TELECOMMUNICATION AND ITS IMPACT ON CONTEMPORARY ART

                        TELECOMMUNICATION AND ITS IMPACT ON CONTEMPORARY ART   

Dani Tagen May 2010 

        “In our post­modern societies, the most pressing thing is no                   longer the emancipation of individuals, but the freeing­up of                 inter­human communications, the dimensional emancipation         of existence.” (Bourrriaud, 2002:60) 

  One of the most fascinating aspects of human evolution is the quest to improve                           communication. The development of different strategies to accomplish the utopian                   perfect communication has led to the invention of amazing technology and the desire to                           expand information networks as well as to increase speed and accuracy of messages.                         Understanding the history of the development of communication is to understand how                       society has evolved around the world.   Communication if often taken for granted as it is as natural as walking, eating or                             sleeping. We are creatures of communities; we are animals that have always gathered                         together and from caveman to cyber avatars, mankind has shown the need to express                           ideas and emotions in order to be understood. Being understood is the essence of being                             part of a group, of having a sense of belonging and feeling we matter.                           Anthropologically­speaking, humanity evolved due to its capacity to share information.   The telecommunication revolution that is happening nowadays – due to the                     technological revolution itself – is not new; humanity has been through such a change                           before, however the big difference is that its speed is exponential when compared to                           previous technology shifts. It took over 100 years to have telephone lines installed in                           every home but it took 20 years for the Internet revolution to happen. The impact on                               society follows in tandem pattern with telecommunication developments and the                   argument here will try to show how digital telecommunication will have an impact on                           the future of a contemporary art gallery/museum visit experience.      Everyday life   “Every surface longs for dust as dust is the flesh of time” (Brodsky, 1992:41)   To study everyday life is to reflect on the apparently mundane life whilst revealing the                             shades of the almost invisible. Everyday life is a paradox in itself: full of extraordinary                             things happening so frequently, they seem ordinary. Why is it so easy to turn a blind                               eye to the richness of the detail? Maybe it is just a matter of getting overwhelmed by                                 the abundance of things. If our memory could remember everything we learnt we                         would go mad; forgetting is one of the details of life that makes it unpredictable and                               certainly one of the main ingredients of its richness.   

Somehow life gets sadder or more meaningless when it emphasises only the                       outstanding.  We all need a “significant other” in some part of our lives to help define                               who we are, strengthen our beliefs and find our role in society.   Sometimes we overlook situations or conditions or even take for granted that because                         things are accessible where we live, they should be commonplace everywhere.                     Technology is getting cheaper and cheaper therefore more accessible than ever, but it                         is still not commonplace all around the world for personal use. Technology is something                           ubiquitous today, but it is a paradox that though we are surrounded by it and cannot                               avoid it, we are still learning to deal with it on a social and personal level.     The Third Industrial Revolution   There are so many interesting aspects of past technological revolutions that could be                         used to exemplify how they can change society and bring forward new ways of                           thinking… If we take photography and its effects, for instance; when photography was                         invented it instantly affected the way painters depicted the world. There was no need                           for a literal copy of their surroundings or a meticulous representation of a sitter.                           Photography freed painters from the painstaking task of repetition. They were now able                         to pursue creativity in the name of expression. What came after this new feeling of                             freedom were the art revolution and all its movements – impressionism, cubism,                       constructivism, Bauhaus, pop art…   There was also the impact on society. Photography enabled people to record their                         ordinary lives, allowed people to be portrayed in a way which gave new meaning to                             what ordinary meant. For the first time common people felt their tiny history was                           actually interfering with History1. It made them feel important.   Up to the middle of the 19th century, only the wealthy were able to have a glance at the                                     face of their past generations, as portraits were very expensive. This seemingly simple                         resource of photography opened up a window of self­discovery; suddenly ordinary                     people felt empowered by this new media, it gave them a sense of importance as if                               having their portrait taken blurred the boundaries of social classes.   During the American Civil War (1861­1865) it was common to have your carte de visite                             sent to loved ones ­ a small visiting card portrait cheaply available because it used one                               single plate to produce on average eight photographs.  The mania took over the world                           in such a way that in London there were 35 photographers in Regent Street during the                               1860s.    By recording the way they lived, dressed, travelled, interacted… people were building                       up a vast catalogue of data – more specifically, visual data – not available before. This                               resulted in a better understanding of the social evolution, habits, codes … for future                           generations. We understand the past because we have people who left their                       

