I also appologise for how much reading you have to do on this blog, I didn’t realise how many entries I had written for the major project until I was editing them all! There are eleven of them all up, in case you didn’t notice, starting with ““What’s in a Name?” And So My Second Life Begins…” and finishing with “My Second Life Comes to an End.”

To make things easier I suggest clicking on the seperate catagories to the right of the page to seperate the entries from the major project and the reading journal. It also means you can read them in order too.

Goodluck with the new year and hopefully I see you about!

Jamie xx

While I did feel I experienced some amazing artistic endevours, I found general second life to be a little lacking. Even though I was sceptical about joining SL, I secretly thought it may become my new favourite place. However, at times I found myself forcing engagement and participation. Othertimes, when engaged, my internet would lag and the world would loose me.

Having said that, I am particularly glad that I chose SL as my subject for this assignment and I guess I could say I would rather be a “faker” than inexperienced (not that I feel that SL is faking at all). I do feel I have a much more informed opinion of the world and did learn a lot during my [short] time there.

While I began my experience thinking that SL is merely Baudrillard’s simulacrum realised, I soon learnt that “people’s experiences and memories in a virtual world are as real as any other, as real as a telephone conversation” (Freeman in Banjo 2008, p.1). But even when one is on the telephone there is one inescapable truth; you can never forget RL; No matter how much you try, you can never escape your first life.

Being a part of SL has definately been interesting though, because it made me realise that it is changing some issues in the real world. This can be seen in how SL and virtual worlds are helping change definitions of copyright. But again, first life is never escapable and many modern issues are prevelant in-world. SL mimics RL as consequently fosters individualism and consumerism.

To me, SL is most effective when used as an art space. Only in a virtual world is one able to let go of the restraints of reality to delve deeply into a critique of it. That, combined with some amazing artistic ability, allows for truly unique and innovative art to grow. This is the one area of SL that will continue to excite and inspire me; I will definately return to SL for the sake of art.

This is not where SL is most effective for community as a whole however, with the fact that it can breakdown social barriers for those in need being its best asset. While for many it is impossible to escape the stigma of SL, it allows people with disabilities (both mental and physical) to experience and socialise when they may not be able to. It can also be beneficial in situations such as homosexuality in small towns. Because of this SL is a real benefit to those in a difficult social situations.

I am thankful that I ventured into this whole new world, but I am also thankful that it is over for now the pressure I experienced to maintain my SL is dropped, I may just be able to enjoy it casually… rather casually, I think!

And to finish I leave you with some photos from my trip in world and beyond…

My visiting Egypt. Being worshiped was definately a plus.

Me at stonehenge (above) and me floating at stonehenge (below).

And finally, me sitting on a dead bird, like you do.

References:

Banjo, D 2008, ‘RL recession could fuel virtual boom’, Slnn.com, http://slnn.com/article/recession-fuels-virtual, viewed October 25th 2008.

The Yes Men are a group of activists who “agree” their way to the top. They use culture jamming to conduct high-profile hijinks to “provide a public glimpse at the behind-the-scenes world of business” (‘Latest Hijinks’ on The Yes Men n.d.).

By creating elaborate hoax sites that mimic the real websites of the companies they wish to target, they are able to accept invitations sent to them to appear on television shows and at conferences as “representatives” of these companies. They describe this process as “identity correction” (‘Frequently Asked Questions’ on The Yes Men n.d.). Their proceeding satirical statements as these representatives are often degrading to workers, generally shocking or dream senarios that many would like the companies to take on.

Their first prank was conducted in 2000 and was an attack at George W. Bush’s presidential campaign. They established the site www.gwbush.com to help draw attention to discrepancies on the actual Bush presidential site. Angering Bush so much that when asked about it he commented “there ought to be limits to freedom” (‘The Yes Men’ 2008).

In 2003 a film was made with the same title, outlining some of the hijinks that The Yes Men conduct. The film “follows a couple of anti-corporate activist-pranksters as they impersonate World Trade Organization spokesmen on TV and at business conferences around the world” (‘Movie’ on The Yes Men n.d.).

