We are the curators of our lives (or not?)
Abstract
This project, developed for the LABMIS 2017 residence, discusses the production of imagery collections in social networks, the relations between analogical and digital, institutional and not legitimized, and the new unfolding of the spaces of the museum beyond its own physical space. As part of a larger research, linked to the project's authors, The Museum of the Other and a theoretical-practical reflection from the Museum of Image and Sound of Sao Paulo through its visitors and passers-by.
Key words: museum, social networks, collective collection, interactivity, contemporary art.
Introduction
Faced with memories built in collectivity, society increasingly debates the gaps of our memories, our social and affective networks. This project focuses on the paradigm of memory fragmented by experiences between the physical and virtual worlds, in a coming and going of actions.
Social networks are the backdrop for contemporary collective behavior and building the recent memories of us all. In the face of the many albums and contents generated by today's affective networks, we can evaluate the emergence of a new type of audiovisual production, resulting from contemporary memories. Instagram and Facebook converge countless types of videos, fragments of daily life and prove a new type of aesthetic derived from this joint production, made by everyone with many memories.
The Museum of the Other is a multimedia intervention, composed of audio, video and interactive elements with augmented reality, designed from an educational process with actions in the space of the museum, aiming at mapping collective / individual memories, curing them within an experience aesthetic and artistic.
Among the references for this project, we point out dynamics such as: MoMA in the acquisition of an affective collection referring to the historical context of the role of virtual signs (Emojis, Augmented Reality images, etc); the Museum of Transitional Art (MoTA); Lev Manovich and his mediation works and quantitative data reads of social networks, such as Inequaligram, On Brodway, Selfiecity, Taipei, Phototime; Richard Prince, an artist who appropriated images of Instagram and marketed them as his works.
Objectives and Justification:
The Museum of Others is an umbrella project that begins in the space of LABMIS motivated by the social, communicational, archivological and collecting dynamics of contemporary times.
Looking to understand the current scenario of image generation and hierarchical revision in the field of memory legitimation, our project was created to study the phenomenon of collectivization of image creation, in an individualized dynamic of the urban // cultural experience of space not antagonistic, so we are interested). In addition to the simple demographic study, our proposal is an exposition based on the collection of others, who today are the true legitimators of what we see: the collective speaks for itself, through social networks. It is an open source collection that contributes to the history of the future and the identity of the present.
Therefore, our interests as researchers, artists and scientists, led us to an artistic intervention, whose collection is built by those who consume the contents of the museum. Almost in a state of institutional anthropophagy, the Museum is consumed by its visitors which is consumed by the Museum, in the creation of a collection made by the "others."
The concept of museum is directly related to the construction of collective memories of society, starting from individual memories and informational capillarization. In this way, it generates a temporary fragmentation of the various personal micro universes, thus constructing a new narrative of memories and, as a consequence, the real-time construction of random collections interconnecting art, technology, innovation and image.
Memories are like a frame of reference for our old memories, conversely these memories fit the set of our perceptions of the present in a testimonial way.
Worcman (2016), follows the principles applied in the methodology social technological memory, already widely applied in the Museum of the Person in São Paulo: 1 - Any individual can and should consider himself as a leading actor both globally and locally in his heritage through the narrative of his story. 2 - Every group has the right and can produce its own memory. 3- The practice and results coming from communities and individuals in producing their memories, life histories, heritage, access should be open, transparent and inclusive. 4 - The potential for change, social, cultural and theoretical must be the main result in the reconstruction, having the past in the present as personal and individual memory.
The role of the museum is related to the past, present and reflection of the future, and thus, it houses many layers of memory established in collectivity. Therefore, the idea of the Museum of the Other helps in the conception of the contemporary museum, whose awareness of the mix of universal experiences brings with it a new aesthetic and cognitive load. The collective museum as a way to recreate identity, nationality and particularity, creates in this volatile and accelerated present, new sanctuaries of memory as a result of artistic enjoyment and individual provocation.