impressions of it, but up to the invention of photography history relied on personal                           accounts, artist interpretations and legal documents.   Not that photography is or ever was a media of total truth. The angle, lens, film grain,                                 light and film format used to take a picture corrupts the representation of an event or                               person in the same way that words tell only what the writer sees. However, just like                               language, photography can be very useful to depict social modes and standards of an                           era.       1­ “…[the expansion of] collective, genealogical and historical memory, multiplying the occasions on which an individual [could] feel his own history intersecting with History.” (Augé, 1995:24) There is a strong similarity when we compare how this technological revolution affected                         social behaviours. In the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th the blurring                               between upper and middle classes started to happen due to the availability of cheaper                           technological devices: US$1 pocket watch by Westclox, the Kodak camera, spectacles,                     fountain pens… At the time, it was fashionable to have those gadgets even though they                             were not that reliable – accuracy was a problem in the case of watches. Having them                               became a matter of status. We can relate to this behaviour today; this blurring has                             gradually continued throughout the 20th century, as it had always been a matter of                           showing off possessions. It became more a matter of what you can afford than which                             class you belong to.   The advances of digital technology have already proven to have a massive impact in the                             way the whole world lives. Everything – from food to the air we breathe inside buildings                               – nowadays has a direct or indirect connection to a computer. Differences in the way                             this impact is taking place are noticeable in the way richer and poorer countries are                             prioritising their digital technology usage and in the way western and eastern cultures                         are adapting to this new way of life.     The Internet   What is new with this technological revolution is the way we communicate and                         therefore interact with the world around us. The way we communicate can be used to                             trace our social evolution and this is the fundamental revolution that the digital                         technology is setting upon humanity. Just like we understand better how customs and                         lives changed during the previous technological revolution thanks for example to                     Lartigue  ­ a French amateur photographer who shot everything around him from 1900                         to 1960  ­ and his incredible portrait of turn­of­the­century France – future generations                         will, most certainly, have a better understanding of what the world is going through                           now in years to come, thanks to the Internet and the massive amount of data it is                                 helping mankind to gather.   

Before the Internet, sharing daily, mundane ideas was inconceivable, almost. Our way                       of sharing simple ideas was by the oral tradition – a tradition almost lost with the                               advent of the mass media. Though the need of telling stories or anecdotes had never                             died, writing a description of any ordinary day was seen more as a task for amateur or                                 enthusiast writers. People that kept diaries or logs were seen as meticulous and                         committed and it was not viewed as a task for everyone. The Internet has changed that                               and has proven that deep inside each human being there has always been the need for                               self­expression that surpasses any high­standard skill in writing, photography, film                   directing, music playing…   Blogs – a short form for web logs ­ were the first major vehicle of public self­expression                                 used by Internauts, which reached every Internet user. Blogs created a new trend, a                           new way of reflecting on life. It is not only about having an online diary: it is a public                                     diary where the public is allowed to add comments – with the blogger’s approval                           usually. This makes Blogs a new communication tool, which reach more people faster                         and further. Following the idea of Blogs, with their instant interactivity and colloquial                         language, social networking has invaded the Internet, with Facebook and Twitter being                       the most famous networking tools. Suddenly any subject is worth writing about and                         sharing; everyone can write, everyone can have something to say and every reader can                           comment on what is said, too. The idea of letting everyone know each other’s                           whereabouts and doings is now part of the i­generation2 and a good part of the                             in­betweeners3 as well. Once again, as with the photography revolution, we are making                         history by recording the ordinary stories of our daily lives.   We are using virtual social networking to tell others what is going on in our lives, in the                                   most ordinary way. The subjects reflect who we are at that moment. In 10 years time                               we will be able to access all this data and learn about the person we used to be. This is                                       the fascinating thing with the Internet, just like opening an old album of photographs, it                             will be like opening up a photographic album full of data: where we were, who we were                                 with, what we were doing, what precise day and time of the year… all gathered                             together thanks to digital technology. As we change without realising it, in the future                           we will probably feel as ashamed of our past selves as we feel when we see our old                                   photographs. But it will be the first time a large amount of people will have access to                                 their past selves and surely this will have a big impact on us. Just like when people                                 were able to have their portraits taken for the first time, back in last decade of the 19th                                   century, and felt they were themselves important, now people are using the Internet to                           express their ideas and the feeling of self­recognition must only get stronger.                       Teenagers are writing on social networking websites all their feelings and anxieties                       leaving a trace of who they are for the adult they will become later.   “ A photographic portrait, when new and privately possessed, promotes identity,                     individualism: it offers opportunities for self­recognition, self­study. It provides the extra                     sensation of objectivising the self. It makes the self more real, more dramatic. For the                             subject, it’s no longer enough to be: now he knows he is. He is conscious of himself.”                                 (Hockings, 2003:448) 

