Jacques Lacan proposed in
his Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis that meaning is created
where language breaks down i.e. we find the most important content of
communication in the cracks in language, the spaces left when an idea tries to
conform to grammar, syntax and the words available for us to express ourselves
and fails in a fascinating and meaning way. It is these juxtapositions of words
and grammatical structures that animate the building blocks of language, that
take information or data and imbue it with meaning; they are sometimes expertly
crafted and linguistically 'accurate' and sometimes solipsistic accidents that
resonate with others and help modify our language structure to accommodate
this new insight.
The interplay between data
and technology operates in much the same way: data is not information without
the effect of technology to animate it. I use the term technology in its purest
sense from the Greek meaning a crafted or systematic treatment, so the book is
as much technology as the computer. And in so doing suggest that there are two
complementary missions we undertake as caretakers of knowledge: the first is to
collect and protect data, the second is to apply technology to that data in
order to reveal and explore its meaning as information.
The danger arises when our
desire for meaning encourages us to elide the distinction between data and
information; we see it as a useful shortcut that gets us to the point faster,
but in so doing we risk morphing the data, altering its fundamental nature to
suit a particular interpretation. Once changed the data cannot be re-presented,
interpreted or analyzed and potential new and more informed meaning is
impossible.
I see enormous value in
interrogating data projects through this lens to understand if our short term
goals preclude the future utility of the data inherent in the project. It seems
there are many things to consider about the data per se before we are in a
position to start using it!