Abstract
This presentation tracks the community building practices of "e- vangelists" in Second Life, a virtual world possessing autonomous, but integrated (networked) communities. Using in-world ethnographic research and in-world and "Real Life" in-person interviews of e-vangelicals including the Second Life religious community builder Sonic Rang of Eternal Creations, I report on how many Web 2.0 religious leaders describe their use of SL to conduct online worship services, their "mission" as cyber-Christians, and the future of e-vangelism in an evolving new media ecology. The presentation will include in-world Second Life photographs.
Details
On Thursday 12/6, I will present an examination of my work thus far on this project (which I plan on continuing through years end in order to observe the community during their most holy day). My presentation will include media created by e-vangelical community builders and my own in-world photography. The presentation will be organized, like our course, into five units (post-humanism, design, friction, the network society, and force) that represent ways of explaining new media ecology.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
The cult of the milkshake
Stewart's Cultural Poesis has a particularly fascinating section about the Body For Life diet/self-actualizing regiment. If you follow the rules of the 12-step program you will live the life that was always just out of reach because of physical/mental inadequacies that drove you to seek help in the first place. The idea of salvation casts a shadow over the distractions of overeating and the pleasures of sloth. As Stewart writes: "They began the crave the 12week program even more than they craved a piece of key lime pie or a beer" (1037).
Now imagine such a powerful promise delivered in just one simple step? The acceptance of the lord. The promise is delivered. Beyond all of the psychological benefits of feeling that you have made some sort of good change in your life (turning a new page), there is the life-affirming power of being "part of something." A supportive group, that accepts you for who you are, and encourages you to do better, alongside others who are working towards the same ends. I don't know if I could continue doing these assignments and weekly readings, if I didn't know there were others who were going through it with me.
Community building provides a certain life-affirmation for the builders as well. The professor enjoys watching the study of their dedication enthused by new practitioners. For the pastor and the organizer of groups like Body for Life, there is something stronger at work. The belief that the people they enfranchise are being saved. Communities give participants and builders something to "step" towards.
Now imagine such a powerful promise delivered in just one simple step? The acceptance of the lord. The promise is delivered. Beyond all of the psychological benefits of feeling that you have made some sort of good change in your life (turning a new page), there is the life-affirming power of being "part of something." A supportive group, that accepts you for who you are, and encourages you to do better, alongside others who are working towards the same ends. I don't know if I could continue doing these assignments and weekly readings, if I didn't know there were others who were going through it with me.
Community building provides a certain life-affirmation for the builders as well. The professor enjoys watching the study of their dedication enthused by new practitioners. For the pastor and the organizer of groups like Body for Life, there is something stronger at work. The belief that the people they enfranchise are being saved. Communities give participants and builders something to "step" towards.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Being Watched
The idea of being watched is tossed around in Cache, the way that we toss around our visions of the lives of others. Someone watching Georges and his family. Him turning an eye to Majid. The public watches Georges on TV, and we watch it all in the film. All the viewers are looking for answers it would seem, monitoring the evidence of captured for some better understanding as to what is going on within the captured scene. A question that the film begs, and which often eludes us is: Why do we watch? Why do we torture ourselves with bewildering views into other peoples complex universes? Georges may have found peace with himself had he not so easily absolved his past. His view into his past through nightmares and confrontations with Majid were shown to us (and presumably before his consciousness) far fewer times than repeated screenings of the front of his own house looking for answers.
In Stewart's "Ordinary Affects" we get almost voyeuristic snapshots into the lives of charming innocents. Stewart makes a convincing case for the legitimacy of this "qualitative research," the often unseen power of "ordinary" moments. The example of the motorcycling couple that gets into an accident, is used in both this and the reader on Qualitative Research. Stewart writes that the little accident will "shift people's life trajectories in some small way."
