Fatherland+Messerchmitt+Research+Project

Are we what the system makes us to be? Throughout this semester, our class has explored the world of Second Life in an effort to not only become accustomed to this increasing popular virtual community but apply the knowledge and themes thus discusses as well as derived by ourselves from the numerous pieces of literature that we’ve read. Rather than analyze the obvious, I’ve questioned how the system (Second Life) forges us and how the community has adapted as individual wants are upheld over the community’s general interest. In addition, the community of Second Life has lead to the development of class distinctions as the value of property and objects are acquired by a select few rather than the whole. Based on this question, I’m set to prove that the world of Second Life has constructed regulations which not only hinder avatars from accessing certain places but ultimately regulates and constrains their functions in the virtual world. Through these virtually constructed architectures of restraint, avatars become nothing more than individuals within a community whose existence is nothing more than compiled similar interests and declared ownership of all objects. As ownership is declared, the purpose of Second Life of being a virtual community is basically eliminated as the individual upholds materialist ideals over the general welfare of the community. Simply, avatars are molded according to the system and as we adjust we ourselves are changing the system. As the system continues to change the system becomes nothing more than regulations that we’ve constructed. **__ Part II: Research Method and Analysis __** Rather than pursuing a statistical analysis, I feel it to be necessary to step back and view what’s occurring within Second Life amongst the many avatars to answer my questions. Taking an ethnographic position, I plan to evaluate the two items within Second Life most impacted by the system: the individual and the community. Both the individual and the community affect one another interchangeably and continuously play off one another as the system continues to evolve. In addition, I’ll discuss how the individual and the community create class distinctions. I’ll conclude in Part III with closing remarks. **// I. //****//The individual//** When first exploring the world of Second Life, the presence of various avatars molded freely by someone’s creativity and imagination is indicative of the success and enjoyment found within the virtual community. Teleporting from island to island, Fatherland Messerchmitt became acquainted with communities shaped by values and desires by a particular avatar; a self-created virtual asylum away from the pressures and problems associated with reality. Consider the picture below: Fatherland Messerchmitt is relaxing on a green lawn with the hippies. Self expression, no worries, and creativity; the Woodstock Island was Fatherland’s initial expectations of what Second Life offered and its purpose for existence. Despite these initial thoughts, Second Life had begun to contradict my expectations. As travel throughout the virtual world continued, more and more barriers and restraints became apparent. These regulations symbolize intentional manacles created by an avatar to dictate what avatars can and cannot do while on their island. Simply, the freedoms an avatar first experienced are eliminated by created modalities of constraint intended to control how a visiting avatar acts on their island. As discussed in Lawrence Lessig’s //Free Culture//, "the modalities of constraints (laws, norms, architectures, and markets) restrict the individual and dictates how" (Lessig; 121) or what actions avatars can perform. Unlike expected expectations, Fatherland Messerchmitt was at the mercy, as well as every other “non-owner” avatar, of those who compiled regulations intended to control Fatherland Messerchmitt's experiences throughout Second Life. When first entering this virtual community, Fatherland Messerchmitt was nothing more than a male figure who wore jeans and a white tee-shirt. To my astonishment, Fatherland Messerchmitt began to run into avatars with rainbow wings, multicolored hair, and robotic body parts. Yes, Fatherland Messerchmitt even encountered an avatar that flew around playing the piano. At first this virtual community was a culture shock but the overriding theme Fatherland Messerchmitt ascertained was the individualism of the community. These avatars were created out of someone’s imagination and likeness. The world “normal” doesn’t exist within Second Life. As seen below, the image of the giant cat is just as acceptable as a traditional cowboy. These avatars and the way they’re created aren’t just images but expressions of individualism that distinguish themselves from the norm. This truly seemed to be a free place. Yet, all of these options of what you could wear were overshadowed by objects you couldn’t wear, own, or touch. One of the coolest aspects is an avatar's ability to fly but how high I could fly was controlled by something. Why? The more time Fatherland Messerchmitt spent within the Second Life world, the more Fatherland Messerchmitt came to realize the restrictions and regulations implemented to control my destiny within Second Life. The creation of avatars is truly the only freedom experienced in Second Life but what an avatar can wear or become is ultimately decided and controlled by the system under the guidance of a single controller. Given the creations of these restraints, the world of Second Life has shifted from one bred from free creativity to a world dominated and organized around materialism. When material objects dictate one’s individualism, the purpose of one’s identity has shifted away from individualism and has