So, I decided to keep WordPress for longer-form spirals of thought and geeky diatribes, whereas tumblr would focus on visual curation. It’s still a work in progress, but I have to say, tumblr and I have had a pretty awesome fling thus far. It has this great way of always making me look good (thanks to a beautiful theme called “Native Citizens”) and is super adaptive to my lifestyle (loving the bookmarklet).

So while I’m definitely not saying bye to WordPress and have a couple posts lined up, this might have to be more of an “open relationship.” At least I’m honest, right?

With that I give you: http://muddledfairytales.tumblr.com/

At least I'm not having an identity crisis...

]]> http://muddledfairytales.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/rumble-tumble/feed/ 0 carinecarmy tumblr http://muddledfairytales.wordpress.com/2011/09/21/the-fame-monster/ http://muddledfairytales.wordpress.com/2011/09/21/the-fame-monster/#comments Wed, 21 Sep 2011 04:44:08 +0000 carinecarmy http://muddledfairytales.wordpress.com/?p=570 ]]> I was watching the Emmys on Sunday night and had “a moment.” I think it hit before Modern Family won its 17th award, and after the intro song and dance, whose sardonic tone left me with that uneasy feeling unique to Hollywood spiraling flames like Larry David engulfing himself in an incredibly awkward faux pas, or Lindsay Lohan teetering yet again on the verge of self-destruction.

So the moment…As the cameras were circling in on actors’ reactions to the results or the half-baked jokes being thrown across the stage, I had that sensation many people have when you look at celebrities, namely (artificial) closeness and the contagion of their laughs or frowns (pun intended). There’s no “aha” in that, but what struck me over the course of the next day, and particularly as I examined the infographic below, is how much picture-driven social media is creating a celebrity culture among us common folk. As individuals document every moment of life and in turn, share piecemeal tidbits of information, we too create seemingly picturesque projections of ourselves, ripe for storytelling.

"Every 2 minutes today we snap as many photos as the whole of humanity took in the 1800s."

Social media naysayers often argue that as a result of Facebook and the like, we spend more time in the digital world than the real world, that people are constantly on their phones in the middle of dinner, and that strangers no longer talk to each other in person. Yada yada yada. While there is definitely some structural adjustment that needs to happen to improve the civility of “post-social, post-mobile human to human interaction,” I’m not convinced that social media is to blame for unraveling of decent social interaction, or whatever yarn you want to spin.

FIRST, and most basically, society changes over time. While it’s darn sure changing pretty quickly, I’m not particularly yearning for the mythic era of common decency 50ish years ago in which women and minorities had no rights, or worse. The longing for the “good ‘ol days” is getting old, though it does make for good films (e.g., Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris).

SECOND, visual or textual fragments (i.e., tumblr blogs) can actually be quite beneficial in helping to inform our understanding of one another. Viscerally, a collection of images – personal or inspired – seems less overtly constructed than a profile that lists Kurt Vonnegut and Led Zeppelin as favorites. So I think we’re moving in the right direction of show v. tell. Also, the same way we know we are in a living room because we see a couch and TV, identities too can be viewed as the summation of social cues. From the article linked above, an interesting quote:

“I think it’s neat that a sum of the information from the objects is what makes up the scene, as far as the LOC is concerned,’ Bernhardt-Walther says. ‘There is no additional magical ingredient. There’s no scene glue somewhere.”

(For more identity fodder, check out the Quora thread on online identities, which delves into questions of online self-expression. Thanks to @christinacaci for pointing it out.)

THIRD, because so many people use social media in a celebrity-esque / broadcasting manner, I probably know a little more about a lot of people. As a result, the tradeoff is not “digital life v. real life,” and perhaps it’s not even a question of quantity over quality. As a result of social networking, we talk to more people, engage in more relationships, and are probably more likely to maintain them. For those not inclined to multitask, that can be problematic…On a similar note, having hundreds of “friends” is totally absurd according to traditional conceptions of friendship. But if we rethink the concept of “friend” to reflect some level of intimacy through shared knowledge, perhaps it’s no longer crazy to think about holding onto evolving tidbits of people’s daily lives. The same way I might have a delusional slip and believe I intimately know Ryan Gosling after reading an article and seeing him in a film, it’s also easy to feel closer to the random person from college whose engagement photos popped up into my Facebook feed.

If the Kardashians can build their fame on revealing themselves publicly, I’m inclined to believe it’s fair game for the masses. To me, the problem arises when (1) we tread back into overt profile construction territory and sound more like PR reps than real people, (2) if we forget to treat others respectfully as a result of “universe of one” thinking, or (3) if Bravo were to accommodate everyone with their own reality show, although by now, there’s probably an app for that.

I like to think that art is everywhere, at least for those looking…

Below is a unofficial, hodgepodge round up of some spaces and places where at least one of your senses can get its fix.

