AM ST 475 Final Week

I missed Thursday class because I had finals.

I worked in lab literally for 24 hours also. Like I didn't get to go home and I slept on the couch.

It's not that bad though. I just have to change some computer settings every hour which takes about 10 seconds then I go dick around on the computer for another hour.

Anyways. Not much to talk about, all presentations this week. Most I felt were fairly lackluster compared to what I was expecting.

Still working on my paper/presentation.

AM ST 475 Final Project

Project idea is pretty simple.

The bulk of the project is in a big paper divided into four sections. The first three sections use three games as the medium to talk about things. Mass Effect, Bioshock, and Fallout 3. The last section ties together all three and talks about the similarities between them to discuss how we view things, and how we process/digest/interpret information.

The 'Mass Effect' discusses how, despite being set in an advanced space-aged future, all of the issues the game presents are essentially the same types of ordeals we have in the present.

Bioshock will discuss the never-ending struggle between democrat/republican ideologies, the nature of linearity in gameplay and how the game serves as a harsh critique of un-regulated capitalism.

Fallout 3 will discuss how the game is unique in the sense that it creates a fusion of cyber-punk and steam-punk genres; and why the world it's set in is so fitting to examine different social settings. Communications in the wasteland is severely limited, and groups/communities are vastly separated. Because of this and little interaction with one another, you see different towns growing in different ways.

Last section touches on how in all three games, you the player are constantly being observed and given feedback to. Etc etc. Stuff like that.

WoW Character - Race/class/gender etc

So for class we had to play WoW. Brings back memories. It's changed a lot though, too bad the trial only covers the first game so it doesn't really matter.

I picked a Tauren Druid. I'm already lvl 16 and it's been like 2 days. It's kind of sad. Anyhow, for the most part, the starting 'n00b' zones are fairly empty, since most people pretty enthusiastic about the game are on the expansions and/or other servers. So, interaction with real people is a little lackluster. I DID meet this girl (yes a real girl and not a guy pretending) near crossroads. Basically I was getting my ass handed to me by a pack of stupid lions and this undead hunter saves my ass. This other toon follows and starts apologizing, saying 'my step son has AD HD blah blah'. And we just started whisper/chatting. I was very honest about myself, and she seemed honest enough about herself I guess. We're both Canadian, although she's in Calgary. She's never been to college, but interested in psychology. Plays a ton of WoW. I told her that I was only playing for class and she thought it was very intriguing. That was the bulk of my random interaction really.

The thing is, for games like this I don't even care about the lore. As in I read nothing. All I do is follow the objective markers until I reach the designated point, find the NPC, grab quest, then follow the marker to where the quest is, then kill X amount of monster Y for Z amount of item Q. It kind of ruins the whole discourse about race/class/gender, but that's just really how it is for a lot of seasoned gamers, especially of the MMORPG crowd.

The same probably can't be said for players who have been in the game for a long time, who are playing in the zones with far more things going on.

I DID join a dungeon group though. However, it was a random join. Nobody really said much, there was kind of an unspoken agreement about what to do. There were several different classes/races/genders in the group, but all it really came down to was 'Tank, DPS, healer.' Which is pretty much what I expected.

In order to gain further insight into the social constructs of the game, one needs to be fully immersed in it and actually participate (i.e join a guild, raid, get addicted, try the auction house, etc etc). However due to the limitations of time/trial account I regret to admit that these things probably won't be fully realized.

AMST 475 Post #3

Let's see. Been sick for a while and I can't stop coughing so it's annoying. Work sucks.

I can't say I've learned all that much in this course yet, because the bulk of the material I've already seen through another course. However, I've never seen it applied in so many unique and interesting ways.

This is going to be fairly short, but, we're just supposed to write what we've learned and what we hope to learn. I enjoy being in the class and having discussion, so....maybe just keep rolling with that?

Race, Media, Cyberpunk - Class blog #2

Shawn - didn't go to class on Thursday. Every 2 weeks I have an exam at 1:30 for this other class. So, I'll probably be missing those 3 days total.

Not sure what to talk about. I was brewing up this great storm in my mind a few days ago but kind of lost it over the course of nights where I actually got to sleep.

It's interesting to note the racial dynamic in cyber punk films such as blade runner and the matrix. Although, there is definitely a disparity between the analysis given in the text, and the actual context of those films. i.e I highly doubt that the films' original writers/directors intended for all of those things the analysis calls for. However, that does not refute the validity of Nakamura's writing either. Her writing serves as a good insight into contemporary attitude towards race and gender. I am simply implying that there are various superfluous reasons why certain characters are cast.

It is true that in cyberpunk genre, it is typical to depict racially mixed characters in that idealic blending of cultures concept of the future. However, those films all have one thing in common - that they are made in the present where racism exists, and that media controls and practice ultimately decide what happens in a film. For example, nearly all lead protagonists are white actors, while seemingly ethnic actors are nearly always put into one of these roles: naieve young sidekick, cannon fodder, old wise man, forced awkward love interest ( if you're a woman - why are there so many of these?), or villain. This has been slowly improving over the years, but there are still waaays to go.

