MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080559663 · doi:10.1353/tech.2011.0058

Online a Lot of the Time: Ritual, Fetish, Sign (review)

2011· article· en· W2080559663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Timothy Dugdale

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Culture · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSign (mathematics)ClubCyberspaceMedia studiesWhite (mutation)Identity (music)Meaning (existential)FeelingSociologyThe InternetExistentialismCultArtArt historyAestheticsPsychologyWorld Wide WebLawSocial psychologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Online a Lot of the Time: Ritual, Fetish, Sign Timothy Dugdale (bio) Online a Lot of the Time: Ritual, Fetish, Sign. By Ken Hillis. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2009. Pp. x+316. $84.95/$23.95. After spending a couple of hours online, how do you feel? Not so good? Me neither. It’s not just the sitting or the staring or the clicking. The web leaves me feeling both paranoid and pathetic. What if Google, the self-proclaimed white hat of the web, is mapping my surf, much to the delight of future suspicious employers or rapacious divorce attorneys? And why the devil am I not outside working on my backhand? Lord knows it needs some help. Or I could be hanging with my mates down at the club, tippling a grappa and yelling at a soccer match on the telly. The internet is, in the end, a rather sad place. It is a place for people without a place where they can be known by sight and smell. It is a place for people in search of the identity and meaning that belonging brings. Online a Lot of the Time is a book about those people and their existential cargo cult of cyberspace. Marshall McLuhan referred to media as “extensions of man.” For the sage of Toronto, media were tools that allow you to transcend time and space, to be here and there, now and then. Just as McLuhan was influenced by the work of another great Canadian communications scholar, Harold Innis (The Fur Trade in Canada [1930]), the two of them greatly impressed James W. Carey, the man whose seminal essay on ritual, symbol, and transmission is the theoretical linchpin of this work. Innis zeroed in on how technology and narratives about technology do ideological work for empire builders. Via Carey, Hillis revamps this point. “To varying degrees, networked individuals fetishize not only information machines as the economic and social actualization of the progress myth,” he writes, “but also an experience that such machines support—of the post-representational trace, transmitted to them in the form of an indexical sign/body, of geographically distant individuals who pique their interest for any number of reasons” (p. 15). Hillis briefly discusses the Church of Fools, a “site” launched by the United Kingdom Methodist Church. The virtual church allows an individual to experience an extended spiritual charge—while you’re working, your avatar is praying. But the avatar is not you, Hillis argues, it is always a representation, infused with an existential investment that transforms it into a fetish. I wish that Hillis had spent more time exploring other virtual churches and, perhaps even more importantly, the networking of online hives that feed into physical megachurches such as Rick Warren’s famous Saddleback Church. After all, Hillis suggests that people turn to the web for community because they spend so much time commuting in the barren wilds of exurbia, the very fertile hunting ground for on-the-make pastors. [End Page 426] But if web dwellers crave community, it is often community in gutless anonymity. Too many people on the web don’t own what they say or do. They want to leave a trace but without the responsibility of authorship. Ultimately, Hillis is writing about a strange breed of celebrity. The web hails (troubled?) individuals to “perform themselves into public media” and create a microniche market for that performance. Hillis offers a case study on gay webcam performance as a form of consumerism in which “fans” fetishize both the delivery system and the performer. Making yourself into a “telefetish” is a form of power—conquering your fragile self-image to become a desirable albeit unknowable object for another—but to what end? In traditional anthropological theory, rituals are often rites of passage or collective opportunities to explore, as Victor Turner would say, the what if of a culture turned upside down, if only for a few days. Festivals like Carnival allow individuals to escape their place in a social structure, and in the process catch a glimpse of how to challenge that hegemony when its order is restored on Ash Wednesday. Hillis argues that rituals...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.015

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology and CultureSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207