| In their book Remediation: Understanding New media Bolter and Grusin argue a couple of things that are important to this project as stated in the introduction. First, they say that mediation draws upon a desire for immediacy (or: getting in 'direct contact' with the 'real', and totally immersing oneself without 'noticing' the medium any more) and hypermediacy (or: becoming extremely aware of the medium, which experience also constitutes a 'reality'). The perception of either immediacy or hypermediacy depends on the cultural context. |
| Second, they argue that all mediation (in our age) is always remediation. |
| Remediation, or the representation of a medium in another, has then three logics to it, say Bolter and Grusin. One of these is that all media co-construct each other and are always in a dialogue with each other. Furthermore, reality and mediation are inseparable: all mediations are as real as any artifact in a society. Therefore, remediation can be seen as a process involving the reform of reality. |
| Bolter and Grusin interestingly reject McLuhan's technological determinism when he says that 'the medium is the message', but still appreciate his analysis of the remediating power of media. Or, in other words: Is there a message in the medium? Yes, but this message is not inherent to the medium but entangled in it's economic and cultural context. |
| Last but not least, Bolter and Grusin point out that the faith in technological progress seems to be a typically American one, whereas Europeans historically are more sceptical on this point. They do not go into the ideological and historical backgrounds of this claim, however. |