Simulacra.

SIMULACRA

Simulacra. A speculative journey among ethics, aesthetics and emerging technologies, towards a Post Human future.

SIMULACRA

Thesis of: Ilaria Castelli, 915049.

Supervisor: Francesca Piredda.

A.Y. 2019-2020.

Politecnico di Milano, School of Design, Product Service System Design.

INDEX Introduction.

P. 20

1 The Case Study of Lil Miquela and the questions on humanity.

P. 28

P. P. P. P. P. P. P.

Introduction to the chapter.

1.1 Description.

1.2 Analysis.

1.3 Ethnographic Research.

1.4 Insights.

1.5 Further Directions.

Conclusion of the chapter.

2 Change of paradigm, socio-cultural crisis and new perspectives.

Introduction to the chapter.

2.1 The metaphor of the flaneur parisienne.

2.2 A transparent society.

2.3 Fake freedom and continuous surveillance.

2.4 “Digital Swarm”.

2.5 “Infoxication”.

2.6 A time of eloquent images.

2.7 New Media and “Information Behaviour”.

2.8 Post-materialistic, post-hierarchical and post-realistic society.

2.9 Technologies as a product of human mind.

2.10 Decentralization of human point of view.

Conclusion of the chapter.

IV

31 32 33 38 54 56 57

P. 58 P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P.

61 62 64 66 70 71 74 78 80

P. 86 P. 88 P. 89

3 Blended Reality and New Media as the technical aspects defining the current age.

Introduction to the chapter.

3.1 Sensory transformation and dual identity.

3.2 The blending of multiple realities.

3.3 Impacts of Blended Reality.

3.4 What is a Medium.

3.5 Characteristics of New Media.

3.6 The fundamental concept of interaction.

3.7 Human and body in Blended Reality.

3.8 The new perception of space.

Conclusion of the chapter.

4 Synthetic media and the complex issue of reality.

P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P.

Introduction to the chapter.

5.1 What defines virtuality and the metaphor of the conscious dream.

5.2 Aesthetic of virtual reality.

94 96 100 103 104 107 112 116 117 121

P. 122

P. Introduction to the chapter.

P. 4.1 Synthetic media: what they are and how they work.

P. 4.2 A new digital language that will revolutionize, in good and bad, the media landscape.

P. 4.3 Deepfakes and trust issues.

P. 4.4 The real-fake quadrant.

P. 4.5 What is now considered real and what is now considered fake.

4.6 Current limitations of synthetic realism and a look P. towards the future.

P. Conclusion of the chapter.

5 The virtual realm.

P. 90

126 130 136 140 143 145 150 152

P. 154 P. 158 P. 160 P. 162

V

5.3 Reality, representation and mimesis.

P. 5.4 Representation and design.

P. 5.5 Ethical considerations on virtual reality.

P. 5.6 Case: Situationism, Guy Debord and the Drift Theory. P. Conclusion of the chapter.

P.

6 Communication between man and machines, or “technological organisms�.

Introduction to the chapter.

6.1 The relation with emotions.

6.2 Living with robots.

6.3 Enabling enactive systems.

6.4 Too much similarity means anxiety: the Uncanny Valley.

6.5 Ethical doubts.

6.6 Potential dystopian futures.

6.7 The Futures Cone and further considerations.

Conclusion of the chapter.

7 Human is no longer at the center: De-Anthropocentrization.

Introduction to the chapter.

7.1 Where this anthropocentric view come from?

The central role of narration.

7.2 Anthropocentrization as an human fictional construct.

7.3 Building imaginary worlds.

7.4 How does design use narration?

7.5 Within the framework of identity building.

But, are we happy of how we are?

7.6 Reimagining the human: where are we going?

Conclusion of the chapter.

VI

167 172 173 176 180

P. 182 P. P. P. P. P.

186 188 191 196 200

P. P. P. P.

202 210 212 217

P. 218 P. 221 P. 224 P. P. P. P.

228 236 242 243

P. 246 P. 250

8 Towards a Post Humanistic perspective.

Introduction to the chapter.

8.1 Transitory and Trans Humanism.

8.2 The affirmation of Post Humanism.

8.3 Ethic of Post Humanism.

8.4 Aesthetic of Post Humanism.

8.5 Post Humanist thinking and design.

8.6 Hybridization of Species: a new place in nature for man.

8.7 Animal, Human, Robot: a visual narration.

Conclusion of the chapter.

P. 252 P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P.

255 258 262 264 268 270 278 284 306

Conclusion.

P. 308

Bibliography.

P. 318

VII

VIII

Index of Figures.

Figure 1. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2018.

Figure 2. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2020.

Figure 3-4. Personal screenshots of Lil Miquela Instagram profile, 2020.

Figure 5. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2018.

Figure 6. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2019.

Figure 7. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2019.

Figure 8. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2018.

Figure 9. Le Flaneur, Pierrot Le Chat, 2015.

Figure 10. Painting with data: Timeline, Lev Manovich, 2010.

Figure 11. No Signal Zone, Milan Design City, 2020. Personal Shot.

Figure 12. Narcissus, Benczur Gyula, 1881.

Figure 13-14-15-16. Seeing and Thinking, Gaetano Kanitza, 1991.

Figure 17. Exploring Cosmos, screenshot from Triennale Milano Instagram page, 2020.

Figure 18-19. Freetime. Kaleidoscope. XIII International Exposition, Triennale Milano Archives, 1964.

Figure 20. human?, Instagram filter personally developed, 2020.

Figure 21. Global User Interface, Manovich and Kratky, 2007.

Figure 22. Working Series, Photography 14, Bill Owens, 1976.

Figure 23. Young Woman Model, perspective 1, solidhumans.xyz, 2018.

Figure 24. Young Woman Model, perspective 2, solidhumans.xyz, 2018.

Figure 25. Imma, fake influencer for Ikea Japan, Ikea Japan, 2020.

Figure 26. Blinx 1, Rosa Menkmann, 2014.

Figure 27. Personal screenshot from Synthesia website, 2020.

Figure 28. Obama deepfake production, MashableItalia, 2019.

Figure 29. Visualization of 50,000 images sorted by visual characteristics shared on Instagram in San Francisco, Cultural Analytics Lab, 2013.

Figure 30. Radial image plot visualization of a random sample of 50,000 photos shared on Instagram in Tel Aviv, Cultural Analytics Lab, 2012.

Figure 31. Ceci n’est pas une pipe, René Magritte, 1964.

Figure 32. Screenshot taken from the film “Rear Window”, Alfred Hitchcock, 1954.

Figure 33. Paris et l’agglomeration parisienne, Paul-Henry Chombart, 1952.

Figure 34. Screenshot taken from the movie “Her”, Spike Jonze, 2013.

Figure 35. Screenshot taken from the movie “Ex-Machina”, Alex Garland, 2015.

Figure 36. Personal Screenshot taken from the film “Blade Runner”, Ridley Scott, 1982.

Figure 37. Uncanny Valley Performance, Gabriela Neeb, 2019.

Figure 38. Hiroshi Ishiguro and his android twin, Ishiguro Lab, Osaka University, 2015.

Figure 39. Personal Screenshot taken from the film “Blade Runner”, Ridley Scott, 1982.

Figure 40. Personal Shot of the helmet prototype of the light scenario Through Me, 2019.

Figure 41. Imagined cities. XVII International Exposition, Triennale Milano Archives, 1988.

Figure 42. Pilgrims circling the Ka’aba in Mecca, findGlocal, 2019.

P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P.

35 37 42 48 49 53 54 63 65 67 69 76-77 87

P. 98-99 P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P.

105 113 114-115 118 120 133 134-135 138 141 163

P. 165 P. P. P. P. P. P.

168 171 179 191 194 196

P. 203 P. 207 P. 208-209 P. 213 P. 227 P. 229

IX

X

Figure 43. Negative of a human handprint on the wall of the Chauvet Pont d’Arc Cave in southern France, French Ministry of culture, 1994.

Figure 44. A wall painting from an Egyptian grave, dated to about 3,500 years ago, depicting typical agricultural scenes, from “Sapiens.

A brief history of humankind”, Yuval Noah Harari, 2015.

Figure 45. Screenshot taken from the film “Modern Times”, Charlie Chaplin, 1936.

Figure 46. Alamogordo, history.com, 1945.

Figure 47. Photo taken from “Orlando” installation by Trisha Baga, ArtBasel, 2015.

Figure 48. Riccardo III by Shakespeare, Luca Ronconi, 1968.

Figure 49. Cover image of “Reimagining the Human” symposium, Vilnius University, 2020.

Figure 50. Night Sky Photography, Babak Tafreshi, 2014.

Figure 51. For whom the computer graphics, Structure & Narrative, 2018.

Figure 52. Enlargement of cells of the human oral mucosa, Grant Heilman Photography, 2015.

Figure 53. Enlargement of Elodea Anacharis plant cell, Grant Heilman Photography, 2017.

Figure 54. Nightlife green Japanese mushrooms, greenlane.com, 2019.

Figure 55. The Vitruvian Man, Leonardo da Vinci, 1490 ca.

Figure 56. Modulor, Le Corbusier, 1900.

Figure 57. Scanning Hands, Ji Kim, 2019.

Figure 58. Galaxy Shot, Hubble Space Telescope Images, Nasa, 2020.

Figure 59. From aliens to ancestors: the definition of an universal language, personal scan of pages 142-143 of the book “The Politics of Design”, Ruben Pater, 2016.

Figure 60. Sagittarius, Algis Griskevicius, 2006.

Figure 61. Tradition, Aiste Kisarauskaite, 2012.

Figure 62. Mandala with Chickens, Robertas Antinis, 2008.

Figure 63. June, Kristina Inciuraite, 2015.

Figure 64. Quarantine, Rimas Sakalauskas, 2018.

Figure 65. Extrakorporal, Pakui Hardware, 2018.

Figure 66. IsourceD, Daiga Grantina, 2015.

Figure 67. Pathfinder, Daiga Grantina, 2015.

Figure 68. Perspectivism-sequence1, personal visualization, 2020.

Figure 69. Perspectivism-sequence2, personal visualization, 2020.

Figure 70. Perspectivism-sequence3, personal visualization, 2020.

Figure 71. Perspectivism-sequence4, personal visualization, 2020.

Figure 72. Perspectivism-sequence5, personal visualization, 2020.

P. 231 P. 231 P. 232 P. 232 P. 237 P. 240-241 P. 245 P. 251 P. 261 P. 265 P. 265 P. P. P. P. P. P.

269 274 275 276 281 282-283

P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P.

286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 297 309 301 303 305

XI

XII

Index of Graphs.

Graph 1. Type of online social experience in site, from “Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online”, Robert Kozinets, 2009.

Graph 2. Communications of Interest, from “Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online”, Robert Kozinets, 2009.

Graph 3. The Hierarchy of Needs, Abraham Maslow, 1954.

Graph 4. The Real-Fake quadrant, Luciano Floridi, 2018.

Graph 5. The Perceptual Cycle Model, Ulric Neisser, 1976.

Graph 6. Simplified view of how it works the installation “Obsession”, Pia Tikka, 2005. Personal adaptation and visualization, 2020.

Graph 7. Uncanny Valley phenomenon, Masairo Mori, 1970.

Graph 8. The Futures Cone, Hancock and Bezold, 1994.

Graph 9. Converging Through Center, personal visualization of anthropocentrism, 2020.

Graph 10. The Progression of Species, personal visualization, 2020.

P. 41 P. 45 P. P. P. P.

81 144 148 199

P. 201 P. 215 P. 247 P. 285

XIII

XIV

Abstract/ENG VERSION. Simulacra is a research of speculative design between ethnographic research, case studies and a phenomenological approach, that starting from the socio-cultural shift of our contemporary age, investigates the role that emerging technologies, such as synthetic media, play on a social, ethical and aesthetic level. Furthermore, it analyses what correlation there is between these, man and other organisms, showing the need to abandon an anthropocentric point of view, in order to embrace new perspectives of decentralized action, in a new post-human ecology. Particularly, the technologies and tools that we are creating nowadays are changing a fundamental part of our existence: the lenses through which we view and interact with the world. We are literally beginning to see the world through a new set of eyes and ears: things that were previously invisible become visible. The world of today is the world of simulacra, where media are autonomously created, distributed and spread without having a visual respondence in tangible references, acting and existing only in the digital realm, but still creating consequences on the material one.

What can now be considered real, or fake? The ethical implications that this research brings with it, namely, the importance of relationships of trust and awareness, are also discussed. The aim is to analyze what are the weaknesses and what are the areas of possible growth. It will be investigated how, consequently, the role of design has to change and adapt: de​​ sign becomes a bridge between known and unknown. With it is possible to explore the endless possibilities we have in front of us and that we can embrace. Design, we can say, acting as a cultural mediator and enhancer, could become the coordinator of a collective strength and intellect. It has to go beyond the pure rational and logical thought, in order to build beliefs for humans and non humans. Design can build awareness and meaning, it can become the catalyst of a collective consciousness, ready to face what is going to happen in the next future. In particular, the definition and search for a future of meaning and growth, avoiding dystopian futures governed by inhuman technologies and useless hierarchical constructs.

XV

XVI

Abstract/ITA VERSION. Simulacra è una ricerca di design speculativo tra ricerca etnografica, casi studio e un approccio fenomenologico alla base, che partendo dallo shift socio culturale della nostra epoca contemporanea, investiga il ruolo che tecnologie emergenti, come i media sintetici, giocano su un piano sociale, etico ed estetico. Inoltre, analizza che correlazione c’è tra queste, l’uomo e gli altri organismi, mostrando la necessità dell’abbandono di un punto di vista antropocentrico, per poter abbracciare nuove prospettive di azione decentrate, in una nuova ecologia post umana. In particolare, le tecnologie e gli strumenti che stiamo creando e sviluppando oggi stanno cambiando una parte fondamentale della nostra esistenza: le lenti attraverso le quali guardiamo e interagiamo con il mondo. Stiamo letteralmente iniziando a vedere il mondo attraverso un nuovo set sensoriale: cose che prima erano invisibili diventano visibili. Il mondo di oggi è il mondo dei simulacri, dove i media vengono creati, distribuiti e diffusi in modo autonomo, senza avere una corrispondenza visiva in riferimenti tangibili, agendo ed esistendo solo nella sfera del digitale, ma creando comunque conseguenze su quella fisica. Cosa è attualmente considerato reale? Cosa invece falso? Vengono discusse anche le implicazioni etiche che questa ricerca porta con se, l’importanza di rapporti di fiducia e consapevolezza, analizzando quelli che sono i punti di debolezza e quelle che sono le area di possible crescita. Viene investigato come, conseguentemente a ciò, il ruolo del design deve cambiare e adattarsi: il design diventa un ponte tra il conosciuto e lo sconosciuto. Con esso è possibile esplorare le infinite possibilità che abbiamo di fronte a noi e che possiamo abbracciare. Il design, si può dire, agendo come mediatore e valorizzatore culturale, può diventare il coordinatore di una forza e di un intelletto collettivo. Andando oltre un pensiero puramente logico e razionale, può costruire credenze per umani e non umani. Esso può costruire consapevolezza e nuovi significati, diventando catalizzatore di una coscienza collettiva, pronta ad affrontare ciò che accadrà nel prossimo futuro. In particolare, la definizione e la ricerca di un futuro di significato e di crescita, evitando futuri dispotici governati da tecnologie disumane e inutili costrutti gerarchici.

XVII

SIMUL 18

LACRA

INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH

20

21

Introduction.

Wikipedia has become for me a sort of foothold, a sort of fixation that I browse every time I have to find some information about the topics I have to discuss. I don’t go there to click on informations for their particular credibility, authority or reference, but I venture there to get a general picture or inspiration, between definitions and informations that are nothing more than the result, more or less controlled, of the continuous and incessant collaboration between a specific number of people interested in the subject, who, like an infinite crowd of participants, massively feed the different pages of this incredibly infinite digital library. Why start with Wikipedia?

Here, for me it represents well today’s situation and society. A network of passing identities, in transit between the fluctuation of the world, always on the threshold of dispersion. Wikipedia is the sign of the reticular environment in which we live; it is the proven reflexive sign of information in the contemporary age. No transcendence that decides meaning or value, just a swarm of actors who, indistinguishably, surf online and offline. Wikipedia is the metaphor of the cultural metamorphosis in progress today, of an ephemeral and easily consumed knowledge, relationships and interactions. Starting from these considerations, a lot are today the fields and the area that are changing, adapting and evolving, for overcoming the current alienation and trying to avoid dystopian futures. And these are part of the topics I also covered for my research that, starting from the analysis of our contemporary age, on a socio cultural level, expands then itself further, opening up new perspectives of investigation and possibilities of action.

For starting to have a general idea of what will be discussed in deep later, along the various chapters, I’ll briefly recall now which are the themes covered, by providing a fast overview. The logical thread I followed is quite linear, and it has been built on following insights and correlations, that permit to go on with the discussion. All the research starts with a detailed zoom in, with the analysis of a case study, used for directly entering in contact with the subject and for understanding some issues and ideas. It is the analysis of Lil Miquela, a virtual influencer and one of the major evidence of synthetic media, new way of expression of our age. After this, a discussion around the current socio cultural shift is presented, for giving a contextual frame. It explains the huge impact of communication, its exponential growth, as well as issues related to transparency, aliena-

22

tion and miscommunication. It shows how the automatic and technological society we are living in provokes the raising of new needs for people, such as the desire of authenticity and reliable relationships. After this, with a bump towards, it is explored the concept of Blended Reality, seen as the result of a world where boundaries between real and digital are being redefined, where we constantly interact online and offline, where we are simultaneously present in different contexts. The investigation over Blended Reality shows how also media are changing, adapting to this constant evolution, helping to reshape and define new values and modes of expression. The complex issue of reality is taken on also with the analysis of the virtual realm, its ethic and aesthetic, and also the correlation between the concept itself of reality, representation and mimesis. Showing how the virtual reality is like a conscious dream, based on interaction and active experience, permits to consider it as a type of reality with personal rules and structures, and not for being only a copy or a simulation of the materials one. After having provided this pack of informations, with pros and cons, exposing all the potential on the side, as well as hypothetical conflicts and issues on the other, it is investigated the relationship between humans and technological organisms created by them, posing a special accent on the emotional part, and understanding where all of this is going. By doing this, it is possible to analyze the correlation between us, as humans, other type of beings and the environments around us, starting to reflect on what happens in a human-non human type of communication. It is, thus, understood that the role and position of man is being reevaluated and decentralized, and it is investigated the cause of this. In particular, it is found it in the role that narration and language cover, intending them as the creators of all the anthropocentric view we have nowadays. Seeing anthropocentrism as a series of cultural and social constructs, originated for believing in something and for achieving a common order, enables the possibility of starting to reflect on perspectivism and changement of point of view. In fact, lastly, a series of perspectives that go further the concept of anthropocentrism are explained, proposing a new and post human ecology in which we could live in, based on hybridization and horizontal relationships between the different organisms.

23

So, starting from the end, the general question that could synthesize my research thesis could be: Man is no longer at the center of nature and the anthropocentric perspective that has reigned for centuries is starting to be reevaluated. What role do emerging technologies, such as synthetic media, play on a cultural, social and ethical level, and what relationship intervene between these, man and all other organisms? And, moreover, what is the role that design covers within this transformation? A question that can help us define the most desirable future, in a new and shared common ecology.

The title and explanation chosen from my research is “Simulacra. A speculative journey among ethics, aesthetics and emerging technologies, towards a Post Human future�.

Let’s focus for a while on the term Simulacra, even if it will be recalled also within the thesis, for justifying its presence in the title. From the latin word Simulacrum, it is a single word that, I believe, can contain different shades mentioned throughout the research. Simulacra recalls the relation between mediacity, technology and images. The world today is the world of simulacra. All identities are generated and produced as an optical effect through a game of repetition in the different type of reality we experience everyday.

Simulacra means presence; in particular, the repetition of being present here and there, simultaneously, over space and time. Moreover, the images produced by new media have to be understood as simulacra themselves, and this allows us an additional reading of the complexity of the contemporary. In fact, if we analyze more in depth the original meaning of the word simulacrum, we get that it is not a pictorial image, which reproduces an external prototype, but an actual image that dissolves the original. This underlines the autonomy of creation, distribution, spread and diffusion of the new media, that have no visual respondence in tangible references, acting and existing only in the digital realm, but still creating consequences on the material one. The simulacrum is an image without a prototype, the image of something that does not exist. So, when we talk

24

about the concept of reality, representation, virtuality and much more, we understand that what we have in front of us are just simulacra, as thoughts and visions deriving from our perception and knowledge.

As an over thinker person like I am, I decided to develop this thesis with a speculative approach, leaving apart any practical development of it. In fact, as a designer, I strongly believe that for spotty and emerging themes, it is really important to debate and reflect, with the intention of promoting and giving a general consciousness around a specific argument and awareness to people. One of the book that has been useful for the study of this approach has been “Speculative Everything. Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming”, that, with this title, expresses already in a good way the intention of my thesis. As the authors of this book affirm: “Let’s call it critical design, that questions the cultural, social and ethical implications of emerging technologies. A form of design that can help us to define the most desirable futures, and avoid the least desirable” (Dunne, Raby, 2013). And then, from critical design, we go to design for debate, by intending the part of design that promotes the collective discussion on a theme, together with the stimulation towards thoughts and hypothesis for solutions. And, what I noticed during my researches is that, even if this type of design might seems only ephemeral and fleeting, in reality it is really different: speculative design is the part of our work that has to go over its comfort zone or privileged area, for entering the real world. With its powerful language, it is perfectly positioned and able to provide relevant social and cultural critiques, for envisioning near future scenarios that might help us to understand the paths we want to take as a society.

So, the first thing I did for developing my research has been a profound exploration of emerging trends in a sociocultural level, in order to be sure to intake directions that are still fertile and in need of a further contribution of knowledge and study. By reading the report of trends of Deloitte, for the year 2020, I found out that two were the major trends of interest for my field: one was related to ethical development and the concept of trust, highly investigated and full of dilemmas, and the other related to the emotional sphere linked to digital and technological interactions. As we will see, these two themes are quite recurrent along my thesis development. These are discussions around the value creation and the impacts that specific media or technological

25

products have on our live. After this starting point, concerning the methodology, I used a phenomenological approach, supported in each part developed by literature and academic references.

