Hi All,
Without wanting to interrupt the fabulous discussion, Fibreculture Journal is currently preparing our next issue, which coincidentally is on trolling. Edited by Jason Wilson and Glen Fuller, the issue builds on the emerging field of troll studies, and includes papers considering the role of trolls and trolling in virtual worlds, game cultures, and popular culture. It looks at trolling in relation to identity, political debate and indeed new media art. Altogether the issue asks us to consider how trolls have come to be problematized in the Foucauldian sense - why are they now an object of consideration? The answers provided in the papers indicate that trolls are fascinating because they are entangled with issues of truth, rationality, trust and affective management that are constitutive of liberal rationality. Its a big issue, and should be on your desktops well before the end of the year.
cheers
Su Ballard
Editor. Fibreculture Journal.
http://fibreculturejournal.org/
On 09/10/2013, at 6:21 AM, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 08/10/13 10:34 AM, Dorian Batycka wrote:
>>
>> For Cochran of Rustle League, "Trolling is a form of social commentary or
>> satirical performance art for people who take themselves too seriously on
>> the internet." Spot on in my opinion!
>
> Nobody could take themself more seriously than the apologetic troll.
>
> Pace Mez, there's an etymological problem here. The mass media's "troll"
> is not the Usenet troll or the mailing list art troll. Rolling them all
> in together doesn't help.
>
> To the extent that trolling is disruptive (and this is generally its
> intention), that disruption needs a moral or aesthetic justification if
> we are to accept its value.
>
> "For teh lulz" is at least more honest than hiding behind (c|C)oyote.
>
> The problem with seeking to excuse list trolling as art up, to and
> including the point where it destroys the list, with the value of the
> resulting artistic production is that it had better be some pretty
> amazing art.
|