  The world is shrinking, whilst its connections are expanding. Our parameters of                       distances have been blurred. The Internet is softening once more the limits of class by                             empowering its users. The idea that everyone can have a say about any subject is                             extremely empowering because it entitles individuals to have a direct influence on                       history, making their own personal history again blend with History. Blogs such as                         Global Voices seek to aggregate, curate, and amplify the global conversation online ­                         shining light on places and people other media often ignore. (globalvoicesonline.org).                     We have witnessed how China struggled to control the circulation of images of badly                           built buildings, right after the earthquake in Sichuan Province, back in May 2008. In                           December 2009, Iran banned international reporters from Tehran in order to stop them                         providing coverage of Iranians protesting against the Islamic regime, but thanks to the                         Internet and the mobile phone technology, videos and images poured around the world                         on both occasions.      2­ i­generation: the Internet generation or people born after 1990. Also know as “digital native” as they have a lifelong use of digital telecommunication tools. 3­ in­betweeners: everyone that has lived without digital telecommunication and now makes use of it.   The Internet has allowed us to get in contact with parts of the world we would not have                                   been able to, if the Internet did not exist. We are now able to make friends anywhere in                                   the globe. This will have a huge impact on the development of world peace. Before the                               Internet we could get upset, angry or concerned with war in distant countries. In the                             future, when the i­generation are in power, people might think twicebefore bombing a                           village on the other side of the world, just because they might have a lasting friendship                               with someone there. They will probably be wiser and know that even though people                           come from very different backgrounds, they can still find something in common to                         sustain a friendship.    The Internet is building up a new social utopia: basically there is no power hierarchy                             and even though only a third of the world is directly connected, it is affecting us all. We                                   do not need to look only at world issues to see the outcomes of this new power. In July                                     2008, a big party was organised via the Internet in order to protest against the drink                               ban on London Tube. Thousands of people signed up to groups on Facebook such as:                             "Circle Line Party ­ Last Day of Drinking on the Tube" with an estimated 2,700                             members4. In Indonesia, where only 12.5% 5 of the population has access to the                           Internet, people are using the Internet to break down resource barriers. Genevieve Bell                         – an anthropologist who researches the importance of culture in the adoption and                         adaptation of technology – on a conference about technology usage, tells the story of                           when she met an illiterate Indonesian woman living without electricity or a computer                         who loves the Internet because she is able to communicate with her daughter living in                             Australia. After investigating a bit further, Genevieve Bell understands that this woman’s                       son goes to cybercafés in the nearest connected town and reads the emails of his sister                               

