Re: [microsound] OS

[david turgeon <dt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Otherwise, the repetition of 'the tool is the message' remains somewhat
> meaningless as an axiomatic. Perhaps it IS a mantra.

all i wanted to point out is that mcluhan is quite clear (& unsarcastic)
about his definition of 'media' completely encompassing the idea of
'tool', hence my equation, tool == medium.  which, in my modest opinion,
is a fairly convenient definition for what we're talking about.

the whole "the medium is the message" deal (otherwise a great example of
deadpan Canadian humour) is a whole other can of worms in itself.  it
can't really be dispelled because there is some poetic truth in saying
something like, for example, "the pencil is the drawing".  the issue is
that the use of the word 'is' here is ambiguous: it doesn't denote a
clear identity (as per my aforementioned "tool == medium" equation)
although it looks like it does.  so i could easily imagine someone
seeking to criticise the false "medium == message" identity while
(poetically) accepting that "the medium *is* the message".

of course, i'm not in kim cascone's head so these are merely suppositions.

have a nice day
~ david

------------------------------