Talk:Hyperreality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Hyperreality, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (core areas): Metaphysics Related task forces (major traditions): Continental philosophy

Contents 1 Hyperreality in the 9/11 truth movement 2 Hyperreality in Art 3 Wikipedia as Hyperreality? 4 Video Games 5 Whoa 6 Las Vegas? 7 Discussion of Examples 8 Pornography 9 Explain Hyperreality 10 Mexican Election 11 Video Games 12 What fresh hell is this? 13 Map Example 14 Criticism

[edit] Hyperreality in the 9/11 truth movement

"Hyperreality: the inability of consciousness to distinguish reality from fantasy, especially in technologically advanced postmodern cultures." => Can we consider the investigations of the 9/11_Truth_Movement to be part of a Hyperreality? --Rougieux 22:51, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hyperreality in Art

I think another good example of hyperreality might be found in "fine art" a painting that of say a landscape where the viewer can see more acuratly what the lanscsape actually is than they could see looking at the real landscape. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Leroy1213 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Wikipedia as Hyperreality?

I'd like to see more thoughts on Wikipedia as hyperreality.

- I would too, will include Wikiality on the Hyperreality page -Psychologesetz 18:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Video Games

I don't see that video games are much more hyperreal than any other form of fiction. There is a difference between games and traditional media; games are interactive. However, for the most part video games do not serve to supplant or obscure reality. It could be argued that MMORPGs are hyperreal but I can't see Pong or Tetris fitting the definition. If video games are hyperreal, then many television programs, movies, works of art and works of literature are as well. Examples: Soap operas, reality television, "mockumentaries", trompe l'oeil paintings, the War of the Worlds radio broadcast. I believe video games should be removed from the list and / or some of these examples should be included. --ccherlin 14:50, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I could see video games as a sort of analogy for hyperreality, but not an example. A better one, as you pointed out, would be reality TV or possibly soap operas, which people in a sense believe is real without believing it is real, and TV and movies in general, which are more real than real, or at least in a sense preferred to the (supposedly nonexistant) real. I don't know about the War of the Worlds radio broadcast - that he was able to tap into people's anxieties and uncertainty about their place in the universe doesn't quite jive with hyperreality, I think. Yeah, I agree - video games off the list, unless Baudrillard mentions them specifically, which, its been a while, but afaik he doesn't. -Seth Mahoney 17:19, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

I am in agreement with Clement, we shouldn't overuse the term to a cliché, and therefore video games should be carefully scrutinized before accepted as hyperreal. However, I am of the opinion that MMORPG's are in fact hyperreal because their sole purpose is to provide an entire simulation of the human experience, and many users become addicted to them, because the RPG universe is more desirable than the 'real world'. A Matrix reference may be warranted here. Would I be wrong to say that the Matrix is at the same level of reality as the 'real world', but the 'perfect' Matrix Agent Smith spoke of is hyperreality by definition? --Navaburo 03:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

What about games like grand theft auto, they seem like the best examples of hyperreality in videogames. They are modeled after the images and style of real cities. -User:Malcom-x-mass 15:23, Dec 8 (EST)

I guess my main problem with video games in general as examples of hyperreality is that they are games, and people playing them go into them knowing that. That we go about playing video games as games sort of sets up a line between real and unreal that seems to be more blurred when dealing with, especially, reality TV and a lot of movies. The other thing is that, as I understand it, hyperreality is more real than real, while, at least with current technology, video games are decidedly less real than real. GTA and maybe sports games are probably the best examples of games approaching something like hyperreality, but at least I think they still fall short. Anyhow, just my 2 cents - mine is far from the sole vote. -Seth Mahoney 00:10, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

There are some who invest MORE in the "reality" of the game than they do in the reality of their own life. When one makes more of an emotional or intellectual investment in things that do not really exist than in things that do, one enters - or exists in - a hyperreality. -Anonymous

Video games are NOT an example of hyperreality. This is because they do not seek to enhance and confuse reality. Compare with pornography (Baudrillard's favorite example)... pornography is better than sex, it is kinkier than sex, more erotic than sex... all of which are paradoxes because pornography is not sex. - Abscissa 16:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

So video games are an entity now 'seeking' something, as well as las vegas etc... from the above post it seems a performative contradiction to state that. Games do not have any intentions in and of themselves, and that we are antropormorphising them as such will be an example of how they are hyperreal. If not distortions of their actual 'real' selves.

[edit] Whoa

That bold part in the middle is really preachy. It made me immediately think the writer was a wacko. The crazy emphasis didn't help the explanation at all. However, I will leave this revision to someone with at least one clue. Otherwise, thank you! This article was very interesting.

I agree with the above writer - what should be a straightforward definition comes across as a paranoid rant against technology... There are a lot of assumptions and politics couched in this article... It badly needs a more balanced rewrite IMHO...

