Saturday, January 19, 2008
Blog #1: How do you interpret Baudrillard's concept of the simulacra? Can you identify other simulacras?
Hi all- it's been a pleasure having all of you in class and talking with you! For your first blog entry, please respond to the question posed above as you also read through your peers' responses. In your responses, please take into consideration class discussions, readings, peer comments, and outside experiences, etc. Your answer is thorough when you have included these aspects. Have fun!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
In class discussion it was said that the simulacra is a copy of a copy to the point where an original is no longer able to be distinguished. When I think of this, I think of the movie Multiplicity in that the clones were cloned to the point that the last clone is a couple fries short of a happy meal and completely unlike the original man. In our notes it is put that we "have lost all ability" to tell reality from the imagined. I may be far off but the majority of what we like to call "chick flicks" are simulacra. They are so far from how real people function in relationships yet people enjoy escaping into a world a gorgeous man and a cute girl meet on a plane, talk on the phone for a few hours and ultimately fall in love. Bascially a simulacra is an idea, story, anything that has been stretched so far that it cannot be traced back to its owner or truth.
As we have discussed in class, when we get further from the original statement or starting point we question what is real and what is not. Reading the previous statement, I completely agree that a simulacra is an idea, story, or anything that has been so far stretched that it cannot be traced back to its owner or truth. I feel that statement clearly states what a simulacra is and how it can be identified in various forms. An example that that I consider a simulacra is celebrity gossip. Celebrity gossip can be a copy of a copy because when stories are released they are not always first hand information. The paparazzi takes pictures and media transforms those pictures into what their audience wants to see or hear. The audience does not know what is real or imaged and cannot be traced back to the original.
In terms of simulacra, I felt the best relation to the Disneyland example. I felt this played so largely on both the real & imaginary world. It creates a bubble in a sense, that once you're inside, you are happy and your “real world” worries seem to disappear, but then when you leave, you’re thrown back into your daily routine. An additional point I felt was interesting that came from the class discussion was the relation of the parking lot to a concentration camp. It made me further think that she is not only questioning what is real and what is not real, but on different levels in terms of positive vs. negative feelings that the imaginary or reality worlds may create. I felt this example helped to paint a better picture of how simulacra to all people.
An example of simulacra I thought of was the movie Jurassic Park. Although the movie is based in an “imaginary” setting, much of the knowledge that the directors/producers, etc., gained had to come from some form of reality. For instance, they had to form re-creations of the dinosaurs that once lived, have a background on them, and be able to incorporate them into somewhat of a “real” setting.
I also felt that the example of the "chick flicks" was very interesting...that is a really good way to relate it to the world today, as so many of those types of movies are released!
I think everyone seems to have pretty good points...especially the "chick flick" one from lindsey. I keep thinking about his "Disneyland" idea and though I do follow what he talking about I also feel that Disney isn't the only thing that takes people away from reality.
When people go on vacation, no matter where they go they are trying to escape reality. If you go to the beach is it not an escape from reality? Is a camping trip off into the middle of the forest an escape? If they are, then I wonder how much do they really differ from Disney? I believe that technically they are almost similar when considering a persons "want" to escape their reality.
Star Wars for myself is another type of simulacra. It is a place made up of completely fictional characters and settings. The original trilogy was closer to real life only because the locations used in the filmings were mostly real places (though some were made on a set)...as the latest trilogy came out, the settings were only partial and could almost be considered second or third space. The viewer has no clue that almost 90% of all backgrounds and locations in Ep. 3 are completely fake..interiors and exteriors. Star Wars is also my escape from reality. If I'm having a crappy day...I turn to either my collection of Star Wars movies or to my Star Wars online video game and just go off into a completely different world and I know that it does the same for many other people which I play with.
Hopefully some of this makes sense...in my mind it does, but...who knows.
Doug Thomas
From previous discussions we learned that a simulacra is a copy of something without a orginal. Using different images and signs that allow us to decide what is 'real' and 'not real'. Its like taking one thing and stretching so far into your imagination, but not too far so that the mind thinks its crazy, but just enough that its enjoyable and allows for some type of escape.
