A portrait in products

In all my hours wasted spent I made one lame and over-simplified depiction of Kai and the fact that he works dish utility at Gusto (see screenshot). I decided to stop while I was ahead. While I could continue to make similar layers it just wasn't getting my point across (unless you feel otherwise).

Going forward I think I have to revamp my idea. Right now I am just not inspired to work on this trajectory.

I revisit my literature review from first semester to see if there was any other directions I could go.

Currently what I'm trying to say:

- we all have different multiplicities to ourselves

- these versions change based on context

- some individuals experience more than others which often leads to new or more 'versions'

Other outputs:

- some sort of conceptual film or 2D portrait with an accompanying soundtrack of the person??

- gif/animation depicting the changing selves of a person

Other possible directions based on lit review:

1. "People are more comfortable with representations of reality versus the real thing (avatars interacting vs. real social settings)

2. "The new experience of the self is multifaceted". I wonder if there is a brand/outcome I can create taking an object and altering it based on fragments of the self or mood. Ie: Take one item and brand it based on the different versions of a person. Think this could be cool??

3. "Online activity can create a false sense of self". Does it? Maybe I can explore this notion in depth?

Anyways, totally stuck. Any feedback or suggestions are GREATLY appreciated at this point in time.

Thanks Richard.

His Response?

"This image isn't interesting, because it's only about dishwashing, not all the other stuff. What does he read? What does he do in his none dishwashing time? What does he think about when he is washing dishes. What is his function in the economy? etc/  Though I woudn't want to make you do something that isn't inspiring to you, I think this still has potential. But no question, it isn't the only way to approach this.

The gif/video approach could be interesting, showing different aspects, especially if the images were cut up so it wasn't just swapping images, but something that changed organically.

The product idea is ok, but what product? It would have to be something that lends itself to different approaches maybe the computer (or something) would work. Or you could brand the person, with sub-brands. A bit obvious maybe, but could be interesting.

Online activity can create a false sense of self, but so can being a cop, or a university professor.

That being said, I sourced out a print shop that does large format acetate prints… directly after melting a sheet of non-printer acetate in my printer– not cute. Hopefully this is the added touch I am missing.

For next weeks class I will redo portrait #1 in addition a new portrait. I found my latest candidate and am thrilled to find out more. I can foresee this next portrait/portrayal of my project as a nice contrast to my portrait of Mckenzie…

Due to McKenzie’s spontaneous nature I shot images of her on a whim when she forgot her umbrella at a CVS Pharmacy and we had to run back. I wanted intentional action shots that were candid and in the moment. She seldom is in one place for a long time (moving to different states and countries) and is always out and about in various shenanigans.

January 16, 2015

New year, new me. Just kidding, but in all seriousness it is time to push my thesis even further and hopefully score a design related job at the end of all this.

This week I was overwhelmed by my topic and to be honest, not quite clear myself what I was hoping to explore. Persona? Technology? Schizophrenia? Reliance on technology?? Last semester I looked at the relationship between the representation of the online and offline version of the selves. At the end of the term I came to realize we have more than two main facets of our personalities. We have many. Hence why this semester I aspire to investigate and explore the multiplicity of the self and the complexity, coherence and technological aspects that go along with it.

This week I constructed a conceptual ‘prescription’ assisting users a simpler way to navigate between the many versions of themselves. This came about as I was in ‘thesis/school mode’ and I had to go to my hostess job at the restaurant. I couldn’t help but wonder, what if there was an easier way to ‘exit’ my work mode and enter my ‘social’ mode. While there is a devil’s advocate out there somewhere critiquing that people already ‘self-medicate’ with drugs, this exploration is targeting the conceptual aspect of providing a safe and tangible way to change between the selves.

The caption I wrote along side my quick prototype on instagram: Is there a way to manage all of our personas across platforms? As identities are becoming more complex how do we maintain different versions of ourselves in different contexts? What if there was a pill we could take to activate these different multiplicities of our personality on command? The fine print on the bottle reads:

“SOME MEDICINES MAY INCREASE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MANAGING MULTIPLICITIES OF THE SELF.  CHECK SOCIAL MEDIA AND CONSULT YOUR ‘FRIENDS’ FOR MORE INFORMATION REGARDING PERSONALITY COHERENCY ACROSS CONTEXTS.”