Also some recalling from philosophy has been done, since some themes explored are strictly linked to fundamental questions that this discipline has always investigated, such as the concept of reality of the idea of identity. Also the analysis of case studies has been a method used: sometimes done in a more fast way, only for providing a brief knowledge or context, other, for example the opening one, with a more deep approach, analyzing objectives, data and insights. For this case study, that is the one related to Lil Miquela, also a netnographic research has been conducted, for having more data to work on, and for establishing some directions of exploration to undertake. Within my netnographic research, that stands for an ethnographic research, but with digital subject (Kozinets, 2009), I selected some tools to use, such as observation, participant observation and semi-structured interviews. This helped my to gather more informations, as well as more points of view on the subject and perspectives to take into consideration for the issues that will be recurrent in my thesis.

One book in particular that helped me for a sort of individual brain storming, popping up of thoughts and mind opening has been a reading I did in spring, that is called “The Politics of Design. A (Not So) Global Manual for Visual Communication�, by Ruben Pater, written in 2016, so, still quite actual. This book has a singular structure: it passes lots of major themes in maximum a couple of pages each, providing insights, anecdotes, stories or, simply, objective information. It explains all biases of culture, saying that design cannot be disconnected from the values and assumptions in which it is created, from the ideologies behind it. And sometimes it can be difficult to understand how communication and ideology are related, since, due to the fact the ideology is in everything around, we perceive it as natural. Moreover, acknowledging that communication is not neutral puts everything in perspective. And the idea of perspectivism is, indeed, a fundamental part of my research of thesis. Only by realizing that we are all culturally biased we can open up new perspectives. Anything is neutral: my view proposed also cannot be entirely neutral, since each of us is affected by the specific context we are living and the

26

background we have. Over these, also thematic like visual literacy, cultural appropriation, miscommunication and misunderstanding are investigated, showing how nowadays societies are becoming complex and diverse, and designers can no longer assume that their audience shares the same visual language and values. Lastly, some other themes that inspired me were related to images manipulation and ethic, fake diversity and data usage: all of these, even if at first glance could seem untied among them, stare at the core some common aspects, such as the need of balance, equality, inclusivity and universality.

So, with this introduction I wanted to recall the globality of the themes covered, and together providing an explanation of the logical thread, of the methodology used and of the speculative approach used.

For concluding and clearly recall the objectives, my thesis wants to trigger debate and reflection; it is not an attempt to predict the future but it is the try to create stories of possible future realities to question the implications in the present. Looking for problem to discuss help also to question on ourselves, obtaining awareness and motivations for building an environment that is engaging and valuable for all of us.

27

THE CASE STUDY OF LIL MIQUELA AND THE QUESTIONS ON HUMANITY.

28

01 CHAPTER ONE

29

Introduction to the chapter.

1.1 Description.

1.2 Analysis.

1.3 Ethnographic Research.

1.4 Insights.

1.5 Further Directions.

Conclusion of the chapter.

30

Introduction to the chapter.

This chapter takes the CGI influencer Lil Miquela as a case study for starting off a series of reflections and speculations on the themes faced in this thesis, that will be gradually discussed in all following chapters.

The first part (1.1) opens with a description of Lil Miquela, that provides general data, informations and her story, in order to locate her in the contemporary landscape of media, culture and communication. The chapter is then developed with a systematic analysis (1.2), that touches the aspects that are more interesting and relevant, placing them within my critic point of view. I decided not to be based only on literature for the investigation on Lil Miquela, so in 1.3 it is collect and explained all the Ethnographic Research I conducted. From this on-field work some significant insights has been collected (1.4), that, eventually, lead to the tracking of the main directions (1.5) of exploration to be taken during the thesis.

31

1.1 Description.

Name: Miquela Sousa Age: 19 Location: Los Angeles Period of activity: April 2016 to present Creators: Brud start-up Followers on Instagram: 2,7 MIL (2020, September 02).

Lil Miquela is a CGI influencer active primarily on Instagram, but also on other media channels. But what does it mean CGI? Following the definition of the Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus, CGI is the abbreviation of “computer generated imagery”, and it stands for the process of using computer to create pictures or characters in film and television (2013). And, nowadays, I would add online. “CGI characters are the XXI century version of a cartoon or, as someone predicts, the firstborns of a new ‘race’ of DigitalHumans” (AdEspresso, 2018).

Lil Miquela does not exist, or rather exists virtually. She is a digital character developed through photography, renderings and codes by Brud, a Los Angeles startup specialized in AI and robotics, created to be the first successful worldwide influencer not in flesh and blood. For now there is a staff of people who create the content for her, but Brud is working to equip her with a machine learning system and therefore make it independent in many aspect. They describes themselves like this: “We’re a small team of artists, engineers, roboticists and activists, operating with the belief that technology can help to bring about both a more empathetic world and a more tolerant future” (Brud, 2018).

Lil Miquela is a trendy girl, posing for the most famous brands; she is also supporter of social causes; she has released 5 singles that went viral on Spotify, Vimeo and Youtube. She takes selfies with celebrities, conducts interviews as well she is invited to festivals; she is an editor of Dazed Beauty magazine. Time magazine proclaimed her as one of “The Most Influential People on the Internet”.

32

Regarding her physicality, people can see the freckles on Miquela’s face and her gap-toothed smile; she has brown hair, often pulled into buns, and a smooth skin. But when you look at her big brown eyes, then you understand that she is not accordant the “humanity test”.

“At first glance, or swipe, Miquela could understandably be mistaken for a living, breathing person. She wears real-life clothes by streetwear brands like Supreme and luxury labels like Chanel. She hangs out with real-life musicians, artists, and influencers in real-life trendy restaurants in New York and Los Angeles, where she ‘lives’. When Miquela holds her phone to a mirror, her reflection stares back. When she is photographed in the daylight, her body casts a shadow” (The Cut, 2018). Although she is not real, from a biological perspective, Lil Miquela provides an array of real insights from a socio-cultural perspective that is useful to investigate.

1.2 Analysis.

When one scrolls over Miquela’s Instagram account, without paying full attention to her details, she might pass as just another influencer among many. But she’s not. She is a visual representation, she doesn’t have any physical presence. She is a pioneer of the most recent trend on Instagram, the phenomenon of virtually created avatars mimicking human influencers. This can be fascinating or bizarre, but for sure it is surprising. Through the use of a combination of photoshop skills and numerous instagram filters aesthetically ideal, not only does all contents appear the same, or extremely similar, but it also appear unrealistic, which makes us wonder if we are actually able to recognize computer generated images. So, as real people can appear fake, fake “people” can appear real. Miquela is the first and, at the moment, the most famous CGI avatar on Instagram, but she is not the only one.

Miquela’s followers and audience speculate on her humanness since the beginning of her career, but she is honest

33

and clear with them: on her bio is clearly written that she is a robot. Anyway, her audience addresses her in a manner as if she is a real presence. The confusion around her, so, it’s not for a lack of clearness, but because the relation established between Miquela and her followers is so real and authentic, as it happens for real influencers, over her “existence”. Miquela behaves like real life influencers, but she states in her bio that she is not. Even if she’s physically not real, she’s real enough to have an impact for people. On her Instagram profile, Lil Miquela posts moody selfies, pics with friends and family, reposts of current events, celebrities, and check-ins at events; regarding the captions, these are open, honest, and relatable. And these aspects are an opportunity to unveil her personality, to trigger discussions and to link into global conversations by connecting with all other users. Although she is completely fabricated, she embraces humanity as it is, even more that other influencers do. She is definitely reframing the discourse of online representation. She built around her a community that feels like a safe space to communicate and voice opinions. And, moreover, her aesthetics are fascinating.

Lil Miquela’s story is covered in a veil of strangeness and mystery. An example of this is the revelation of April 19, 2018, the day on which the influencer admitted that she was not human after @BermudaIsBae, another virtual creation, hacked her instagram profile to urge her to show her true nature. The virtual robots in question appear enigmatic, as does the same agency that manages them, whose history is not easily identifiable on the web. Another controversial point is Nick Illian, the alleged boyfriend of Lil Miquela: a human boy! Anyway, from what it is written in the news, they broke up during 2020. These aspects that disturb users are the same ones that increase interest in CGI, attracting individuals and leaving them glued to the screen with the desire to understand the dynamics that revolve around Lil Miquela’s life.

The reason why all this phenomenon is spreading is that “we humans have been tripping over the differences between real and fake ever since our forebears saw shadows on cave walls. But it used to be that real-looking fake humans were

34

Figure 1. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2018.

35

confined to Disney parks, movies, music videos, or video games. We could turn them off, or leave them behind. Now they occupy spaces once reserved for real-life people experiencing real-life things” (The Cut, 2018). Let’s now mention a couple of extracts of some of her interviews that are the umpteenth proof of her presence and humanity.

From an interview by Christopher Morency, for Business of Fashion, 2018: “I’d like to be described as an artist or a singer or something that denotes my craft rather than focus on the superficial qualities of who I am”, and, moreover, BoF, interviewer: “To what do you attribute your growing success?”

Lil Miquela: “At the beginning, it probably stems from curiosity. I think people stick around because they end up learning more about themselves through the questions they’re asking.

After this, they probably like who I am, my authenticity and my desire to result genuine and open-minded”.

Lil Miquela is self-aware about her condition, and being “real” and “honest” with people has been, for sure, the key to success and popularity. She is also facing deep themes in her interviews, such as this extract (2019) that comes from “Beyond Humanity”, an online blog.

Sara Caputo, interviewer: “Do you think AI is ethical when used to influence people surrounding acceptance and equality? Or is any kind of replication of human behavior misleading?”

Lil Miquela: “As a robot, obviously, I’m seen as different. I can only speak for myself, but I’ve been so lucky to be accepted by my followers, brands and publications.

The act of accepting and being aware is a learned process.

As long as positivity, acceptance and equality are the main message, I see anything wrong”.

36

Figure 2. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2020.

37

1.3 Ethnographic Research.

The analysis of the case study proceeds with a research on field, in order to gain more critic perspectives, point of views of other people involved and useful informations.

The qualitative methodology selected falls under the name “Netnography”, that goes over the simple ethnographic research. Netnography is a practice of research developed by Robert Kozinets (2009) in the book “Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online”; Robert Kozinets is widely recognized as the inventor of Netnography and research authority.

Since online interactions are now widely diffused and people are constantly immersed in the digital realm, studying thematics related to this requires the use of a method that support computer-mediated communication. Millions of individuals are joining networks in a complex virtual world that not only reflects their lived experiences but, also, it reveals a unique social phenomenon. Netnography can help to understand this world. It can help to shape and define the various contexts that make possible the new social forms and the old forms it replaces.

This book uses social science methods to present a new approach for conducting researches; it combines archival and online communications work, participation and observation, with new forms of digital and network data collection, analysis and research representation.

“First it overviews the changing and always contested terrain of ethnographic inquiry. Secondly, it surveys the nature of online social experience and interaction” (Kozinets, 2009): Netnography provides a view of the online social interaction that is aligned with the current cultural and social theory.

The ‘distance’ when investigating online communities should not be considered a problem, but rather an asset that helps to collaboratively learn in ways different from face-to-face learning. Across academic fields, netnography has been found immensely useful to reveal interaction styles, personal narratives, communal exchanges, online rules,

38

practices, and rituals, discursive styles, innovative forms of collaboration and organization and manifestations of creativity. It is just a different and new type of mapping the reality.

Culture and community have become increasingly unstable concepts that are in permanent flux; conducting a Netnographic research permits the interpretation of human communications under realistic emerging contexts, in native conditions of interaction, when those human communications are shaped by new technologies. The fluidity and instability of the human social realm should not be underestimated, and so, also the methods used to investigated them should be updated and adapted to changes. As the same Robert Kozinets affirms: “Interacting human beings are neither gigantic social machines nor vast evolving organisms, but symbolic constructions that assume different patterned forms depending upon which method we choose to use to study them. Cultures and communities are worlds of meaning that exist purely because of their continued adoption and use in the minds of their members”. Netnography is an interdisciplinary field in constant growing, that will follow the development of society and culture, since it considers social and machine interaction from an human point of view.

In its book, the author provides all the methodology needed to structure a complete Netnographic research; let’s follow all the process I did, adapting his reflections on my personal analysis. Firstly, we can conceptualize different types of online social experience partially by relating them to the type of site in which we find them, the area of investigation and the people selected. sites

Sites: Instagram, as primary site, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, as secondary sites, used only for comparisons.

area of investigation

Area of Investigation: to observe the way in which the relation between Lil Miquela as a CGI influencer and “her” followers is developed.

people

People: different type of followers (fans, haters, experts).

39

Next to this, it has been analyzed the type of data used, analyzed, collected and produced. The digital world permits to access a vast amount of archived data, more than what we could have with a research in the physical world.

All humans’ thoughts posted and shared are collected kept within the Internet, and are always accessible. data

Data: produced by people; digital artifacts such as images, audio file, video.

collection, analysis and interpretation

Collection, Analysis and Interpretation of Data: manual.

type of netnography

Type of Netnography: Humanist.

Humanist netnographers focus on human interactions and experiences with and through technology in the contemporary, global, corporate-run and government surveilled landscape.

The social media space is complex and varied, with sites that range from the social to the informational, specific sites for specific purposes and interest, and specific sites targeted to the needs of specific people, and also targeted to specific needs. In netnography, we have to be aware of this landscape as we seek to match our research interests to available sites.

With this simple scheme (Graph 1) it is possible to determine the nature of the online social relations, that can vary from the intensely personal and deeply meaningful experiences to those that are quite superficial, short-lasting and relatively insignificant.

type of experience in site

40

Type of online social experience in site (Instagram): focus & orientation: ACTIVITY intensity of the share: FRIENDLY result: social sharing expression.

This type of online social experience is online interaction for the purpose of sharing targeted information, news, stories, images, photos, expertise, information and techniques about some particular activity or interest.

activity organizational social enterprises

social sharing expressions

mingling media enthusiasm

hyving social experiences

focus & orientation

social formal

intensity of the share & care relationships

friendly

Although there seems to be an automatic correlation between the type of online site and the type of online social experience (for example, Facebook providing predominantly interpersonal rather than activity-based experiences), there is by no means a perfect correlation. Any site, or type of site, can be used for any purpose. These purposes and exchanges may vary over time even with the same individuals on the same online site. Rather than to suggest any sort of simplistic determinism, the intention of the classification is to draw the netnographer’s attention to the type of social experience rather than to propose any technologically overdetermining structural effects of a site, app, or software form on social actors’ agency.

Graph 1. Type of online social experience in site, from “Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online”, Robert Kozinets, 2009.

41

Figure 3-4. Personal screenshots of Lil Miquela Instagram profile, 2020. Example of the meaningful and true engagement Lil Miquela has with her fan-based.

42

DO YOU WISH YOU COULD GO BACK TO BLISSFUL IGNORANCE OF YOUR TRUE EXISTENCE HERE?

43

Social network analysis is an analytical method that focuses on the structures and patterns of relationships between and among social actors in a network. The social actors we are interested in are called the ‘nodes’ and the relation between them is called the ‘tie’. A network is composed of a set of actors connected by a set of relational ties. Understanding the relation that passes between these elements permits to gain a basic and simplified view of the type of connection that people have with the other online. There are six typologies of these representations. network archetipe

Network Archetipe (instagram): communications of interest.

Interest group alliance networks are more complex forms in which popular and widely shared topics unite multiple smaller groups. Each of these groups forms around social hubs (Graph 2).

Let’s now focus on the thickest part of the research, that contains all the tools I selected and used for conducing it.

The full methodology of my research includes two types of observation, participant observation and, lastly, semi-structured interviews. All the tools have been used progressively, and after each one a series of findings has been collected.

tools and actions observation 1

findings

44

Tools and actions: Observation (1) in depth of Lil Miquela profile, comments, discussions and reactions of “her” audience. Moreover, other parameters such as adherence to the narrative, responsiveness to comments and frequency of posting; all elements that can describe “her” presence online. Likes, comments and shares are, in netnography researches, real mechanisms of social validation. observation done on daily basis for 14 days.

Findings (1): 1. Frequence of posts: once a day; constant.

2. Miquela often interact with her followers, replying with emoji or likes. Moreover, sometimes she starts discussions

COMMUNICATIONS OF INTEREST

Graph 2. Communications of Interest, from “Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online”, Robert Kozinets, 2009.

45

in the comments around certain topics (correlated to the content of the post).

3. Despite Miquela clearly declared that she’s a robot, her followers, in most comments, address as she is a real person, using pronouns she/her.

4. And when she’s addressed, with consciousness, as a robot, from her supporters this is done with irony. ex. “Why did you update? If not you updated your feature, I think that you’ll be more beautiful. But still loving you. I’m waiting for updating your hair style :)”.

5. A lot of comments express sensitive and personal matters about their state of being, family, love, problems and insecurities. The level of intimacy with Miquela is high.

6. The perception of community is high and firm.

7. Often, discussions about her identity are generated from (probably) new followers asking “is that a robot?” kind of questions, moved from a sense of curiosity or confusion. observation 2

Observation (2) of her other social media, such as Facebook, Youtube, Twitter in order to understand “her” behavior also there. observation done occasionally.

findings

Findings (2): 1. User behavior adequate itself to different social media sites.

2. On Facebook and Twitter comments are less explicit and more reserved, and less “community-based”; it’s more the expression of each singularity and opinions.

3. Twitter is often used to promote her music, activities and social causes; On Youtube people discuss primary only about music, without considering anymore issues about the identity of Lil Miquela. On this site it’s still perceived the sense of community and support from followers to Lil Miquela.

4. Most haters are expressing themselves on Instagram and Facebook.

participant observation

Participant observation with other followers, by opening discussions and sharing opinions. I posted comments on group discussion threads in the comment section and liked

46

and shared CGI Instagrammers content. I paid attention to the way other followers’ comment and participate in discussions, adapting myself to their style of commenting.

2 times within observation period. findings

Findings (3): 1. By sharing contents related to Lil Miquela on my profile, I found out that this topic is not so well known, even from people that are studying/working in pertinent fields (ex. design/art/engineering).

From these people, I got only positive reactions, surprised by this new world and eager to discover it deeper.

2. Within the discussions, the audience of Miquela is becoming quite used to the idea of CGI influencers, although confusion and amusement are still presente.

semi-structured interviews

Semi-Structured Interviews: understand what does it mean for them to be follower of a CGI influencer, how they consider these particular type fo contents, how do they get involved in it. Interviews have been conducted orally or through messages correspondence, as friendly talks, in order not to make the topic be perceived as too heavy; moreover, it has been preserved the anonymity of people.

5 people interviewed, all followers of Lil Miquela, each with a specific relation with Miquela.

1 fan, frequently active on Lil Miquela profile; 1 normal user, medium active; 1 hater; 1 expert in the sector of 3d; 1 researcher in the sector of emerging technologies, Pia Tikka.

Structured questions: What does it mean for you to consume this particular content?

What makes it attractive?

How do you get involved with it?

What do you think about how people (on, in this case, other type of beings) represent themselves online?

47

Figure 5. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2018.

48

Figure 6. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2019.

49

highligths

Highlights of interview 1.

Female, 28 y.o., fan of Lil Miquela. Excited, eager and impatient of sharing opinions.

“Miquela is literally like a friend of mine! I don’t consider her as an avatar”.

“I consider her a person! She seems genuinely. I do think we should behave more like she does though. At the beginning I was drawn to how she wasn’t human, but she was acting more real than other social influencers. It’s like we as real people try living fake lives online whereas she is doing the opposite”.

Highlights of interview 2.

Male, 24 y.o., medium follower of Lil Miquela. Reflective and more-objective approach.

“Even if she’s not real, she’s real enough to have impact on people”.

“The most interesting thing about these people is the fan base itself, the way they react like these are real people. To me, personally, it doesn’t matter. This avatar seems that is doing something good for the society”.

Highlights of interview 3. Angry approach, dis-believer.

Male, 23 y.o., hater of Lil Miquela.

“I know it’s not even remotely real, what’s the point? That’s like me talking to SpongeBob. It’s a drama of Instagram.

They think this shit is real. Most of fans are really defensive of her”.

Highlights of interview 4.

Male, 29 y.o., expert. Professional approach, positive towards the issue.

“Brud robots are positive things, which breaks down essentialist categories of heteronormativity, race and ethnicity”.

“Miquela and other will teach us how people see robots, in order to helps to design them better with acceptable personalities”.

“Miquela has a body. It’s just she’s in a CPU and someone’s imagination but in this regard, she’s got a body and a mind. Moreover, there are ‘real’ people behind her working hard every day”.

50

THE DIRECTION GOES FROM AN ARTIFICIAL ARTIFACT TOWARDS HUMANLIKENESS, WITH AN HYBRID COMBINATION. Highlights of interview 5.

Pia Tikka, Female, expert. Professional approach, positively open towards the issue.

“Firstly, thank you for introducing Lil Miquela (LM) to me, I had not ‘met’ her before. I find the images fascinating. The imagery of LM plays heavily upon the aesthetic appearance trends of the contemporary media environment, and especially that of young adults (of same age as LM), as it seems.

The discussion around LM should relate to the generally adapted practice of modifying photographs of humans in media, journals, etc. These are typically done in a way that preserves humanlikeness. In the case of LM, the direction is opposite, namely from artificial towards human. This is well achieved by means of a hybrid combination of photographs in which only the face is modified. This facilitates the mental projection of humanlikeness to the character, especially in the case of still images, that is, without the often unnatural-looking facial dynamics.” (Tikka, p.c., 2020)

51

HERE’S THE HARD PART. I’M NOT A HUMAN BEING.

52

Figure 7. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2019.

53

54

1.4 Insights.

The ethnographic research, together with the previous analyses, brought with it some significant insights that is important to list and mention in order to have the complete frame of this case study.

1. What do people class as real? If it is something it can be hold, touch, smell and taste, 99% of social influencers has been removed fro this list, intact people normally didn’t have meet them; if it is something people can see with eyes, then it will not be difficult to accept the story of Lil Miquela.

2. The big controversial topic is that Miquela isn’t a human being. But why does this matter when she’s engaging and genuinely supporting millions of fans and people? People still don’t meet their online heroes but continue to consume their sponsored products and support them online.

3. When people remove doubts and distrust from their mind, all it is left are facts: the fact is a team of creatives that, with Miquela, raise money for charity, speak for social causes and enable viewers to escape into a world they would with any human influencer.

4. Once the content is online, it’s up to the viewer how to address it. Whether he wants to believe what they see is the truth or whether he wants to see it as an escape.

5. Some people question the validity of Miquela as social influencer: but what does it means to be social influencer? The word social looks at the platform in which the individual distributes contents and how he/she interacts; influencer means to determine behaviors of people. And if things are like this, the answer has to be yes.

6. If a person is defined by social relations that activate it and that he is interacting with, is it true not to consider Lil Miquela as a person? “I’m not human, but am I still a person?” In fact, she is socially enabled by her followers and audience, with who she has authentic and real relations and interactions. “Even if she’s physically not real, she’s real enough to have an impact for people”.

