One of our readings from last week, Leslie Jamison’s The Digital Forgotten Future, capitalizes on the idea that a life lived in the virtual world is part of a real life lived. Jamison writes that “inhabiting any life always involves reckoning with the urge to abandon it” (Jamison). In other words, Jamison defines the purpose of interactive technology such as Second Life as a necessary escape for living our human lives. However, I want to argue that Jamison’s idea is not accurate because the virtual, physical, and real world we’ve been discussing in class are becoming more and more indistinguishable, especially with the rise of virtual cultural icons.
In Thomas Conner’s Hatsune Miku, 2.0 Pac, and Beyond, Connor writes that “transmedia fluidity” of the Muppets is what launched the world-renowned puppet franchise, even though the actual puppets have never been seen in space (Conner 137). While Muppet characters were clearly puppets with no life of their own, people still commented that “it is hard to tell where our world ends and [the Muppets’] world begins” (Conner 137). If it is so difficult to distinguish our world with those of puppets on a screen, how would we be able to differentiate the former with one of more humanly characters?
Hatsune Miku is a Japanese virtual popstar with a set height, weight, and birthday; she has her own physical concerts in the human world as a hologram. One fan describes her as a goddess with “human parts [who] transcends human limitations,” but everyone’s view on her differs (Greenfield). Other than her physical attributes, her personal background is completely customizable. In other words, she may be more intimate with her fans than human celebrities are. After all, if someone creates Hatsune Miku’s personality and past, he or she would know everything about her. This nonliving star would be more tangible than an actual celebrity.
This idea is further exemplified with Lil Miquela , a 19-year old social media influencer, diversity advocate, women’s rights leader, recording artist, supermodel, brand ambassador, and, most notably, a robot with 1.6 million Instagram followers. Despite her complete “virtuality," people still look up to her, saying she is more authentic than other influencers and their calculated lives (Yocom & Acevedo). Simply put, influencer robots are arguably more real than human ones because, at the very least, people know they are not physically real; unreal things are performing unrealistic actions.
A couple weeks ago, Miquela uploaded her first Youtube vlog, meaning she is starting to participate on more platforms used for human communication. With virtual characters now actively “living” on physical stages and, albeit virtual, human spaces of interaction, such technology can’t possibly be for escaping—people can’t escape the physical to the virtual world if the real world is now a complete blend of the two. Now that we are in some shape living with virtual humans, people must decide how far we should allow this “cohabitation” with simulated characters.
Citations
Conner, Thomas. “Hatsune Miku, 2.Opac, and Beyond.” The Oxford Handbook of Music and Virtuality, vol. 1, Oxford Publisher, 2016, pp. 129–144.
Greenfield, Rebecca. “Meet Hatsune Miku, The Japanese Pop Superstar Who Is Entirely Virtual.” Fast Company, Fast Company, 18 Apr. 2017, https://www.fastcompany.com/3037383/meet-hatsune-miku-the-japanese-pop-superstar-who-is-entirely-virtual.
Jamison, Leslie. “The Digital Ruins of a Forgotten Future.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 6 June 2018, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/12/second-life-leslie-jamison/544149/.
Miquela. I'm Miquela and I'm Here to Overshare, YouTube, 12 Sept. 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAxRDyGxGdA&feature=youtu.be.
Yocom, Jaden, and Nicholas Mirzoeff. “This Influencer Is a Robot - But How Could This Influence the Future?” The Globe Post, 18 Sept. 2019, https://theglobepost.com/2019/09/18/lil-miquela-ethics/.
Comments
Your video example also made me think about how we perceive human vloggers. While your example more directly relates to a "virtual being", I was wondering if we can apply a similar perception to human vloggers (who exist in the physical world). The reason why I started thinking about this is simply because people who watch vlogs/vloggers have allowed these individuals to permeate their lives, however they will likely never meet these vloggers in real life. In that sense, to the viewer, wouldn't the vlogger only exist in the virtual world (even though they do exist in the physical world)? How might knowing these individuals are alive versus knowing the vlogger is digital affect our perception of the two? I apologize if this explanation is confusing, but I think it's definitely something interesting to think about, and maybe we can discuss it at large in class.