OK, so we have Foucault, Boellstorff's book's two first chapters and some basic concepts like: virtual, parallel, actual (worlds), techne, episteme and heterotopias—among others—and, of course, rambling in second life. I would like, additionally, to connect these concepts and experiences in SL with two other major—at least in my perspective—concepts: dialogism and telepresence, both pertinent for a discussion on digital aesthetics.
Perhaps I should start by establishing a simple, yet important, point which may contribute to the nature of my blogging activity in the next weeks in our 9726 course: I am interested in analysing digital aesthetics and dialogic structures, especially the role concerning subjectivity exchanges (and intersubjectivity) in the realm of digital information, to which participating in SL as a 'resident', an avatar (an ambassador of my self? an improved version of me? a deviated version, looking for a heterotopic home for him/me?) seems to be promissory.
Especially central to a discussion of the nature of the kind of aesthesia one may experience in forms of dialogic electronic art and therefore as a participant or resident in SL, is Bakhtin's Dialogism. "For [Mikhail] Bakhtin the aesthetic event implies the dialogic interaction of two distinct consciousnesses." (Eduardo Kac, Telepresence and Bio Art, Networking Humans, Rabbits and Robots, The University of Michigan Press, 2005, p. 113). Because dialogical aesthetics is not concerned with sensory cognition nor beauty but with intersubjectivity, the vast territories of subjectivity's exchange in SL, and the possibility of designing my own appearance/behaviour (though up to a certain finite point) through the interaction of the dynamic databases, and most important, the fascinating and unpredictable conversational interaction (reciprocal rhythms, body language, interruptions, change of course and flickering identities) as in 'a normal day in an avatar's life' in SL (chp. 1 in Booellstorff's book) might lead to engage us in the process of negotiating meanings, that is to say the truly dialogic calling of art.
It is in this context in which I wish to relate Foucault's heterotopias; after all, discourse, power and ethics are central to Foucault's thought. According to Philip Smith: "Foucault saw himself as an authority on the 'History of Systems of Thought' [...] Foucault argued that discourse was never free of power relations." (Cultural Theory, An Introduction, 21st Century Sociology, Blackwell Publishers, 2005, p. 118 - 119). Henceforth, Foucault's idea of discourses, subjectivity, even agency constructed by powerful but arbitrary cultural and historical forces, seems very appealing to me in Lacan's (Galicia) SL incursions. We read in Jay Miskowiec's translation of Foucault's Des Espaces Autres: "The Mirror functions as a Heterotopia [...] it makes this place that I occupy at the moment when I look at myself in the glass at once absolutely real, connected with all the space that surrounds it, and absolutely unreal, since in order to be perceived it has to pass through this virtual point which is over there. I consider SL to be not a mirror in the conventional way, but a highly technified digital distributing device for personal/avatar mirrors in real time attacking the idea of a unitary, sovereign actor. After all one builds his/her persona or avatar under any kind of deterred projected model; Lacan (Jacques), among others, had addressed these interesting possibilities referred to as decentering the subject.
In my first incursions in SL, I was fascinated with the possibilities of reinventing a different temporary appearance/identity paradigm. After all, under the dynamics of database mediation, depicting becomes second, behind reconfiguration. These properties plus the capabilities of reinventing the 'physical' environment (virtual, not actual, according to Boellstorff) depending on the quality of the interaction and intersubjective exchanging with us, the proliferation of discourses and flickering signifiers.
In an essay wrote for a past course I quoted Anna Munter's article "Digitality: Approximate Aesthetics:" "Life alone creates such zones where living beings whirl around, and only art can reach them and penetrate them in its enterprise of co-creation. This is because from the moment the material passes into sensation, as in a Rodin sculpture, art itself lives on in these zones of indetermination. They are blocs." This is Deleuze and Guattari's description of the grouping of sensations into affectual moments that occur in aesthetic experience. See G. Deleuze and F. Guattari, What is Philosophy?, H. Tomlinson translator, Columbia University Press, New York, 1994, p. 173-174. In this sense SL might be Blocland, we will see.
The manipulation and commodification of illusion (and delusion) is not inherent to digitality, but is extremely important and evident because, as Oliver Grau has stated, "the technological convergence of image and medium is driven by the desire of illusion, […] reflection on the applications of these technologies in virtual art reveals a hyperlogical and utopian quest for illusionism." (Oliver Grau, Virtual Art. From illusion to Immersion, MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, London, England, 2003, xii). I am just trying to outline some theoretical tasks or wish list to perform in the future SL diaries, I am presuming Lacan (Galicia) will be able, somehow, sometime, to 'conduct decentered-subject sessions' within SL, and proceed with some findings; after all he bears that absurd name thanks to my arbitrariness and sense of deviation and heterotopic humour.
One last reflection concerning Tom Boellstorff's idea on page 21 connects to the above paragraph, the idea of becoming an Age of Techne: essentially those (decentered) negotiations one can deal with in SL (in my first incursion I was offered kinky services from residents, made a couple of female friends (on-line) and performed a strange and private tarot session to a digital-rubber doll, lead to improving our techne and gradually as we become masters of the software, the awareness that the virtual is very true, that the virtual is not opposed to the real but to the actual, becomes a natural fact.
