I feel like I have been violated by the media

OK – not a big entry – I have one brewing on the Situationists and SL – but it isn’t fully formed yet. So – yesterday – two events – left me feeling violated by the media. The first – someone or thing hacked my iphone and posted on all my FB friend’s walls some crap about free ipads. So then I gotta spend 35 minutes removing them all and changing my password to some unimaginably complex impossible to remember thing. Then – I get into SL to visit my favorite club – mainly cause DJ QT’s spin is a great mix of classic, blues, and house. I get there earlier than usual and the place is packed. So I move to an empty spot on the floor and start dancing. The conversation is – as always – light and fun with emphasis on playful banter and puns. This – um – furry dancing near me – and here I am not sure how to describe the avi – part bunny, part lion, part camel with a figure and wardrobe worthy of R. Crumb. She/he/it seems amused by my banter – so much so that they want to take me home as a pet. OK – I’ll play along – I state that I will need a box with air holes and some rawhide. The conversation moves to collars and tying me to a tree. Yea – as I stated – I have a real problem with authority – and I am definitely not responding to something with tons of body hair I can’t even identify. S/he/it goes to leave and demands I come with them. I must admit – part of me wanted to know where I would go and the other part was seriously creeped out. She stood in front of me for what seemed like an uncomfortably long time – the gesture of sort of waiting for me to get ready to leave. With a curt “ok since this is your first time I will let it slide” s/he/it was gone. This leaves me wondering if I have violated some unwritten furry code - like if you respond they get to take you home or something like that. If offered pet-dom a second time I wonder if I would take it - I mean - it is a virtual world what is gonna happen. The again they might get me to sell Amway - Yikes! I have yet to meet avi that creep me out more than the furries and the tinies (and the tiny furries). There have got to be some seriously wacked sub-cultures in here.

I force myself to contradict myself in order to avoid conforming to my own tastes.

I was recently reading a RS article about deadmau5 where he was described as post-social – the idea being that as a loner most of his social relationships are mediated by the available technology. This doesn’t mean that they are not social and it doesn’t mean that they are not relationships, but they are somehow different than the connections we make in RL. There is distance, mediatization, implied anonymity – although it often fairly simple to find out who people are in RL if they are not extremely careful about setting up things like emails, blogs, second lives and beyond. As I have explained before - these tools offer information and occasional connections, but for me there is always a shred of doubt. Everything anyone tells me in a virtual environment could be true or false or somewhere in between. Which is fine since what I find interests me most is the conversation itself – on whatever level it transpires – post or other wise.

The other day while in-world I had someone send me a friend request after about 30 seconds of sharing the same space. My IM question to them was – why would you want to friend me – you know nothing about me – I could be a stalker or psychopath (as well, I suppose, could anyone I have digital or real world communications with). We ended up having quite an interesting conversation about post-structuralism – so my defenses lowered and the request was accepted. And this is where I catch myself. Not wanting a “real” or “truth-full” connection I substitute a kind of wry intellectualism for emotion – which pretty much amounts to the same thing. Unwilling to accept or acknowledge or develop an emotional connection in a mediatized environment I find I am a sucker for the intellectual conversation. How is this any different? How is having a light-hearted or otherwise discussion about mediataization, post-structuralism, or simply looking forward to the evening’s dance club chatter any different from using SL (or any social network or virtual world) to discuss work or family issues, fears, longings, desires or otherwise? Cultivating that cool detached aesthetic so often linked to postmodernism (and in my mind the evolving clockwork exterior) belies connections that are often presented as mere surface, but in reality cut much deeper.

This is what I didn’t see until I explored an out-of-world via in-world exchange. And I realize that focused on one particular aspect of virtual worlds I often miss or fail to acknowledge what is really going on. Paul De Man hit it on the head with the idea of blindness and insight – which are two poles seemingly hardwired into human nature that are hard to avoid. We see something because we are looking for it, but often miss how we see. And I find that this is a large part of what I am interested in exploring in SL – a sort of faith-based approach to the digital. I don’t necessarily mean this in a religious or spiritual way – although that is certainly there – but the kind of unshakable belief in something – anything – that is taken for “truth.” I send a response out in SL or through FB or via email and honestly do not know who is on the other end. And yet, I am engaged in and place faith in the response.

Now it is possible that all these social networking sites are in reality an elaborate and bizarre Turing Test designed to gather information about our likes and dislikes, our syntax and our shopping habits. This may seem like some kind of sci-fi paranoia but keep in mind that the folks that created Google set out to develop a kind artificial intelligence – which is why places like Amazon seem to know what books, music, and video games I am likely to buy and why my local supermarket knows what its clientele are most likely to gravitate toward. I mentioned the other day in class that Orwell’s frightening picture of Big Brother in 1984 developed in far more insidious ways than he had imagined. Not only are we watched all the time (and recorded, and sorted, and noted) – but we largely pay for that service. If many of us are now post-social is it possible that we are also post-informational? I do tend to rationalize the fact that I really don’t care one way or another. I deny truth in a digital environment but for some reason have faith in the conversation as a means of expressing or exchanging ideas - true or otherwise. I am not quite sure what to do with this yet – so in the meantime here is a picture of me riding a sheep.

