"I Don't need a shirt that does that..."

Sure, nobody needs a shirt that does anything besides cover their body, but I bet it won't be long before you want one. Andrejevic discusses in his paper about smart clothing technology. Personally I find this concept fascinating. My initial reaction was ‘why not?’ we have digitized many other aspects of our lives, so why not take it one step further. I did not realize that this concept would be so repulsive to some people in our class until we began to discuss it.

People seemed especially offended by the ‘hug’ shirts that were used as an example during the presentation on Andrejevic’s article. I can see where the offense comes from, but I do not understand how some people have such a huge issue with this, considering how much of our communication is already mediated by technology.

There seems to always be a slight resistance when a new technology is introduced. It reminds me of reactions towards touch-screens. Many people felt that they would never use a computer that was completely touch-screen, and early forms of these technologies failed. However; Apple integrated this technology quite well by introducing it in technologies that people are less ‘attached’ to, like iPods. A touch screen iPod seemed cool, whereas a touch screen computer seemed inconvenient or complicated. Slowly they produced other products like the iPhone that were also touch screen. By the time the iPhone had become mainstream, users were much more comfortable with the idea of the touch screen, which is perhaps one of the reasons the iPad had so much immediate success.

I predict that smart-clothing technologies will be introduced with the same technique. Small, ‘fun’ additions first, in order to prepare the market for more highly technical fabrics.

Is taylorism eroding our Public Sphere?

In third year MIT we spend a significant amount of time discussing the idealistic notion of a public sphere. We hypothosize about how to create one, what makes it democratic and if it would ever succeed. Unfortunately, the more time I spend thinking about this issue, the less likely it seems to be.

Robbins and Webster explore emergence of Taylorism as a method of production and its effects on communication throughout the past century in their reading the times of the technoculture. It really made me consider all of the areas of our life (which we feel like we have total autonomy over) that have been over-powered by efficiency and productivity.

The university experience, in its ideal form, is supposed to be one of enlightenment, learning and discovery. However; as we have discussed in class, the North American structure for post-secondary school seems to be more about becoming a consumptive and productive member of society.

Take for example…

· Classroom power-structures

· Corporate partnerships (like Coca-cola and Western)

· Utilitarian architecture (esp. since the 1960s)

· The hierarchy of faculties

· The surveillance of student behaviour

One thing I look forward to discussing in the coming weeks, is methods of resistance, or perhaps instances of university structures that are fighting the taylorism of education.