It is the story as old as the metaverse itself. Since humans landed in the cyberspace for the first time the problem was: "Are we ourselves here, or we can be something else?" In the first BBS's, protected by false feeling of anonymity, people created different personalities to represent themselves. At the same time, there were always those to tell that wherever one shows up, it is the same person. Now, when metaverse evolved to 3D virtual worlds things got no better. No, with offering virtual space and avatars instead of just group e-mails, they became even worse.
Virtual worlds just pushes some people into creating characters. It is not just making a nickname and maybe talking a bit differently than the actual human would do. It is making the appearance, it is dressing and behaving, it is making social interactions. It is making friendships and it is having cybersex. And, some people consider those things a possible deceit. No surprise that hostility can arise. Two tribes, immersionists and augmentationists (see the Alidar Moxie's post for the descriptions of each), have completely different approaches to the world. Still, they share that world. They meet on the streets, in clubs or in shops. And it is not a rare occasion that one group wants the whole world to behave their way while other is protecting their right to play.
Recently Dalien asked if there is any other choice:
I'd probably belong to neither of the two groups. Call me immersive augmentist, please :-)
No matter how different an avatar and the human are, they are coming from the same ground. Even if the human has more than one avatar, each of them connects to one part of human's personality. Immersionism is not a deceit as much as a journey to one's self, an exploration.
Humans are not so simple as we often like to think. Too many personalities are hidden in each of our typists. Avatars are just possibilities never came to full realization in the meatspace. As Argent Bury recently said:
I think of it as different facets of the same diamond.
This has been a topic of discussion in SL for some time. If you are interested, I’d encourage you to read Henrik Bennetsen’s wiki thesis at SLCreativity: http://slcreativity.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
There is a section specifically on Augmentation vs. Immersion here: http://slcreativity.org/wiki/index.php?title=Augmentation_vs_Immersion
but given the date this was written, you might want to read the wiki in context.
[...] interesting things happened that I whould like to comment about, like dandellion’s post about inmersionism, the funny link to this blog from Dolmere Talamasca’s one, the drama around fashion blogs [...]
Dande,
Wow! Thanks for quoting me here. I guess I should comment…
I suppose I’m mostly an immersionist, and I’m wary of people who classify that as “deceit”. I’m pretty up front about the fact that I, Argent Bury, do not exist in RL. After all, how many cyborgs from the Moon do you know in RL? My cybernetic eyes serve as one warning to hard core Augmentationists – I am not a carbon copy of a RL person. My profile says something similar. Without the aid of SL Software I am simply an unexpressed portion of someone’s personality and creativity.
Immersionist or not, I feel pretty “real” here. I don’t share every aspect of the RL person who made me, but I’ve developed my own habits and traits in response to my environment and the people around me. I made the “diamond” reference you mentioned above. Others have compared it to Siamese twins joined at the brain, or branches from the same tree. All I know is, this experience has given me the chance to take a long look at myself in a lot of ways, and I’m very glad of that.
::Argent Out::
Thank you for a fascinating post!
And it is not a rare occasion that one group wants the whole world to behave their way while other is protecting their right to play.
Yes, exactly. Augmentationism can easily be a fundamentalism: incapable of living and letting live, so many augmentationists demand that their rules apply to everyone, everywhere, and abuse those who seek the freedom of self-definition.
I really don’t understand it: there already *is* an atomic world, and it’s as rigid and repressive a place as any fundamentalist could want. Why they come to SL, let alone why they come to SL, and try to turn it into a replica of the world they live in, I can’t fathom.
But, the thing is, as with the religious fundamentalists, they’ve already lost. The worlds have passed them by. Identity *is* mutable. We can invent ourselves, recreate ourselves in our own image, transcend the tyranny of A/S/L. We can do it in virtual worlds, fully, and the capacity to do so in the atomic world is at hand.
Grace, thanks for the links. Now, we can bet I’ll do more writing on the subject. :)
London, thanks for the linking. Appreciated as always.
Argent, thanks for the metaphor with a diamond, and thanks for the morning on the Okinawa beach.