After a weekly one-on-one meeting with Richard, I talked about creating one overall project that will last me the duration of the this semester. I came up with the loose idea of ‘portraits’ of different people showing the complexity of their personas. I already anticipate facing challenges surrounding incorporating a whole identity into ‘one image’/portrait and aesthetically how I am going to do this. The past few days I have scoured the library and internet for digital collages, portraiture, infographics and photography techniques. I came to the conclusion that I will collect a data set per person and let the information guide me.

I’m going to New York this week for my birthday and hope I can incorporate some of my trip/friend into my project. Can’t wait to seek out some inspiration at the Met/MoMa/New Museum and other local galleries.

Rough Work Ideation

For the duration of this literary review, the physical or ‘real world’ will be referred to as the non-virtual world. This is an important distinction, as it seeks to preserve the ‘reality-bearing qualities’ that virtual spaces offer.

Less than a short decade ago “people were often made nervous by the idea of thinking about computers in human terms”. Today, the traditional distance between people and the screen has become even closer. Sherry Turkle, guru of psychology and human relationships with technology, is quick to question whether we are living life in the screen or on the screen. In her novel , ‘Life on Screen’ she in fact claims that we are learning to take things at interface value. Furthermore, she asserts that we are moving towards a culture of simulation in which people are increasingly comfortable with substituting representations of reality for the real. In a phenomenon coined the ‘artificial crocodile effect’ Turkle compellingly asks readers: “which would you rather see– a Disney crocodile robot or a real crocodile? The Disney version has a certain vividness. It rolls its eyes, it moves from side to side, it disappears beneath the surface and rises again. It is designed to thrill us, to command our attention at all times. None of these qualities is necessarily visible in a real crocodile at a zoo, which seems to spend most of it’s time sleeping. And you may have neither the means nor the inclination to observe a real crocodile in the Nile or the River Gambia” (236). Turkle is, arguably, entirely correct. This is true for the following reasons. As our attention spans grow shorter, we want to be highly entertained all the time and at our personal convenience.  This is why digital natives and those ‘born digital’ are beginning to become accustomed to the virtual over the non-virtual.  Why communicate with a friend in person when that same interaction can occur on Facebook chat? Though the emotional quality of the online interaction may pale in comparison, it is quick, convenient and is surprisingly becoming the norm. 

In her most recent novel Alone Together, Turkle explains how the seductiveness of technology meets our human vulnerabilities as “we are lonely but fearful of intimacy. Digital connections in the sociable robot may offer the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship”. Essentially, everyone wants to feel close without actually being close. We want connections but aren’t willing to put the effort, dedication, loyalty or commitment that traditional friendships require. Though our digital age offers ‘friends’ at the touch of a button, these connections unsurprisingly lack emotional significance. In a 2012 TED Talk, Turkle refers to this concept as the “modern-day Goldilocks effect”. She links texting as the perfect medium to illustrate her message. By texting someone you know, you are close, but not too close. Just at the perfect distance away. Texting also encourages continuous connection as most people have their phones always on and always on them. The appeal behind on screen communication is that it offers a place to hide, yet expose oneself. The limitations of texting allow the user to “keep people at a reassuring distance. You can edit, reflect and redirect the conversation or cut it off” at any point. In the same novel, Turkle interviews 16-year-old Audrey who makes the brilliant connection between texting and the avatar. Audrey says: “Making an avatar and texting. Pretty much the same. You’re creating your own person; you don't have to think of things on the spot really, which a lot of people can’t really do. You’re creating your own little ideal person and sending it out. Also on the Internet… you’re not going to advertise the bad aspects of you” (191). This is precisely the appeal of the avatar.

