[Reader-list] Sarai.txt 2.2 (text version)
Aarti
aarti at sarai.net
Mon Jun 13 15:20:52 IST 2005
Sarai txt 2.2
1 May - 1 July, 2005
Also see: http://broadsheet.var.cc/blog for previous issues.
*TRANSMIT*
A blank audio cassette, CD, notebook is a medium of as well as testimony
to multiple everyday acts of creativity; a tool and an impetus to the
flow of needs, desires and friendships; a gift, and also a commodity.
That which does not contain anything can take any form. That which does
not have a fixed location finds itself constituting the rhythms of
different relationships. It flows, leaving trails in the landscape.
These trails are lines of transmission. They could be the pre-configured
circuits on which transmission rides. Or rewired circuits, as that which
is transmitted seeks and finds new shapes, carriers, loops, in its path.
And they are also eddies, of acts performed and journeys undertaken when
that which is being transmitted spills over its destined routes.
Depending on how lines of power are drawn, and where we position
ourselves, we experience and register blockages, barriers, risks,
threats, fears and small moments of epiphany.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Content of the text version:
(Does not include the poster)
SIDE 01
Anchor texts:
- Production of Newness (commons-law post by Solomon Benjamin)
- Forms of Technology Transfer (from public lecture at 'Contested
Commons Trespassing Publics' conference, Sarai-CSDS and ALF, by Doron
Ben Atar)
SIDE 02
- PLAY: Even Before I have Stepped into The Station... (Meera Pillai,
Sarai Independent Fellow)
- SHUFFLE: How to Build a Transmitter
- REPLAY: What it Is and What It's Called (from presentation at
'Contested Commons Trespassing Publics' conference, Sarai-CSDS and ALF,
by Jane Gaines)
- PAUSE: Long Distance Conversations (Shuddhabrata Sengupta)
- REWIND: The Censor and the Interpreter (from presentation at 'History,
Memory, Identity' seminar at Sarai-CSDS, by Luisa Passerini)
- RECORD: The Map is Never Complete/Terracotta (Muthata Ramanathan,
Sarai Independent Fellow, and Smriti Vohra)
- RELEASE: MGM Vs Grokster: "My Way" to "Our Way"
BACKPAGE:
- Sarai[s] : Saraiki + frEeMuzik.net
- Forthcoming: Medianagar 02
- Credits
write to : broadsheet at sarai.net for print copies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIDE 01:
Subject: Production of Newness
Date: 19/03/2005
To: commons-law at sarai.net
Reply to: sollybenj at yahoo.co.in
Hi,
I want to raise some questions and provocations about the 'production of
newness' regarding settled understandings about modes of producing
social goods, specifically in the context of the divide between research
in the university setting and its application on the ground.
My observations come from a close look at three of India's large
industrial clusters - one in Delhi, which in 1995 manufactured about 30%
of the cables (23 family types) and conductors (both copper and
aluminium) in the Indian market; and textile clusters in the cities of
Kancheepuram (of 'high grade' silk sarees) and Ramanagaram (silk
reeling, with Asia’s largest silk cocoon market).
Our studies in these areas have been to trace how these economies grew,
paralleling macro-economic transformation, to demonstrate that very
little, if not all, of the innovation came from non-university trained
people, on the job. Not only is the range of innovations in all three
places fascinating, but also, in the very short period of three months,
a new fabric made out of silk waste found itself in the high-fashion
markets of Milan, New York and Tel Aviv, via 'suitcase entrepreneurs'.
I would like to point out that there was no intellectual property regime
to 'sustain and foster innovation', and no technical or management
training by NGOs or government agencies. There were a few cases where
there was an attempt to promote 'new technologies' - one by an NGO, and
the other by the Tata Energy Research Institute - on silk reeling. These
were total disasters, and the overqualified technicians doing their
stints in the field were the laughing stock of the scruffy locals, who
commented that the salaries would be better utilised in buying more
cocoons!
As for 'basic research', one has only to visit the computers supplied by
Japan Aid laid out in thick plastic sheets in a 'demonstration' Tata
silk farm near Bangalore. I suspect that as part of a Nehruvian
development argument, the issue of basic research in universities, as
contrasted with 'slummy'/applied research innovation, reflects a
politics of the ability to corner resources. Earlier, it was the select
few in the IITs (Indian Institute of Technology); and now it's the
multinationals, via complex contractual regulations and the
international intellectual property rights asserted in their newfound
collaborations.