ART, in the traditional sense

Museum of Architecture and Design – “Otherworldly: Optical Delusions and Small Realities“ (through Sept 17)

In an age of massive proportions (i.e., oversized meals, wheels, and IPOs), it’s not surprising that the miniature can yield an overwhelming sense of awe. MAD has curated a visually striking show of small worlds that calls into question exactly what is real. Some of the pieces are shown in two stages, with the diorama and photographic representation side by side. Included in this bunch is a personal favorite, Lori Nix, whose “The City” series shows destroyed, decaying worlds.

Beauty Parlor, by Lori Nix

Alan Wolfson’s “Canal Street Cross Section”  masters the art of deception with a subway scene that would make you forget you’re above ground (the website photography does not do it justice). Also, not to miss is the mesmerizing “Garden of Unearthly Delights” by Mat Collishaw:

For more intel and a glimpse of what to expect, check out the review by @marytom.

Artspace.com

Artspace is a relatively new website founded by the former COO of DailyCandy that showcases affordable art by contemporary artists. In addition to sales, though, its collections are visually striking and intellectually provocative. I particularly like “Fantasy Realms” collection, whose imaginative scenery transport the viewer to another place or time.

"Untitled 2" by Claire Rojas

"From the Earth" by Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir, 2007

Though likely unintentional, I love the resemblance of Guðleifsdóttir's work to "Christina’s World" by Andrew Wyeth (at MOMA)

Other similar sites worth checking out are Paddle 8, whose site focuses on online exhibitions, and ArtLog, a curated guide to art on the web and in your city. And perhaps the best daily email I get is from Flavorwire, a cultural blog, who yesterday had a series on outsider art.

MUSIC + ART

André Chénier Opera Set floating in Austria's Lake Constance

FastCo Design unearthed an incredible opera set designed by David Fielding. Writer Belinda Lanks explains, “The set is not only a visual feast, it’s a feat of engineering.“

This is clearly not the first time art and music meld. In 2010, William Kentridge designed the set for the Met’s The Nose. And of course, there’s Frank Gehry’s stunning Walt Disney Hall in Los Angeles, whose external structure and built in organ are seeping with musical tones.

DESIGN

The Fancy, a website about which I’ve written before, recently launched a recommendations page. It’s an amalgamation of quirky and surreal across the web, all in high resolution and most available for purchase. Some of this week’s favorites:

Also a recent go-to for visual eye candy is fab.com’s design inspiration page:

May the impending hurricane not blur your vision…Happy Friday.

Until next week...

The article notes, “3D printing has come on in leaps and bounds since its origins as an expensive prototyping tool over two decades ago. It uses laser-assisted machines to fabricate plastic or metal objects, building up the item layer by layer, each slice just 100 micrometres thick.”

The applications in aviation are quite exciting since ideas have often been too expensive or technically complicated to build with traditional processes. Moreover, 3D printing is set to revolutionize countless industries, with the rapid production of things like furniture, mobile phones, refrigerator parts, prosthetic legs, car parts, chocolate (!), and even homes.

Despite my usual weariness of hype, I can’t help but be excited by the technology’s transformative possibilities.

New Scientist claims the “second industrial revolution is under way.” The New York Times wrote last year that “3-D Printing is Spurring a Manufacturing Revolution” and explains, “Advocates of the technology say that by doing away with manual labor, 3-D printing could revamp the economics of manufacturing and revive American industry as creativity and ingenuity replace labor costs as the main concern around a variety of goods.” The Economist, which in true form steers clear of hyperbole, notes in a very helpful industry overview that some “believe that the effect of 3D printing on manufacturing will be analogous to that of the inkjet printer on document printing.”

In a fascinating discussion about intellectual property law and 3D printing (i.e., in theory, what protections exist when someone can print almost anything using any material), the author compares the impact to the Gutenberg Press. He writes, “Though still in its infancy, 3D printing technology promises to democratize creation the same way the Gutenberg Press democratized knowledge. Broken dishwasher part? Download the relevant CAD (computer-aided design) file and print it.”

3D printing allows for low volume, high quality production, often with speed-fire turnaround. In fashion, this has already taken off as with Spanish retail giant Zara, whose stores often receive only a couple shipments of small-batch trendy delights. Speed is of the essence, as VC Albert Wenger explains, “Physical objects can now be developed iteratively just like we have grown used to with web sites.”

Not only does 3D printing change the manufacturing process, it changes the economics. For inventory management, this is a bit of a dream as manufacturers no longer need to keep stock of obscurities like coil springs for a 1967 Mustang. It might also call for more local (and hence sustainable) production, as on-demand printing is often cheaper than transcontinental shipping. The original applications of 3D printing should not be ignored either; rapid prototyping with less expensive printers can lower the barriers to entry for entrepreneurs of all stripes.

For those without mad CAD skills or a fine-tuned design sensibility, several companies are offering widespread access to creation on-demand. A personal favorite is Shapeways, which provides tools for community members to customize products from cuff-links to lampshades, and also connects them with designers to build out more sophisticated designs like a dream chair. For the shopping-inclined, they have a marketplace à la Etsy with 3D printed gadgets, home decor, and jewelry, including this awesome deer ring:

From nature to computer to hand...

