Gaza Flotilla

I wrote this piece about a week ago, but I hesitated to post it, since its serious nature is out of keeping with the generally frivolous tone of this blog. I vaguely know a couple of people who were on board the Gaza flotilla though, and I figured that if they were willing to risk a bullet in the head, the least I could do was to show a little solidarity.

Since I’m coming to this late there’s probably no point in repeating the case for ending the Gaza blockade (even the US administration has come out against it) or going over the Israeli assault on the flotilla (you can read eyewitness accounts here and here, and watch unedited video here). Anyone who hasn’t thought about how the incident illuminates the nature of the Israeli state can read an insightful essay on the subject here.

The internet is supposed to have made it harder for the powerful to get away with outrages like this, by democratising the flow of information. That’s true to some extent, but it’s also the case that, thanks to the speed of modern communication, the old saying “‘A lie is halfway round the world before the truth has got its boots on” has never been more accurate. What’s even more disheartening is that the multiplicity of news sources doesn’t seem to have broadened minds – instead of seeing things from another point of view, people just shop around until they find a newsfeed that confirms their existing prejudices.

I guess I am as susceptible to this as anyone, though I do try to take in more than just Indymedia and the Weekly Worker. I tend to get my information via Google News, which usually links to a fair spectrum of opinion, though of course I must consciously and unconsciously select what I click on.

Looking in my browser history for the last few days I see the BBC, The Guardian, The Times, The Telegraph, The Independent, The Herald, The Scotsman, Salon, The LA Times, The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor, The Houston Chronicle, Al Jazeera, Xinhua, AP, Reuters, AFP and the CBC. Now, Al Jazeera and Xinhua aside, I would characterise those outlets as largely conservative, western, mainstream media, which in theory should counterbalance my habitual far-left outlook, but in this case, none of the facts reported by any of these sources would seriously undermine the argument that Israel is guilty of an unjustified act of aggression.

Facts don’t always carry the day though, and exposure to information that challenges one’s existing opinions doesn’t necessarily change one’s mind. If anything the evidence suggests that it does just the opposite.

So maybe this post is a waste of time, since anyone who disagrees with the view that the Israeli state is out of control is unlikely to change their ideas after reading what I think. Still, I can hope that what I’ve written and linked to may go a little way towards convincing at least a few people to think about opposing the Gaza blockade, and supporting a just peace for Palestine.

Explosive talent

I can’t mention Blue Velvet without noting that Dennis Hopper, who fully inhabited the role of Frank Booth in that movie, passed away this week.

Hopper was a complex character, and was evidently not much fun to be around in the 70’s, but it’s difficult not to have some respect for the guy who directed Easy Rider, and was hard enough to round off a lecture to film students by blowing himself up.

That gum you like is going to come back in style

I don’t look at the TV much these days, and I very rarely find myself following an episodic drama series. The last time I even partially got into a show was when I caught most of the first season of The Wire, which I quite liked, but the effort of committing myself to regular appointments with the box was too much, and I never made it past the first episode of season two.

I was thinking about this the other day when I read an article at the AV Club which considered the cultural impact of David Lynch’s cult 90’s series Twin Peaks. It reminded me not just of how slavishly I had followed that programme, but of the way that even left-field shows like Lynch‘s unsettling masterpiece could attract mass audiences at that time.

Compared with today it was both easier and harder for a show to be a big hit back then; easier because there was less competition for the audience’s attention – the UK had only four terrestrial channels to choose from, satellite and cable were niche products, and there was no internet – and harder because there was no way to see things other than by sitting down in front of the TV at a set time – no DVD box-sets, no Tivo, and no internet TV. We did have VHS recorders I guess, though the elderly model I had at the time was much too unreliable to trust with an unmissable event like that week’s Twin Peaks.