I'll take the chance to mention here a very interesting document - the
1912 Mysore Economic Conference by Sir Vishwaria, where the issue was
technological innovation in silk production. The verbatim accounts of
the discussions show that the big debate was whether to have research
exclusively in laboratories, or instead for scientists to sleep out on
the farms, and observe how farmers reared cocoons and made yarn. And in
this way, test out their 'innovations' in the field, and move away from
a framework of 'technology transfer' to a framework of 'technology,
basic and applied'.
For those interested, we'll be happy to share this, perhaps in a more
reflective piece. But for now, I strongly urge a look at accounts of
historical and social processes like the 1912 conference! History may
help us ask necessary questions about our assumptions and axioms.
Cheers,
Solly
Excerpted and adapted from a posting by Solomon Benjamin on the
commons-law list.
http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/2005-March/002324.html
***
- Forms of Technology Transfer
During the 18th and 19th centuries, there were three forms of technology
transfer between the US and Europe. One was the knowledge itself,
whichever way it came. It could come as something written or described,
but this was problematic because descriptions lacked standard
measurements. For example, when people registered for patents in the
English Patent Office, they were required to describe the machine, but
they always kept their accounts vague because they feared that if the
descriptions were too detailed, the machine would be copied.
Another form of transfer was the machines themselves. But these were not
of great use unless you knew how to operate them. Which brings me to the
central agent, the people themselves, the carriers of skill and
technological know-how, who were crucial to this process.
The migration of artisans and the dissemination of technical skills took
place in spite of a concerted effort on the part of the British
government to keep its trade secrets at home. As the imperial conflict
between the patriots and the metropolis took shape in the mid-1770s, the
British Parliament ruled that all people leaving for North America from
the British Isles and Ireland, with the intent to settle, were required
to pay £50 per head. After the United States won its independence from
Britain, the act of exporting equipment for various industries, from
textiles, leather, paper and metals to glass and clock-making, was
prohibited. The Utopian Socialist thinker Robert Owen, recalling his
earlier days in the English textile industry, reported that in the
1780s, “Cotton mills were closed against all strangers. No one was
admitted. They were kept with great jealousy against all intruders, with
their doors being always locked.” A tactic that can still evoke smiles
was that of employing Welsh speakers in certain mills. These people were
‘safe’; they could not go anywhere or divulge anything, as no one
understood their language.
The American ‘founders’ knew of these restrictions. But they also
believed that for the United States to survive politically and
economically, it had to close the technology gap. Framers of the US
Constitution unanimously approved Article 1, Section 8, which instructed
the government to promote the progress of science and useful arts by
securing, for a limited time, for authors and inventors, the exclusive
right to their respective writings and discoveries.
This was a significant break from the English system of intellectual
property, which was itself founded on the promotion of piracy. In the
14th century, the English monarchy lured European artisans to England by
offering them a production monopoly. The English law of patents granted
what are known as ‘patents of importation’ to introducers. ‘Inventors’
and ‘introducers’ are different categories; yet in the English system,
they are not distinct.
The first United States Patent Act broke with the European tradition of
patents of importation. It restricted patents exclusively to original
inventors, and established the principle that prior use anywhere in the
world constituted grounds for invalidating a patent. In theory, the US
pioneered a new standard of intellectual property rights that set the
highest possible standards for patent protection, that of worldwide
originality and novelty. But the intellectual property laws Congress
enacted in the first fifty years of its existence were a smokescreen for
a very different reality. The statutory requirement of worldwide
originality and novelty did not hinder widespread, and officially
sanctioned, technology piracy.
William Thornton, who administered the American Patent Office for an
extended period, did not insist on the oath of worldwide novelty. It is
indeed entirely possible that most of the patent applications received
were for devices that were already in use, since acquiring a patent
required little more than the successful completion of paperwork.
Moreover, the Patent Act of 1793 explicitly prohibited foreigners from
obtaining patents in the US for inventions that had been put to work
elsewhere in the world. This meant that while US citizens could petition
for introducers patents in European nations, European inventors could
not protect their intellectual property in America.
What seems to be emerging, then, is a new understanding of the proper
arena for technology piracy. The young republic embraced a Janus-faced
approach. In theory, it pioneered a new standard of intellectual
property with the strictest possible requirements. A self-respecting
government, eager to join the international community, could not flaunt
its violation of the laws of other nations. But in practice, the state
encouraged widespread piracy and industrial espionage.
In this process of theoretical distancing from/pragmatic embracing of
piracy, the US had come full circle. The fledgling republic had become
the primary technology exporter in the world. The years of piracy upon
which the current stature was founded were, however, erased from the
American national memory. The intellectual debt owed to imported
technology did not turn the US into a champion of the free exchange of
knowledge. As the diffusion of technology began to flow eastward of the
Atlantic, America emerged as the world’s foremost advocate of extending
intellectual property rights to the international sphere.