In a 2008 blog post unveiling the Shapeways Creator, former community manager Joris Peels explains the leading role the company has taken in “personal manufacturing and mass customization.“ I would extend the claim further in that Shapeways and other B2C services like TechShop or MakerBot are enabling customization for the masses.

Medical device companies, jewelers, and drone enthusiasts alike all have reason to celebrate – making cool stuff has never been easier.

I was on a call for work the other day, and someone aptly said, “In an effort to maintain sanity, I’ve chosen to limit my weather complaints to one season. And that season is winter.” Granted, she’s from Boston, but kudos at a valiant effort which will likely require a change in 40% of daily conversation.

Inspired, I’ve decided to take back summer and own the heat. Here’s a running list things I want to do in NYC before summer (and my tan, mental well-being, and higher than normal Vitamin D levels) ends…

Any other ideas?? Who’s game?

My a-linear / ADD news consumption might serve as a test case for innovation in news delivery and personalization. I have a steroid-infused Google Reader, 30+ bookmarks, 10+ mobile apps, as well as Twitter and Facebook to check on a daily (or even hourly) basis. And while the role of editors is increasingly important given what is clearly information overload, many have become their own curators, sifting through hand-picked content to stay engaged and “in the know.” Some companies like FlipBoard and AOL Editions for the iPad, and now Google+ for the browser, aim to help readers sift through their social and editorials webs for relevant content.

And then there’s email. I’m signed up for at least 15 daily news emails, with a heavy skew toward NY city happenings and tech news. Trying to keep up with everything is no easy feat, and I’m quite grateful that Gmail has recently unveiled its new look and filtering options, which lets you customize the top of your inbox.

I can imagine (and have heard) that a challenge for many news providers is that readers can access the same content via 100s of combinations of devices and browsers. Namely, how do you optimize an experience when the paths and destinations are so fragmented? And how do you drive revenue along the way? It seems the goldmine for many content providers is to get information to the right people when and where it’s relevant. Plus, the content needs to be designed for how the user is experiencing it.

LinkedIn’s recent foray into news delivery hints at a future of contextual, customized aggregation. Amidst a newly instigated “unsubscribe” rampage, a rogue email creeped up into my inbox for the first time last week and again today:

Am I that obvious?

LinkedIn was updating me not about my professional network but about news relevant to my profession. Mashable announced in March that the company is rolling out a social news product for professionals called “LinkedIn Today.” According to Mashable, “Product manager Liz Walker says that it chooses stories based on what stories a user’s network is sharing.”

While email might not have been my delivery mechanism of choice, the new product does raise the question: Is LinkedIn Today positioning itself to be the Industry News Source of Tomorrow? Where other intranet social media platforms have failed for being yet another destination or platform, LinkedIn has the opportunity to make companies smarter with relevant industry news. In theory, it could get employees onto a system that they are already using, and likely destroy a historic walled garden around internal company conversations.

As readers go from being already platform-agnostic (i.e., reading a NY Times article on Facebook) to platform-promiscuous (i.e., consuming multiple providers’ articles or videos across 100s of sites), content providers will need to innovate both how they deliver their proprietary content and how they account for potential declines site traffic, which has historically been a top driver for online ad revenues.

Ultimately, media companies will have to “follow the user” — and yet again shift revenue models accordingly.

One of the first tech blogs to tickle my fancy, and one that I’ve even welcomed with open arms to my sacred Gmail inbox, is Silicon Alley Insider. It’s a bit of a guilty pleasure, with the writing often taking a tabloid-esque approach in its celebritized treatment of the tech players and start-up sagas. This morning, I opened up an email titled “How Men And Women Look At This Half Naked Woman Differently:”

Email marketing at its best

My initial reaction was to try to find the correlation to business or technology, which would in turn merit email headline (in this case, the researcher’s use of eye-tracking software). Secondarily, with six bikini-clad women above on the fold before 6am on Monday, I’d be curious to see the growth in click-through rates compared to other, less sexualized emails.

While it is Monday and the tech news circuit is often subdued come happy hour on Friday, an eye-tracking study comparing gender perceptions of naked women is not necessarily in my “must reads” to kick off the week. However, relevance is in the eye of the beholder. And when you are competing for precious “eyeballs,” hits and clicks to a content-driven website, one should clearly write for his or her audience, providing targeted hooks to get them reading more.

So who is the typical Business Insider reader? According to Quantcast, nearly 70% of the readers are male, 84% without children, and almost 50% make more than $100k:

Who said men didn't like gossip?

The demographics are not surprising, and actually borderline ironic given the second headline in the email about women being more active on Google Plus than originally thought. Not to worry, men in tech, the women using Google Plus are all Victoria’s Secret models who sit at their desks in lace lingerie. I’ve heard some complaints from the girls, though. The angel wings are getting to be a bit of a nuisance.