An avatar can loosely be defined as a graphical-representation of a user or their alter-ego/character in a computer game, Internet forum and so on. During the creation of an avatar, users have the ability to be co-designers of their experiences. Given the constraints of the platform, users can micro-adjust their avatar to suit their desired wants and needs. At this point, it may be instructive to explore its design process. How do users make certain choices when representing themselves in new environments? Why did the user choose to be taller on screen? Did they change their gender from male to female to based on sheer ability, interest or deep rooted curiosity? Though individuals are not always directly representing themselves, engaging with an avatar allows for subconscious curiosities to arise. When playing an avatar “experimentation and self reflection may just sneak up on you. You don’t realize how engrossed you are until you begin to play”. This is where the notion of ‘slippages’ come into effect. A ‘slippage’ is where the online persona and offline self merge into one accidentally; “where the multiple personae join to compromise what the individual thinks of as his or her authentic self”in a blurred state of mind. Likewise, sometimes non-virtual life moments are projected into the digital world by ‘acting-out’ - the process of staging non-virtual conflicts in new settings. Turkle shares an anecdote of Julie and her rocky relationship with her mother. In person they bicker frequently with little to no foreseeable resolution. Julie is troubled by her unstable relationship and often projects her situation online. She gains peace of mind by vicariously engaging in different forms of resolution with others in an array of situations. Multi-user dimension (MUD) games offer users like Julie permission to play and try things out. This is precisely what makes them attractive to thousands of players. It is also very common for people to use the avatar as ‘practice’ for life in the non-virtual world. Turkle mentions a situation where one boy used the online world as a space to reveal his homosexuality to others anonymously before coming out to his friends and family in person. Due to the forgivingness and flexibility of the online sphere, this boy could be anonymous, have time to edit, reflect and even ‘test out’ different methods of sharing his story. Avatars cater flawlessly to these situations as they allow for the ideal hybrid of anonymity and multiplicity.

In the online world, one can have a sense of self without being limited to just a single version. In Life on Screen, Turkle puts forth the metaphor that the digital self can be viewed as having multiple drafts or several versions of the same document open with the ability to move between them all. This implies that there is not one version or ‘true self’ but rather many versions that can be cycled through depending on context. If the new experience of the self is multifaceted, then the idea of projecting different selves online is fundamental. When representing the self, virtual spaces allow for fluidity which “acknowledg[e] diversity. It makes it easier to accept the array of our (and others’) inconsistent personae– perhaps with humour, perhaps with irony. We do not feel compelled to rank or judge the elements of our multiplicity. We do not feel compelled to exclude what does not fit” (261). By acknowledging the multiple versions of the self, one is not confined to unity. It is this multiplicity that makes for uniqueness and individuality. Just as a person may represent themselves slightly differently at the office, home, the gym, their parents house, or on an airplane, that same person may behave slightly differently in that same equivalent of online contexts.

However, not all online spaces have rigid social norms that are established or followed like those in the non-virtual world. According to Philosophy professor R. Rodogno “in a space like a cocktail party, the goal and social norms are clear; on facebook for instance, they are not. Facebook allows for plurality of purposes by the same person at one time or by different people at one time”. This is precisely where blurred lines occur between the online and offline representation of the self. Offline, social norms are made fairly clear. For instance there are certain forms of etiquette one non-verbally complies to when at a movie theatre or the office. Online this isn’t always the case. He continues “a good illustration here is Facebook whose avowed purpose is helping its users find and keep in touch with their friends. Yet, while some users clearly stick to that, other users blend that purpose with clearly professional ones, something that Facebook easily allows users to do… there is no way for a viewer to know exactly what the presenter of information is up to unless the question is explicitly taken in a written exchange.” To a degree, a lack of social norms online can be problematic. If a user is unclear of expected behavior, how can they represent themselves accordingly? It is imperative to explore these types of representations as “an individual can now have more than one manifestation of a single consciousness. As new ‘worlds’ are defined, the definition of ‘self’ must, and will, change”. Also, as online connections begin to hold greater significance, the relationship between the different selves, primarily in online and offline contexts, will most likely change. Though these relationships may seem trivial, they will ultimately influence how we view ourselves, connect with others, establish social norms, and live out our hopes, passions and desires. 

