What about the Glitchsquatch?
The Blobsquatch, for my pursuits, is a welcome personification of technological aberration as unknown 'animal'. The suffix "squatch" serves as a short-cut into acres of associated cryptozoological ideas. "Squatch" operates in a manner similar to the prefix "franken", a direct line to notions of mad science in modern culture, or the suffix "gate" which transforms anything into a political scandal. Blobsquatch works but Blobfoot doesn't. Why? "Blobfoot" sounds like some sort of disease or awkward dance. Chupacablob, Blob Ness might be acceptable variants using other known cryptids, but of course Bigfoot/Sasquatch is more memetically charged as an emblem of cryptozoological culture.
Recently, one of my colleagues asked me "What about the Glitchsquatch? Do you know about the Glitchsquatch?" So far as I can tell the term "glitch" is self-sufficient. It doesn't need the suffix "squatch" to express the idea of technological anomaly. Etymologically, "glitch" is likely derived from Yiddish glitsh "a slip," from glitshn "to slip," from Ger. glitschen, and related gleiten "to glide," as Etymonline.com suggests. Emerged in the early 1960s as technical term associated with electronic engineering it was "popularized and given a broader meaning by U.S. space program." (Etymonline) I wouldn't be the first to suggest that the glitch may be close cousins with the gremlin. The conglomeration "Frankenglitch" as a term meaning approximately the "mad science of manufacturing malfunction," might work out. Mad scientists of malfunction, in my mind are audio-visual artists who seek signals in noise and/or are motivated by a belief/conviction to do so. But then, the term "mad scientist" isn't synonomous with "cryptozoologist," (despite what some people might think) and so the use of the prefix "franken" gets entangled in a whole other system of signs.
In its original usage, Blobsquatch refers to the results of an optical error, or lens based blurring of an image. This unintentional illusion (rather than photoshopped hoax) appears, in its blob-like form, to be a Sasquatch (which it may or may not be in actuality.) As stated elsewhere, I'm interested in pursuing the Blobsquatch in the expanded field. In other words I'm interested not just in the blurs, blobs and unknowns specific to botched attempts at documenting Sasquatches, but the holding power of aberrations and curious encounters across the technocultural imagination. Optical, electronic and digital unknowns that are both aesthetically fascinating and foundational to various vernacular belief systems. The Blobsquatch functions for me as a means of interdisciplinary exploration at the intersection of the cryptozoological and technological.
Recently, one of my colleagues asked me "What about the Glitchsquatch? Do you know about the Glitchsquatch?" So far as I can tell the term "glitch" is self-sufficient. It doesn't need the suffix "squatch" to express the idea of technological anomaly. Etymologically, "glitch" is likely derived from Yiddish glitsh "a slip," from glitshn "to slip," from Ger. glitschen, and related gleiten "to glide," as Etymonline.com suggests. Emerged in the early 1960s as technical term associated with electronic engineering it was "popularized and given a broader meaning by U.S. space program." (Etymonline) I wouldn't be the first to suggest that the glitch may be close cousins with the gremlin. The conglomeration "Frankenglitch" as a term meaning approximately the "mad science of manufacturing malfunction," might work out. Mad scientists of malfunction, in my mind are audio-visual artists who seek signals in noise and/or are motivated by a belief/conviction to do so. But then, the term "mad scientist" isn't synonomous with "cryptozoologist," (despite what some people might think) and so the use of the prefix "franken" gets entangled in a whole other system of signs.
In its original usage, Blobsquatch refers to the results of an optical error, or lens based blurring of an image. This unintentional illusion (rather than photoshopped hoax) appears, in its blob-like form, to be a Sasquatch (which it may or may not be in actuality.) As stated elsewhere, I'm interested in pursuing the Blobsquatch in the expanded field. In other words I'm interested not just in the blurs, blobs and unknowns specific to botched attempts at documenting Sasquatches, but the holding power of aberrations and curious encounters across the technocultural imagination. Optical, electronic and digital unknowns that are both aesthetically fascinating and foundational to various vernacular belief systems. The Blobsquatch functions for me as a means of interdisciplinary exploration at the intersection of the cryptozoological and technological.
posted by cdiehl at 5:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home