Excerpted and adapted from “US Path to Wealth and Power: Intellectual
Piracy and the Making of America”, a public lecture by Doron Ben- Atar
at the ‘Contested Commons, Trespassing Publics’ conference organised by
Sarai-CSDS and the Alternative Law Forum (6-8 January 2005, New Delhi).
The full text of the lecture can be accessed at:
http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2005-April/005344.html
An audio file of the lecture is available for free download at:
http://www.sarai.net/events/ip_conf/doron.mp3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SIDE 02
PLAY
- Even Before I Have Stepped into the Station...
Spotting us from the corner of their eyes, the boys leap up and flee.
Joseph calls out, “Hey, it’s us! Where are you off to?” They pause, two
or three with a leg over the railings. Their faces split in grins, they
wait for us to catch up with them.
“Did you think we were the police?” asks Joseph, his cheerful voice
booming.
“We were playing bomma,” they explain. A simple game played by younger
boys at Vijaywada railway station: tossing a coin, calling out heads or
tails, keeping the coin if you call correctly. The keepers of law
mistake this for gambling, and usually object.
Curious passersby slow down, stop to watch us talk to the children.
There are seven boys aged 8-12 in this group, hanging out at the end of
the handicapped-accessible ramp beside the broad steps of the station’s
side entrance. Vijaywada is the largest junction on the South Central
Railway. It services 135 trains and about 30,000 passengers daily. On an
average, 23 children arrive here each day, having left their homes and
families. Joseph and Basha, who trawl the railway platforms daily on
behalf of a local NGO working with children in need of care and
protection, are familiar figures to these particular boys. The fact that
I am accompanying Joseph and Basha makes me ‘safe’, in the group’s
perception.
“Does anyone speak Hindi? She can speak Hindi,” Joseph says. In my
minimal Telugu, and with hand gestures, I explain, “Telugu raadu. I
can’t maatlaadu, but if you speak to me, artham cheysukontaanu.”
All seven are amused at my incompetence, but generous about my effort.
Three start talking to me in Hindi, and a fourth, we discover, speaks
Tamil, so he and I have that language in common. Most important is their
question “Tumhara gaon kahaan (Where is your village)?”
One of them has travelled to Bangalore, and asks me where the street
children’s shelters are. “I looked for them, but I couldn’t find them.”
I give him a quick tip on how to locate the shelters there.
A man comes by with a flask and tiny plastic “glasses” that can hold
about two tablespoons of liquid. Within a moment, we are all sipping
tea. The vendor is in a chatty mood. “I tell them they should also sell
tea...I can help one or two. They can sell tea and make Rs. 50-100 a
day. But they don’t listen.”
The boys ignore him. “Do you hang out here often?” I ask. They say yes,
nod casually.
“And no one disturbs you?”
“No...Or if they come, we go there. Or there.” They point to the roof
abutting the ramp, to the roof of the wide porch, to the space under the
metal stairs leading from a footbridge to the road outside the railway
station. “When we want to sleep, we go under those stairs. Or up there,
when it is hot. We climb up that.” They point at a cast iron drainpipe
along the side of the building.
“Is that difficult?”
They laugh. One boy leaps onto the railings. In a couple of seconds, he
has shimmied up to the roof and back. “We can climb up that neem tree to
the porch. Or use that pipe over there...or those pipes.”
I’ve not even entered yet, and already I’ve seen three non-standard
living spaces that the Vijaywada railway station provides to its young
residents. Spaces that I have never noticed there before. This was my
second lesson in recent times. Earlier, three young men at the station
had drawn freehand maps to indicate spaces they thought were ‘safe’ and
‘dangerous’ for children who live there. In their sketch, a well-lit,
modern food court and the railway reservation counter were marked as
dangerous, and the roofs of footbridges and stairways connecting
different platforms were marked as the safest - for rest, for play, for
living. How the youngsters inhabiting the station perceived its spaces
in terms of ‘security’ and ‘threat’ was in complete contradiction to how
those same spaces were perceived by me, a middle-aged, middle-class woman.
Meera Pillai
mpillai65 at yahoo.com
Sarai Independent Fellow, 2004-05. Her research is titled “Food Courts
and Footbridges: Conceptualising Space in Vijaywada Railway Station”.