Watching Cache shifted my life trajectory, both by endowing me with an increased paranoia and by getting me to think and talk about the idea of being watched with other people, who in turn told me creepy voyeur stories from their lives, and that they've heard through friends. Also when I was at the video store (which I signed of for membership for the sole purpose of getting Cache for this class), I discovered a movie I'd always wanted to see, but never really thought about renting, but it was in the "Employee Picks Bargain Price" section. When I saw it there, I got it too and made my day double feature. Further altering my encounters of the day, and those I encounter with the recommendations to watch Cache (and The Day the Earth Caught Fire).
In Stewart's "Ordinary Affects" we get almost voyeuristic snapshots into the lives of charming innocents. Stewart makes a convincing case for the legitimacy of this "qualitative research," the often unseen power of "ordinary" moments. The example of the motorcycling couple that gets into an accident, is used in both this and the reader on Qualitative Research. Stewart writes that the little accident will "shift people's life trajectories in some small way."
Watching Cache shifted my life trajectory, both by endowing me with an increased paranoia and by getting me to think and talk about the idea of being watched with other people, who in turn told me creepy voyeur stories from their lives, and that they've heard through friends. Also when I was at the video store (which I signed of for membership for the sole purpose of getting Cache for this class), I discovered a movie I'd always wanted to see, but never really thought about renting, but it was in the "Employee Picks Bargain Price" section. When I saw it there, I got it too and made my day double feature. Further altering my encounters of the day, and those I encounter with the recommendations to watch Cache (and The Day the Earth Caught Fire).
Monday, November 19, 2007
What is hip?
Thanks to Jason's valuable support/meddling, I've discovered a cold mine of an example of forming an online Christian community (or fellowship). St. Pixels.
St. Pixels is a good model, because they do what every other online fellowship I've found does to enfranchise internet users. They espouse hipness, and put-down anything that would be conceived as traditional or "outdated." Perhaps, a strange attempt to shake off the image of
religiosity as a relic of an era when we just didn't know any better. To not treat the web with the respect that a young user might be pre-disposed (through a whole life time of using it as a resource) to treating it with, would seem to fuel the belief that the Christian community "just doesn't get it." By harnessing power of web 2.0 as a medium to such a degree that you endow it with powers once reserved for "sacred places" (praying online, online confessionals, etc), you show young users that have been brought up to trust the web with personal information, fact-finding, and general advice, that you do get it.
Part of St. Pixel's mission statement is: to create a sacred place. To make the internet sacred? This is an interesting extension of the accessibility that evangelical Christians have been developing since, well, the apostles. The idea that hyperspace can be considered sacred, seems revolutionary to me. I don't mean necessarily a revolution on the order of The Reformation, or The Great Awakenings, but to assign the internet the power of a church certainly frees up control of how one can participate on the level older media have leading to the aforementioned revolutions. Would the Reformation be possible without the printing press? The "mega church" without unprecedented ease in automotive travel?
Could online holy spaces change the way we view religious participation? Imagine staying home on a Sunday, with your family hunched around the computer watching an e-service. If the music was interrupting your football game, it could be guiltlessly muted. Say the sermon was boring, maybe you could only watch half. I'm not saying that this potential would destroy the traditions of a good service. I think some people will always need to dress up and worship in a traditional way, but now the community has been extended to include these possibilities. New ways to participate expand what community membership means. The process of being a practicing Christian is "globalized." The way that everybody who writes can, with debatable verisimilitude, now call themselves a writer if they keep a blog, any one who considers themselves a Christian can call themselves one, as long as they log on for an occasional chat.
Adapting a community to serve new ways of networking is essential, but is all the "hipification"? Should St. Pixels use goofy cartoon avatars, instead of, maybe more realistic ones. Is making the structure of RL services seem boring by assigning them traits like "cobwebs, and organ fund," really necessary?
