A seminar held on Waiheke Island some weeks ago left the distinct impression that the three hundred year old boundaries between artistic, academic and commercial disciplines are finally breaking down. The butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker may have been notable by their absence, but the movie producer, the artist, the designer, the marketer, the lawyer, the programmer, the freight shipper, the sales team, the journalist and the academic all turned out in force. And the theme that brought this diverse band of disciples together? None other than the ubiquitous, digital media and electronic communications technology. There are few instances recorded in the history of the modern world when common interest has extended so far across the disciplinary divides. Whether and where new boundaries will appear is a matter of pure speculation by conceptually blinkered minds in the infancy of the digital age. So watch this space because anything might appear. It may be real or virtual, tangible or incorporeal, permanent or inconstant, but the odds on it being created by an artisan with electronic tools are high. The only limits likely will be the scope of imagination.

Put in a long term perspective, two significant events precede the collapse of this demarcation. The first was the western world 'invention' of the printing press by Gutenberg circa 1450. Although print had already existed for centuries in other countries - Babylonia, Rome and China - it had never been the catalyst for radical social and cultural change as it was to become in Europe. Prior to 1450, writing meant meticulous, word for word copying of ancient religious manuscripts. Few people could read, and the church was the 'owner' of all written truth. The freedom of interpretation and expression that followed the advent of the printing press was initially condemned as heresy, an assault on truth and reason which would surely end in the speedy downfall of the deviant types who supported it. The infant called 'the novel' grew up into great works of fiction, and the fruit of a subsequent union added artwork to imagination and endless potential for open communication with the masses, and still the sky did not fall on the heads of the 'sinners'. Rather the general population became increasingly capable of intellectual pursuits, reading, writing, critical judgement and creative thought. The dissenters of the era said no good could possibly come from printed media, but were very few in number when their religiously controlled world stopped turning. Creativity in words and pictures came together for the first time and were gifted to the masses. With the benefit of hindsight, it is hard to see a negative side to these developments. The record shows that nothing of significant worth was destroyed by the birth or early growth of the print era. The mass destruction of trees to feed ravenous print machines to satisfy demands for massive human consumption rates happened later on.

The second major incident occurred in the 17th century when the philosopher Rene Descartes instigated an acrimonious divorce between the contextually rich fields of study such as poetry, humanities, ethnography and history, and the abstract, decontextualized areas of epistemology, geometry, and science. The positive outcomes of the separation were many notable, technical innovations of the 18th and 19th centuries which resulted from extrapolation of rational, scientific explanations for all phenomena. However, the cost was excessively high in terms of human failure and suffering for the masses who could not claim ownership of the 'rights' to the 'creations' nor the means of their production. This Cartesian rationalist movement is commonly identified as the beginning of modernity, a period characterised by divisions of labour, demarcation and the break down of production processes. The series of discrete tasks and disciplines which resulted were obviously somehow related, but ceased to be seen as essentially inter-dependent parts of the same whole. In Cartesian thinking, the outcomes of interconnectedness and synergistic relationships could not be described in rational terms, "accepts no object about which we cannot attain a certitude equal to that of the demonstration of arithmetic and geometry". therefore they could not exist.

It took the next three hundred years to reach the conclusion that Cartesian rationalism is at least one part of history that can correctly be labelled as bunk (to use the words of Winston Churchill). As we cruise through the post-modern era trying to define exactly what the term post-modern might mean, the rational, separatist philosophy of the age of modernity is thankfully being relegated as a thing of the past, in principle if not yet always in practise. If the progenitors of post-modernism had to be identified, the architects and designers of 1970s Europe and the US are likely candidates. In response to the characterless, minimal style of the post-war years, they dressed the growing infant in local culture, historical reference, added splashes of colour and even a touch of fantasy. By the time the babe had faltered to its feet, pluralism and constructivism were becoming the norms of forward thinking, and separate, national identity was another morphing target in most of the western world. The self sustaining nation-state was proving itself as yet another rationalist concept, rapidly losing its relevance. The need for functional organizations began to transcend existing boundaries on all fronts and at all levels, national, social, political and disciplinary. The cross-fertilisation found within these functional organizations is reflected from meta-level to microscopic perspectives. With the added capacity of 1990s digital technologies, the relevant, functional organization is, in many cases, also a fluid and a virtual one.

The Cartesian concept of dualism need not be thrown out with either the baby or the bath water though, and modern technology must be seen as both silk purse and sow's ear. Virtual silk purses can be sown from digital sow's ears, and hopefully without the need for version 19.90 of the last century's Luddites, who fought in vain to keep the human dignity side of the process under control. Ned Ludd himself was a virtual presence on the planet, but his followers were for real. They attacked real people and smashed real machines that were destroying their communities and livelihoods. It must be accepted that in some respects, the new technologies of the 1990s are changing lives for the worse. But that all stems from human intention and action, not intrinsically evil technology. The plus side is that it's only as bad or good as its driver. Now, having pre-empted possible accusations of uncritical infatuation with digital technologies, let the praise begin!

But first a pause for reflection. It's nearly the new millennium, and at least one (this one!) computer shouldn't cause chaos on a national scale when the clock ticks over the two- triple- zero hour. The prospect of being a nerd - rich enough to retire by about April 2000 - might be appealing. But really, there is more to life and digital media than a get-rich-quick-fix, and anyway, the threat of NET Ludd might be real. 'Talking' (or is it texting?), to people in corners of the world, meeting strangers in cyberspace to pursue common interests without the pollution of inter-personal politics, expanding the meanings of communication, creativity and choice. Whether I am an artist, a trader, a teacher, a learner, a traveller, an actor, a writer, a scientist, or a.n.other, life would be hopelessly restricted and tedious without the now familiar digital tool kit and the dialogue with other worlds it opens up. Anything I need to know, I can find out all about then decide. Anything I want to buy, I can see what's available then choose. Anything I need to understand, I can access from multiple perspectives, one of which will teach me. Anything I need to communicate, I have the media to present and the channels to broadcast. Anything I want to create, I have the tools with which to express the product of my imagination.

In the broader scheme of things, the pluralist philosophy of the Western World in the current age supports the constructive, critical, contextual, connectivity, reflected in the technologies that are becoming the tools of every trade. It will go down in history as the age of post- post-modernism, some call it the information age, though what we have is much richer than information, it is knowledge in comprehensive, flexible and multi-sensory forms. There is no longer a compulsion to separate the senses or demarcate skills by disciplinary lines. The boundaries became irrelevant. Whatever lifestyle or profession I choose to follow, digital technology is an important tool of my trade and through it, I understand, support and share in what others unlike me do.

Cathy Gunn <ca.gunn@auckland.ac.nz> is an Instructional Designer working at the University of Auckland.