter example: Ethical Economy that uses a wiki to collect contributions) or the wider political scope of techno-based communities (ie, the free open software movement) [in produsage-a brief response]
2. -the problems of generalising ideal produsage conditions, whilst most groups are struggling with the real-life conditions of working together (critical practice as an example of collaborative project within the artistic community) [in produsage-a brief response]
3. -the revolutionary collaborative potential of the techno-social framework provided by the so called ‘web 2.0′ (in beyond utopia )
4. -the implications of meritocracy for an artists’ practice within this techno-social environment (in beyond utopia )
5. - the suggestion to separate the concepts of produsage and collaboration (comment 1)
6. -the need to learn from situated open organisations on their resolution-making tactics, like the use of rough consensus by critical practice (comment 1)
7. -a challenge to the meritocracy ethos, with the counter-suggestion that peripheral participation is as much valid as core contributions (comment 2)
8. -the survival of the industrial model of knowledge production, that will continue to develop side by side with the produsage paradigm (comment 2)

The simple weaving of these ideas suggests that the conversation has already started and the “connective debate” is bringing the classroom well beyond the harrow campus! And still such an exciting journey ahead of us!

I leave with the link to Communities of practice a text that outines Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger’s model of situated learning. Their concepts of communities of practice and legitimate peripheral participation are very relevant not only to our debate but also to the way we are working together as part of a teaching and learning project.

Filed under: e-tivity01-08/09, paula roush, produsage, tiip-0809 , art of produsage, paula roush

Beyond Utopia?

New terminology emerges only when new concepts have the need to be coined. In this sense, Produsage introduces an ideal (not totally unheard of) paradigm where the status of community and equality stand up again. Collaborative, user-led creativity through the web is a revolutionary way of conceiving work and knowledge, especially in an ever increasing individualist and competitive world.

As Alex Bruns says in Produsage: Towards a Broader Framework for User-Led Content when he is talking about a working definition: ”Participants in such activities are not producers in a conventional, industrial sense, as that term implies a distinction between producers and consumers which no longer exists…”
Because we now live in the so called informational era, that no longer deals with the prosaic procedures of industry and fixed products, but through web 2.0 moves more fluidly towards an endless intangible stream of information and knowledge, a continuous and progressive process of creation is made possible and everybody has the same chance to contribute and to share.

This new democratic paradigm brings a profound change into society, one could say that a new polis is addressed: Public participation and public domain are crucial issues on the table for discussion. Knowledge is no longer conceived of as the privilege of a few but more as a cooperative self regulated embodiment.
When describing the Key Principles of Produsage, Bruns expresses: “Leadership is determined through the continuous communal evaluation of participants and their ideas, and through the degree of community merit they are able to build in the process; in this sense, then, produsage heterarchies constitute not simply adhocracies, but ad hoc meritocracies.” Following this idea, artists too, are challenged to adapt to this meritocratic regime; surely they still undergo the same lonely mysterious encounter with their inspiring muse, but now, in a highly technological collaborative environment, they must assume that they are part of the ever changing whole in which no man stands on their own for their own purpose anymore. This does not mean that personal talents or efforts receive no rewards, the nature of a social web understands the importance of recognition and motivation, from the beginning, every participant is encouraged to go as far and as deep as they want (spontaneous leadership), and because they do, short sighted lazy contributors are automatically and naturally expelled. Meritocracy is the key word in this new model, it holds a magic power, and might be what guarantees this new paradigm’s success: No more rigid hierarchies in the academic field, no more arrogant structures in culture, instead, roles and boundaries become relative, more flexible, there is a new understanding, a true sense of collective work, a new conception of ownership and credit, more support, more efficiency, and the encouraging feeling that there is no such thing as Utopia, because it has been the lack of a fair scenario, that made dreams feel impossible, not some inherent condition of humankind.

Filed under: e-tivity01-08/09, liliana garcia urmeneta, tiip-0809 , liliana garcia urmeneta

Produsage – a brief response

I find it very interesting that Bruns attempts to conceptualise some of the practices of participation made more accessible by networked technologies, in particular the fact that participants can self-nominate, and choose at what level to participate. This seems to me the core challenge this field launches to methods of legitimizing culture and production through established forms of authority.

Nevertheless, there are two aspects of his work that I would like to criticise:

1. A narrow way of making theory?

I find it quite frustrating that Bruns limits the range of his conceptualization to such a narrow field. In the introduction to Produsage: Towards a Broader Framework for User-Led Content Creation, Bruns mentions economic and legal frameworks, and democratic society itself, but also expresses his intention to theorize and establish an analytical framework. Although I appreciate that a researcher is entitled to establish the boundaries of her or his own field of enquiry, this feels like a missed opportunity to link this academic conceptualization with a wider set of concerns.