Like the example of chick flicks from the previous speaker. I think thats a perfect example, because like she said real people don't function like they do in those movies. But watching those movies helps escape and almost imagine ourselves in their shoes, but in reality we know that its all false and far from "reality." But where do the ideas come from of this superficial chick flick world, its a copy but with no orginal.
I decided to search the web about simulacra because i am still a little bit confused on the meaning. I was able to find a really good example, "caricatures." You know when you go to a fair and this guy is looking at a couple and sketching their "features" on a piece of paper. But he really isn't drawing their exact features because he is changing them and exaggerating them (you know with the huge head and what not). So this picture is supposed to resemble the couple, but in reality it could be a photo of any other couple. Because the artist has skewed the picture so much it can no longer measure itself against the actual features of the couple.
I also totally agree with Doug when he talks about vacations. If you think about it, why else would you go on a vacation..it wouldn't be called a vacation if you weren't trying to escape something. But that also doesn't mean that what your getting away from is necessarily negative.
Okay, i may have confused myself even more, haha.
When I think of simulacra, the first thing that comes to mind is “reality” TV. Like Baudrillard’s example of Disneyworld, I believe we need these programs which intend to imitate our “real” lives to confirm to us that real life in fact exists. We need them to define what real life is. As we mature our 1st identity takes back seat to the public space presented on TV and in the media. We assume reality is based on consensus. Therefore we turn to shared public space to understand “reality.” Meanwhile, popular shows like Real World and The Bachelor which are supposedly based in “real life” are a mere simulation of our reality which we construct based on simulations. A simulacra is this decay in which a simulation replaces a reality that had been created based on a prior simulation. The real has been replicated over and over so many times, we have lost track of its origin. I think an example of this could be the media coverage of the war in Iraq. What we see and hear on the news is taken for reality. I experience the war in Iraq through the stories I’m told, the images I see, the footage of George Bush sharing Thanksgiving turkey with soldiers. Most of this comes from what I watch in the news and what I read. The media hides the horror of war abroad under layers of idealized, palatable simulations. And we are inundated with these second, third, and fourth hand stories which people internalize as reality rather than mere representations from the recliner in our living rooms. As Lyndsy pointed out in her reference to chic flics, we rely on simulacra for its idealized representation of “the real.” Truth is further lost with each replication.
As far as simulacra are concerned, the first thoughts to come into my head are, as with Doug, the many imaginary worlds created through the use of film and text. Novels, poetry, films of all types, and many other genres all are able to portray that which cannot be truly achieved in so-called "real life." I will refer here to the previous comment on "chick flicks." It is entirely true that these types of films envision a ludicrous view of relationships. The "Love Conquers All" scenario simply does not work. But it does help to be able to escape into a world where it just might be possible.
Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Jurassic PArk, and many more are all fine examples of simulacra, of worlds in which the scientific speculations of today are brought to the forefront, made possible.
However, while all of these would serve as complete simulacra, i believe that there is a slightly older, slightly more obvious simulacra that we are overlooking. In 1902, JM Barrie created Peter Pan, a boy who had escaped to, and who was inextricably linked emotionally to, a large island in the stars known only as Never Never Land. This island was a place of magic and mystery, where children never had to worry about the fears of growing up and where adults were not only those people who make rules, but those who would attempt to destroy fun and youthfulness altogether. It is interesting to look at this other world from the viewpoint of the simulacra. When it comes to the imaginary created from the real, this story takes the proverbial cake. Envisioned meals at long tables with the head of the house at one end, medicine that is so horrible that the children would rather die than take it (in all actuality, it was only water), the ability to fly simply by thinking happy thoughts, and the ability to fight against authority all come together to create the world that children imagine but which, most likely, can never be real in any place other than the imagination.
I'm glad that Tara said she looked up simulacra on the internet because I was a bit confused about what simulacra meant and I was planning on researching it myself. All the examples so far, chick flicks, vacations, caricatures, Peter Pan, etc. helped me to understand it better. The more you duplicate the original, the less you know what the original was. The first thing that came to my mind was the movie Fight Club. Edward Norton plays the narrator who is miserable and feels empty. He meets a character named Tyler Durden who is everything Norton wishes he could be. At the end of the movie the viewer comes to realize that Tyler Durden is in fact the same person as Edward Norton. Norton created Durden in his imagination. The characters are supposed to be the same person but they are so different from each other that you find yourself questioning what is real and what is fake. That might be a bit a stretch and I dont know how well i described it but I hope it makes sense.
