the virtual and the actual

by justinsprague

1) Rajchman discusses the metaphor of the virtual landscape as a house (architecture, construction, etc.), noting, “the virtual house becomes here the house of this less grounded condition of image and body, as though it were the house for an unreal, disembodied mind linked to all other in a virtual realm” (118). I wonder, since the ‘house’ is being reimagined and appropriated to explain the virtual, if the virtual house can then be used to explain community arrangements in the physical world? Reading this made me think of ‘Houses’ from Ball culture (e.g. Paris is Burning). I keep churning these ideas of de-centered specificity, virtual house, and increased possibility as being really useful vehicles to apply to concepts in areas like identity, area, or mixed-race studies.

2) With de Souza e Silva and Sutko in mind (specifically page 34), I wonder where the psychological interacts with the physical and virtual. Specifically thinking about location based technologies like Whrrl or foursquare, when I log on I can edit my location and provide details or see my friends details. Their interaction with the virtual then has the possibility to steer my interaction with the physical. My friend saying I got this great croissant at so-and-so deli may influence my choice to go there, when I may have never entered this deli without them. They mention this with potential, but I’m interested in the implications of making choice (or they might use actualization) tangible/mappable like they are with physical and virtual.

3) While reading Tierney’s discussion of temporarily starting on page 138, I am brought back to a question that was lingering from last week, which was about the ways in which we can imagine physical topography maps on top of digital topographies. added to this, I’m interested to explore how time in both physical and digital interact and what that would look like mapped out.

Space: Something able to be occupied; is layered based on context, and the same space can be occupied in multiple ways

Week 8: Tierney, Rajchman, de Souza e Silva and Sutko

by jessicavooris

This week I should have started with the de Souza e Silva and Sutko reading, but instead read backwards, which is probably part of the reason that I found myself lost in the discussions of the virtual and the actual seemingly without anything concrete to ground me.  However, re-reading I think I have a better grasp on the concepts, though I am still struggling a bit to keep a hold on them.

1) In the “Theorizing Locative Media” article, de Souza e Silva and Stuko discuss the ways in which “information as space” and “space as information” are always in a process of becoming, through the process of actualization (37).  Thinking about space as information and vice-versus reminded me of the Manovich (?) article we read and the discussion of architecture as information and “augmented space.” de Souza e Silva and Stuko further the conversation around the link between technology interfaces and how we understand the world around us.  How is our concepts around space influenced by our ideas around knowledge/information? We are said to be living in an “information age” after all.

2) I am interested in the concepts of becoming and the potential and hope that comes up in discussion this evening.  “Thus actualization is not a making-real. The real already exists. Actualization is rather one instantiated, particular, immanent, and imminent configuration of the multiplicity of the potential.” (de Souza e Silva and Sutko, 35).  ”

3) Throughout class we have been talking about the relationship between space and time.  I was interested in Rajchman’s exploration of our concept of time, and our experience of it as a duration, ‘an endlessly flowing process” (138) and the connection between time, the virtual and memory.  Rajchman writes, “Henri Bergman proposed memory to be a virtual image that coexists with the perception of the object.” (35).  How can we extend the conversation around the virtual and memory to some of the other discussions we have had around space and bodies moving through space?

definitions–

space: “people do not simply operate in space; space also operates on people. The container/thing contained cannot be separated.” (de Souza e Silva and Sutko) There is a relation between actual and virtual space.

The Virtual

by felixburgos

1) In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects in the study of space is how different social practices affect (and are affected) within the interaction of space. One of question that comes to my mind is, in the context of location-based technologies, how does spatial experience change in the process of “actualizing information as space and space as information”? (de Souza & Sutko, 2011, p. 37). For example, the authors explain that LBSs, such as WikiMe, influence how a user thinks about space and how users experience location augmented by LBSs. Therefore, we would be facing the idea that social practices such as tourism and entertainment suffer a modification because of the interference of location-based technologies. In other words, could we think that nowadays the ideas we have in relation to the physical world (represented in cities, monuments, museums, etc.) would be conditioned by the interaction between the virtual and the physical? Would the “market” of entertainment and tourism should change the way they offer places to visit?

