My Final Entry

To be perfectly honest, this course has been a real challenge. The medium of blogging was initially so foreign to me that I had difficulties writing. At first, I had absolutely no idea what a blog should contain. I thought that blogging was just for journaling thoughts, but now I realize that there is more to it than that. When done correctly, blogs can be as sophisticated as a formal paper. Even writers for The New York Times have blogs. I think once I realized that formal papers could be completely virtual and even contain the word “I”, this class became less stressful, and my writing improved.

When this class began, my attempts at writing a proficient post were dismal. The knowledge that my work would be read and judged by a larger audience had a profound impact on my writing. I found myself punching the backspace key more frequently because I was highly conscious of my word choices. For some reason, knowing that anyone in the world could potentially read my posts was extremely discomforting. Initially, I let this feeling of unease take control, and my posts suffered. They were short and lacked deeper analysis. I was so concerned with how I would be perceived that I refused to give my opinion. Eventually, it was this concern that actually improved my writing. Having an awareness of a larger audience made my thoughts more logical and concise. Additionally, I would have to say that this class has taught me to read critically.

Although this virtual medium improved my writing, I think I still prefer formal papers. My preference is solely due to my familiarity and comfort with the classic style of writing (i.e. type and print). Even though Blogspot offers a text box complete with spell check, I still chose write all of my posts in a Word document. For some reason a Word document has a certain aura about it. It evokes a particular style of writing. For me, that style becomes a formal one. The text window in Blogspot on the other hand, reminds me of instant messaging and therefore seems much less formal. I fell into this trap for my very first post. Instead of writing in Word first, I wrote directly onto the Blogspot page. Needless to say, my post was far below the standard which some of my classmates achieved. Quickly, I learned and my writing improved. I am not trying to say that I did not enjoy writing in a different medium. I only meant that this was a big change and it took some getting used to. Ultimately, I believe that this was a great class and I hope to take something similar in the near future.

Reality

The notion of reality was once a simple and straightforward concept. It is commonly defined as something that is in definite being, not pretend or imagined. However, due to recent technological advances, the idea of reality is becoming more and more complicated. Several theories surround the philosophical sense of the word, thereby confusing its meaning even further. What was once considered science fiction (i.e. computers, high-tech games, and the Internet) is now possible and is effectively shifting the way we think of the separation between what is real and virtual.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines reality as “the quality of being real or having an actual existence.” It is derived from the late Latin realis meaning “relating to things.” In the past, reality was used to refer to a “sincere devotion or loyalty to a person” (The Oxford English Dictionary). Although this particular usage is obsolete, it has direct ties to its Latin derivation. Being loyal to someone is to have a relation with him or her. The shift from the term’s early history to its contemporary denotation, however, is relatively unknown. Although a direct correlation between these uses is unclear, an evolution of this word could be traced. Perhaps sincere devotion became an important ideology and was later recognized as something concrete or real. This then transformed into the definition that is recognized today.

Wikipedia goes on to state the controversy surrounding what is “reality”. Many believe that reality is a subjective term and is solely based on the interpretation of the individual. A consensus reality is formed when a group of people experience a certain event and come to an agreement on what it was real. This however, can lead to inconsistencies. What happens when one group has developed one particular set of realities while another group rejects them? In this subjective theory, reality cannot be considered a universal truth, but only a socially constructed concept. Reality is then considered to be “dependent upon mental and cultural factors such as perceptions, beliefs, and other mental states, as well as cultural artifacts, such as religions and political movements, on up to the vague notion of a common cultural world view” (Wikipedia). A famous historical example of this occurred in the 16th century. In this time everyone accepted that the sun revolved around the Earth. What we now know to be false was the consensus reality of the time. Until the Copernican Theory, this fact was basically undisputed. Alternatively, in the realist sense, reality is synonymous with “fact.” It is objective and therefore independent of human perception. The assertion that the Earth is round is a fact and therefore reality. Phillip K. Dick accurately summarizes the realist view in his statement that “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.” This theory, as opposed to the anti-realist beliefs, effectively prevents confusion over what should be declared as reality.