I agree totally, to many assumptions not enough hardfacts. Buts thats the problem with most of wikipedia, to many 'enthusiasts', not many impartial academics. RoloTamassey 12:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You guys are missing the point. The point is that soon enough, we'll be IN the video game.

What part is being referred to here? -Abscissa 16:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Las Vegas?

Seems to me that there are much better examples of hyperreality than Las Vegas, as set forth in the article. The Gulf War is interesting and very well substantiated by Jean Baudrillard in his book 'The Gulf War Did Not Take Place'. Is Las Vegas referred to in the literature base?

--Furste 22:42, 5 December 2005

Yeah, he writes about Vegas in America. -Seth Mahoney 22:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll second that. Las Vegas is an essential example for Baudrillard's postmodern theory. Szpak 07:01, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

See the official Las Vegas motto, "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas." Kevin143 08:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Definately -- Las Vegas and Disneyworld are two places Baudrillard loves to pick on. Think about it... can you get more simulated than either of those places? -Abscissa 16:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Dubai..? --Exformation.info 23:28, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Dubai isn't really "designed to be fake" the way Las Vegas is. I disagree that it is an illustrative example, but we sorted this out before and I agreed to leave it. - Abscissa 04:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of Examples

"entertainment news programming and supermarket tabloids" -- I don't think this belongs as an example. But then I thought it over, and didn't delete it because I thought it did fit after all... but I still don't think it is an illustrative example. - Abscissa 16:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

It almost seems like, especially supermarket tabloids, are designed to be fake in a way that fits, but not taken for real, which doesn't fit... -Smahoney 04:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the implication of hyperreal is much more serious and far less literal than "a sports drink for a flavor that does not exist." The concept of hyperreality brings into question all systems of order we have, of identity, sex, gender, race, class, nationality, etc. So a brief read through of the examples, like pretty gardens, sugary drinks, plastic christmas trees, is not helpful to anyone who actually wants to understand what hyperreal means. The examples section should be turned into links to essays or excerpts from essays by published academics in the field (I'm only familiar with Baudrillard but I'm also not well read).

I think the sports drink should be further explained. Like the whole "Ice" and "Rain" flavors of Gatorade. The drinks don't really taste like ice or rain, but the ice and rain represent something hyperreal. (Clopnaz 17:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Pornography

I removed "pornography" from examples of hyperreality. Though I certainly understand what the author was thinking, not everything considered "pornographic" by everyone's standards is necessarily "hyperreal." Without delving into the differing definitions of pornography, there's a specific example I can think of which illustrates my argument. Let's say that someone makes an amateur video of him or herself having intercourse, and let's postulate that this person decides to sell said video for whatever reason. Since it's a depiction of a sex act and it's being distributed, this video would be considered pornographic by most definitions. Nothing about this particular example, however, is inherently hyperreal. This might be an odd example, but I think it serves to illustrate that "pornography" is too vague and subjective a concept to consider implicitly hyperreal.

In addition, it seems to me that there is a clear distinction between something which is simply meant to arouse, and the hideously garish mainstream pornography which you'll find in your local "adult" video store. A lot of pornography is indeed designed and marketed to be "better" and more erotic than sex; this brand of pornography--the stuff with the bowling-ball sized implants and big budgets--is very clearly hyperreal because it's an artificial over-sexualization of sex. However, I don't see how watching a depiction of intercourse for the purpose of stimulating sexual arousal is inherently more hyperreal than watching someone get kicked in the groin to stimulate laughter, or than going to the orchestra or a concert to stimulate euphoria. I've always read Baudrillard as referring to the garish, hyper-sexualized variety of pornography, and not representations of sex acts in and of themselves, as being hyperreal. This would disqualify "pornography" as a blanket term from being included under examples of hyperreality. But perhaps I'm totally wrong.

I have re-inserted the example of pornography. THIS IS BAUDRILLARD'S EXAMPLE. It is also **THE BEST** example of hyperreality. I appriciate your argument but it doesn't really relate to what Baudrillard has to say. - Abscissa 04:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment - the nature of pornography is to simulate sex. More specifically -- the act of watching pornography. This does not necessarily include masturbation, but unless you have a specific fetish that relates to the viewing of pornography, you are engaging in hyperreality. - Abscissa 04:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

The fact that anyone could take pornography to be a real dipiction of sexuality at all lends more creedence to the concept of hyperreality... --DanielCD 18:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I rephrased the example to reflect film in general. I also gave direct credit to Baudrillard for the pornography example. 69.140.33.146 (talk) 19:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The pornography example is much more relevant than film in general. It makes the point a lot better. People don't enter film in general the way they do with pornography. --DanielCD (talk) 20:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Again, I don't see why this is being changed to "film". Film may be an example of this, but it is in no way as good an example as pornography. People don't engage film the way they do pornography, and trading the examples makes the article more confusing. Pornography is perhaps a perfect example of hyperreality. If it's taken out here, it needs to be reemphasized somewhere else. Therefore I see no reason to change it to "film" in general. It's not *just* Baudrillard's example either; it is the best example. Perhaps some expansion or rewording might make a stronger article, but the pornography shouldn't be de-emphasized. --DanielCD (talk) 16:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