2) Just a thought…. Imagination! Perhaps, that is one of the core components of the virtual. I cannot stop thinking about imagination while reading Rajchman’s reflection on the virtual house. Deleuze (as explained by de Souza & Sutko) considers that “the real encompasses both our actual world and the potential to produce new realities” (p. 33). If we use the metaphor of the body (and the brain) to explain the way technological devices work, then the mind and imagination becomes the counterpart of the virtual. Rajchman states that the virtual “thinks in terms of arrangements of body and soul, irreducible to any such symbolic order, any such law of possibilities” (p. 120) and for that reason we could consider the virtual can only be compared to processes of the mind that have certain potential to be part of the real. Therefore, the virtual might not have limits, but it is interesting to consider that the devices that allow the virtual to become actual might impose some boundaries.

3) Tierney explains that “a more accurate description of the virtual, then, is as the nexus of an entire set of cognitive, social, and material activities” (p. 137). I think that this is does not only point out at the notion of the virtual but also at the notion of culture and social experience. Therefore, does culture enter into the field of the virtual? Could we say that culture helps to determine the way in which the virtual emerges or the virtual shapes and modifies culture?

Definition:

The virtual space: it is the field where multiplicities of possible worlds can be actualized simultaneously.

Virtual as Actual and Vice Versa.

by alyssaneuner

Arguably, the virtual world is no longer simulacra – an escape from reality. It can at times represent a hyperreal situation in which the virtual becomes similar to that of Las Vegas. In regards to the creation of digital/virtual graffiti there is an app that allows you to share your graffiti with members of the community. You can tag any place with whatever image you so desire. Along these lines I would have enjoyed a more intense or in-depth discussion about dynamic locative maps and how they work in connection to reality and potential changes to maps. I think this is an important step in understanding interactivity with digital spaces as well as interactivity with the physical spaces surrounding us. I am also a little hung up on this idea of the virtual and the actual via Aristotle. I don’t know how convinced I am of this considering Deleuze’s argument that the virtual is actually real and is a state of potential.

I like the idea that is brought up in “The Virtual House” (originating from Deleuze) that the virtual essentially “makes visible something intolerable for which there existed no present manner of thinking” – in relation to “time images” of postwar films (117); this idea that something is virtual because it allows for a better understanding or new way of thinking is something that I’d like to play with or push further.  Also the idea of a virtual house, one that does everything for the inhabitants of such a place reminds me of a film called ‘Smart House’ where the house turns against those inhabiting it. Essentially treating those who own the house like intruders. Who is to say that continuing on with virtual lifestyles is going to make a positive impact?

Virtuality does not exist tangibly and is immaterial and yet is considered real and having affect. Virtuality and space are similar in this aspect – both not being tangible but having an affect on those who occupy (given that the virtual is constantly being occupied because it is not limited to the digital). My question here is as follows: Is Tierney saying that the virtual also exists on multiple planes or through different zones of occupation/spaces/objects?

Definitions:

Space – (cont’d) Sharing similar qualities with the virtual; intangible and immaterial yet having an affect on the material/tangible.

Let’s Talk Virtual.

by cassygriff
  1. I’m still working/thinking through the concepts and ideas I posed in my digital space presentation and upon rereading de Souza e Silva and Sutko, I’m now considering how the body can be understood as an interface. As the authors explain in their discussion of Deleuze and the virtual as potentiality, “[t]he choice of interface itself actualizes certain potentialities and leaves others virtual” (33). If we think of the body as an interface (this reminds me of an earlier discussion about experience mediated through embodiment), does that also mean we necessarily leave other potentialities virtual? So, to draw from my own work, if the goal of weight loss relies on the body as a interface (the object through which information on diet, exercise, motivation, etc. can be read, what potentialities get left unfulfilled?
  2. I’m grateful for the impetus to read Rajchman a second time, especially his discussion of possibility and specificity. While the virtual house’s possibility does not preclude specificity or vice versa, I wonder if that is also true of the body. He explains that “[i]ncreased possibility comes at the price of reducing specificity,” which, if I apply this concept to the bodies of fat women, seems to make sense (119). That is, the possibilities read into the fat body presuppose the fat body as malleable and without specificity (an amorphous blob, if you will. Please don’t. Ever.) but as it approaches its potential, its possibilities decrease to the point that it becomes an example of a very specific type of body, a “normal” body, a “thin” body.
  3. Backing away from my project for a moment, I’d like to think about de Souza e Silva and Sutko’s discussion of WikiMe and “distance as the logic for organizing entries” (28). The authors argue that this means that “[p]hysical space, represented by distance, becomes the primary interface for that information. Can we consider space outside of distance? For example, the primacy of distance shifts when we consider the facts of physical barriers (walls, one-way streets, wheelchair inaccessible pathways) between two things that supposedly are closest to one another. What happens when the logic of “from Point A to Point B” does not work?