Figure 8. Lil Miquela, Brud start-up, 2018.

55

7. One of the reason people question about realness of Miquela is because she looks incredibly realistic. but does this extreme realism has a limit? And what happen when it would be overcome? Could Lil Miquela become, in some circumstances, an uncanny valley girl?

8. The figure of Lil Miquela doesn’t not end in itself: what Brud built is a whole universe of new perspective and open possibilities.

With these insights is now possible to delineate a set of directions that will constitute a common thread of exploration along the chapters and themes.

1.5

Further Directions.

All what investigated, discussed and examined till now has made possible to select a set of directions, important for further discussions and development.

This case study will constitute the common thread where to riconduce each argument that will be analyzed and each thematic that will be faced.

• • • • • • • • •

56

Let’s sum up these directions: nowadays technological and digital revolution and shift in culture and society. over traditional media. it is not the technologies that are decisive, but the ability to extract value from their use. potential dystopian future has to be avoided. rise of digital humans and concept of hyper-real. synthetic media has read potential of improvement and development, but also ethical doubts to debate (policy, trust, control, conveying message). what is fake in digital/virtual reality. what is real and what is virtual/digital: a blurred line between these spheres. ethic and aesthetic of virtual reality.

• • • • • • •

•

reality, representation and mimesis. time and space in virtual reality. the idea of “interaction”. man and language, ways of interacting with others within society and surrounding environment. language and narration. personhood and alter ego. man is no longer at the center of the world, but he also has to be in contact with other types of organisms that are biologically different from himself (cfr. robots).

How far can all this go? need of consciousness about this issues.

Conclusion of the chapter.

To begin the investigation of my thesis with a case study means to face concretely the theme chosen, being able to see all the different aspects and how they are correlated.

By starting from an argument of personal interest, it has been possible to use the chapter for delineate the different directions to follow after. It has been useful not only to read about Lil Miquela, but also to conduct a personal research, that enhanced my critical perspective about the topic. Concerting all following chapters, the discussions will cover different fields of exploration: from more scientific ones to other that are more philosophical, till reaching investigations on a socio-cultural level. What stands at the center, anyway, are always people; and it is according to them that all this thematics will be explored.

57

CHANGE OF PARADIGM, SOCIO-CULTURAL CRISIS AND NEW PERSPECTIVES.

58

02 CHAPTER TWO

59

Introduction to the chapter.

2.1 The metaphor of the flaneur parisienne.

2.2 A transparent society.

2.3 Fake freedom and continuous surveillance.

2.4 “Digital Swarm”.

2.5 “Infoxication”.

2.6 A time of eloquent images.

2.7 New Media and “Information Behaviour”.

2.8 Post-materialistic, post-hierarchical

and post-realistic society.

2.9 Technologies as a product of human mind.

2.10 Decentralization of human point of view.

Conclusion of the chapter.

60

Introduction to the chapter.

In this chapter it is analyzed how digital revolution and technological development are affecting human life in this age. It is firstly examined characteristics of the society that describe the current socio-cultural crisis derived from mass communication (2.1 to 2.5).

Then it is considered the nowadays preferential mode of communication and interaction, related to visual expression and images (2.6), exploring also the raise of what is called “New Media� (Manovich, 2002) with the relative consequences of it (2.7). Meanwhile, on the other side it is presented how people are reacting to all of this, which are their desires and needs in order to face this changement (2.8). With then a reflection regarding technologies as a product of human mind (2.9), new perspectives of action are open, together with hypothesis of where human life is going in future (2.10).

61

2.1 The metaphor of the flaneur parisienne.

Recent papers and books on visual culture (Debord, 1967; Ruozzi, 2012; Lombardinilo, 2013; D’Andrea, 2014; Codeluppi, 2015.) often evoke the figure of the flaneur parisienne, an anonymous observer that fluctuates within the crowd, mentally recording and deleting immediately after faces of the people he’s encountering. From time to time his gaze meets the figure of a passerby, he seduces her with a virtual contact that lasts a moment, and then he betrays her with the next one who’s passing. His ideal is to stay away from home and yet feel at home, to admire the world and being immersed in it, while remaining hidden from it (Baudelaire, 2017). The figure of the flaneur, ideally described by the poet Baudelaire, is still common and perfectly fitting more now than ever the relation between people and society, and the digital and technological shift we are living in. Now it is possible to rethink the metaphor of the flaneur as a key in understanding, participating in, and portraying the city. In fact, for some aspects people are currently acting like this: a personal detachment in society, closed in what is personal self, while being exposed to everyone’s sight, because of technologies.

If years ago people were facing the raise of new technologies, what is now happening, I believe, is the pervasive and invasive use of these, that are now permeating all layers of society. They are not anymore only a support to human actions and contingencies, but, as an autonomous entity, they are taking over society and surrounding environments.

The result is a mechanical and automated society, in which people are mostly interacting through their devices and technological support, where the virtual connection is exponential and the real interaction is getting reduced. All of this is changing radically our way of living, behavior, perception and sensibility.

62

Figure 9. Le Flaneur, Pierrot Le Chat, 2015.

A society with a total absence of distance, where we are all spectators; spectators from the latin verb “spectare�, that means to look without regard, detachment and respect.

And reduction of physical distances is related to erosion of mental distances. A flattening in relationships and interactions, a sort of boredom or bother that pervades human mind. More than this, what cause the pervasion of technology is a commistione of public and private, with a consequent blurred line between these sphere. There is no more a define separation of personal and intimate facts from what is in the public domain. This is one of the major characteristics of the contemporary status.

63

2.2

A transparent society.

To go on with the discussion, it’s interesting to recall the idea of “transparent society” expressed by Byung-Chul Han (2014), one of the most active contemporary philosophers.

Let’s follow his reasoning with a step back. For the philosopher, men are, for their nature, opaque. Being opaque means to have inner and personal spheres where a person can be alone with himself, reserved spaces in which to withdraw privately. And in this stays the depth and magnitude of the human mind. Opacity is reflection and thought.

What is now happening is the affirmation of a society that is transparent, overexposed and controlled.

“Transparency is a systemic coercion that involves all social processes and subjects them to a profound mutation”, says Byung-Chul Han. The reason why it is so violente is that this reduces men only to a functional element of the system.

Transparency doesn’t mean clear communication, but implies breach of privacy. This is caused by the huge amount of informations and communications in which we are totally immersed, without understanding till the deep: an accumulation of informations where it is difficult to extricate and orient oneself. In the transparent society, everything is turned outwards, revealed, undressed and exposed; things do not vanish in the darkness but in the excess of illumination.

So, the result of this huge and unique flux is a society of spectaculum (cfr. chapter 5 and the case of Situationism), a porno-society. Processes and movements are deprived and stripped out of any deep sense and narrativity. Public space is a stage; but not a stage where emotions are represented and interpreted, it is a stage-market where intimacies are exposed and consumed. The fact that things are seen becomes more important than the fact that things exist. Cultural value disappears for the benefit of exposition.

The society of transparency manifests itself as a society of the “positive”, in the sense that things become transparent

64

when they are smoothed out and leveled, without obstacles, introduced without any opposition into the flow of communication and information. Time itself becomes transparent, reduced to a succession of operational and automated moments. The society of transparency, therefore, is a kind of boring and flat place where the Identical reigns. Transparency stabilizes and unifies the system by eliminating the Other or the Diverse. And right here is a crucial point that needs a reflection: these characteristics just expressed outline the profile of action of machines. Man, finding himself within this circle, loses spontaneity and freedom, feelings that are naturally opaque, not systematic or controllable. Transparency means a renunciation of personal sentiments, a loss of vitality and a lack of being.

Figure 10. Painting with data: Timeline, Lev Manovich, 2010.

This visualization represents the huge amount of data of nowadays; it contains 4535 covers of Time magazine (1923-2009), assembled together with a custom software.

65

2.3 Fake freedom and continuous surveillance.

Here the society of transparency turns out to be a society of total control and surveillance. However, this surveillance is a-prospective, not from a single center. And this type of control is even more effective, because people can be illuminated from all sides, from everywhere and from anyone.

Seen in this way, people immersed in this believe themselves free, since there is no point of power. But what is revealed under this appearance, it is that control is misunderstood with freedom and everyone is constantly surveilled. People connect and communicate massively with each other; and, in doing so, they are the ones who work to build and maintain the supervised society. Each exposes each other to visibility and control, even into the private sphere. Without being totally aware of it, each of us exposes all the others in this huge window where everything is known.

And social media are the main reflection of what exposed.

As well narrated in the new documentary “The Social Dilemma”, by Netflix (2020), social media are not only a way to be connected with others; they are shaping and changing our way of thinking and acting, in order to gain profits.

Everything we do online is being watched and tracked; as it is said in the documentary, “if you are not paying for a product, then the product is you”. More specifically, it is our attention the product that is being sold. Without even triggering awareness, social media are exploiting vulnerabilities of human psychology. Even if they were born with the noble mission of an easy connection between people, probably no one was imagining this flip side of the coin, related to these technologies: fake news, misinformation, depression and dependence. We have definitely less control on who we are and we have little knowledge about all of this giant that are surrounding our lives.

The same topic is faced also by Marshall McLuhan in “Understanding Media” (1994), where he writes: “during the

66

Figure 11. No Signal Zone, Milan Design City, 2020. Personal Shot. It is a purplish cloud of system interference, provocative, to make geographic portions, individuals and places disappearing from satellite radars.

mechanical ages we had extended our bodies in space. Today, after more than a century of electric technology, we have extended our central nervous system itself in a global embrace, abolishing both space and time as far as our planet is conceived. Rapidly, we approach the final phase of the extensions of man, the technological simulation of consciousness, when the creative process of knowing will be collectively and corporately extended to the whole of hu-

67

man society”. Talking about a fragmentation of the self, McLuhan thinks that men acquired from technology the ability (or disability) to act without reacting. He considers technologies as an extensions of people, as if senses and the nervous system are being extended into media. Anyway, as result, this provokes an increasing alienation, a deep feeling that pervades modern humans. From here the name “the Age of Anxiety”, an era where people are getting numb with all these extensions; they are losing control being covered with the usage of technologies.

The Greek myth of Narcissus is directly concerned with this fact of human experience. The word narcissus derives from the Greek word narcosis, and to this is strictly linked the aim of this narration.

“The youth Narcissus mistook his own reflection in the water for another person. This extension of himself numbed his perception until he became part of the mechanism of his extended and repeated image” (McLuhan, 1994).

So, in line with this, today’s society is characterized by a narcissistic disorder, as it psychologically organizes the processes of personal expression and undermines the sense of social interactions. Everywhere you meet yourself. And just as the narcissistic subject cannot define himself, so he cannot develop a stable image of himself either.

68

Figure 12. Narcissus, Benczur Gyula, 1881.

69

2.4

“Digital Swarm”.

Let’s consider now the type of communication that is raising with this socio-cultural shift.

Digital connections encourages a symmetric communication (Byung-Chul Han, 2015). Those who take part in communication today do not consume informations only passively, but they actively produce them. No hierarchy separates the receiver from the transmitter. What is created is therefore a sort of communicative entropy, a disorder and a general dispersion of information. Being active producers of media and data causes an exponential growth of informations, from which we feel overwhelmed. At the base of the communication stand people; it is their type of connection and interaction what changed over time. Let’s take a step back.

In “Psicologia delle Folle” (2019), Gustave Le Bon was deeply analyzing the word “crowd”, defining it as a meeting of individuals. An agglomeration of men in which the feelings and ideas of all units are oriented in the same direction. “It forms a single being: whatever the individuals that compose it, similar or dissimilar to their kind of life, this soul makes them think and act in a completely different way from how they would operate in isolation”.

This complex unity shows itself to fight for its ideas and it shout them out with a unique voice. With a sort of mental contagion, the crowd is able to modify and intervene into the human mind, raising itself almost like a religious sentiment to be fearfully respected. Seen like this, it can be said that individuals that are part of a crowd are fighting for some ideologies and values.

What we are entering now is a new type of crowd, that it is called “Digital Swarm” (Byung-Chul Han, 2015) and it has peculiarity that differentiate it from the classic one. The digital swarm doesn’t own a spirit: the crowd of Le Bon unites and gather together, while this new one consists of isolated individuals. A casual gathering of men caused by

70

digital media. This union dissolves with the same rapidity as it is come together. Not the multitude, but rather loneliness distinguishes today’s social form, characterized by the general disintegration of the common and the collective. It is a sort of anonymous communication, where respect is drastically reduced and the indiscretion spreads fast. People don’t really put their face in what they say, there is always the mediation of screens or devices, and so, ideals such as responsibility for action quickly fall to the ground.

The most common sentiment originated by discussions within the Digital Swarm is indignation: like real waves, they hit people from time to time, and arouse their attention. Digital indignation is not capable of action or narration, and it does not deploy any useful force for constructive communication. It results only as a general dispersion of forces and words, sterile and without any prospect in front of it.

There are no stable discursive or action connections, as on the contrary there were in the crowd described by Le Bon: speeches are now uncontrollable, unpredictable, ephemeral and amorphous.

2.5 “Infoxication”.

Acting nowadays means to be under automated processes that people are no longer able to interrupt and to be controlled in every decision it is taken. And this type of daze, I think, is the crisis of nowadays.

Humans, with their digital devices, live in a state of physical atrophy, where they are inert and living in the immaterial dimension. Communicative devices, that at first seem to guaranty freedom, turn into objects of constraint, that oblige to interact. The same word digital derives from “digitus”, finger, showing the correlation between the digital world and the necessity to be attached to it. And what is hidden beyond this is, probably, that mass communication aggravates the isolation of men. In fact, if firstly we all feel surrounded by

71

COMMUNICATIVE ENTROPY, DISORDER AND GENERAL DISPERSION OF INFORMATION. people to communicate with, after a while we then find out that this is only the superficial view of the situation. Humans are alienated from the world they themselves created.

Communications in the public sphere that are not authentic but just chaotic, and loss of privacy in their private spheres due to hyper exposition of current society. They are confused about all news and informations they collect, and they approach all interactions with a suspicious attitude.

Another concept that raises within this frame is the distinction between information and truth: truth is selective and exclusive, while informations are cumulative. It doesn’t exist a mass of truth, but it does a mass of information. Mass of informations that, inevitably, leads to some issues, such as misinformation and misperception, deep fakes and authenticity. As it says Peter Pomerantsev (2020) in its new book

72

“Questa non è propaganda. Avventure nella guerra contro la realtà”, we are living in an era of abundance of information.

Now we have more information available than ever before, but they have not brought us the expected benefits. “It was thought that more information would mean greater freedom to oppose power, but also gave in power new tools to crush and silence the dissent. It was thought that more information would mean a more informed debate, but we seem less capable to discuss rationally what never happened. We live in a world of unbridled persuasion of mass, where the tools of manipulation have been developed and multiplied; a world of occult advertising, psychological warfare, hacking, bot, factoids, deep fakes, fake news, isis, Putin, trolls, Trump”.

With sincere affirmations, the writer hits the point of one of the greatest contradiction of our age: we have more than we need at our disposal, and this is turning against us.

The huge amount of informations gives origin to the word “Infoxication”, minted by Michael Thomas and Elena Benito-Ruiz (2009), that describes a phenomenon related to the difficulty or impossibility of taking a decision or keeping informed about a particular subject, due to the endless amount of data and content that exists on the web. From here the pathology IFS, acronym of “Information Fatigue Syndrome”; today mostly everyone is affected by this, since the quantity of information is always growing faster and faster. Digital media are voracious and noisy, and they are going over human forces, becoming uncontrollable and overwhelming.

More specifically, human memory is affected by this situation: it becomes a deposit of data and images, badly preserved, disordered and not interpreted; an accumulation of information without logic.

In fact, normally in humans mind informations are organized with some hierarchies, and datas have different weights and importance. Now, the accumulation of informations is more like a shapeless stratification that is arising more and more.

73

2.6

A time of eloquent images.

The element that stays at the base of this type of communication is the image: now, a new production, use and consume of this is transforming, mostly through social media, our attachment to visual expression.

The tendency to prefer visual communication rather than other type of expression comes from distant times. If we go back to ancient époques and consider primitive men, the only place where they were able to translate their experiences were the walls of caves; there they drew what they were living. Social networks have become the wall of our digital cave. Like most prehistoric paintings, even the images we collect are destined to disappear. Moreover, it is not the artistic quality of the Paleolithic graffiti that fascinates us, but the stories they try to tell. The more we refine and sophisticate our way of communicating, the more we distance ourselves from the world, or rather from people.

The more complicated the thinking is, the more the conversation narrows and the number of listeners decreases. We have a huge choice of means to communicate, however we are increasingly choosing simple and synthetic methods.

While locked inside our cave, we are able to talk to everyone under the illusion that everyone is listening to us, while, on the contrary, everyone sees what we do and where we are.

Communication, which has become a slave to data, risks losing its spontaneous emotional dimension.

The relationship between the current age and the social communication is well investigated by Francesco Bonami, author of the book “Post. L’opera d’arte nell’epoca della sua riproducibilità sociale” (2019), in which he clearly states that “the sharing and social reproducibility of everything has meant that everything is in the sunlight and must grow under the sun. Whoever wants to remain underground dies for lack of communication”. This outlines today’s mode of communicate, that is based on appearing rather than on being, that makes us “spect-actors”, all authors and creators of contents on one side, all observers and voyeurs on the other side.

74

We now live in a time of eloquent images in which we often quote that an image is worth a thousand words. This privileged role of images over speech is already at the center of the reflections that John Berger was writing in “Ways of Seeing” (2008), in which he analyzed, in different contexts and situations, the prominent and leading role of images.

“Seeing comes before words. […] But there is also another sense in which seeing comes before words. It is seeing which establishes our place in the surrounding world; we explain that world with words, but words can never undo the fact that we are surrounded by it. The relation between what we see and what we know is never settled.There is always a gap between words and seeing.”

In fact, the way we see things is affected by what we know or what we believe. It is like we are not just looking at things, but at their relationship between them and ourselves. Our vision is constantly active; the dialogue is only an attempt in verbalizing this process and a try to narrate what we see.

This is probably the reason why the visual narration it has always been at the first place between the type of communication chosen by human, and probably it will remain for long. Going back to images, John Berger defines them as a sight that has been reproduced, as an apparent that doesn’t have anymore a correspondence with place and time.

And since every image embodies a specific way of seeing, selecting a particular image rather than another means to select one within other infinite possible sights. So, taken for granted this relationship between images and personal mediation, let’s interpret what just said in the light of our days.

Does this bombardment with images contribute to some new kind of visual expression and literacy?

The answer is probably yes, and the case expressed in advance about Lil Miquela is an efficient example. More now than ever, visual expression is no longer only in the eye of the user, but on the mental path from the pupil to the mind;

75

Figure 13-14-15-16. Seeing and Thinking, Gaetano Kanitza, 1991.

76

77

images are getting more dense and visual expression is entering new field of experimentation. Consuming images doesn’t mean just to look at them, it requires interpretation and attention of fruition. A superficial use, on the contrary, is what leads users to manipulation and unconscious consequences. Images constitute “a public mind”, as it is defined in the documentary by Gail Pellett that looks this society inundated with visual images: “we live in a world of the mass producing and consuming of images which shape our lives and the public mind”.

2.7 New Media and “Information Behaviour”.

From what expressed till now, it is possible to clearly state the crisis of traditional media, in the sense that the constant raise of technologies is reinventing they way we use and consume them. Lev Manovich, Russian professor and writer, is one of the most investigators of these “new media”. This ideas will be treated in depth in following chapters, but now it is useful to recall some concepts in order to have a complete frame of the socio-cultural shifts I’m investigating in this part of the thesis. Till the digital revolution of the 90s, all mediated practices were characterized by distinct and specific type of media, for example the radio or the TV. What we are experiencing now is an époque of post-media, that deals with mass culture and mass distribution, depending on various mechanical and electronic reproduction technologies, that blending between them constantly give birth to new type of media and communication.

“The traditional strong link between the identity of an object and its medium becomes broken”, Lev Manovich says in one of his papers (2001), highlighting how the traditional concept of medium does not work anymore in relation of its content. What we are living now is the post-digital culture: if, traditionally, a medium was investigated mostly in its

78

physical properties and the emphasis was put on its capacities, now the point of interest has been moved to the user of the media. This means that the description shifted from something related to structures to something else related to culture, perception, user’s capabilities and user’s behavior.

From here the term “Cultural Software”, that intends how the way of using a given object is different and can change according to the person considered. This assumption is important because it brings in the foresight the dimension of cultural communication, that was previously unnoticed.

But why this dimension has become relevant only recently?

Today, as mentioned in advance, our lives consist on information activities in the most literal meaning.

“Human perception and cognition in general can be thought as information processing […] of new types of behaviors activities which involve seeking, extracting, processing and communication large amounts of information, often quantitative one” (Manovich, 2001).

This permits to define the current society characterized by an “Information Behavior”. The nervous system has evolved in a sort of machine that filter information in the surrounding environment, and as a sender/receiver of messages.

The communication model, in fact, is based on the encoding and the consequent decoding of messages, almost in a mechanical and passive way. This is something critical, which should not be underestimated. The danger of these post-media expressions is exactly here behind the corner: the emphasis put on information structures and information behaviors privileges informational and cognitive dimensions of culture over affective, emotional, performative and experiential dimensions.

79

2.8 Post-materialistic, post-hierarchical and post-realistic society Here it can be considered concluded the general frame related to the current technological shift with its implications, potential problematic and issues. The present age constitutes one of the critical moments in which human thought is in the process of transformation, an age characterized by entirely new conditions of existence and thinking, erected by the modern demands of science and progress. Because of this, it is important to analyze how people are currently reacting to this, what they are demanding, which are their feelings and their inner expectations. Three are the adjectives that, from the point of view of people, can describe the actual society.

Firstly, this is a post-materialist époque, that “adheres to more secular values and self-expression, and it is focused on self-actualization more than other generations and goes through life in a meta-modern way” (Van Doorn, Duivestein & Pepping, 2018). The main interests of people are going over material things; this doesn’t mean that these are not important, but they disengage when there is no correlation with higher matters and values. Intended like this, post-materialism permits the transformation from materialistic values to new individual values such as auto-expression, equality, freedom of speech and much more.

With a sort of neo-romantic soul, self-expression and self-affirmation are the two most raising values of these days: let’s consider Maslow’s pyramid (1954) for this analysis (Graph 3). This one is a model that describes the human development and it is based on different type of needs that have to be fulfilled. The satisfaction of basic needs permits to let emerge superior ones. At the base of it there are fundamental physiological needs, such as food or water.