Lipovetsky (2016), in the age of hypermodernity, even the museums integrated in their work the logics of the spectacular, the ludic attraction, the recreational seduction. The moment is the fusion of art, of distraction, heritage and show, education and seduction. Artistic enjoyment as a real-time reinterpretation of the museum's collection and its users who shared their experiences, emphasizing the collective museum and the creation of the Museum of the Other.
Mission
The Museum of the Other works with the contemporary collection, focused on the experiences of museum visitors and their production of records / shares. It is about managing dynamics and mapping a parallel museum of images, audios and videos, generated from the visitation in the museum, but not institutionally legitimized (so far). In the face of a culture of media sharing, the proposal is divided between (1) research, mapping and curation of the "others" collection; (2) directed actions within the museum using beacons (and exploring physical computing and computer vision) for the greater collection of contents; (3) intervention and installation from collected data, using multimedia and augmented reality technologies for visualization.
These three stages of production are allocated in two major phases of action in the MIS space: The Museum for Others and The Others for the Museum. The first phase consists of working images from the MIS collection (whose image right allows propagation in the networks) and encourage the appropriation of these contents by online users, proposing an intervention in the museum's own collection. It consists of composing an open collection from the objects, files and contents belonging to the reservation of the Museum of Image and Sound. The second stage consists of mapping and constructing a collection from the visitors, using the hashtags in the social networks as Instagram, and the installation of bluetooth transmitters in the museum space, with a specific programming that allows its users to insert real-time content, such as photos, videos and audios, about their experience inside the museum. For the total of three months, the two phases that divide between steps 1, 2 and 3 (described above), resulted in a bank of images, audios and videos that integrate museum and visitors, from a non-institutional perspective.
This project, developed for the LABMIS 2017 residence, discusses the production of imagery collections in social networks, the relations between analogical and digital, institutional and not legitimized, and the new unfolding of the spaces of the museum beyond its own physical space. As part of a larger research, linked to the project's authors, The Museum of the Other and a theoretical-practical reflection from the Museum of Image and Sound of Sao Paulo through its visitors and passers-by.
Key words: museum, social networks, collective collection, interactivity, contemporary art.
Introduction
Faced with memories built in collectivity, society increasingly debates the gaps of our memories, our social and affective networks. This project focuses on the paradigm of memory fragmented by experiences between the physical and virtual worlds, in a coming and going of actions.
Social networks are the backdrop for contemporary collective behavior and building the recent memories of us all. In the face of the many albums and contents generated by today's affective networks, we can evaluate the emergence of a new type of audiovisual production, resulting from contemporary memories. Instagram and Facebook converge countless types of videos, fragments of daily life and prove a new type of aesthetic derived from this joint production, made by everyone with many memories.
The Museum of the Other is a multimedia intervention, composed of audio, video and interactive elements with augmented reality, designed from an educational process with actions in the space of the museum, aiming at mapping collective / individual memories, curing them within an experience aesthetic and artistic.
Among the references for this project, we point out dynamics such as: MoMA in the acquisition of an affective collection referring to the historical context of the role of virtual signs (Emojis, Augmented Reality images, etc); the Museum of Transitional Art (MoTA); Lev Manovich and his mediation works and quantitative data reads of social networks, such as Inequaligram, On Brodway, Selfiecity, Taipei, Phototime; Richard Prince, an artist who appropriated images of Instagram and marketed them as his works.
Objectives and Justification:
The Museum of Others is an umbrella project that begins in the space of LABMIS motivated by the social, communicational, archivological and collecting dynamics of contemporary times.
Looking to understand the current scenario of image generation and hierarchical revision in the field of memory legitimation, our project was created to study the phenomenon of collectivization of image creation, in an individualized dynamic of the urban // cultural experience of space not antagonistic, so we are interested). In addition to the simple demographic study, our proposal is an exposition based on the collection of others, who today are the true legitimators of what we see: the collective speaks for itself, through social networks. It is an open source collection that contributes to the history of the future and the identity of the present.
