The Digital Panacea 
Exploring Electracy
Artifact 1
In the previous page, different themes were discussed to understand the concept of electracy compared
to orality and literacy. To delve deeper into this concept one of the themes will be applied to a digital
artifact, which for the sake of this experiment, a digitalartifact is a product of electracy.
I think the most fitting artifact to choose would be the video game that inspired the theme of this site,
the first time I ever saw the word panacea, the game Dragon Quest IX. This artifact is an example of the
theme of fantasy.
Dragon Quest IX was a JRPG or Japanese Role Playing Game for the Nintendo DS. The Dragon Quest series features
players controlling a cast of characters exploring and going through strategic turn based combat through which
the story advances. Dragon Quest IX stands out from the rest of the series however, as in other installments
there was a set cast of characters, including the main character, but Dragon Quest IX featured a completely
customizable player character. This would allow players to easily project themselves into the story,
to live the fantasy that they were a powerful fantasy character. The game also did not have a set group
of party members the players could have and they could instead either play the game multiplayer
or create their own npcs.
From a narrative standpoint, these customizations would make the story weaker, however the game
still had plenty of appeal due to customization allowing a more personal story in a way. In fact
many longstanding series did a similar shift of allowing players to create a custom character
(such as Fire Emblem), or more aptly personalize the main character as many of these customizations were
purely cosmetic. This is an interesting concept of what is more important, experiencing a richer, fuller
story that does not have to be generalized for character customization or being able to more easily live
the fantasy of being in the story yourself? The answer may be different for everyone but how much does
our connection to the digital affect our answer?
Another interesting aspect of the game is that it existed when it was not as common for games
to have online features, but Dragon Quest IX certainly feels like a game indicative of the shift
to electracy, in that it encouraged players to stay online more even with others. There
were three ways that the game was connected to the internet. The first is that you could
simply pass by someone else running the game and you would both get a benefit from each other,
even without ever speaking a word to the other. The second was that until its discontinuation, the
game featured an online shop that would update weekly with expensive items that encouraged you to
play the game more by first getting you to check for items and then have to accrue the
in-game currency to buy the limited time items. Thirdly the game had local multiplayer so you could
both hang out with friends and play the game more. These features show a pivotal aspect of electracy,
where the goal is to engage with it for as long as possible.
To engage with the fantasy for as long as possible.
In Dragon Quest IX you got to live out a fantasy. Of getting a character you could easily
see yourself in and connect with so that you could be the main character.
So that you could live out a fantasy of being a powerful warrior, magic user, healer,
or something in between. So you could livea fantasy of saving the world and impacting so many
other characters for the better. That is not a unique thing for any video game because fantasy
is just such a huge part of electracy. And while Dragon Quest IX may not have been completely
rooted in the internet itself, I believe this is a good artifact to start with as it does show
the shift of technology becoming so much more intertwined in the internet, how fantasy became so much
more important in our experiences, and how even in the presence of what is real, even if
that is just the presence of others, the electrate fantasies try to call us back.
Artifact 2: Aesthetic Analysis
For my aesthetic analysis I have chosen the Punk aesthetic.
The Punk aesthetic is one of the main aesthetics under the alternative (alt.) label, along with things like grunge,
emo, scene, as well as goth and its dozens of subtypes. Which is an interesting subject to me since more aesthetics
than not would be different than the cultural mainstream. However, despite that when talking about alt. Aesthetics
people are often referring to the “edgier” aesthetics or offshoots of those aesthetics, even though aesthetics inspired
by Japanese culture are acknowledged under the label, and technically since alt indicates things “outside of the mainstream”
even more aesthetics fit under the label than acknowledged.
I bring this up specifically as it is just an interesting thing to note and alt being used as an umbrella
term for so many similar aesthetics, has almost made alt its own label and has also caused the line to blur
between many of these aesthetics. This blurring has often led to infighting between those fighting against
the misuse of the terms and those who think the aesthetic is simply changing and growing. So I state this
partially as a disclaimer in case I have misunderstood something about the punk aesthetic.
As stated the Punk Aesthetic is very much an alternative aesthetic, and is at its core an extremely
political aesthetic. The punk ethos is primarily made up of beliefs such as non-conformity, anti-authoritarianism,
anti-corporatism, DIY culture, anti-consumerism, anti-corporate greed, direct action, and not "selling out."
Punk is a fairly older subculture and has gone through many changes, but these ideals are consistently at the heart of it.
Most people tend to first think of fashion or music when hearing the word punk and those aspects are very much
at the heart of the style and music. The fashion is at the heart of it as especially at its beginning, the style
was very unique and based on creativity. The chains and spikes came from hardware stores (which I assume is why
the metal bits on these types of clothes are referred to as hardware) and the base of the clothes came from thrift
stores. This would be in direct defiance of a very consumerist society where we tear through trends and styles
without thinking of the unethical conditions created in order for us to easily produce and buy things all the time,
in a society encouraging us to be constantly buying things. The music especially was and is incredibly counter cultural
and anti-government. With many songs in the genre expressing discontent with the way things are in society and talking
more about taboo topics in various tones. (From drugs, addiction, anarchism, mental health issues, toxic relationships,
to anti-police messaging). Even in things more loosely associated with punk, the punk ethos is clear, such as the image
of being part of a band playing in a garage (music for the primary goal of expression and not making money), tattoos,
and graffiti.