That it is "perfect" or "the best example" is your opinion. The pornography example is compelling due to social norms and attitudes more than relevance, in my opinion. The level of hyperreality in a medium really depends on how it is approached by the creator and the observer, meaning the experiance could very widely from one individual to another, one map to another. Moreover, watching pornography isn't as universal as watching plain old movies, something to which everybody can relate. As this is an introductory example, I think the article should use something that applies as widely as possible to maintain neutrality, even at thee expense of depth. I don't have time to hunt down sources or cite Baudrillard to reemphasized the pornography example latter in the article, though, so I'll leave this for now. I do, however, want to strengthen examples of social actions and combat. Any comments on that? 69.140.33.146 (talk) 20:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

In reading Baudrillard's own definition of hyperreality: "the simulation of something which never really existed," I do not understand how this argument can continue. I understand Baudrillard did in fact make a statement about pornography, yet the example of pornography undercuts his own argument. Saying that in general pornography (without masturbation as the article is currently geared towards)is hyperreal is the same as saying watching pro football at home is hyperreal. Just because the representation surpasses your personal experiences does not mean it surpasses all experiences. After all, the people being filmed are having sex. In the course of reading this article I am reminded of René Magritte's famous painting, "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" (This is not a pipe.) All media is a representation, simply viewing pornography is no different from viewing other media. The only real discussion left pertains to metaphysical beliefs surrounding truth and reality (simply what exactly are fiction and nonfiction, and how do they relate to the concept of hyperreality.) And that discussion is stick and gross, and I do not want to participate in another metaphysical discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.169.6 (talk) 19:03, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Explain Hyperreality

Maybe I'm just stupid, but I was totally incapable of figuring out what "hyperreality" is from a reading of this article. I don't the the article does a good job of serving as an encyclopedia entry; it opens by claiming that hyperreality doesn't exist, calls it a "symptom of culture" and then goes on to give metaphors relating to hyperreality and (probably debateable) examples of hyperreality without ever making a serious attempt to actually give a definition of hyperreality. The article comes across as self-serving and self-indulgent, like the article on U.G. Krishnamurti that opens with the claim that he isn't a philosopher, teacher, guru, author, etcetera. Someone needs to actually make this into an entry that explains what hyperreality is.--Halloween jack 05:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

A definition is there, though its not, granted entirely clear. From the intro:

Most aspects of hyperreality can be thought of as "reality by proxy." Baudrillard in particular suggests that the world we live in has been replaced by a copy world, where we seek simulated stimuli and nothing more.

-Smahoney 05:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I will try to write a more clear introduction -- though Baudrillard's writing is intentionally "roundabout" (don't have a better word at 12:50 AM) in this way. He is probably the clearest of all the postmodernists, and that's not saying much. - Abscissa 04:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mexican Election

The Mexican Election is not an appropriate example because it not only is a specific event, but it is not represnted by a signifier that confuses reality (McDonalds = M arches, Pornography = TV, Las Vegas = Decor, etc.). While I happen to agree that the election (and elections in general) are "fake" in the sense that they are driven by spectacle and meaning, it is best not to make this article more confusing and it doesn't really belong here. People unfermilliar with the topic have enough time understanding it as it is. - Abscissa 19:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Video Games

Video Games have previously been suggested as an example but, frankly (once again), they do not belong. I am not fermilliar with any of Baudrillard's work talking about video games. Also, the video game user is interacting (at a sub-basic level) with real-reality -- since he does know that he is interacting with it (and by choice).

However, I do agree that research in this area is out of date because the current video games are extraordinaraily realistic, i.e. they involve combat operations, going in and resucing soldiers, other sorts of nonsense. I would be interested to hear from anyone who has up-to-date information from someone in this field. - Abscissa 09:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

"Video games are NOT an example of hyperreality. This is because they do not seek to enhance and confuse reality."

Well I think you are wrong. Here let me quote a recent event which the reality/fantasy of the simulation of videogames has splilled into the real world because the user is totally immeresed in the stimuli. This is from netscape and the recent Montreal shootings.

"He said he liked to play "Super Columbine Massacre," an Internet-based computer game that simulates the April 20, 1999, shootings at the Colorado high school when Klebold and Harris killed 13 people and then themselves.

Gill complained that a video shooting game, "Postal 2," was too childish. He wanted one that allowed him to kill more and go "beserk."

