DMCT - Week 14

Is the Internet inherently a resistive and subversive medium? Lurie argues that "the architecture of the web, and the way the users navigate it, closely resembles theories about the authority and coherence of texts that liberal deconstructionist critics have offered by thirty years." He claims that the conservative domination of the primary branches of federal government will come under attack as the hyperlinks, frames and meta-tags of the web begin to provide information that undermines claims to authority. However, does it truly construct subversive citizens, or does it simply offer a new power dynamic that still oppresses some and denies rights to others? The answer must lie somewhere in the middle.

Much of the theory of deconstruction relies on the work of Barthes, who argued that the authorial vision of the text is no longer relevant. Instead, we see readerly works which rely on the interpretation, personalization and interaction of the user/reader. Barthes states that "the work of the commentary, once it is separate from any ideology of totality, consists precisely in manhandling the text, interrupting it. What is thereby denied is not the quality of the text (here incomparable) but it's 'naturalness'" (Barthes, S/Z, 15). Barthes "interruption" is later translated into contexts of deconstructions of texts. According to Lurie then, the medium of the Internet effectively interrupts traditional texts and relieves them of their naturalness and exposes their underlying ideologies. However, this is not an inherent quality of the web. Lurie accords the medium to much agency, when in fact it relies on the user base as a primary agent of deconstruction. If the user does not understand the deconstruction, the web is not successful in subverting traditional power structures.

Luries notion of hypertext still relies on the vision of information distribution and reading as a linear process. Instead, it looks more like what Deleuze and Gutarri call a "rhizome." There is no longer one dominant source of meaning. Rather, we see meaning develop from multiple sources and networks, and users fall into these meanings after following the architecture of the web. The Internet is not inherently deconstructionist, but it is inherently rhizomatic, and as such has the potential for subversion. This potential is seen in things like the Arab Spring, the defeat of SOPA and PIPA, and Occupy Wallstreet. There is indeed a strong indication of the subversive potentials of the Internet, but it is not because it permits deconstruction (which relies to heavily on the user). Rather, it promotes rhizomatic social structures that attack traditional power structures.