It’s immaterial whether Ong is “right” or “wrong” because his theory is important as a lens. If it reveal something useful, then the specific composition of the lens is, pragmatically, irrelevant. And the theory of a secondary orality is, as I tried to bring out in my presentation, both fantastically relevant to many different areas of the current information ecology/arena (not least in that it might present an opportunity to cut the Gordian knot of digital/media literacy/fluency confusion/conflation – how’s that for slashing a sentence?) and distinctly under-studied.

So, here’s the video (the setup Jared Stein came up with worked well… the only change I would make would be to use a detached cam instead of the built-in web cam… and figure out a way to mic the audience for questions):

And because some of the slides are hard to read on the web-video, the slides:

This Thursday, October 22 at 3:15p (Denver (MDT) time, check for your time zone) I and my compadre Jared Stein will be in Denver at WCET presenting on the Gutenberg Parenthesis, secondary orality, and information literacy & fluency. If you are attending WCET, you can just show up at the room: Colorado GH.

If you’d like to participate remotely, we will be broadcasting the session via U-Stream (http://www.ustream.tv/channel/ruminate) and monitoring the live U-Stream chat as well as the Twitter hashtag: #ruminate

I’d love to make this session as interactive as possible because it really is about high-level rumination on something that represents emergent thinking (for me, at least)… so the more I can hear from you the better.

The basic idea behind the session is to explore the potential for the thinking of Walter Ong on secondary orality (the Gutenberg Parenthesis) as a lens for conceptualizing and teaching new media literacy and information fluency. Along the way I’ll dip into a couple of sidestreams, such the “problem” of so many different ideas of digital literacy and the changing role(s) of memory in the context of new media.

I wonder if Torres’ frequent and heartfelt connections to Kathy Sierra’s presentation yesterday will help elicit and frame some of its more subtle depths. Just because someone is a dynamic speaker with a message they carry in much the same way from venue to venue doesn’t mean the person or the talk is superficial or inauthentic. If learning is self-help … or vice-versa … bring it on.

I can’t help but think this is in part directed to what I wrote yesterday about Kathy’s presentation. And I can’t help but clarify.

Here’s the deal: stump speeches aren’t bad things. I’m not accusing Kathy of being inauthentic. And not really even being superficial. And I’m certainly not saying she is shallow! I’m dinging her (and very slightly, really) because I expect more from a keynote than a stump speech. Stump speeches are for the regular campaign stops… a keynote should be, in my opinion, a place to share something new and/or something that has been considered for that particular audience or organization. Is that really such a high bar? I’d prefer a keynote to be more like Obama’s 2004 Democratic Convention speech and less like the one delivered in Peoria, the 4th in two days.

Perhaps I would feel differently if I were asked to keynote speak as often as Kathy Sierra. Or perhaps I would simply choose NOT to give such addresses so often that the only way to keep up would be to repeat myself so often. I don’t mind connecting dots. In fact, that’s one of my favorite activities. But it’s really great to have a few new dots to connect!

The second problem with the stump speech is that—and this critical in this context—is that it’s really hard to be particularly convincing or passionate about something that you’ve said and presented many times before. In politics that’s expected. I don’t expect the stumping politician to wow them at every stop. If one has different expectations for a keynote, perhaps the same logic works there. But not only do I expect more, but Kathy’s presentation is about passion and kicking ass. Am I crazy in thinking that she might demonstrate more of that in the presentation itself?

I’m reminded of the disappointment of listening to a band live that I’ve admired for a long time for their studio recordings. It’s perfectly ok with me that live performances are a different thing, and perhaps in some ways lesser than the careful recordings, but if there’s nothing in the performance to compensate for those shortcomings or to balance out the differences, it’s lackluster and a little disappointing even if it doesn’t change my love for the band.

I like Kathy Sierra a lot. But her keynote wasn’t a great performance, it didn’t take any steps toward anything new, and it didn’t demonstrate the concepts she was promoting as much as I’d have liked. That might be OK in a breakout session… it just wasn’t that inspiring (despite being very much in tune and agreement with her impressive ideas) as a keynote.

I recently gave the closing keynote address at the TTIX conference. The topic and the way in which I composed and delivered it were all unusual for me (though I backed away a little from my initial plan to give a “reading” of the text in the manner of an address I once saw Bruce Sterling deliver and gave the speech a bit less formally… I was extremely gratified when one of the audience members told me I reminded them of Sterling).

Video of the presentation (in which I “riffed” off the larger text) is available, as well as the complete mini-essay and the accompanying slides. ]]> http://rhetorica.uaf.edu/chris/2009/06/09/ideas-ttix-2009-keynote/feed/ 0 http://rhetorica.uaf.edu/chris/2009/04/29/prezi-pshaw/ http://rhetorica.uaf.edu/chris/2009/04/29/prezi-pshaw/#comments Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:19:27 +0000 chris http://rhetorica.uaf.edu/chris/2009/04/29/prezi-pshaw/
[image by Melle Oh]

In an aside while discussing Serena Epstein’s brilliance (I can’t help but agree, someone should hire her pronto), The Rev says:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not one of those fickle zombies that fawns over every slick tool that comes around. On the contrary, I’m a rather loyal WordPress zombie. Nonetheless, their presentation with Prezi is so intelligently imagined and executed that I came away re-thinking that tool. The presentation became the canvas upon which they painted their way through the topic of visual interaction, and in this example the medium was the message in every sense of that concept. Hats off to Serena and Brian for both imagining and executing this fact so brilliantly. Nothing like having faculty raving about these new fangled web 2.0 tools after the students rock their world! Check out their presentation blog, and be sure to feast your eyes on the Prezi here …

A similar sentiment came up in conversation with another colleague a few weeks ago, and I’m just not seeing it. Prezi looked pretty interesting when it first came out– I was eager for a Beta account– but it only took a half-dozen steps into my first viewing of a Prezi presentation to lose interest. In effect, Prezi is like a stockpile of cool Powerpoint transitions with the slides, and like their despised Powerpoint brethren, these become irritating rather quickly. I just don’t see the innovation that others talk about.

I’m a strong proponent of a presentation style– using Powerpoint or otherwise– that use few or no words. Prezi does help with this. And in very minor sense in this particular case, with this particular topic, Jim is right that Prezi illustrates the idea of the medium being part of the message. But it does so in both a positive and negative way. In this case– as in every Prezi presentation– it doesn’t take long for the medium to get in the way. I’m reminded of Larry Lessig’s presentation style and how amazing and effective it was the first few times until it became something that only Larry could pull off without seeming cheesy, derivative and repetitive.

When Alan Levine showed Blabberize in a Northern Voice session a few years ago, it got a great laugh. It was funny and well-placed. But more than about 30 seconds of it– no matter how brilliant the words coming out of its mouth– and I’m suddenly a long way from re-thinking the power of the talking llama.

I want to be clear: the content of the presentation is very interesting. In the end, quality will out. I wouldn’t (won’t!) hesitate to recommend the presentation to others. It’s just unfortunate that after the umpteenth Prezi "swirl and grow"– guess what’s going to happen, swirl around and grow/focus? Yep. What’s next? The same!– the Prezintation starts to distract from the presentation.