I want to further explore the need for coolness that seems to be inescapable in e-vangelism. While there is nothing disrespectful about St. Pixel's attitude towards a traditional service, there is a subversive sensibility to what they are doing. There is an emphasis on the conflict that this subversion creates, that doesn't seem to be necessary for expansion, but is perhaps is part of a greater marketing strategy to make the organization seem like an alternative for those who "don't like church." What about the crotchety old traditionalist point that we lose certain things with this network, especially in such a deeply spiritual context. Is it fair to suggest that logging on is akin to attending a real service. I wonder what Islamic attitudes towards this kind of worship are/would be, and what this says about the two religions different ideas about community building.
St. Pixels is a good model, because they do what every other online fellowship I've found does to enfranchise internet users. They espouse hipness, and put-down anything that would be conceived as traditional or "outdated." Perhaps, a strange attempt to shake off the image of
religiosity as a relic of an era when we just didn't know any better. To not treat the web with the respect that a young user might be pre-disposed (through a whole life time of using it as a resource) to treating it with, would seem to fuel the belief that the Christian community "just doesn't get it." By harnessing power of web 2.0 as a medium to such a degree that you endow it with powers once reserved for "sacred places" (praying online, online confessionals, etc), you show young users that have been brought up to trust the web with personal information, fact-finding, and general advice, that you do get it.
Part of St. Pixel's mission statement is: to create a sacred place. To make the internet sacred? This is an interesting extension of the accessibility that evangelical Christians have been developing since, well, the apostles. The idea that hyperspace can be considered sacred, seems revolutionary to me. I don't mean necessarily a revolution on the order of The Reformation, or The Great Awakenings, but to assign the internet the power of a church certainly frees up control of how one can participate on the level older media have leading to the aforementioned revolutions. Would the Reformation be possible without the printing press? The "mega church" without unprecedented ease in automotive travel?
Could online holy spaces change the way we view religious participation? Imagine staying home on a Sunday, with your family hunched around the computer watching an e-service. If the music was interrupting your football game, it could be guiltlessly muted. Say the sermon was boring, maybe you could only watch half. I'm not saying that this potential would destroy the traditions of a good service. I think some people will always need to dress up and worship in a traditional way, but now the community has been extended to include these possibilities. New ways to participate expand what community membership means. The process of being a practicing Christian is "globalized." The way that everybody who writes can, with debatable verisimilitude, now call themselves a writer if they keep a blog, any one who considers themselves a Christian can call themselves one, as long as they log on for an occasional chat.
Adapting a community to serve new ways of networking is essential, but is all the "hipification"? Should St. Pixels use goofy cartoon avatars, instead of, maybe more realistic ones. Is making the structure of RL services seem boring by assigning them traits like "cobwebs, and organ fund," really necessary?
I want to further explore the need for coolness that seems to be inescapable in e-vangelism. While there is nothing disrespectful about St. Pixel's attitude towards a traditional service, there is a subversive sensibility to what they are doing. There is an emphasis on the conflict that this subversion creates, that doesn't seem to be necessary for expansion, but is perhaps is part of a greater marketing strategy to make the organization seem like an alternative for those who "don't like church." What about the crotchety old traditionalist point that we lose certain things with this network, especially in such a deeply spiritual context. Is it fair to suggest that logging on is akin to attending a real service. I wonder what Islamic attitudes towards this kind of worship are/would be, and what this says about the two religions different ideas about community building.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
War Games
Exploration of Christian communities and recolections of my past experience with evangelism has led me to an observation, which in turn has led to an easier and more direct method of observing e-vangelical communities.
My observation is that understanding the nature of evangelism is secondary to the nature of communities. Formation of communities is more important to understanding the nature of the network society, and sheds light onto why e-vangelists opperate in the way that they do.
Eternal Creations, Campus Crusades, youth groups are all communities that use the power of group think that play on our desires to belong. They need not preach, only to provide. The cordinators of such groups are are networkers, builders of networks. Networks give us a place to "be."
These places provide free things, stuff to do, and a happy face. They don't ask anything in return. They aren't judgemental, and often break with skeptical asumptions of what missionaries do. They are, in my experience, outwardly tolerant, and genuinely interested in meeting people from different persectives. That being said, like all groups, they have a mission. A goal, something that unifies them, if they didn't, well, they wouldn't be a group. The mission of a missionary is to spread Christianity.