I had been a big David Lynch fan since I saw Eraserhead late one night on TV, and I’ve liked everything he’s done since (even Dune), especially Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive (the latter is in the running for my favourite film of all time), so it was always likely I was going to be a Twin Peaks devotee, but what confirmed my addiction was the community that grew up around the show on campus. I was already hanging out with most of what became the Twin Peaks crowd, but we certainly bonded that little bit more over long evenings of coffee and cherry pie (actually, “coffee” and “cherry pie”) discussing our various theories of what the story was about. I’d like to say that we still get together every year to reminisce, but, with a couple of exceptions, I haven’t talked to any of those people in the best part of twenty years. Probably best to leave the memories undisturbed.

Anyway, the point that I’m meandering towards is that often what sticks with you about a cultural experience is not so much the event itself, but more the social connections that surrounded it. What’s changed since my Twin Peaks days is that, thanks to the wonder of the interwebs, it’s no longer necessary to be geographically co-located with your fellow fanatics to feel part of a community.

Certainly my experience over the last three years has been that, while it was the virtual eye-candy that initially pulled me into Second Life, what’s kept me around is the narrative that unfolds in the relationships between residents, played out partly in-world, but mostly in the SL blogosphere.

I don’t want to overstate the profundity of the SL storyline – it’s more potboiler than classic literature – but it’s diverting, harmless, and, best of all, it creates a pleasing illusion of interactivity. I can tell myself that I am involved in writing this tale, in my own small way, and that makes me just committed enough to stick with it through the many, many dull patches.

There’s an interesting paper by Wanenchak in the latest edition of Game Studies entitled Tags, Threads, and Frames: Toward a Synthesis of Interaction Ritual and Livejournal Roleplaying. It’s well worth reading in its entirety, but the part pertinent to this discussion is the brief review of Goffman‘s frame analysis as it applies to a collaborative online narrative:

… frames allow players to engage with the gameworld in such a way that their narrative construction and interactions become sensible to themselves and to each other.

What I find most fascinating about the Second Life narrative (and what I think gives it a claim to being a unique cultural phenomenon) is the fact that the frames that people are using are often unclear, shifting and overlapping. To put it in different terms, although they are operating in the same “gameworld”, which includes not just the SL grid but also the associated blogs, tweets and what have you, people are engaged with often wildly differing levels of immersion.

The effect of this is, more often than not, to render the meta-story unintelligible, but occasionally it all comes together to produce an instant of dream-like clarity that makes the whole project seem worthwhile. I would give some examples of this, but I suspect that, like real dreams, the beauty of these moments is highly subjective, and that any description I attempted would sound hopelessly prosaic.

Which brings us back to David Lynch. What I think he does better than any other director is capture the fractured reality of dreams and nightmares, in a way that is at once unsettling and beguiling. Sometimes – just sometimes – being part of the world of Second Life is like living in Twin Peaks.

Introducing the SLSBPI

There was an interesting post in the WordPress blog yesterday; you can follow the link if you want the details, but the essence of it is that Fortune has smiled upon one of our blogger brethren.

I reckon that this could be used as the basis of a one-item personality schedule for bloggers. Here’s the procedure:

  1. Ask the subject to carefully read the WordPress post, then study the blog to which it refers.
  2. Present them with this visual analogue scale:

    What is your predominant emotion at the present time?

    Vicariously Thrilled ————————— Bitterly Raging

  3. Score from -100 to 100, with 0 being the midpoint.

I scored +95. How about you?

Now we are three

On a slightly less gloomy note, today is our third birthday. I can honestly say that when I started this blog I never imagined that I would keep it going this long. I’m not entirely sure why I have; a combination of escapism and vanity I suppose. I’m sure that there’s some unconscious dread of mortality in there too, driving me to leave a trace of my existence, even if I am just one more pseudonymous scribbler in the vast ocean of irrelevance that is the blogosphere.

Anyway, to celebrate this auspicious date, I’ve decided to retire the rather dull blog theme (Andreas09) that I picked more or less at random back in 2007, and have been too lazy to change ever since, and go for something a little brighter.

