Baudrillard pgs. 38-49
The author's conclusion from his suggestion to stage a fake robbery amidst the "real established order" contradicts what he said about Disneyland. If the establishment's goal is to condense every attempt at simulation into some reality -- that is to say the establishment sees everything as part of a singular reality -- they wouldn't create fake realms for us to bask within.
Baudrillard states that a fake robbery is no different from a real one. The signs and gestures involved with the fake robbery are the same as the signs and gestures involved in a real one. This is due to the outside establishment and their understandings of their world, which is also partly our world because of shared signifiers and public knowledge/morals.
How do we know when we have entered a "fake" reality? Is it the moment we step through the turnstiles at Disneyland? Sit down in the cinema? There are often grey areas. Online, we have no conception of irony, fakeness, or truth. Realms that exist to promote truth also promote falsehoods. The difference here all lies in perception. This can make it tricky for some to latch on to certain societal concepts or ideas, while others flourish in those constraints.
If we think about the idea of an institution creating an established order for us, we are left to decide who is a part of the institution in the first place. This is frustrating because we are all living in echo-chambers with our own ideas, peers, and pursuits. Therefore we must break down what Baudrillard means when he talks about the "establishment."
He states that "The only weapon of power, its only strategy against this defection, is to reinject realness and referentiality everywhere, in order to convince us of the reality of the social, of the gravity of the economy and the finalities of production."
The establishment is just as dependent on the simulation as the simulation is. In this way, there cannot be a global truth tied to a single establishment. This is all a collection of signifiers and processes.
The author's conclusion from his suggestion to stage a fake robbery amidst the "real established order" contradicts what he said about Disneyland. If the establishment's goal is to condense every attempt at simulation into some reality -- that is to say the establishment sees everything as part of a singular reality -- they wouldn't create fake realms for us to bask within.
Baudrillard states that a fake robbery is no different from a real one. The signs and gestures involved with the fake robbery are the same as the signs and gestures involved in a real one. This is due to the outside establishment and their understandings of their world, which is also partly our world because of shared signifiers and public knowledge/morals.
How do we know when we have entered a "fake" reality? Is it the moment we step through the turnstiles at Disneyland? Sit down in the cinema? There are often grey areas. Online, we have no conception of irony, fakeness, or truth. Realms that exist to promote truth also promote falsehoods. The difference here all lies in perception. This can make it tricky for some to latch on to certain societal concepts or ideas, while others flourish in those constraints.
If we think about the idea of an institution creating an established order for us, we are left to decide who is a part of the institution in the first place. This is frustrating because we are all living in echo-chambers with our own ideas, peers, and pursuits. Therefore we must break down what Baudrillard means when he talks about the "establishment."
He states that "The only weapon of power, its only strategy against this defection, is to reinject realness and referentiality everywhere, in order to convince us of the reality of the social, of the gravity of the economy and the finalities of production."
The establishment is just as dependent on the simulation as the simulation is. In this way, there cannot be a global truth tied to a single establishment. This is all a collection of signifiers and processes.
Comments
Post a Comment