become based on the collection of objects. Rather than forging a world based on the community, the desire to attain material objects has transformed the community into one based around individual wants rather than the community’s needs. Take the following picture for example:  What is the first thing that comes to mind? (No, Fatherland Messerchmitt isn’t taking advantage of a Victoria’s Secret sale.) Personally, the world of Second Life allows you to create avatars to your likeness; the objects you couldn’t become in this life you can become in virtual life. Yet, avatars place value upon the ability for you to create and forge an avatar of your preference. In placing such an emphasis on material wealth, the individual becomes nothing more than an object compounded by the system. The system goes so far as to control where you can’t and cannot go or enter. Similar to capitalism, the individual changes into an object, an object concentrated on building upon their identity rather than the community. The system gives us options, similar to the supermarket depicted below, to forge our identity but the system is actually controlling how we look and eventually we evolve from ourselves to many avatars locked into the system’s set uniformity. At first, avatars conform to the system’s expectations but as the system continue to grow more and more avatars continue to establish regulations on owned objects that hinder the freedoms supposively found within the system. The system has now detached itself from the community and upholds the command of avatars. Certainly, the world of Second Life is based upon limitless freedoms of expression and creativity but as numerous avatars are entering the system, the instinctive ability to protect what is yours comes into play. By protecting their created property, objects owned by an avatar become limited or only accessible for a few. This ultimately affects the individual avatar by hindering their ability to acquire objects or enter structures. The creation of these architectures serves not only to barrier-off the general avatar population but symbolize the development of a virtual elite community. Found similarly in reality, the development of social classes within Second Life serves to distinguish the individual from the community. Consequently, the freedom found in the system is being eradicated and replaced with accepted conditions of what the new system would entail. What this new system is based upon is the establishment of architectures with the intentions of controlling property. The following picture is a prime example of this new world and the impact of self-imposed architectures upon the general community:  In this picture, you can see a gorgeous house and a tree house to the right. Interestingly, Fatherland Messerchmitt can freely enter the tree house but cannot gain access into the house. Why? This is the hypocrisy of the Second Life: avatars have eradicated the welfare of the community and constructed individual wants. The house doesn’t symbolize wealth but a restricted world guarded by imposed architectures to keep others out. Differentiating from the house, the tree house values the community as Fatherland Messerchmitt conversed with numerous other avatars. Asking other avatars their opinions regarding the “neighbors”, most found the house to be contradictory to the purpose of Second Life; they said changes like this have been occurring for some time as the value of virtual property is more essential than the community’s welfare. From Fatherland Messerchmitt’s perspective, the house as well as plethora of other structures across the islands symbolizes nothing more than lust, self-identity driven creations for someone’s access. But, what’s most startling is the shifting occurring within Second Life. As the community’s needs are continuously disregarded by individual wants, the system is becoming more than something that can be controlled. As materialism has become the driving force behind individual identity, the value of all these objects results in ownership. As more and more object becomes owned, the system becomes a uniformed networked based on restraints. Eventually, this amassing of all material objects and placing values upon these objects will bring an entirely new meaning to property within Second Life. Ownership is the new identity. As an owner, you can control other avatars telling them what they can and cannot do. Ultimately, the system allows us to do as we please but with stipulations based upon permission. This newly formed permission culture results in the creation of class structures and raises the importance of ownership within Second Life. **// II. //****//Community//** T he importance of community is one of the most essential aspects to successful societies. Not only do communities provide security but builds trust amongst its many members. Unfortunately, Second Life’s community is slowly withering away as the private has begun to overshadow and erase the public sphere. Unlike its intention, Second Life has drifted away from the community and more towards the establishment of strong individuals. Similar to //Fight Club// in that the "system (Project Mayhem) became something incapable of being stopped" (Palahniuk, p.79), the world of Second Life has become nothing more than a system with intentionally created forms of regulation, which has caused the system to be redirected towards ownership and permission and away from the intended free community. Not only has this taken away the general theme of Second Life being a “free world” but has shifted the system completely. By implementing regulations based upon the ownership of property, Second Life has become a permission world; a world being constructed around ownership principles with the intention of