Common colloquialisms, however, support the notion that reality is subjective. Sayings such as “my reality is not your reality,” suggest that everyone has their own perceptions of what they consider to be real. Even though an objectively-based reality makes more logical sense, it seems as though the subjective philosophy is commonly accepted. This is termed as “idealism” and focuses on anti-realist beliefs. Idealism is perhaps popular due to the comfort associated with the idea that reality can be subject to personal interpretation. The knowledge that the individual can essentially create his or her own reality is reassuring. This is how most ideologies are formed. The “subjective reality,” in this sense, is often contrasted with the imagination (or the virtual world that is created by the mind).

This comparison has lead to a shift from the common usage of reality, to denote an actual existence, to focus more on the separation between the real and virtual. Recently, the two have been fused to create what is known as virtual reality (VR). This technology “allows a user to interact with a computer-simulated environment, be it a real or imagined one” (Wikipedia). Virtual reality is often used in gaming, but has more recently been implemented in realistic training simulations for emergency personnel, such as firefighters, police officers, and even medical physicians. VR programmers pride themselves on the creation of a reality-based system. Such a system is defined by The Oxford English Dictionary as something “founded on realistic thinking or the state of things as they actually are.” These technological innovations are so advanced that their ability to portray real life is astounding.

It is this accurate representation of reality that is effectively confusing the distinction between reality and fiction. Hyperreality is the term that “characterize[s] the way consciousness defines what is actually ‘real’ in a world where a multitude of media can radically shape and filter the original event or experience being depicted” (Wikipedia). One famous hyperreality theorist includes Jean Baudrillard. In particular, Baudrillard indicates that the real world is being replaced by a fictitious one. As a society, we are beginning to experience virtual realities as part of our physical reality and are therefore allowing it to become part of our everyday life in the real world. As technologies become more sophisticated in their abilities to emulate the real world, hyperreality becomes more prevalent. This issue can be clearly seen in today’s society when examining Second Life. Second Life is an online game with no true objective. It is essentially a virtual world in which its users can manipulate details such as the places to visit, gestures, clothing, gender, and even the appearance of their avatar (a virtual representation of the user). Users are able to escape reality by turning to a virtual world. Ironically, they are escaping to a very accurate simulation of the real world. Due to this emulation, many people grow to accept this virtual world as their reality, in the strict subjective sense of the word. This rejection of real life is widely disputed and a hierarchy between the real and virtual has developed. Many believe that reality should be in higher regard than a virtual world. However, to many users of Second Life, this hierarchy is not true.

Reality is a very fluid concept. It defines a variety of things and may never be solidified. Even now, all of its previous meanings are being challenged. Society is rejecting the term and replacing it with “actuality.” The creation of reality television has ultimately put a blemish on the face of reality. Because these programs have become an inaccurate representation of real life (due to character scripting), the concept of reality has been questioned and accused of misrepresenting true life. Perhaps “actuality” will become the new reality.

An LG Dare-ing Identity

At 3am Monday night, I realized that I was not going to sleep. I had spent the last four hours lying awake in bed trying to convince myself that sleep was inevitable, but I was wrong. Finally, I decided to give in and get up to read. The closest thing to me in the dark room was an old copy of Allure magazine. As I flipped through the pages absent mindedly, I began to notice an abundance of advertisements for various products: Gucci, OPI, Ralph Lauren, Chanel, and Coke-a-cola. Half asleep, yet brutally aware of my consciousness, I stumbled upon this advertisement.

At first glance, it seems completely mundane due to the lack of color. Perhaps, it was my glazed over senses from a profound lack of sleep, but after awhile I became aware of a deeper meaning within this ad. It was not simply promoting a cell phone, but also an identity. At this point it may be confusing how an advertisement for a cell phone can possibly be selling a new identity. In the following post, I intend to clarify how Verizon Wireless can effectively do just this. This purchasable identity is hidden beneath numerous representations.