Compiled from two postings, which can be accessed at:
https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2005-January/004879.html
https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2005-May/005689.html
***
SHUFFLE
Materials Required
ØA 1-megahertz crystal oscillator
ØAn audio transformer
ØA generic printed circuit board
ØA phone plug
ØA 9-volt battery clip
ØA 9-volt battery
ØA set of alligator jumpers
ØSome insulated wire for an antenna
How to Build a Transmitter
1] Flatten out the two metal tabs on the bottom of the transformer and
glue them to the circuit board.
2] Insert and firmly secure the leads of the oscillator into the circuit
board, placing it far to the right. Solder.
3] Insert the stripped end of the red wire of the transformer into a
hole in the printed circuit board. Insert the red wire from the battery
clip into another hole that is connected by copper foil to the first
hole. Solder.
4] Insert the white transformer wire into a hole whose copper foil is
connected to the upper left pin of the oscillator. Solder.
5] Cut one of the clip leads in half and strip the insulation from the
last half-inch of each piece.
6] Insert the black wire of the battery clip into a hole whose copper
foil connects to the lower right pin of the oscillator. Do the same with
the stripped end of one of the alligator clip leads. Solder the two
wires to the copper foil. The alligator clip will be the “ground”
connection.
7] Insert the stripped end of the other alligator clip into a hole that
is connected to the upper right pin of the oscillator. Solder to the
copper foil. This is the antenna connector.
8] Open the phone plug, insert the blue and green wires of the
transformer into the plastic handle. Put each of the transformer wires
into holes in the plug. Solder.
Depending on the antenna, the transmitter can send voice and music
across the room, or across the street. To get a good range, clip the
ground wire to a good ground, such as a cold water pipe, and clip the
antenna to a long wire. Choose your range. Transmit.
http://www.scitoys.com/scitoys/scitoys/radio/am_transmitter.html
***
REPLAY
- What It Is, and What It’s Called
How many times can a joke be told if a joke be told more than once?
How many ways can a joke be told if a joke be told more than once?
What would a jester do if told that a joke dies with its first telling?
Would a joke remain the same joke if we only changed the spelling?
In 1895, the Lumière brothers in France made a film called L'Arroseur
Arrosé, or The Waterer Watered. The plot was apparently simple, comic,
almost slapstick. A gardener is holding a hose. A boy steps on the hose,
choking off the flow of water. The gardener peers down the hose. The boy
lifts his foot from the hose. The gardener is squirted.
Early films were in high demand; the period between 1895 and 1899 was a
sort of Wild West of opportunity to reproduce at random and at large.
Often the original negatives ran out, and the prints could only be shown
about 60 times; by then they were reduced to shreds. In such instances,
as with The Waterer Watered, the only option was to re-shoot, i.e., to
‘re-tell’ the joke. So, like all jokes which grow and transform in the
telling, this rudimentary plot changed with each version. Stylistic
components such as depth of field were introduced; so were dramatic
elements. The boy is spanked; the ‘watered’ gardener ‘waters’ the boy in
turn; the boy is played by a girl...
From 1896 to 1903 occurs what I call the moment of the too-too-many
copies of The Waterer Watered. Through my research on this film’s
multiple variants, we know that a film called The Gardener (Le
Jardinier, 1895, Lumière Company) was shown at the Salon Indien in
Paris. The film later becomes The Waterer Watered. This is further
complicated, in that the Lumières made the same film, The Waterer
Watered, more than once.
Making and Re-making:
Most textbooks record one version of The Waterer Watered, and possibly
two. Only two textbooks from the 1930s refer to ten versions. I have
actually counted up to sixteen versions. As we shall see, these versions
were not just by the Lumières, the ‘original’ makers. In 1896, Méliès
made his own version. Edison made an 1896 American version, Bad Woman,
Bad Boy, in which both roles are played by women; this film is not
extant. The British made The Bad Boy and the Garden Hose (Blackton and
Smith), and The Gardener with Hose or The Mischievous Boy (W.H. Smith).
Then we have two more French examples, one of them made by the pioneer
woman producer/director Alice Guy-Blaché.
Most interesting to me is the mystery print, The Gardener and the Bad
Boy, which was shown in New York in 1896, but had no mention of any
exhibitor or distributor. The date of this ‘extra-legal’ screening does
not correspond with the date that the Lumière company actually showed
the first work in New York.
Prints and Titles:
The other question of the too-too-many copies, besides the number of
copies, is also what you call the copies. Do the titles give us an
indication of the prints? Because all we have to go on, in our attempt
to do this kind of motion picture history, this history of copyright,
are titles and prints in archives all over the world which have probably
been misnamed. In addition to the multiple translations of the French
L’Arroseur Arrosé as Waterer and Watered and The Waterer Watered, you
will also see The Practical Joke and the Gardener, Watering the
Gardener, The Sprinkler Sprinkled, and Teasing the Gardener. With all of
these variations, where is the correspondence, if any, between the
titles and the prints?
