Cultures of Virtual Worlds

Over the last two days I’ve had the real pleasure of being back in the classroom, straining at times to hear over the noise of the construction of the engineering building next door.  But it was worth it being able to hear 30 ethnographic researchers gathered at UC Irvine to present their studies of just what we avatars are doing inside virtual worlds.  The theme for the gathering was Cultures of Virtual Worlds, organized by the Center for Ethnography in the Department of Anthropology and sponsored by Intel’s People and Practices Research Group.

Ethnographic research is a first person study of the observed behaviors of others.  These were indeed the tales from the road, observations organized and structured into what we already understand about human behavior.  But, mostly the tales raised questions and many mysteries yet to be understood about virtuality.

Dr. Celia Pearce of Georgia Tech, traversed worlds for us as she reported on the forced migration of Uru (Myst Online) players, as they became refugees in the “new” worlds of There.com and Second Life due to the closing of their game.  She showed us how the artifacts from one world ported over to another through recreation of the old world in the new, transforming both the place and the narrative of the new, joined community.  Her experiences highlight how a true community, once created, does not die easily – indeed another world often becomes the beneficiary.

My thoughts:  This phenomenon is as true in the actual world as in the virtual.   I’ve been watching a similar migration in process at this very moment with the closing of Virtual Magic Kingdom as that community is creating a new Virtual Family Kingdom and preparing its [heartbreaking] move from VMK.   Both these instances raise a fascinating question of just what is a community.  Do we use the word too loosely today in social networking since we move and migrate so easily among networks?  When does “affiliation” or “networked communication” become community – or does it?  Do commercial entities have responsibilities to the communities they create?

Graduate student Lilly Irani coined a phrase in the title of her presentation I suspect I will be using in the future, as it captures our modern communication habits so well:  Assemblages of Communication.  She documented her travels inside Second Life focusing on the fluid communications habits of activist avatars who seamlessly weave IRC, blogs, web forums, Facebook, Café Press, SLProfiles, and photo sharing to communicate.  Her conclusion: the immersive nature of communication inside virtual worlds is just one type of communication and that “collectives” keep in touch through assemblages of communications that are unique to them and that serve their individual community.

My thoughts: Lilly’s focused observations of a small group of activists operating inside a virtual world validate my own theories of the fluidity of what we still call “media.”  We tend to think of media as a “thing.” But media in practice is in fact very ephemeral.   We describe it as “distributed,” but it goes way fuzzier than that. Media  “in practice” isn’t a channel, but an activity.

Dr. Rebecca Black plunged us into the virtual literary world at FanFiction.net where she chronicled the shifting online identity of a young Chinese girl as she published her fiction while learning English.  Through her observations Dr. Black concludes that over time our identities shift and evolve – are never static - because we construct them in diverse ways, influenced by the media, pop culture, our ethnicity and our own “actual” identity.  In a focused study of the language used within the space, she also contrasted the support and encouragement given to her subject by this virtual community versus that she might receive within our traditional educational environment.

My thoughts:  Every virtual space has its own reason for being along with its own rules, norms, culture, and communication methods – often its own language.  The richness of the connections in virtual worlds does often trump the interactions we receive in the actual world.  There is a realness to them that transcends the physical.  Reciprocity is central to the growth of a true community.  What troubles me is that we have constructed our “real” institutions, organizations, and expectations in ways that often dehumanizes and that removes reciprocity – possibly encouraging (forcing?) us to escape into the virtual to find the real.

Deborah Fields' projects lead us through a study of race and gender via Whyville, where 68% of the participants are girls. Deborah is studying how children develop connections and identities in social worlds and how it might inform “real life” learning. She shared a fascinating case study of “Zoë” who grapples with her ethnicity through an evolutionary process of trading “face parts.”  (In Whyville you have very limited abilities in avatar creation.)  Zoë in real life is black.  However while she could approximate a “black” face – it was difficult to find black “bodies” (“bodies” are actually part of Whyville clothing).  She began looking to trade for Latina representations and she even went through a period of scamming other Whyville avatars. Through this case study Deborah  illustrated that children (all of us, actually) go through phases of participation, developing multiple identities and that we continually evolve them.

My thoughts:  Wow, many thoughts hit me on this one:  children’s game designers have enormous responsibilities and need to consider children's identity formation in their products- let’s start by making it possible to represent more than “white.” Teachers and parents need to keep tabs on the identity formation/experimentation that their children and students are doing – create safety, freedom and encouragement to do so, while gathering insight as children go about it. The shifting “demographic” implications of the transitory nature of online identity and how we will adapt to two very different “states” of identity – one where we are the “same” person all the time due to the melding of our work, social and personal lives online (you are your Google results); and two, the liquidness with which we morph and evolve our identities.

This is by no means even a close approximation of all the stimulating and insightful presentations – just a few of the many highlights.

Dr. Dean Terry of University of Texas, Dallas provided a fun and thought provoking talk on the work his Virtual Worlds Lab and Mobile Lab is doing.  He wrapped up with a demonstration of an augmented reality via a mobile phone project that his students will be unveiling soon.

