I recently posted some thoughts about avatar and actual identity, which generated excellent discussion. But I thought I’d highlight the following comment, posted by Debs Regent of the SLLondon virtual community:
Social Construction
Anyone who has studied Social Psychology will be familiar with the extensive work of Kenneth Gergen about the constructed identity and its variants in different social groups and situations. Also group work done by Zimbardo and others underpins these significant findings.
We are arguing here about a phenomena that has been well researched and well proven for many years now. Its findings and conclusions are well established, even in situations that are fabricated and not considered ‘normal’ interaction.
Constructed Identity
Our identity consists of parts. All are part of the whole, yet the sum of the parts is greater than the parts themselves.
Identity varies in differing situations and each person who knows us sees us with a different identity according to their own filter of experience and understanding. Just as we all have our ‘telephone voice’, we have a personality for every individual we come into contact with, depending on our previous stereotyping of people we judge as being ‘like them’ – in real life this judgement is often made by the colour of someone’s skin, their gender, hair colour, age and dress. These categorisations are strikingly arrived at within 7 seconds, before a person even has a chance to open his or her mouth.
Pinker (2002, p. 202) writes that “some categories really are social constructions: they exist only because people tacitly agree to act as if they exist”.
Avatar Identity
Avatars are a convenient way to decide on what stereotype you wish to be given, outside of those organically embedded into you. You already have an idea of what makes up that category. In Second Life, we are also defining new categories, such as Steam Punk and Furries. What we have is created a socially agreed norm for what constitutes that category.
Avatar names are also constructed like real names. Akin to nicknames, they are ones we chose for ourselves rather than having names like ‘four eyes’ thrust upon us. We construct our own chosen identities within the pressures of our real environment, it is much the same within virtual worlds.
Identities Linked
I personally agree that real names and photographs should identify us and link us to the real world, however there too, we are in a continual process of constructing and deconstructing our identities, dependent on our own and others’ expectations. No one has a consistent identity that they carry around with them intact, we vary al the time. When you row with your significant other or scream at your kids, are you the same person who greets the boss? I hope not because you’ll soon be out of a job.
The same applies to virtual worlds, we fit in with societal expectations of us. Linden Labs has the intelligence to treat each cultural entity as distinct. They don’t expect conformity as Twinity does (which is not surprising given its Germanic home – were we to stereotype this would be neat, tidy, organised and controlled). We are bound by cultural expectations.
What is Transparency?
When Dusan talks about trust, again the word transparency raises its ugly head. Authenticity, integrity, validity and other such words enter the arena too. He mentions ‘RECOURSE’, this is simply a culturally bound principle in the US and other western nations. Nations who do not have a blame/sue culture are not even aware of this. I have a lot of contact with Portuguese people, in both realms and people from this culture are eager to exchange personal information in Second Life. There is no ‘blame culture’ in that country. Perhaps the Western ‘sue’ culture is the reason for fear, not transparency itself.
I myself was at the sharp end of that phenomenon in hiring a builder who we shall call ‘Dolly’ here. Dolly was from the US, California to be precise. Dolly wasn’t interested in the pittance I paid her to build in Second Life, she had a sick relative who needed money for medical care. Dolly had limited building skills and I took pity on her believing I could train her. Needless to say Dolly’s work was never any good and was never completed. However, after she disappeared I was contacted by her lawyer who informed me that I had to pay $12,000 US because she had incurred stress during her work in Second Life. All this was set up well before I took Dolly on and needless to say, she had already tried the same stunt several times before this. If this is your culture, then indeed it is wise to hide your true identity.
Where there is money, the lawyers, accountants and tax men will always be there to take their cut.
However this is nothing to do with ‘who you are’ and everything to do with preventing exploitation. As Dusan says, relationships are another construction, built over time and dependent on past performance. This is why social networks have become paramount during these information rich times.
Body of Evidence
I have to disagree with Prokofy Neva, not because I personally disagree, but because there is a huge body of empirical research that reinforces these facts about the human psyche. I see the power of Prokofy’s argument and know that might can sometimes be right, but not in this case – where masses of leading research over the past 100 years points in the opposite direction. Alberik did not write tripe, he wrote something that has been well substantiated. I am sure that those interested in this subject would find much of the work done by ‘Social Constructionists’ useful.
The Value of Anonymity
As Infocyde points out, Oscar Wilde was a wise man. Seldom are we given the opportunity for anonymity in life. However, the opposite is also possible, as people are shown to construct lies more liberally when given anonymity in courts. As even language is a fundamental construct, we can make ourselves and others believe anything we want to through language and image.
Why hide behind an Avatar?
So why separate part of our personalities and split them off – as you would do if you kept your true identity hidden behind an avatar?
- To separate an aspect of your personality and contain it in an environment that is not threatening. People threatened in this way would find help in the study of PTSD, fragmented personalities and warfare to understand this more deeply.
As Kwame AKA (Julius Sowu) says, fleeing from ourselves has caused more grief that integrating and understanding our various identities, or ‘faces’. Personally I would encourage anyone resisting this move forward to look at themselves and identify what they are frightened of instead of resisting change.
Times are Changing
Change is inevitable, even change of the ‘self’. We grow older, we change jobs, we cannot resist it. Change can be positive, once we are across the barrier that is fear. We are more than one identity, we are many – changing, evolving and growing. I thank everyone who has given me the material and inspiration to join this discussion to help me change and grow.