Some argue that The Waterer Watered is the first comedy, some argue that
it’s the first fiction film. I have to tell you that I am not a believer
in ‘firsts’. I am also on the warpath against ‘origins’. And what I love
about this particular project is that it is impossible to really
determine where the ‘first’ occurs, when the ‘first’ occurs, or if there
is a ‘first’...
Excerpted and adapted from the presentation “Early Cinema, Heyday of
Copying” by Jane Gaines, at the ‘Contested Commons, Trespassing Publics’
conference organised by Sarai-CSDS and the Alternative Law Forum (6-8
January 2005, New Delhi). An audio file of the presentation can be
accessed at:
http://www.sarai.net/events/ip_conf/day02_audio/stream-070105-afterlunch.mp3
***
PAUSE
- Long Distance Conversations
I am a prisoner of phone booths. STD/ISD/PCO/FAX/Xerox By Japanese
Machine booths. I am enthralled by their darkened glass panes,
stencilled signage and plastic flowers, the late hours they keep, and
the stories that gather on their wallpapers. Like an idiot hungry for
tales of travellers who idled in the sarais of the Delhi sultanate, I
waste my time in the phone booths of ‘90s New Delhi. Even when I have
nothing to say and no one to call. I go there to eavesdrop on the world,
to whisper in my head the magic of distant place names: Adas, Addagadde,
Galsi, Gambhoi, Kanjirapuzha, Kalna, Zira, Zineboto. Or, I search
further in the book of codes for cities with enchantments: Rosario,
Uppsala, Valparaiso, Zauqa, Aqaba...and Sandnes...and Los Angeles.
...Phone booths in the city centre, close to railway stations and cheap
hotels, are home to a floating population of tourists and travellers in
various stages of fatigue and enthusiasm. They unbuckle their voluminous
rucksacks, unzip their hip pouches to take out scraps of paper with
phone numbers in Belgium or Germany, while imagining the prospects of
return and mapping their future itineraries. Will it be Ladakh before
Goa, or Dharamsala before Varanasi? These are the roving envoys of the
lonely planet, invariably overcharged by smooth phone booth owners who
hide their racism behind the complicated arithmetic of time and money
conversions.
...A refugee Afghan doctor and his wife come to ring up Kabul. I asked
them once if they still have friends or relatives there. “No,” they
said, “everyone is dead, or in exile. We call only to see if the house
we left behind is still standing. When the phone rings, it means that
the house has not been shelled.”
...Three Malayali nurses, exceptionally graceful, regularly call up
family in their home town. After the change has been tendered, the boss
of our phone booth, who lets the nurses move to the head of the queue
(no one seems to mind), asks them searching questions about the
Christian faith. Is the Holy Ghost a ghost? Was Jesus reborn after his
death? Did the Virgin Mary have a normal delivery? Do Christians have
caste? The nurses painstakingly answer these questions in halting Hindi,
promise to try and find out from their priest.
...The night’s calls are nearly over, at 12.40 am. Along with me,
there’s a backpacker still trying to get through to Barcelona, and the
boss, staring at cable TV. The phone rings, but the boss and the
backpacker have fallen asleep, and for the next twenty-five minutes or
so, the shiny-shoed salesman who rushes in makes long-distance love to a
married woman in Bangalore. Sometimes he breaks off from Kannada and
begins talking about her long hair in English. He jokes about the
sleeping husband, asks for news of the children, promises to see her soon.
...The boss counts the day’s takings and begins to roll down the
shutter. I offer to drive the backpacker down to the all-night STD booth
outside the Eastern Court buildings on Janpath. We drive in silence; we
have things to say to the people we need to call, not to each other.
Then my companion decides to tell me that his friend is dead and cold in
a hospital morgue, that he is catching the next flight back in the
morning with her body. When we get to the booth, he lets me wake the
operator and get the cards with which to work the phones. He shuts the
door tight behind him when he calls, and I cannot hear his voice. When
he is done, he thanks me and leaves before I can ask him if I can take
him to his hotel, or to the hospital.
...How did he say what he had to tell his friend’s family? “Flavia and I
are coming home tomorrow, but she is not alive”, or “Flavia died this
morning at 6.45 in her sleep”, or just, “Flavia is dead.”
Sometimes I think of all the telephone conversations that criss-cross
the earth...Numbers don’t match, there is static interference, satellite
links fail, people don’t know what to say, or are unable to say what
they mean. Perhaps all that is unsaid collects each night and hovers
above us like an unknown layer in the atmosphere, until it is blown away
on the rare days when people find it possible to really speak to each
other.
