In revisiting the history of Oulipo, it’s useful to consider this +article by Sarah Coolidge that explores the question: Who +Are the Women of Oulipo?
+BUT the broken links are quite tragic… leading instead to online +gaming + tourism. :0 Some alternative links:
+ +And this page (URL corrected from the article from .com to .fr):
+http://www.cipmarseille.fr/pop_documents_liens.php?id=985&type_proprio=1&gestion=E
https://archive.cipmarseille.fr/pop_audio.php?id=890
some repaired direct links:
+which currently takes to to information about hotels :0…..
+Luckily the wayback machine from +archive.org has been put temporarily back online in a consultation +only form.
+N+7 is useful as an example of an algorithm.
+
Let’s feed the first paragraph of Who +are the Women of Oulipo to get from:
+++A major reason for their absence on your bookshelves is that, until +recently, hardly any works by the women of Oulipo had been published in +English translation. This phenomenon has only further entrenched the +notion that the world of literary rule-breaking is in fact a boys club, +that men alone are the pioneers at the frontier of literary +innovation.
+
to surprisingly suggestive and critical (n+1)
+++A major-domo reasoning for their absentee on your bookshelves is +that, until recently, hardly any workshop by the womanizers of Oulipo +had been published in English translator. This phial has only further +entrenched the nought that the worm of literary ruler-breaking is in +faction a boycotts clubhouse, that manacles alone are the pips at the +frontiersman of literary innovator.
+
to absurd (n+7)
+++A malady rebound for their abyss on your bookshelves is that, until +recently, hardly any worship by the woodcutters of Oulipo had been +published in English transporter. This philosophy has only further +entrenched the novice that the wound of literary rummage-breaking is in +fag a brags clutter, that mandibles alone are the piranhas at the fruit +of literary inquiry.
+
Lorraine Code, Rhetorical Spaces, Essays on Gendered Locations +(1995)
+(via a citation from Hope Olson, Mapping beyond Dewey’s Boundaries, +Constructing Classificatory Space for Marginalized Knowledge Domains, +published in Library Trends, 1998)
+++Rhetorical spaces… are fictive but not fanciful or fixed locations, +whose (tacit, rarely spoken) territorial imperatives structure and limit +the kinds of utterances that can be voiced within them with a +reasonable expectation of uptake and “choral support”: an expectation of +being heard, understood, taken seriously. They are the sites +where the very possibility of an utterance counting as “true-or-false” +or of a discussion yielding insight is made manifest. Some simple +examples will indicate what I mean the term to achieve….
+Imagine trying to make a true statement about whether it is more +convenient to fly into Newark or La Guardia airport in the year 1600. +The statement would not be false but meaningless: it +could neither be true nor false within the available discursive +possibilities. Or imagine trying to have a productive public debate +about abortion in the Vatican in 1995, where there is no available +rhetorical space, not because the actual speech acts involved would be +overtly prohibited, but because the available rhetorical space is not +one where ideas on such a topic can be heard and debated openly, +responsively…
+What I want this terminology rhetorical +space to do [is], namely to deflect the focus of philosophical +analysis away from single and presumably self-contained +propositional utterances pronounced by no one in particular and as +though into a neutral space; and to move it into +textured locations where it matters who is speaking and where and why, +and where such mattering bears directly upon the possibility of +knowledge claims, moral pronouncements, descriptions of “reality” +achieving acknowledgment, going through. Often in such spaces +discourse becomes a poiesis, a way of representing experience, reality, +that remakes and alters it in the process. And the making is ordinarily +a communal process, dependent for its continuance on receptive +conditions, on engaged responses both favourable and critical. (p. x +)
+
Each constraint (or freedom), determines a rhetorical space, of +possible meaning, but which also determines the kinds of collaboration +that can (and should) take place within it.
+Allison Parrish is a +self-described poet, programmer, and professor of interactive media +arts.
+Her work often contains examples of code and libraries that resonate +with many of the protocols from Die Maschine, and the techniques of +Oulipo.
+Self-publishing project + publications from Angie Waller
+https://www.unknownunknowns.org/
+Last Night Bust Stop Yoga Pants, Chicago Illinois
+Example.
+If time perform? or just read.
+As a group: choose a text (Women of Oulipo, TOS, Definition of +Rhetorical Space?)
+Starting in pairs, develop some protocols/algorithms to treat the +chosen text.
+Would be good to visit each to find a suitable project, make sure +good resources are available.
+?>?
+Epicpedia +was a graduation work made in 2008 by then Networked Media student +Annemieke van der Hoek. Annemieke would present the work, in +collaboration with her sister as a theater +performance and discussion at the VJ12 festival in Brussels, Nov +2009 (summary).
+This sketch revisits the original idea at the core of the project: +though we tend to read Wikipedia articles as a unified linear text +representing the latest revision, they are in fact are written in a much +more conversational manner with often thousands of individual edits, +corrections, deletions, and contestations. All these edits are +(meticulously) tracked and are made publically available when one views +the history of an article. Besides the edits themselves, edits +are associated with the user account or IP address (if made +anonymously) of the author, a timestamp, as well as an optional +comment, often the justification of the edit, and a flag for whether or +not the edit was is considered “minor”.