Definitions:

Body: The interface through which we interact with the world

Weekly Post – Week 8

by alexcarson

1: Rajchman talks about the concept of the “virtual home” and the difference between the virtual and the actual. While he stresses that they are not dichotomous, exclusive terms, he doesn’t touch on the notion of the virtual dictating the actual. There is a new practice in architectural and historical communities to create computerized, virtual tours of landmarks and historic sites that no longer exist. In these cases, could it be argued that what we believe as being the “actual” site becomes influenced directly by the “virtual” decisions made by the digital architects?

2: On the reverse side of question 1, Rachjman discusses the “house with the most possibilities” on page 119 (PDF page 5), and states that contrary to the idea of the house being empty, it allows for the greatest number of singular points. When he discusses the virtual house in this manner, I think of MySpace, Facebook, and virtually every website promoting its ability for customization and control. Thus, is the appeal of the “virtual” home – be it a “smart” house or a website one considers a home of sorts – the idea of having control over one’s own space? Is that perhaps the driving force behind human fascination with the concept of the virtual?

3: Maybe this comes from my general understanding of the internet and how I’ve come to conceptualize it, but why is there so much time and effort dedicated to trying to define the “virtual” and particularly against the “actual”. Everything described as “virtual” is as important a part of our lives as physical objects and phenomena, so is this distinction relevant or even useful, particularly in an integrated world like our own?

Definition:

Virtual: Rajchman defines the virtual as the mobilization of possibilities and potential into an organized, if not determined, plan.

Cartesian: Cartesian logic, which I have followed through the course, has a primary role in this chapter as it relates to the separation between the physical and the mental, which in this case I believe to be the “actual” and the “virtual”.

Book Review – Access Contested

by alexcarson

Book Link: http://web.idrc.ca/openebooks/507-6/

In the last several years digital rights have become increasingly prominent in American political and social discourse, but the debate is far from new. While acts like SOPA and PIPA would have been inconceivable just a few years ago, other nations in other parts of the globe were already engaged in heated – and sometimes violent – contests over whose interests are represented on the world wide web and who has control over what content can and can not be shared and what people can and can not do on the internet. Access Contested: Security, Identity, and Resistance in Asian Cyberspace – edited by Ronald Deibert, John Palfrey, Rafal Rohozinski, and Jonathan Zittrain – is an anthology of writings in a format reminiscent of university textbooks that utilizes academic work done in East Asia – a region where internet access has been a controversial issue among its diverse nations – to paint a picture of the internet which portrays the actors and the consequences of an increasingly contested world wide web.

The first two chapters of Access Contested are essential to understanding the remainder of the book. The editors use these chapters to establish the theoretical framework of internet development that they are working in and key terms that are utilized throughout the rest of the book. The authors of the chapters establish brief histories of internet use and regulation, from the earliest days when the internet was virtually free of outside regulation to more recent times when state actors have begun to refine their methods of controlling behavior on the internet and using it as a tool to enforce their authority. Both arrive at the same fundamental conclusion: that the internet is a space that is contested between a myriad of different forces all with their own way of using the internet, their own agendas, and their own views for how the internet should grow in the future. Both strike an optimistic tone, acknowledging that state control of the internet have turned the medium into an arm of state power but holding that the contesting of such power by other parties may pave the way for a better future for all involved. While I don’t quite share the optimism, both of these chapters present the anthology’s fundamental working theories in a simple manner that holds the reader’s interest, going into detail on the manner in which stakeholders interact without delving into overly-technical jargon which I have seen other internet studies go into to the detriment of the accessibility of their work.