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
shuddha at sarai.net
Excerpted from an essay first published in The India Magazine,
August-September 1996; republished in Elsewhere, ed. Kai Friese, Penguin
India, New Delhi, 2000. For full text see:
http://www.sarai.net/compositions/texts/works/longdistance.htm
***
REWIND
- The Censor and the Interpreter
For an oral historian, the first major source is the encounter between
two subjectivities, between the interviewee and the interviewer. But
when I say two subjectivities, I mean not only the agency, the capacity
to act. I mean also the world of ideas, imagination, thought, emotion,
which inhabits the subject. And the source here is to be understood in
the literal sense like the water which vivifies. The source is the
meeting between human beings, and therefore the recognition between
them, how they relate to each other and present each other, the
understanding between them, and finally the actual emotion of meeting.
So this is the first source of oral history: the emotion of the meeting.
Of course, there are other similar sources. I mean, there is a similar
source in history also that does not use the oral at all, and it is
called empathy. It is the empathy of the biographer; it is the empathy
with the document. So this encounter is there, the encounter of feelings.
Why do I insist on the emotion? Not only because I think that it is an
under-recognised topic and attitude in history, but also because I am
thinking of Freud’s reference to the question of emotion when he says
that the erotic drive is actually extremely flexible. It is much more
flexible than the drive to eat, because you cannot eat just anything but
you can become attached to anything. You can love anything.
This flexibility of sentiment is the first source of oral history.
Secondly, this encounter between two subjectivities is expressed in
words, and therefore it gives rise to an inter-subjectivity of dialogue.
It is this inter-subjectivity that is taped on the tape recorder.
This ‘tape’ is a very strong censorship. It is the censorship of
everything that is not a word. The tape recorder does not include the
image, does not include the body. (It does, however, include laughter,
chuckles, cries...).
But the very censorship it operates through also forms the tools through
which we work. The taped interview is the source I always send my
students back to. They cannot go back to the original situation but they
can go back to the taped interview.
The transcript, which is the third source, is only a shortcut: a
shortcut for analysis. But the transcript is already the translation of
the oral into the written. So it has undergone a huge transformation.
And then there is a fourth transformation, which is interpretation. Here
one uses all sorts of disciplinary tools, from folklore, from
anthropology, from media studies, from economics, and so on.
Then there is the question of temporalities. I would say that in the
oral interview there are three temporalities at least. One is the time
in which one does the interview – the present. Another is the time
period of the narration. A narration, for instance, can refer to Fascism
in the 1930s, between the two world wars. And the third is the
temporality of the narration itself. The narration can very well have
centuries-long roots. It can have roots in other traditions of narration
– a tradition of narration that exists since a very long time or that
comes from different spheres, for instance TV shows, and so on.
Operating through these three temporalities, the inter-subjectivity of
the encounter produces something that can constitute very different
collections. It can constitute an oral archive, it can become the basis
of a community project or it can undergo literary treatment, or it can
become a radio programme, or it can become a source for history.
These are ways in which oral material becomes a source...In order to be
transformed into a source, oral material has to undergo specific
procedures.
Excerpted and adapted from a talk by Luisa Passerini at the ‘History,
Memory, Identity’ workshop organised by Sarai-CSDS (14-16 January 2005).
***
RECORD
- The Map Is Never Complete
This project is an attempt to extend critical understandings of the use
of spatial technologies (remote sensing and GIS) that typically focus on
institutional and instrumental aspects. My research includes documenting
my observations of the actual processes of technological practice.
I argue that we should pay attention to the spaces and actors involved
in the technical stages of knowledge production, and maintain the
linkages from the phenomenon to be represented (e.g., the agrarian
landscape) to the objects of representation (e.g., a land use map) and
the manner in which these are utilised.
During my ongoing interactions with the technical staff of the NGO that
I have been associated with for this work, I have noticed a specific
culture of learning/practice.
I accompanied a soil scientist on a soil mapping field trip. To
familiarise me with his approach to soil classification and mapping, he
handed me a soils manual and asked me to read it on the day before our
field visit. It contained information about soil characteristics such as
texture, depth, and colour – specifically, definitions of different
classes of texture, depth, etc. Later he gave me a quick overview of his
field methods.
These methods were based on the interaction between soil
characteristics, and this information was not contained in the manual. I
asked him about this as we drove to the site the next morning. He
replied that while writing the manual, he had made a deliberate choice
to not include the information about the interactions. He also refused
to tell me about it in the jeep. He described this as a question of
style that he had developed over the years. In his opinion, if he ‘told’
me about it, broke it down into steps, it would not help me in the
least. I would not develop my own style or understanding, and would
instead practice a simplistic method of soil mapping.
