DIGC335 - Character Creation and Inextricable Identity in the 'Real World'

As an individual who has spent large portions of his life probing and participating in varied virtual realms, I found myself acutely affected by Dibbell’s (1998) account of an aggravated sexual assault that took place in the world of LambdaMOO. I found the author’s interrogation of the ill-conceived divide between the virtual and the real, exampled by an examination of “netsex”, particularly pertinent to our tutorial discussions, resonating with my own notions of online identity.

During my years as a resident of Azeroth within the World of Warcraft (WoW), I was a socially active participant of a prominent guild. Within this guild, there were many I counted as close friends, and yet I knew nothing more about them than what was shared with me through a scrolling chat feed next to their chosen username. For me this wasn’t an issue, as the sincerity and authenticity of these users, combined with actions of “identity-in-practice” (Larsen 2008, pp.15), allowed me to form friendships just as real as those formed in a physical environment. Dibbell (1998) described my participation perfectly when stating that experiences within a virtual world are “neither exactly real nor exactly make-believe, but nonetheless profoundly, compellingly, and emotionally true.”

Of course role-playing games (RPGs) have a fantasy element, but I found that within WoW at least, those who wished to assume a false facade would do so within dedicated role-playing realms, with chat on my server closer to that of an IRC room. I encountered the odd “faker” (Larsen, pp.8-10), but these were easy to spot and ignore, especially with ever decreasing anonymity online (Fahey, 2010).

I believe that regardless of the realm we occupy our identity is a constant, and is inevitably imprinted in any form of character we create. The emotional anguish suffered by ‘exu’ as a virtual victim (Dibbell 1998) illustrates this inextricable identification, proving that our emotional engagement with virtual worlds may have deeper ties than we care to admit.

References:

Dibbell, J 1998, ‘A Rape In Cyberspace’, Julian Dibbell (DOT COM), weblog post, viewed 30 March 2014, <http://www.juliandibbell.com/articles/a-rape-in-cyberspace/>

Fahey, M 2010, ‘Blizzard's Real Name Forum Policy Has Fans In An Uproar’, Kotaku, weblog post, viewed 31 March 2014, <http://kotaku.com/5581209/blizzards-real-name-forum-policy-has-fans-in-an-uproar/>

Larsen, M C 2008, ‘Understanding Social Networking: On Young People’s Construction and Co-construction of Identity Online’, Department of Communication and Psychology, Aalborg University, Denmark

DIGC335 - If This is the Future, Where Are All the Cyborgs?

When first encountering 'Johnny Mnemonic' (Gibson 1988), my first  reaction was one of disbelief, stemming from my utter enjoyment of a prescribed course reading. Guns, cyborgs and ­­­futuristic technology in a post-industrial, ‘cyberpunk’ dystopia? Yes please! I pleasurably perused the ‘.pdf’ in an addictive manner easily mistakable for leisure, and for this incredibly engaging e-reading I must thank Graham.

While enjoyable, this was still an academic exercise and I found myself resonating with a number of tropes unique to ‘cyperpunk’ culture that were later defined for me in Tomas’ (2000) examination of ‘technicity’ in the Gibson canon. I found myself fixated on a central notion of Gibson’s (1988) work, and particularly focussed on it in Tomas’ (2000, p.176); the idea of the ‘technophilic body’, involving “aesthetic and functional transformations directed to the human body's surface and functional organic structure.” This fascinates me because I would love to see it become a reality but at the same time, I do not believe that it will.

During our class discussions of the ‘memex’ (Bush 1945) and subsequent discussions about technological prophecy, I’ve begun to formulate my own position on the matter. Using past technological advancement as a base, it is easy for those looking forward to become swept up in endless possibility, formulating a future that while feasible, becomes increasingly implausible as technology continues to advance. Forms of bodily modification, whether they be Bush’s (1945) notions of mind control or realisations of the ‘technophilic’ body (Gibson 1988, Tomas 2000), are indeed feasible with even current technology, but it seems that the consumerist nature of our society largely governs the direction of technological advancement, and, in my opinion, there is very little demand for such direct integration of technology.

Medical marvels such as the cochlear implant prove that we have the technology to begin realising the dreams of visionaries such as Bush or Gibson, yet I see no public outcry demanding further exploration of this avenue in ways closer to Tomas’ ‘technophilic body’ (2000, p.176). This could possibly be explained by cultural acceptance and the morality of modifying what it is to be human, but even if this were the case, there are many who act outside of common morality, and I believe we would be well on our way to ‘technicity’ by now if this were all that stood in the way. Of course I could simply be speaking from the pessimistic side of the prophetic coin and am open to debate on what the future may hold, while remaining quietly hopeful that I am wrong.

References:

Bush, V 1945, ‘As We May Think’, Atlantic Monthly, vol.176, no.1, pp.101-108

Gibson, W 1988, ‘Johnny Mnemonic’, Burning Chrome, Grafton, London, pp. 14-36

Tomas, D 2000, ‘The technophilic body: on technicity in William Gibson's cyborg culture’, in Bell, D and Kennedy, B (eds.), The Cybercultures Reader, Routledge, London, pp. 175-189