> ! < on Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:21:03 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> [Augmentology] _A Warcry for Birthing Synthetic Worlds_ |
// thanx to pighed & second loop for exploring SL > because Second Life is the new Los Angeles. > specifically, Second Life 2006 = Los Angeles 1929. > people moved into SL for the same reasons people moved into the LA + is materialism a specter for SL ? for .. save that nobody 'moves' anywhere (everyone, in fact, is quite immobile: SL is to Los Angeles as masturbation is to sex with another). + you can't get shot in SL . you can't make love in SL . you can't "do" *anything* in SL . you can move your hands around on plastic, and type, and build scripts which result in a screen-based representation that can be 'navigated' and 'modified'. is this materialism missing the point .. ? or does SL require a kind of new-media litcrit to appreciate the depth of its imaginary .. ? + i.e. how does skinning an online social 'community' (such as a posting forum or email list) into 3D suddenly render it in the strongest terms as a 'world' ? + at its most bare, why does an illusionist lightshow suddenly deserve the term 'world' ? or even the parallel, 'metaphoric' or not, to an actual city .. ? -- even metaphorical, but apparently, not really for SL devotees -- >> what would happen if John Lennon's assassination were re-enacted in SL > > well, i spent time in a charles manson mansion. there was great > attention paid to the blood on the walls. the tools allowed that > paintjob and the culture framed the LA-style manson metaphor. I like this. What does it mean that there was great attention paid to the blood on the walls ? I am intrigued when the point arrives when 'real' actors will re-enact scenes from SL that are themselves re-creations from the real, influenced themselves by other media imaginaries (such as novels). This double twist of real / imaginary mediascapes will prompt a more deserving recognition of the integration of SL into 'world' and vice-versa. + point being that the 'metaphor' will only be transcended when a 'synthetic' or 'virtual' event ripples into the real, by way of its doubling (the synthetic event bearing a trace of the real to begin with, the latter which itself contains traces of the imaginary) . will this only: (1) take place with violence? i.e. is the greatest effect so far of 'virtual worlds' the highschool or college video-game inspired weapon massacre. Columbine, Dawson, etc. (I do not yet distinguish between SL and a 'game', for the world itself may be something of a language game, np. Wittgenstein) (2) take place with economic and energy effects? i.e. that SL requires energy to operate, a technical backbone; as noted one can make 'money' in SL; of course SL costs money, is corporate, and generates revenue for its corporate parents; also SL reduces time spent on other activities, so it has traceable 'economic' affects in this way by making a large number of bodies immobile, like the noted cases of World of Warcraft addiction .. point being, will SL only have 'real' effects in this manner ? (3) addiction . i.e. will SL, developing point 2, leave its most lasting impression in the addiction of bodies to screen-based interactions to the point where one's imaginary is fully translated into a new metaphysics of the digital, a 'world' existing only via electricity and light diodes. (4) art / politics i.e. for surely there must be art. and surely SL might (oh, we hope) raise the specter of the Declaration of Cyberspace (in a decentralized, FLOSS variant), of the Netizen, etc etc, now that we can wiggle 3D bodies around and make it seem-so-real. and this might all bleed into the Real, like we hoped blogging would somehow affect the US election(s) and beat Bush with the 'tech-arts-blog-savvy' vote. Is this still all too new .. or is it still all missing the point, and SL serves more as a pt. (3), an ultimate addiction / distraction that conveniently serves to immobilize bodies+minds while forces concerned with plundering the planet's resources strip us all bare while accelerating global theotechnical conflict. If there is worldwide ecological meltdown, will it matter for SL ? perhaps only for the (1) sustenance of the connected bodies & (2) electricity supply . _ or will conscientous SL/ers take to rendering SL as barren as the Real? .. or will SL really become that dreamed-of, Hollywood-stylized Matrix..? a true escape from the planet's slow failure as it activates its cleaning system to rid itself of the human virus ? -- which will all be much easier if we are sitting targets.. sitting ducks, so to speak (metaphorically, of course) <!/g> > ok; i published a book this spring on my adventures in SL - "I, Avatar, > The Culture and Consequences of Having a Second Life..." \ > http://boar.com/books/avatars > its got lots of pictures.. portraits, more acurately. > > - mark stephen meadows / pighed <...> . . tobias c. van Veen -----------++++ ! http://www.quadrantcrossing.org -- McGill Communication & Philosophy resistance . through . rhythm . ||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||| # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org