Unit 10: What Is Real and Not Real in the Digital and Real Worlds
I haven’t really thought about the intersection of physical reality and digital reality before. Perhaps because I grew up with computers (albeit floppy-disk reading computers) in classrooms, I’ve become accustomed to the digital reality / reality dichotomy. When using the examples of Persepolis or 1544 Edinburgh, it’s easy to see these places as now wholly digital, because they no longer exist in reality. But when you consider a print article vs. an online article or an ebook vs. the print copy, the line begins to blur. What came first, the chicken or the egg? And which is more important historically?
In this unit the focus is on reality within the digital realm, but after some research I’ve become more interested in the idea of the digital realm coming out into reality. There’s an interesting article from The Atlantic that discusses just that -- “We Need a Word for That Thing Where a Digital Thing Appears in the Physical World.” The article brings a really interesting points to light:
“Cyberspace is not oozing out into reality, that which we encounter on some glowing screen was always reality, never locked away in a separate, mythical, cyber space.”
“These are not digital objects becoming real; these objects were always in our reality. What we are experiencing is not a Matrix-like teleportation trick, but a rearrangement, a different flavor of information.”
I couldn’t have said it better myself. In fact, I couldn’t have put that explanation together if I tried. It would seem that the question of digital reality v. physical reality is all about perception. And even better, this article was written in 2012! Which goes to show that this isn’t a new question, nor is it something we’ve completely figured out 5 years later. I would suggest including this article as part of the suggested reading – it certainly helped me to understand the discussion around physical and digital reality.
However, I believe that the question isn’t about the line between physical reality and digital reality, but how we chose to intertwine the two into one shared space. As technology advances, the two will become more seamless; soon we may have have phones in our fingertips and cameras in our eyes (or maybe lasers if I get a choice).
A Local Example
An interesting local example of this interplay between physical and digital reality is the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. The museum is a brick and mortar establishment, but online the museum offers a complete virtual tour of each exhibit. Visitors to the site can pan 360 degrees around each room and zoom-in to read labels. This online version of the museum provides an arguably better experience for those so inclined to label reading – no one to stand in your line of sight or push you along. Is this experience online any less real than that of the in-person visitor? I think it’s down to preference.
At the current rate of technological advancements, who knows how we’ll view physical and digital reality in another 5 years.
In this unit the focus is on reality within the digital realm, but after some research I’ve become more interested in the idea of the digital realm coming out into reality. There’s an interesting article from The Atlantic that discusses just that -- “We Need a Word for That Thing Where a Digital Thing Appears in the Physical World.” The article brings a really interesting points to light:
“Cyberspace is not oozing out into reality, that which we encounter on some glowing screen was always reality, never locked away in a separate, mythical, cyber space.”
“These are not digital objects becoming real; these objects were always in our reality. What we are experiencing is not a Matrix-like teleportation trick, but a rearrangement, a different flavor of information.”
I couldn’t have said it better myself. In fact, I couldn’t have put that explanation together if I tried. It would seem that the question of digital reality v. physical reality is all about perception. And even better, this article was written in 2012! Which goes to show that this isn’t a new question, nor is it something we’ve completely figured out 5 years later. I would suggest including this article as part of the suggested reading – it certainly helped me to understand the discussion around physical and digital reality.
However, I believe that the question isn’t about the line between physical reality and digital reality, but how we chose to intertwine the two into one shared space. As technology advances, the two will become more seamless; soon we may have have phones in our fingertips and cameras in our eyes (or maybe lasers if I get a choice).
A Local Example
An interesting local example of this interplay between physical and digital reality is the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. The museum is a brick and mortar establishment, but online the museum offers a complete virtual tour of each exhibit. Visitors to the site can pan 360 degrees around each room and zoom-in to read labels. This online version of the museum provides an arguably better experience for those so inclined to label reading – no one to stand in your line of sight or push you along. Is this experience online any less real than that of the in-person visitor? I think it’s down to preference.
At the current rate of technological advancements, who knows how we’ll view physical and digital reality in another 5 years.
Well done here. Thanks for the info on 1544 Edinburgh and the link to the Atlantic article.
ReplyDelete