Sean Cubitt’s essay, titled "Shit Happens", which appears in The World Wide Web and Contemporary Cultural Theory, seems to be an incredibly fragmented piece of writing. I found it difficult to follow his various tangents, and was unable, at least initially, to understand what it was that he was driving at. However, as I have reread the essay I have decided that maybe the fragmentation and chaos is intentional; perhaps Cubitt is trying to mimic the chaos of the Web through his essay. I cannot be certain about this conclusion, though.

Throughout this essay, Cubitt speaks about luck and randomness, and how we humans attempt to derive meaning from that chaos. On page 128 Cubitt writes "[b]ut most of all, in the absence of God or gods, we have found a firm belief in the wilderness of chance, chaos, and complexity, in the power of the last survivor of the pantheon, Lady Luck." Is this perhaps an allusion to the hyperlink (which so much of this semester has been devoted to discussing?) Is the idea that Cubitt is posing something as simple as the concept that when one chooses to "click" on a hyperlink the action is much the same as pulling the handle on a slot machine? The momentary thrill of "will I win" rushing through the veins before the wheels stop spinning and you realize that you’ve just lost another couple of quarters? If this is not what Cubitt is saying, then perhaps I have developed a new analogy. For, when one follows a link, one never knows what will be at the other end. Will it be the dreaded "Error 404" message? Something completely irrelevant? Something relevant but not relevant enough? Or perhaps, just maybe, will it be that nugget of information that one has been seeking?

Later in his essay, Cubitt talks about the fact that anyone can circulate information on the Internet (through websites, message boards, chat rooms, email, etc.) and that information does not necessarily have to be "accurate." Cubitt writes "[w]ithout a governing protocol or discursive hierarchy like those of refereed journals and scholarly apparatus to guide us, the Web can proliferate not only information but surmise, opinion, guesswork, assertion, fallacy, superstition." (page 130) I actually find this aspect of the Internet to be fascinating (if not frequently frustrating.) I do agree with those people who argue that the advent of the Internet has had a democratizing effect on society, in some ways. The basic fact that people who would never dream of writing a scholarly article or other text, regardless of their level of knowledge, are now putting-up scholarly websites and circulating information via other means as well, means that more balanced information is now available. Of course, it also means that any lunatic with a gripe can also circulate inaccurate information, too. But the point that I am attempting to make is that dispersion of knowledge is no longer purely the realm of academics. I think that what is occurring now is similar to what happened after books started to become more widely printed: power shifted from the elite to the masses. I am certain that, after the initial hysteria and chaos that surrounds the Web has died down, and it starts to become more self-regulating (and as people begin to learn how to filter through legitimate and illegitimate "facts"), we will see a new level of basic knowledge arise. The academic world will have to adjust if it wants to compete in this new medium, though.

From this point on, Cubitt’s article becomes more and more convoluted, and it is difficult to ferret-out particular points that he makes. Much of his writing wanders through numerology and mathematical issues, and I found it difficult to follow his reasoning. However, he does raise one final issue that I would like to comment upon. On page 141, Cubitt writes "[p]rivacy has become, over the 250 years of its sociological importance, something of a dead weight. Today, only wife-beaters and tax-evaders genuinely guard their privacy: the battered and impoverished might wish for more openness." I very much take issue with this "point" of Cubitt’s. For personal reasons I will not go into here, I am extremely protective of my privacy. Due to circumstances beyond my control, I have even gone so far as to change my last name in hopes of protecting that privacy. However, in today’s electronic age, I keep finding that my name pops up in the oddest places (such as through the University publications, who released my home address without my permission.) It seems as though I am fighting a losing battle in trying to keep my privacy. As more and more information becomes readily available though electronic means I think that we are all in danger of losing the right to keep our personal information from others.