I have recently come across a project for a book that, I think, complements Bruns work with a deeper analysis of the economical and political ramifications of what he describes as produsage. It is by Adam Arvidsson and Nicolai Peitersen and it is called Ethical Economy. The book itself is being edited through a wiki, which means we can all self-elect to contribute. Moreover, Bruns makes hardly any mention of the self-organised structures and political principles that have emerged in collaborative networked practices, particularly the free and open source software movement – e.g. rough consensus.

Rough Consensus at work - Critical Practice and guests working on the budget guidelines for Open Organizations at a ResourceCamp, part of Disclosure, Gasworks, 2008

2. Generalization

Bruns attempts to build a generalised discourse applicable to all forms of collaborations and participations. In my limited experience, particularly as a member of Critical Practice, the possible permutations of merged production and usage – to use Bruns’ terms – are varied and complex. Bruns uses expressions like Necessary Preconditions to define dynamics that, in my experience, are not as ubiquitous as it sounds in these texts. Many of Bruns’ descriptions apply only temporarily to only a handful of collaborative ‘communities’. Power struggles are as common as probabilistic or meritocratic dynamics, and hierarchical systems are woven with collaborative structures.

A large number of people – including the members of Critical Practice – have been contributing for several years to defining the best practices for Open Organizations. I feel that this is an important aspect of produsage that also needs to be mentioned.

One last note: collaborative practices also have gate-keepers, and some artists have delighted in highlighting these invisible processes. Here is an example: http://www.in-vacua.com/un_wiki.html

Filed under: cinzia cremona, e-tivity01-08/09, produsage, tiip-0809 , criticism of Bruns, ethical economy, produsage

e1: from production to produsage

In session 1 we initated the debate around the model of art as knowledge production, and argued for the need for a flexible concept to account for the multiplicity of thinking practices that develop in the artist’s work (Cinzia’s response Mahkuzine #5 – some thoughts elaborates well on this need for multiplicity rather than standardised programmes). For session 2, we move the debate into the model of art as produsage. This concept is outlined by Axel Bruns in Produsage: Towards a Broader Framework for User-Led Content Creation (direct link to download the pdf ) and further developed in the site produsage.org, companion to the book Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage

Task:

read

produsage: a working definition

produsage: necessary preconditions

produsage: key principles

and return here to post your comments on the author’s argument that we need to shift our way of thinking about knowledge from an industrial age product-centred model, into an information age user-led model, characterised by collaborative content creation. Refer to the extract quoted below on Creative Practice to Introduce your point of view on how the concept of produsage as a model of collaborative artistic creation and thinking practice has implications for the way artists work. What are the implications for an artist working toward the MA degree? In academic terms, what are the implications of a produsage environment for artists-lecturers working with artists-participants in the MA in Art and Media Practice? Suggest word cont: from 250 w

“Creative Practice
Sites such as Flickr for images, YouTube, Jumpcut, and Revver for video, and ccMixter for audio, as well as a plethora of blogs and collaborative publishing environments for text, now provide a rich and diverse range of user-submitted creative content. Further, legal frameworks such as the Creative Commons suite of licenses allow for the re-use and remixing of existing content into new artworks which are then able to be further reworked by subsequent generations of users. This opens up new avenues for creative work and publication beyond the traditional media industries, as well as undermining romantic notions of the artist as individual genius.”
inAxel Bruns 2007 Produsage: Towards a Broader Framework for User-Led Content Creation (direct link to download the pdf )

Respond
In this blog, follow your classmates posts and choose one to leave a comment about what they said on the topic of produsage.

Timeline:
Monday, November 17th (task),
Tuesday, November 18th (respond).

also of interest (submitted on the 12th of nov 1990)
WorldWideWeb: Proposal for a HyperText Project

The environments of produsage- also described as social software or web 2.0- may be traced to the initial project of the world wide web as outlined by Tim Berners Lee and Robert Cailliau in WorldWideWeb: Proposal for a HyperText Project.The document describes Hypertext and mentions two phases ( under the heading Project phases): the first related to information access; the second (under the heading Phase 2 — Target: 6 months from start) allowing the users to add new material, namely

“The creation of new links and new material by readers. At this stage, authorship becomes universal.” And “The automatic notification of a reader when new material of interest to him/her has become available. This is essential for news articles, but is very useful for any other material.” And,
“The ability of readers to create links allows annotation by users of existing data, allows to add themselves and their documents to lists (mailing lists, indexes, etc). It should be possible for users to link public documents to (for example) bug reports, bug fixes, and other documents which the authors themselves might never have realised existed.This phase allows collaborative authorship. It provides a place to put any piece of information such that it can later be found. Making it easy to change the web is thus the key to avoiding obsolete information. “

support

If you need help start blogging please follow my post http://thinkingpractices.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/how-to-start-blog

Filed under: e-tivity01-08/09, paula roush, produsage, tiip, tiip-0809 , art of produsage, e1, paula roush