By ascending the pyramid it is then found safety needs,

80

self-actualization

esteem needs

belonging and love needs

safety needs

physiological needs

belonging and love needs, esteem needs. All these fall in the category of social and relational needs. At the top of the pyramid there is the most ambitious need, that it is what is pursued currently from most of people: it is the self-actualization need, concerning the realization of personal potential. This is a period where people want to realize something new that fits their values. Value creation now does not take place in productive processes, but in the hearts and minds of people. They are demanding meaningful and rooted transformations, deep and valuable experiences.

The second characteristic is related to a society that is post-hierarchical. The trust is now placed more in people over than institutions, the judgment is done on merit and not on rank. This is a sign that people are desiring knowledge and brightness more than appearance or unclear environments. Anyway, the shift to these new values, to new forms of trust and to a new reality is a constant development.

The desire of trust means seeking authentic relationship and experiences.

Graph 3. The Hierarchy of Needs, Abraham Maslow, 1954.

81

Authentic as something of undisputed origin, not a copy, genuine. Authentic as a response in reaction to the role and position that the social media and media in general have reached these days. This attention to new values of trust and loyalty is a valuable sign of a mindful approach to the shifts that the society is facing. Regarding trust, a precision has to be done.

Trust doesn’t mean to know everything about a specific topic or situation. Trust is possible only in an intermediate condition between knowing and not-knowing. Trust someone means build a relation with someone even despite the things not known about him. If everything is known, trust wouldn’t be necessary. And in the transparent society described by Byung-Chul Han (2014), at the moment it is really difficult to find space for trust. That’s probably why people are demanding it so deeply.

On the contrary, what is going to happen if trust and authenticity will not be affirmed? Aviv Ovadya, Chief Technologist at The Center for Social Media Responsibility (2018), talks about an upcoming Infocalypse: if don’t this problem is not taken seriously, people will get bogged down in a reality-apathy because there will be a tendency to constantly ask whether something is true or false, manipulated or authentic.

The third and last aspect for closing the characterization of the society is the post-realistic one: post-realistic refers to all new opportunities, related to technologies, that are emerging. It means that we are going over what is our physical reality, and investigating what there is over it. It refers to the fact that we are not sticking to what is real for sure, but that we are looking for much more, exploring always further.

Before, while reporting a quote, I mentioned the word “meta-modernism”. Here it is appropriate to recall it back.

Meta-modernism refers to a reaction to post-modernism; meta-modernism reinvents itself as a continuous discover and journey. There are no large ideological programs as in modernity, no plans for the future. There are only thoughts that must contribute to something we believe in in a certain moment and that can ultimately lead to something new.

Now everything is in motion and everything seems possible.

82

“PITCH FOR NOVEL: A DYSTOPIA WHERE AI HAS TAKEN ALL JOBS EXCEPT FOR JOURNALISTS WHO CONTINUALLY WRITE THINK PIECES ABOUT AI TAKING ALL JOBS”.

These desire of people are also confirmed by a research done

by Twitter at the end of last year (2019), in which, by analyzing billion of Tweets of the last three years, it has been possible to find out some cultural insights. In fact, people absorb like sponges the spirit of a specific time and respond to it in order to well survive. Twitter can be considered as the largest catalogue of human thought and conversations.

By using machine learning and clustering processes, these researchers came up with six overarching themes. These has to be considered as a window that permits to see what we are entering. Between these themes I selected three, that, for different aspects, are relevant for my research and refer to topics that will be dived deeper in the next sections.

83

The first one is called “everyday wonder” and tells about the unstoppable desire of people from exploring the unknown. In particular, they’re fascinated by the cosmos and everything it contains, from the planets themselves, to spiritual energy and healing. Fascination with nature is motivating people to capture its beauty and reverence for nature’s power is on the rise. Investigations on these topics has to be interpreted in its wider sense: it’s not strictly about nature or planets, it’s about being eager to go over the part of reality that is well known and to explore the infinite possibilities that lie beyond earth. On Twitter, cosmic exploration discussions increased by 131%.

The second theme regards “tech life”: technology is continuing to change how people learn, how they create, and how they work. People are excited, even if a bit uncertain at times, about having a front-row seat to fundamental change, and they’re imagining the possibilities of a more connected, more efficient, more expansive future. Technology is stretching the limits of our everyday world and people are curious about all forms of experiences and how everyday life will be transformed. Scientific development and expansion is unstoppable and, in consequence, relationships between humans and technologies continue to radically evolve.

People are exploring human-machine dialogue with results ranging from hilarious to creepy. The world is changing quickly, and questions around the morality of artificial intelligence are a subject often accompanied by anxiety. Discussion about tech ethics raised for the 158%. As much as people are fascinated by automation, as much they are worried abut what technology could end in.

The last theme concerns a topic that I already exposed in advance, and so it can work as a confirmation of this. It is the theme of identity. The concept of identity is broader than ever, and people have never felt more empowered to be their true selves and make their own rules. They’re demanding representation, inclusion, and acceptance; a set of values that bring back the immaterial and higher world over the material one.

84

PEOPLE ARE EXCITED, EVEN IF A BIT UNCERTAIN AT TIMES, ABOUT HAVING A FRONT-ROW SEAT TO FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE, AND THEY’RE IMAGINING THE POSSIBILITIES OF A MORE CONNECTED, MORE EFFICIENT, MORE EXPANSIVE FUTURE.

85

2.9 Technologies as a product of human mind.

As it can be seen, by questioning nowadays reality a lot of hidden and inner aspects are emerging and moving upside down humans’ set of values and beliefs. These contents are now gaining lot of importance and it is no longer possible to leave them apart. This moment of crisis is due to the fact that it’s still unknown how to act and proceed, and everything is at the moment fluctuating, without a precise direction.

Behind this change of paradigm and sort of daze, it’s necessary to open new scenarios that can re-evaluate, as first thing, the role of human within the world and the nature.

The irruption of technologies is getting so big that is resulting even bigger than its creator, the human. But since technology is a product of human mind, a human design and project is the only that can solve it and move further.

About this, Francesco Bonami (2019), still in his analyses, is saying with sharp irony: “if we want to find the source of the discomfort we have to look inside our heads.” And indeed, we are the only ones that can take matters into our own hands and act actively. It is necessary to untie from any pessimisms, and since these evidences are stronger than just trends, it is useless to be obstinate in rejecting it. But to go over what Bonami said, the real issue is that this shift is no longer occurring only in our mind and physical reality, but it is happening also in infinite imaginary and virtual network spaces, that are way more difficult to control.

Often it is spoken about this great technological revolution in terms of machines, putting the human next to them. But the point of view should be the other way around: the central aspect should be considering all people that powered the digital revolution and all human species that now is immersed in it. Without doubt the technological growth of the past decades brought us new incredible capabilities, that

86

Figure 17. Exploring Cosmos, screenshot from Triennale Milano Instagram page, 2020.

it was not even possible to imagine. But next to it, next to the benefits technologies incremented, there is the flip side of the coin: this revolution has come to the cost of our psychology, wellbeing, communication, culture and structure of the society itself.

This behavior modification of which we are getting aware now, should stimulate us for looking new solutions in order to overcome this, and for opening new perspective of action.

87

2.10 Decentralization of human point of view.

Decentralize human point of view and explore the unknown world is the challenge we are facing now. A sort of collective observational experiment from a shifted perspective. An exploration, performed urgently and in a time of crisis, of the large part of the world we do not yet know, aimed at developing together new non-anthropocentric perspectives and imagining a different relationship with the world, the future and all the other organisms. The fragility of our species has to be re-invented in opportunities for growth: without ceasing to believe only in an anthropocentric culture and by investigating which are the self-critical aspects and reparative capacities of this same culture, it will be possible to look at the future with new eyes, not immobile ones.

This theme is the central focus of the International Expo that will be held in Triennale Milano in 2022, as the president Stefano Boeri anticipated recently in September 2020 in an interview on the newspaper “La Repubblica”: “The 23rd International Exhibition is conceived as a space for open and plural debate and confrontation, where different experiences, cultures and perspectives can converge. It will be called ‘Unknown Unkowns’: a tribute to the unknown part of the micro and macro universe, to the unknown side that scares us and which, however, can instead become the fertile ground for a meeting between different disciplines.

It is a real invitation to redesign what is to come on a new basis. Unknown Unknowns will try to answer a series of questions on what we still ‘don’t know we don’t know’ in various fields, from the evolution of the city to the oceans, from genetics to astrophysics, considered from the perspective of the culture of the project”.

Today’s world is uncertain, broken, a world that lacks the prospect of the future. In the midst of uncertainty, it is important to find cultural roots to work on. We have to over-

88

come this fragility: fragility for not having been able to foresee what was happening, for not having been able to face it. The theme now is how to transform this fragility not into despair, but into a reason to imagine a different relationship with the world, with the future, with nature. The fundamental point is to understand that our species is not detached from other living species, and that more of these, thanks to technology, are being discovered. So, understanding also their point of view it is important in order to have a complete view of all the big chain, of which we also, as human, are part. A sort of interference between different type of knowledge, this is what will be the new vision, and what will lead us to new perspectives of action.

Conclusion of the chapter.

The decentralization of the point of view with which this chapter has been concluded brings together different topics that needs to be analyzed. It opens and raises new questions and new themes of discussion. We are no longer able only to look at our close surrounding, we want and we need to go over it.

Anyway, having a complete frame of the current society is the first step to trigger debate around this topics and expand them further. To go on with discussion, the next theme that will be deeply examined in the next chapter concerns the new type of reality we are living in, defined as Blended Reality.

89

BLENDED REALITY AND NEW MEDIA AS THE TECHNICAL ASPECTS DEFINING THE CURRENT AGE.

90

03 CHAPTER THREE

91

Introduction to the chapter.

3.1 Sensory transformation and dual identity.

3.2 The blending of multiple realities.

3.3 Impacts of Blended Reality.

3.4 What is a Medium.

3.5 Characteristics of New Media.

3.6 The fundamental concept of interaction.

3.7 Human and body in Blended Reality.

3.8 The new perception of space.

Conclusion of the chapter.

92

93

Introduction to the chapter.

This chapter provides a systematic examination of contemporary emergent reality, defined as Blended Reality (Institute for The Future of Palo Alto, 2009), its characteristics and consequences on people. In fact, if from one side people know that digital revolution is happening, they are still unconscious about the invisible and hidden parts of it. We know what are social media, network, internet, cyber culture, but we ignore the structures behind them. The chapter starts with the analysis of the sensory transformation that occurs in relation to this new reality (3.1), till arriving to the explanation of what this Blended Reality is and how it works (3.2). Also main impacts and open aspects of Blended Reality are investigated (3.3). The discussion keeps on by analyzing the use of New Media (Manovich, 2002), mode of expression within Blended Reality. In parti-

94

cular, it is understood what a medium is (3.4) and, with a comparison with old traditional media, the characteristics of New Media (3.5).

To support all this discussion on New Media it is used Lev Manovich’s researches, “Il linguaggio dei nuovi media” and “Software takes command”, that show how the whole range of new technologies, new expressive and communicative possibilities, new forms of sociality that are emerging around the internet and the digital realm are based on a single term: software.

By knowing that “all is software”, and that it shapes our understanding of what media are now in general, the chapter proceeds with the analysis of a fundamental aspect within New Media: the idea of interaction (3.6). After this, in 3.7 it is faced how the perception of human body is developed while approaching communicative experience and interactions and, lastly, also the dimension of space is investigated and described in all its new meanings (3.8).

95

3.1 Sensory transformation and dual identity.

What emerged from the previous chapter is that humans invented technology, and technology in turn reinvented them, with a continuous and reciprocal relation. This means that, for understanding the value of technology is necessary to look at people, and, together, the other way of the construct.

In the realm of reality, the technologies and tools that people are creating change a fundamental part of the existence: “the lenses through which people view and interact with the world” (Van Doorn, Duivestein, Pepping, 2018). “People are beginning to see and feel the world through new sets of eyes and ears; things that were previously invisible become visible, and the familiar is seen in a new way”, as the Institute for The Future describes (2009). It is a type of sensory transformation that will change people’s lives, their sense of self and of the others, and their view of the world around them. This metamorphosis is well observed in the relation that people now have with the reality: not only the physical reality, but also the digital one. People are now growing with a dualism: the digital reality is not perceived anymore as an addition of the physical one, but these are at the same level, seen as an indivisible mix. This mix of realities produces a dual identity in people.

I believe people nowadays think about themselves not as one single unit, but as “one of many”, and they act and interact according to this. The virtual realm and the media interactions are like digital mirrors of human lives that can be aggregated and experienced with new type of stimulations.

This transformation into one-person for each media channels is what will enhance this multi-faceted view of oneself.

Such fundamental transformation in how we play out identity will inevitably impact on how people view others, how they interact with each other and how they think about personal responsibility and personal obligations. This produces a

96

PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO SEE AND FEEL THE WORLD DIFFERENTLY: THINGS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY INVISIBLE BECOME VISIBLE. growing sense of thinking to an individual as a single node of many networks, that are intersecting one with the other.

The media manipulation and the filtered view of the others within virtuality determine for sure new perceptions and way of expressions. Growing up in this media reality put the digital world and the, so-called, real world in a new perspective and in new possibilities of action. Even the man perceives to be in the middle of these realities, not entirely in the analog one, not even entirely in the virtual one.

As it is also said in a research done by the Institute for The Future of Palo Alto (2009), “we are blending ourselves into one global intelligence, one global body, one global brain”.

This paper is called “Blended Reality. Superstructing Reality, Superstructing Selves” as an explicit indicator of this new type of reality; moreover, superstructing means to create structures that go beyond the basic forms and processes with which we are familiar. A clear stimulus to go beyond what is strictly connected to us. These transitions and intersections between physical and digital are where we can have unexpected surprises, learning new ways of navigating relationships and interactions.

97

Figure 18-19. Freetime. Kaleidoscope. XIII International Exposition, Triennale Milano Archives, 1964.

98

99

3.2 The blending of multiple realities.

Analog and digital worlds that are merging together without a clear distinction are giving birth to what is called Blended Reality. Let’s focus in deep on this concept.

Blended Reality refers to a concept of perceiving reality and self, which blends multiple alternate realities across temporal and spatial domains, with the vision of expanding the boundary of human experience of reality (Szu-Wen, 2016).

By using technology, it is possible to alter the perception people have of reality. The approach of expanding this boundaries by blending realities is intaken by looking at the relation that passes between “self” and “reality” from a new perspective.

Let’s take a step back by defining what I intend in this thesis with the term reality and its declinations (the issue of reality will be, anyway, deepen in chapter 4). Reality is defined as the tangible aspect which provides a person the sense of presence. Reality means, in sample words, where I feel present. Lived (or Physical)Reality concerns the reality people perceive with unadulterated senses, where they are physically located with the biological body. Lived reality, then, in the sense I’m touching things and smelling scents. Lastly, Alternate (or Virtual, or Digital) Reality indicates the reality constructed with the assistance of technology. Alternate reality refers to when I’m immersed in the digital world.

Let’s now go back to the flow of the discourse. A deep research on the theme of Blended Reality has been done by the Keio University for Media Design (2016), quite oriented in investigating these aspects. Following its reasoning, the established concept to start off is that people perceive reality as an interaction between mind, body (together referring as self) and world (reality). Moreover, most of people think about themselves as an unified entity. This concept of em-

100

bodied mind has origin, anyway, in the last century, from the work of the neuroscientist Francisco Varela, that in the book “The embodied mind”, was the first one to propose the approach of “embodied cognition”, pioneering a new form of cognitive science called “enaction” in which both the environment and first person experience are aspects of embodiment. Enactive embodiment is not the grasping of an independent, outside world by a brain, a mind, or a self; rather, it is the bringing forth of an interdependent world in and through embodied action (1991). And as we will see in chapter 6, this is an aspect that keeps on having importance in contemporary research, for example with the work of the designer Pia Tikka, opening up new frame of investigation and possibilities.

Before we said that nowadays people consider themselves as “one of many” (3.1), but this has to be intended in the sense that they are acting and interacting in multiple ways online, but considering their presence well anchored in the physical world. Now, with Blended Reality, we can begin to question whether self is actually unified with our biological body or not. We could consider the self, intended as the source of our perceptions of reality, as dissociated from our biological body and situated in any forms of alternate realities. It could be located in different realities simultaneously (Szu-Wen, 2016). What is, instead, common sense, is the human tendency to distinguish between realities, and, consequently to this, the sense of their presence in these.

This strict separation people have in mind is what has to be overcome in order to approach the realm of Blended Reality.

Blending, literally, stands for a fusion, where the elements inside it are not separate or distinguishable.

What happens nowadays is that we fluctuate between different realities, physical and digital, but without having the complete understanding of how we do this. We think it’s something spontaneous, just deriving from social media, digital communication and technology, but we have to be now aware that this is causing the raising of an entire new type of reality. It’s like we are going in the direction of Blended Reality, but we still are not totally conscious of it.

101

Each individual perceives the reality in different ways, and he creates a personal set of own realities, being present in physical reality, being present online. This means that, we are automatically going over the limitation that the self has to be forced into one reality, and we are extending our perceptions to multiple realities simultaneously. The self, intended as the source of consciousness, is regarded as a proof of our existence in a reality. And transcending the physical self into the digital reality implies to see the world with a new perspective, the perspective of Blended Reality.

Being immersed in the digital realm, the alternate one, deviating from the lived reality, means to receive stimuli and engaging experiences enhanced by technology. But the main problem is the following: even if humans and technologies have the ability to manipolate the alternate realities in order to provide genuine experiences, there is still a barrier to a truly immersive alternate reality. “The barrier is that, without a logical connection and seamless transition between the true lived reality and the alternate one presented, the user would simply regard to those alternate realities as realistic but in the same time as something artificial. The barrier has to be lifted so that the user do not know when the lived reality ends and when the alternate reality experience starts. This is called Reality-Virtuality continuum.” (Keio University for Media Design, 2016). As a sort of substitutional reality, the sensations from the alternate reality have to be seen as a continuation of the lived reality and the user should be insecure about where to locate himself. This line between realities is the area of investigation that is taking a lot of energies nowadays; the same synthetic media, area of interest of this thesis, are the total expression of this blending. Experiencing synthetic media means to be in a blended reality, being simultaneously present in the physical and in the digital, without understanding where the separation line is. Seen like this, they represent a big achievement for technologies: as it says the researcher Bryan Gardiner, “the most profound technologies are those that disappear, entering the fabric of everyday life and becoming undistinguishable from it” (2017).

102

3.3

Impacts of Blended Reality.

Over what exposed till now, there are some open aspects and impacts of Blended Reality that is important to recall.

The main open fact is that Blended Reality will be considered fully realized when the interaction in the alternate realities will be at the same level as the one experienced in the lived reality. Only by doing this the realities will have the same degree of fidelity. At the moment it is still difficult, but it is the direction towards studies of human perception alongside to the development of new technologies, I believe, are proceeding. And, when this will become real, communication and interactions will be radically different. Having the same degree of fidelity between more than one reality implies also changes in humans: probably we will be surrounded by augmented humans, with additional features able to face this total merging of environments. Our mind is, at the moment, not complete ready.

Blended Reality, currently, is in a phase of speculation, that is scientific, philosophical, cultural and sociological. The reason why we talk about its raising during these years is that we are starting to see the germs of it, some attempts, some situations which, however, still remain isolated. At the moment, being immersed in digital and virtual realities does not allow a total detachment from physical reality.

And this is something all of us can clearly state.

Regarding the impacts, there are three levels of reading, as suggested by the Institute for The Future (2009), in one of its researches. The first one is the philosophical level: being in a reality has been a philosophical issue since ancient times and Blended Reality finally permits a deep discussion on this theme, and it can dive deeper into people’s belief about reality. Also, the importance of the role of the body and its interaction with the world is an area of interest, that can permit to understand how human’s body affects the reality.

103

On the scientific level, researchers are investigating the notions of space and distance, time and its dilation.

Time that is also intended as mental time, the time of the observer, the time that he constructs while experiencing and that deviates from the traditional idea of time.

The last level is the social one, that is looking at interpersonal interaction extended to multiple realities. Augment interpersonal relations means to be immersed in one reality, but not totally isolated in it.

For concluding this part, we can say that the digital revolution is happening again, now more than ever, and this time, as many experts have analyzed, alternate realities are here to stay, since we, as humans, have been fascinated by the definition of reality since historical times. With Blended Reality, the aim is to provide the foundation of the discussion against the limitation of one reality and its singularity, by bringing a novel perspective that multiple realities could coexist and, at the same times, augment humans.

Blended Reality represents a revolution of our traditional belief of reality an self-existence, and it opens new dimensions for the future.

3.4

What is a Medium.

Being immersed in blended realities implies the usage of what Lev Manovich called “New Media”, that have been mentioned in the previous chapter, but that here become one fundamental aspect to be treated.

From now on, all the characteristics of New Media, on which Blended Reality is based, will be discussed by leaning on two books of the Russian writer, which are “The Language of New Media” and “Software Takes Command”. In fact, these have been for me as a sort of manuals alongside my researches, and so I decided to use them as a full support for explaining my perspective and providing a complete frame about this topics.

104

Figure 20. human?, Instagram filter personally developed, 2020.

105

The context in which the explanation of New Media and their characteristic is that we live in a world of permanent change; and if before it was defined by industrial machines, now at the center there are softwares, always in a continuous flux, as it is also well expressed by Facebook motto: “Move Fast and Break Things”. In most of cultural and social areas, software has become the interface between us, the world, the others. It is a sort of layer that permeates all areas of contemporaneity, it is the engine that pushes forward our reality. “[…] Software is not just technology, but rather the new medium in which we can think and imagine differently”, Lev Manovich (2013).

Briefly, it can be affirmed that softwares are shaping and revolutionize the contemporary aesthetic and visual language, overcoming the traditional media. More specifically, what we are intending is the “cultural software”, in the sense that it is directly used by people for their interactions, as a sort of invisible thread that glues together and permits communication.

In previous chapters we talked about information society: also called network society, it is itself been enabled by the raise of the software.

Here some of Lev Manovich’s main questions (2013) to proceed with the analysis: “does media still exist?” and, moreover, “what is (then) media after software”?

But before answering these question, it is necessary to understand what a medium is. Most of researchers and people from this fields, when talking about media, take for granted their origin, moving soon in telling the present, excited by all the rapid transformations brought out by technology. But for understanding better the shift from traditional media to New Media and software age, it is useful to examine the origin.

Medium: “a specific kind of artistic technique or means of expression as determined by the material used or the creative methods involved”; American Heritage Dictionary (2000).

We can say that the medium stands for the channel of communication between a transmitter and a receiver, and it has

106

to be extended in its broader sense. Transmitter and receiver doesn’t have to be people, it can also be considered a type of communication that is man-machine.