and writes down the replies for their mother 6. This proves Genevieve Bell’s own                           statement that the Internet – just like any technology – is not only about what it does,                                 but what it means.   “…attitudes become forms, and we should now realise that forms prompt models of                         sociability.” (Bourriaud, 2002:58)     Mobiles   Though the Internet is setting a new marker in telecommunication, we cannot forget                         the importance of mobile phones ­ the apparatus that has become an extension of our                             arms. Actually, it is the advent of social networking combined with mobile                       communication that is permitting us to be everywhere at the same time, whilst allowing                           others to know where we are physically and virtually, all the time. Mobile phones are                             the first digital technological tool that everyone feels entitled to use. Unlike personal                         computers, which are used in the privacy of our homes and where most people use the                               Internet, mobiles phones are used out in public. This allows us to see how everybody is                               being affected by mobiles usage, as we are able to watch each other’s behaviour.      4­ London Evening Standard http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard­mayor/article­23488536­party­time­on­the­tube­before­drink­ban­begins.do 5­ http://www.america.gov/st/democracyhr­english/2010/March/20100323153622esnamfuak 0.8532373.html 6­ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAcooO23OaY   When landline phones were made extensively available in homes, it was quite common                         to have the device installed in the most communal area, where everybody could have                           access to it. Usually, it had its own table and a comfy chair next to it. It was almost a                                       sanctuary recognisable in every home. Telephone chairs were set in a familiar                       environment, a place where we got to know every detail, so the sense that we were                               talking to a person who was not really there was constant. There were also the old                               telephone booths which, when we used them, took us away from our visual comfort                           zone as they were in the middle of the street. Even though we were out in public, we                                   were hiding inside a box, “protected” from the outside world, from eyes that could see                             our body language and ears that could hear our most private conversations. At this                           time, we would talk briefly – as the costs were not that cheap – and we would be                                   unlikely to call anyone after 9 o’clock in the evening, unless the person was a close                               friend or family or was expecting the phone call.   With the introduction of mobile phones in the 80s, our relationship with telephones                         changed. At first, it became a symbol of status associated with being busy, young and                             wealthy; but as it got cheaper everybody felt they needed to have their own mobile –                               

either to fulfil a desire of ostentation, to be available 24/7 or to avoid the feeling of                                 being alone. Suddenly, we are allowed to talk to anyone, anywhere, any time. Mobiles                           are entitling people to feel they are important, just like photography did.   “[mobile phones] are altering our notion of time & space, blurring the boundaries                         between public and private, mixing the real and the virtual, expanding the sense of self,                             making us seemingly grandeur and more important.” Nick Rankin7    Different cultures exist due to our ability to adapt and the way we are adapting to                               mobile phones is setting new social codes and standards. Every country is facing the                           invasion of mobile phones in its own way, but patterns are emerging worldwide. One in                             every two human beings has a mobile8 and overhearing a phone conversation on public                           transport, in restaurants, supermarket queues or any available staircase is unavoidable.   Our surroundings change every time we talk on a mobile and unlike landlines, with their                             comfy chairs set in a familiar environment, we are in a different place, with different                             people every time we talk on mobiles; therefore the sense that we are talking to a                               person who is there is enhanced. People forget where they are and whom they are                             with, they lose track of time and sometimes jump off at the wrong stop or catch the                                 wrong connection whilst on the phone – not to mention what happens whilst driving.      7­ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/documentary_archive/4603284.stm 8­ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8640473.stm   Mobiles are altering what we have hitherto considered normal privacy. It feels like there                           is a de­territorialisation of the inner­self or a thinner line between public and private.                           People share their bank details, when they are going to travel, their addresses and date                             of births. And the information can become less data­oriented and more personal, as                         they share their opinion on their last night’s date, how the evening ended, what they                             think about their co­worker and if they fancy this co­worker or not. The private talk with                               a close friend is happening out in public and we just hear half of these conversations.                               People are speaking louder, more often and more indiscriminately of place. We have no                           actual control of it and the only thing left for the person close to someone having a                                 mobile conversation is either to fill in the gaps of the half overheard dialogue, put on an                                 ipod or make their own phone call. These public phone conversations invade without                         permission our private space like a smell we are not expecting and might get used to it                                 if it lasts long enough.   In some countries, like in Egypt, the government launched a list of Ethics Code to try to                                 educate the population to use the device in a more appropriate manner. One of Egypt's                             Ethics codes is:   “Don't annoy others with your loud conversations in case you have a mobile phone loud                             

