Mini Book Review (shoddy on my part)
Slow brain day, just reviewing old reading notes. I'll put on my literary criticism hat and review a few statements taken from Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. I read this book some time ago and seem to recall enjoying it, but when I look back on the quotes I jotted down, I seem to have changed my position. So, with minor apologies to Ms. Murray for not addressing the work in full:
A major point the author makes is that virtual worlds, exemplified by the Star Trek holodeck, are "enticing but unenslaving". We are "in control of the mirage". I'm not sure I can agree with that. Nor would many Koreans, whose countrymen are dying in front of their computers at a surprising rate. I've felt the siren song of fictional digital worlds, with their implicit encouragement to forsake other activities. I've mostly triumphed in these confrontations, but I've watched others fall to it (though not in the literal Korean sense). We are, in fact, not in control of the mirage. This is neither novel nor inherently dangerous, however--we're not in control of the "real world" either. Her claim implies a clear-cut distinction between fiction and reality which many people don't share.
A line I probably nodded in agreement with as I first read it: "The commitment to any particular story is a painful diminution of the intoxicating possibilities of the blank page." Now I realize that only a literary academic could compose such a sentence. In the practical world of gaming and virtual worlds, players most certainly want a particular story. There are virtual worlds with, and virtual worlds without strong narrative, but the presence of the former shouldn't overshadow the greater popularity of the latter. The trick, actually, is that the two aren't mutually exclusive. You can provide players with a story, and then all the blank pages they want to amend, interact with, and add to that story. Providing a particular story in the first place creates an anchor for all those blank pages. Virtual worlds aren't entirely different and separate from the analog world--they are extensions.
"When we enter a fictional world...we do not suspend disbelief so much as we actively create belief." True enough, but this implies that we don't create belief in non-fictional worlds--when we do all the time, and rely on it. I believe that you love me. You believe that aliens ate your dog. The creation of belief is not exclusive to fiction (digital or analog), and shouldn't be analyzed as such. Literary analysis of technical creations has huge potential offerings that the social sciences neglect, but this book isn't at the top of the pile. (One book that is at the top of the pile is How We Became Posthuman. A dense but rewarding history of cybernetics from a technically knowledgeable, but literary vantage point. And if you think that cybernetics don't interest or affect you, this book will show you how wrong you are.)
A major point the author makes is that virtual worlds, exemplified by the Star Trek holodeck, are "enticing but unenslaving". We are "in control of the mirage". I'm not sure I can agree with that. Nor would many Koreans, whose countrymen are dying in front of their computers at a surprising rate. I've felt the siren song of fictional digital worlds, with their implicit encouragement to forsake other activities. I've mostly triumphed in these confrontations, but I've watched others fall to it (though not in the literal Korean sense). We are, in fact, not in control of the mirage. This is neither novel nor inherently dangerous, however--we're not in control of the "real world" either. Her claim implies a clear-cut distinction between fiction and reality which many people don't share.
A line I probably nodded in agreement with as I first read it: "The commitment to any particular story is a painful diminution of the intoxicating possibilities of the blank page." Now I realize that only a literary academic could compose such a sentence. In the practical world of gaming and virtual worlds, players most certainly want a particular story. There are virtual worlds with, and virtual worlds without strong narrative, but the presence of the former shouldn't overshadow the greater popularity of the latter. The trick, actually, is that the two aren't mutually exclusive. You can provide players with a story, and then all the blank pages they want to amend, interact with, and add to that story. Providing a particular story in the first place creates an anchor for all those blank pages. Virtual worlds aren't entirely different and separate from the analog world--they are extensions.
"When we enter a fictional world...we do not suspend disbelief so much as we actively create belief." True enough, but this implies that we don't create belief in non-fictional worlds--when we do all the time, and rely on it. I believe that you love me. You believe that aliens ate your dog. The creation of belief is not exclusive to fiction (digital or analog), and shouldn't be analyzed as such. Literary analysis of technical creations has huge potential offerings that the social sciences neglect, but this book isn't at the top of the pile. (One book that is at the top of the pile is How We Became Posthuman. A dense but rewarding history of cybernetics from a technically knowledgeable, but literary vantage point. And if you think that cybernetics don't interest or affect you, this book will show you how wrong you are.)
posted by Andrew at 6:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home