It’s interesting to compare the new media pieces (especially “We Feel Fine”) that aggregate individual discourse (blogs) into a visual, interactive whole, with the Claritas demographic tool we saw in class. Both seem to trivialize individuals. This feeling is less profound in “We Feel Fine,” because the “participants” are being defined or categorized by theemotions they project. Still, they are reduced to blips and blobs, and the defining object itself (short text) is fragmentary. The Claritas tool is obviously more upsetting in this sense. We end up defined by the car we drive, and the square footage of our houses. At the same time (if I recall correctly), the categories are presented with cartoonish, idyllic pictures. This seems worse than a straightforward, un-illustrated presentation; you get dehumanized by becoming a consumer category and then are represented as a cartoon.
What all this seems to highlight is the ongoing transformation of identity in current society. The postmodern is obsessed with the plasticity and solipsism of perception. But in spite (or because) of the sheer amount of representational forms available to us, projecting this“authentic” self to a greater community seems increasingly elusive. We become more and more fragmented as our means of representation expand. And in a culture obsessed with individuality,this is painful. I’m beginning to wonder to what extent my interest in obscure and frequently transgressive media originated as a means of reclaiming or maintaining a strong sense of individuality, as opposed to simply authentic curiosity. It seems to be a “chicken or the egg” type of relationship. Are these obscure trappings on my Facebook identity simply a means of having a foothold in an increasingly “information saturated” world, or do they constitute a partof a “real” identity. And how would I know the difference in genesis?