OK, sorry going on a bit longer than planned, but suddenly I find myself thinking more clearly with red hair and pale green pupils. Next time I will try my secret tiny robot ID.
Lacan G. / G. Toledo
Perhaps I should start by establishing a simple, yet important, point which may contribute to the nature of my blogging activity in the next weeks in our 9726 course: I am interested in analysing digital aesthetics and dialogic structures, especially the role concerning subjectivity exchanges (and intersubjectivity) in the realm of digital information, to which participating in SL as a 'resident', an avatar (an ambassador of my self? an improved version of me? a deviated version, looking for a heterotopic home for him/me?) seems to be promissory.
Especially central to a discussion of the nature of the kind of aesthesia one may experience in forms of dialogic electronic art and therefore as a participant or resident in SL, is Bakhtin's Dialogism. "For [Mikhail] Bakhtin the aesthetic event implies the dialogic interaction of two distinct consciousnesses." (Eduardo Kac, Telepresence and Bio Art, Networking Humans, Rabbits and Robots, The University of Michigan Press, 2005, p. 113). Because dialogical aesthetics is not concerned with sensory cognition nor beauty but with intersubjectivity, the vast territories of subjectivity's exchange in SL, and the possibility of designing my own appearance/behaviour (though up to a certain finite point) through the interaction of the dynamic databases, and most important, the fascinating and unpredictable conversational interaction (reciprocal rhythms, body language, interruptions, change of course and flickering identities) as in 'a normal day in an avatar's life' in SL (chp. 1 in Booellstorff's book) might lead to engage us in the process of negotiating meanings, that is to say the truly dialogic calling of art.
It is in this context in which I wish to relate Foucault's heterotopias; after all, discourse, power and ethics are central to Foucault's thought. According to Philip Smith: "Foucault saw himself as an authority on the 'History of Systems of Thought' [...] Foucault argued that discourse was never free of power relations." (Cultural Theory, An Introduction, 21st Century Sociology, Blackwell Publishers, 2005, p. 118 - 119). Henceforth, Foucault's idea of discourses, subjectivity, even agency constructed by powerful but arbitrary cultural and historical forces, seems very appealing to me in Lacan's (Galicia) SL incursions. We read in Jay Miskowiec's translation of Foucault's Des Espaces Autres: "The Mirror functions as a Heterotopia [...] it makes this place that I occupy at the moment when I look at myself in the glass at once absolutely real, connected with all the space that surrounds it, and absolutely unreal, since in order to be perceived it has to pass through this virtual point which is over there. I consider SL to be not a mirror in the conventional way, but a highly technified digital distributing device for personal/avatar mirrors in real time attacking the idea of a unitary, sovereign actor. After all one builds his/her persona or avatar under any kind of deterred projected model; Lacan (Jacques), among others, had addressed these interesting possibilities referred to as decentering the subject.
In my first incursions in SL, I was fascinated with the possibilities of reinventing a different temporary appearance/identity paradigm. After all, under the dynamics of database mediation, depicting becomes second, behind reconfiguration. These properties plus the capabilities of reinventing the 'physical' environment (virtual, not actual, according to Boellstorff) depending on the quality of the interaction and intersubjective exchanging with us, the proliferation of discourses and flickering signifiers.
In an essay wrote for a past course I quoted Anna Munter's article "Digitality: Approximate Aesthetics:" "Life alone creates such zones where living beings whirl around, and only art can reach them and penetrate them in its enterprise of co-creation. This is because from the moment the material passes into sensation, as in a Rodin sculpture, art itself lives on in these zones of indetermination. They are blocs." This is Deleuze and Guattari's description of the grouping of sensations into affectual moments that occur in aesthetic experience. See G. Deleuze and F. Guattari, What is Philosophy?, H. Tomlinson translator, Columbia University Press, New York, 1994, p. 173-174. In this sense SL might be Blocland, we will see.
The manipulation and commodification of illusion (and delusion) is not inherent to digitality, but is extremely important and evident because, as Oliver Grau has stated, "the technological convergence of image and medium is driven by the desire of illusion, […] reflection on the applications of these technologies in virtual art reveals a hyperlogical and utopian quest for illusionism." (Oliver Grau, Virtual Art. From illusion to Immersion, MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, London, England, 2003, xii). I am just trying to outline some theoretical tasks or wish list to perform in the future SL diaries, I am presuming Lacan (Galicia) will be able, somehow, sometime, to 'conduct decentered-subject sessions' within SL, and proceed with some findings; after all he bears that absurd name thanks to my arbitrariness and sense of deviation and heterotopic humour.
One last reflection concerning Tom Boellstorff's idea on page 21 connects to the above paragraph, the idea of becoming an Age of Techne: essentially those (decentered) negotiations one can deal with in SL (in my first incursion I was offered kinky services from residents, made a couple of female friends (on-line) and performed a strange and private tarot session to a digital-rubber doll, lead to improving our techne and gradually as we become masters of the software, the awareness that the virtual is very true, that the virtual is not opposed to the real but to the actual, becomes a natural fact.
OK, sorry going on a bit longer than planned, but suddenly I find myself thinking more clearly with red hair and pale green pupils. Next time I will try my secret tiny robot ID.
Lacan G. / G. Toledo
Comments