by reading the previous posts, it seems like everyone has the same image of simulacra as a copy that has been so warped and stretched from the orignal that it doesn't even resemble it anymore, so a copy without an original. i realy liked the ideas of star wars and lord of the rings as a simulacra, and i thought it was interesting in how people said that it can only really exist in your imagination because it's just a temporary escape while your body and physical state is still in the real world-but that got me thinking about all the different star wars conventions and comic book conventions and even renaissance faires where people go and literally play the part and interract with each other as if they were in the film or the story. in those instances, the person isn't only suspending their belief and losing themselves mentally in a film, but they are actually becoming a part of the story and physically immersing themselves in the simulacra.
thinking of the peter pan theory, the only real relation i can refer to that in terms of simulacra is michal jackson. he is physcially adopting the mantra of staying young forever and never growing up to the extremes and it's creepy. a less dramatic version would maybe be plastic surgery. in this case, you try to revert your features back to that of a younger age or to mimick what you think the "perfection" is, whether it's a celebrity or some other person. however, if you keep making changes, isn't it like you're making copies of an original that doesn't exist anymore? you keep pulling yourself farther and farther from your true image and into a simulacra of an appearance.
The last remaining traces of something - an idea, fact, story - that leaves someone with only the representation of the alleged original.
That's how I have come to understand simulacra in all of its glory.
Silly putty - bounce it, break it, transfer newspaper images to your mom's favorite sweater, pick up dirt, lint, pet hair ... Do with it what you will, but after playing with it long enough, it becomes a dirty, wrinkled representation of the original ball of putty in a plastic egg. [Not the world's best comparison], silly putty has the same effect as any "chick flick" or fantasy movie: It takes on different forms over a period of time, leaving it worn out and very different from its earliest form.
More concretely, folktales and the stuff of legends - stories passed down from generation to generation - usually have no particular original. The select few have hard copies written decades ago, but most live on through oral history, and, just like a good game of Telephone between fifth graders, the facts/ideas/plots have assuredly changed.
But "chick flicks" work as a good comparison, too.
When we were given the definition of simulacra, I imagined a example I was given in another class where one person whispered a sentence to a class member and they whispered it to the next until it went around the entire class. At the end, the message changed from what it originally was.
I totally agree with GaryM's interpretation of simulacra through Peter Pan, (the only correction comes that you have to be thinking happy thoughts *and* you need some fairy dust).
As others mentioned the different types of movies that they see could be considered simulacra's, but isn't any fiction movie (story, game) in actuality a simulacra? They are all based on dreams, ideas, images, or other sources from the imagination. There may be some fiction involved - the keyword being some. From these movies or stories some may be more farfetched than others, but those others are still a combination of stuff people meshed together.
I believe that simulacra is a world of fantasy where a person is unable to distinguish reality. The media does this daily as they distort orginal pictures to what they want to convey to the public. Only the photographer can truly know what is the real thing. In TIME Magazine during the OJ Simpson trial they ran a picture of OJ on the front cover but darkened the area around his face to portray him as guilty. The same picture was published to show him in a brighter light to show is innocence. When I think of simulacra I associate it with media. I dont agree with lyndsey when she says simulacra cannot be traced back to its owner, because it has been created therefore it can be traced.
I agree with everyone’s statements above about vacations, chick flicks, movies, and celebrity gossip in the news. Through these things we are able to escape reality and take a break from our lives. We are able to live in a dream world of what we may wish our real world was like. According to Baudrillard we have lost all ability to make sense of the distinction between nature and artifice. Baudrillard claims that modern society has replaced all reality and meaning with symbols and signs, and that the human experience is of a simulation of reality rather than reality itself. The simulacra that Baudrillard refers to are signs of culture and media that create the perceived reality. I believe a great example of this concept was portrayed in the movie The Matrix. Reality was questioned in this movie and distinguishing from what was real and what we think is real was the main concept. This movie questioned if what we see and believe in our lives are real or are they just images and stories that we are programmed to believe are true.
I interpret Baudrillard's concept of the simulacra as culture losing its origin. In addition because reality no longer has a face of its own it is hard to tell what is percieved as real or as a false image. Reality has been shaped so much that it hard to distingush what the world once looked like or wheteher or not reality is reality reality or maybe it just lives within our mind.