"I want them to make a game so realistic, that it looks and feels like it's actually happening," he wrote in his blog."

Look at the last line, it been like this for many yaers. 'Pong' et el, are abstractions of reality that try to simulate the mechanics of one might do for real. The description of t.v. and film can be applied to videogames or the definition needs changing. End users "Engage in Fantasy worlds' al la the Matrix. Regardless of the way 'interactivity' is implemented, which is a bit of red herring, simply because people are only following the structure of games, (not creating thier own), which in turn borrow heavily from the film world or 'reality'. Also of note is that the original 'Columbine Shootings were allegedly influenced by the videogame Doom, which of course is a fantasy FPS game and lets the user be in the 'eyes' of the character which is what films are so successful at. Which is a paradox and post modern conundrum of immense proportions, is it not? RoloTamassey 07:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I would like to suggest to you that is one example of a particular individual with a psychological problem rather than an example of a cultural phenomena. In general, "hyperreality" is like a fine wine and should only be brought out for those cases -- i.e., the Iraq war on TV -- where the general public has no idea what is really going on... instead they are excited for the bombs, the tanks, etc. which are thousands of miles away. I would say that 99.99% of the public understands what happens when they play a video game, and the video game is meant to hypnotise them for a bit and perhaps escape from reality but it does not substitute for reality. - Abscissa 12:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Video games are a cultural phenomenom. They exceed films and music for revenue and the influence videogames have on other media is quite prevalant. Critical analysis of this phenomena is threadbear and your assumption that the influence is not widespread is inaccurate. Also, I could assume that 99.9% of people know whats going on when they watch a film or go to 'Las Vegas'. That is not the point wether someone knows or is unaware of what they are doing. It is about what artifacts contemporary culture produces that mould our environment. Baudrilliards notion of hyppereality is a theory on contemporary culture of the time and some foresight into where it will go. It's not a philosophy, it just incorpates exisentialism because of the notion that world centres around oneself. I.e. a certain amount of self dillusion is needed to believe the illusion. RoloTamassey 12:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

First, there is absolutely no way, none, zero, none at all -- nil -- that video game revenue exceeds that of the movies. But that is not relevant. I also was not aware that I spoke to the relevance of the "infuence" of video games, since that would be irrelevant also. You claim that "It is about what artifacts contemporary culture produces that mould our environment" is worth addressing, especially since that definition is highly specific and easily refutiable. I would propose to you that hyperreality is instead about how reality is confused by contemporary culture. Watching the Gulf war on TV (Baudrillard's most famous example) does not produce "artifacts", the entire idea behind it is that it confuses an entire nation of people about what a war is, what is actually happening, what is going on, etc. Video games do not have this effect, at least not permanantly for most people. And when people do choose to play video games, they realise that they are engaging in a fantasy world. - Abscissa 17:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What fresh hell is this?

[T]he McDonald's "M" arches create a world with the promise of endless amounts of identical food, when in "reality" the "M" represents nothing, and the food produced is neither identical nor infinite. Am I missing something here? How do you get a "promise of endless amounts of identical food" from a pair of giant yellow arches? Strad 19:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Why do you think McDonald's is successful? If I go to Toronto, or Vancouver, or San Diego, or New York, I *know* I can get a Big Mac whenever I see the yellow arches. And I know my Big Macs will always be there. Why do you think they call it "McDonald's" everywhere with the exact same identical "M"? They could open tens of thousands of different menus, with local food, local tastes which change according to the seasons, etc. -- they would never be as successful. - Abscissa 22:58, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. I was trying to find symbolism in the arch itself, not the fact that it appears everywhere. Strad 03:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

It is the point when I see the "M" not for what it is, (a big yellow M) but for these things, I engage in the world of the hyperreal. - Abscissa 04:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Map Example

I don't understand what "a map so detailed that it covers the very things it was designed to represent" means. Specifically, I can't figure out the sense in which the word "covers" is being used. Iridius 10:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

In this quote, the word "covers" is being used in a literal sense. The idea is that the map is a perfect representation of the real land. It is detailed and accurate down to details of size and space. As you can imagine, a map like this would actually cover the land itself. You can read more about this in Jorge Luis Borges' On Exactitude in Science.--Audreyhorne 18:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

It's all perspectival isn't it? It would be no less valid for a person whose consciousness has developed in a time when the phenomena in question are common to view the world which these authors view as 'normal' as hyporeality, i.e. if you will, 'devoid of the intensity and generality of the sign common the modern epoch'. This I think shows the worthlessness of much/most of this philosophy (postmodernism) and it's parochiality. As a constrast I am working on a short essay based on highlighting of Husserl Paris Lectures which is relevant to the underlying topic but addresses it in a manner worthy of the Western tradition and therefore as relevant now as it was in 1929.Lycurgus 09:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)