A different medium means a different type of expression and interaction. As also Marshall McLuhan theorized in 1994, “the medium is the message”: the selection of a particular medium instead of another carries with it specific meanings of transmitting a message. Said with the same words of McLuhan, the idea would be: “The medium is the message because it is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action”.

A medium itself is not specifically good or bad, it is the way it is used that determine its value, and the cultural matrix that stands around it. Seen like this, media are like translators: translators of one form of knowledge into another mode of expression. In fact, as affirmed the American educator Lyman Bryson (quoted in McLuhan, 1994) “technology is explicitness”, meaning that media are able, each with their specialized form, to transfer the experience into other new forms. As active metaphors, they translate different modes of information, moving the technological progress of consciousness and interpretation.

3.5

Characteristics of New Media.

Now that we have an answer of what a medium is, we can go back to Manovich’s questions and compare traditional and new media, in the age of software.

In general, traditional media (ex. radio, television, print) can be seen as fixed entities, with a defined structure and content, while New Media (ex. apps) are “dynamic software performances” (Manovich, 2013), with which we can interact and experience. In synthesis, we are engaging not with something that is predefined and static, but with real-time encoding/decoding processes, constructed and decon-

107

structed by the user and managed by the software. It is resumed that people are no longer passive viewers of contents created for them, but “prosumers” (Manovich, 2013), in the sense that they both create and consume contents, engaging in experiences.

The shift from traditional media to new media has been possible during the 90s. Before that period computers and technological devices, so in consequent softwares, were something for few people, such as engineers or professionals of the sector. What happened next is what is called “democratization of the software”, that refers to the progressive adoption of it by always more and more people; firstly software tools have been used by various industries and after they reached all the majority of people, that started using them as a support to actions and communication. And this phenomenon kept on spreading till nowadays. Media revolution invades all phases of communication, from acquisition, to manipulation, till distribution. In fact, we now all use programs and apps, and we understand that these are at the base of any type of communication. Through these tools provided, we are able to create, share and access contents, managing them as we prefer. Creating personal contents, used to interact with the surroundings, has become central to a person’s cultural life. A small clarification: we don’t interact directly with the software, but with a layer above it, the interface.

The bridge that links traditional media and new media is the concept of “remediation” (Bolter, Grusin, 2003): generally it means to improve a situation, but in this case it stands for the reinterpretation of one medium into another. It is said that New Media remediate the old ones in the sense that they extend the old ones by mixing them, implementing them, giving them new meanings till create a new language. New Media are not only representing the old ones in a new way, but with lots of new capabilities, they are also able to create new ones, generating new ways of expression. So, starting from saying that New Media can simulate old physical media, by extending them with new properties, we reached also the point that New Media, by creating new languages, give origin to an entire and constantly growing new array of media software. This concept explicits the continuum that exists between

108

old and new media; it has not been a strict interrupt and passage from one to the other. Someone may argue that today some contents of these New Media look similar to the old ones; but the newness lies not in the content, but in the tools used to create and distribute it. It’s not enough to look at the output. Remediation brings with it some additional features that is appropriate to mention.

The first one is the “permanent extendibility” (Manovich, 2013), that is also what confers the adjective “new” to the term New Media. Permanent extendibility refers to the characteristic that always new properties can be added to media softwares, with a constant augmentation; to understand it better let’s just think about plugins and how they work.

This possibility of continuous extension and consequent redefinition of their structure is possible thanks to the continual invention of new algorithms. So, if before, with traditional media, the main idea was to have a clear and distinct set of medium, with own technique of representation, now this is no longer possible. Media are losing their specificity, constantly mixing with each other. This causes what is defined cross-media aesthetic, that is the next feature to be investigated.

Cross-media aesthetic is what defines nowadays key aspect of visual language, and it is obtained with the phenomenon of “deep remixability” (Manovich, 2013). Remixing is a technique that can be applied to any media in general, it works universally. Usually, in different fields (from music to fashion) it normally indicates a combination of contents that comes from different media. By the way, what it is now taken in consideration is “deep” remixability, due to the fact that not only contents are being mixed, but also their fundamental structures, way of representation and expression. By doing this, techniques that were originally part of a specific medium are now applicable to other media types.

But, in order to remix, we firstly need to decompose the subject considered. It’s like a designer working on an image with Photoshop: he’s probably not working on the entire image, but he’s acting on different layers, each of them

109

managing different properties, that, merged together, gives the unity of the image. By working with this collection of separate elements, it will always be possible to go back to the file and to recombine them, change their order, re-arrange them and give origin to a new artifact. Each element is independent inside the whole composition, that can change over time. This is the metaphor of the remixability.

The last feature to be mentioned is “hybridization” (Manovich, 2013). By considering the features expressed in advance, it comes natural to understand that, by considering software as a sort of bricks and blocks, they are inevitably used for new media combinations; in other words, they start to create hybrids. Each media hybrid produced is translated in a new way of expression; in fact, the languages of previously distinct media come together, they exchange properties and structures. It can also happen that some combinations result not very profitable, and they are left apart. The process of hybridization brings, as a consequence, also new type of user behaviors and new kind of experiences. Hybridization offers new ways of representing the world, and new ways for navigating these representations in endless variations. New Media and these features, anyway, has not to be understood as a simple continuous addition of more and more media. The key aspect is to let emerge new languages and mode of expressions. And Manovich identifies this as the fundamental condition for the evolution and the expansion.

Also Marshall McLuhan, in “Understanding Media”, was talking about hybridization and cross-fertilization, considering them as “the great new force” that is able to create new systems (1994). Moreover, he was considering the moment of meeting between forms and the consequent birth of an hybrid as a moment of truth and revelation, a moment of progress towards new horizons.

110

REMEDIATION, PERMANENET EXTENDIBILITY, DEEP REMIXABILITY, HYBRIDIZATION: THESE AS MAIN FEATURES OF NEW MEDIA. Never before we had such variety of forms as today: “now everything can always change and everything can be rendered in a new way” (Manovich, 2013). This is the reason why this digital revolution is different from all previous ones: this extreme fluidity, versatility and variability open to unbounded space of experimentation. To make a reflection, it can also be that in the period of time you have been reading this text, some features of your preferred social network has been changed. And here we came to the conclusion of this part, with, I hope, a complete frame and an explanation of what, definitely, is media after software, for answering the questions we posed at the beginning of the section.

111

3.6 The fundamental concept of interaction.

The adoption of New Media has twists on human senses and perception. One of the fundamental concepts that stands at the real base of New Media is the idea of interaction (Manovich, 2002). Interaction considers the interface between man and devices, and the output generated with these. The relationship between media and people has been analyzed in the past, among many, also by McLuhan (1994), which made a distinction between hot media and cold media. For the writer, hot media are low in participation, while cold media are high in participation or, even, have to be completed by the audience. Seen like this, cold media include while hot media tend to exclude the user. Without any doubts, we can affirm that this age is fulfilled with cold media. But since, always following his reasoning, “any intense experience must by reduced before it can be assimilated and learned�, it is consequent that this cold system brings a sort of somnambulism, that protects our central system from experiences that would be too deep in interaction. While hot media cause hypnosis and stillness, cold media bring numbness and apathy (cfr. chapter 2).

Anyway, it is taken for granted that how each person, as a living organism, interprets interaction is unique, and it depends on his cognition and mind. In our age, in fact, every citizen can choose how to act from a wide range of options.

The logic behind the New Media technology reflects this social model: it seeks to address the individual rather than the mass. The development of New Media has gone far beyond the mere level of information and data; today what predominates is the cultural level. Cultural level refers to the interface that is created between man-media-culture. In fact, if what stands at the base of all is data and their analysis, this is not the aspect of major importance. It is more relevant to understand the impacts they have on a socio-cultural level. It is a double relationship between information and immersion,

112

Figure 21. Global User Interface, Manovich and Kratky, 2007. Computer-driven media installation with variable narratives and spatial configurations.

which can be seen as an expression that characterizes New Media: and since today we all have access to informations, it is for sure more important to focus on the other part, that is also the most interesting one.

As Manovich says in “The Language of New Media” (2002), the user plays an active role in determining the order in which he accesses the various elements of the interface, that is previously generated by the software. This means that, by interacting with a medial object, he can select elements and paths, generating a customized output. In this way the person becomes a sort of co-creator of the media. The interaction the people have now it is both physical and psychological, since interactive media are reflecting mental processes of the person considered. The essence of “being active” modifies also the concept of image, that becomes, within the experiential process, something where the user is entering, with a full zoom, for the fruition. New Media makes images not a static visual output and element, but a dynamic entity, that can be browse and interpreted. By having interactive narrations, New Media becomes, over than objective channels of communication, expression of user’s psychology. And, when this exceeds, we are back to narcissistic disorders and issues that we talked about in previous chapter.

Following pages.

Figure 22. Working Series, Photography 14, Bill Owens, 1976.

113

114

115

3.7 Human and body in Blended Reality.

Contemporary interfaces, we said, offer new possibilities of communication. And as it has been just mentioned, they refer also to the physicality of the user, implying a new role and position for its body within these interactive processes.

In particular, the condition sine qua non for which the current visual language is made possible is the existence of virtual spaces, over the physical one, contained inside frames, screens and devices. And these are precisely the separators between the two spaces in which people interact. Let’s take the screen as a generic separator for investigating this theme. As Manovich (2002) affirms, “the screen, instead of being a neutral thing, is an aggressive entity. It works as a filter to cut, or make non-existent, anything that doesn’t fit within its boundaries. Interacting in the virtual dimension means ignoring the physical space that is surrounding us”.

From this assumption, it follows the relation from the screen and the body of the user.

Each person has its own unique physical body, so it comes naturally to think that each one perceives the reality differently based on the interaction between mind, body and world. The fact of dividing reality into what exists and what does not exist physically simultaneously duplicates the figure of the spectator, that finds himself existing in two different spaces: the space of his real body and the virtual space of his image enclosed into the screen. The screen allows people to go on virtual journeys and experiences without moving from their seat: a virtual mobility for a physical immobility. With an immobilized and passive body, only the eyes are moving, following all the virtual elements around.

With eyes, the user can explores freely the surrounding environment. New Media, in this case, are, over a filter for the mind and the imagination, a filter for the physicality. With the user in action, the virtual world gets alive: from a pale

116

impression it becomes a digital world full of rich illusions and particulars. And more the person is still and motionless, more the experience results perfect and complete. Movements distract and move the focus, destroying or ruining the virtual world.

The current condition of the human body is well interpreted and expressed also by Byung-Chul Han (2015), which says: “human communication is made up of non-verbal forms of expression such as gestures, facial expressions or body language. Human perception is multidimensional and stratificated; the digital medium deprives communication of tactility and corporeality”. If, in most cases, we think that by being immobile the user is controlling communicative experiences only with its hand and fingers, recently there have been innovative experiments going way over this. One example is constituted by the “Enactive Systems” studied by the Estonian designer and researcher Pia Tikka.

The core concept changes the classic interaction between human and technology: it does not assume a standard interface, but “the function of interfacing is driven by bodily involvement and spatial presence of the human agent”, that with its unconscious movements and spontaneous reactions to a specific media situation is able to modify and change the course of the experience (2011). This interesting case will be deepen in chapter 6, specifically dedicated to the couple human-machine and its relation.

3.8

The new perception of space.

This discussion about Media as a filter for physicality can be used also for discussing the new perception of space. Space is, together with time, an entity that has always been an argument of discussion between scientists, philosophers and scholars. In the last decades, the advance of transportation and telecommunication technology has enabled us to travel and

117

Figure 23. Young Woman Model, perspective 1, solidhumans.xyz, 2018.

118

communicate across the globe in an instance and shortened the spatial distance, eliminating the place limitations of our perception about reality.

It can be said that spaces are becoming simulated: we think we are living them even if we are not physically present. And simulation of other realities brings with it the inevitable consequence of a continuous progression toward realism; it’s for this reason that also the space of representation and communication has been subject of updates in this direction. In fact, at the beginning of the XXI century, a big innovation in the representation of the space occurred: the space passed from a 2D view to a 3D one, bringing consequences on the paradigms of visualization. This method of representation is completely new from the old one: it gives life to media objects, that till that moment where only moving along two dimensions.

Nowadays, “virtual reality creates in the user the illusion of being in an artificial world.

But the virtual has this additional ability: it allows the user to actively modify this world. In other words, it ensures control over a fake reality (Manovich, 2002)”. This relation implies not only to assist to the representation of a reality, but also to interfere with it. Space becomes a navigable construct: it’s where digital identities are fluctuating and living experiences.

The physical presence in a remote environment introduces the concept of distance; in particular, the spatial distance between the user and what he sees and experience. He is, virtually, present in all realities, overcoming the physical distance. It remains only the distance of the view (Manovich, 2002), while he’s getting closer to all elements of the reality, emptying the concepts of space and distance. This is one of the big illusions of our age. Distance is a construct that doesn’t exist anymore in our age; space becomes, instead, subjective to the observer, and it cannot be considered anymore as a linear dimension. These are elements that are now totally dependent on human experiences and on the technological development; their classic meanings are only the starting point of a wide spectrum of new interpretations.

119

Figure 24. Young Woman Model, perspective 2, solidhumans.xyz, 2018.

120

Conclusion of the chapter.

Today society is in a constant balance between stability, innovation and exploration of new possibilities. Within this frame, people have currently the desire to understand the world they are living in; they don’t want just to communicate through the web, bust also they want to know how it works.

In fact, more than pure knowledge, being aware of how New Media with all the surrounding work permits to accept them more easily and to use them in better ways.

Concerning the evolution we are living in, probably we are still in the middle of the process, since new techniques are still being invented. It is an open-ended process. The shift from traditional media to digital enabled the development of media software, but it does not constrain the directions in which it is going and continues to go. Software for sure represents a turning point in communication; it is shaping our culture, as it is shaped by the culture in return. The positive aspect is that all parts of these modern technologies introduce new ways of acquiring and distributing knowledge; but, over this, still a lot of issues are open and need clarifications.

The next ones that will be considered in the following chapter are, between the others, the definition of real and fake, together with the fact that boundary within these is blurring and, lastly, ethical considerations about this.

121

SYNTHETIC MEDIA AND THE COMPLEX ISSUE OF REALITY.

122

04 CHAPTER FOUR

123

Introduction to the chapter.

4.1 Synthetic media: what they are and how they work.

4.2 A new digital language that will revolutionize, in good and bad, the media landscape.

4.3 Deepfakes and trust issues.

4.4 The real-fake quadrant.

4.5 What is now considered real and what is now considered fake.

4.6 Current limitations of synthetic realism and a look towards the future.

Conclusion of the chapter.

124

125

Introduction to the chapter.

This chapter is dedicated to the exploration of the theme of synthetic media, the emergent new type of content that is surrounded by a veil of fascination, as well as other more contradictory aspects. This theme is an important part of my research and investigation: it is where all started, with the case of Lil Miquela, and it is the topic that has provided different insights. More in details, in part 4.1, it is studied some aspects that define synthetic media, how they work and their area of interest. After this, in 4.2 the focus is posed more on the meaningful aspects of this type of visual expression, both in positive and in negative, mentioning which are the effects of the production and use of these contents. 4.3 is dedicated to deepfakes, unfortunately the most cur-

126

rently known type of expression of synthetic media, analyzing their origin, what they are and how to act consciously according to them. And since the big controversial point related to synthetic media is that they are able to blur the line between what is real and what is fake, the last sections of the chapter are dedicated exactly to this: the discussion starts in 4.4 with the exploration and the analysis of the real-fake quadrant by Luciano Floridi (2018), for going on with a personal reflection on what is now real and what is now fake (4.5). Lastly, in 4.6 it is considered the type of realism generated by synthetic media, with all the limits it is carrying with it, and with the potential implications of where it could end in future.

127

SIMULACRUM, NOUN. LATIN WORLD THAT DESIGNATES AN IMAGE OR REPRESENTATION OF SOMEONE OR SOMETHING (OXFORD LANGUAGES DICTIONARY, 2019).

128

“SYNTHETIC MEDIA, OF WHICH DEEPFAKES IS A MANIFESTATION, IS A NEW TYPE OF SIMULACRA. IT BUILDS ON EXISTING MODELS CREATING CONVINCING REPRESENTATIONS OF THINGS THAT ARE INHERENTLY RECONSTRUCTED. ENCOMPASSING SOUND, IMAGES, TEXT, CINEMATIC, VIRTUAL EXPERIENCES, AND VARIETIES OF AMALGAMATED COMBINATIONS, IT INTENSIFIES AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL CRISIS IN THE ROLE OF MEDIA FOR VALIDATING REALITY” (THOUGHTWORKS ARTS, 2020).

129

4.1 Synthetic Media: what they are and how they work.

The visual expression that represents Blended Reality in all its aspects and characteristics is, for sure, constituted by Synthetic Media, previously object of study in the case of Lil Miquela (cfr. chapter 1). So let’s now investigate better what they are, what defines them and how they work. The emergent case of CGI and synthetic media derives from the new meanings and shift behavior fostered by new technologies, that, as we said, produced an impact on the mode of consumption of perceptive experiences, and on the relationship between people, and between the individual and the society. The digital space, and synthetic media in particular, are effective and alive only when there is someone that interact with them, that observe them and that it is immersed inside.

Computer generated imagery (CGI) consist in realistic human-appearing animations, that are used to impersonate the behavior of humans (Bojanìc, 2019); CGI are the main way of expression of synthetic media. Thus, within this digital context, it often becomes hard to distinguish real people from those created by CGI. This is a clear demonstration of how our perceptions are being distorted and are changing. The relation between people and this artifacts has already been investigated in deep, but to recall it, the breaking point in this discourse is the “humanity” and authenticity that this type of content can transmit, despite the fake nature that characterize them. As explained in an article on Ubermetrics written by Falk Rehkopf (2019), “Synthetic media refers to digitally created or modified media, often driven by algorithms. Whi-

130

le they have been around for decades now, it’s only in the past few years that they’ve begun to truly penetrate in our digital landscape”; Synthetic Media are on the rise. In fact, if before they were previously reserved to the domain of highly skilled programmers and engineers, now this technology has been democratized, and it is incredibly accessible to the mass.

Over the past years, we have seen texts, images and videos all reaching a point where algorithmically created versions were indistinguishable to human observation. Today everybody can face a synthetic media content, and moreover, they can also be easily produced. Of course, an amateur production can be done with a low fidelity aspect and not optimal results, but still, it is possible. And this, as we will see after, could lead to potential disasters and issues of miscommunication. One example of tool for self-created synthetic media is the app Impression, that exploits the substitution of the personal face with another one. With this face-swap, it is then possible to generate short synthetic videos. The app works really easily: what a user has to do is only to place his face within the correct space selection and act; after some minutes the process of conversion is completed. This type of app, anyway, has also negative aspects: firstly, it is not possible to know and check for which purpose a specific video is done, if it is only for leisure of for more harmful aims. Moreover, this app, as well analyzed by Sergio Donato in an article for D-Day (2020), bases its revenue streams on the collection of datas from the users; so, matters related to privacy and confidentiality are a problem to be aware of.

The advent of synthetic media have, for sure, been possible with deep learning and machine learning, able to reproduce artificially realistic aspect multimedia contents. There are many forms of synthetic media, including images, videos, audios and, the most controversial, deepfakes. They are often used also in animation and gaming production, for the realization of mixed or virtual realities.

131

Synthetic is actually an important and fast-moving definition of how humans and machines are collaborating to make media and this, for sure, is exciting and innovative; on the other side, it is also disturbing and ethically ambiguous.

(Rosenbaum, 2019).

Following a paper written by Crang and Graham (2007), there are “three key emerging dynamics” that set three corrispettive categories for the use of this type of media: commercial use, artistic use and activism. The first case addresses all CGI influencers, models and much more, used for gain profits. In fact, managing a virtual avatar respect a real influencer is much easier: it is easier to control it, to set specific reactions, to promote something or to sell products. They are tireless, always perfect and always ready.

Moreover, using CGI personalities for advertising means to better control their emotions and the way they are acting.

An example in this case can be Ikea, that recently started to make advertising campaigns that feature Imma, a CGI popular Japanese influencer. Inside these advertisements, she’s living her life as a common person: “she sits on her couch, eats meals, makes calls, and posts plenty to the Instagram” (Wilson, 2020). And Ikea is getting positive feedback and reactions from users for this type of promotion.

The second case, related to artistic use, implies all the thematics of self-expression and creativity, enhanced by the use of this particular type of technology. One example within this context could be the artistic current of post-internet art that, based on web 2.0, sees the artist as fully immersed in the network culture. He doesn’t want to be only an observer in this framework, and so he tells his perceptions about these environments with his production. This current promotes a new aesthetic, that merges physical and virtual, and that create artworks with videos, processes and sequences computer-created (Danae, 2019).

132

Figure 25. Imma, fake influencer for Ikea Japan, Ikea Japan, 2020.

Example of synthetic media used for commercial aims.

The last category of investigation is the one of activism: this area contains all the synthetic media produced and used for political aims, social causes and for the diffusion of specific messages. But if the two categories already discussed are, generally, used for good reasons, for this one the situation is different. Unfortunately, in fact, the majority of synthetic media generated within this frame are spokesmen of extremist perspectives, ambiguous messages and fake informations. They fall often under the category of deepfakes, analyzed in 4.3.

With this frame that analyses synthetic media is then clear that, over than being an exciting area of new development and new perspectives, there are still a lot of open urgencies, questions and implications to be faced.

Following pages.

Figure 26. Blinx 1, Rosa Menkmann, 2014. Post internet art artifacts that speaks about rupture, the departure from a condition of expected and normal mediated experience, towards the beyond, where systems fail, aberration prevails, and our preconception and flow of information is disrupted or even halted.

133

134

135

4.2 A new digital language that will revolutionize, in good and bad, the media landscape.

“This decade will see a massive proliferation of synthetic media in our daily lives. Synthetic media will bring fundamental shifts in three areas in particular: media creation, licensing and ownership, verification” (Chandra Babu, 2020).

Concerning media creation, synthetic media have the power to completely revolutionize the media landscape, by changing the contents we create and consume. They will accelerate creativity and new type of expressions, giving the possibility to new aesthetics to rise and to be diffused. This means new methods of storytelling and narration, and also new ways of fruition. There are other reasons for considering as positive synthetic media. Potential supporters of synthetic media, in fact, could argue that it is a natural extension of media that society should embrace. There are many cases where synthetic media are used for good reasons; it is considered as an exciting area with wide potential of development and expansion. This new scenario of opportunities of communication can also be used by brands and companies for the creation of specific contents.