Therefore, our interests as researchers, artists and scientists, led us to an artistic intervention, whose collection is built by those who consume the contents of the museum. Almost in a state of institutional anthropophagy, the Museum is consumed by its visitors which is consumed by the Museum, in the creation of a collection made by the "others."
The concept of museum is directly related to the construction of collective memories of society, starting from individual memories and informational capillarization. In this way, it generates a temporary fragmentation of the various personal micro universes, thus constructing a new narrative of memories and, as a consequence, the real-time construction of random collections interconnecting art, technology, innovation and image.
Memories are like a frame of reference for our old memories, conversely these memories fit the set of our perceptions of the present in a testimonial way.
Worcman (2016), follows the principles applied in the methodology social technological memory, already widely applied in the Museum of the Person in São Paulo: 1 - Any individual can and should consider himself as a leading actor both globally and locally in his heritage through the narrative of his story. 2 - Every group has the right and can produce its own memory. 3- The practice and results coming from communities and individuals in producing their memories, life histories, heritage, access should be open, transparent and inclusive. 4 - The potential for change, social, cultural and theoretical must be the main result in the reconstruction, having the past in the present as personal and individual memory.
The role of the museum is related to the past, present and reflection of the future, and thus, it houses many layers of memory established in collectivity. Therefore, the idea of the Museum of the Other helps in the conception of the contemporary museum, whose awareness of the mix of universal experiences brings with it a new aesthetic and cognitive load. The collective museum as a way to recreate identity, nationality and particularity, creates in this volatile and accelerated present, new sanctuaries of memory as a result of artistic enjoyment and individual provocation.
Lipovetsky (2016), in the age of hypermodernity, even the museums integrated in their work the logics of the spectacular, the ludic attraction, the recreational seduction. The moment is the fusion of art, of distraction, heritage and show, education and seduction. Artistic enjoyment as a real-time reinterpretation of the museum's collection and its users who shared their experiences, emphasizing the collective museum and the creation of the Museum of the Other.
Mission
The Museum of the Other works with the contemporary collection, focused on the experiences of museum visitors and their production of records / shares. It is about managing dynamics and mapping a parallel museum of images, audios and videos, generated from the visitation in the museum, but not institutionally legitimized (so far). In the face of a culture of media sharing, the proposal is divided between (1) research, mapping and curation of the "others" collection; (2) directed actions within the museum using beacons (and exploring physical computing and computer vision) for the greater collection of contents; (3) intervention and installation from collected data, using multimedia and augmented reality technologies for visualization.
These three stages of production are allocated in two major phases of action in the MIS space: The Museum for Others and The Others for the Museum. The first phase consists of working images from the MIS collection (whose image right allows propagation in the networks) and encourage the appropriation of these contents by online users, proposing an intervention in the museum's own collection. It consists of composing an open collection from the objects, files and contents belonging to the reservation of the Museum of Image and Sound. The second stage consists of mapping and constructing a collection from the visitors, using the hashtags in the social networks as Instagram, and the installation of bluetooth transmitters in the museum space, with a specific programming that allows its users to insert real-time content, such as photos, videos and audios, about their experience inside the museum. For the total of three months, the two phases that divide between steps 1, 2 and 3 (described above), resulted in a bank of images, audios and videos that integrate museum and visitors, from a non-institutional perspective.
Theoretical foundation
The discussions about the collective collections and the imaginary collections produced in great quantity in the contemporaneity, generate tensions between the idea of museum and the contemporary collecting. Gilles Lipovetsky (2008) argues that hypermodernity has profoundly transformed the relief, meaning, social and economic surface of culture, which can no longer be considered as a superstructure of local signs, since it has become a world of planetary technocapitalism, cultural, total consumerism, media and digital networks: "the universal hyperculture that transcending borders and confusing the old dichotomies (economy / imaginary, real / virtual, production / representation, brand / art, commercial culture / , reconfigures the world that we live the civilization to come ".