Communities like these don't ask anymore than belonging, a perfect and most members want nothing more. But what does it mean to belong to a group or a network. What do we sacrifice by belonging? What do those who ask us to belong stand to gain?
Evangelism is defined as a "militant zeal for a cause." Can activities as innocent as dance parties, games, charity work, etc, be considered militant? The question, better posed, is: can dance parties, games and charity work be considered the weapons of war. To me it's obvious. Could there be a better way to enfranchise people than mere unconditional acceptance? I certaintly get a little giddy everytime I find I'm pre-approved for a new credit card.
To ease my work, I will approach my further interviews by digging up clues as to how the activities are used to create a sense of community. The formation of a community is analogous to the formation of an army. If you form a community on behalf of anything, especially something as deeply devisive as religion, you are inherently conquering something, someone's individuality perhaps (If you haven't figured it out yet, I personally eschew affiliations). I am no longer interested in why evangelists use open, non-coersive communities as a tool of recruitment. This appears self-evident. I want to use my observations to gain a better insight into what community means to the creators of evangelical communities.
By understanding the personal value of communities within a network, we better understand the power of the network society. We gain an insight into, for better or worse, what our network society does for community affiliations in general. A better explanation of my research: How/why Christian communities appeal to disaffected web surfers.
My observation is that understanding the nature of evangelism is secondary to the nature of communities. Formation of communities is more important to understanding the nature of the network society, and sheds light onto why e-vangelists opperate in the way that they do.
Eternal Creations, Campus Crusades, youth groups are all communities that use the power of group think that play on our desires to belong. They need not preach, only to provide. The cordinators of such groups are are networkers, builders of networks. Networks give us a place to "be."
These places provide free things, stuff to do, and a happy face. They don't ask anything in return. They aren't judgemental, and often break with skeptical asumptions of what missionaries do. They are, in my experience, outwardly tolerant, and genuinely interested in meeting people from different persectives. That being said, like all groups, they have a mission. A goal, something that unifies them, if they didn't, well, they wouldn't be a group. The mission of a missionary is to spread Christianity.
Communities like these don't ask anymore than belonging, a perfect and most members want nothing more. But what does it mean to belong to a group or a network. What do we sacrifice by belonging? What do those who ask us to belong stand to gain?
Evangelism is defined as a "militant zeal for a cause." Can activities as innocent as dance parties, games, charity work, etc, be considered militant? The question, better posed, is: can dance parties, games and charity work be considered the weapons of war. To me it's obvious. Could there be a better way to enfranchise people than mere unconditional acceptance? I certaintly get a little giddy everytime I find I'm pre-approved for a new credit card.
To ease my work, I will approach my further interviews by digging up clues as to how the activities are used to create a sense of community. The formation of a community is analogous to the formation of an army. If you form a community on behalf of anything, especially something as deeply devisive as religion, you are inherently conquering something, someone's individuality perhaps (If you haven't figured it out yet, I personally eschew affiliations). I am no longer interested in why evangelists use open, non-coersive communities as a tool of recruitment. This appears self-evident. I want to use my observations to gain a better insight into what community means to the creators of evangelical communities.
By understanding the personal value of communities within a network, we better understand the power of the network society. We gain an insight into, for better or worse, what our network society does for community affiliations in general. A better explanation of my research: How/why Christian communities appeal to disaffected web surfers.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Ebbs and Flows
Castell's "Space of Flows" follows information throughout our ever-expanding series of complex networks. Changes in the way we live, change the way information is exchanged and from where it comes. Both valuable as an anology and as an example, is the changing face of the metropolis. The new "mega-opolis" which Castell exemplifies with the Pearl River Delta. He describes them as "discontinuous constellations of spatial fragments, functional pieces and social segments." Where the rural and urban are connected through the increasing posibility of commuting, the increasing possibilities of community and the exansion of cities.