Post-graduate students, Paolo Ruffino introduced some fascinating concepts of our collective evolving worldview (virtual and actual) through mapping; Bianca Ahmadi presented machinima as an art and education form; and Lindsay Todres explored “self spectatorship” online and how it relates to/changes our use of media, especially cinema.

All in all, there is much to be understood about we avatars.  But it is clear our ideas of reality, community, intimacy, identity and space must evolve in step with virtuality.  This research is just a beginning, and from all the encouragement and collaboration I saw going on we have some interesting research to look forward to.

Kudos to Tom Boellstorff and Maria Bezaitis of UCI’s Anthropology Department for organizing the event.  Tom’s book, Coming of Age in Second Life is due to be released in a couple of days.

April 27, 2008

Comments

[IsadoraQ]

Thank you for the article. Leaving VMK is very painful for all of us. So we set up a petition to ask Disney to reconsider, at www.savevmk.com. Thanks again.

[Grace]

Interesting thoughts.

The VMK situation is so sad. Unfortunately, the Virtual Family Kingdom you mentioned seems to be startup business set to disappoint VMK users. I don't know if players realize what's so great about their current game- it has a lot to do with how their current game is set up. The way Virtual Family Kingdom was started was sketchy, and I'm disgusted, but not surprised, that someone would want to take advantage of a community in this way.

Do corporations have a responsibility for the communities they create? This shouldn't be a question, but Disney is taking this group for granted and seems to be kicking them to the curb. If an organization like Disney takes this approach to their virtual world, I am almost scared to think of what will happen when these other not-so-good games start to face this decision. Just about every kid's media/toy company has at least one of these worlds now and I'm not convinced that any of them are thinking of that next step.

[Linda Zimmer]

Grace and Isadora, thanks for your comments. The VMK situation *is* sad and it does raise the issue for every game designer about the emotional attachments people create based on the design to do just that - create emotional connections. These "products" aren't just "consumed" in isolation - they create very real connections.

I think these raise especially important ethical questions for commercial organizations who are specifically aiming at children. They must ask themselves what kind of long term commitment are they making when creating and promoting these worlds.

[c3]

i think MTV worlds answers your question.....;)

we OWN your childrens ideas now...

but then again, daddy is away playing GTA 4.

and mommy is blogging about her second life "elfquest" dresses being copied and resold by others.

we "passed" on broadcast media literacy as a culture over 30 years ago.

immersive media literacy wont i fear, fair much better.

when TV finally came into the classroom, it came to sell Candy and Soda. Chris Whittle- thanks.

When VR comes to the classroom, will it be any different?

good luck.:)

[IsadoraQ]

I agree very much that companies need to consider they are making a long-term commitment when they set up a virtual world or social network. The kind of short-sightedness that destroys millions of friendships seems to fall not just into the realm of corporate irresponsibility, but true evil, because it removes the support systems people need -- and are relying upon -- to live happily and well. I called Virtual Family Kingdom and believe they are making exactly that commitment, one that Disney failed to make, resulting in the pain and sorrow of millions. How many suicide threats we have had sent to savevmk.com over Disney closing VMK I cannot say. Their lives are being ruined, and these children, disabled people and lonely adults are having trouble finding new support systems. VFK will provide that for some, in a way that is safe, fun, and free. But for Disney, with its resources, there seems to be no excuse.

[c3]

its sad to hear that many are so "immerssed" that suicide could be an option. But i do understand it. I have been very personally sadened by how the VR worlds medium has so quickly become the tulip of the irresponsible hucksters of todays world.

so quickly and without so much a thought to the outcomes of the medium released, the short term "flip its" - from SL land barons, to VC funded startups from SV, to large copycat media "buyers" like todays Disney or Viacom,are now all going to find out that social/cultural media cannot be as easy to control or shut down as was their broadcast media of 2 decades ago.-MAYBE.-:)

Corporations will either have to be made to learn to live WITH individuals, or Individuals will have to learn how to NOT live without the corporations allowance...
Civil govermenment in the west is all about sold off now... and the choice of the next civic commons is still up for grabs even as the "free" internet goes the way of "free airwaved tv"--feb 9th looms.., though im getting real unsure that the outcome were choosing will be best for our children.

Time to get serious, or not only will your legacy to your children be no more polar bears and a sea sunken NYC, but a culture that can only answer "in machine/google we trust"

the way the "metapundits" parroted the Second Life Love machine metanonsence was horrible and damaging.

after 2 years of fooling the old media press, the old media dollar sint letting them fool much more...

As to the Disney and IMVU, i only request those who say " we didnt know it would end up like this" to read the statements of both companies leaders and founders published online 2 years before the hype from yes even sites like this..;0... unless Google has already lost the legacy links...

no surprise that webVR 2008 looks alot like webVR 1998.

no excuses? one can only wish. no more "new"- and "SL firsts blogs"..lol
now you all know....

do or do not....;)-yoda

c3