Digital Death Day

Last Thursday was Digital Death Day, marked by a conference at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California. The event was a spin-off from the biannual Internet Identity Workshop, which is generally concerned with the technical and commercial aspects of online identity, rather than philosophical issues, and the DDD meeting was explicitly aimed at “Death Care Professionals … Estate Planners … [&} Death Attorneys” which would seem to indicate that the participants were inclined to grapple with practical matters rather than existential themes.

Nevertheless, even consideration of strictly material questions like the heritability of virtual assets and the ownership of online identity cannot help but make one think about the way that social media have influenced the experience of bereavement and grieving in the modern world. News reports of the death of a young person almost invariably mention friends and family paying virtual tribute to the deceased via Facebook or Twitter, and the concept of the social network page as a persistent memorial is well established. There is no doubt that this phenomenon can have a powerful emotional effect, as these personal accounts show.

Is this a healthy development? The persistent nature of an online presence can give mourners a chance to bid their farewells to the dead in their own time, reducing the trauma of a sudden departure. It also maintains the focus on the whole of the life that has been lived, rather than just on the death itself. All this can help give meaning to what might otherwise seem like a senseless tragedy, which in turn may aid the grieving process for those left behind.

This is perhaps not as new as we might think. In many ways it is a return a concept of death that our ancestors might have recognised, a communal experience, rather than a private matter for the immediate relatives of the deceased, after a century in which the end of life had been increasingly hidden away.

Of course it can also be argued that this process trivialises death and loss, that it is impossible to pay respectful tribute to the dead in 140 characters, that death has become just another commodified experience to be vicariously consumed. There is some truth in this – one can hardly deny that one’s reaction to the passing of someone that one has no real connection to will be driven more by one’s own internal dynamics than any genuine feeling for the deceased. (We explored this phenomenon in relation to Second Life in a previous post). On the other hand, expressions of sympathy from complete strangers, whatever their motivation, can be immensely comforting to the bereaved. At the most basic level they are an affirmation of our common humanity, a recognition that we are all bound together by our inevitable mortality, and it is that sense of solidarity that can carry us through our darkest hours.

Reality is overrated

Well, my sojourn in the real world turned out to be pretty depressing, sending me scurrying back to the synthetic succour of Second Life, to the comforting predictability of the rampant paranoia and gripes about the Lindens.

I guess that the new political situation will be taking up more of my real-life attention in the immediate future, but I’m going to try to keep it out of this blog, in favour of more inconsequential musings on SL culture and the like. I need to preserve a little oasis of fantasy in a world that looks set to become increasingly unforgiving.

Liberal betrayal

After six days of haggling we finally have a new Prime Minister. To no one’s great surprise it’s David Cameron, though at the head of a Conservative-Liberal coalition rather than a minority government. The Lib Dems evidently found the lure of high office irresistible, though they will no doubt talk nobly about “The National Interest” as they try to explain their sorry sell-out. I guess they must be confident that the concession they have extracted from the Tories on reforming the voting system – the promise of a referendum on AV – can be converted into some sort of concrete change before we all go to the polls again. In my view this is very optimistic – the Tory party (and a large part of the Labour party) are implacably opposed to PR in any form, and will surely work hard, along with their allies in the media, to ensure there is a “No” vote in any plebiscite on the issue.

In exchange for this vague nod towards reform, and perhaps other compromises on some details of economic policy that will emerge in time, the Lib Dems are identifying themselves with an administration that seems likely to embark on the most savage attack on working-class living standards in at least 30 years. The Tories may have made promises about protecting vital services, but now they are in power they will be able to claim that the public finances are in much worse state than they had thought, and push though cuts on a scale that no one has imagined. The Lib Dems may hope that their presence in government may put a brake on the worst of the Tory excesses, but in reality they will have no leverage other than threatening to quit the coalition and bring the government down, probably precipitating fresh elections in which they would risk being wiped out as disillusioned voters punished them for their perfidy.