And last but not the least, thanks to Sophrosyne for two comments that give me hope that avatars really do care about our freedoms and that virtual identity is not something we should give away.
Which leads me to the comparison with religious fundamentalists. Yes, maybe we can assume they are losing the war, but many battles are still open and some more are just in front of us. And each of those battles, even if won, is making huge loses on the side of our civilization and the humanity. I guess that is the price we will have to pay.
dandelion:
Thank you for your kind words!
Like you, I’m not comfortable with that price – but I’m coming to terms with the thought that I will have to pay it, will have to invest in the unpleasantness of political activism, to protect my freedoms – indeed, in my case, my very existence as an autonomous Digital Person.
I’m glad to have discovered you. You’re an inspiration, and a model for a style of activism that hasn’t gone all obsessive and humorless! :)
Argent says she’ll set up a meeting amongst us sometime. I’d love that!
If we are all many-faceted jewels as Argent Bury so eloquently put it, then the Immerssionist is more likely to turn and examine these faces in the mirror, so to speak, of the virtual world. I love this metaphor. The rabbis of ancient days viewed Scripture in the same way, as if turning a gem and seeing new sides to the lessons from God.
As a self-identified Augmentalist, I was disappointed with this depiction as a fundamentalist. I certainly don’t try to make people believe the same things I do and would not advocate that a virtual world be just one way. Indeed, I get the feeling that the virtual world is also a gem … The mirror we look into has many faces, too!
No, neither Sophrosyne nor I are saying that all the augumentatists are fundamental. I have at least one aug friend. And it is fun to watch how strange friendships can develop between two avatars one as an representation of the human behin and one… well, the white skinned part-time cyborg :)
Actually, immersionist can go radical way too. But, their fundamentalism sounds different. Without any siupport in their humans, their characters are to transparent and non-persuasive.
I definitely think there is common ground between the two worlds, just as with any other set of ‘tribes’. I think that as long as we are aware of each other and know that there lines that the other will not cross, we can co-exists. Its not one or the other. I know people who are Augmentist and know my boundaries, and I consider them best friends.
Interesting discussion, indeed. I’ll just drop all the terminology (Dutch? Anybody? ;)) and say that I think it will always be a combination of the two: people making up their characters will always add ‘pieces’ of themselves, probably not even realising that. And people playing ‘themselvse’ will always play only how they see themselves, not who they really are. Thus play a role too. *combines the two, and is proud of it* ;)
dandellion: what I had in mind, that there are also shades of gray, besides the black and white. And I’m somewhere in the twilight. A lot of free space here – so I don’t even think on infringing the freedoms of everyone – as soon as I still can maintain the existence of the “gray zone” category for myself. Oh, look – seems there’s someone nearby too, so not just for myself. *smiles*
Oberon: Thank you for your gentle correction. I should have been clearer in stating that, certainly, not all augmentalists are fundamentalists!
And, in the interest of fair disclosure, I can be as uppity and judgemental an Immersionist (I keep wanting to say “insurrectionist,” for some reason!) as any A/S/L anti-genderbending bigot.
I’m in a family of five – four gynoid Immersionists and an utterly protean Augmentalist (with a *serious* Grendel’s Chlidren avatar habit!), and we work together very well.
Vint: That’s a *marvelous* insight, and one I’m going to hang onto as a reminder that the difference is not nearly so black and white!
dandellion: And it is fun to watch how strange friendships can develop between two avatars one as an representation of the human behin and one… well, the white skinned part-time cyborg :) – aaak! you’re my separated-at-birth twin!!! :)
That is you, then! I am in a quest for my long lost sister since I have played Pirates! We should celebrate a family reunion!
dandellion:
Absolutely, let’s meet up soon! I’m hosting at the Diversionarium, a sort of nerds’ social club, this Thursday and next Thursday (though I usually work Wednesdays), from 6:30 – 9 PM SLT, and “hosting” means inviting all my friends to come hang out. If that time works for you, please come by!
Also, I’m starting to plan a party for late next week – I’ll definitely get details to you!
[...] reminded me of Dandellion’s post on Immersionists vs. Augumentationists, where in the comments I decided my thought on this would be just as clear if I dropped the to many [...]