This interview seeks to provide a thorough and discerning overview of the various theories, concepts and issues guiding the work of Gregory L. Ulmer. The central aim of Ulmer’s multifaceted project, which he terms electracy, is to theorize a skill-set intended to operate with networked technologies, in the same manner as literacy is an ability related to alphabetic writing. In Ulmer’s words, electracy ‘is to digital media what literacy is to print’. While literacy enables the mind to develop complex lines of reasoning, he suggests that electracy augments it by seeking to enhance the affective capacity of the body. In a more general sense, Ulmer conceptualizes electracy as the era, or, as he also puts it, an apparatus, dominated by digital technologies. To theorize various aspects of this apparatus, Ulmer compares and contrasts it with the other apparatuses (that of literacy and orality). The interview also situates Ulmer’s insights within our current cultural context of a post-COVID world and examines the various social implications such insights entail. Moving from Greek antiquity, through Kafka and even Mickey Mouse, Ulmer provides an unnerving and motivating method for better understanding and interrogating the problems that we all face, particularly with regard to education. He also sheds light on other contemporary issues such as digital misinformation and the waning trust in traditional institutions. In addition to offering a ‘crash course’ on Ulmerian theory, the interview interrogates the ways in which electracy can help us develop new angles for digital pedagogy, but also for living and being, after the COVID-19 pandemic.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this article, we reassess Marxist notions of labour and value for our datafied societies, where data is allegedly becoming one of the dominant sources of economic value. Our contention is that the existing accounts of value, which assume that value is produced exclusively by human labour, are unable to fully account for the processes of exploitation that take place in our digital platform dominated economy. We begin addressing these shortcomings by critiquing the anthropocentric notion of agency that informs the Marxist account of labour. This notion of agency locates productive activity exclusively in human intentionality. After offering an overview of anthropocentric concepts of labour that still dominate (post-)Marxist theories today, we draw on the work of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari to develop a post-anthropocentric account of agency that we term machinic agency. Machinic agency sees activity as a matter of connectivity between different human and nonhuman actors (technologies, organisms, minerals etc.), which productively combine and amplify their capacities to act. These affective connections precede and shape, but often also completely bypass, human consciousness. We make a case for the concept of machinic agency by comparing it with Actor-Network Theory (ANT), an established theory that conceptualises agency as arising from compositions of both human and nonhuman elements. Our contention is that, unlike ANT, machinic agency is able to collapse both, the distinction between human and nonhuman, and that between mechanism and vitalism. We conclude by suggesting that machinic agency allows us to demonstrate that data capitalism exploits and appropriates not only the surplus value produced by conscious human effort, but also the co-production of affective, technological, and ecological aspects of our existence.