So – Blair Witch Project scared the shit out of me, as did House of Leaves, and when I was a kid Grieg’s “Hall of the Mountain King” sent shivers up my spine. What connects all three of these things is the fact that they provide the viewer/reader/listener with little more than a frame to scare themselves. Certainly the Symbolist idea of a "suggestive indefiniteness" – where they were able to create a kind of terror with little more than some punctuated silence, a few clock ticks, and an old man muttering about the sound of a scythe – suggests that this kind activity has a rich history. Obviously this is nothing new, but what fascinates me is that as the media changes the space for slippage between what is presented and what is received expands exponentially. I am not suggesting that RL is any less mediated than things like SL – after all we generally speak a language we didn’t invent, wear clothing designed by someone else, quote films, books, and songs created by others – but that liminal gap between one individual and another appears magnified in cyberspace. Each step in the mediatized frame amplifies the potential for deception, misreading, misinterpretation and over interpretation.
Part of the issue is that I place a certain amount of trust in the information my senses garner from RL. Having a conversation with someone face to face there is a feedback loop created though pitch, tone, gesture, intensity, etc that allows me to gauge reactions and level of involvement. Could this all be feigned – sure – but I am also given the opportunity to react to that. Denied this type of interaction cyberspace leaves me generally with an intentional image and words - words often clumsily misspelled. I am not a fan of the chat feature in virtual worlds because it is too specific – even when disguised – and breaks the illusion necessary for the imaginative element to be involved in the suggestions. SL – like RL to a certain extent – is built on a fantasy frame in which projection operates like it does with any text - film, novel or piece of music but with the very important difference of the involvement of a generally unknown person on the other end of the line. So – while I might be able to fantasize about running away with Mr. Darcy he doesn’t have the opportunity to fantasize back.
And this is where my thinking gets fuzzy. Virtual worlds are seductive in a way that previous media only hinted at. I don’t necessarily mean seductive in an erotic or sexual way – although that is certainly part of it – but they present spaces and avatars and experiences that are ripe for projection and fantasy – but a form of fantasy that can talk back. Unwilling to get completely drawn into this world for various reasons I am determined to remain cynical and critical – bracketing my experiences with a seemingly dispassionate theoretical eye. But I am caught by this time and time again. I doubt actions and emotions and consciously avoid any kind of RL sharing, and yet I find that I can be intimidated, scared, sympathetic and entertained – all RL emotions. By way of example I had an extended conversation with a furry the other day (I know I am going on about this group – but they are fascinating!). While I doubt all of the information offered – I have no idea how big his/her virtual member is, I don’t know if they like virtual bondage or not, and I wonder if they are just playing a role and telling me what I want to hear – but the aggression that came through in the chat was undeniable. Now if someone in this world calls me a moron with a below 60 IQ I generally respond in kind either to shut them down or spar. But in SL I didn’t – oddly to spare the “feelings” of the person on the other end. Not knowing who they were gave them power since I didn’t want to offend them.
So – while I don’t really want to reveal anything about who I am in RL I end up saying volumes about who I am because I don’t want to offend some jerk dressed as a skunk doing his or her best to offend and intimidate me. Huh. Kind of makes me wonder what other things slip through. It also makes me wonder how much RL of others I actually encounter. In the end though does it really matter? If SL is a play-full space of slippage that is constructed on a fantasy frame that encourages projection onto any and all objects and avatars then is
Two things come to my mind while thinking about this.
ReplyDeleteFirst, your comment "...like real life to a certain extent..." It's true that we have ways of discerning what people really mean despite what they do or say in RL...you mentioned body language. However, with enough experience one can do the same thing in SL. A person's choice of avatar, clothes and accoutrements is often as telling as facial expressions and arm positions. It's a question of learning how to read people in a virtual world. Stereotypes, like in RL, are often true. In addition, it's also possible to learn to read people's IMs and chat in a way which helps with the understanding of who they are and what they represent. I'm not sure how to explain it other than you get to know who you might have a decent conversation with and who might piss you off. A person's language (meaning, structure, vocabulary) tells much about who they are...just like in RL.
Second, I think your last paragraph makes it clear that you're learning that, if SL stays in SL, and doesn't spill over into RL, then it doesn't really matter. The trick is to learn to compartmentalize enough to be successful. For example, if someone calls me names or otherwise insults me I mute them and move on...no loss...and I don't worry that a nasty response might hurt their feelings in RL. SL is not paradise...it's not a utopia. We each need to find places and people that are safe by our own definitions. Once you do that, you can relax and enjoy yourself.
Truth is the point...however, it's truth in the context of a virtual world...virtual truth, if you will. It's true for SL or for our SL personae...and when we sign out it waits in SL for our return.
There's nothing wrong with a healthy fantasy life :)