"The Precession of Simulacra" - Baudrillard

Summary
Published in 1985, "Simulcra and Simulation," is the work of French philospher Jean Baudrillard in which he describes a world dominated by mass media, images, and symbols.  In this world of hyperreality, the line between true and false is blurred to the point where truth ceases to exist.  Utilizing an extended metaphor of a map and its territory, Baudrillard illustrates how it is not longer necessary to have discovered a territory before creating its map.  Instead, there is a loss of abstraction as the lines between the map and the territory are blurred.  The "real" is thus produced through models of control that can be reproduced indefinitely while defying natural laws such as scope and depth.  This altered state of real is then dubbed as being "hyperreal." Baudrillard also explores the differences between representations and simulations, claiming that representations are the equivalent of their symbol and are thus real; whereas simulations completely absorb the representation and negate the symbol as having value, instead creating a new meaning.  Baudrillard concludes that there is an increasing concern regarding simulations and their effects, for the lines between real and hyperreal are blurred to the point where nothing is "real."

Inquiry:
According to Baudrilard, in the realm of the hyperreal everything is accounted for as all solutions are calculated and nothing is ever given the chance to develop naturally.  This calculated nature is reflected in our impatience of the unknown and now that we are armed with the capability to shape the future nothing happens solely because of fate.  As we are capable of controlling our own destiny, we are now able to change the things we don't like about ourselves.  For examples, take the recent new media phenomenon of editing photos, specifically altering our bodies in photos.  Magazine covers feature individuals who merely possess the framework of the "perfect," person, who is consequently stretched, shrunk, buffed, and shined to perfection.  While the model is a real person, the image that we see belongs to the realm of the "hyperreal," in that it was created in a world controlled by an infinite number of combinatorial models that mix and match to create the "perfect" body that we see.


Points to Ponder:

• Do we live in a hyperreal world? How much of what we see/experience is actually "real"?
• If all actions are calculated, has this created an increase in predictability?
• Businesses are now held more accountable for their creations because we expect their products to last longer. Who is held responsible when the system fails? How are we becoming increasingly dependent on corporations to fulfill our "real," expectations?
• Baudrillard utilizes the example of Disneyland in his "America," piece to show how it is a place of illusions, where happy endings do exist and dreams come true.  In this land of hyperreal, Disneyland masks the reality of what the United States actually looks like, and presents us with an opportunity to go back to the pure American dream that never happened.
• Is anything in Disneyland actually "real," or is it entirely invested in the "hyperreal"?

Continue Reading

"Panopticisim" - Foucault

"The Panopticon is a machine for dissociating the see/being seen dyad: in the peripheric ring one is totally seen without ever seeing; in the central tower one sees everything without ever being seen" (p.5)

Summary

In his article entitled "Panopticism," Michel Foucault describes the ultimate surveillance mechanism known as the panopticon and its subsequent impact on society.  Often utilized in prisons, the structure of the panopticon is effective in that the constant fear of being watched causes individuals to self-monitor their actions in fear of being caught.  

According to Foucault it is the ultimate "utopia of a perfectly governed city," (p. 4),  as the panopticon functions as a lab of power where society can be examined in its de-individualized form.  Through observations, one can become more efficient in how to best control society, and thus have the ability to understand what motivates individuals to do what they do.  As knowledge follows the advancement of power, the panopticon becomes the ultimate way of examining "power of mind over mind," as those who are in the outer ring of the panopticon self-monitor their thoughts and actions to appease the all-seeing eye that keeps watch.  Foucault concludes that the concept of the Panopticon can be applied to anything, for it is ultimately a discipline mechanism that has evolved from a model of surveillance through the ages to something that could ultimately form a disciplinary society.

Inquiry

While the Panopticon's creator Bentham utilized this design for buildings, Foucault explores how the Panopticon could be applied to any venture, where absolute power is focused and honed on those in the periphery ring.  He claims that Bentham:

"dreamt of transforming into a network of mechanisms that would be everywhere and always alert, running through society without interference in space or time," (p. 7). 

As a society we are becoming increasingly dependent on automatic forms of new media such as calender updates, e-bill reminders, and text messages that delve into our private lives and personal information. Take the example of e-bill reminders - why deal with the hassle of remembering to pay your bills when you can sign up for e-bills, which automatically deduct your monthly payments from your bank of choice and apply said credit to your account. In the new media age where identity theft is far too common, this reliance on programs to access our personal bank accounts to pay for services that automate our lives demonstrates how far the Panopticon has infiltrated our daily lives. We, the consumer are in the periphery ring, self-monitoring our actions by paying bills on time to avoid legal consequences. Giant corporations sit in the "tower," controlling how much services cost, when services must be paid for, and cracking down on those who do not comply. Those who occupy the tower are nameless faces to us, we just know that at the end of the month when we see that our cell phone bill and utilities were paid for the system works. We are completely at the mercy of those in the "tower," who power our lives but pay little attention to the automatic e-bill programs that silently siphon funds away to pay for our life expenses without creating a ripple in our fast paced lives.


Given that we are becoming increasingly reliant on these invisible mechanisms that power our lives, here are some points to ponder:

• As new media becomes increasingly automatic, and the world powers are grappling to create bylaws that govern new media use, how does the Panopticon model fit into the rampant growth of new media? 
• Following the structure of the Panopticon, where those in the periphery ring exist in individual cells constantly self-monitoring their actions to avoid being caught, and those in the tower exist to keep watch over the outer ring, who is in the "tower," of today's Panopticon regarding new media?
• Should there be rules and regulations citing how those in the "tower," must enforce their power to avoid a total invasion of privacy? 
• Does privacy exist in the Panopticon model?

