e-tivity4 Simulation & simulacrum

Having read both texts I am surprised at the differences in writing style and content considering they both offer possible definitions of the same thing: Simulation and simulacrum. Whilst the second text by Joanna Topor referenced its text sources very thoroughly I found it generalised the theory it examined, Baudrillard’s in particular. This meant that it came across merely as description of other peoples theories which raised them to a state of fact. Where as, I found that the first text by Devin Sandoz offered a clear analysis of other theorists texts, which developed into an interesting argument. For instance, he begins a paragraph with “Jean Baudrillard writes in Simulations that…” which is then developed in the next paragraph starting, ”If for Baudrillard the simulation is the process through which…” in his own voice. However, the texts and sources have, disappointingly, not been referenced well, leaving me unsure as where to investigate to read more. I found that both texts only skirt around the notion of Simulation and simulacrum in relation to the media ‘artwork’. I felt the first text addressed the artwork most directly when considering Deleuze’s writing on the subject; a theorist who has also studied previous theory (Baudrillard) and developed his own voice regarding the subject. Where as the second text focused more directly upon either the various dictionary definitions of the terms, or Baudrillard’s philosophical framework for the terms. For me this, again, made the text too closed and dry. As with the first text, narrative films were used as examples that contextualised the definitions, but I was frustrated by the question/fact posed at the end of the second text: “In the end it becomes impossible to know what came first, the filmic depiction of reality or reality itself.” For, whilst the notion of narrative film as simulation of reality is an interesting one, it is easy to trace the linear progression of the filmic depiction of reality; following a brief period of experimentation of the new medium at the turn of last century, film became a means to depict reality, to tell a story, which has be established as the ‘mainstream’ of film; conceived for the cinema, ever since. This typified this text for me and highlights a need to thoroughly research theory, and consider it from more than one or two positions, particularly when attempting to define a comlex theory. Although, in criticism of the first text, which was open to a number of texts on the matter, any sources need to be referenced when presenting research online (or anywhere for that matter.)
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s