One simulacra I can idenitfy with is gene reproduction. Like the link of Genetics; the more a gene is reproduced the farther we get away from finding who are orignal ancestors are there who to say where we orginally came from our what species were evolved from.
During our discussion of simulacra in class, the first thing that came to my mind was Hershey Park. When we talked about the Disney parks mentioned in the book, I thought of my summers working at an amusement park. As an employee, I was to help guests (most, if not all, on vacation) to have a "sweet" day. The park has tied chocolate into many of its attractions to leave the guests with "sweet" memories of their day spent with family and friends.
Working in a chocolate-themed amusement park only brings me to realize that when I leave, I will not run into a parade of candy charaters when I walk through the grocery store. The daily parade of characters is there to entertain families in the park's illusion of life as always "sweet" and happy. In real life, everyday will not be as exciting and cheerful.
All examples given are great, I never thought of the Peter Pan and Micheal Jackson connections. I especially liked the media and genetics references. The media can show what they want to on the coverage of the war and can only describe what they receive images of. Our genes are copies of 1/2 of each parent, and each of our parents the same thing. Good luck trying distinguishing the original genes.
Baudrillard writes that, "when the real is no longer what it was, nostalgia assumes its full meaning" (6). The simulacrum is eligible to be sensationalized, popularized precisely when the "original" is pronounced defunct. We are left with a grotesque distortion, the function of which can be at complete odds from the original.
Kali wrote that we need "reality" programs, that are not really "real" to reaffirm our own reality. As much as I hate television, I wholeheartedly agree that something is fulfilled in the voyeuristic nature of these shows, that cast oversimplified caricatures as "people." Our definition of "people" and the associated attributes may then become subject to change. Thus the successive phases of the image progress, leaving me, specifically, without any epistemological claims.
These responses are amazing and articulate. Wow- Star Wars, chick flicks, paparazzi,, etc...all excellent examples of simulacara.
from listening to the discussions in class and reading the book which Ididnt really understand all that well. i feel that the class has come up with a very good interpretation of what a simulcra is and it has helped me better understand what I hadnt in the first place.
the best example I can think of is the media. The media tends to take information and stretch it to the limit and pretty much to the point where it is rediculous to consider.
the book used examples to show how our era today is composed of different simulations such as how to organize a hold up, or how to simulate a robbery in a store or bank.
these are all imaginary settings in which people can try to enforce but will never achieve it because something will always be different
I agree with everyone's comments about their interpretations of Baudrillard's concept of the simulacra.A copy of a copy..., and the original no longer exists. What is real? What is not real? An example of simulacra I thought of was the movie Harry Potter (well the first one). He was introduced to a world (reality) of magic, in which he only imagined, although in this movie the reality became real. The imagination behind this movie provides an enjoyable type of escape from the "real world".
As I read through all of the comments, I am finally getting the idea of what a simulacrum is. When I read Baudrillard for the first time I was lost. (It makes me happy to know I wasn't the only one in the dark!) Tara mentioned caricatures as simulacra, which made the concept clear. I immediately thought of reality TV, (an example being The Hills) then I thought of the example used in the book about Disneyland. All of these ideas and examples have been said.
An example that came to my mind was remembering when you were a little kid and something happened to you, whether it was traumatic or absolutely wonderful, and then when you were retelling the story it somehow became much better or much worse. I used to make up stories, sometimes from thin air, and then was usually asked if I was telling the truth or making it all up. But each time it was told the story grew and grew. It ties in with Kali's comment " Truth is further lost with each replication".
As silly as this may seem, after reading some of the posts the first thought to come to mind was the telephone game we used to play as children. The first person would be given a phrase or 'secret.' The saying then had to be passed down through twenty children and retold to the teacher. By the end of the game there would be multiple versions of what was thought to be the truth. We made reference in class to the fact that a simulacra can be a false or fake truth.