In turn, the city in the contemporary context of the 21st century seems to adopt new forms and layers of experience based on this context of digital consumption and content production, related to urban space. Especially since the advent of locative media, urban space strengthens as a place of tension, appropriation and cultural experience, becoming a kind of grid of artistic resistance and, contradictorily, of digital companies / services, evidencing a dynamic of control, domination and ambivalence. At the same time that these services generate new informational layers, they are directed at the construction of value, the understanding of space and its relation with digital technologies.
On the control perspective, services provided by Google generate constant metrics of individual and collective behavior through locative media in the city, resulting in a process of continuous surveillance and ubiquity. Collective, affective, preference, consumption and path memories belong to these large collecting groups of informational flows, and which seem to offer an easy management of the city. However, it seems to me a veiled domination process in which free services are offered in exchange for data / metrics, generating a kind of digital neocolonialism whose exploitation of resources occurs directly through the production of spontaneous information by the users, in an outsourcing creative. It is an unconscious exploitation of the citizen's own experience in exchange for a fanciful sense of visibility. And here, the idea of visibility makes one think of cultural imposition, since it is a question of the overvaluation of the culture of the dominant, in a stage of near domination by the ego, of individualization of experiences (sold as collective) which establishes new cultural value systems and judgment.
In the city as a cultural space, it is curious to evaluate the various initiatives based on locative media in the generation of content by the city, a fact that more and more evidences the urban potentialities for the creation of collective dynamics in market actions and, contradictorily, of resistance. Above all, from the point of view of geolocated services, Google Cardboard, Street View and Google Local Guides can be found, all available services that converge the city space into a place of value sharing and, also to Facebook, evidence a cycle of evangelization access to real-time content. In a kind of service package, Google Maps has expanded its content view into the Google Local Guides loyalty program, which is structured as a global community of explorers who write comments, share photos, answer questions, add or edit posts, and verify the data available in Google Maps. Users are rewarded with rewards, a point accumulation system, and can earn discounts on Google services, file storage space, and invitations to official company meetings around the world.
These services condition their users to curating spaces in the city, building their own image collections, in a review of the legitimating power through gamma dynamics, in exchange for free content generation. The ambivalent character is perceptible because it is a process of empowerment conditioned to cultural moderation based on the values of the large dominant groups of information (Google, Facebook, etc): "in the scenario of the luxuriant existence of a world that promises the happiness of indisputable satisfactions and always renewed, there is an immense collective and individual disorientation. "
Security gaps point to the state itself, which is subjugated to these data-holding companies, whose knowledge production and large amounts of information legitimize the new ruling class. The WhatsApp service confirms this premise by denying private user information to criminal investigations in different locations around the world; hackers and sites provide confidential information, such as Wikileaks; Wikipedia questions the construction of conventional knowledge and dissolves the centralization of power. These examples reinforce the condition of digital culture as a review of institutional and state boundaries, since the relations of submission today are rather linear, based on the constant exchange and construction of fidelity between dominant and dominated. I wonder about the visible process of digital neo-colonization that reinforces the North American culture about the Latin American and global consumption mode, in a constant process of Americanization of behavior, products, languages. The understanding of nation seems to change strongly against this context, no longer tied to the common links under a governmental or cultural power, but under the segmentation of tribes and interest groups that are established from the level of digital literacy (the groups are divide according to the degree of improvement of their literacy and familiarity with digital technology). This phenomenon is seen mainly in the process of viralization of contents in social networks, which prove that certain levels of understanding of signs / symbols occur in isolation, within specific groups (as well as legitimation). Finally, we can see the complexity in the construction of value as the aesthetic and spatial experience of the digital devices changes, as well as the social experience among inhabitants.
The concept of the world-system pointed out by Quijano (2005) can be rethought under the contemporary perspective of Lipovetsky (2008), who affirms the existence of a world culture, which replaces the understanding of local cultures and nations sectioned by territoriality. It affirms the existence of a second era of world culture, which, this time, is drawn under the traces of a concrete and social universal, no longer being the ideal of a "citizen of the world", but the world without frontiers of capital cities, multinationals, cyberspace and consumerism.
