For the last blog post, I thought it would be appropriate to reach back to what I found to be one of the most interesting texts we read this quarter: the Morgan Stanley “Multitasking Leisure” article. I wanted to look at this article in relation to the Wark piece we read this week, because I think the Morgan Stanley text can be seen as a direct example of the types of new labor Wark describes in less specific terms.
The aspect of Wark’s article I’m most interested in is his description of the creation of new, digitized intellectual property, and the way the ruling class, or vectoral class, attempts to regularize and control intellect and innovation, in order to use the labor of digital property creation for their benefit. This is essentially what is occurring in the Morgan Stanley document. This document is an internal communication, a privileged view into the inner workings of Wark’s vectoral class. The document is expressly concerned with monetizing digital leisure, with taking capitalistic advantage of the digital labors of the “hacker” class.
Interestingly, the authors of the document aren’t directly concerned with controlling the makers, which is somewhat contrary to Wark’s point. Instead, the document authors provide instructions on how to capitalize on the labor that is already happening. In a way, the document describes a sort of passive interest in digital labor, not a controlling arm. This still finds its place in Wark’s model of new digital labor though, because he describes the way the vectoral class hoards “potentially monetizable intellectual property.”
I was somewhat surprised that nobody made this connection in class, and I’m not sure why I didn’t bring it up myself (probably shyness). The Morgan Stanley document is extremely valuable in this discussion of postmodern, digital labor, and the ways the capital system is shifting to maintain dominance over these new systems of labor. It is a primary source, something that can bring actual examples into conversation with the more theoretical texts we’ve read.
Obviously, any real, vigorous examination of this would require a different setting. My goal here is to simply point out the relationship, and raise some questions about their interaction. Does the Morgan Stanley document cohere to Wark’s vision? Where might the document, a real world example, contradict Wark? What does the Morgan Stanley document indicate about the future of digital labor?
Comments