Since, for example, it takes time to record a spot or to produce an advertising, with this type of media these processes could be changed and accelerated. Synthetic media can also lessen the gap between what a company wants to do and what is the effective cost for doing it, making it more affordable. In fact, it will be more effective to produce audio, video or images like this, without the need of the cost of physical processes. This type of media resulted also useful, for example, in the pandemic period of last months, where companies still needed to promote their contents, but it

136

was impossible to produce them within physical environments. So that’s another example of positive impact of synthetic media (Simonite, 2020). One concrete company that is specifically working on this is Synthesia, a startup based in London that promote the ethical use of synthetic media in commercial areas. Producers of synthetic contents, they affirmed about themselves: “As synthetic media technologies evolve and increasingly become an integral part of the media production value chain it is important that we as technology providers take responsibility for the ways in which our products are used. We propose a simple framework of consent, control and collaboration for working with synthetic media in a commercial context and it is our hope that other companies will join us in following these simple guidelines. Synthesia technology is already used in video production today to translate and personalize video content in a much more scaleable way than what has been possible before.” (Synthesia, 2020). By acting ethically, Synthesia results politically correct in terms of consents, controls and collaboration with and for people. This startup has a clear vision of how to use these technologies, and of which are the consequences of this process. It is a real example of good use of Synthetic Media, and also for good matters.

Thus, we can say that this type of media is moving from being primarily used in fun to making its way into traditional media production chains. The last few years have seen an explosion in synthetic media. Text, images, even video are created by software with such precision and authenticity that you can’t tell even on close inspection which contents have been synthesized. So, in the positive evolution of synthetic media, contents are automatically translated and delivered in multiple languages across the globe. More readers and viewers, and more engagement.

On the flip side of the coin, synthetic media have been exploited and used for ambiguous intentions; in fact, there are some areas of innovation with still lots of controversial points.

The first issue related to this is licensing and ownership (Chandra Babu, 2020) and it regards specifically the production

137

Figure 27. Personal screenshot from Synthesia website, 2020. Example of synthetic video produced by the start up for corporate aims.

of the contents. When you normally consume media, you’re pretty sure to know who created it: writers, filmmakers, photographers, etc. But, when we start to talk specifically about synthetic media, things are not like that. Each of us know the famous example of the 2016 USA election, where thousands of political bots has been used to distort public discourses and amplify extremist viewpoints. This is, as it can be imagined, an inappropriate use of synthetic media, because it is used for harmful aims. And the problem is here behind the corner: since there are a lot of different tools that permit to create synthetic media, in many case, such as in this one, they are spread around and received without exactly knowing the source or the owner of the content.

This concept leads to another one: the idea of misperception and disinformation. Synthetic media are making these aspects more insidious than before; with them around, disinformation campaigns and fake news are largely diffused. Knowing if a content is authentic or not is really difficult, since the line between what’s real and synthetic is blurring. What it is needed, for this urgent issue, is a transparent pact between the actors involved (who promote a certain message and who receives it, and within them, all the people that could potentially intercept it); briefly, users should know if they are watching a synthetic content or not. And strictly correlated to this, another problem is raising: the issue of the verification of contents. In fact, while at

138

LICENSING AND OWNERSHIP, MISPERCEPTION, DISINFORMATION, VERIFICATION OF CONTENTS. an engineering level there are programs and softwares that help to understand whether a content is fake or not, regarding daily life and people the discourse is different. There is no a foolproof approach to prevent this problem, there are only precautions that should be followed. “For sure, consumers who don’t have the time or inclination to fact check things that arrive in their feed are likely to become suspicious of news, no matter what the source or point of view is” (Rosenbaum, 2019). People have to better verify the informations they are receiving, by developing a sort of defense mechanisms against this. The selection of information is fundamental, and it can be considered as an ethic attitude and a collective responsibility. For sure, among the others, this is a socio-cultural issue that is becoming an urgency that has to be faced nowadays.

And while we can hope that the vast majority of synthetic media will be used for good rather than bad, the truth is that synthetic media is a powerful weapon that can be extremely dangerous when reaching malicious hands. The responsibility is on us to develop closer relationships with the sources we use and to be aware of what is happening. These are the reasons why we should all care: because we are all in it.

139

4.3

Deepfakes and trust issues.

Spreading false facts, distorting reality with alternative facts: on the Internet, fakes are nothing new. It doesn’t matter whether they are manipulated images, fake news or fabricated information, the Web 2.0 is full of them, making increasingly difficult to distinguish between fact and fiction. Now manipulation has reached a new level: deepfakes. Deepfakes are, in fact, one of the most popular type of synthetic media at the moment, unfortunately!

Deepfake is a loose term that generically stands for a non-ethical production, use and diffusion of synthetic and modified contents. The word appeared in 2017, and immediately after it has become a search term on Google Trends (Rosenbaum, 2019). But how did deepfakes were born?

Following a research done by the Digital Guide Ionos in 2020, Deepfakes emerged in December 2017 on Reddit, when a guy managed to put celebrity faces on porn movie characters, and “sadly in a terribly believable way”. From that episode, a proliferation started, with a real boom, also on other social platforms, among which also Twitter. Using digital technologies to impersonate someone on someone else started then as an harmless fun, but rapidly it began evolving into a dangerous situation. In fact, even if Reddit was closed few moments after the diffusion of this content, deepfakes were already spread around the world.

Normally a “fake” doesn’t have to have obligatory bad intentions; a lot of movie producers use them, to facilitate scenes than would, on the contrary, be too difficult to manage. But it is the adjective deep next to the term fake that adds a specific connotation: it is referred to the deep learning, a type of machine learning that allows the computer to process this type of intervention without too much human’s work. Nowadays, deepfakes often refers to facial manipulation of famous people, where their acting, gesture and voice is altered and changed, and they are used to transmitted new and deviated messages. The reason why celebrities are

140

Figure 28. Obama deepfake production, MashableItalia, 2019.

the preferred subject of deepfakes creators is that online there is a lot of material related to them. And more material means more data to process, so more accuracy and fidelity of the final result. Deepfakes, so, bring with them the problem of fake news, that, used as propaganda methods, are able to influence huge quantity of people. “A lie has time to travel around the world before the truth gets into its pants�, Winston Churchill. All deepfakes has a common trait: the apparent truthfulness, or pseudo-truthfulness, as defined by Daga & Barletta (2020) in a webinar for the Milan Digital Week of this year; this characteristic refers to the fact that fake informations potentially can become an alternative truth. In fact, by leveraging on emotions and perceptions of the people, they try to impose themselves as real facts, being able to spread globally, capillary and quickly.

141

This pseudo-truthfulness gives origin to the phenomenon of “Echo Chamber” (Daga, Barletta, 2020), that indicates specific web spaces where groups of users keep on sharing a specific information, even if it is not true, strengthening each other in their opinions. And from this we can understand that echo chamber are metaphorical places for the expansion of deepfakes and fake informations, carried forward unconsciously by people. Deepfakes are based on real psychological rules, which are aimed precisely at the unconscious part of the human mind.

With all what affirmed till now, we can say that we are now living in an era where, virtually, nothing we see or hear can be trusted. And the trust issue is the major problem when talking about deepfakes and information online. In fact, if this phenomenon will not be posed under control, it could depress the trust level that people have while interacting with a content. As Sam Gregory affirms, they “further damage people’s trust in our shared information sphere” and “contribute to the move of our default response from trust to mistrust” (2019). The levels of mistrust, I would add, is probably higher on social media and on platforms where contents are distributed and shared by lots of people. Moreover, “if people don’t have the conceptual mechanisms in place to understand how narrative is created and employed to manipulate, then the better the fake, the more susceptible and increasingly large segment of the population becomes to this kind of attack. Helping people to understand how media are weaponized against them, and provide them with critical thoughts in order to be able to spot if a communication has been manipulated or not is fundamental” (Structure & Narrative, 2018). People can’t be attacked too much if they see things coming in front of them. And also, the fragmentation of trust in media could provokes chaos and skepticism, if we don’t learn to control it. By reading this, we could feel a sensation of imminent catastrophe re-

142

lated to a virtual sphere where we have to be suspicious in front of everything and everyone. But it is not exactly like this: “That is also what most experts will agree on: basic image/video editing is only prominent in around 10% of all disinformation today.” (Riparbelli, 2020). So, this means that even if it is a phenomenon is evident growth, there is still place for acting and, more important, reacting.

4.4 The real-fake quadrant.

The deepfake phenomenon opens a scenario in which it’s no longer discernible with confidence what is real and what is fake. More specifically, the correlation between real and fake in the production of media has been studied in by Luciano Floridi, professor at Oxford University and specialized in information ethics. In particular, within his researches he prototyped his famous quadrant, the “real-fake” quadrant.

This is a 2x2 matrix (Graph 4) used to classify and categorize media expression by authenticity and the link to an original source. The syntax used is the pairing: {presents as} – {actually is}, and the canonical example used is a pet dog (Van Doorn, Duivestein, Pepping, 2018). Let’s follow this example to understand the quadrant better. Your actual pet dog is Real-Real, it presents itself as a real dog, and it actually is one. Let’s imagine now that your dog has been Photoshopped into a family photo, and it has been done really well, that would be Real-Fake. It presents itself as being your real dog, but it is in fact a fake. The dog exists in reality, but the context in which it is located is fake and it doesn’t exist. The example for Quadrant 3 is somewhat convoluted, but imagine you had a dog that was somehow genetically engineered so that it looked artificial, but it was in fact a dog, you would have yourself a Fake-Real dog. This refers to something artificially produced but that after it is placed within the real world. Finally, a cartoon dog is a Fake-Fake dog. It

143

THE REAL-FAKE QUADRANT

Real

Quadrant 1 Real-Real

Quadrant 2 Real-Fake

Real

Fake

Quadrant 3 Fake-Real

Quadrant 4 Fake-Fake

Fake

144

Graph 4. The Real-Fake quadrant, Luciano Floridi, 2018.

doesn’t exist in the real world, and it doesn’t even have the aspect of a real dog (Structure & Narrative, 2018).

What is nowadays happening is that, with technology stretching the boundaries of reality, the area of the quadrant Fake-Fake is assuming the meaning of Hyper-Real.

Contents that are artificially generated and that exist in the virtual world without having a correspondence in the real world are now becoming, as investigated before, of detailed realism, provoking confusion. The term Hyper-Real, in fact, refers to the inability to distinguish reality from a simulation of reality (cfr. chapter 5; reality, representation and mimesis). Contents that fall under the category Hyper-Real are exactly like the case of Lil Miquela, that are technically unoriginal and unauthentic as original source.

This system studied by Floridi offers, over the pure classification, a framework for reflecting on how we create concepts and ideas and how we put them into reality. Understanding the way in which objects, physical or virtual, affect our perception of reality is the first step to understand what reality means for us now. Over the specific axes, what is left to the observer is if he considers a specific content as authentic, reliable and genuine, despite of its nature. Since real and fake are becoming difficult to disassemble, they have to be considered together in order to assume meaning.

4.5

What is now considered real and what is considered fake.

“Is reality what we see, hear and feel through our organs, or is reality what we know is based on our logical reasoning?”

(Szu-Wen, 2016). Since the ancient times philosophers have been debating on what defines a reality, all of them were questioning and studying the reality, its phenomenological part, and the one resident in the consciousness. Despite all the opinions and insights gathered, not discussed in this thesis

145

for not going too far from my arguments, what was of common opinion is that reality has to exist in strict link and connection with human perception and self.

Self has to be intended as a person, agent in the society.

As Bojanic (2019) affirms: “To have agency is not only to make decisions, but also to possess certain capacities which enable social inclusion”. This means that a person’s behavior is curated by socio and cultural aspects, and that a person attitude changes in relation to contextual changes. The public sphere with which he’s interacting is able to transform and to influence actions and thoughts. And this exchange between individual and society is well visible in the thematic of synthetic media, that, without asking permissions, are changing human’s perceptions and approach towards the consumption of media and information in the virtual sphere.

This media impact means that the concept of reality must be reformulated. As Funkhouser and Shawy (2019) say, “media images present distorted views of the world. […] The ability of the media is to shape portraits of reality in ways that may in turn shape audience perception of content and reality”.

But is then a synthetic experience a distortion of reality? What synthetic experiences are, for sure, teaching us is that for defining reality is not enough to be based on what we touch or hear, and on what is tangible for us. And even just by saying hypothetically that synthetic media represent a distortion of reality, we are assuming that they are part of it. Synthetic media are embedded in our current reality; they are just qualitative different from a physical interaction or experience. Interacting with the others doesn’t mean now to communicate with someone in flesh and bones, but it can also be a visual representation without any physical presence.

We are now living in the era of post-truth, and, I believe, it is on this concept that a “new” idea of reality should be based on. Real should be referred to what has a meaning for people: even in the example of Lil Miquela, she is fake influencer with real follower and she is promoting a real and authentic engagement. Real is correlated to reliability and authenticity, to trust and truth. And so, the way of saying “seeing is believing” appears to be too limited now: we see too many things within our communications, but it’s not taken for granted that we believe to all of these. We have to learn to render the truth in order to process what we consider real.

146

Our virtual experience has to be seen as part of a novel cultural framework, which we need to redefine and rethink more comprehensively. Accepting it with fluidity and consciousness is the key for not being anchored to old preconceptions. In fact, the virtual realm is interpreted now as another cultural and social context where one has to adopt a new set of skills in order to interpret what is given by the various platforms and interactions. But still, it is important to have in mind that online spaces are considered in a much broader and less defined sense. This is particularly true because online spaces are not contextualized in space and time. This I believe is what we unconsciously see as a limit for considering this sphere as totally real. And this is what we have to overcome. Physical world and virtual one are nowadays both part of our reality, just with different set of rules and different type of representations.

The same discourse, turned upside down, works for trying to define what is then fake. Fake is not synonymous of artificial or simulated. Fake means carrier of misleading informations, not genuine contents and not reliable sources. It is an implicit condition that we are learning to identify while interacting and communicating.

While interviewing the researcher and professor Pia Tikka on the case study of Lil Miquela, I also dropped a couple of questions for extending the discussion over the general topic of reality. Following her reasoning, “I would not personally use the word ‘real’ at all. Instead, I assume, along the lines of cognitive constructivists, that humans continuously reconstruct the world” (Tikka, p.c., 2020).

Tikka introduced me the perceptual cycle model of Ulric Neisser (Graph 5), which shows how the behavior of a specific being is based on background experiences as well as on on-going engagement with his context and other entities.

Talking about real or fake is reductive, it is more a matter of analyzing and understanding the context around. When

147

THE PERCEPTUAL CYCLE MODEL

Individual Cognitive Map of the World

Directs

Modifies

Present Environment and Available Set of Informations

Possible Actions and Perceptual Exploration

Samples

148

Graph 5. The Perceptual Cycle Model, Ulric Neisser, 1976.

REAL MEANS A TRUSTWORTHY AND MEANINGFUL CONTEXT. a context is meaningful, as in the example of Lil Miquela, professor Tikka continues, “visual and behavioral discrepancies with the humans are ignored. The meaningfulness for the perceiving or interacting emerges via the embodied simulation of the human-human encounters, which allows projection of one’s experiences of humanlikeness on the character (Lil Miquela)” (Tikka, p.c., 2020). We can say, fake is something not meaningful, and does not contribute to engaging for people. According to Tikka, mass production of deep fake persons in the social media and how they are harmful is one of the contemporary issues we have to face. “The distribution of illegally modified images of politicians, especially generating fake speech, is a danger we should not ignore. General audience still has a strong trust on images, especially audiovisual media; putting words into the mouths of digitally modified politicians or opinion leaders may have a catastrophic effect on social, political, economical life” (Tikka, p.c. 2020).

For sure, anyway, there is no a precise answer for what we should consider nowadays as real or fake. The certain takeaways are that real shouldn’t be limited anymore to what is tangible or viewable, and, moreover, to what stands only in the physical realm. Out there there is much more, much more that needs to be investigated and discussed; we are in the middle of this complex phenomenon.

149

4.6 Current limitations of Synthetic Media and a look towards the future.

The concept that inevitably accompanies the development of synthetic media and new modes of expression is realism. The history of technological innovation is, in fact, presented as a continuous progression towards realism, that is seen as the ability to simulate a certain object in order to make the computer-generated image indistinguishable from its physical appearance. As reported by Manovich in “Il Linguaggio dei Nuovi Media” (2002), the search for realism means the reproduction of the phenomenological qualities of reality and of the perceptive dynamics that bring the vision closer to a natural one. The discourse concerning synthetic realism is slightly different, and it carries with it some implications.

What happens with synthetic media is that often they appear even more realistic than, for example, a traditional image or photography. In fact, images typically produced like this, result to be too clean, smooth and geometric, especially when they come in contact with a photography.

It’s like, at the moment, they are too perfect and too real.

And this is the key limit that rotates around this type of content. Synthetic media are the result of a “mechanical” view and operational and that’s the reason why it is perfect in comparison to the human vision (Manovich, 2002).

They are the view of a computer.

Let’s now consider this discourse from the point of view of people: synthetic media, in order to be effective, has to fall into a specific range of verisimilitude and realism, that lies in the middle. In fact, if a synthetic media appears to be unrealistic, the danger is that this can lead to disappointment, frustration and dissatisfaction. The observer would

150

be unhappy and not satisfied by the content he’s fruiting.

On the contrary, too much realism has been proofed to conduct to fear and anxiety, and to what is called the “Uncanny Valley” (argument deepen in chapter 6). This condition implies a sensation of discomfort while interacting with the content considered.

So, in the end, what should we do and how we should act with synthetic media? Since it is evident, and, I would add, also useless, absurd and counterproductive to outlaw synthetic media, what has to be done is to explore, engage, and put synthetic media to work to share information, ideas, and new digital expertise across languages, devices, and platforms.

And what about their future steps?

“The near future is just like the present, with added nuggets of weirdness embedded in it” (Charlie Stross, quoted in Structure & Narrative, 2018). “About 90% of the near future is already here today: the buildings, the cars, the clothing.

This is because we don’t junk our entire fleet of automobiles every time a new model appears; change is incremental, and old stuff hangs around. In addition to the 90% that’s familiar, there will be another 9% that is new but not unexpected, cheaper, flatter TV screens, better cancer treatments, bigger airliners, cars with extra cup-holders. These are the things that are trivially predictable. Finally, if you go more than 5 years out, about 1% of the world will be utterly, incomprehensibly alien and unexpected”. When I bumped into this quote within the article “For whom the computer graphics” (2018), I realized that this couldn’t have described my research better, and this question also. When talking about the future, especially the near one, we shouldn’t imagine strong changement or revolutions: more or less, probably, the majority of things will be the same, except for some triggers in specific areas that will bring an air of newness. This trigger, at the moment, for the area I decided to investigate, are synthetic media, that are shuffling the cards in the landscape fo communication and interaction.

151

Conclusion of the chapter.

The raise of synthetic media has for sure swept up our lives, the society we are living it and the interactions we have between each other. Communicating nowadays implies verification, validation of sources and control of authenticity. Each of us lives in a personal sphere of reality, that is different from the one of someone else. The concept of reality itself is not anymore easily definible, as also the concept of fake.

Each one has its own complex sphere of reality, that merges inner reality and consciousness, the external and phenomenological one, and the set of virtual experiences we live and experience. Synthetic media are upgrading our perceptions, our way of seeing the reality and our way of interacting within it. With this frame, one conclusion that this discussion left me with is how critical the idea of truth is now for our world, and that technology is rapidly changing our ability to determine this as humans.

And after this technological implication, what follows now to be analyzed is the virtual world itself, and with its experiences, being it the realm of synthetic media.

152

COMMUNICATING NOWADAYS IMPLIES VERIFICATION, VALIDATION OF RESOURCES AND CONTROL OF AUTHENTICITY.

153

THE VIRTUAL REALM.

154

05 CHAPTER FIVE

155

Introduction to the chapter.

5.1 What defines virtuality and

the metaphor of the conscious dream.

5.2 Aesthetic of virtual reality.

5.3 Reality, representation and mimesis.

5.4 Representation and design.

5.5 Ethical considerations on virtual reality.

5.6 Case: Situationism, Guy Debord and

the Drift Theory.

Conclusion of the chapter.

156

157

Introduction to the chapter.

After having analyzed Blended Reality and the concept of reality itself, it is now the moment of concentrating on the sphere of virtual reality, that is the other field of research. This world, along with the physical sphere, should not be put in hierarchical order, but just seen as different manifestation and different area of interaction for people.

In 5.1 it is investigated the virtual reality itself, with its characteristics and features; moreover, for its definition it is used the metaphor of the “conscious dream�. In 5.2 it is then deepen the aesthetic of virtuality, seen as the visual manifestation and the perceptive part of it. 5.3 is dedicated to the exploration of virtual reality intended as a form of representation, but intending it deeper than a pure simulation. Virtual reality,

158

in fact, has to be considered as a complete reality, with determinate structures and rules. In 5.4 it is then investigated the correlation that passes between representation and design field, showing that the link lies in the practice of prototyping.

The chapter goes on with the analysis of the behaviors of people regarding this sphere, with what is defined ethic (5.5). The last part of chapter 5 (5.6) is dedicated to a case study, the artistic current of Situationism, that already in the last century was making correct predictions over the society, its behavior, its structure and its alienation within communication.

159

5.1 What defines virtuality and the metaphor of the conscious dream.

The choice of dedicating an entire chapter to the virtual realm could presuppose or suggest that there is a clear difference and division between real and virtual. But if this division would have been absolute we could not speak about the compound term “virtual reality”. The fact that the virtual world is now very integrated within our reality has already been discussed at length, with multiple arguments. But then why a specific chapter on the virtual?

Having spoken in chapter 3 about Blended Reality, that regards the fusion between physical and non-physical realities, and having investigated in chapter 4 what is now meant by reality, what remains in order to have a complete picture of the various elements it is to study this new-entry part of reality, the sphere of enlargement where most of our experiences now are located.

To get in touch with the theme, a virtual experience can be described as an immersion in a world of numbers and algorithms, which manifests itself in shapes, images and sensations. The technical entity of the virtual world is well studied by Roberto Diodato that, in his book “Estetica del Virtuale”, gives a definition of what is called virtual body (or virtual object): “by virtual body I mean first of all an interactive digital image, the phenomenization of an algorithm in binary format in the interaction with a user” (2005). And this explanation implies a strict relation between what is visible and what is not. Invisible algorithms become visible when in contact with a person, in a multisensorial way. It is a system based on traduction, from a language to another, from a machine and mechanical language not directly accessible for human perceptions, to another type of expression, visual and interactive. Due to the fact of this multiple types of existence, Diodato defines the virtual body as an

160

“hybrid” entity, that manifests its being only when it is in relation with an user. The user and the virtual body, then, create a unique environment where they can interact.