They say compassion is a virtue, but I don’t have the time

I suspect that my wife is suspicious of social network sites like SL and FB because she assumes that real emotions and real connections occur there. I am suspicious of them for exactly the opposite reason. Part of the beauty of digital age technology is the distance – both physical and emotional. Its like standing on the edge of a very interesting party hurling bon mots and pot shots at will, knowing that you can bolt at any time. I find that I am more likely to engage folks in these spaces who enjoy this kind of superficial connection. This hearkens back to the notion of a play-full space in which riffing on what someone just said is largely the point. But I do realize that there are people in here (in this great vast metaverse – yea I just read Snow Crash) that seek true and meaning-full connections. This is where it gets a bit weird for me – it is also where it gets a bit theoretical.

The Prague school was a collection of talented and brilliant semioticins that studied things like literature, mythology, folk tales, clothing, and performance. Their theory of how a “stage character” is created has a lot to do with how avatars function. Built on a tri-partite system that involves an actor, a stage figure, and a character in which the stage figure is what the actor creates (based on text, body, voice, movement, etc) and the character is what the audience sees and hears. Both stage figure and character are interpreted – which leaves a great deal of room for miss-reading, miss-interpretation, and play. When and if true connections happen in cyberspace they are rarely unmediated. Swiping the tri-partite system and applying it to virtual worlds I find that the technology presents a user, an interface (things like programs, browsers, etc), and finally an avatar (like a character – an easy object to project on). The point here is that what is often taken for a singularity (a character, an avatar) is in actuality composed of multiple pieces. I find that as long as the banter remains on the level of superficiality this system works for me – but beyond that my suspicions are aroused. I doubt, I bracket, I filter – I approaching everything in these spaces with a wry phenomenological eye. It is not a matter of wondering if what I am seeing is true – but suspending all judgment that any truth can be found here at all. This is part of what I like about setting the camera so that I can watch my avatar – I am always at a distance peering into another world. And then I get an IM.

This is a feature that I shut off in FB almost immediately. Its too insistent, too demanding, too – “answer me now!” for my tastes. But for some reason I like it in SL. I like the fact that there can be multiple conversations going on in the same space. What unnerves me is the implied privacy of the IM space. In RL I let very very few people inside that tiny, fragile, private space of real thought, real emotion and I am always caught off guard when folks I barely know try to open that door. No offence – I realize that some people are more open than others and that part of the draw of virtual worlds is a kind of anonymity that allows real connections to develop. I am not sure I am here for that. As discussed below – my avatar is basically in Stempunk mode – but slowly evolving into a kind of clockwork avatar. My hope is that this appearance will be a tip that there is nothing beyond the metallic exterior except a cold-hearted machine driven by gears and cogs. It will respond to the given information, but offer nothing of any depth. And I wonder about this – are those in SL looking for true emotional connections more likely to appear “normal” (or human, or some digital equivalent)? But right now I love the dancing – when it

is good it is a shared space where people banter, riff on each other, give each other shit while listening to some good tunes (check out the Black Dragon Tavern on a night when Shannon and melqt are there – you won’t regret it). The beauty of these encounters is that they are

effortless. I find very few times of the day when I can just sit and listen to music and not feel like I should be doing something else. In SL the

dancing occupies that need to produce – to do something – the rest is just fun. As I become more comfortable in this space my approach to it may change. I may develop life-long deep connections to people I don’t really know. I doubt it. But for now the dancing will suffice.

I'm blogging as my avatar dances

I know I seem somewhat obsessed with this dancing thing – but it is a fascinating 21^st century space to meet interesting people and listen to music that is not at deafening levels. I had a great experience clicking on someone’s profile. She had this wonderful quote about how important play is in life. I IM’d "her" for the title of the book the quote was from and we proceeded to have this extended conversation about play, life, education, perception and outlook. Now I may have had this same conversation with a random person at Starbucks, but it is unlikely I would ever be able to find them again. Not only does the computer hold a record of this conversation, but allows me to friend this person and find them again in the future. From the bar conversation I gather they are in Europe somewhere – another difficulty in this world. I find that the music in these spaces is only a shallow part of the draw for me. If the conversation is interesting – I go back. The fact that there can be multiple levels of conversation going on at once is another draw. Another club and another interesting conversation with an elementary school teacher. Interesting how education was a theme in both conversations - but from very different perspectives. It is like being at a great party where everyone has something cool to say and you get to talk to all of them with out having to ask "what?" every five seconds. Space becomes layered and conversations become entwined – but generally only from a single perspective. Private conversations, public conversations, add to this facebook asynchronous conversations, email conversations, conversations where I may be split between 5 or 6 spaces at the same time. Hard to imagine this in RL. But space is only defined by the avatars that are there. I find myself in the same space with different folks and my interest level is nil. Since SL is not a “game” with any tangible outcomes – community and experience are the only things that seem to be left – well – that and buying stuff – or finding free stuff – or making stuff – but stuff is important. In this respect SL is not too much different from RL – just on more of a global scale. The space of thousands of miles shrinks into the space of a teleport (have I mentioned how much I love the teleport sound – almost as much as I love the Mac start-up sound and the Play Station sound – highly underrated design aspects). These random connections are what humanity seems to thrive on – like minded folks with whom to share a few turns of the globe dressed as if they were 4 and had an unlimited closet to pick from. What more could you ask for.