For an example that hits closer to home look at BosWash the megaopolis that we are in the epicenter of. There are areas of discontinuity on the 95 coridor that runs down BosWash. I am more likely to wind up in Boston than the Bronx on any given weekend, or more relevantly I am more likely to wind up talking to someone in Europe on SL than anybody in Jersey. My exchanges become more associated with purpose than proximity. Proximity still takes it's toll of course, but outside of my neighborhood and my commute to school, proximity becomes less meaningful. I buy my vegtables from places I've never been in upstate New York. When I go to Jersey for Thanksgiving I will eat pears from Oregon orchards (Harry & David) that I have romped through. The Union Square farmers market is like a hub for the flow of fruit. Where those with the benefit of farm land can benefit from Manhattans flow of consumers and commerce.
For an example that hits closer to home look at BosWash the megaopolis that we are in the epicenter of. There are areas of discontinuity on the 95 coridor that runs down BosWash. I am more likely to wind up in Boston than the Bronx on any given weekend, or more relevantly I am more likely to wind up talking to someone in Europe on SL than anybody in Jersey. My exchanges become more associated with purpose than proximity. Proximity still takes it's toll of course, but outside of my neighborhood and my commute to school, proximity becomes less meaningful. I buy my vegtables from places I've never been in upstate New York. When I go to Jersey for Thanksgiving I will eat pears from Oregon orchards (Harry & David) that I have romped through. The Union Square farmers market is like a hub for the flow of fruit. Where those with the benefit of farm land can benefit from Manhattans flow of consumers and commerce.
Meme Map
In designing a digital research tool, I wanted to somehow design a system for measuring the conviction of one's beliefs. This would be valuable for my project, but also prove to stump me. I couldn't think of a reasonable way to do "measure" beliefs, so I figured the next best thing would be a way to organize everything (or at least any popular ones) that is believed by groups of people. One of my inspirations for this concept was the website www.relgioustolerance.org. They do their best to create a database of religion. They've created an interesting place to surf and learn in the giest of relgious harmony.
Religious Tolerance's website isn't exactly what I had in mind though, I was something beyond just religious beliefs, but all memes maped the way those clever geneticists figured out the human genome. A database the size of imdb, or better yet wikipedia. Of course it would be a wiki! Then people could add beliefs they share, or encounter. Of course the wiki would have to be edited as judiciously as wikipedia to prevent, as one of my irreverant undergraduate prank postings was labeled by a moderator, "patent non-sense." Ok so what I envision is a comprehensive wiki, that is (unlike wikipedia) limited to memes. The design inovation would be the map.
Like wikipedia, my meme map would be searchable, for ease of opperation, but unlike wikipedia, the site wouldn't be organized in alaphabetical lists (if it were, again, it would be an afterthought to increase ease of use). No my meme map would be a linked series of ideas, that would be taged to link to other ideas that perhaps inspired or were inspired by the idea you first found on the map. For example, say I looked up evangelism, which certaintly is a meme. You would come to a page that might look somewhat like a wikipedia post, but with much more emphasis on user testimonials and ideas, than origins and facts (although those aren't without their importance to the evolution of memes). Up in the corner of each meme page there would be a button a link that would say MapIt! When pressed it would link you to evangelisms place on the meme map (also user/moderator edited). I envision the meme map looking something like an idea map that like writers groups use to brainstorm: here is a link to a model. I would want the meme map to be less scribbly instead to have a key and different fonts and colors to signify different classes of memes (the way a cartographer does on a geographical map).
Bigger memes would be more pervasive, and generally have smaller sub-memes comming off. Christianity would be a huge sphere on the meme map, with it's different sects and sub-sects comming off. Different idea's that have developed from Christianity would be linked off of the appropriate meme bubble, and perhaps be linked to another huge concept that helped develop it. For example, temperance would be linked off of puritanical sects of Christianity, and on the other side of the bubble, temperance would link to Islamic law, or healthy living etc... The reason it would have to be a wiki, is that memes are so hard to pin down in such a way, the only chance a map like this has, is regular contributions from those "infected." Any time a change was made to the map, a facebook like story would be added to a blog seen by moderators it might say "user samhag has established a link between animism and paganism."
