Spore-ality

The "long zoom" is a topic I find myself pondering quite frequently. Educational programs on the Discovery channel about the universe have always fascinated me, and I think this is because I really just can't fully process the scale of it. Will Wright, a video game designer, is creating a game called Spore that takes place on a universe-size scale. In his eyes, Wright says he believes that "the game deserves to be seen as a work of art first and foremost, a way of seeing and making sense of the world." This is a fascinating way to look at a video game. With so many video games being labeled as destructive and time-wasting, Spore taking on the identity of a work of art is unheard of, especially when thinking of the game as a combination of scientific theories and entertainment.

What makes this game so unique is the idea that you can create any creature your imagination can come up with and send him out into the universe to try and survive. Establishing new homes on different planets, flying spaceships through the cosmos, interacting with other creatures in the game; their are no limits to the possibilities. Wright describes it as "the computer as an amplifier of your imagination." In a society where creativity and imagination have fallen by the wayside to games like Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty, this opens up a whole new realm of an experience that is both educational and addicting.

Wright says the beauty of Spore lies in the fact that it is "massively single player." Most games that are popular right now rely on other players logged in to a common network that can interact with each other. Spore allows you to be with other creatures that people have created, but they are fully automated. Your character is out there on his own, not at the mercy of the whim of another player. What makes this so "massively single player" is the powers of 10 train of thought. The scale to which your creature lives is similar to the scale in which we as humans live. The game instills a sense of power because we have seen the scale of the universe in which the game takes place, but because of the scale, it can, in a way, make players feel insignificant.

In our digital culture, the universality of this game is what is going to take it to new heights. Players of all ages can enjoy the game equally, and for different reasons. Spore shows us the "fragility of life, connection between micro and macro scales, complex ecosystems and food webs, the impact of new technology on social systems," and all these aspects culminate into a very real experience. The long zoom perspective is impossible for us to fully grasp, but it is important for us to give it our best shot.

Art can be a manipulative tool, but what constitutes something as art? In Victor Burgin's essay Art, common sense and photography, he investigates the meanings people construe to art. He gives an example of people questioning cultures different from their own. Why is it that in America, we don't question things like a "no shirt, no shoes, no service" policy. In other cultures, it may be completely acceptable to walk into a store wearing nothing but pants and buy whatever you like. It is just the way things are, so we don't question it. This can be a problem when thinking in the arena of art. "Art with an ideological slant can be manipulative," Burgin says. If someone does not take a critical stance when viewing a work of art or a photograph with an intended message of ideology, then they themselves can adopt the philosophy as their own. In terms of photography, it seems that it would be difficult for someone to construe meanings out of something that is simply a reproduction of what the eye can see. However, a photo is a complex of signs used to communicate a message. "While the picture before us may have depended on luck for its existence, it does not depend upon luck, or talent, for its meaning." An image can carry a large number of meanings, especially when it is parodied with linguistics. This is especially apparent in advertising. Most advertisements contain some sort of visual basis, be it a photograph or a work of art, along with words for anchorage. A cigarette ad depicting a lovely mountain scene with a river running through the valley suggests much more than what is actually behind the product they are selling. A cigarette may be described as "cool as a mountain stream," but this statement is deceptive. Nowhere on the advertisement would the company like to put a slogan such as "deadlier than car accidents" even though that is another aspect of the product. The ad can "suggest pleasure while rejecting that of unwholesomeness," as Burgin says. Photographs and other forms of art, to put it plainly, need to be taken with a grain of salt. Burgin sums up his essay with the words "We need to treat the photographic image as an occasion for skepticism and questioning, not as a source of hypnosis." It is easy to be captivated by the beauty of an image, but beauty alone is not justice for unwilling persuasion.

Big Brother: Panopticism

The idea of the Panopticon is fascinating as much as it is disturbing. From the perspective of a sane human being, being enclosed in such a structure would certainly challenge the person to maintain sanity. Constantly knowing that at any moment, someone could be watching you while you are unable to watch back. As terrible as this situation may seem, digital advancements have enabled high forces all over the world to engage in the practice of panopticism. "our society is one not of spectacle, but of surveillance" says Foucault. With closed circuit cameras being installed in major cities all over the world, how is this different from being subjected to the Panopticon? At any moment, an employee of the state could be watching every move you make. Some cities even have the ability to speak through a loud speaker by the camera to penalize wrong-doers. For many reasons, this sounds like a good idea. The only reason the FBI was able to track down the Times Square car bomber was through CCTV cameras installed on the street corner. But how far are we willing to let this kind of surveillance go to give up our right to privacy? These CCTV cameras do not extend behind closed doors, but there is still surveillance thanks to digital technology. Every time I go on the Internet, a record is made of where I went, what I did there, and how long I was there for. With all the social networking sites available, there is no reason that if the powers that be were so inclined, they could find out any little detail of my life. This type of tracking was no possible before our societies transition to a digital culture. People were so fast to embrace all these new technologies when they first came out, but now many are questioning whether or not this really was for the best. Digital culture has changed the way we live, but it has also taken away some of our privacy. Foucault says prisoners of the Panopticon were like actors constantly visible on a stage presented to the guard in the tower. A lot of similarities can be drawn between panopticism and our countries current surveillance capabilities. All of this surveillance is simply a means to ensure the hierarchy of power. One who does no wrong is still subject to abuses of this power, and as we have seen from instances like the school in Pennsylvania who gave out laptops installed with web cams to students and proceeded to watch the students at home, things can get ugly. Privacy is a basic right, and although digital culture has been a blessing, for the most part, privacy has been lost.

Panopticon, The Big Brother of Prisons

Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon Prison, may well have been born from the idea of syndics during the black plague in Europe. Michel Focault explains how this system was put into place and how it worked when the plague was discovered in a population in the opening paragraph of his essay “Panopticism”.

“First, a strict spatial partitioning: the closing of the town and its outlying districts, a prohibition to leave the town on pain of death , the killing of all stray animals; the division of the town into distinct quarters, each governed by an intendant. Each street is placed under the authority of a syndic, who keeps it under surveillance; if he leaves the street, he will be condemned to death. On the appointed day, everyone is ordered to stay indoors; it is forbidden to leave on pain of death. The syndic himself comes to lock the door of each house from the outside; he takes the key with him and hands it over to the intendant of the quarter…” (61).

The idea behind the lockdowns was fear and threat of death. Syndics may not have even been present during some of the times when stepping outside was forbidden, but for fear of being killed, the townsfolk never took the chance to venture outside to find out whether or not the syndics were actually there. This is the same idea behind Bentham’s Panopticon Prison, which is essentially the “Big Brother” of all prisons.

The prison is described as having “at the periphery, and annular building; at the centre, a tower; this tower is pierced with wide windows that open onto the inner side of the ring; the perihperic building is divided into cells, each of which extends the whole width of the building; they have two windows, one on the inside, corresponding to the windows of the tower, the other on the outside, allows the light to cross the cell from one end to the other” (63). The idea was to place inmates in all of the cells and light them, while only putting one watchman in the tower, whom the inmates cannot see. It is the theory that the constant light and fear of being exposed will prevent bad behavior and actually keep the inmates in their cells because they have no idea how many watchmen or people can see their actions. It was the same idea with the syndics in the time of the plague. Townsfolk simply listened to the rules for fear of being seen, even if they couldn’t see the syndics, they never wanted to take the chance that they were there and would catch them sneaking out. As Focault describes it, “Visibility is a trap” (64).