Labour, in my opinion, has taken the sensible option of a spell in opposition, gathering strength for the next election, which may well be sooner rather than later. This of course does leave the population exposed to the depredations of the Tories, but the alternative – trying to hang on to power as part of an unstable “rainbow coalition” – would probably have ended with an early election and a Tory majority. The risk is of course that some external event will help the Tories get re-elected, in the way the Falklands war saved Thatcher from probable defeat in 1983, and condemn us to decades of misery.

There’s nothing else to be done now though, except to agitate and organise, and try to make the new government’s life as short and difficult as possible.

Election reaction

I stayed up until about 1 am this morning, when the early results seemed to be suggesting that the swing to the Tories would be enough to give them a slim majority, sending me to my bed in despair. I avoided listening to the radio first thing this morning, to put off the bad news, but when I did eventually tune in I found that my less gloomy predictions had in fact been more or less right as far as the national results go, apart from the Lib Dems only improving on their 2005 share of the vote by 1.0%, which, thanks to the vagaries of our electoral system, meant they actually ended up losing 5 seats rather than gaining the 20 to 30 they had hoped for. Labour were down 6.2% and the Tories up 3.8%, leaving them 20 seats short of a majority.

Up here in Scotland the Labour vote bucked the national trend by rising 2.5%, as their warnings of the threat of a Tory government resonated with an electorate that still remembers the horrors of the Thatcher years. The Tories stumbled to a single seat and 16.7% of the vote north of the border, compared to their national result of 36.1%, raising the question of whether a London Tory government has a mandate to rule Scotland, an issue that will undoubtedly have a major impact in the Scottish Parliament elections next year. That said, the SNP had a disappointing night, their rise of 2.3% less than they had hoped for, and overall the result in terms of seats was exactly what it had been in 2005.

There wasn’t much to cheer those to the left of Labour; the various organisations which stood candidates mostly polled under 2.0%, with Respect losing their only seat. Even the Greens only managed 1.0% nationally, though they did pull off the coup of winning their first seat, in Brighton. The far-right did a little better, with the BNP on 1.9% and UKIP on 3.1%, though they made no major breakthroughs.

Now the horse-trading has started, I’m still expecting the outcome to be a Tory minority government. The Lib Dems may turn out be a bit less attached to their principles once they get a sniff of actual power, but I think they would be reluctant to enter a formal Con-Lib coalition, if for no other reason than wanting to avoid being too closely associated with the Tories’ cuts agenda, which is bound to be enormously unpopular, when we might be returning to the polls in the not-too-distant future. Labour are going through the motions of tempting the Lib Dems with offers of electoral reform, but I wonder if their real strategy is to regroup in opposition in preparation for an election in 18 months or so. I expect Brown will have to resign, but I’m sure that reports of the death of the Labour as a party of government are very premature.

The Tories’ austerity measures, when they come, will surely generate a lot of opposition in working-class communities, so there will be opportunities for growing the left, though we clearly have our work cut out, not least because the fascists are waiting in the wings. The next couple of years could be one of those periods, like the early 80’s, where the political life of this country changes dramatically, and we have to do our best to make sure that this time round it’s for the better.

Trepidation

Well that’s my ballot cast (for the Communist Party, natch), so there’s nothing to do now but wait for the results. The exit polls will be out in less than an hour, and I’m pretty convinced that we’ll be looking at a Conservative victory.

I have no great love for the Labour Party, what with them invading Iraq, eroding civil liberties, letting the bankers destroy the economy and generally selling out every vaguely socialist principle they ever had, but I can’t help feeling a gnawing sense of dread at the prospect of a Tory government.

I’m old enough to remember how terrible the Thatcher years were, and with the economic situation the way it is, not to mention the decline of the left in the intervening years, we may be in for an even rougher ride this time round.