The remaining eight chapters of the book utilize case studies from nations across the region to identify the various stakeholders in the contesting of the internet, the agendas at work, the means by which states can engage or repress their constituent people over the internet, and the role of the private sector in the regulation of the medium. Utilizing case studies from Malaysia, Thailand, the Phillipines, Burma, and, of course, China, Access Contested uses each nation and each circumstance to view the contests of the internet in a different light. Where in Malaysia the authorities have utilized the internet in order to reinforce patriarchal cultural norms, Thailand uses it to surveill dissidence against the King and China contests the very architecture and power structure of the internet on a global scale in order to better control its own cyberspace. Each article looks at the issues through a different light, and I was very pleased to see that despite the focus on East Asia many were critical of what they saw as similar systems of control in supposedly liberal Western and democratic states. The chapters succeed in painting a picture of the internet as a dynamic force in which virtually every group of people – connected or not – has a stake and has interests to be promoted or protected.

The second half of Access Contested is a series of profiles on the nations of East Asia. Each contains the nation’s vital information, internet regulatory framework, and other issues which impact how its people and the state relate to cyberspace. In its format as a textbook, I see these profiles as being extremely useful for encouraging independent exercises in a college class and for project-based assignments in both addressing current issues regarding the internet in each country and hypothesizing as to those which may impact them in the future.

In a post-Arab Spring, post-SOPA digitized world, it is essential that researchers understand the internet not as a monolithic system or entity, but as a architectural framework in which different, competing social, cultural, and economic influences are in contest with each other for control over this increasingly-vital digital space. Access Contested is contemporary, it is compelling, it is accessible, and the picture of the internet it paints opens the door to new ideas and new research as we come to terms with what the internet was, what it becomes, and how it is being used in the twenty first century.

Virtual and Imagined Communities

by emilywarheit

The anecdote in the Sangupta article about the call center agent calling the man in California really brought home the idea of how identities can be manipulated, especially with the aid of technology. But, at the end of the phone call, it appears the call center employee maintains her original identity and circumstances. Can this type of identity shifting through technology that spans boundaries and obfuscates identities actually have a lasting affect on racial, class, geographic, or other categories?

In the article about social networking sites and “white flight,” I thought boyd provided a really interesting analysis, but that the comparison with the geographical move to the suburbs was limited because of the economic implications. Unlike purchasing a home and being able to commute to work via car (often necessities in the suburbs), switching from MySpace to Facebook does not require any economic capital. So, what are the forces at work that differ in the digital realm from geographic flight?

Anderson’s concept of simultaneity has always seemed to me like an interesting starting point for looking at national identity in the digital age, because our ability to see or hear about what others are doing and provide feedback gets more and more advanced every day. How does the ability to not only read the news in the paper but to hear about events immediately and respond to them change the way our national community is “imagined?”

Book Review: My Life as a Night Elf Priest: An Anthropological Account of World of Warcraft

by alyssaneuner

World of Warcraft is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) created by Blizzard in 2004. The game itself was based off of their original Warcraft series. The game itself has 4 expansions and is home to over 10million active subscribers. This game has been studied in various ways, ranging from addiction to community interaction. Bonnie A. Nardi is an anthropologist by trade and has studied virtual games and digital technologies throughout her career. She uses her background in anthropology and ethnography to develop an argument about WoW that examines play as an active aesthetic experience; to understanding play in its contemporary digital manifestation; and to use ethnographic reporting in order to make the unusual usual for those new to WoW (Nardi, 6). Each argument constitutes a new section of My Life as a Night Elf Priest/

Nardi uses her experiences as a new player to captivate the audience; players an non-players alike can experience the game through someone else’s eyes, sans bias because we are all put on the same playing field, either we have experienced it or are experiencing it for the first time – both exhibit a level of understanding. She uses her ethnographic skills to explain in great detail her trials and tribulations, while at the same time, explaining her successes. Nardi’s experience in anthropology allows her to effectively tell a story. As someone who has played World of Warcraft, and someone who has studied it, I find storytelling, especially the way in which she tells her story, to be an integral part of understanding what the significance of World of Warcraft is. Storytelling not just in the ways that she incorporates her own personal experiences but the aesthetics of World of Warcraft as a way of storytelling as well.