funneling culture away from the community and to the individual. As this shift continues to progress, ownership is becoming the overriding theme of Second Life. Similar to modern elitist society, property is being seen for its value and distribution of the property is unequal. Ultimately, by upholding property’s value the system begins to change as few experience the benefits of ownership. Yes, Second Life allows for the creation of structures and islands but acquiring the means of producing these objects is limited. Essentially, the objects thus owned are controlled by the owner. All forms of regulations and sharing fall under the guidelines of the owner. This isn’t limited just to Fatherland Messerchmitt touching or owning certain objects but being denied access to a facility because permission wasn’t granted. Fatherland Messerchmitt isn’t just discussing being denied by an invisible fence (most of the time it is just that) but by physical barriers. Consider the following picture below: Rather than Fatherland Messerchmitt being able to traverse the following structure, set architectures were created to keep Fatherland Messerchmitt from walking or entering the property. Literally, a virtual fence composed of nothing but the word “private” written is red surrounded the entire piece of property and prevented Fatherland Messerchmitt from entering the property. This fence wasn’t just around the facility but went even further elevating far above the structure to the point that Fatherland Messerchmitt couldn’t fly over the property. A majority of the structures across this particular island had this “private red” barrier around pieces of property. The only access attained by Fatherland Messerchmitt was in the island’s welcoming center located in the picture’s background. This is precisely what Lessig was arguing: free culture doesn’t exist because culture is being recreated on permissions through the modalities of restraints. To put it another way, Second Life is based on restrictions and not on free culture. By limiting the freedom of culture, the individual is forced to conform to the system’s set regulations. As this occurs, the community undergoes drastic changes as individualism becomes the accepted norm. As individual avatars continue to exploit the freedoms found in Second Life by continuously placing ownership on property and protecting their properties through created modalities intended to constrain, the creation of social classes emerge but a more startling repercussion occurs: the social elite who claim ownership of objects consequently developing a private sector within Second Life. As this private sector continues to grow, the entire community is eliminated as privacy barriers and other forms of deterrence are created. Thus, similar to Klein’s argument in //Shock Doctrine//, the original system is being "recreated from a fresh slate which benefits the private and slowly erases the public spheres" (Klein, p.383). What is occurring currently in Second Life isn’t freely created islands but the death of the public spheres and the freedoms associated with it. The scale of what is owned and the regulations implemented to protect the property are startling. Even the smallest objects, such as a bike, have architectures imposed upon them that are controlled by the owner. Here, Fatherland Messerchmitt is pictured sitting on a bike and that’s all he’s allowed to do. The system only permits   Fatherland Messerchmitt to sit on the bike. Riding it isn’t allowed. Directly next to the bike is a small box which contains the words “Secret key only allowed for owner”. This is startling if permission must be granted in order for Fatherland Messerchmitt to ride. One of the central components of a successful community is trust. Here, and everywhere within Second Life, trust is inexistent as permission and not trust is the dominating feature. This travesty of the importance placed in the value of property is reverberated in //Fight Club//. In the beginning, the narrator is depicted as a lonely man who holds some wealth or at least an identity attached to his possessions. These aren’t just objects but assets which defy who he is and helped to identify him and his image; they bring him comforting knowing that he can escape to them and feel safe. After the destruction of his apartment, tangible objects once valued by the narrator ceased to exist. Accordingly, the narrator had an epiphany and succumbed to the reality that he has "lived in a world completely dependent upon tangible goods" (Palahniuk, p.24). By creating the fictional character Tyler Dunn, the narrator was able to find a means of escaping from the suffocating realms of reality. By creating Tyler, the narrator ultimately became controlled by Tyler who challenged the accepted norms of society and began constructing an empire based upon the individual and not the community. Through this challenge, Tyler envisioned the recreation of society solely by giving to people the one thing they’ve always had but couldn’t discover or unleash because of restrictions imposed by the modalities of constraint: the power of change capable of altering the world. By shocking people into this understanding, Tyler was able to eliminate the distractions of tangible wealth, destroy the modalities of constraints which served to restrict individuals, and forged a new society based on the power found in the individual. Similar to Tyler, avatars are virtual creations of our imaginations communicating and traversing in a world with limitations. Just as Tyler was capable of changing the accepted norms, the power of individual avatars has questioned the existence of the accepted community and has undertaken the obligation of redirecting the system towards individualism. Similar to //Fight