Raúl Bernal, a researcher and professor at the Universidad Pontificia Javeriana in Bogotá, points out (2003) that in the city, culture, the meaning of consumption and its symbolic dimensions are expressions of human behavior itself, and that the contemporary world exists from urban fantasies , sustaining the experiences of creation. He affirms that urban culture brings processes and tensions according to their dynamics and relations of meaning with which the whole can be visualized: an urban as a creative response of the contemporary. Bernal states that cities redefined as places of diversity and heterogeneity, where aesthetics itself is the social experience of coexistence, in an urban aesthetic that integrates the language of cities and the way of living, transforming their paradigms of relationship through creativity and technological innovation.
The condition of participation points to new ways of operating the creation of images and sensory experiences, generating innovative ways to destabilize existing systems, discussing a surveillance of affections and bodies in the city. The scale of the interactive objects in the city helps to sensitize and humanize the urban space, demystifying the idea of a shallow digital experience, but for this it is necessary to look critically, enabling the creation of devices of resistance that take us beyond the absolute existence of the vigilant system information monopolies). Therefore, the discussion of the city as an interactive interface or even linked to the experience of digital memory, extends the field of understanding of urban space as an object of appropriation, tool of creation and support of collections / data / content compilations. This articulation of the city in the digital context generates a diverse scenario for the artists in questioning dynamics on the status of the city in front of the contemporary cultural, in a process of breaking of regimes of information domination, predominantly North American. In this way, the relationship between the city as a cultural interface and the imminent interest of different sectors in appropriating the urban space is increasingly observed.
It is a clash between powers that reorder the demands of digital culture, evidencing the transition from tangible to intangible, from linear to non-linear. Above all, the parameters of contemporaneity are based on ambivalences resulting from the mixing of experiences between the physical and virtual worlds, creating a middle ground between the potential and literal existence of objects / data in the city. Under this spectrum, the discussion about heritage is directly related to the new paradigms of digital, after all, the discussion of presence-absence occurs in many scales in the context of the preservation of the legitimation of the patrimony. It is observed a moment of convergence of the media and hybridization of the human senses, making feasible a project that revises the physical structure of the city and, above all, the validation of its spaces. A society based on digital experiences generates unfoldings in the field of history and heritage conservation, because space-time experiences are given beyond the object, transforming the understanding of heritage in the face of new experiences of memory and urban occupation. In this way, it is reflected on the tensions between the collective construction of memory, its legitimization as patrimony of the future and the production of this same content by companies holding digital services linked to the city. It is observed that the emergence of a digitization of memories in response to the transition from the tangible to the intangible and possibly a return to the memories of the city on a collective scale of appropriation and creation. The discussion of presence and tangibility is affirmed by the absence, and this aspect dialogues strongly to the question of the patrimony.
In front of the digital culture, such values are questioned due to the anachronistic dynamics associated with digital devices, where the user is able to transpose linear processes into his own memory, building a web of memories and values that are not always associated in a linear fashion. Still, most of the image bank and social network services, such as Instagram and Snapchat, are based on the linear existence of the files, but with temporary dynamics of memory existence that goes out after 24 hours. This idea of ephemeral memories nourishes the desire for what is forgotten, and helps to strengthen the evident process of musealization of things and people. Thus, the discussion about intangible heritage emerges to think of the presence of physical heritage replaced by the experience of heritage, whether material or immaterial, a discussion that is strengthened by digital culture, based on convergent but mostly intangible data. At the same time, it is a patrimony without original, after all the digital files are all original and copies of the same binary set, incapable of being differentiated, whose understanding of losses occurs in another condition: the file always remains the same , and spreads, viralizes, and shares.
The discussions about the collective collections and the imaginary collections produced in great quantity in the contemporaneity, generate tensions between the idea of museum and the contemporary collecting. Gilles Lipovetsky (2008) argues that hypermodernity has profoundly transformed the relief, meaning, social and economic surface of culture, which can no longer be considered as a superstructure of local signs, since it has become a world of planetary technocapitalism, cultural, total consumerism, media and digital networks: "the universal hyperculture that transcending borders and confusing the old dichotomies (economy / imaginary, real / virtual, production / representation, brand / art, commercial culture / , reconfigures the world that we live the civilization to come ".
