Lev Manovich's 2001 book, The Language of New Media, has a specific point of view when looking at new media. Manovich looks at new media through the lens of visual and cinematic code: "the visual culture of the information age is cinematic in its appearance." Manovich uses the term “language” to describe “emerging conventions, design patterns, and key forms of new media” (Manovich, 2001, p. 38). This book focuses on how new media have already developed rather than their future. The book is well written and guides the reader through its dense content but providing short summaries at the end of each chapter. The arguments are supported by a wide range of examples from his experiences. The book is structured into six chapters which all deal with particular concepts and problems, from the “material and logical organization” (ibid, page 37) of the new medium itself to the effects of new media far from information technology. Its historical approach to the study of new media distinguishes it from other work on new media. Manovich explains how in the early days of cinema the cultural impact that cinema had could not have been predicted. Because if that were the case, the transformation and impact would not have been systematically recorded. With the advent of cinema, a new artistic language was born: cinematography. Although Manovich criticizes the fact that it was not recorded, we need some kind of hindsight to grasp its importance and consequences before we can make an informed judgment about the cinematography that will determine its recording. Manovich tries to provide “a potential map of what the field might be” (ibid, p.11) as early as 2001. I think not enough time has passed for this, however he provides a theory on which it can be built. He focuses his argument on c...... middle of paper ......ht in the language of new media. However, it is therefore limited, it cannot be seen as a "map of the field". He sees it in layers: cultural interfaces, operations, illusions and forms in new media. I found it difficult to always see the differences between the layers and see how they affect each other. But the distinction between these layers is not always clear and he fails to show how they work even though he provides significant examples. It seemed very broad and sometimes superficial. For example, it does not consider interactivity as a factor that influences new media or generalizes quickly. There is an interdisciplinary approach and it is not clear when you are talking from which field of study, instead it mixes history, art history, literary theory and computer science. Despite my comments, this book provides a distinct theory for new media.