In keeping with this idea of a fake truth, I'm tempted to expand on the idea that the campus environment is not only a form of discourse, but also simulacra in and of itself. The blood, sweat, and tears that are put into your time spent here on campus are supposed to be preparing us for the 'real world' of deadlines and evaluations when in actuality the world that we are thrown into after graduation couldn't be farther from the ideas of campus life. (Note, however, that I am speaking of the typical dorm/apartment experience of campus life. I realize that not all situations are the same.) One of the posts I read mentioned this sense of a 'bubble.' There are times when it seems college acts as this 'bubble' - this distorted representation of life. However, once we toss that graduation cap or leave that amusement park, the bubble bursts and we are faced with not society's reality, but our own personal reality. This transition is what creates the withdrawal like reaction.
We briefly mentioned in class that Baudrillard suggests the idea that society has been replicated and reproduced so many times that reality has be lost. Perhaps there is some truth to this. Maybe the reality of society as a whole is nonexistent, only to thrive in the face or rules, government, trends and symbols. Facing and finding your own reality, not society’s is where the challenge lies.
I think everyone has a lot to say about the concept of Baudrillard's simulacra. I find it hard to understand what the word actually means by the definition but after reading what everyone has to say in these blogs the meaning of the word makes a lot more sense. The examples used like Disneyland and Star Wars are perfect in describing what Simulacra actually means. They are basically places your mind goes and believes that whats going on around you is real. An example I can think of would be Dave and Busters an arcade, bar, restaurant because you can go act like a kid but its meant for adults.
Okay... so after reading this chapter in the book on simulacra... I was completely stunned! I was like " what in the hell did I just read!" Although the example on Disneyland help me better understand the meaning it and I can't help but think about every freakin Disney movie that is out on DVD. Every kid, after watching any disney movie is an "awe" because it starts our as "once upon a time" and ends with "happily ever after." Just like Lyndsey said about chick flicks, they are so far from what really happens in real life and children grow up believing that you will find your "prince-charming" and the "bad-guy in your life" will disappear and you will live a worry free life. So I couldn't agree more with what Lyndsey said about how simulacra is just a story and ideas have been stretched so far that we something forget about the reality of life.
Upon reading the book "Simulacra and Simulation" by Jean Baudrillard, and reading posts by other students, it became evident to me of what a simulacra is perceived to be. As many have said before, I took it as, "a copy of a copy, copied so many times that the original piece is no longer able to be distinguised or represented by the present copies. The aspect that I relate best to this definition would be making copies of the old school VHS tapes. Each sequential copy of a copy makes the picture quality decrease to a point which makes the movie undesireable. It starts with a copy, then a copy of that copy, and a copy of that copy..etc until the picture quality is terrible and colors keep changing. I also agree especially with Sharlmaine's post about genetics. Every copy of a copy during reproduction differs slightly from the last. As generations pass, each copy strays a little further from the norm, or the original. This, is somewhat similar to the point I was trying to make with the tapes. Great example..Personally, simulacra to me is somewhat mysterious. Taking just this thought and applying it to different aspects and examples keeps me wondering...
I personally think that Baudrillard's intelligence was his own prison. That neither here nor there...so anyway. Baudrillard would make sense to me however I believe that once a copy of a copy is made it loses its quality. I recall my of times when I would burn cds that the quality of music was sacrificed because I was copying music for other copy's of the original. Pretty much the same thing Lyndsey said when she referred to the clones being copied.
As far as being able to distinguish if we are in fact in reality I'm reminded of the philosopher De carte. "I think there for I am." Simple as that. Personally I think Baudrillard lacked social skills...any guy who says he is a "Simulacra" of himself to me doesn't take time to enjoy the little things in life.
This whole topic on simulacra had me pretty stumped in the beginning. As I made my way through Baudrillard's book I was simply lost. However, after hearing of the examples of simulacra in class as well as reading through all these fuckin great comments I now have a clear idea of what simulacra actually means. As the definition states and as have the other 20 students in this class, simulacra is simply a copy of a copy of an original copy that has been translated over time.
I really enjoyed reading everyone else's examples of what they percieved simulacra to be. I definately agreed with the vacations. Vacationing is a definite escape from one's reality. They leave their real world life for a week or so to escape, relax, and enjoy their time away from everyday stresses and problems. I can agree with this because traveling is one of my major hapinesses in this life. It's an easy way to escape and it's quite enjoyable.
I also felt that steph had a good point in bringing up folktales. Like stated earlier, simulacra is a copy of a copy and when these stories from years past get past down to future generations, the stories might become skewed from what the original piece was. I felt this was a great example of simulacra.