The idea behind the meme map is to create a different way of exploring belief, one that attempts to use a "flow." The map would be good for preserving meme theory (which of course has it's own spot on the map somewhere between evolutionary genetics and enlightenment philosophy. The most difficult disiction to draw, might be where to seperate a meme from something more, something that is empirically established, for example the concept of temperature is a meme as far certain things that are theorized about it it (degrees), but it in itself is perceived. So there could be small meme pages that distinguish between Kelvin, Centigrade etc... but one for temperature itself wouldn't be necessary because everyone recognizes that there are varying degrees of heat in one place and time.
Hopefully this makes sence, it's an abstract idea, but memes themselves are an abstraction. My meme map is nothing more than a different way to organize knowledge. It's main revolution could be to put ideas in their place, rather than as something as truthfull as an encyclopedia page.
Religious Tolerance's website isn't exactly what I had in mind though, I was something beyond just religious beliefs, but all memes maped the way those clever geneticists figured out the human genome. A database the size of imdb, or better yet wikipedia. Of course it would be a wiki! Then people could add beliefs they share, or encounter. Of course the wiki would have to be edited as judiciously as wikipedia to prevent, as one of my irreverant undergraduate prank postings was labeled by a moderator, "patent non-sense." Ok so what I envision is a comprehensive wiki, that is (unlike wikipedia) limited to memes. The design inovation would be the map.
Like wikipedia, my meme map would be searchable, for ease of opperation, but unlike wikipedia, the site wouldn't be organized in alaphabetical lists (if it were, again, it would be an afterthought to increase ease of use). No my meme map would be a linked series of ideas, that would be taged to link to other ideas that perhaps inspired or were inspired by the idea you first found on the map. For example, say I looked up evangelism, which certaintly is a meme. You would come to a page that might look somewhat like a wikipedia post, but with much more emphasis on user testimonials and ideas, than origins and facts (although those aren't without their importance to the evolution of memes). Up in the corner of each meme page there would be a button a link that would say MapIt! When pressed it would link you to evangelisms place on the meme map (also user/moderator edited). I envision the meme map looking something like an idea map that like writers groups use to brainstorm: here is a link to a model. I would want the meme map to be less scribbly instead to have a key and different fonts and colors to signify different classes of memes (the way a cartographer does on a geographical map).
Bigger memes would be more pervasive, and generally have smaller sub-memes comming off. Christianity would be a huge sphere on the meme map, with it's different sects and sub-sects comming off. Different idea's that have developed from Christianity would be linked off of the appropriate meme bubble, and perhaps be linked to another huge concept that helped develop it. For example, temperance would be linked off of puritanical sects of Christianity, and on the other side of the bubble, temperance would link to Islamic law, or healthy living etc... The reason it would have to be a wiki, is that memes are so hard to pin down in such a way, the only chance a map like this has, is regular contributions from those "infected." Any time a change was made to the map, a facebook like story would be added to a blog seen by moderators it might say "user samhag has established a link between animism and paganism."
The idea behind the meme map is to create a different way of exploring belief, one that attempts to use a "flow." The map would be good for preserving meme theory (which of course has it's own spot on the map somewhere between evolutionary genetics and enlightenment philosophy. The most difficult disiction to draw, might be where to seperate a meme from something more, something that is empirically established, for example the concept of temperature is a meme as far certain things that are theorized about it it (degrees), but it in itself is perceived. So there could be small meme pages that distinguish between Kelvin, Centigrade etc... but one for temperature itself wouldn't be necessary because everyone recognizes that there are varying degrees of heat in one place and time.
Hopefully this makes sence, it's an abstract idea, but memes themselves are an abstraction. My meme map is nothing more than a different way to organize knowledge. It's main revolution could be to put ideas in their place, rather than as something as truthfull as an encyclopedia page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