We spent nearly two days traversing the fields, classifying soils and
mapping their distributions. During this, he shared many insights.
However none were prescriptive; instead, they were (some rather
slippery) building blocks.
This seemed to me a specific epistemology and approach to learning.
There is no absolute soil class or soil map for a region. Much is based
on interpretation and making tough, but informed, choices on the ground.
In order to impart this kind of knowledge, my ‘teacher’ chose to provide
me with the basics textually, and then chose to show the way differently
through ‘practice’.
I had to learn to make these choices myself as I stood on a plot of land
and looked around – how to situate myself with respect to the local
topography, interpret the local geology, triangulate it with standing
crops (if any) in the area, the slope of the land, the colour of the
soil. The map is never complete, stage by stage, inch by inch – a choice
you make down the line might still influence a choice you had just made.
Muthatha Ramanathan
muthatha at u.washington.edu
Sarai Independent Fellow, 2004-05. Her research is titled “Tracing
Spatial Technology in the Rural Development Landscape of South India”.
Her posting can be accessed at:
http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2005-April/005376.html
+++++++
Terracotta, known locally as peeli mitti (yellow earth), is of a
recalcitrant grain, its rough beauty fretted with stones, roots, twigs,
sharp edges of buried fragments, gritty seams of resistance willing
their own annihilation.
To prepare this clay for use, soak it in a bucket overnight. Pour off
the water that collects on the surface of the sediment. Vigorously sieve
the dense slurry through a close-latticed mesh. Free of detritus, liquid
silk falls through, so fine that it coats the skin without nudging the
alignment of a single hair.
Allow this yield to dry to the preferred consistency, turning it over
occasionally to make sure it is evenly exposed.
Technically speaking, if the slurry is kept adequately moist and left to
“sour” in the bucket for an extended period, the clay later proves
stronger, as well smoother and more supple, to the potter’s grip.
smriti at sarai.net
***
RELEASE
- MGM vs. Grokster: “My Way” to “Our” Way
In October 2001, Metro-Goldwyn-Meyer and twenty-eight of the world’s
largest entertainment companies took the makers and distributors of the
Grokster, Morpheus and Kazaa softwares to court, alleging secondary
copyright violation. They held that the distributors of the software
were directly responsible for the infringing activities of users of the
system. MGM vs. Grokster came up for hearing before a bench of the US
Supreme Court on 29 March 2005. Arguments are currently in progress, and
a decision is expected by the end of June this year.
Grokster, like other P2P softwares such as Kazaa, Limewire and
BitTorrent, enables users connected to a network, such as the Internet,
to share files with each other. These could be music files, video files
and even digitised books. The industry has traditionally been suspicious
of technologies that enable the circulation of cultural material in ways
and forms that cannot be controlled by the owners of the copyright on
that material. An anxiety ratcheted up by the immense transformative
possibilities opened up by new media and digital technology tools on the
one hand, and a parallel tightening of an international intellectual
property regime on the other. The Grokster case is not the first
instance of such a suit. In 1999, AGM music filed a similar suit against
the makers of Napster, a similar file-sharing software.
At the juridical level, the Grokster case is a question of technological
innovation and its limits, when situated within a regime that places an
equally high value on the protection of the intellectual property of
other innovators, such as artists, authors, musicians, etc., which
technologies like Grokster are seen to threaten, violate and undermine.
A precedent had been set in 1984 with Sony Corporation of America vs.
Universal City Studios, or the Betamax case. The US Supreme Court ruled
that a company was not liable for creating a technology that some
customers may use for copyright infringing purposes, so long as the
technology lends itself to substantial, commercially viable
non-infringing uses.
However a consideration of the Grokster case would have to take into
account the fact that this is as much about the ‘case’ and all that
surrounds it as a cluster of transmissible signals, as it is about the
bare facts of the case itself.
The many avatars of Grokster – a posting on a list, an announcement on a
website, a transcript in an archive, an entry in a blog, perhaps a
conversation between a judge and his teenage grandson – gesture to the
cumulative effects of what happens when something enters a network
capable of allowing the simultaneous exchange of information between an
ever-expanding constituency of interested parties.
Ideas multiply and go places. And so does the simple idea of file
sharing. From a court case to a web log to a posting to the words in the
paper that you hold in your hand to the next set of hands that hold the
paper, and so on.
