Even War is a Simulation
Tim Lenoir's article "All but War is Simulation: The Military-Entertainment Complex" illuminates the close relationship between the US military and entertainment industries. The sinister links he exposes reminds us of the interconnectedness of our modern world. In the end, what emerges from this article is a world of shadowy military agents roaming the halls of academia and the entertainment industry hungrily seeking new technologies. Of course, without military funding many now standard entertainment products and techniques probably would not exist for lack of funding.
Lenoir begins his article by dismissing Baudrillard and states that "we are witnessing a drive toward the fusion of digital and physical reality: not the replacement of the real by the hyperreal" (p. 289). Hyperreality was used by Umberto Eco in his 1975 essay "Travels in Hyperreality" which examined the tendency of museums and theme parks to use illusions to represent reality. This tendency was a response to the demand by the public to see an 'authentic' representation of something that never actually existed. For instance, idealized representations of Native Americans (e.g., the Noble Savage living in harmony with nature) created more to appease audiences than represent an authentic past. Of course, the irony is that these entertainment-driven representations were eventually treated as truth. However, in fact they were actually absolute fakes.
Baudrillard expanded on these ideas in a number of his works dealing with Simulacra. A simulacra is defined as an copy of something that never existed. The representations of nations at Epcot Center are an excellent example, for they represent an idealized version of countries that do not articulate well or at all with the lands being portrayed. Baudrillard remains an elusive figure in today's world and his ideas on hyperreality, simulacra, and the arms race remain troubling and fascinating. Indeed, it would appear that it is Baudrillard's work which Lenoir draws upon in naming this article. Baudrillard's 1991 essay "The Gulf War Did Not Take Place" stated, among other things, that the Gulf War was not a real war because it was fought more in the Media than on the ground. This hyperreal (more real than real) form of warfare satisfied a cultural imaginary seeking an authentic portrayal of the war by sensationalizing the conflict.
Throughout the article, Lenoir builds the argument that this blending between real and digital worlds is progressing through a Military-Entertainment Complex. Unfortunately, by the end of the article, I'm left wondering if this intersection of private interest (the media-consuming public) and producing interest (either Hollywood as entertainment producer or Military as force behind technological growth) is truly creating something 'more real' than real. Is the Military-Entertainment Complex (and New Media for that matter) generating authentic representations of the 'real' or do we transform and exaggerate the world around us as we translate it into the digital? Plus, who gets to define what 'authentic' means anyway?
I think that a number of factors will place some of these questions at the center of debates in the 21st century. For instance, as we improve the integration of database-driven 3D content and immersive VR it will be possible to ask questions like "should we visit Paris now or Paris circa 1920?" Also, the coming age of strong AI's will further complicate many such questions as self-aware, non-organic persons will join in the debate of what constitutes the 'real' and the imaginary.
Thanks for reading,
-ed
Lenoir begins his article by dismissing Baudrillard and states that "we are witnessing a drive toward the fusion of digital and physical reality: not the replacement of the real by the hyperreal" (p. 289). Hyperreality was used by Umberto Eco in his 1975 essay "Travels in Hyperreality" which examined the tendency of museums and theme parks to use illusions to represent reality. This tendency was a response to the demand by the public to see an 'authentic' representation of something that never actually existed. For instance, idealized representations of Native Americans (e.g., the Noble Savage living in harmony with nature) created more to appease audiences than represent an authentic past. Of course, the irony is that these entertainment-driven representations were eventually treated as truth. However, in fact they were actually absolute fakes.Baudrillard expanded on these ideas in a number of his works dealing with Simulacra. A simulacra is defined as an copy of something that never existed. The representations of nations at Epcot Center are an excellent example, for they represent an idealized version of countries that do not articulate well or at all with the lands being portrayed. Baudrillard remains an elusive figure in today's world and his ideas on hyperreality, simulacra, and the arms race remain troubling and fascinating. Indeed, it would appear that it is Baudrillard's work which Lenoir draws upon in naming this article. Baudrillard's 1991 essay "The Gulf War Did Not Take Place" stated, among other things, that the Gulf War was not a real war because it was fought more in the Media than on the ground. This hyperreal (more real than real) form of warfare satisfied a cultural imaginary seeking an authentic portrayal of the war by sensationalizing the conflict.
Throughout the article, Lenoir builds the argument that this blending between real and digital worlds is progressing through a Military-Entertainment Complex. Unfortunately, by the end of the article, I'm left wondering if this intersection of private interest (the media-consuming public) and producing interest (either Hollywood as entertainment producer or Military as force behind technological growth) is truly creating something 'more real' than real. Is the Military-Entertainment Complex (and New Media for that matter) generating authentic representations of the 'real' or do we transform and exaggerate the world around us as we translate it into the digital? Plus, who gets to define what 'authentic' means anyway?
I think that a number of factors will place some of these questions at the center of debates in the 21st century. For instance, as we improve the integration of database-driven 3D content and immersive VR it will be possible to ask questions like "should we visit Paris now or Paris circa 1920?" Also, the coming age of strong AI's will further complicate many such questions as self-aware, non-organic persons will join in the debate of what constitutes the 'real' and the imaginary.
Thanks for reading,
-ed
Comments