There is also a full colour scrapbook published about them titled The Yes Men: The True Story of the End of the World Trade Organization. It “follows the Yes Men’s attempts to get experts to notice that they aren’t WTO representatives” (‘Book’ on The Yes Men n.d.).

The Yes Men have impersonated people from the World Trade Organization, McDonald’s, Dow Chemical, BP, Captian Euro, Cato Institute, ExxonMobil, HUD, WTO and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. They see themselves as working for the good of the public and say that ”a person (male or female) becomes a Yes Man by exposing, perhaps deviously, the nastiness of powerful evildoers” (Frequently Asked Questions on The Yes Men n.d.).

References:

The Yes Men n.d., http://theyesmen.org, viewed November 6th 2008.

‘The Yes Men’ 2008, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yes_Men, viewed November 6th 2008.

It did not matter if it was my flailing internet connection, my housemate teasing me or a nagging bladder, RL continued to penetrate. Not only that but it also set agendas for the way my avatar acted/dressed and my in-world conversations and most of the time I wished I could experience the things I was doing in SL in RL. RL is inescapable. Jenkins (2007) sums it up best when he writes:

The last several decades of observation of the digital world teaches us that the digital world is never totally disconnected from the real world. Even when we go onto the digital world to “escape” reality, we end up engaging with symbolic representations which we read in relation to reality. We learn things about our first lives by stepping into a Second or parallel life which allows us to suspend certain rules, break out of certain roles, and see the world from a fresh perspective. More often, though, there are a complex set of social ties, economic practices, political debates, etc. which almost always connects what’s taking place online to what’s going on in our lives off line.

I very much doubt that full immersion will ever be a prevelant occurence, even if the technology exists. People like being aware that when they become part of a virtual world that the RL is still there, and I believe people will never fully let go of that. Virtual worlds are an escape, but the whole world does not want to run away completely.

There are those out there who may disagree, with virtual worlds such as SL being the perfect outlet for those faced with difficultly in RL, such as homosexuality in a small town and disabilities, both social, mental and physical. For example:

Chartrooms (sic) played important functions for queers who lived in small towns or in conservative regions of the country where there were little or no chances to socialize with others who shared their sexual preferences. Entering into a virtual world (even one as simple as the early chat rooms) allowed them to begin to explore aspects of their sexual identity that they could not yet act upon in their First Lives. Through this process, they developed the self confidence necessary to come out to their friends and family, they felt some connection to the realm of queer activism, and they made a range of other life-changing choices (Jenkins 2007).

It can also allow for a breakdown of traditional barries of contact such as space and time that see new forms of support growing from these technologies. While I still believe that total immursion is not in our future, the validity of places such as SL as an outlet for these people is quite apparent.

But still, as I wander the scapes of SL, I cannot help but wonder instead about my plans for the weekend. So it seems even if I occupy the second space, my mind lingers elsewhere…

References:

Jenkins, H. 2007, ‘How Second Life Impacts Our First Life…’, Confessions of a aca-fan: the official weblog of Henry Jenkins, http://www.henryjenkins.org/2007/03/my_main_question_to_jenkins.html, viewed October 14th 2008.

Brophy is here to tell us that really, they don’t. In fact, he writes that ”your lounge room is thoroughly drab. Your back yard is a yawning expanse of crap. And your kitchen &endash; so warm and close to your early morning esprit &endash; is oppressively normal.”

Just because you are an artist and a DJ does not, in Brophy’s mind, give you the right to boor the pants off everyone around you just because your work is “‘boyond painting”. Instead it is important to remember that video does not capture reality, nor your internal vision:

That record button is not a psychic link to your mind-blowing perception of the world. It just records what’s in front of the lens – end of story. You simply have not thought about what it is you put in front of the camera before you shoot. Worse – you can’t sort the shit from the shinola when you move into your exciting digital edit suite.