A lawsuit against a technology of transmission itself becomes the object
of transmission along the byways of the Net. Information travels across
the neurons of the Net sparking off connections, sometimes at random. A
Washington lawyer who attended the oral submission before the Supreme
Court describes this on his blog, an artist who uses file-sharing
software to upload and share his music with peers features news of the
case on his site, a website begins a countdown of all the technologies
that would be retrospectively prohibited if the Court rules against the
technology, a law school decides to upload the oral transcripts in pdf
format on its portal. A group of artists get together and file amicus
curiae (friends of the court) briefs in favour of Grokster, just as
other artists signed by the recording labels file briefs against it. A
critical mass gathers around the case, so that regardless of whether the
final judgment is in its favour or not, it (and along with it, the idea
of file sharing) has nonetheless entered the accretive memory of the
network.
The circulation of things is crucially about the patterns of usage that
emerge around them. Circulation builds cultures and contexts of
sociality, in which things are gifted, shared, transformed, repurposed
and remixed. In a network, Frank Sinatra’s “My Way” is open to becoming
“his way” and “her way”. Sometimes maybe even “our way”. Then, these
‘ways’ enter the everydayness of discourse and practice and it becomes
difficult to create barriers to block them.
For more information on this case see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Studios_v._Grokster and
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/
To download a full text version in pdf format of the oral submission
before the United States Supreme Court, see:
http://p2p.weblogsinc.com/entry/1234000167039288/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
BACKPAGE:
- Story: Saraiki
SARAI[S]:
In medieval South Asia, sarais (inns) were constructed at strategic
distances all along intersecting trade routes, providing free food and
lodging for travellers, and grain and fodder for their weary horses,
camels and pack animals. Sarais were junctions where those on the road
-– merchants, traders, artisans, seekers of fortune, scholars, pilgrims,
vagrants, beggars, priests – could find shelter, sustenance and
companionship. Magicians, dancers and musicians lived around the sarais
and performed for its floating clientele.
Sarais functioned as crucial hubs in an extensive communication network
that used horse mail and itinerant human couriers to cover huge
distances. Messages passed along the length and breadth of the South
Asian subcontinent, from Kandahar and beyond in the far north-west,
bordering Afghanistan and the Baluchistan deserts in the west, to the
Irrawaddy basin in Burma in the east, and from the Tibetan plateau in
the far north to the far southern tip of the Deccan peninsula.
Even today, the map of Delhi is inscribed with at least twelve locations
that include the word sarai.
A transit point suspended between departure and arrival, the sarai was a
site for the exchange of news, stories, gossip, trade secrets and useful
information. Many tongues carrying their own subtle inflections and
unique cadences jostled for space here. From this eloquent din emerged a
strange, polyglot creation, an unruly mix of Persian, Khari Boli,
Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashto and Turkish. It was called Saraiki: the language
of the sarai.
**
frEeMuzik.net
Welcome to frEeMuzik (http://www.freemuzik.net/). This is a digital
intervention, a collective where musicians can interact and create
recordings without commercial pressures. It aims to foster an open
cultural space for the expression and documentation of musical forms
that are
ignored/neglected in the market, and are threatening to disappear. All
music on the site can be freely downloaded.
Artistes are invited to improvise, experiment and freely contribute to
frEeMuzik.net, which will focus on genres across the musical spectrum,
including Indian and Western classical/folk, Latin, Indigenous and
electronic.
With its alternative, non-profit approach, and without soliciting
funds/promotion from music companies or corporate sponsors,
frEeMuzik.net intends to establish a record label and recording studio,
and build an audio library by collecting old and rare records as well as
new CDs. We will also be working with Internet radio towards
broadcasting frEeMuzik.net in the public domain.
We welcome participation from photographers, musicians, sound
recordists, mixing/mastering experts, studio professionals, software
coders and people interested in contributing to the frEeMuzik.net
resource base in any way.
Contact ish at sarai.net
http://users.sarai.net/ish/idea.htm
FORTHCOMING: Medianagar 02
Medianagar is the annual Hindi publication of the Publics and Practices
in the History of the Present project, in Sarai. Medianagar 02 explores
the dynamic and fluid networks of the production, distribution and
circulation of diverse media forms. It attempts a creative exploration
of the forms, trends and representations of media in the contemporary city.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[END OF BROADSHEET]
CREDITS
Editorial Collective:
Aarti Sethi
Iram Ghufran
Shveta Sarda
Smriti Vohra
Editorial Co-ordinator
Monica Narula
Design (print version): Mrityunjay Chatterjee
Photographs: Monica Narula
Write to
broadsheet at sarai.net
More information about the reader-list
mailing list