“SPECTACLE,” “SCOPIC,” “GAZE,” “PERSPECTIVE”:
THESE ARE ALL AMONG THE MOST KEY TERMS IN MEDIA STUDIES, AND ALL
OF THEM RELY ON UPON SIGHT, OR AT LEAST METAPHORS OF SEEING. THESE
TERMS ALL GAIN THEIR CRITICAL POWER AS MUCH FROM THE COMMON-SENSE UNDERSTANDING
THAT SIGHT IS THE PRIMARY HUMAN SENSE AS FROM THEIR CONCEPTUAL STRENGTH
AND APPLICABILITY. COMPARED TO SIGHT, SOUND EARNS ONLY A DISTANT SECOND IN ITS
IMPORTANCE BOTH TO THEORIES OF MEDIA (MUSIC AND AUDIALITY USUALLY TAKING
A BACKSEAT, A CULTURAL/PRODUCTION ASPECT, OR A DISCIPLINE OF ITS OWN)
AND TO CRITICISM, EVEN OF FILMS, WHERE IT IS ARGUABLY, IN THIS AGE OF DOLBY DIGITAL
SURROUND SOUND, AT LEAST AS IMPORTANT AS THE SIZE, DIMENSIONS, AND
DEPLOYMENT OF THE SCREEN IN NEW MEDIA OBJECTS. AND MORE: WHERE IS TOUCH IN ANY
OF THIS? SMELL? TASTE?
I IDENTIFY THESE LAST THREE OF THE SENSES (MORE THAN HALF THE CONSTITUENTS
OF THE TRADITIONALLY SCHEMATIZED SENSORIUM!) AS FORMING THE TACTILE SENSORY
COMPLEX AND THE BLINDSPOT (THERE'S THE VISUAL INTRUDING AGAIN) OF MEDIA THEORY.
ACCOMPANYING ANY DISCUSSION OF THE TACTILE ARE, RATHER THAN ANSWERS, A SERIES
OF BURNING QUESTIONS. WHAT DISTINGUISHES THE TACTILE FROM THE OPTIC OR THE
AUDITORY? PERHAPS IT IS BECAUSE THE TACTILE COMPLEX SENSES PHYSICAL PRESENCE
RATHER THAN EMANATION IN A STRICT-BUT-NOT-QUANTUM PHYSICAL SENSE. OR PERHAPS
THERE IS AN EVOLUTIONARY ANSWER: WALKING UPRIGHT WITH A BINOCULAR APPARATUS
MOUNTED ON A PIVOTING NECK, THE HORIZON BECOMES THE MOST IMPORTANT EXTERNAL
FEATURE IN THE APPERCEPTION OF OUR SURROUNDINGS. RETURNING TO THE NOTION OF
PRESENCE, PERHAPS THE DIFFICULTY ARISES BECAUSE OBJECTS SOMEHOW RESIST MEDIATION
WHEN THEY ARE CONFRONTED PHYSICALLY RATHER THAN AT A DISTANCE (YOU CAN'T STUB
YOUR TOE ON SOMETHING THAT YOU SAW COMING) AND ARE THUS EXTERNAL TO THE WHOLE
FIELD OF THE MEDIA. THINK OF SCRATCH-AND-SNIFF STICKERS FROM YOUR YOUTH: WOULD
YOU HAVE KNOWN THAT A PARTICULAR SLIP OF PAPER SMELLED LIKE A BANANA IF THE
STICKER HADN'T ALSO BORNE THE VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF A BANANA? TO GO ON LIKE
THIS: HOW IS IT THAT IMAGES CAN HAVE PHYSICAL, BODILY EFFECTS, LIKE TURNING
OUR STOMACHS OR MAKING US CRY? FURTHERMORE, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR ME, WHAT
DO WE DO WITH A MEDIUM THAT RELIES UPON THE TACTILE IN ORDER TO “WORK”?
I'M THINKING HERE SPECIFICALLY OF THE NEW MEDIA, AND THEREFORE OF COMPUTERS.
WHILE THE VISUAL PREDOMINATES ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB AS THE INTERFACE (MANOVICH'S
TERM), WHAT COULD THE VISUALS ACCOMPLISH IF MY HANDS WERE TAKEN OFF THE KEYBOARD
OR THE MOUSE? AND EVEN BEFORE THE WEB, BEFORE VGA, BEFORE WINDOWS, IN THE DAYS
OF THE COMMAND LINE, WHEN A COMPUTER WAS LITTLE MORE FOR MOST PEOPLE THAN A
VERY CAPABLE TYPEWRITER, PERHAPS WITH A PHONE ATTACHED, WHAT WOULD THAT TYPEWRITER
HAVE BEEN WITHOUT COMPUTERS (OF THE HUMAN SORT) POUNDING AWAY ON KEYS (OR KNOCKING
THE CHADS OFF PUNCHCARDS, FOR THAT MATTER)? WHAT ROLE DOES THE ERGONOMICS OF
A MEDIUM PLAY IN DEFINING THE EXPERIENCE OF A USER WITH THAT MEDIUM? THIS LAST
SET OF QUESTIONS, AN INVESTIGATION OF THE NECESSARY REASSERTION OF THE TACTILE
IN THE REALM OF COMPUTER MEDIA, IS THE TOPIC FOR MY FINAL PAPER. SOME CORE
ISSUES THAT I INTEND TO ADDRESS ARE THE CONFIGURATION OF THE KEYBOARD AND MOUSE
AND THE STUDY OF “ERGONOMICS”; THE “MAPPING” OF TACTILE
INTERACTIONS ONTO VISUAL/AUDITORY/CONCEPTUAL MOVEMENTS, PARTICULARLY IN VIDEO
GAMES WHERE THE POSSIBILITIES ARE SIMULTANEOUSLY SEVERELY CONSTRAINED (BY THE “RULES” OF
THE GAME) AND WIDE OPEN, AND THE ROLE THIS VARIABLE MAPPING PLAYS IN DEFINING
CYBERSPACE; AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CYBERSUBJECT IS
NECESSARILY A RECONSTRUCTION OF THE BODY, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE USING SUBJECT
OPPOSED TO, OR AT LEAST VERY DIFFERENT FROM, THE DISEMBODIED VIEWING OR READING
SUBJECT.
PUTATIVE BIBLIOGRAPHY:
HARAWAY, DONNA. THE CYBORG MANIFESTO.
KITTLER, FRIEDRICH. GRAMOPHONE, FILM, TYPEWRITER.
MANOVICH, LEV. THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW MEDIA.
SHAVIRO, STEPHEN. THE CINEMATIC BODY.
QUAKE III. ID SOFTWARE.
UNREAL TOURNAMENT. EPIC MEGAGAMES.