A Second Way to Read McLuhan’s Footnotes to Innis

Simple item page
dc.citation.issue2
dc.citation.volume45
dc.contributor.authorChrystall AB
dc.date.available2020-07-06
dc.date.issued2020-07-06
dc.description.abstractBackground Marshall McLuhan claimed his work was a footnote to Harold A. Innis. His claims have been used to argue that McLuhan and Innis offer a coherent system of thought, with a systematic methodology and common set of basic assumptions and presuppositions. This article questions that species of argument and looks to deepen our understanding of the McLuhan-Innis relationship. Analysis McLuhan is read as an analogist, and his footnotes (plural) are interpreted as deliberate violations of normative patterns of academic use in the satiric tradition of Thomas Nashe and the Scriblerus Club. Conclusion and implications McLuhan is repositioned apropos of Innis, figures conventionally associated with the Toronto School of Communication Theory and historians who address themselves to the theme of orality and literacy. This article also invites a reconsideration of McLuhan in relation to the digital era, his contributions to epistemology and understanding media. Contexte Marshall McLuhan a dit que son œuvre n’était qu’une note en bas de page par rapport à celle de Harold A. Innis. Certains commentateurs ont utilisé ce propos pour soutenir que McLuhan et Innis ensemble présentent un système de pensée cohérent ayant une méthodologie systématique et des suppositions et présuppositions de base communes. L’article met cet argument en question tout en cherchant à approfondir notre compréhension du rapport McLuhan / Innis. Analyse On perçoit communément McLuhan comme étant un analogiste et on interprète ses notes en bas de page (au pluriel) comme étant des violations délibérées des normes académiques dans la tradition satirique d’un Thomas Nashe ou d’un Scriblerus Club. Conclusion et implications Cet article repositionne McLuhan par rapport à Innis, ces deux figures traditionnellement associées à l’École de communication de Toronto et aux historiens de l’oral et l’écrit. Cet article propose en outre une reconsidération de McLuhan par rapport à l’ère numérique et à ses contributions en épistémologie et en analyse des médias.
dc.description.confidentialfalse
dc.edition.editionJuly 2020
dc.format.extent327 - 345
dc.identifierhttps://cjc.utpjournals.press/doi/10.22230/cjc.2020v45n2a3521
dc.identifier.citationCanadian Journal of Communication, 2020, July 2020, 45 (2), pp. 327 - 345
dc.identifier.doi10.22230/cjc.2020v45n2a3521
dc.identifier.eissn1499-6642
dc.identifier.elements-id433354
dc.identifier.harvestedMassey_Dark
dc.identifier.issn0705-3657
dc.languageEnglish and French (abstract)
dc.publisherUniversity of Toronto Press
dc.publisher.urihttps://cjc.utpjournals.press/doi/10.22230/cjc.2020v45n2a3521
dc.relation.isPartOfCanadian Journal of Communication
dc.subjectMcLuhan
dc.subjectInnis
dc.subjectAnalogy
dc.subjectMedia ecology
dc.subjectToronto School
dc.subjectAnalogie
dc.subjectÉcologie des médias
dc.subjectÉcole de Toronto
dc.titleA Second Way to Read McLuhan’s Footnotes to Innis
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.notesNot known
pubs.organisational-group/Massey University
pubs.organisational-group/Massey University/Massey Business School
pubs.organisational-group/Massey University/Massey Business School/School of Communication, Journalism and Marketing
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
3521-17755-1-PB.pdf
Size:
697.24 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal Articles