As she moves away from briefly explaining what World of Warcraft and ethnography are, she moves towards explaining what compels people to play games, especially World of Warcraft. The obvious argument to be made here would be to assume addiction (read: players have addictive personalities). However, Nardi moves away from this overly generalized, simplistic, and problematic way of thinking and asserts that what makes the game compelling is actually a combination of things, some of these things include goal meeting and reward structures. She dives into reward structures quite nicely saying that the unpredictability of what players are going to loot from any given goal that players meet is a perfectly acceptable answer. Nardi also suggests that the social aspect of World of Warcraft plays a specific role in continuous play (although the stereotype is that gaming is a completely isolating event). Another important point to mention is that Nardi suggests that continued play is all of the aforementioned and then some – suggesting that aesthetic experience and activity theory are playing a huge part in this continuous play. She combines the two theories in a really approachable and understanding way – one does not need to have read complete works on either to understand where Nardi is taking and shaping these theories.

Probably the more captivating part of My Life as a Night Elf is Nardi’s writings on Chinese and American players. Nardi and her research assistants traveled to China to study and understand World of Warcraft’s largest group of active subscribers. What Nardi and her assistants came to find out is that the only difference between American and Chinese players is the venue of play and interaction. American players have the ability to experience World of Warcraft as a primarily digital experience while Chinese players experience the world through the use of Internet Cafés. This type of venue means that not only are players completely immersed in a digital space, but they are also made fully aware of their place in the physical world.

This point of parallel is interesting in games studies, especially studies on World of Warcraft because it steps out of the typical parameters of research. Interviewing in game only works to a certain extent, this is a completely different experience. Not only does this study the ways in which people play but actually where and how people are playing these games, especially people are part of an imagined community, where they share a common digital but not physical location – this isn’t a LAN party folks.

My life as a Night Elf succeeds in every way at what it’s trying to do, to reiterate her goals they are, to develop an argument about WoW that examines play as an active aesthetic experience; to understand play in its contemporary digital manifestation; and to use ethnographic reporting in order to make the unusual usual for those new to WoW (Nardi, 6). This book is probably one of the best books on World of Warcraft in that it is accessible to the general non-playing public as well as giving a more in-depth look at a game that so many people play and complicating their basic understandings of the ways in which they game. If someone approached me and asked for me to suggest to them a book to help them understand World of Warcraft (beyond typical gaming guides) and the people who play, I would without a doubt suggest this book as an interesting take on the anthropology of virtual games.

Guided Discussion Handout – Justin and Avery

by justinsprague

Handout PDF

Here is a handout for our discussion today 🙂

by jessicawalker

Can Andersons formulation of nationalism without nation be instructive to Sengupta’s rupture of identity? Im really interested in what the phenomenon exist (I think Sengupta thinks things exist) that can create conversations between and across people who question the fixity of their identities? Can it only happen through production and networked materialities? And what happens to the “emotional legitimacy “ of identity?

Anderson argues that “ontological reality is apprehensible only through a single, privileged system of re-presentation: the truth-language (14).”Does Sengupta suggests that the current truth language is the logics of domination expressed through capitalism?  Does domination become the paradigm through which everyone can interpret their lives? Does that make you sad? Makes me a little sad.

Time becomes what makes nation different from racism in Anderson’s formulation. While nationalism is invested in “historical destinies” racism doesn’t care about time—it is timeless and outside of history. Do racism and nationalism become complicit in Senguptas text where racialized identities are the representation of nation and therefore interested in very specific historical destinies?

Space: A infinite processes whereby interconnecting systems of global, social, cultural and embodied knowledges inform the value of place. Space is a right.

Place: Fixed in the material and moving freely. Facilitated by place marking objects like maps.

Identity:  How you make sense of places’ relationships to the idea of individualism.

