You're right-- the creator's intentions don't matter here, that's beside the point.

-Jonathan

--- On Wed, 6/22/11, Charles Henry <czhenry@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Charles Henry <czhenry@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PD] [OT] technological parody was: Pd performance at TED
To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika@yahoo.com>, pd-list@iem.at
Date: Wednesday, June 22, 2011, 11:33 PM



On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika@yahoo.com> wrote:

The Rube Goldberg machines and the fridge are great examples of parodies-- I suppose
we can call them technological parodies if we want to be precise.  But for things that
are not actually meant as parodies, it's a misnomer that just seems like an
ideological term of derision.

Correct.  It's a kids game, I know... and it works as intended.  Yes--I am deriding it even though I probably don't have to. 

so, I guess you mean to say that a *real* parody has to be intentional?  I doubt the creators of the robotic beer fridge thought they were creating a parody--but the sheer impracticality and high-technology implementation *makes* it one. 

So, calling *anything* a "technological parody" is as you said, just an ideological term of derision.  But after all, you can create anything you want, it depends on how it's received by other people what labels they would put on it.