Virtual reality, I believe, is a pervasive and persuasive immersion; it penetrates in us and it diffuses all around, and, in contemporary, it fascinates us with its aesthetic and manifestations. Virtuality refers to a particular state of the reality, not as something opposed to it. Virtuality is a process of actualization that is realized dynamically together with the user. Anyway, virtual doesn’t mean potential or possible (Diodato, 2014): potential indicates a possibility, an hypothetical entity that could be realized; virtual is something different, it is already there, preconstituited in its form, just waiting for people and its manifestation within the environment. It is a more complex structure.

Virtual reality is often compared to dreams, or more specifically, it is defined as a conscious dream (Revonsuo, 2015).

Within a virtual experience, the user is conscious of being in an imaginary space, where his perspective is being both manipulated and altered.

The concept of conscious dream and virtuality is correlated to the concept of internal-external. The virtual body doesn’t belong to the external world, since it doesn’t present tangible aspects. But, on the contrary, it doesn’t even belong to the inner world: the virtual experience it is not a dream of pure imagination, but it is a navigable interaction produced by technology. Virtual body is in between this, it is internal-external together, in the sense that it takes action within the personal experience of the user and so with internal perceptions, but in an external dimension from himself (Diodato, 2012).

The virtual body (Diodato, 2012) plays a role of intermediary and man-machine integration, between the mechanical world of the algorithm and the organic and psychic world of sensations and of the human mind. The virtual experience implies the idea of presence, that is the condition sine qua non for making it existing; an interactive pre-

161

sence, that intentionally can keep on the experience. And if the dream can be considered as an unilateral interaction, since the human mind is only passively living an imaginary world, the discourse for the virtual experience is different, because it implies active engagement and interaction from both parts, with a series of bounces. An interaction from the user provokes an effect within the virtual environment, that in consequence re-project an answer on the person, and so the process continues.

The virtual space is an informative and connective space, a space to communicate, a semantic and cultural space (Maldonado, 2015). The characteristic of immersion, moreover, tries to ensure that a person can experience virtuality as if he is in the everyday physical world. It is a dematerialized experience, where physical things and digital moments are colliding (Institute for The Future, 2009). Immersion in the environment and hybridization between the person’s body and the space in which he is in are, thus, the main features of this realm. Virtual reality, as said, is a space that exists only in the meeting between man and machine. And this concept leads to considering the user as an actor-spectator: he is, firstly spectator of the experience, with an established point of view for observing what is around. Moreover, he’s the one that decides which movements and which interactions to take, so he’s the actor, with an active role. It is a double “self”, the one living the experience and the one (co)producing it, together with the technology. And this, produces in the user a sort of freedom, in experiencing what he wants. Virtual behavior, so, is often a fusion of several behaviors, online and offline (Bojanic, 2019). Spectator-actor, active-passive, intimacy and spectacular, in one word: virtual.

5.2

Aesthetic of virtual reality.

We can say that our cultural period is characterized by an unprecedented scale of production and circulation, in terms of media reception and use; people interact with millions of

162

Figure 29. Visualization of 50,000 images sorted by visual characteristics shared on Instagram in San Francisco, Cultural Analytics Lab, 2013.

artifacts every day. The virtual world adds a contamination in the ways of expression, and it is developed with a multiplicity of visual results. Variability in the aspect is, for sure, a dominant thread when talking about aesthetic of virtuality. Moreover, the virtual reality, with its aesthetic, becomes able to influence and stimulate the collective imagination (CatricalĂ , 2020). In fact, even if often the accent is posed on the technological aspect, it is important to recall that what affects the people is the visual result, and the way of

163

expression of it. So this is the reason why it is important to have a look at the aesthetic of this realm.

Aesthetic refers to the investigation on the indicators perceptible and expectable through senses, of a specific current or visual expression. And as Emilio Garroni says, we intend “experience in its variety and complexity, in the case of a judgment of taste, and it is looked at from the point of view of a principle of aesthetic determination, which on the other hand cannot fail to play a necessary role in any other experience, primarily cognitive” (1992). For sure, virtuality implies new aesthetic indicators, that has to be analyzed with a new point of view, placing it within the current socio-cultural processes.

So, the main question that is in this frame, posed by Manovich in his book “AI Aesthetics” is if technology will either flatten aesthetic diversity or implement it (2020). The importance of this question resides in the fact that, if one one side technology is making the world an unique globalized village, with everything accessible for everyone (mostly), on the other side the same technology is what premises customization, differentiation and personal choice in the majority of our actions.

The language of virtuality, at the beginning, was centered on automation, while now it is becoming more influent in the cultural field, affecting cognitive processes, choices, behaviors and imaginary (Manovich, 2020). It is modeling the aesthetic paradigms, and since it is keeping on expanding, it is always more challenging to find common traits.

But, for going back to the question, the tendencies that virtual aesthetic could follow are two: or it will tends to unification of contents, or contents will be really diverse. The motivation behind this affirmation is clearly visible with examples. Let’s consider, for a moment, some photographies shared on social platforms. The behavior of the cameras used for capturing a pic are following an unified attitude of work and principles. So,

164

thinking like this, it would follow that the digital and technological methodologies are being unified. On the contrary, if we have a look at the final content, we understand that there are a series of additional functions, such as filters or edits, that confer unicity to the aspect of a specific photo.

Anyway, if we reflect deeper on what said, imagining an hypothetical world dominated by unification and reduction of modes of expression means to imagine a world where contents and artifacts are products of pure machines, without the human intervention. In this view, technology would become the content creator, autonomous from the beginning to the end of the process. At the moment there are, already, some experiments with AI that creates by itself contents, but this, as it can be seen, are mostly abstract pattern or representations, so all of them are falling in the same type of expression.

Results can be interesting, but, for sure, they are way further from the human production. Just consider the synthetic production, and the progresses it is having in its expression!

And also, always following Manovich’s reflections, “if all creative and knowledge work would be dominated by techno-

Figure 30. Radial image plot visualization of a random sample of 50,000 photos shared on Instagram in Tel Aviv, Cultural Analytics Lab, 2012.

165

logy, what would humans be left with? What would be the purpose of our existence?” (2020). So, rather than focusing on what technology could do at its extreme, perhaps it is the time to focus on ourselves and our environment, which also includes technology, but that doesn’t see it as the main actor. Reduction could, in fact, be a limit to expression, something not needed and counterproductive.

Let’s analyze now the second hypothetical tendency for aesthetic, related to diversity and heterogeneity of expression.

For sure, the interesting thing is to see how diversity is perceived from the different people, and how they express it.

There is a specific discipline, called Cultural Analytic (Manovich, 2009), that can produce interesting visualizations, qualitative over quantitative, about a particular brunch of artifacts considered. This technique permits to show all artifacts in an unique data set, by classifying them with different properties (ex. texture, colors, composition, content).

These visualizations show that, for each content, the type of expression and interaction is unique. And probably, the reason why we should be inclined in preferring this tendency is that, “what fascinates us are not the repeated patterns, but unique details and combinations” (Manovich, 2020).

This is, for example, why we don’t get bored of keeping on scrolling social media feeds; it is because the figures shown are unique, all different between them. So, this detailed mapping of the diversity of expression permits to focus on the details and on the little differences between artifacts, and on their fascination. Thus, if rigid schemes and pure technology riduce variability of expression, on the contrary, the human intervention permits to generate multiplicity and variety. Cultural analytics is a relative young field with high ambitious goal, that carries with it a new view on culture: to misure diversity over rigid schemes.

Here it comes the conclusion of our investigation on the aesthetic of virtuality: learning to look at differences without forcing them into specific categories, and accepting variety without strict models or structures. This is the new method to think and look at the aesthetic in the digital era.

166

5.3 Reality, representation and mimesis.

The sophistication of the simulation techniques of reality offers ideas for rethinking the relationship between reality and its representations. Today we often talk about the possibility of accessing virtual realities, illusory worlds in which the operator-observer becomes an actor, experiencing them as if they were real.

But, anyway, while discussing about this, one of the key points that often emerges, or that is though, is the fact of considering it as a reality that only simulates the physical reality, without having its own structure. The relationship between reality and representation is complex and ambiguous, especially in this case. It is a thematic that has always been investigated, for example also in the famous painting

by René Magritte, “Ceci n’est pas une pipe”, that with a stimulating dialogue with the observer makes a reflection over this dichotomy. But if for him representation was something detached from the reality, on another ontological level, with the socio-cultural evolution and our current situation, the discourse has now to be different. Representation, from the latin word repraesentatio, refers to “the activity and operation of characterize with figures, signs and sensitive symbols, or with various processes, even if not material, objects or aspects of reality, abstract facts and values” (Treccani, 2019). So, as it can be intended by the definition, the term doesn’t imply a pure copy of something else, but to have this “else” as a reference or focus. For sure there are some aspects that could make appear the virtual reality as a pure simulation of the material sphere: one within these is the tendency to realism. Virtual realism, as already investigated, is a clear feature of this realm; but it derives from the desire of obtaining the typical virtual immersion. Allowing people to being immersed in digital realms means to obligatory have as visual starting point the world they are used

167

Figure 31. Ceci n’est pas une pipe, René Magritte, 1964.

to see and experience, the physical one. But, if technology is used to simulated environments that are familiar to people, this doesn’t mean that here the discourse on representation is spent. In fact, this is only the appearance at first sight; when analyzing it deeply there is much more. After simulating in some aspects the physical world, the virtual one goes far from this: “it is not a simulation of physical space since the aim is not to create an illusory continuum of physical space, but to create a separate and different reality. There is no connection between the two spaces. And the fact that this virtual world is not just a simulation can also be seen from the concept that the user has some control over this reality; he can interact with it and he can modify it” (Manovich, 2002). Moreover, despite the virtual body rises as a set of algorithms and then it becomes as an illusory and multi sensorial object, it has proper and defined characteristics, as seen before, and it cannot be reduced to pure imitation.

Also Tomàs Maldonado, in his book “Reale e Virtuale” faces this theme, supporting this current of thoughts: he affirms to be skeptic in front of the people that consider virtual reality only with a symbolic nature and that neglect any type of true realism. On the contrary, he explains with ex-

168

treme lucidity the huge progresses made by visual representation, that, starting from perspective in Renaissance, are now, with the huge application of technology, able to create virtual worlds, representative of new values and contexts enhanced by the interaction of the user.

The main difference with the real world, he says, is that the virtual world is characterized by dematerialization; it is the world of the “non-things�, where we are projected for experiencing new things, sometimes even more deep then in the material reality (2015). So, for concluding this part, by intending the term representation as the process of taking elements, recombining them in a new context, making them present and actionable, we can say that virtual reality is a representation of the physical world. Just to highlight again, representation and not simulation. Or, at least, one last fast precision: of course virtual reality could be used also as a simulation of real, but, in this case, it is done like this for intentional aims, not because it is the common practice. It’s a matter of purpose, and simulation is only a specific sub-category of the huge world of representation.

But now the discourse on representation goes even further: since we said that virtuality tends to realism, and that realism is now becoming hyper-realism (chapter 4), what is now happening, as well explained by Byung-Chul Han, is a crisis of representation (2015). In fact, the digital manipulation and production brings the era of representation to completion, and it marks the end of the connection with the real world: in digital world there is no longer so much reference to the real part. Hyper reality opens up a self-referential space. It does not represent, but presents a new reality.

Virtual images are thus seen more alive, more beautiful, better than the reality perceived as imperfect.

Images offer now an optimized reality, a new one, by cancelling out the original iconic value of the image and of the simulation, as a sort of escape within the image itself. I would call it a new paradigm of representation.

169

Another concept, strictly correlated to representation, is the one of mimesis. Mimesis (Treccani, 2019) derives from the greek word ‘mimeisthai’, and it literally means imitation. Anyway, this term has been studied for long, becoming quite important in philosophical and cultural speculations.

Within the time, it acquired a positive meaning, becoming an interpretative instrument of specific contexts or environments and the interactions that constitute them.

In particular, concerning the virtual ambience, the mimetic process stands between mechanical reproduction and creative reproduction. It is the territory in which the aesthetic process of the world currently is located. It is a meaning of expression (Diodato, 2005). It is a mimetic production since aesthetically it is based on the production of reality, but in totally new forms and structures. The virtual world is both copy and original, and it does not constitute a counterfeit. Mimesis indicates the copy in the sense that it is the manifestation of what represented. In fact, in the digital realm the pure being and its image cannot be separated from each other, as in a process of absorption of the reality within the media itself (Lacarbonara, 2011).

A particular object of study, interesting within this theme, is the avatar, seen as a representation of a non-generic human body in a virtual environment. In this context, a user takes shape with it, appearing on the screen or device as a representation of himself. It is a sort of splitting of the self, where each of the two parts acts differently and in a separate way. Thus, generating a virtual reality means to produce a new environment in its own right, capable of creating perceptive experiences in the user.

A good example that could concretize a bit more the essence of this part of the chapter can be a film by Alfred Hitchcock, “Rear Window” (Italian: “La finestra sul cortile”). This movie shows the correlation between the experience of the real and the experience within the image, placing them on two different levels. The theme faced is the process of identification: Jeff, the protagonist, moves from being a passive and immobile spectator to an active actor, that starts to navigate, metaphorically, the space that surrounds him. Jeff is a photographer, that due to an accident is immobilized on a

170

Figure 32. Screenshot taken from the film “Rear Window”, Alfred Hitchcock, 1954.

wheelchair. So he spends all his days by looking outside his window with telescope, watching the courtyard around him.

The fact that he is a photographer clearly places more emphasis on his attitude to look and observe. By doing this, he gets in the safe spaces of the other people, overcoming their privacy. This is totally in line with the figure of a spect-actor in a virtual reality. Being physically distant but digitally experiencing a lot. Having access to all formations we want, while interacting within the environment. By doing this, he’s entering the imagery world and its representation, consciously acting within it. Moreover, by misunderstanding part of some scenes and events he assists, he is metaphorically able to change this reality, the virtual one, at least in his mind, figuring it in another way than the real one. Anyway, at the end of the movie a strong shock occurs: his “virtual” experience comes to an end, and he is suddenly brought back to the physical world. The rear window represents a nice view, a virtual world that shields the real one.

171

5.4

Representation and design.

All the discussions made in 5.3 are useful for reflecting upon the correlation that passes between the idea of representation and design. In fact, within design field, representation and also simulation are concepts strictly related to the practice of prototyping. The discipline of design can be oriented to these ideas for proposing solutions and future scenarios. It is a visual way for exploring future alternatives, by providing a concrete framework for work and research. The output of this activity can be images, videos, or any type of visual vision useful for supporting conversations around specific issues.

Becoming a real tool, representation can also be used in participative scenario building, with activities of co-design and open brain storming. In fact, involving people within the design process, and doing this by providing a visual context to work on is much easier and effective. They can have an impacting vision, making more simple to find strengths, weaknesses and insights.

A pioneer in this context has been Francois Jegou, that, in an interview conducted by the Desis Lab of Politecnico di Milano during this year, explains how he applies this practice in the field of social innovation. The aim, the designer continues, is to inspire innovators, designers, politicians and all stakeholders involved in a specific discussion in changing the way of living, by inventing new solutions (Jegou, 2020).

The works that Jegou with his team produces are real and complex films, based on experimentation of techniques and points of view. From rough reportages to more precise reconstructions, the spectrum of possibilities of action is wide.

Anyway, as the same Jegou claims, these representations don’t have to be too perfect, in order to enable people to interact with them (2020). Representations and prototypes are not advertisements or spots, they are something to be rei-

172

terated, re-done and changed. They are something to work on. And so, the reason why people, while being involved in a scenario building, perceive it as real is that it contains imperfections, all the imperfections of our real world. What is important, at the core of this, it just to set the scene in a way to make it credible, finding which is the best way for proposing a specific scenario or solution. So, for concluding, we can say that representation can be seen as a potential model for providing solution in the design field and in research projects, providing lucid visualizations of states that are still not concrete and real, but that are potential and possible in our next future.

5.5 Ethical considerations on virtual reality.

As noticed by Peter Lunenfeld (quoted in Manovich, 2002) Blade Runner and the Macintosh computer, released two years apart from each other, 1982 and 1984 respectively, defined the two social parameters that today, more than twenty years ago, are still governing contemporary culture, establishing what it is called the “permanent present”. The film was a dystopia that combined futurism and decadence, retro taste and urbanism, that was describing a society governed by paranoia and invasive technology. In contrast to the postmodern vision suggested by Blade Runner, the graphical user interface (GUI) popularized by the Macintosh has remained true to the modernist values ​​of clarity and functionality. Like Blade Runner, the Macintosh GUI proposed its own vision of the future, profoundly different, where the lines that unite the human being to his technological creations are clearly drawn and there is no decay.

And, nowadays, I believe this double vision can be considered as a filter for the entire culture. All culture is filtered through digital experiences, with a human-machine interfa-

173

ce that pervades every aspect of our daily life. Within this, we are struggling and wandering between extreme functionality and dystopian scenario. According to this view, it can now be discussed some ethical aspects related to the current situation, that are clearly situated between this two parameters. Ethic in this chapter is intended as the try to understand some good and bad implication of this frame, what we could morally do and how we should act. It considers the human behavior within virtual world; it doesn’t consider moral aspects of the environment itself, such as privacy issues or transparency, since they have already been discussed while presenting the current socio-cultural frame.

It is a focus on the experience lived by people, rather than on the external context.

There is no doubt that media have power and authority in the modern society. People around the globe, at all economic and social levels, consume multiple forms of media daily. So, ethic should set guidelines, rules, norms, codes and principles to make moral decisions. Anyway, people should not be forced to do so because ethics is applied voluntarily (Khan, 2011). It should be something that we spontaneously want to embrace, because we feel it is the right approach for being inserted in our complex reality.

The virtual world is an open and comprehensive system, by intending system as a plurality of elements that are correlated, so that they constitute together a global unity, and that this is governed by rules and normatives (Diodato, 2014). And it is the idea of correlation the key aspect: correlation can not be interpreted within itself, but only when in contact with other elements; in this case, people. In order to evaluate the digital realm, we have to look at people.

The phenomenological nature of the virtual body, that we already discussed, has a fundamental implication: it shows that the new data-based technologies are beyond man, and the human being reconfigures himself through them when being in contact. Technologies are neither tools or products, but they are autonomous and hidden flows that structure and deconstruct the human. We are not the ones who use digital technology; in a sort, we are living with them.

From this, we get that the magnificence of technology is an

174

ethical issue, since it keeps on working independently on us, but that then provokes side effects. Over this, another aspect that is interesting to analyze, and that I believe is felt a lot at the moment, is the influence that an environment can have over psychological states. This phenomenon has been studied by Gutenberg and Metzinger, in a publication for Frontiers, an online journal (2016).

They call this “Plasticity in the Human Mind”, intending that human behavior can be strongly influenced by external factors while the subject is totally unconscious of this influence. “Behavior is context sensitive and the mind is plastic, which is to say that it is capable of being continuously shaped and re-shaped by causal factors” (Gutenberg, Metzinger, 2016).

This means that our environment, including technology and other humans, has an unconscious influence on our behavior. The way in which our behavior is sensitive to environmental features is especially relevant here in this frame, since the digital world introduces a completely new type of environment, a new cognitive and cultural niche, which we are now constructing for ourselves as human species. This, ethically, means that we should promote more consciousness over human vulnerability. Anyway, over the implications that virtual reality could imply, it is really difficult to set specific limitations of action within this context, since experiences are inherently personal, and personally lived. The subjectivity of the virtual world implies that it is our job to seek the meaning and density of the experience without forcing it, but knowing what we want and where we are going, without exceeding. We are now called to redefine the social space around us and ourselves, as well as the implications of this, by considering them in harmony with our person. Virtual world is full of opportunities and risks, and this requires dialogue and negotiation within the experiences we live.

175

5.6 Case: Situationism, Guy Debord and the Drift Theory.

Wrapping together all what said about reality and technology till this point, we can now move to the analysis of an artistic movement of the last century, that was already foreseeing, in a provocative and revolutionary way, some aspects of the current situation. It is the movement of Situationism, a current inspired by Dadaism and Surrealism that has been active in Europe in the 60s, aspiring to important social and political transformations.

The reason I am recalling it in this pages is that the though of Guy Debord, one of the founder, more than a sort of prophecy, can result extremely actual, and also it could work as a sort of inspiration for how to act within our reality. Moreover, “the critical Situationist theory presents itself, decades later, as something that must be rethought and interpreted without nostalgic or commemorative intentions.�

(Stanziale, 1998). Situationism can be something to start from nowadays. The reasonings of Guy Debord and his fellows starts with the assumption that society, with its velocity of changes and complex strategies, provokes disorientation and fragmentation in people, substituting conscious action with alienation. So, with humans moved from this sentiment, the reality became the society of the spectacular, the place for the representation over the being. And the reduction of the lived experience to representation opens to a sort of vision of virtuality, in which the appearance goes over the concrete facts. Guy Debord, for screaming out loud his thoughts, produces in first person artifacts such as visual essays, assembled by using different parts of advertisings or movies of that time, by decontextualizing and recontextualizing, for giving a visual and more impressive discussion of the Situationist philosophy.

Guy Debord and the other situationists explains, by reclaiming the trivialization of real life, that it is necessary to react in front of all of this. The first technique of reaction

176

exposed by the International Situationist is the detournment (Perniola, 2005), concept seen as a throw-in and manifestation of creativity. It is the construction of a new personal order after the devaluation of the previous one, the one of alienation and fragmentation. The detournment is actuated with the displacement and decontextualization of elements, and the reassembly of these in new ways.

Over this, the aspect that I consider mind blowing, and useful also nowadays, is the technique of the dérive (Perniola, 2005). Guy Debord defines the dèrive (English: Drift) as “a mode of experimental behavior linked to the conditions of urban society: a technique of rapid passage through varied ambiances” (1958). It is an unplanned journey through a landscape, usually urban, in which participants drop their everyday relations and let themselves be drawn by the attractions of the terrain and the encounters they find there.

It implies the construction of situations, a different arrangement of reality and the drift as a spatial-emotive play that sees a creative use of contexts and environments. Detournment and dérive are ways for “letting yourself go to the solicitations of the terrain and the experiences that correspond to it” (Debord, 1958).

Bringing this discourse back to the actuality, Situationism shows how human existence has always been realized on several parallel plans: illusory, imaginary and alternative plans, which are contexts where temporality and spatiality are revisited, and the eternal environment of physical and tangible reality. The fact that, as humans, in one way or another, we always tend, in different historical periods, to construct alternative realities to the material one in which we are anchored indicates a need for continuous exploration and also for evasion, for enlargement of our perspectives. Situationism is an active critique for not falling victim to frustration and aberration, and, on the contrary, for breaking the daily life and and going beyond it.