One point of connection that can quite literally be made between our non-virtual and virtual selves is data mapping. In her book The Virtual Self, author Nora Young investigates how our virtual selves are changing us and the world around us. One growing trend or perhaps even lifestyle choice is to record various bits of data surrounding one’s day, week, month or even year. Through websites and apps users are able to record an array of personal information from their food consumption to their bad habits. What is fascinating, though, is how much of that data comes from individuals themselves. While it may appear worthwhile to track certain types of information, what is the incentive to record insignificant numbers that are solely relevant on a personal scale, ie steps taken per day? Young believes our “data mapped selves give us a certain coherence, unlike the coherence from a meaningful community. They are a form of our extended selves. Our physical selves in a parallel digital world”. She attributes

this extended self as a means of tethering our virtual and non-virtual selves. A means of connecting our offline selves to the online; “a response to the disembodiment of digital life”. Also, recording the self creates “a self that's been turned into an object, a machine, a functional tool” (191) a means of gaining a more complete insight into the self. Young quotes philosopher Charles Taylor on “the growing ideal of the human agent who is able to remake himself by methodical and disciplined actions” (191). So although data-tracking helps users feel they are bridging the gap between their virtual and non-virtual self it also allows for ‘perpetual scrutiny’ and subconscious need to improve. Young is not oblivious to the dangers of self-tracking and how it can lead to a driven, hyper-regulated image of the self. By taking the non-virtual self and making it virtual, users are exposed to a new form of self-awareness; a principle that can be tied back to the avatar and its influence on the offline self. 

The ‘Proteus effect’ is a phenomenon where a persons non-virtual self subconsciously adapts to conform to their virtual self or avatar. According to Yee’s findings; “Virtual environments allow individuals to dramatically alter their self-representation. More important, studies have shown that people infer their expected behaviors and attitudes from observing their avatar’s appearance… For example, users given taller avatars negotiated more aggressively than users given shorter avatars”. In addition, a second study found “behavioral changes stemming from the virtual environment transferred to subsequent face-to-face interactions. Participants were placed in an immersive virtual environment and were given either shorter or taller avatars. They then interacted with a confederate for about 15 minutes. In addition to causing a behavioral difference within the virtual environment, the authors found that participants given taller avatars negotiated more aggressively in subsequent face-to-face interactions than participants given shorter avatars”. Together, these two studies demonstrate the influence and affect the online and offline selves have on each other. Perhaps the disparity is not as vast as one may think.

As new selves emerge in different environments we must embrace the plurality and possibility that is presented before us. As we share more personalized content with each other online we can’t neglect to form emotionally significant connections offline as well. As Turkle suggests, we are becoming more connected but ultimately more alone. The seduction towards technology and simulations is appealing and the concept of living vicariously through another self is even more so. The allure of avatars is the permission to play and try things out in a low-risk environment. They also offer anonymity, ‘practice’ for non-virtual life and freedom of expression to play out one's deepest desires. Communication is also beginning to change due to the high affordability of technology and emerging platforms. Online connections have begun to hold greater significance and some even prefer them to offline encounters. While simulations can appear more attractive we can’t leave the real behind. This raises the question: how will we manage and create coherence between the selves in a world that is so rapidly changing? More importantly, do we need to? As Young suggests, one method is to tether our virtual and non-virtual selves through data-mapping. By recording personal information we can visually see who we are digitally, objectively. Overall, though there is no black and white solution to personal representation across environments it is worthwhile to examine these relationships as more pluralities of the self come into existence.

Bibliography

5 Crazy Ways Social Media Is Changing Your Brain Right Now. YouTube. AsapSCIENCE, 7  Sept. 2014. Web. 12 Nov. 2014.

Palfrey, John G., and Urs Gasser. Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic, 2008. Print.

Rodogno, Raffaele. "Personal identity online." Philosophy & Technology 25.3 (2012): 309+. Academic OneFile. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.

Graber, Mark Alan, and Abraham David Graber. "Get Your Paws off of My Pixels: Personal Identity and Avatars as Self." National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, 13 July 2010. Web. 17 Nov. 2014.

Young, Nora. The Virtual Self: How Our Digital Lives Are Altering the World around Us. Toronto, Ont.: McClelland & Stewart, 2012. Print.

Turkle, Sherry. The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984. Print.

Turkle, Sherry. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995. Print.

Turkle, Sherry. Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

Yee, Nick, and Jeremy Bailenson. "The Proteus Effect: The Effect of Transformed Self-Representation on Behavior." Human Communication Research 33.3 (2007): 271-90. Web. 20 Nov. 2014.