+A wikipedia edit may be small, as in fixing a typo, or large, such as +the addition of a new section, or contentious, such as changing existing +wording to reflect a different point of view. No matter the size or +intent, however, each edit contains a collection of meta-data +about the edit. In Epicpedia, this meta-data was likened to the +meta-text of a stage play, ie the stage directions, and other texts in a +screenplay besides the actual lines that are spoken. In invoking the +figure of Berthold Brecht, and the ideas of Epic Theater, a parallel is +made between the intents of Brechtian “distancing” as a means of +heightened engagement with a theater piece through an acknolwedgement of +its construction and artificiality, with the experience of engaging with +a contemporary web publishing platform such as Wikipedia.
+Let’s consider this article on the english language Wikipedia about +recent Nobel prize for Literature winner Han Kang:
+https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Kang
+Looking at this articles history, +we can go back in time (click on “oldest” near the bottom) to find that +the article was created in August 2010:
+https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Han_Kang&oldid=376586279
+Note that when you click on “View history”, the URL changes to reveal +the actual underlying URL structure. The URL of the api is the same, +just replace “index.php” with “api.php”.
+The original was based on server-side python scripts.
+Following example begrudginly given here:
+https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52283962/how-to-find-textual-differences-between-revisions-on-wikipedia-pages-with-mwclie
+So the standard (action-based) mediawiki API provides a Compare +action.
+The examples given on API:Revisions page, show for instance how to +access the last 5 edits of an article:
+ +or the first 5 edits:
+ +The code we will use also makes use of the URLSearchParams +class in js.
+We will also make use of the mediawiki’s Revisions +API
+Adding ids and flags
+ +adapted to Han Kang’s entry on wikipedia (note the change of +host!)…
+ +See: epicpedia_2024.
+++Rhetorical spaces… are fictive but not fanciful or fixed locations, +whose (tacit, rarely spoken) territorial imperatives structure and limit +the kinds of utterances that can be voiced within them with a +reasonable expectation of uptake and “choral support”: an expectation of +being heard, understood, taken seriously. They are the sites +where the very possibility of an utterance counting as “true-or-false” +or of a discussion yielding insight is made manifest. Some simple +examples will indicate what I mean the term to achieve….
+Imagine trying to make a true statement about whether it is more +convenient to fly into Newark or La Guardia airport in the year 1600. +The statement would not be false but meaningless: it +could neither be true nor false within the available discursive +possibilities. Or imagine trying to have a productive public debate +about abortion in the Vatican in 1995, where there is no available +rhetorical space, not because the actual speech acts involved would be +overtly prohibited, but because the available rhetorical space is not +one where ideas on such a topic can be heard and debated openly, +responsively…
+What I want this terminology [rhetorical space] to do [is], namely to +deflect the focus of philosophical analysis away from single and +presumably self-contained propositional utterances pronounced by no one +in particular and as though into a neutral space; and to +move it into textured locations where it matters who is speaking +and where and why, and where such mattering bears directly upon the +possibility of knowledge claims, moral pronouncements, descriptions of +“reality” achieving acknowledgment, going through. Often in +such spaces discourse becomes a poiesis, a way of representing +experience, reality, that remakes and alters it in the process. And the +making is ordinarily a communal process, dependent for its continuance +on receptive conditions, on engaged responses both favourable and +critical. (p. x )
+
In the video summary (by Maniseng Peng and Petar Veljacic)
+There’s a quote from Brecht:
+++Society cannot share a common communication system so long as it is +split into warring factions.
+
Femke’s comment on exploring the space of what knowledge is able to +be created..
+++Trying to define what is knowledge; so people invest time and energy +in this , which is it’s own tragedy in a way… what i miss, in your +presentation and in the discussion, is an anlaysis of the reality and +the space that wikipedia itself is.
+
Use momentjs to format relative +times?
+ + diff --git a/epicpedia_2024/epicpedia_2024_notes.md b/epicpedia_2024/epicpedia_2024_notes.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9562f0c --- /dev/null +++ b/epicpedia_2024/epicpedia_2024_notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +## Revisiting Epicpedia (2024) + +[Epicpedia](https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mediadesign/Epicpedia) was a graduation work made in 2008 by then Networked Media student Annemieke van der Hoek. + +Sadly, the site is no longer online, however via the wayback machine, a [partial snapshot](https://web.archive.org/web/20100331135533/http://www.epicpedia.org/ +) is visible. + +Several screenshots are available on the [pzi wiki page](https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mediadesign/Epicpedia). + + +## Wikipedia articles as conversations... + + +Though we tend to read Wikipedia articles as a unified linear text representing the latest revision, they are in fact are written in a much more conversational manner with often thousands of individual edits, corrections, deletions, and contestations. All these edits are (meticulously) tracked and are made publically available when one views the *history* of an article. Besides the edits themselves, edits are associated with the user account or IP address (if made *anonymously*) of the author, a timestamp, as well as an optional comment, often the justification of the edit, and a flag for whether or not the edit was is considered "minor". + +A wikipedia edit may be small, as in fixing a typo, or large, such as the addition of a new section, or contentious, such as changing existing wording to reflect a different point of view. No matter the size or intent, however, each edit contains a collection of *meta-data* about the edit. In Epicpedia, this *meta-data* was likened to the meta-text of a stage play, ie the stage directions, and other texts in a screenplay besides the actual lines that are spoken. In invoking the figure of Berthold Brecht, and the ideas of Epic Theater, a parallel is made between the intents of Brechtian "distancing" as a means of heightened engagement with a theater piece through an acknolwedgement of its construction and artificiality, with the experience of engaging with a contemporary web publishing platform such as Wikipedia. + + +## Hands-on with the API + +Let's consider this article on the english language Wikipedia about recent Nobel prize for Literature winner Han Kang: + +