syn·site
in Johanna Flato's terms: an ever-evolving conceptual constellation, an entangled situating crystallized from a myriad of fragmented realities. Simultaneity and singularities dance in a swirling waltz of intertwined moments and spaces, each adding to the cacophony and harmony of this complex site. A syn-site is a living, breathing tapestry of the world, constantly rewriting its own narrative, always open to edits, always challenging what we have come to accept as static or fixed. It is a manifestation of a world that is anything but singular or isolated — it is a world that is complex, interwoven, and infinitely entangled.
in Johanna Flato's terms: an ever-evolving conceptual constellation, an entangled situating crystallized from a myriad of fragmented realities. Simultaneity and singularities dance in a swirling waltz of intertwined moments and spaces, each adding to the cacophony and harmony of this complex site. A syn-site is a living, breathing tapestry of the world, constantly rewriting its own narrative, always open to edits, always challenging what we have come to accept as static or fixed. It is a manifestation of a world that is anything but singular or isolated — it is a world that is complex, interwoven, and infinitely entangled.
SYN (along with, at the same time | from Greek SYN, with | ~SYNTHETIC) + SITE (N: point of event, occupied space, internet address; V: to place in position | from Latin SITUS, location, idleness, forgetfulness | ~WEBSITE ¬cite ¬sight), cf. SITE/NON-SITE (from Robert Smithson, A PROVISIONAL THEORY OF NONSITES, 1968)
...it is possible to assert that cyberspace is “just like” real space only if one ignores that cyberspace is peopled by real users who experience cyberspace and real space as different but connected, with acts taken in one having consequences in the other. In all cases, theories of cyberspace as separate space give short shrift to cyberspace as both extension and evolution of everyday spatial practice—as a space neither separate from real space nor simply a continuation of it. That is to say, they ignore both the embodied, situated experience of cyberspace users and the complex interplay between real and digital geographies.
...it is possible to assert that cyberspace is “just like” real space only if one ignores that cyberspace is peopled by real users who experience cyberspace and real space as different but connected, with acts taken in one having consequences in the other. In all cases, theories of cyberspace as separate space give short shrift to cyberspace as both extension and evolution of everyday spatial practice—as a space neither separate from real space nor simply a continuation of it. That is to say, they ignore both the embodied, situated experience of cyberspace users and the complex interplay between real and digital geographies.
...it is possible to assert that cyberspace is “just like” real space only if one ignores that cyberspace is peopled by real users who experience cyberspace and real space as different but connected, with acts taken in one having consequences in the other. In all cases, theories of cyberspace as separate space give short shrift to cyberspace as both extension and evolution of everyday spatial practice—as a space neither separate from real space nor simply a continuation of it. That is to say, they ignore both the embodied, situated experience of cyberspace users and the complex interplay between real and digital geographies.