Mētic action in digital culture

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This essay explores how mētis – understood as the appropriation of dominant power and its inscription in the resistant force of alternative practices – can serve as a framing device for theorising tactical practices of digital culture. Revisiting critical discourses on mētis here serves as a framework for arguing that digital practices can simultaneously exist within and without (i.e., against) capital, and as such can become a viable oppositional stance that derives its power from precisely the contradictions that also delineate its limits of criticality. My discussion is linked to theories of appropriation, biopower, the multitude, and cognitive capitalism; my arguments are supported by reference to a series of examples in the form of
experimental media art works which, as I argue, inhabit the critical potential of digital mētic action.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)8-23
Number of pages16
JournalPlatform
Volume8
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 8 Aug 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

biotechnology policy
capitalist society
art
discourse

Cite this

Zeilinger, Martin. / Mētic action in digital culture. In: Platform. 2017 ; Vol. 8, No. 1. pp. 8-23.
@article{5150fc15342d4c0d818c8498a2308750,
title = "Mētic action in digital culture",
abstract = "This essay explores how mētis – understood as the appropriation of dominant power and its inscription in the resistant force of alternative practices – can serve as a framing device for theorising tactical practices of digital culture. Revisiting critical discourses on mētis here serves as a framework for arguing that digital practices can simultaneously exist within and without (i.e., against) capital, and as such can become a viable oppositional stance that derives its power from precisely the contradictions that also delineate its limits of criticality. My discussion is linked to theories of appropriation, biopower, the multitude, and cognitive capitalism; my arguments are supported by reference to a series of examples in the form ofexperimental media art works which, as I argue, inhabit the critical potential of digital mētic action.",
author = "Martin Zeilinger",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "8",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "8--23",
journal = "Platform",
issn = "1836-5132",
publisher = "School of Culture and Communication at the University of Melbourne",
number = "1",

}

Zeilinger, M 2017, 'Mētic action in digital culture', Platform, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 8-23.

Mētic action in digital culture. / Zeilinger, Martin.

In: Platform, Vol. 8, No. 1, 08.08.2017, p. 8-23.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mētic action in digital culture

AU - Zeilinger, Martin

PY - 2017/8/8

Y1 - 2017/8/8

N2 - This essay explores how mētis – understood as the appropriation of dominant power and its inscription in the resistant force of alternative practices – can serve as a framing device for theorising tactical practices of digital culture. Revisiting critical discourses on mētis here serves as a framework for arguing that digital practices can simultaneously exist within and without (i.e., against) capital, and as such can become a viable oppositional stance that derives its power from precisely the contradictions that also delineate its limits of criticality. My discussion is linked to theories of appropriation, biopower, the multitude, and cognitive capitalism; my arguments are supported by reference to a series of examples in the form ofexperimental media art works which, as I argue, inhabit the critical potential of digital mētic action.

AB - This essay explores how mētis – understood as the appropriation of dominant power and its inscription in the resistant force of alternative practices – can serve as a framing device for theorising tactical practices of digital culture. Revisiting critical discourses on mētis here serves as a framework for arguing that digital practices can simultaneously exist within and without (i.e., against) capital, and as such can become a viable oppositional stance that derives its power from precisely the contradictions that also delineate its limits of criticality. My discussion is linked to theories of appropriation, biopower, the multitude, and cognitive capitalism; my arguments are supported by reference to a series of examples in the form ofexperimental media art works which, as I argue, inhabit the critical potential of digital mētic action.

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 8

EP - 23

JO - Platform

JF - Platform

SN - 1836-5132

IS - 1

ER -