The New Virtual Reality

This assignment is in response to the article: ""Screen Democracy" or Fascism of the Image? New Audiovisual Regimes in an Era of Indiscriminate Information Dissemination" by F. Javier Panera from ArtPulse Magazine.

Refer. http://artpulsemagazine.com/screen-democracy-or-fascism-of-the-image-new-audiovisual-regimes-in-an-era-of-indiscriminate-information-dissemination

Smartphones, social media, and innovative technology have grown in exponential rates in the last decade. This generation that we are apart of is all about change and the newest thing. I mean, haven't we all seen how the world reacted when the new iPhone 6 came out?

However, these fast-paced changes have almost never been questioned by the Millenials or especially Gen Z. We have welcomed these technologies with open arms and probably very few of us have questioned buying that new iPhone or Samsung smartphone. The way we, Gen Z, view the world is different than previous generations. It is not just because we live in a more modern, advanced society, but also because we are simply...different.

F. Javier Panera, the author of the article, is correct in assuming that our virtual reality is no longer the same as the people of the older generation. We have a constant need to post, tweet, take pictures, Snapchat, and Instagram the moments we want to remember. It gives us a way to store our memories and to make them live on. It is no longer enough for us just to look at an event live and remember; not without snapping a few pictures for our Facebook and Instagram. Does this assumption make Generation Z any less smarter? Is it a bad thing that most of our lives is lived through a screen? Answer for the first question, no. Answer for the second, debatable.

Our generation is just so used to the movement on a screen, whether it's scrolling through posts or simply watching a funny video on YouTube. So when Panera says that art museums are lacking in keeping the younger generations interested is, sadly, correct. It seems to be that, unless you are an Arts major or someone who really loves old things and classical art, no one in this generation will be able to keep their attention trained on a portrait hung on the wall. In my opinion, honestly, it IS Arts responsibility to be entertaining. We cannot force ourselves to like the art, so the only way to keep us engaged is to innovate and to move with the times that our society is inevitably a part of.

These days, digital preservation IS key. When Panera suggests that our generation needs documentation to prove a memory is real and has actually happened is partly true. Generation Z has adopted the saying "Pics or it didn't happen", which basically means you must take a picture and send it to Instagram, Snapchat, your friend, etc., to prove that an event actually happened. It is not a bad thing, per say, but it does show exactly how much the generation depends on documentation, especially digital preservation, to be able to remember certain events. In the end, it doesn't prove our existence, but it proves that the way we move forward is different than the other generations (digital preservation vs. physical memories).

A mnemonic memory is remembering or recalling a memory right from the brain. A person will talk about the concert from last year and immediately begin talking about the details of that event because the picture will pop up in their head. A heuristic memory is all about connectivity. Ask a different person about the same concert and they will bring out their phone and show you the pictures they took of the concert. It seems that heuristic memory focuses on sharing the picture with the world around them rather than about the actual event itself. The more I think about it, the more I believe it to be true. We speak through our pictures and our phones. Our lives are intertwined by our posts and our memories live on through that little SD card or the gigabyte storage on iCloud.

Panera says that we are "sacrificing [the human being] phenomenological relationship with the world in favor of "visualization"". As much as I hate to admit it, Panera is right once again. I have already stated that we (Generation Z) crave that connectivity, the internet to preserve the memories of important events. And sadly, we are giving up a little part of what connects us to the basic cores of nature: direct experience. We favor viewing pictures and videos of certain places. We can go to the most coveted places on Earth and still have our phone attached to our hands. We can barely look, touch, taste, smell, or feel anything of this Earth without taking a picture or video first. Are we missing out on something so little and so big at the same time? Are we giving up a part of our humanity because we prefer screen time to physical experience? The truth is sad but this is the way we were raised and the way our society has played out the newest innovations. The very definition of "being human" has been altered with every technology that has come out. Being in nature and being connected to the world itself in a physical sense is no longer enough for this generation or the generation to come.

Ask anyone before Generation Y or Z and they could tell you an event that happened forward and backward just by recollection. These days, we can't even remember what our friend said last night without having to check back on their text. However, I don't think Panera is right when he suggests that the human memory is becoming more fragile. Our memory is simply being stretched in different ways. Generation Z may not be able to tell you all the things that happened at an event, but ask one of use the newest iOS software or press a series of buttons to make your laptop do a weird trick. The best example I can think of is a classroom full of frustrated students trying to tell the teacher how to full screen a video or make it reload and play while the teacher confusedly hits random buttons and takes five minutes to find the right button. Our memory is not becoming fragile nor are we becoming more stupid. We have grown up with certain technologies and have become advanced in ways of preservation and innovation; we have become a modern norm and changed the way we think and act.

When Panera suggests a "fascism of the image", he means that we are not aware just how much we are controlled by our technological devices. However, this isn't a bad thing. To us, technology isn't a fascist device that's controlling our mind. It's not scary to us. It's the norm these days. Do I believe we should limit our technology usage? Slightly yes. Do I believe we should completely stop using technology? Definitely not. My cell phone and my laptop is such a big part of my life that I couldn't ever imagine not being tied to it all the time. There is no need for a democratization of images because we have grown up with these technologies. Limiting our usage as well as bringing government into the way we communicate with others and selling and buying will not move us forward. Our communication should be our right since we grew up with it in the first place. In this fast-paced society, we have no room for nonessential censorship.

Needless to say, not everyone can agree that technology has advanced our world. There are going to be people that want to move the world forward in a different way and believe today's innovation is inhibiting our society. But change is unavoidable in this day and age. And soon even the people who want to keep the world around them a certain way will have to change if they want to survive in this society. Although Panera seems to be on the fence about the way this generation is moving in society, I believe that technology has always moved us forward and innovation is inevitable.