vs. interactivity and participation

Henry Jenkins’ definition of interactivity, in Convergence Culture, locates interactivity and participation as two poles of a production/consumption continuum:

“[Glossary]: Interactivity: The potential for a new media technology (or of texts produced within that medium) to respond to consumer feedback. The technological determinants of interactivity (which is most often pre-structured or at least enabled by the designer) contrasts with the social and cultural determinants of participation (which is more open ended and more fully shaped by consumer choices).” (2008: 328).

Line bisecting circleGenerativity, I would propose, functions at both poles simultaneously, being both a set of conditions authored into a text and also a particular mode of receiving – better represented perhaps by a circle than the linear relationship of production <-> consumption . Furthermore, whilst interactivity and participation can both be automatic, repetitive, non-creative, generativity, I propose, always requires creative, imaginative, actantial engagement.

Similarly, because generativity requires an open rather than a closed/sterile environment, I would propose that generative authorship arises at the intersection of a set of conditions with a particular philosophy. Both Jenkins (290, Afterword) and Eno (Meet the Developers) point to this:

Jenkins, after writing on the 2004 US presidential campaign: “I believe very firmly in the potential for participatory culture to serve as a catalyst for revitalizing civic life”.

Eno:

photo of Brian Eno looking very fit

(c) Warp Records, photo Michiko Nakau

“The craft of composing becomes two things: designing the system but also designing the inputs, and that turns out to be quite a lot harder than it seems […]. It doesn’t make the musician’s skills redundant – all the sounds in Scape were made by musicians; the system is a way of permutating those things, […] so it doesn’t change the role of musicians but it does change the role of the composer. The composer […] moves away from the paradigm of the architect […] to the slightly further-back position where you set it up and let it happen. We start pieces of music; they finish when you use them. This also accords with lots of political ideas that I find stimulating: self-organising societies and so on.”

To me, this is a model that calls for democratic and active exchange, not passivity or abrogation of personal responsibility; and ultimately leading to a more engaged, empowered culture working to a common good.

Leave a comment