When I think of the word simulacra and what I learned in class I believe that it is something that has been stretched and twisted from the truth. I really liked the example relating to Disney Land. The fact that people go there to escape everyday life into a world that is something that you would see in your dreams. People want to escape all the troubles and worries of the real world. I also totally agree with the people who say that "chick flicks" are a simulacra. I know personally I like to watch the chick flicks because the stories and what happens in them is what most girls, dare I say it? Dream could possibly happen to them? A handsome guy magically sweeps her off her feet and lives happily ever after. One other example I can think of that reminds me of simulacra is a TV show I've seen on Nickelodeon. The TV show Drake and Josh about two brothers who get into all kinds of crazy situations and usually end up okay at the end. The boys in the show are always meeting new girls too. In reality most kids their age would get in a lot of trouble for the stunts they pull, like taking over a helicopter for example. It’s amusing for the view to watch though as they try to fly and land it safely. Concluding I believe a simulacra is a stretch that we want to see happen.
I agree with most of the class that in simulcra it has gone so far that it can't be compared to the truth. Reading the chapter and seeing others examples makes me think of reality television over and over again. Although I do find myself amused and entertained watching many of the television shows at times, in the back of my mind I still know it is not real life. With growing up in my generation, it's even hard now to think of the world without such shows.
Even though the material was very streched out it helped understanding with the examples given such as how many students pointed out the Disneyland example. Unfortunately, life is not a Disneyland with happy people running around and fun rides. In a way, even though some of these unrealistic things are so far from life, I think we have them to save us sometimes from the harshness life can bring.
OK, so I probably come off as the worst slacker, seeing as I am posting this comment at 1:30 a.m.
I am not sure if waiting to respond to the question is beneficial to me or if I am screwing myself by reading 28 blog posts. Either way, I enjoyed skimming the class' responses and feeling out everyone's views on Baudrillard's book.
As we discussed simulacra, I thought about my premature view on life and "love" as a middle school student. I watched the seemingly realistic show, Dawson's Creek, and tried to envision what my future relationships would be like. Looking back and after having experienced many of the stages that are the lives of Dawson, Joey, Jen, Pacey and Co., I realize that I was basing my interpretation on an unrealistic dramatization.
This show is a simulacra on typical teenage life in its dramatic obscenity. Dawson's Creek showed its viewers a distorted representation of life and love as a teenager. It uses typically adult situations and bends them into teenage drama, thus creating a loss in translation for adolescents who want to take a peek at young-adult life.
I look forward to reading more of Baudrillard's book.
When I think of simulacra, and a reality that may not exist, I always revert back to thinking of Plato's Allegory of the Cave. For those unfamiliar, Plato imagined a place where there were prisoners forced to stare at a wall in the cave. On this wall, they would see shadows of animals, plants, and other objects. Without knowing better, they would see these objects (merely the shadows) as reality. However, if they were to happen upon the real object, for example an animal that makes the shadow, they may view this as farther from reality than the shadow, even though one would know that the opposite is true.
When doing the Matrix assignment, I realized that I wear many "hats," and that there are a lot of factors that may influence who I am and how I am defined through my identity. I think that our identity can be a Simulacra.
One major psychological debate is that of naturee vs. nurture -- whether we are taught to act a certain way, or whether we are bron with innate feelings and instincts that shape who we are. We also discussed in class that there are no things as new ideas, just new connections and hybrids that are formed. I think herein lies the basis for our Simulacra -- we learn to act by observing others, and by either imitating or not imitating their actions. It is this combination of others' actions that forms who we are, taking from other people and forming our own identity. We borrow from so many people and other sources, that although we call ourselves "individuals," we're really just a combination of all that we've seen, and how we act and put all of these actions together. We're far from being exact copies, and therefore are no longer able to discern the original. Although we each have certain behaviors that define who we are, it is this amalgamation of many different types of behaviors and actions (or unactions) that forms our identity, and determines the plane of our behaviors.