Now referring back to Alternative labeling discourse, where sometimes within these communities people
nitpick and fight against certain label usage, there are actually some valid arguments against some people trying
to call themselves punk. In the age of widespread internet usage and social media, aesthetics are becoming shaped
in new ways. A lot of the alt. Aesthetics that have been around for a while were shaped a lot differently. Where ideology
and especially music used to shape certain aesthetics more than even the fashion, there seems to be a switch now where
aesthetics feel more appearance based in many ways. (As an example, e-girls and e-boys are an esthetic that emerged on
tik tok, and from what I have seen don’t really have one main ideology and it seems to be far more visually based.)
With this change there has been an emergence of people wanting the style of an aesthetic while ignoring any
ideological history an aesthetic might have. Which has led to fast fashion companies producing items fitting the punk style,
despite the fact that fast fashion is inherently very anti-punk. So recently I have seen a lot of push back from particularly
the goth and punk communities trying to protect their aesthetic, ranging from educating to extremely nitpicky gate keeping.
It has been interesting to watch as at one point I did very heavily align with the punk aesthetic and now I feel more
comfortable just using the alt. label. Which was likely in part to the nitpicking of these communities, to partially
just the fact that I appreciate too many of the Alt. aesthetics to want to align myself with just one.
Overall though, I think that while aesthetics should have room to grow and evolve,
people should definitely respect an aesthetic’s roots
before boldly claiming something or someone to be a part of that community.
As a separate note, to professor Brake, I would like to make a claim from last week’s class.
I think aesthetics can very easily become an idol and something someone worships. I even think
that video could have been very easily making cottage core an idol. My reason for stating this
is that if someone is using an aesthetic to fill a hole in their life, to find their joy and reason
in life, and placing their entire identity in that aesthetic, I would consider it to be the
subject of their worship. I also think it would certainly explain why some people are so protective
of their aesthetic and so strict on what and who is or isn’t a part of that aesthetic.
I think there is an oddly fine line between appreciating an aesthetic to worshiping it.
That is likely crossed way more often than people think.
Just a thought I wanted to share that may have no real merit to it.
Artifact 3: The language of the internet
If you’ve spent any amount of time on the internet you’re probably familiar with memes.
After all, they seem to be the language of the internet in the same way speech is to orality and writing is to literacy.
If someone uses a meme you’re unfamiliar with, it’s almost like they’re speaking a different language.
Memes come in many different forms, or more specifically, formats. They can be words over an image or pure image,
they can be short videos and audios, or they can be a reference cycled around so much the context isn’t necessary
to those immersed in the electorate language. (For instance: The Snail) Memes also have a time limit before
they are considered “dead memes” where they are no longer perceived as entertaining and they are not cycled anymore.
This time limit is as unique as each different meme, but I think it has to do with the meme’s remixability. The idea
is that memes are either imitation or remix. Honestly, I think they’re both, or well, once a meme can only be imitated,
no longer remixed, is when it becomes a dead meme.
If memes are to be considered the language of the internet then we must acknowledge that people can use memes to convey
something about their own unique perspectives and interests. We see this a lot with memes, where they start out as one thing
and people take them and apply them to different things. This is a remix as everyone is changing the meme to express something
different. However, there’s only so much one can say using these memes before there is nothing original left to say and people
start to lose interest. That is because these memes have lost their appeal and there is no longer unique expression, but only pale
imitation. Thus, the meme dies and a new format takes its place and the cycle continues once more. Memes are constantly changing.
There is also the idea that nothing is sacred in memes. Well to that I would actually agree. Since I see memes as a language and
way for each individual to express themselves, I also have to acknowledge that everyone has things they hold sacred and things
they don’t. Which then means that there is nothing that every single person holds sacred so, there’s nothing that memes can hold
sacred. There will always be someone willing to make a joke or make light of something. (For instance some may find 9/11 jokes
to be very offensive and some may find it funny. Whether these jokes are told orally or through memes doesn’t really seem to matter
in the comparison.)
However, I think I would argue against the idea that memes are automatically inauthentic. Memes certainly can be inauthentic
and often are. However, I feel as though I have seen memes where people are just brutally honest and open about themselves
becoming vulnerable for the sake of being relatable. I also feel as though memes can be just as powerful a form of expression
as any other, as odd as it may be to think about. Memes can give an avenue to open the door to scary conversations and normalize
the parts we often try to hide. People can join in “cringy” trends for the sake of fun and expression, even if it isn’t as palatable
to others. Memes are certainly more interesting than they let on at surface value, and looking at them more closely shows a unique
human connection being made, for better or for worse.
Home