Lev Manovich's 2001 book, The Language of New Media, presents a specific angle when examining new media. Manovich looks at new media through the prism of visuals and cinematic code: "the visual culture of the computer age is cinematic in its appearance." Manovich uses the term “language” to describe “the emerging conventions, design patterns, and key forms of new media” (Manovich, 2001, p. 38). This book focuses on how new media has already developed rather than its future. The book is well written and guides the reader through its dense content but gives short summaries at the end of each chapter. The arguments are supported by a wide range of examples from his own experiences. The book is structured to have six chapters all dealing with particular concepts and issues, from the "material and logical organization" (ibid, p. 37) of the new media itself to the effects of new media outside of computer science. Its historical approach to the study of new media sets it apart from other work on new media. Manovich explains how, in the early days of cinema, the cultural impact of cinema could not be predicted. Because in this case the transformation and impact were not systematically recorded. With the rise of cinema, a new artistic language was born: cinematography. Although Manovich is critical of the fact that it was not recorded, it takes some form of perspective to see its importance and consequences before we can make an informed judgment on the cinematography that would shape its recording. Manovich attempts to provide "a potential map of what this field could be" (ibid, p. 11) in 2001. I think not enough time has passed to do so, but he offers a theory about which we can rely on. . He centers his argument on the medium of paper, in the language of new media. However, it is limited as a result; it cannot be considered as a “map of the terrain”. 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 influence each other. But the distinction between these layers is not always clear and he fails to show how these layers work even though he provided significant examples. I found it to be very broad and sometimes superficial. For example, he does not consider interactivity as a factor that influences new media or that is becoming widespread rapidly. There is an interdisciplinary approach and it is not clear when he is talking about which field of study, but rather he mixes history, art history, literary theory and computer science. Despite my comments, this book offers a distinct theory for new media.