Also, whenever minorities are present in films, I feel like it's always African Americans. Likewise with race issues, it's always black vs. white, and every other minority group is neglected. Granted, African Americans are the only ones who were technically enslaved, if that counts for anything.

Again this is age old present day rhetoric. That when a white dominated media portrays ethnicity in anything it displays, it often romanticizes or bastardizes culture into bite size pieces in order to make the content more accessible to whom they THINK is their primary viewers i.e other whites.

I talked a lot in the class chat. And uhh.... yeah not much on my mind right now.

First post in a long time

Back in the day before myspace and facebook and all those other social networking sites out there, I was one of those angsty teenagers on xanga and livejournal. Back when blogs were just online ranting boards for you and your friends instead of quirky themes for desperate aspiring would-be writers to snag some kind of book deal. Anyhow for one reason or the other I fell out of habit a while a go, and looking back at everything I thought to myself - how could I ever possibly think that THAT was good writing? So, from thus forth, I personally declare that I denounce everything I've ever written in a blog before this date. That's what I WOULD have said, but then I realized I could just delete everything. So delete I did.

I know I'm supposed to be discussing 'Panopticism,' but I guess some old 'blogging' habits are just resurfacing. 'Like an old caged animal seeing the sunlight for the first time and stretching it's limbs.' HA. Had you. That's something only silly 15 year old would write.

Anyway, onto Panopticism. I never got the packet, because I wasn't present for the first day of class. BUT. I do have several things to say, based on what we talk about in class. And my ever trustworthy friend wikipedia. SO. From wikipedia I have this definition:

"A Panopticon is a circular building with an observation tower in the center in an open space surrounded by an outer wall made up of cells for the incarceration of mental patients or convicts. The purpose of the design is to increase the security through the effectiveness of the surveillance. Placed in a cell, inmates cannot see each other through the concrete walls and their cells are flooded with light so that everything they do can be observed by the central tower. Foucault explains an additional function of the central tower in his book, the "Birth of the Prison," "We have seen that anyone may come and exercise in the central tower the functions of surveillance, and that this being the case, he can gain a clear idea of the way the surveillance is practiced." In this way, with the inclusion of the public and non-institutional members, the disciplinary mechanism of observation is decentered, which has the effect of increasing the efficacy of the disciplinary mechanism."

At first glance, I would assume that this 'circular structure' with increasing hierarchies and inhabitants, in this case the 'prison,' functions to display a social structure, or 'system' if you will. I was going to say something about power structures in social groups, as a function of cultural value, fitness, social norms, and class. It was going to be a grand rhetoric about why people do the things they do, and seemingly unknowingly accept many things for no apparent reason without asking - WHY. However, based entirely on the wikipedia entry (sorry Shawn, I'll read the actual packet I promise) and the cues in 'Southland Tales', the definition seems to revolve SPECIFICALLY around surveillance. And not just surveillance of an oppressed mass by a strict elite leadership (well, mostly anyway). It is a surveillance that is open to anyone, who happens to be observing from the surveillance end.

There are several assumptions I need to make. First, I saw that Foucault died in 1984 (thanks wiki), which was before the time of mass surveillance as we know it (cameras, media monitoring, fuck you patriot act) was massively implemented. Thus, his writings deal primarily with the 'prison' model. In his prison model, there is always the CHANCE that one of the inmates is being watched. In modern society with mass public camera surveillance, this goes on mostly taken for granted by the general public (unless they are severely paranoid or are planning something extremely devious). In the prison model, assuming unruly behavior results in some kind of reprimand or negative consequence, it encourages the inmates to act in accordance to the set of norms put in place by the 'overseer.' The modern mass surveillance model is a little more ambiguous.

In 'Southland tales', whenever a scene occurred in a highly public place, most of the public went about their daily lives, while the only ones consciously troubled by surveillance were those who had something to fear from it. However, it is interesting to note that in that society, they have military snipers in higher places open to plain site for anybody in the public to see. In case of any troubling behavior, the sniper has every right to shoot any member of the public they judge as unruly. This is something the populous seems to have accepted, as several characters are sniped from afar, yet (other than being startled at the scene), normal people are seemingly untroubled by this.

The difference between being under surveillance from afar, and with those you can directly see, is mostly interpersonal relationship. When you interact with another person, you constantly receive almost instant feedback from the person you are interacting with (whom is also observing you). When under surveillance, you can not be sure whom is watching, what they're thinking, or judging, or how they are responding by what you are doing. This uncertainty causes those who are conscious of this to act in ways that THEY believe the overseer desires. However, in BOTH cases, the individual acts as a response.

I'm done for now. I don't even know if I can get into the class yet. So then that'll have all been for a waste.