The All Seeing Eye (of the Network)

One would think that in the infinite expanse of the internet there would be shadowy corners or trap doors that hid in them people's secrets and desires. In these spaces people would be able to protect the things they want to hide from the all seeing eye that is made up of all users of the network, but there really is no such places. On the internet if there is a way to hide something, there are many different ways to bypass the protection and reveal the secrets that lay hidden. This power of "revealing all" that the internet (along with the people that use the internet) seems to have imbedded in it's fabric can have grave effects on the people that use (and misuse) the internet. In my high school a kid in my grade had a passionate hatred for another student at the school and would write about it on his personal blog. Not long after he had written a couple of posts about this particular kid, school administrators discovered it and disciplinary action was taken (and even a restraining order was made). The point is that one would not expect their personal blog (or online diary, really) to be discovered by people that you know, causing problems in the physical world. The blog was discovered, even though it was a private blog, because nothing stays hidden on the internet where the all seeing eye of collective users finds anything and everything that is posted. This is the power the internet has over its users, the power of sight and knowledge made up collectively of companies, citizens, governments and many more entities. Combined, they create a tower with an all seeing eye that discovers and uncovers anything noteworthy or powerful that is posted to the internet. Those hidden places or clandestine activities that people think they can keep to themselves never stay hidden because the internet, at its foundation, is about the power of seeing and knowledge.

What is an Author in Today's World?

In Foucault's "What is an Author?" he describes the way that authors have a sphere of discourse surrounding them that connects their works together as well as points to common themes, motifs, ideas and feelings that are associated with their works. Foucault imagined the worlds that were associated with authors at the time he was writing this, but did he imagine what would happen to these spheres of influence that surrounded authors in the years to come? He probably would not be able to imagine the impact of celebrity culture, the internet and the growth of people's personal branding. With the invention of the internet individual people became their own brand with followers, products and projects that span different mediums. What would Foucault think of the effect of the internet on the sphere of an author like Stephanie Meyer? She is an author with a sphere of influence so large because of the popularity of her books, the movies based on her books and the fan fiction written by her admirers.

 It is interesting to look at a sphere like Freud’s sphere where many other authors have reviewed, analyzed and expanded on Freud’s ideas in an academic way. Then comparing Freud’s sphere to the way Stephanie Meyers’ fans have taken her ideas and characters and have expanded upon them to create thousands of pages of fan fiction, even one that was turned into Fifty Shades of Grey. Even though Foucault was describing this phenomenon long before the rise of the personal computer, blogs, and the general democratic nature of the internet made authors’ and even other people like artists, chefs and people of interest’s spheres of influence into a giant phenomenon. I am interested to see what Foucault would think of the effect the internet has had on the function of the author as he relates to the texts and ideas that are associated with him.

This is 100% Me, Take it or Leave it!

Over the popular five or so social media outlets that people use there is always somewhere a space where people state or show who they really are. This may be in their “about me” on their Tumblr, in their about section on Facebook, or the types of things they re-pin on Pinterest. In some way most people will make it know what they are about and who they are. The thing that intrigues me is what these people, including myself, post about themselves and what they choose to post. What people post on their social media outlets is never really a whole or completely true picture of their personality because they are choosing which parts of themselves to show. I think this is true even if someone is honestly trying to describe themselves in a bio or post. This is especially true on a site like Tumblr where someone’s “about me” may not just be words that describe them like: “Hi I’m Abby. 16. Tay Swift. 1D. Tacos. My BF. The Beach. Ya I’m going to get a tattoo when I turn 18, whatta ya gonna do about it?” While looking at a bio like this I only get a shallow view of who Abby really is, a view completely controlled by Abby. In real life I can make my own judgments when I meet someone, but on the internet the person presenting themselves dictates what people know and sometimes even think of them. This shallow view of someone is harder to present because you usually know someone when you are friends on Facebook on top of the fact that photos and posts usually factor in to your judgment of someone. In a world where millions of people are on social media sites are we ever actually seeing people’s real personality? Can social media ever recreate the experience of meeting someone in person and making the judgments that you would when meeting someone in person?

The Knowledge I Gain is From a Screen, Not a Book

It is all about being published in print. Today, in a world dominated by the words we read from a screen, to be published by a large publisher in print is a sign of status. It seems that the elitists in the world written text only covet what is written on the paper in front of them. To me this is crazy because being a digital native I grew up reading from paper books and from reading off a screen. On top of this I currently read 95 percent of my assignments and pleasure readings from a screen, not a physical text.
Being someone who loves fashion, I am constantly reading reviews of shows (and I am currently doing that because it is of course New York Fashion Week right now) from my favorite designers, getting the scoop of who is doing what and keeping my knowledge of the industry growing. I do all of this reading from a computer. I even read books about fashion from a screen! I deem these writings no less creditable or scholarly than the texts I read in a newspaper or a physical book about fashion. And without the texts I source from online I would not have access to the kinds of information that I want to read about. Just last night I read the review of the Prabal Gurung show only hours after it happened. This quick and accessible text that I read kept me updated about a field I am passionate about. I didn’t care that it wasn’t from a printed source because I feel texts on paper or on a screen have the same creditability. 

Prabal Gurung Fall/Winter 2014

The age of physical texts is gradually coming to and end and it is something that society is going to have to start accepting more and more. The inevitability of physical texts being phased out, in my opinion, is imminent and the clout surrounding published texts will no longer have influence and pull on society.