Basically his rant is attacking the ability of new media technologies to allow everyone to video post without thought… and call it art. It degrades the institution of cinema, seeing a wave of “wannabes who make the worst post-Clerks crud imaginable, but which in each director’s eyes is something sublimely above all the other crud.”

The plethora of video diaries, journals and impressions just aren’t worth sharing. No major statement is being made, you aren’t breaking boundries or creating something new says Brophy… you’re just boring. “Enough with boring video artists. Enough with boring video art curators. Enough with boring video art.”

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should!

References:

Brophy, P. 2006, ‘Singapore Biennale 2006′, Stuff, originally published in Flash 2006, Melbourne, http://www.philipbrophy.com/projects/rstff/BoringVideoArt_A.html, viewed 30th October 2008.

Recently at a conference in London titled Virtual Worlds, talk turned towards a similar topic when the current economic state was brought up (Banjo 2008, p.1). It seems many are looking to platforms such as SL as being the future of business, with one panel being dubbed “Virtual Goods: the next big business model” (Banjo 2008, p.1). There appeared to be general agreement from the panel that the decrease in the economy will see a growth of virtual goods.

This suggests to me that the capitalist mindset is deeply imbedded within SL, with Rohan Freeman, CEO of Sine Wave Company (which is a prominent animation supplier within SL), commenting that “People’s experiences and memories in a virtual world are as real as any other, as real as a telephone conversation. Their desire for goods which enhance those experiences and capture those memories is a huge market” (Freeman in Banjo 2008, p.1).

While personally this strong consumerist attitude worries me, I cannot help but think that virtual goods could be a good answer to the consumerist desire during an economic crisis. “In a similar way to the growth of Hollywood during the great depression, we could see a much larger adoption of virtual worlds like Second Life, and purchases of virtual goods, instead of the purchase of more expensive real world experiences and items” (Banjo 2008, p.2).

On the other hand I can’t help but ask why this consumerst mindset is so strong that it even filters through into virtual worlds? Instead of encouraging this way of thinking, why can’t we see a promotion of experience rather than monetary value and stuff? This saddens me; even though I have some amazing experiences in-world, I cannot help but feel a little repelled in the fear that this mentality will filter furthur and effect me.

References:

Banjo, D 2008, ‘RL recession could fuel virtual boom’, Slnn.com, http://slnn.com/article/recession-fuels-virtual, viewed October 25th 2008.

Palante (1909) describes individualism as “the sentiment of a profound, irreducible antinomy between the individual and society.” That is; nurturing a individualistic nature highlights a tension between what is right for the self and what is right for society, or what I can do for myself and what I can do for society. Individualism grows from a hostility, disdain and mistrust of the organised society the person is forced to live, and to escape the individual desdires to “escape from it and withdraw into oneself” (Palante 1909).

This is particularly interesting because I do not believe it acuretly describes the individualism we experience today. It does not appear to develop from a mistrust or a disdain of society; merely through the identification of different networks.

So as I guide myself around the amazing landscapes of SL, I cannot help but wonder whether this hyper-world is really the poster-child for a social, community based experience, or rather promoting an individualistic and selfish outlook towards society. As I sit in my room, away from my fellow housemates and tend to my SL avatar, I cannot help but feel that Palante describes some truth. “Above all, it is the profound sentiment of the “uniqueness of the I,” of that which despite it all the I maintains of unrepressible and impenetrable to social influences” (Palante 1909).

Tocqueville (in Bellah 1986) describes indidualism as the tendancy of the citizen to isolate themself from the “mass of his fellows” and to “withdraw into the circile of family and friends.” This individual leaves the greater society to its own devices, owe nothing to anybody, see destiny purely in their own hands and forget their ancestory history. He sums it up quite eloquently when he says that “each man is forever thrown back on himself alone, and there is danger that he may be shut up in the solitude of his own heart.”

In this updated account of individualism we can see SL really harbouring these qualities – in fact, it comes at the rejection of the larger society to engage with another. However, I believe a new definition of society is growing. While I do not think the citizen should ignore ones society completely, we cannot ignore the fact that games such as SL see a rise in collective play and a breakdown of space and time barriers, which suggests a shift in the definition of society.