speaker. Moreover, this offends the person you are talking to (on the mobile) as he                             does not know that others are hearing his conversation.”9     Performance   “ The aura of art no longer lies in the hinter­world represented by the work, nor in form                                   itself, but in front of it, within the temporality collective form that it produces by being                               put on show. It is in this sense that we can talk of a community effect in contemporary                                   art…The aura of contemporary art is a free association.” (Bourriraud, 2002:61)   When we whisper we lose track of our identity, as we cannot hear the familiar tone of                                 our voices nor can the person we are talking to, therefore it is very hard for anyone to                                   try to keep the voice tone to a minimum when talking over the phone. In addition,                               when we talk on mobiles there are two factors playing against our sense of privacy: the                               fact that it feels like the person we are talking to is much closer than they actually are                                   and the fact that the space around us is not familiar (contrary to when we talked on                                 landline phones) and as the surroundings usually change, we feel less comfortable, a bit                           unprotected and our natural instinct makes us cling to the person we trust the most. It                               can be a complete stranger we are talking to on the mobile phone but nevertheless,                             this person is the closest person we know on that train, bus…etc.  So we tend to                               develop a “tunnel vision” that weakens our peripheral vision, making us feel more                         isolated and therefore alone – the perfect combination for a private loud conversation.       9­ http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00n58ml   Another factor may be our need to have a role. We all need to perform a role in society                                     ­ either the daughter, the son, the husband, the student ­ our roles change daily and                               the older we get the more roles we learn to play.  There are roles that are played very                                   briefly but are much anticipated like the ones we play during weddings, graduations,                         religious events, award ceremonies... Some people wait all their lives rehearsing these                       roles in their heads. Having a role empowers the “player”; few people like to live their                               lives being an “extra” forever. So we are drawn to habits that ask us to perform roles;                                 this is the basis of society. In smaller societies, roles are easily distinguishable. When                           the world was less complex, it was a very straightforward “game” or “play”; basically                           everybody knew their role in their community. The world is bigger now, we know more                             people, we go to more places we do more things and it is not the case that we                                   automatically know our role anymore. The fact is that we have so many roles now, it is                                 quite daunting. We perform a role when we talk on our mobile phones in the streets or                                 on public transport. We are performing the role of ‘busy person’, the one that has so                               many friends, too many problems or the one that has such good/bad news we cannot                             wait to share it. We live times of performative roles and the mobile is the perfect device                                 to show we can perform all of these roles accordingly. Talking on mobile phones is our                               