Based on what we have talked about in class I think Simulacra is something that is original because it has nothing to compare itself to but is also a copy of something else. It seems to take ideas from various things and jumble them together making some new. Its kind of like a "fairy tale" world. The Disney Land idea that many speak of here, the theme parks take ideas from the real world and change them into something far more fantastic than we could ever do. The castle in Disney and the character portrayed are representations of Queens and Lady's but the stories that go along with them are completely fantasy, but while you are there you are immersed in that world not the "outside" world or real world. It is a life that many would love to have, with the romance and magic and all the fun stuff that makes our minds wonder. This is why I see it as a "fairy tale" world. However I do agree with Doug Thomas in that vacations can be Simulacra's also. I agree that the reason people take vacations to escape reality. For example, Sea World I think is a great Simulacra. It takes its ideas from the real and makes them so much better for the viewers. The whales and dolphins splashing the audience. If you went to see whales and dolphins in the ocean they would not interact like those at Sea World do, because Sea World is a "fairy tale" place.
????
Joe Ladisic
I agree with dwtanimator that Disneyland is not the only form of escape from reality for people today. Vacations are most definitely a way for people to escape their everyday mundane routine and experience something outside their own reality. This student also accredited the movie Star Wars as a simulacra for himself because it is his own escape from reality. The fictional storyline and characters in Star Wars are obviously far different from reality on Earth.
I also liked what Tara said, referencing a simulacra to caricatures cartoon figures. The makes sense to me in the most basic sense because a caricature is essentially a stretch or exaggeration of what is real. At first, I was mildly confused about the entire concept of a simulacra, but reading through some of these blogs has helped me to make analogies and better understand the concept.
I feel that I could interpret Baudrillard’s simulacra best in my own sense when referencing it to my life at home with my family and my life here at IUP with my friends. I always remain the same person, no matter where I am residing, however, my lifestyles are different, if not exaggerated. For example, my life back home with my family is much more stable, a little quiet, and much more relaxed. I eat dinner with my family almost nightly, engage in healthy activities like skiing and hiking, and I’m really involved with my nephew. The living environment is clean, there is always food in the kitchen, and my mom still does my laundry. At school however, I eat dinner whenever I can grab it, often times simply foregoing the entire meal, the main activity I engage in is drinking, and my friends are completely unstable and entirely crazy. The living environment is dirty and cluttered, and my laundry piles up until eventually I just buy more clothes. To me, being back home with my family is my reality, and my college life is a simulacra stretched so far from reality that I can barely remember but reality was.
Simulacra, in my opinion, is strongest in the [kind of out there] idea of the "unknown reality." The second order, false images, is fairly interesting. I've heard it said somewhere, "You'd be non-comforming too if you looked just like me." This is seen in the repetition of signs that create a false identity.
I really find it quite curious, if not a bit scary, that we produce false images, the "automaton," if you will. This fits with the Disneyland example in that we create an alternate reality, but then I wonder if this alternate reality, the creation of what you want life to be, is not just another additional reality living side-by-side with the "original."
Speaking of the original, the idea that the original is so far different from the current process is astonishing. Honestly, it is fairly difficult to wrap my head around the idea that our reality is, in fact, a pseudo-reality.
Simulacra comes at us in a lot of forms, not the least of which is music. You have rock n' roll, which became, among other genres, heavy metal. But, really, nü-metal, rap metal, hair metal, etc., are really just all the same in different clothing. For other Simulacra, you may look at the clothing industry, political systems, even food companies...everything is, seemingly, a copy of a copy, making the original hard to pin down.
When I look at the subject of simulacra I look at my life and try to see the way that it affects me. I often refer to myself as a mutt when it comes to ethnicity conversations because Im a quarter Italian, Serbian, Irish, and Polish. When thinking about how closely related to my grandparents I am its easy to compare our differences and see where I came from, but in the idea of simulacra I can easily see how six generations after me could have no idea of my being and how i affected their genes. In the post that Lindsey made she made a comment about chick flicks which was very pertinent; I look at movies and TV shows that have bands on them and they play one show and they nail it and there just so happens to be a huge record producer in the crowd and they make it famous right there. That's a simulacra that I wish was true.
I also think the silly putty comparison is a very good one. It encompasses everything that a simulacra is I believe. It just like the class's name that includes 'posers'. They're are people, including myself, who change their personality at times to fit in or whatever. Some people just do it more than others. Some people do it so much that they don't even remember where they came from or who they are.
Post a Comment