So while much of the rhetoric involved talks of individualism as the downfall of modern society, I would suggest that a dual relationship exists, much like that of the local and the global. Abiven & Labidoire (n.d. p.1) describe SL as moving beyond individualism and into the realm of space. To them, SL is, first and foremost, a meeting place.

Perhaps most interestingly, Abiven and Labidoire (n.d. p.1) describe SL as a place to: “discovering other people in all of their diversity and uniqueness: definite enthusiasm was expressed in being able to go beyond borders, discover different cultures and tastes as well as being able to discover affinities with a resident from the other side of the world.”

I guess the real question that arises is; is this isolated exploration into the lives of others promoting unkempt individualism, or can it help encourage a social outlook to the user?

References:

Abiven & Labidoire n.d. ‘Second Life perceived by its residents…’ in Repères, http://www.reperes-secondlife.com/image/SL_perceived_residents.pdf, viewed 6th October 2008.

Bellah 1986, Individualism and Commitment in American Life, University of California, Santa Barbara, http://www.robertbellah.com/lectures_4.htm, viewed 6th October 2008.

Palante 1909, ‘Anarchism and Individualism’ in La Sensibilité individualiste, Paris, Alcan, translated by Mitchell Abidor for marxists.org, http://www.marxists.org/archive/palante/1909/individualism.htm, viewed 6th October 2008.

Bell began recording every aspect of his life over nine years ago (seven when the article was written). Bell uses his custom built software “MyLifeBits.” to archive a copy of absolutely everything (and I mean everything!) he comes across. Bell uses cameras, microphones, scanners and computer technology to compile a comprehensive archive that includes complete text and audio annotations, search and hyperlinks. As Thompson (2006) writes:

Every piece of email he sends and receives every document he types, every chat session he engages in, every Web page he surfs, a copy is scooped up and stashed away. MyLifeBits records his telephone calls and archives every picture – up to 1,000 a day – snapped by his automatic “SenseCam,” that device slung around his neck. He has even stowed his entire past: The massive stacks of documents from his 47-year computer career, first as a millionaire executive then as a government Internet bureaucrat, have been hoovered up and scanned in. The last time he counted, MyLifeBits had more than 101,000 emails, almost 15,000 Word and PDF documents, 99,000 Web pages, and 44,000 pictures.

An extension of Vannevar Bush’s 1945 Memex vision, Bell describes the lifelogging experiment as “evolutionary”, giving his mind the capability to play and be extra creative. But seeming less like an example of our utopian future, Bell appears to be trapped to his invention like a drug addict to smack. When faced with the possibility of stopping the technology, Bell admits it will be like having a lobotomy.

To some this project is dangerous, and surprisingly Bell himself agrees; “Bell suspects MyLifeBits might be slowly degrading his real, carbon-based brain’s ability to remember clearly. When you have an outboard mind doing the scut work, you tend to get out of practice” (Thompson 2006).

Thompson (2006) writes that “knowing that everything is being logged might actually turn us into different people.” Do projects like this change the nature of being a human? But is it just changing us in similar ways to how the invention of the printing press changed us? Is it just letting us think in new and different ways? Apparently “projects like MyLifeBits can actually improve mental health by freeing our brains to be more productive and more creative” (Thompson 2006).

While I have never been one to shun new technology and the possibilities of new cognitive processes, there seems to be an extremity to Bell’s project that sits uneasily. Perhaps this is the way of the future, but just not in the way Bell experiences it.

References:

MyLifeBits Project 2008, http://research.microsoft.com/barc/MediaPresence/MyLifeBits.aspx, viewed October 23rd 2008.

Thompson, C 2006, ‘The man with perfect memory: profile of Gordon Bell in Fast Company,’ Collision detection, http://www.collisiondetection.net/mt/archives/2006/12/a_head_for_deta.html, viewed October 23rd 2008.