Continue Reading

Mythinformation

Mythinformation Summary Winner wrote Mythinformation to try to highlight to the public the fact that the technological/ computer revolution is not really going to revolutionize the political and social structures of a country. Access to all this new information and technology is not immediately going to make the world a better place either. Winner calls “mythinformation the almost religious conviction that a widespread adoption of computers and communications systems along with easy access to electronic information will automatically produce a better world for human living. (592)” Many people who claim that there is going to be a computer revolution overlook the fact that the problems that computers are going to solve can’t be remedied by the computer. I think that the author’s audience was people who were for the “computer revolution.” He begins his article by building up the computer revolution, and then in the middle, phrases his argument in a way as to how these revolutionaries are misguided. He writes about how the idea of increasing access to information is supposed to enhance democracy, but the belief is misguided. Every day, people have access to more and more information, including through the television. Since the advent of the television, there has actually been a decline in the participation of voting, because many people don’t have a real connection to the candidates now. I felt like this author must have some type of history background simply based on the style of his writing. He started the article off by writing about typical revolutions in Europe, and the way he structured his arguments was much the way one would read a historical document. I didn’t get the feeling from him that he was saying, “I’m right, you’re wrong”, but rather that he was trying to correct misconceptions about this so-called “revolution.” I think that this author has his reputation at stake. He is going against public opinion, and can be seen as controversial, which can become a positive or negative thing. Maybe the author is seeking to be more famous by writing something that is against popular opinion. I truly think that the author is just trying to make people be more aware of the fact that improvement in technology does not necessarily equate to a better society. Inquiry I don’t think that just because we have more information available to society, we are going to automatically be better off. There needs to some kind of active involvement with the knowledge that we gain from all this new technology before we become better off. I could search the internet, and probably find instructions on how to build a computer. However, I don’t know how to follow the instructions because I am unfamiliar with computer lingo/ hardware/ etc. I first need to be taught these concepts before I can “work” with them. However, I can search the internet for a recipe to make a cake, and make a cake. The reason for this is ONLY because I have the prior knowledge of how to bake. If I had never baked before in my life, I probably wouldn’t be able to make a very good cake. Questions How (if at all) does availability of technology lead to a better democratic and/or social process? New means of communication (facebook, twitter, texting) have changed the way that people communicate with one another. Are these changes for the better or worse? Winner argues that technology isn’t really a great equalizer with big business and government gaining more power, while others keep the same amount of power or lose it. Can you think of examples where technology has actually leveled the playing field for those involved?

Continue Reading

The End Of Books?

Blogging Assignment 1 The End Of Books: Summary Coover argues that the invention of hypertext is changing the way that people are communicating in writing. He says that “with hypertext we focus, both as writers and as readers, on structure as much as on prose, for we are made aware suddenly of the shapes of narratives that are often hidden in print stories. (707)” He goes on further to describe how his students are now able to communicate and interact with one another when they are reading and reviewing one another’s written work. By using examples of how he teaches and defining unknown words (such as hypertext) this article can be read by multiple audiences. They don’t necessarily need to have a background in computers or technology. On page 709, Coover writes about how he “guessed” most of these theories before he even delved into the world of hyperspace. Most of his theories were correct, but the one that he says he could not have foreseen was “[hypertext] is a technology that both absorbs and totally displaces.” I think he is “warning” us that with the invention of new technology, the print media is going to be displaced due to hypertext. He is foreseeing print media (not specifically books) shifting online to the computer where people will be able to interact with the text and communicate with one another, unlike the print media where there is no interaction. As a teacher who created a class dealing with hypertext and this new form of media, I think that he wants people to realize (either his students, the administration, of the world in general) the importance of hypertext, and how it is going to change the way we communicate. Inquiry: Before I respond to the claim made by Coover, I just wanted to say that I felt deceived by the title of the article. The author didn’t talk at all about the end of books, or even truly talk about books in his article. He mentioned a new form of writing and communicating, but didn’t really come out and say, THIS IS THE END OF THE BOOK. I do agree that being able to communicate online and using the computer/hypertext have changed the way that we communicate. Look at the assignment that we are doing right now. We are all writing to one another, and yet never have to meet with one another. When I simply read the title of the article, I was saddened because there has been so much talk lately about the end of books. Last year, the Kindle was the number one selling product on Amazon for a year straight, and there seems to be a shift away from physical print media. I was talking with some friends about the kindle, and they love it. They told me that before, they didn’t read books that often, but now that e-books are cheaper and more portable, they are reading more often. I think that any device that is getting more people to read is awesome. For me though, I don’t actually asorb what I am reading as well if I read it on a computer screen compared to reading it in a book, plus I love to highlight, and I can’t do that. I am not against progress and all the really cool things that we can do online with the improvements in technology, but I don’t think that you will ever be able to convince me to read long articles or even books on a little computer screen. Questions Why do you think there is a shift away from physical books? Did you feel deceived by the title of the article? Why? Have we reached an “end of books” or a new form of books? What are the disadvantages to this shift to non-print media?

Continue Reading