To show the world all that you are and share it with others is the most powerful expression of ‘self’ possible. To deny this to yourself and others is tragic.
Nice post, People are hiding behind the avtars cause there are suffering from identity crisis
Hi Dusan,
I’ve been alternatively wrestling and romancing the concept of identity for the past year or so. As you mentioned, we all take on different identities, not only over the course of a day, but over the course of our lives.
One challenge in thinking clearly about the subject is that the word “identity” encompasses quite a few different meanings which are related, but not identical. For instance, there are legal, social, psychological and even spiritual aspects. Just within the psychological sphere, the term identity can apply to social roles, gender preference, transcendental states, and so on.
So Botgirl is both real and fictional, depending upon the context and the particular aspect of identity one is referring to. I’ve found that arguments about identity in the avatar community often stem from mushy definitions. We end up disagreeing because I might be referring to legal identity and the other person is describing the personal experience of being a unique being.
I disagree with your statement “I personally agree that real names and photographs should identify us and link us to the real world…” The problem I have is the word “should.” Should from an ethical standpoint? A healthy psychological standpoint? A legal standpoint? I would certainly agree that it is your right to insist that I disclose RL identity if I want to do business with you. But that’s not my responsibility, rather it’s your personal preference. Like most things in life, some people make a choice for a healthy reason and some out of either nefarious intent or psychological trauma.
Finally, agree with your last statement, if you mean “self” as the unique mixture of personal qualities, talents, beliefs and so on each of us possesses. I don’t think it’s tragic if I don’t give you my social security number.
Anyway, thanks for continuing to fight the good fight. I’m going to be working in this area for the next six months as I prepare for a RL/SL exhibition on the topic of “The Ambiguity of Identity.” Hopefully, I figure a few more things out along the way.
Extremely well written and thought out. Thank you for posting it.
I strongly disagree with the implication that anonymity is detrimental to self and society. Like pen-names before then, anonymous online identities afford all the appropriate avenues for open self-expression, creativity, and safety in today’s world.
Here is my original blog post about Identify, Anonymity, Transparency, Safety which makes my case for appropriate use of anonymity–even in the work place.
As much as I respect the work made to refer to existing academic research on this topic, I suggest it does not fit entirely since it cannot reflect nuances relevant to today’s use of online anonymity.
Thanks again for the post.
Avatars are only fancy immersive cursers be them anthropomorphic or a puff of smoke with a name on top.
They are not beings, and no rights should be given to them. The need to act as though they are real is dangerous new age dribble.
SL fails mainly as a growth platform since it cannot decide if its a “roleplay service” or a “platform service”.
The SL name system is WHY most people never return, or dont go further than a half sign up.
If allowed a real relationship to others immersively and allowed to create a set of play personas for the Furry or RPG Cyberpunk games WITHIN the Second Life Platform, then LL would have a business beyond server space ponzi scheme, which they dont, and is why they are now in decline phase headed to sell off.
The attempt to just pay a bill to LL is a joke messed up with faux avatar boundries that make all talk of corporate buisness tools a lost cause.
Proof is in almost all the work done by the SL birthed Metaconsultant Agencies, a few produced a few “experiences for marketing or branding”. Most have produced empty office complexs for a platform that cant be used for real business activities.
People in general want the truth, people stressed in these times demand it.
chris
Great post Dusan, most are very stimulating in scope.
I have touched on this topic, once before on Botgirl’s Blog here> http://botgirl.blogspot.com/2008/10/if-you-see-your-avatar-on-road-kill-her.html
But, to stay more focused on your post, Dusan, my perception is one of opportunity. I liken it to several factors or analogies rather. For example, when we move to a different community or change jobs this opportunity presents itself, albeit a not conscious effort that we made this change. But, point being is this new environment gives us this opportunity to be something we haven’t before.
One might ask why was it necessary, for this environmental change to present this opportunity? This brings me to another factor. It can be argued as to ‘whom’ we really are and what we are made of that makes us that. More often than not, as people we frequent contact with come to ‘know’ us, from their own biased views, it builds a “BOX” around us making very difficult to be different. Why? Because, most people want to be comfortable, change is hard for all. So, this comfort breeds inertia and a degree of psychological laziness. Again, this is not intentional on individualness, for the most part.
It has been said many times that to grow we must reach outside our comfort zone. This takes much effort. Therefore, SL, and I strongly disagree with “chris” above. There are so many pursuits in life we choose as individuals that reflect the things we strongly desire. SL is a very different one, obviously. Chris, why do you think they refer to it as a “virtual reality”; something to think about.
Anyway, there are so many experiences in life that bring us to a personality, and that is only part of who we are. There are also the parts that others perceive us to be. Then there are parts that are much more unconscious, and hidden, or not expressed out of fear of ridicule or rejection. This is where Second Life presents a very different and a historical revolutionary opportunity to BE much of what we have always wanted to be, even if it’s not what we THINK reality IS.
In closing, I’d point out that obsessive or fanatical behavior is a dysfunction. This does not mean it’s something we don’t need to go through to grow into, hopefully, something for the better.
Finally, there is “Anonymity”. I think it’s entirely appropriate when dealing in business transactions that are of a very significant kind. Buying virtual products for the most part isn’t one of them. But, if it’s a major undertaking and potentially can affect important concerns, then it’s a must. Otherwise this anonymity is crucial to this period of growing outside the box. The key will be, can we take what we have learnt, and apply it in our everyday REAL life; this would represent something very profound.