什麼是 Maker Movement，為什麼說它是新的工業革命？

01-13

The maker subculture is a contemporary subculture, representing a technology-based extension of DIY culture. Typical interests enjoyed by the maker subculture include engineering-oriented pursuits such as electronics, robotics, 3-D printing, and the use of CNC tools, as well as more traditional activities such as metalworking, woodworking, and traditional arts and crafts.

部分網站甚至科技作者稱其為「新的工業革命」（ http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/09/wireds-chris-anderson-todays-maker-movement-is-the-new-industrial-revolution-tctv/ ），請問這一運動的背景與意義是什麼？

沒有看視頻，但是看到這段話：「The real revolution here is not in the creation of the technology, but the democratization of the technology. It』s when you basically give it to a huge expanded group of people who come up with new applications, and you harness the ideas and the creativity and the energy of everybody. That』s what really makes a revolution.」

我也是頭一次聽到這個概念，這讓我想起了從20世紀初開始就一直存在的關於科技進步對人類生活和文化創造的影響的討論：

這種「democratization of technology」其實就類似瓦爾特·本雅明提出的技術複製的概念：「technical reproduction」。由於技術越來越接近大眾，就有了這樣一種技術被不斷複製應用的過程，而在這個過程中很多人在文化活動中的參與度從被動變為主動。本雅明最初用到的例子是傳播技術的發展如何改變人類參與文學活動的方式，這種變化在如今的數字媒體時代更加明顯：

For centuries a small
number of writers were confronted by many thousands of readers. This changed
toward the end of the last century. With the increasing extension of the press,
which kept placing new political, religious, scientific, professional, and
local organs before the readers, an increasing number of readers became writers
– at first, occasional ones. [1]

@濤吳在評論中給出了一個關於Maker運動的雜誌的鏈接，最近一期雜誌的標題就叫：「Design for Makers」，儘管提到設計就在某種程度上上升到了藝術層面，其實這也是一種技術複製的手段，設計的目的是為了讓技術更好地被複制利用：

To an ever greater degree the work of art reproduced becomes the work of art designed for reproducibility.[2]

到了數字時代，數字技術的複製使技術得到更廣泛的應用和傳播：

Digital reproduction
both accelerates and shifts processes of textual of reproduction. Digital
reproduction might be said to open up new spaces, social relations and domains
of textual play. It affects the appearance of a new textual ontology. In the
age of digital reproduction, material moves in different circuits at high
speed. Virtual centres gather textual material together and offer new
combinations and opportunities and modes of access. Access is dispersed and
distributed anew. Models of inert consumption are displaced by models of active
engagement. If anything, the significance of Benjamin』s essay is accentuated
and renewed by digital reproduction [3]

在本雅明這一派的學者看來，技術複製使得文化產品有了社會和政治功能，在他們看來技術複製不只是技術革命，而且是一種社會革命，它適應了時代革新和群眾的需求。從某種角度來說，兩次工業革命後的資本主義社會，技術佔有者對於技術的壟斷和控制對社會階層的劃分有著重要的影響。而今天技術走向大眾，無疑是一種革新。

批評的聲音也有很多，例如阿多諾和霍克海默提到的：

with good reason the
interest of countless consumers is focused on the technology, not on the
rigidly repeated, threadbare and half-abandoned content. [4]

相關文獻有很多，臨時手邊只找到這些，引用比較倉促，拋磚引玉。

[1]Benjamin,
Walter. 「The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.」 Illuminations.
Ed. Hannah Arendt. New York: Schocken, 1969. pp. 232.

[2]ibid. pp. 224.

[3]Peim,
Nick. 「Walter Benjamin in the Age of Digital Reproduction: Aura in Education: A
Rereading of 『The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction』.」 Journal
of Philosophy of Education 41.3 (2007): pp.376.

[4]Adorno,
Theodor W., and Max Horkheimer. 「The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass
Deception.」 Dialectic of Enlightenment. Stanford: Stanford University
Press, 2002. pp.108.