My Real-World Avatar

So – yea – the other day I came to class dressed in a close approximation of my avatar. I found it interesting that the only person who asked me why was from another class. Perhaps it was self-explanatory. Perhaps no one wanted to find out, or perhaps the students just thought – OK so he is dressed like this today. I am fascinated by choices that we might make in a virtual environment – of size, shape, color, dress, action – that we would never do in this world. The obvious question perhaps is if the avatar is some symbolic representation of what we really want to be but can’t for one reason or another. The again, it just might be that in places like Second Life we can wear cool clothes that don’t cost very much and there is really no situation where we will be dressed “inappropriately.” But I return to the notion of an “intentional body” (as opposed to an accidental or inherited one). How much of our selves in the real world is determined by us and how much by our upbringing, education, career path, language, experiences, and mental and physical heights and limitations? Do these things matter in SL? I don’t know – but I figured one way to start thinking about these questions was to bring a bit of that world into this one.

Field Trips

It has been a while since I was on a class field trip. A number of people you are familiar with – some more than others – jostled together into an educationally rich space. The normal questions arise – did everyone make it from the last place to the new one? Are there certain areas we are allowed to go and other not? What the hell does this trip have to do with this class anyway? What surprises me is that I feel I am learning a great deal more about Second Life, and virtual worlds in general, by traveling in a pack then I did traveling solo. In almost every place we have visited someone outside of our group has commented on what a strange group of people we are. After the presentation of the avatars all of them make perfect sense to me – and I must admit I am used to seeing them – so to comment means that somehow we look different from other avatars that these folks encounter. Which I find odd. Why – given the choice – would you not dress as a hotdog, giant robot, pig, flame twirler, super villain, or ball of light? While I do see unique clothing, hair, and movements in the places I visit solo, I do not often run into dramatically unusual avatars. Is it just us, or does everyone go through the funky avatar stage before they settle down into a nice “human” looking avatar?

I must admit that I consider the “avatar” an evolutionary work in progress – never done. When I first entered the world I felt out of place because I was walking around in the free cloths, hair and skin. I felt that to join this world I needed to experience that part of it. And this is where we started the class – “here is some money now go and create an avatar.” Would the results have been different with no money? Could we have asked you to adapt the freebie stuff to your own look? Would we get different reactions traveling as a group? “My how – um – young you all are”? Is this how SL is set up – conformity in one way – buying stuff – but another kind of non-conformity – strange avatars? Is it part of this consumer-based SL culture that I feel the need to buy stuff just to fit in? Is this whole world really just a process of domestication and gentrification? Why do I keep longing for a virtual house as a place to put my stuff? Why, as Bob pointed out, do most places in SL look like suburbia?

But I digress. We have collectively visited 6 locations – a peaceful space resort where you can do Thai Chi, a zombie killing hut dangled above the ocean, Rivendell – sans Elrond, a dance club, a theatre complex and the NMC campus. While we did encounter the “you look strange” element in a few of these places we were only kicked out of one – the dance club. Why? I have no idea. An IM to the banner yielded no reply. But it did cause me to wonder about unspoken rules here in SL. Were there too many of us? Were we acting inappropriately? Did our host (who set up a blanket invitation on the events page by the way) not like how we were dressed? Until he replies we will never know. But it does tell me that I will occasionally transgress an unspoken pack and the result will be that I am locked out of certain areas of SL.

I have had other encounters at dance clubs that reinforced unspoken rules. The universal “Hello Derridada” when I enter a place with folks who all have their tip jars out. I was also told that I was “blocking my frame of reference” – which I suppose is a polite digital way of saying – “you are dancing too close to me you noob.” But dancing in general is an odd thing in SL. I am not sure that I can explain why I find it fun, but I do. I guess it is because it is a social event that I rarely partake of in the real world. In SL – I could care less what my Avi looks like. Plus he knows WAYYYYYY more dances then I do. There is also the banter. Folks tend to talk and riff on each other while dancing. Kind of like a free play zone. It’s hard to get this kind of activity going in RL with strangers. Plus, and this is where it is starting to feel odd – there is a certain “realness” to these encounters. Returning to a dance club I had been a week ago I was recognized and welcomed – not as a potential tipper – which I was – but perhaps a friend – or at the very least – someone to kill some time with. I need to investigate this more.

Interactive art

This is a quick post but here is an interesting place to visit - The Pencil Factory - some great interactive art projects. http://slurl.com/secondlife/The%20Port/31/66/26