However, It seems that no matter where I go the streets are deserted. Perhaps I am the only one who believes “Socrates Cafe: a place to discuss philosophy” to be a fantastic idea. Actually, I lie; I did [accidently] stumble into a sex store of some sort and there appeared to be people there…

Looking at the events suggested by SL I find myself looking at a SL installation art piece that absolutely took my breath away, and continues to take still:

The space is one of the most amazing art spaces I have ever seen! What I like most about it is that the artist is free to explore reality without actually conforming to the constraints of it. The exhibition allows the viewer to walk through walls, fly to remote areas and to float into various positions, manipulating the avatar body. Just like the realms of science fiction, art in the second life allows us critique reality through the fantasy (Tofts 2003, p.7).

Described as a collaboration between artists, scientists, philosophers, builders and script writers, Spacexcape questions everything I know about reality through “contemporary art, scientific equations, logics, planetarium, surveillance, parachute jump, backgammon, chess, majong, video, film, kinetic [and] space” (‘Project’ on Raimes n.d.).

But while I find myself completely enthralled with the piece, I cannot help but compare it to RL; ultimately I keep thinking how cool it would be if I could actually experience this piece in real life. As much as I can question reality with an installation such as this, I cannot escape it completely and my “exit strategy” (Tofts 2003, p.4) still exists. Again, I am brought back to the simulacrum; how can I be said to have forgone reality for the copy, if I still maintain a reliable distinction between the two? How immursive does the immursive have to be to truely propel us into the hyperreal? 

References:

Raimes, A. n.d., Spacexcape, http://spacexcape.com, viewed October 16th 2008.

Tofts, D. 2003, “The World Will Be Tlön”: Mapping the Fantastic on to the Virtual, http://www.swinburne.edu.au/sbs/media/staff/tofts/essays/borges.pdf, viewed October 16th 2008.

The fantastic, Tofts asserts (p.4), is where “we don’t need anyone to welcome us to the real world, since we reliably know what it is and what it is not.” When the exit to fantasy is blocked and we can no longer distinguish between what is fantasy and what is real, we enter “the desert of the real” (Tofts p.5). It is a total map that covers reality.

Continuing into a description of the short story “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius” by Jorge Luis Borges. In the story there is evidence starts propping up of a place that does not actually exist:

“As with many of Borges’ stories, “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius” begins with a found object. It is a single volume, number 46 to be precise, of a pirated edition of the Anglo-American Cyclopaedia, published in New York in 1917. The volume is unremarkable in every way, apart from four extra pages that are contained in this singular volume only and not in any other copy of this particular edition. The superfluous pages contain a detailed account of a previously unknown and uncharted region of Asia Minor called Uqbar.”

This use of fantasy to critique the world is common in science fiction. But this story is not one sided, and is filled with literary nuances and there are many things that can’t be “are a number of things in this fiction that can’t be simply written off as allegorical parallel (that is, the interpretation of Tlön as metaphor, as the projection of an ideal world)”. Tlön, as a fake, is effecting the “real” world. The real and the fake are converging.

He then continues to decribe an article in the Age by Guy Rundle, which was writen in the style of Borges. It gave an account of a visit to Melbourne by Borges in 1938. The visit, Tofts assures us, never happened.

Later, after reading the appology printed by the Age for not stipulating that the article was a hoax, Tofts continues to investigate furthur in the hope to disprove the trip in the first place. After a succession of failures he gives up the ghost, realising that it is impossible to prove that Borges wasn’t in Australia at that time.

Post-scriptually Tofts offers his last twist and describes how on the morning of returning to Sydney, he recieves an annonymous post. In it there is a picture of Borges, leaning on on a Melbourne tree with a plque that clearly contains the State of Victoria coat of arms…

References:

Tofts, D. 2003, “The World Will Be Tlön”: Mapping the Fantastic on to the Virtual , http://www.swinburne.edu.au/sbs/media/staff/tofts/essays/borges.pdf, viewed October 16th 2008.