daily theatre.     Art and the future   “How can a meeting of two realities alter them bilaterally?” (Bourriaud, 2002:52)   Mobiles have entered our lives in a swift way and have become an everyday object. We                               do not question their usage or the impacts they are setting upon our social modes or                               needs. The extraordinary device has turned into something ordinary; mobiles are now                       completely taken for granted. They enhance our sense of importance as they make us                           engage with more people more often, giving us a sense of belonging. When we use                             them out in public, we send a visual and audio message to people around us: we are                                 relevant to the person we are talking to. The way mobiles are changing us is that they                                 are allowing us to show to others how good it is to feel important. Not that this                                 behaviour is acceptable, most of us get annoyed by the loud conversations happening                         next to us, but mobiles are devices that permit others to see how good we feel when                                 we feel we matter and when we make others feel important as well. Receiving an                             unexpected text saying “good luck” before a job interview or a simple “I miss you” from                               a friend can make both – the sender and receiver – feel good.   The Internet is having almost the same impact, though in exponential scale. Its lack of                             hierarchy and its ability to reach people we may not even know, enhances even more                             our sense of importance. We know it is a device which allows us to interfere in History                                 and we know that this is very powerful. The i­generation was born with access to                             mobiles and to the Internet as everyday tools. For them, the public and private                           relationship is different than it used to be due to sharing thoughts and views online.                             Telecommunication has turned on their sense of belonging, of democratic usage, of                       co­authoring meaning and of being important. Due to the same telecommunication, the                       i­generation also have a stronger need of being together as the new frontier of being                             simultaneously at two places has been broken. They have created a new social                         structure, new social codes and a newer understanding of what being together means.                         They are creating a world that constantly reminds themselves of their own importance                         and the importance of others.  It feels like they are taking History in their own hands,                               making it. There is a community effect going on; we are telling ordinary stories of our                               daily lives, we are learning how to make others feel they matter and how to fulfil our                                 need of being important. It is not about what we use to achieve these things – mobiles,                                 emails, Facebook, twitter…  – but how we use them.   We, the in­betweeners, are caught in the middle of this technological revolution and as                           artists we try to keep up with it, but often show that we are in fact overwhelmed by its                                     possibilities. Artists tend to forget that communicating a message is more important                       than the tool used. Many think that talking about the impact of technology is using                             technology itself and their art pieces become nothing more than gimmicky exhibitions.                       During my “on the ground” research I went to the V&A exhibition entitled ‘Decode’,                           

which was another high­tech exhibition that proved to be very gimmicky, where the                         public showed no thinking process apart from engagement with touch screens and                       taking photos… it felt like being in a scientific fair. Most high tech artworks are mere                               virtuosity of programmers and developers. They neglect the fact that art deals with                         emotions, that it is about they way we feel.   “Technology is only of interest to artist in so far as it puts effects into perspective,                               rather than putting up with it as an ideological instrument […] Art only exercises its                             critical duty with regards to technology from the moment it shifts its challenges. So the                             main effects of the computer revolution are visible among artists who do not use                           computers” (Bourriaud, 2002:67)    If artists do not understand how technology is re­shaping society and how we are                           changing anthropologically because of it, we might not be able to communicate our                         message properly; an ironic paradox for the time we live.   Touching screens, taking pictures, video recording… these are all ordinary things for the                         i­generation. Using them for the sake of it will not add anything else to their art                               gallery/museum visit experience. Up to now, the public was usually asked to perform a                           passive role when inside an art gallery/museum. People would go there to walk slowly                           around the art pieces, to read texts on walls, pamphlets, leaflets…anything to fulfil the                           image of someone thirsty for information; to comment on the work in a very particular                             way, in a different tone of voice; to stop for coffee even though prices are unrealistic; to                                 browse books and probably to buy a postcard… but this role will not fit anymore.   We should reflect on how we, artists, can engage with the i­generation’s emotions; on                           how we can tell people that they matter in an art space, that they have a participatory                                 role. We will need artworks that invite the i­generation to go out and get inside the                               gallery space in order to feel the emotions art evokes when experienced together and                           that viewing it on the Internet, TV or printed media will not be enough.  Artworks that                               will not take into account the changes we are facing socially  ­ the need of “being                               together”, of feeling important, of having an active role, of co­authoring, of sharing                         meaning and inevitably co­learning ­ will struggle to engage with the new viewer.   In the last decade, a lot has been written and said about the role of contemporary art in                                   regards to reflecting everybody’s identity through the artist’s own identity. I think we                         are walking towards a different time where an artwork should talk about inter­human                         relations. Digital technology is paving the way for mankind to have another dimension                         of self­understanding, playing with our sense of identity and our complex of                       uniqueness.   I am watching how our society is changing due to the effects of the digital                             telecommunication usage and how these new tools are re­shaping human relations. I                       am trying hard not to get overwhelmed by the gimmicky aspects of its potentials. What                             I am trying to do is to comment on those changes whilst showing the public that their                                 

everyday lives matter to me, that they inspire me and that they can literally join in the                                 creative process.             Bibliography   

-                     Art in action: nature, creativity and our collective future.  San Rafael, Calif: Earth Aware Editions, c2007. 

