By mez, on June 13, 2008
Alternate Reality Games, Augmented Psychology, Massively Multiplayer Online Environments, Mediated Reality, Presencing, Prosumerism, Reality Spectrum, Social Gaming, Social Networking Platforms, Synthetic, Twitter
Tags: amateur, Anonymous, Flashmob, Gonzoism, Internet meme, Sandboxing, spontaneous engagement, Streisand Effect
Entertainment is associated with the concepts of fiction and non-fiction. Fiction involves the projection of a willing suspension of disbelief with variables designed to further narrative progression. Indicators of traditional fiction include characterisation, foregrounding, plot and/or sub-plot[s]. Non-fiction is fiction’s logical counterpoint; chronology, history and “fact” play clear parts in non-fiction constructions. There are many variations on the standard fiction/non-fiction dichotomy.
Fiction and non-fiction classifications are designed to map to boundaries of known forms [think: cinema, literature, television and music]. They are so designed to provoke audience responses introspectively and externally. Current synthetic practices are refashioning this entertainment base via the perpetuation of types of unintentional and deliberately augmented recreation. These recreation types are reliant on immediacy of response, play, and Pranksterism. They employ Sandboxing, Gonzoism and spontaneous engagement. This type of entertainment is termed _Presencing_.
Presencing involves loose clusters of pursuits that evolve in, or are associated with, synthetic environments. Examples include the Streisand Effect, Supercutting, Flashmobbing, the Slashdot/Digg Effect, acts by the group Anonymous, Geohashing, Image macro generation and Internet meme threading. Less defined examples include: MMOG guild interactions [think: user generated games-within-games], Virtual World involvements, and Social Networking via application adoption and creation. These instances illustrate how Presencing pushes recreation beyond a fictionalised/non-fictionalised framework.
Presencing showcases accidental or reflexive entertainment elements where the fictional/non-fictional divide is erased; associated validity qualifiers are also removed and reconceptualised. Amateur production is equated with valued expression. Presencing also offers adaptive potential for augmented attempts at mediating geophysical constraints.
4 Comments to “[Non] Fiction Eclipsing + Synthetic Presencing”
Leave a Reply
Archives
- December 2011
- November 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
Categories
Search Augmentology
Interesting (and spot-on…) analysis of what actual purposes these categories of fiction/non-fiction serve. Academia and publishing industries both use them to sell product. Very insightful.
Also reminded of Ballard’s introduction to Crash, in particular that famous passage:
“We live in a world ruled by fictions of every kind – mass merchandising, advertising, politics conducted as a branch of advertising, the instant translation of science and technology into popular imagery, the increasing blurring and intermingling of identities within the realm of consumer goods, the preempting of any free or original imaginative response to experience by the television screen. We live inside an enormous novel. For the writer in particular it is less and less necessary for him to invent the fictional content of his novel. The fiction is already there. The writer’s task is to invent the reality.”
Thus, the “line” between fiction and non-fiction has always been on artificial one, and a smear at that.
I disagree that fiction and non-fiction are designed to map boundaries of “known forms”. They can be used to describe various forms, including presencing. Some of the examples linked in the blog can be easily classified as fiction or non-fiction. For instance, the “100 Strangers” example of spontaneous engagement is non-fictional (portraits of actual people), the Streisand effect may refer to non-fictional (Ms Streisand’s house) or fictional information (a supposed scandal that never actually happed, or Photoshopped picture). Taking the more complicated example of a group of people running through an instance or dungeon in a massive multiplayer online role-playing game: the activity undertaken by the group of people is non-fictional (they all jumped online and met in a synthetic environment), but the setting is fictional (it doesn’t exist in the physical world).
I think the key is being clear on what level one is analysing a particular activity, and being careful to not confuse information, which may be fictional or non-fictional, with mechanisms used to deliver that information (e.g. books, television, the internet, synthetic worlds etc). This issue isn’t helped by humans generally having a gross inability to properly separate fictional and non-fictional elements (e.g. those that take a literal translation of everything in Bible, those who believe ever piece of information in celebrity magazines). Admittedly, sometimes it is difficult to do so given the information that is available.
Perhaps synthetic environments have made it easier to blur the distinction between fiction and non-fiction. However, traditional media can also effectively blur the distinction between fiction and non-fiction. For example, the infamous 1938 radio broadcast of The War of the Worlds generated mass hysteria, some films have adopted documentary style approaches while incorporating fictional and non-fictional elements, while the approach in Yann Martel’s book The Life of Pi, which obscures non-fictional and fictional elements, is very effective, in my opinion.
Hi Guys,
Trevor: It’s interesting to see a similar appropriation of Presencing [via capitalistic sources] already occurring. + how amazing was _Crash_!? [Ballard ftw. I can remember interviewing a Industry guy about the movie + the corresponding furor when it was released.]
Ash: 1stly, I also disagree with the idea re: ‘fiction and non-fiction are designed to map boundaries of “known forms”’. Instead, I view ‘Fiction and non-fiction classifications [being] designed to map to boundaries of known forms’ as written in the entry above. Seems like a small distinction but it is a crucial 1: mapping *to* boundaries implies expression templated via pre-established forms, as opposed to actively creating the parameters of those forms [as u seem to think I was suggesting].
In relation to u commenting on several, but not all, Presencing examples as containing fictional/non-fictional elements, I don’t see the relevance of this in terms of highlighting Presencing mechanics and structure? “100 Strangers” has a non-fiction element in the portraits, but the overall project aim was the action taken to *get* the portraits in the 1st place [the method is crucial as in the other examples u cite]. Your approach seems similar to saying “Cos this bread I’m eating is made up of wheat and flour, all it really is is wheat and flour. So what if it’s combined, mixed with seasonings and baked to create a yummy tasty [insert preferred bread choice here]?”
IMO ur assertion that “being clear on what level one is analysing a particular activity, and being careful to not confuse information, which may be fictional or non-fictional, with mechanisms used to deliver that information (e.g. books, television, the internet, synthetic worlds etc)” is far too reductionistic. It fails 2 take in2 account variations and offshoots of a myriad of outputs and types of entertainment, recreation and leisure pursuits that fall outside a strict fiction/non-fiction dichotomy. In outlining the idea of Presencing, it is possible 2 offer conceptual openings that allow these emergent categories to be recognised as something other – not just a retrograde melange of fiction/non-fictional variables.
Hi Mez,
Yes, i was concerned that i was being too reductionsit in the sense that i may somehow been been (not intentiionally) diminishing the overall value of the experience/activity. I just wanted to illustrate that the classification can be applied to synthetic activities at some level.
Having had time to reflect, i think what i really disagree with is the notion of “fiction and non-fiction classifications [being] designed to map to boundaries of known forms”. I think it is really only designed to classify one known form: literature. For instance, one is not confronted with a non-fiction or fiction section in a music store. Furthermore, each of these forms, including literature, have their own classifications in order to capture the “myraid of outputs and types of entertainment” that these known forms provide. For instance, music adopts rap, rock, classical, urban (whatever that is) etc, while cinema adopts horror, comedy, romance etc. Hence, i agree that a fiction/non-fiction dichotomy is not satisfactory for describing the various types of entertainment, recreation and leisure activities facilitated by synthetic environments, and that some other classification is required, just as it is the case with known forms.
Cheers.