Identity from Imagined Communities to Virtual Communities

by robertjiles

Identity from Imagined Communities to Virtual Communities

1) Reading Boyd’s article about MySpace as a digital ghetto and thinking about the digital great white flight and digital ghetto decay made me consider how Facebook can now be read as a digital space where urban meets suburbia. In real space minority groups follow the migration patterns (flight) toward the suburbs for employment, better schools, etc., basically chasing the ideal “American dream”; i.e. they want the house with the picket fence as well. Now that the digital suburb is co-habitate(d) by marginalized identities that were left behind on MySpace and privileged identities, how does this intermingling of multiple identities transform Facebook or even Twitter? I wonder can the metaphor be extended to think about digital suburban sprawl? If even possible in digital space, how can this process be read?

2) What about digital red light districts (communities) or digital spaces read as deviant?  For example: Xtube and the many other pornographic social networking sites online, the personal section of craigslist, and even queer social network sites such as Adam4Adam and GayGirlNet.com (I’m not suggesting that they are pornographic sites but are read by some as deviant). How can digital spaces read as sexually “deviant” provide information for us to think about identity and space?

3) Not to exclude Anderson or Sengupta from the conversation by not directly engaging their work with a question, but I think that reading their work helped me to think more about identity, power, privilege, and oppression’s relationship to space and community when considering Boyd’s work. In regards to how white middle-class journalists considered MySpace “dead” because they did not know anyone who used it still, and assumed that their readers had migrated to Facebook (Boyd, 219), what is at stake when marginalized identities are made invisible in a digital space that is created to provide visibility? (This question may seem redundant but I feel that it is important when thinking about technology that is geared toward creating visibility)

Definition

Identity: Can register as a social and political construct used to mark bodies as normal or deviant and privileged or marginalized through national, class based, age, global, cognitive, intellectual, racial, health, body image, gendered, sexual, familial, and disabled contexts. Identities are nuanced and intersecting and can be contained or imagined spatially and temporally.

Weekly Post 7: boyd, Anderson, Sengupta

by jessicavooris

1) Like Alex, while I was reading the article about Myspace and Facebook I was wondering what a discussion around the international use of social networking sites might look like.  For a while I was a part of many different social networking sites like Myspace, Facebook, Friendster? (don’t remember the name of it, but my friends in Mexico used it), and used both AOL and MSN in order to stay in touch with friends in the US, Mexico, the UK  and Canada who all used different platforms to connect.  Now I think everyone is on Facebook. I wonder too, as facebook has been opened to a wider demographic, how we can think about age in regards to online space.  While boyd makes it clear the class and racial aspects of conversations around the move from myspace and facebook, and the elitism of facebooks beginnings, I wonder if the conversation around teenage use of facebook could be pushed further.  I remember when it switched to allowing high-school and middle-school kids that conversations in my college centered around the age and immaturity of new users.  Also, thinking about age, what does it mean to now exist in an age where your parents and grandparents are also on facebook? How does our sense of online spaces change as more and more of our friends/connections/acquaintances are on there, across age groups?

2) Anderson’s book helps us think about the role of print material, language, and changing world-views (in terms of religion and concepts of time) and their role in creating nationalisms, and continues conversations begun with the Sassen reading about global flows, and thinking about space across borders.  I wonder how we can connect this to thinking about print-material in the digital age and the flow of information and how it shapes national thinking.  The role of the media/internets/twitter in the current presidential debate comes to mind.

3) On one hand I appreciate the ways in which Sengupta offers an analysis and metaphors of violence to think about intersectionality, and I found particular passages provocative, for example in terms of thinking about the assumptions around various types of power, and the way that oppression gets articulated through patriarchy.  However I am not sure if I quite buy his argument about power and difference being an algebraic equation that is the same no matter the identities of the different parties.  Perhaps I just didn’t understand the grand scope of the article? But I was left wanting something more.

Virtual/Real Communities and Identities

by melissarogers

Definitions:

Space: that which we create in and around us by virtue of our embodiment, by virtue of our relationships with other bodies (including objects), and by virtue of practices of representation (digital or otherwise).

Place: those specific spaces or locations to which we are affectively attached, bound, or oriented toward by virtue of meaningful relationships with other bodies (including objects), through embodied practices of power (biopolitics), and through practices of representation, visualization, and mapping; those spaces or locations that come into being through technologies of surveillance.

