As my paper comes to its end I've been thinking about Walter Benjamin's essay on "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproducibility". Essentially in Benjamin's theory art and politics are become intertwined in the age of reproducibility. When things are easily produced and shared there is no longer the sacredness of the original piece of work, it becomes unimportant when photography and film come into the picture. Benjamin states, "For the first time in world history, mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual". With photography and film there is no "original" and there is no inherent value in one copy of the photograph or film over the other. Benjamin theorized that as the ritualistic placement of art faded then art would become based on politics; in addition the barriers between artist and audience would in turn break down. Benjamin strongly desired to see new conceptualizations of the role of art and artist in society. Sadly, I do not believe photography and film ever caused the revolution Benjamin hoped it would.

"Little Brother" terrifies me.

It does not terrify me in the same way that "Twilight" terrifies me (which is by being a glorified novel written at an elementary school level about a pitiful, weak girl who falls in love with a sparkly stalker, and god save our young women from such a terrible female role model.)

Rather, "Little Brother" terrifies me because when I look at my peers, and I look at my parents, and I look at my grand-parents... I see people who view modern technology with either great mystification, or blinding adoration. Computers and cell phones are either incomprehensible tools that only make life more complicated, or they are indistinguishable from magic.

This is not to say the greater populace is unaware of cyber-terrorism, viruses, and bugs, because they are surely familiar with the news and with the frustrations that come with owning such objects. However, I would postulate that average man does not realize (or think much about) the reality that comes hand-in-hand with cell phones and networks, and so forth.

Let's start simply.

If you are a member of the majority of the United States population, you typically have a phone at hand for the greater part of the day. But what is in that phone? What parts are required to created this mechanism with which you spend probably seven hours each day? We have no idea, but we keep using them. They have been placed in our hands as we are placing them into the hands of our children, innocent of their abilities.

"Innocent" is not a term I am using lightly--this is, after all, an English course. "Innocent" implies guiltless, implies naivety, but is it inaccurate? Technology is a big dollar industry, even disregarding the peer pressure to text message! or video chat! We are taking these items from trusted sources without an explanation of how they function at a basic level, besides which buttons will email your bff.

Last week an article in the Washington Post exposed the dangers in both the censorship and the open exchange of information on the internet. It is obvious that throughout history measures were implemented in order to keep secrets, secret. We recently discussed the fickle nature of the internet and how in the United States (and around the world) the internet is still a greatly untamed part of our world. This had me wondering: Will we ever find a true balance in the exchange of information?
In the United States, the internet is a mean of free communication and speedy information exchange. It provides its users with the ability to express opinion readily and easily; as well as to gather virtually any information desired. Because of the open nature of the internet, some foreign countries, such as China, have placed governmental bans on the information that the internet can provide to its people. These bans have created a major rift between the United States and Chinese due to each country’s opposed opinions regarding the accessibility of the internet’s information. These same restrictions also extend to the U.S companies; such as Google, who provide internet service to Chinese citizens. By limiting the information those companies such as Google may display via Chinese internet, a difficult relationship between the Chinese and American governments has formed because Chinese internet bans have limited the ability for free speech on the internet.

Last week an article in the Washington Post exposed the dangers in both the censorship and the open exchange of information on the internet. It is obvious that throughout history measures were implemented in order to keep secrets, secret. We recently discussed the fickle nature of the internet and how in the United States (and around the world) the internet is still a greatly untamed part of our world. This had me wondering: Will we ever find a true balance in the exchange of information?
In the United States, the internet is a mean of free communication and speedy information exchange. It provides its users with the ability to express opinion readily and easily; as well as to gather virtually any information desired. Because of the open nature of the internet, some foreign countries, such as China, have placed governmental bans on the information that the internet can provide to its people. These bans have created a major rift between the United States and Chinese due to each country’s opposed opinions regarding the accessibility of the internet’s information. These same restrictions also extend to the U.S companies; such as Google, who provide internet service to Chinese citizens. By limiting the information those companies such as Google may display via Chinese internet, a difficult relationship between the Chinese and American governments has formed because Chinese internet bans have limited the ability for free speech on the internet.