In turn, the city in the contemporary context of the 21st century seems to adopt new forms and layers of experience based on this context of digital consumption and content production, related to urban space. Especially since the advent of locative media, urban space strengthens as a place of tension, appropriation and cultural experience, becoming a kind of grid of artistic resistance and, contradictorily, of digital companies / services, evidencing a dynamic of control, domination and ambivalence. At the same time that these services generate new informational layers, they are directed at the construction of value, the understanding of space and its relation with digital technologies.
On the control perspective, services provided by Google generate constant metrics of individual and collective behavior through locative media in the city, resulting in a process of continuous surveillance and ubiquity. Collective, affective, preference, consumption and path memories belong to these large collecting groups of informational flows, and which seem to offer an easy management of the city. However, it seems to me a veiled domination process in which free services are offered in exchange for data / metrics, generating a kind of digital neocolonialism whose exploitation of resources occurs directly through the production of spontaneous information by the users, in an outsourcing creative. It is an unconscious exploitation of the citizen's own experience in exchange for a fanciful sense of visibility. And here, the idea of visibility makes one think of cultural imposition, since it is a question of the overvaluation of the culture of the dominant, in a stage of near domination by the ego, of individualization of experiences (sold as collective) which establishes new cultural value systems and judgment.
In the city as a cultural space, it is curious to evaluate the various initiatives based on locative media in the generation of content by the city, a fact that more and more evidences the urban potentialities for the creation of collective dynamics in market actions and, contradictorily, of resistance. Above all, from the point of view of geolocated services, Google Cardboard, Street View and Google Local Guides can be found, all available services that converge the city space into a place of value sharing and, also to Facebook, evidence a cycle of evangelization access to real-time content. In a kind of service package, Google Maps has expanded its content view into the Google Local Guides loyalty program, which is structured as a global community of explorers who write comments, share photos, answer questions, add or edit posts, and verify the data available in Google Maps. Users are rewarded with rewards, a point accumulation system, and can earn discounts on Google services, file storage space, and invitations to official company meetings around the world.
These services condition their users to curating spaces in the city, building their own image collections, in a review of the legitimating power through gamma dynamics, in exchange for free content generation. The ambivalent character is perceptible because it is a process of empowerment conditioned to cultural moderation based on the values of the large dominant groups of information (Google, Facebook, etc): "in the scenario of the luxuriant existence of a world that promises the happiness of indisputable satisfactions and always renewed, there is an immense collective and individual disorientation. "
Security gaps point to the state itself, which is subjugated to these data-holding companies, whose knowledge production and large amounts of information legitimize the new ruling class. The WhatsApp service confirms this premise by denying private user information to criminal investigations in different locations around the world; hackers and sites provide confidential information, such as Wikileaks; Wikipedia questions the construction of conventional knowledge and dissolves the centralization of power. These examples reinforce the condition of digital culture as a review of institutional and state boundaries, since the relations of submission today are rather linear, based on the constant exchange and construction of fidelity between dominant and dominated. I wonder about the visible process of digital neo-colonization that reinforces the North American culture about the Latin American and global consumption mode, in a constant process of Americanization of behavior, products, languages. The understanding of nation seems to change strongly against this context, no longer tied to the common links under a governmental or cultural power, but under the segmentation of tribes and interest groups that are established from the level of digital literacy (the groups are divide according to the degree of improvement of their literacy and familiarity with digital technology). This phenomenon is seen mainly in the process of viralization of contents in social networks, which prove that certain levels of understanding of signs / symbols occur in isolation, within specific groups (as well as legitimation). Finally, we can see the complexity in the construction of value as the aesthetic and spatial experience of the digital devices changes, as well as the social experience among inhabitants.