Identity: the enduring bodily and psychic perception and conception of self across spacetime(s), including the extension of self through cultural tools, technologies, and virtualities, and the disciplining of self through technologies of surveillance, as well as the imagination of self in relation to virtual and actual communities.

Questions:

  1. While perhaps not directly related to the themes of space and place we’ve been exploring throughout this class, I was particularly interested in Benedict Anderson’s discussion of print capitalism, which he argues set the stage for the a national consciousness or an imagined community of the nation. In his discussion of the newspaper as “a book sold on a colossal scale, but of ephemeral popularity” that becomes obsolescent the next day (34), I was thinking about zines in the context of capitalist market ecologies. What scale could zines, as independent publications with usually limited print runs, be said to operate on, and how do space and place affect this? How does the relationship between identity and community get imagined? These are some of the enduring questions of my research.
  2. Furthermore, if, as Anderson argues, the newspaper reader “is well aware that the ceremony he performs is being replicated simultaneously by thousands (or millions) of others of whose existence he is confident, yet of whose identity he has not the slightest notion” (35), then what happens in a neoliberal context, when narrowcasting encourages us each to be our own private market, consuming media individually and asynchronously according to our own finely tuned tastes? I get the sense from boyd that we are consuming, disciplining, and policing each other’s identities all the time in virtual and actual social networks, thereby imagining the boundaries of our communities; is there anything different about this in a neoliberal framing or is it the perfection of liberal individualism?
  3. I find the frameworks that de Souza e Silva and Sutko lay out for thinking the virtual and the real to be immensely useful, especially when it comes to potential. I am also preoccupied with the language of “possible and incompossible worlds” (32), which I think has implications for community organizing of various kinds. They write, “For Borges, as for Deleuze, there is no longer a person who chooses among several worlds, as in Leibniz, but a person who is pressured by several selves, which are not masks or appearances (like in Plato), but indeed constitute the same person. This perspective frames the virtual into something that is ready to emerge, to be created, or to transform” (32-33). This is particularly useful for conceptualizing identity and intersectionality; it gives us a way to think about identification as a process, with multiple forms or modes of consciousness operating or salient at different times, a la Chela Sandoval. My question therefore is about how the difficulty of writing about this process in an analysis, as language seems inadequate to the task of apprehending being/becoming.

My…Space?

by cassygriff
  1. Admittedly, I’m having some trouble getting behind Sengupta’s argument about identity categories and the claiming and deployment of identity as always functioning as a potential weapon of either defense or offense. The call for what I can only conceive of as a post identity takes Benedict Anderson’s explication of imagined communities too far, theoretically overextending Anderson’s argument that nations are actually constructed in the imaginary created by certain historical processes. That is, simply because identity is a construct or “imagined” does not mean that it is not “real” or does not have value or importance beyond what I can’t help but consider (un)affectionately the litany of oppression Olympics in the first part of this article. In general, I am wary of any calls for “a nonspecific, tentative universalism,” as I always wonder (in my very identity-focused way) if universalism of this sort works differently for some people than it would for others.
  2. As I read danah boyd’s chapter, I was particularly drawn to the constant references to the aesthetics of MySpace versus Facebook. MySpace, it was variously argued by boyd’s interviewees is/was ugly, cluttered, “cheesy,” and overly filled with “bling,” all of which are caused by the fact that MySpace can be personalized with images, songs, backgrounds, etc. Facebook, of course (and rather tellingly) “is just plain white and that’s it.” This distinction is often seen outside the “digital ghetto” to the “real” physical “ghetto” characterized by what could arguably be considered customization in the form of street art, graffiti, and a general lack of standardization of space. I wonder, then, what are the processes by which concepts of visuality such as “clutter” or “crampedness” come to stand in for or at least signal urban space and particularly urban space in which People of Color reside?
  3. In an attempt to connect the above question to Anderson’s Imagined Communities, I wonder if we could consider the ways in which even imagined communities are solidified into “real” (whatever that means) communities. For example, how does the visual rendering of spaces (graffiti, American flags, etc.) function simultaneously to perpetuate the imagined but also to make it tangible and physical?

Place: the social construction of a space via particular cues, often visual

Pages:«123»