As I have mentioned in previous posts, identity is a complicated ideology. New Keywords: A Revised Vocabulary of Culture and Society defines it as “the autobiographical self…organized around a range of…cultural attributes, such as character, personality, experience, social position, or lifestyle” (172). However, more recently, identity has been extended to encompass what is called a “collective identity”, or “particular ways of imagining …group belonging.” As anyone who has been to high school knows, fitting into a certain group requires a particular representation of oneself. Many character traits are idealized by society and are therefore widely accepted. A sense of adventure and a disregard for danger are among them, and are repeatedly praised in action movies such as Mission Impossible, Indiana Jones, and James Bond thrillers. Well, lucky for us, anyone who does not posses these qualities can purchase them simply by buying the new LG Dare.

In comparison to the LG Dare, the advertisement for iPhone is very different. While the LG Dare is a black faced phone surrounded by darkness, the iPhone is surrounded by whiteness. Both ads have a rather large amount of space encircling the phone itself, yet each fills this space differently. The iPhone, for example, is bordered by a large, open blank space, but the LG ad contains an image of a snake coiled around the phone. Both the snake and the LG phone share the same color scheme and contain a metallic sheen. The color red appears in the LG advertisement, while the iPhone ad keeps things simple and only displays a purely white background. In addition, iPhone has no catch-phrase, no slogan, and no writing.

While these differences are seemingly mundane, they are, in fact, very important. IPhone was LG Dare’s wildly successful predecessor. In an attempt to compete with the new technology, LG not only needed to offer equivalent features, but also attract its audience more effectively. As opposed to iPhone, LG created an advertising campaign that makes an effort to sell an adventurous identity along with a phone.

Advertising is a language in itself where every detail is calculated and deliberate. Almost everything that you encounter in this particular advertisement is a representation that must be deciphered to uncover its intended meaning. A representation is “partially synonymous with sign” and “understood as ‘speaking for’” something else (New Keywords, 306). The semiotic analysis of this ad begins with the breakdown of color and objects because they represent the new identity being sold.

Colors function in American society as specific representations. Even though the meaning behind colors is overlooked by many, advertisers use them to their advantage. Each object and color combines to construct a dangerous environment. The lack of color, which initially causes this ad to appear dull, is actually a conscious decision. In fact, it is likely that the color black was explicitly selected due to its ties to morbidity, emptiness, and death. This color is very prevalent throughout the advertisement, and therefore elicits an emotional response from the audience. They are left with a sense of foreboding and coldness all from a simple glance at this ad. The snake that is pictured also adds to these thoughts. Snakes often represent evil and instill fear within many. The reflection of similar characteristics in the phone and the snake implies that they are the same not only in appearance, but also in what they represent: fear. The audience is lead to believe that the phone, by itself, is also dangerous. These two representations effectively set up an atmosphere of trepidation and danger. In a stark contrast, the iPhone is neatly settled in the center of the page surrounded by only white space. White is representative of tranquility and cleanliness. There is no sense of fear or danger as in the LG advertisement. Since Apple was the first company to produce such an advanced phone, their advertising objective is to simply promote the technology. The blank, white background ensures that the audience will not be distracted and can focus on the wonders of the phone itself. LG, on the other hand, is simply emulating this technology. To be successful, they must additionally promote a lifestyle; one that promises to make the individual feel accepted. Another color used by LG Dare is red. This color appears in the phrase: “Dare you to touch one.” Red is often associated with traffic signs and used to alert a driver of potential hazards. Not only does the red word “dare” bring attention to the name of the phone, it also reinforces the presence of danger.

Additionally, the slogan itself (“Dare you to touch one.”) provides a kind of incentive. Once the danger had been established, the advertisement dares its audience to become active. The word “you” hails the audience and asks them to participate. “Dare you to touch one” provokes, and almost demands, that you face the present danger (the snake). The entirety of this ad functions to appeal to the desire to be adventurous. It is making the statement that the LG Dare phone is, in itself, dangerous and that by purchasing one (i.e. “touching one”) you can become fearless.

This new identity, full of action and danger, can be yours for only $199.99!