-                     Barrett, William:  The illusion of technique: a search for the meaning of life in a technological age / William Barrett.  London: Kimber, 1979. 

-                     Baudrillard, Jean, 1929­2007:  The system of objects / Jean Baudrillard; translated by James Benedict.  London: Verso, 2005. 

-                     Benjamin, Walter, 1892­1940:  The work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility, and other writings on media / Walter Benjamin; edited by Michael W. Jennings, Brigid Doherty, and Thomas Y. Levin; translated by Edmund Jephcott [et al.].  Cambridge, Mass. London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2008. 

-                     Bishop, Claire:  Installation art: a critical history / Claire Bishop.  London: Tate, 2005. 

-                     Bourriaud, Nicolas:  Relational aesthetics / Nicholas Bourriaud; translated by Simon Pleasance and Fronza Woods with the participation of Mathieu Copeland.  Dijon: Les presses du r el, 2002. 

-                     Bourriaud, Nicolas:  Postproduction: culture as screenplay: how art reprograms the world / Nicolas Bourriaud; editor, Caroline Schneider; translation, Jeanine Herman.  New York: Lukas & Sternberg, 2005. 

-                     Brodsky, Joseph, 1940­1996: Watermark / Joseph Brodsky. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1992. 

-                     Cashell, Kieran:  Aftershock: the ethics of contemporary transgressive art / Kieran Cashell.  London: I.B. Tauris, 2009. 

-                     Certeau, Michel de:  The practice of everyday life / Michel de Certeau; translated by Steven Rendall.  Berkeley: University of California Press, c1984. 

-                     Consumption and everyday life / edited by Hugh Mackay.  London: SAGE in association with Open University, 1997. 

-                     Contemporary art and anthropology / edited by Arnd Schneider and Christopher Wright.  Oxford: Berg, 2006. 

-                     Heidegger reexamined / edited with introductions by Hubert Dreyfus and Mark Wrathall.  New York; London: Taylor & Francis, 2002. 

-                     Heidegger, Martin, 1889­1976:  The question concerning technology, and other essays / Martin Heidegger; translated and with an introduction by William Lovitt.  New York; London: Harper & Row, 1977. 

-                     Hockings, Paul:  Principles of visual anthropology / edited by Paul Hockings.  Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2003. 

-                     Hopkins, David, 1955­:  Art 1945­2000: after modernism / David Hopkins.  New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. 

-                     Kant, Immanuel, 1724­1804:  Immanuel Kant's Critique of pure reason; translated by Norman Kemp Smith.  London: Macmillan, 1929. 

-                     Kaye, Nick:  Site­specific art: performance, place and documentation / edited by Nick Kaye.  London: Routledge, 2000. 

-                     Keesing, Roger M., 1935­:  Cultural anthropology: a contemporary perspective.  Fort Worth; London: Harcourt Brace College; Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, c1998. 

-                     Latour, Bruno:  We have never been modern / Bruno Latour; translated by Catherine Porter.  Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1993. 

-                     Marvin, Carolyn:  When old technologies were new: thinking about electric communication in the late nineteenth century / Carolyn Marvin.  New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. 

-                     McQuire, Scott:  Visions of modernity: representation, memory, time and space in the age of the camera / Scott McQuire.  London: Sage, 1998. 

-                     Michael, Mike:  Technoscience and everyday Life / by Mike Michael.  Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2006. 

-                     Performance analysis: an introductory coursebook / edited by Colin Counsell and Laurie Wolf.  London; New York: Routledge, 2001. 

-                     Photography theory / edited by James Elkins.  New York: Routledge, c2007. 

-                     The Cybercultures reader / edited by David Bell and Barbara M. Kennedy.  London: Routledge, 2000. 

-                     The future of anthropological knowledge / edited by Henrietta L. Moore.  London; New York: Routledge, 1996. 

-                     The photographic paradigm / Annette W. Balkema and Henk Slager (eds.).  Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi, 1997. 

-                     The world as a stage / edited by Jessica Morgan & Catherine Wood.  London: Tate, c2007. 

1