Club//, because of the value placed in objects, the obsession of materialism, and the development of a permission culture, Second Life’s society is based around the individual and not the community. Because of the freedom to create and declare ownership, Second Life is a mirror image of the world Tyler Dunn attempts to eradicate. Not only bikes but larger objects also contain constraints. Here, Fatherland Messerchmitt is at an island which specializes in selling “toys”. Clearly, the assortment is vast but what’s most startling is the fact that most of these objects contain restrictions on them which prevented Fatherland Messerchmitt from sitting in and even touching the objects. As Fatherland Messerchmitt continued to traverse around the island, the opportunity to fly a helicopter was available. Intrigued, Fatherland Messerchmitt began to fly the aircraft but was limited to only a few seconds of airtime. While in mid air, the helicopter, which was originally under his control, suddenly shifted over to the system’s control and returned the aircraft back to the airstrip. The owner of these aircrafts has implemented regulations which not only control their property but controls the avatar using their property. The development of the permission culture has large implications upon the individual. Everywhere Fatherland Messerchmitt goes, either to the airport or hippie island, architectures imposed by ownership only allows certain movements and constricts Fatherland Messerchmitt’s time across the islands. These restricts do more than just grant owners the permission to do as they freely want regarding their declared pieces of property but continue to dissolve the public sphere by creating social distinctions. Second Life isn’t based upon actual but virtual wealth. In reality, the wealth is only seen through restrictions on objects. The ultimate question within Second Life isn’t how much can someone acquire but who owns what. The truth is the ownership of objects is hidden, concealed from avatars as a way of hiding the owners’ identity. Through concealment, the owner of a particular object can utilize the system and construct regulations upon their object in total secrecy. The same type of concealment was discussed in //Free Culture//. Rather than having a large data base which exists to identify the owner of a particular copyright, the "owners remained behind a curtain of laws and regulations protecting them and their property"Lessig, p.238). This created curtain intended to conceal the identity of avatars is apparent in the following picture:       Literally, the owner of this property has constructed a giant concrete wall around the primacies and is only accessible by flying over and dropping in. This isn’t a question of privacy but an obsession of creating a private sphere in place of the public domain. As more private ideals are upheld over the public, the public sphere will be eliminated as will the private sphere. By destroying the public community, the private establishment will surely dwindle as the private sector is dependent upon the public community to support their well being and existence. **__ Part III: Conclusion __** The intentions of Second Life to provide a virtual community which functions because of the creativity and individual expression of its numerous members is being redirected as more claims of ownership of objects and property falls into the control of a few avatars. Rather than being a truly virtual free community, Second Life is currently being redirected around implemented constraints by avatars to control and protect objects and property. From clothing to buildings, the system dictates how avatars can act and move, what one avatar can wear and can’t, and where avatars can and cannot visit. As regulations imposed by the system continuously hinder avatars, some avatars have exploited the freedoms granted by the system and created communities and structures protected by security architectures intended to keep other avatars either out or off. Thus, regulations created by owners only hinder the system’s accessibility as the community becomes nothing. Individualism fueled by materialism begins to become the resounding theme. This shift from the community to the individual changes the purpose and definition of what the community is intended for and plunges the public domain into an abyss. The abyss which it plummets into is the permission culture. The permission culture is a self-created community only occupied by few avatars who claim ownership over an island’s infrastructures. As the permission culture continues to develop, the private sector continues to grow and eventually eliminates the public. Once this has occurred, the private’s ability to exist is hindered as those who it once dictated have ceased to exist. The world they intended to create a world of private property and value laden objects halts as the public sphere is left to die. Parallel to the arguments presented in the works by Klein, Lessig, and Palahniuk, the creation of the community from a blank slate results in a privatized world with a total control upon its culture. As the permission culture continues to develop, the norms of that culture will be contested by a few and potentially altered if enough individuals are given the power to discover within themselves the ability to alter the world.
 * __ Part I: Introduction __**
 * __Work Cited__**

Lessig, Lawrence. "Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity". Penguin Books; New York City, New York: 2004

Klein, Naomi. "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism". Metropolitan Books: Henry Hult and Company, LLC; New York City, New York: 2007

Palahniuk, Chuck. "Fight Club". Metropolitan Books: Henry Hult and Company, LLC; New York City, New York: 1996.