The concept of the world-system pointed out by Quijano (2005) can be rethought under the contemporary perspective of Lipovetsky (2008), who affirms the existence of a world culture, which replaces the understanding of local cultures and nations sectioned by territoriality. It affirms the existence of a second era of world culture, which, this time, is drawn under the traces of a concrete and social universal, no longer being the ideal of a "citizen of the world", but the world without frontiers of capital cities, multinationals, cyberspace and consumerism.
Raúl Bernal, a researcher and professor at the Universidad Pontificia Javeriana in Bogotá, points out (2003) that in the city, culture, the meaning of consumption and its symbolic dimensions are expressions of human behavior itself, and that the contemporary world exists from urban fantasies , sustaining the experiences of creation. He affirms that urban culture brings processes and tensions according to their dynamics and relations of meaning with which the whole can be visualized: an urban as a creative response of the contemporary. Bernal states that cities redefined as places of diversity and heterogeneity, where aesthetics itself is the social experience of coexistence, in an urban aesthetic that integrates the language of cities and the way of living, transforming their paradigms of relationship through creativity and technological innovation.
The condition of participation points to new ways of operating the creation of images and sensory experiences, generating innovative ways to destabilize existing systems, discussing a surveillance of affections and bodies in the city. The scale of the interactive objects in the city helps to sensitize and humanize the urban space, demystifying the idea of a shallow digital experience, but for this it is necessary to look critically, enabling the creation of devices of resistance that take us beyond the absolute existence of the vigilant system information monopolies). Therefore, the discussion of the city as an interactive interface or even linked to the experience of digital memory, extends the field of understanding of urban space as an object of appropriation, tool of creation and support of collections / data / content compilations. This articulation of the city in the digital context generates a diverse scenario for the artists in questioning dynamics on the status of the city in front of the contemporary cultural, in a process of breaking of regimes of information domination, predominantly North American. In this way, the relationship between the city as a cultural interface and the imminent interest of different sectors in appropriating the urban space is increasingly observed.
It is a clash between powers that reorder the demands of digital culture, evidencing the transition from tangible to intangible, from linear to non-linear. Above all, the parameters of contemporaneity are based on ambivalences resulting from the mixing of experiences between the physical and virtual worlds, creating a middle ground between the potential and literal existence of objects / data in the city. Under this spectrum, the discussion about heritage is directly related to the new paradigms of digital, after all, the discussion of presence-absence occurs in many scales in the context of the preservation of the legitimation of the patrimony. It is observed a moment of convergence of the media and hybridization of the human senses, making feasible a project that revises the physical structure of the city and, above all, the validation of its spaces. A society based on digital experiences generates unfoldings in the field of history and heritage conservation, because space-time experiences are given beyond the object, transforming the understanding of heritage in the face of new experiences of memory and urban occupation. In this way, it is reflected on the tensions between the collective construction of memory, its legitimization as patrimony of the future and the production of this same content by companies holding digital services linked to the city. It is observed that the emergence of a digitization of memories in response to the transition from the tangible to the intangible and possibly a return to the memories of the city on a collective scale of appropriation and creation. The discussion of presence and tangibility is affirmed by the absence, and this aspect dialogues strongly to the question of the patrimony.
In front of the digital culture, such values are questioned due to the anachronistic dynamics associated with digital devices, where the user is able to transpose linear processes into his own memory, building a web of memories and values that are not always associated in a linear fashion. Still, most of the image bank and social network services, such as Instagram and Snapchat, are based on the linear existence of the files, but with temporary dynamics of memory existence that goes out after 24 hours. This idea of ephemeral memories nourishes the desire for what is forgotten, and helps to strengthen the evident process of musealization of things and people. Thus, the discussion about intangible heritage emerges to think of the presence of physical heritage replaced by the experience of heritage, whether material or immaterial, a discussion that is strengthened by digital culture, based on convergent but mostly intangible data. At the same time, it is a patrimony without original, after all the digital files are all original and copies of the same binary set, incapable of being differentiated, whose understanding of losses occurs in another condition: the file always remains the same , and spreads, viralizes, and shares.