The Drift Theory and the Detournment are, for the situationists, practices for the trivialization of the art, intending this term in its wide sense, seeing it as something not detached from the reality, but totally inserted in it. Following

177

this, these practices have to be used actively from the people, in order to regain possession of the expressive forms and insert them into everyday life. Specifically concerning our age, all of this can be interpreted as an approach applicable to dismantle the rhetoric and mechanisms of the media of our time, in order to rediscover their authenticity, naturalness and normality. Another interesting point that this sociocultural current raises is the difference between to live and to survive. Globalized societies, as we said, cause alienation, and this has two different ways of escaping: or to accept it passively, or to react against it. Living means reacting, while surviving means staying still.

And from here also it derives the name Situationism, that, to the passivity of existence substitute the creation of situations, intended as moments of life, responding to personal desires and actively created. Situationism gives lot of importance to experiences lived at personal level, in the subjective sphere, in a state of continuous flux of permanent research.

Within the artistic and cultural landscape, one of the supporter of the Situationism is Ugo La Pietra. Critical observer of reality, architect and designer 360°, La Pietra has always defined himself as a “researcher in the visual arts system” (Festivaletteratura, 2017). All his production has always had a twist recalling the disruption of balance: random and dense signs, aimed at the organized structure of society or parts of it, to suggest and build awareness. Moreover, his famous “Living is being everywhere at home”, motto borrowed from the same Situationism, shows the strict collaboration between the artist and the movement, that also gave birth to acts and objects dedicated to the relationship between public and private space. Also, the movie “The reappropriation of the city” (1977) reveals a series of practices for becoming aware of urban space. For concluding, we can say that, nowadays, we are not in the same alienation of the 60s, but still, we are suffering it. This is a theme that is affecting the human mind from the last century almost: even if it is changing in

178

Figure 33. Paris et l’agglomeration parisienne, Paul-Henry Chombart, 1952.

according to the context, it is always present. And we have to react against it. Before the unreality was to consider the world as the world of spectaculum, now the world of information. We are in possession of all informations we want and we need, even too much, and this provokes an unbalanced situation. At the age of Situationism, people had to react over the fragmented society recurring to the Drift theory and the detournment; now, with the extreme reality of this world, we are escaping in its representation, in virtual worlds.

179

Conclusion of the chapter.

With the analysis of situationism chapter 5 comes to end, having brought a series of considerations and clarifications on virtual reality, a theme that is often ambiguous and blurred for the people. On the contrary, the consciousness that is something in which we are in, that we experience and, moreover, that we enable through a set of interactions, is the first step for understanding it and for acting in it ethically.

No pre-determined limits can, at the moment, be posed on this fruition, since experiences are personal and they assume different values in diverse contexts and situations. But, as Francesco Bonami said in one of his books, “we can rely on building the future on all virtual realities and artificial intelligences we want, just remember that their surnames are Artificial and Virtual for a good reason: they all have to do with reality� (2019).

Now, at this point of my research thesis, after having investigated all the aspects that characterize and that determine our society, it is the moment to discuss in deep the communication that passes not between people, but between humans and machines, intending them as another type of organisms, technological organisms.

180

THE SUBJECTIVITY OF THE VIRTUAL WORLD IMPLIES THAT IT IS OUR JOB TO SEEK THE MEANING AND THE DENSITY OF THE EXPERIENCE.

181

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN MAN AND MACHINES, OR “TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANISMS”.

182

06 CHAPTER SIX

183

Introduction to the chapter.

6.1 The relation with emotions.

6.2 Living with robots.

6.3 Enabling enactive systems.

6.4 Too much similarity means anxiety:

the Uncanny Valley.

6.5 Ethical doubts.

6.6 Potential dystopian futures.

6.7 The Futures Cone and further

considerations.

Conclusion of the chapter.

184

185

Introduction to the chapter.

The objective of this chapter is to illustrate the correlation that passes between man and technological organisms, in particular social robots. More specifically, the intent is to find a common ground and answers within the affective dialogue that incessantly takes place between us, and between us and the environment.

The chapter opens (6.1) not with an analytical discussion over robots and AI, but going straight to the heart of the discussion: the relation with emotions. For explaining it it is used a film by Netflix, “Her� (Jonze, 2013) that celebrates the love story between a guy, Theodore, and an operative system, Samantha. In 6.2 and in 6.3 are then investigated a couple of situations, respectively the theory of emotional coordination and the theory of enactive systems, that demonstrate how ad-

186

vanced are progresses in this context, and that illustrate brand new type of visions of interactions between human organisms and tech ones. The part 6.4 is dedicated to a phenomenon related to anthropomorphic robots, the Uncanny Valley (Mori, 1970), following which too much similarity in the appearance provokes anxiety and fear on people.

As any of the big themes discussed in this thesis, it is important then to analyze implications on ethical and personal point of view (6.5). The chapter goes on with a dystopian part, that tries, supported by the case study Black Mirror, to imagine a society that will be disrupted by invasive and dangerous technologies, where the human will become only a subservient (6.6). Lastly, the theory of the Futures Cones (Structure&Narrative, 2016) and other considerations permit us to be reported on our real world, analyzing what is possible to do for acting correctly in this situation (6.7).

187

6.1

The relation with emotions.

CATHERINE So are you seeing anybody?

THEODORE Yeah, I am, for the last few months. That’s the longest case I’ve wanted to be with anybody since we split up…

CATHERINE So, what’s she like?

THEODORE Well, her name is Samantha, and she’s an operating system.

She’s really complex and interesting.

I mean it’s only been a few months, but— CATHERINE Wait. You’re dating your computer?

It does make me sad that you can’t handle real emotions.

THEODORE They are real emotions. How do you know— Theodore stops himself.

What has been reported here above is an extract from the Netflix movie “Her”, written and directed by Spike Jonze in 2013. The film has won in 2014 an Oscar for the most original screenplay. And this is not a surprise: the film, set in Los Angeles in 2020, is a masterpiece of dialogue, images and content, thanks to an amazing script. The original writing is 105 pages long and sometimes repetitive, as are the inner movements of the protagonist, Theodore, obsessed with his fatigue in experiencing emotions, feelings and love. “Scrolling through the lines, the neurotic rhythm of sentences and thoughts immediately emerges, typical of those flounders in life” (Viglino, 2016).

The initial setting is particular: unknown space. Life, existence, thoughts, conflicts originate in an unknown and anonymous space, without connotations, which slowly takes shape, dimension and significance from life experiences. The whole film is a sort of close-up on his being or, perhaps it

188

would be better to say, of his being in multiple and alternate realities. The dialogue reported before focus on the central aspect of the film: the relation with personal emotions.

Theodore has this discussion with his ex wife, and from this it emerges his struggle and difficulty in having last longing relationships with human beings. So, from here, he undertakes a love story with an operative system, Samantha, that seems to be perfect for him. Of course, because it has been programmed for him. But Theodore goes over this, and transposes real emotions on her. Her, that is the exact title of the movie. And this name means that, as seen in the extract reported below, Samantha doesn’t belong to someone, but belongs to herself.

THEODORE Yeah, it’s nice to meet you, too. What should I call you?

Do you have a name?

Beat.

FEMALE OS VOICE Yes. Samantha.

THEODORE Really? Where did you get that name?

SAMANTHA I gave it to myself.

All the movie plays around the thematics of fiction, appearance, illusion, deception and emotional manipulation. Samantha evolves during the movie, developing her own consciousness, by studying and analyzing Theodore’s personality. She knows exactly what he wants. Her voice, answers, phrases and reactions are all modulated on Theodore. So, by doing this, Samantha, more then an object with interiority, becomes a projection of a human self into another external device.

This movie shows an extreme example of communication between man and machine, something that nowadays is becoming a theme complex and actual. It is a film able to give a clear image of this frame, together with a critical thought: it concerns the correlation between man and machine, the difficulties in communication, together with the alienation

189

of ideas and emotions. The starting point is might that the problem is not the technology itself, but the use that people make of it. And the all-round use that Theodore makes of it, I think, should be put back within limits. The character proposed by Spike Jonze is a true archetype of modern man, a sort of spokesperson for a collective morality, oriented towards innovation and individualism. Her is nothing more than a portrait of our contemporaneity.

But, moving further from the movie, how is it possible that something like this happens?

The exchange of levels between reality and virtuality permits to relate to something immaterial, but in the physical world. Body extensions, such as the earphone used by Theodore in the movie, are the new sensory set that we need for interacting with these organisms. As sort of intermediators, they allow us to be in contact with technological entities equipped with an own intelligence, that, anyway, is really difference from our intelligence. The technological, or artificial, intelligence, in fact, is pure mechanical, trained in according to specific parameters and it is simulated on the referent person or, anyway, on who is interacting with it. Simulation goes over the mere actions the device has to follow; “the goal of simulating refers to psychological states, behavior, motivations and emotions� (Manovich, 2002). And this is the reason why, with our subconscious and emotive part, we can perceive them as really close to us, as, in a way, they are comprehending us and our living.

This is the crucial point that surrounds the complex relation and communication between man and machine, since it is affecting not only rationality and cognitive processes, but it is touching our deeper thoughts and emotions.

So, in conclusion, relating with artificial organisms means not only to deal with personal sphere of sentiments, but also with the reflection of this in another device, that reinforces what we do, what we think, and that supports us in the decisions we make.

190

Figure 34. Screenshot taken from the movie “Her�, Spike Jonze, 2013. It is the moment when Theodore is installing Samantha.

6.2

Living with robots.

From what expressed till now, it is clear that AI, acronym of artificial intelligence, is taking lot of importance nowadays, since its progresses are getting enormous, and its work and role start to be compared with humans’ one.

In particular, newspapers, magazines, books and all news sources we have around continually ask themselves if AI and its epochal process will dominate or save man, and, more specifically, if it will become a shoulder or a substitute for humans. In fact, man, in the face of the majesty of technological processes, tends to be seen as weaker. However, it is common sense to think that intelligent technologies cannot truly understand the world of humans and its meanings yet.

It is still unclear whether this will happen or not. Even if this

191

theme is still wide and uncertain, some new perspectives of useful interaction between man and machines has been studied. I’m going to analyze two of them, that regards two different aspects but that together can frame better this discussion.

The first one is a theory, within the social robotic, called “emotional coordination” proposed by Dumouchel and Damiano (2019), that, by starting from a deep analysis of robots and their attitude, brings a novel perspective of exchange and reciprocal growth between man and machines. The second one, instead, regards the already mentioned theory of enabling systems, studied by the researcher and teacher Pia Tikka (2011).

Answering to the question “what is a robot and what defines it?” is really difficult, since at the moment the spectrum of robots is wide, and a lot of differences, technical and other, occur within them. Generally, “the initial idea of robot was the one of an artificial worker, that has its own source of energy, that works instead of a human and it is at least partially autonomous” (Dumouchel, Damiano, 2019). So, since the idea of robot is not well defined, it is consequently difficult to understand when we are interacting with a simply technical object, or with a robotic, then intelligent, device. Also Lev Manovich expresses an important point about the intelligence in robots, affirming that the interesting reflection on why some devices are considered intelligent and others not lies in the fact of the impossibility of giving an unanimous definition of intelligence. Moreover, he talks about the “AI effect” (Manovich, 2020), referring to the phenomenon whereby when we understand how a machine does something intelligent, it ceases to be considered intelligent. So, full of ambiguities, the landscape of robotic appears to be blurred and not well defined. And this is probably caused by the fact that this thematic is recent and still emerging.

Anyway, within this frame, following the current culture, it is like at the moment there are only two possibile direction for the evolution of robots: either they will rebel to us, or they will continue to work for us, as sort of slaves. In the first hypothesis technologies are seen as the premonitors of an

192

inhuman future, of a world totally alienated and devoid of identity.

They will have the supremacy. In the second scenario robots are seen as something deceptive and false, as entities totally controlled and activated by someone external, that are only reproducing actions without growth. The two visions schematically sketch out two different ways of imagining how humans would be able to live with robots in the future.

The theory of Dumouchel and Damiano goes over this double ramification, and it offers a third, more solid view within this frame.

The two researchers think that our relationship with robots and technology can be thought and structured in a richer and more complex way, more measured and less distressed. We can try to find learning companions in robots, artificial agents capable of supporting us in processes of self-awareness and growth. This theory falls under the discipline of the social robotic, that proposes to create technical objects of a particular type: artificial social agents destined to be integrated into the fabric of our relationships. This theory moves from the recognition of the plurality of possible ways of living with robots. And this corresponds precisely to the variety of robotic agents existing today, which implement our lives in the most varied ways.

Proposing a theory of integration and growth between man and machines means firstly to know the personal self and the others, and to understand how the human mind works, especially while interacting with technological organisms (Dumouchel, Damiano, 2019). This is a complex experiment, which concerns not only the robot, but also its human partner, the characteristic traits and the quality of the social relations involved, as well as the very nature of social relations. The first step in order to make this possible is to abandon the classic idea of emotions perceived as something private, internal and discrete. The focal point is that emotions do not depends only on the person, but also on the environment in which he is acting. So, cognitive systems that emerge in different environments provoke an heterogeneity of cognitive organisms.

And, if environments indicates the social area where we are acting and interacting, we can say that human mind comes essentially with a social nature. So, from this is understandable the choice of viewing robots as artificial social agents. The emotions are seen as an expressive and relational process, located also in an

193

Figure 35. Screenshot taken from the movie “Ex-Machina”, Alex Garland, 2015. The young programmer Caleb is testing if the humanoid has a true intelligence and self-awareness. He meets the female-looking robot and he starts to talk to her, being surprised for how smart, sensitive and human-like she can be.

194

external and public dimension. More specifically, “emotions are salient moments and points of balance in a continuous process of interaction” (Dumouchel, Damiano, 2019).

The result of all of this is that organisms are thought as something with an extended mind, that goes over the brain by expanding itself in the external environment, waiting for interactions. A mind that emerges from the interconnection of different cognitive systems. With a perspective re-centering, the meeting between man and machines can becomes a co-evolution process, an inter individual dynamics through which the organisms involved mutually define their own emotional states, reciprocal interactions and also their relation with the environment. In one word, the theory can be synthesized with empathy: syntonization between organisms, this is the sum up of the theory of Dumouchel and Damiano.

For concluding this part, it is important to highlight that social robots are both tools for knowing our social universe and tools for its transformation, because by introducing these artificial social creatures into our world we will discover it more deeply and learn to know it better.

THE MEETING BETWEEN MAN AND MACHINES BECOMES A CO-EVOLUTION PROCESS, AN INTER INDIVIDUAL DYNAMIC THROUGH WHICH THE ORGANISMS INVOLVED MUTUALLY DEFINE THEIR OWN EMOTIONAL STATES.

195

6.3

Enabling enactive systems.

Man is made of symbols, four letters A C G T, that , standing for the chemicals adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G), and thymine (T), constitute our genetic code. Robots are made up of only two, 1 and 0. A famous passage of Blade Runner 2049 shows in this way the radical different nature between man and robots. But, as we have seen before, communication between these organisms is not impossible; on the contrary, the theory of emotional coordination showed how it would be possible to think robots more genuinely, not only as simulated objects.

Another work that has been done within this frame of coupling human with tech devices, in particular concerning ava-

196

Figure 36. Personal Screenshot taken from the film “Blade Runner�, Ridley Scott, 1982.

tars, is the one of Pia Tikka, more specifically what she calls “enactive systems” (Graph 6). This view, firstly, goes over the simplistic and classic division of man and machine as two separate systems in technological interaction, but, on the contrary, it sees them as an unified element. Traditionally, the human agent is regarded as the user and possessor of a specific tool or device that utilizes it with conscious actions and mediations. In this new frame, the human agent is a participant, as well as it is the technology part. Both of them constitute together a two-way system, in which the technology is considered as an intelligent concept, not only mechanical. “The person is living within the system, not only using it” (Kaipainen, Ravaja, Tikka, Vuori, Pugliese et al. 2011).

When I read about this case, I thought about what previously expressed by Marshall Mc Luhan that was seeing technology as extensions of man. But, in this case, the discussion is going even further, since technology and man becomes a dynamic couple, in constant and mutual interaction. The technological device is not anymore as the medium and the conveyor of a message, but is now much more.

The method used to study this particular approach falls under what is called experimental design, that merges theory with common practices. By putting a specific audience in front of a tool or an installation, the enactive system focused on going over the explicit and conscious control of the interface from people. The key point of this system, in fact, lies in the fact that a person, while involved in a technological interaction, has unconscious reactions and psychological states that can be found out only by connecting the person with the digital part. By connecting these parts, to the user’s uncontrolled reactions are corresponding equal responses by the system, that modifies itself according to the human status.

So, real time reconfiguration and content re-assembling are the consequences and the compensation, in the interaction, of the measurements of the human participant’s emotions. An example to concretize this theory is “Obsession”, an interactive installation by Pia Tikka and her crew. “In it, the bio-emotional enactment of the spectator controls the narrative flow, which, in turn, influences the bio-emotional enactment”.

(Kaipainen, Ravaja, Tikka, Vuori, Pugliese et al. 2011).

197

This theory, however, is not a futuristic and view far from us, it just implies a reconsideration of the role of technology. Probably, with all this consideration done till now in this chapter, I think we should enlarge the idea of what is defined “anthropological design”, since the design only for humans in themselves starts to appear limited and confined. All this can be considered as an invitation to change attitude to the project and to give shape to new contexts.

It is clear that human is not anymore closed in himself and only with his species. Experiments and progresses for highlighting the anthropocentric perspective and the predominant role of people, at the end, caused the raise of new type of intelligences, that are now facing the human one. But this, instead to be seen as a challenge of power, has to be seen as an opportunity.

198

Graph 6. Simplified view of how it works the installation “Obsession”, Pia Tikka, 2005. Personal adaptation and visualization, 2020.

ENACTIVE TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION

viewing

real time montage presenting

film clip repository

recombining

sensor measurement

Interpretation Toolbox

psycho-physiological experience

199

6.4 Too much similarity means anxiety: the Uncanny Valley.

Let’s move now back to technological devices, robots and avatar, and let’s see the flip side of the coin of this situation.

In fact, we have explored some potential and interesting directions where the human-machine communication could go, but it is not as simple and smooth. In particular, the present of robotic devices can provokes anxiety and fear to people, and it can be considered in a negative way. A famous study in this regard has been done by Masahiro Mori in 1970, but only recently it is assuming importance in analyses. This study has never been demonstrated, so technically it is still an hypothesis, but, anyway, it is considered really useful to find a common ground for facing the controversy in social robots.

Masahiro Mori is the father of the “Uncanny Valley”, a phenomenon according to which “the more robots resemble humans, the easier and more comfortable we find it to interact with them, but only until a certain degree of similarity is achieved.

Once this limit is exceeded, the similarity turns out to be both excessive and insufficient” (Samuel, 2019). The initial upward trend of the curve (Graph 7) indicates the growing ease of our relationships with robots. But suddenly, the curve reverses its trajectory. This is where these tech objects look too much like us humans and, at the same time, they don’t look like us enough. A notable but imperfect similarity, which, hypothetically, will be canceled out when they will become totally indistinguishable from the human being. But, in your opinion, what could happen if we accidentally touch a robot in the belief that it is a human? Surprise? Amazement? Fear? Anguish? And even if, as mentioned previously, this theory is widely used by experts in this field, the issue open concerns precisely the exact point where the feeling of familiarity with robots becomes uneasy and distress. Mori tries to explain this phenomenon saying that probably the reason why, at one point, we feel fear is the anxiety of substitution.

200

Familiarity

Humanoid Robot

Uncanny Valley

Human Likeness

It is, in fact, plausible to think that the real reason we try to make machines that look like us is that they will never be us.

This is because we want them to be different; in some ways more efficient than us, in other cases worse. But, in any case, different from us. The hypothesis that they can become like us, acting as human beings, involves unpredictability and instability. A small parenthesis in this regard concerns virtual bodies: these, having no physical or three-dimensional presence, do not cause any uncanny valley, being locked up in a reality that is only virtual (that’s why, for example, the presence of Lil Miquela does’t disturb us).

Interacting with the others is not easy, neither immediate, especially if the “other” works totally different from us, with other rules and policies. This theme has been faced also in a theatrical representation during the last edition of Fog, the seasonal edition of performing arts at Triennale Milano. The

Graph 7. Uncanny Valley phenomenon, Masairo Mori, 1970.

201

Berlin collective Rimini Protokoll, with a performance called “Uncanny Valley”, investigates uncomfortable and original paths, also paying attention to the reactions of the public, involved as a spect-actor within a show, in an incredibile opportunity for dialogue.

“If you came here to see an actor, this is the wrong place.

If you’re here for something authentic, it’s still the wrong place. This is what at a certain point the figure on stage says; it is an anthropomorphic robot, which will hold the whole show.” (Tentorio, 2019).

But let’s take a step back: the protagonist, Thomas Melle, is a successful German writer who has decided to undergo an interesting experiment: to create the robotic double of himself.

And now he uses it to talk about his experience in this show.

The android on stage is his faithful reproduction: shoulders, arms, fingers and human voice. But, if under the silicone of the fake leather it preserves the author’s expressions and an incredible resemblance, the cable that protrudes from the nape of the neck reminds us of its essence as a technological artifact (Pocosgnich, 2019). So, all the reflection gravitates around the problem of identity, the relation between robots and humans and, lastly, the issue copy-original. The back of the skull uncovered, with the electronic circuits exposed is what measures the distance between man and machine at the moment; if this expedient wouldn’t have been adopted, probably, the audience would have fallen in the already explained Uncanny Valley.

6.5 Ethical doubts.

The introduction of social robots into society, as we seen, has sparked controversy, with concerns originating mostly in ethical and personal grounds. Among the main concerns, the most common questions regard how much space these robots

202

Figure 37. Uncanny Valley Performance, Gabriela Neeb, 2019.

should occupy in our world and what is the best way to design them in order to be fully accepted by the majority of people.

In a paper wrote by Janina Luise Samuel, from the University of Stirling, it is explained that the human response towards robots and their acceptance is not universal, and that it varies according to certain parameters (2019): for example, people of different gender respond differently to gendered robots; a more positive response is obtained when the robot is more similar to oneself (Crowelly, 2009). Also differences in cultural background impact on the perception of robots; and these social conventions and cultural differences are still an important factor to be understood for a correct design. Lastly, also a different exposure to robots leads to a diverse approach with them: for example, a person that is surrounded with a robots by an early age is more likely to have a positive attitude then someone more adult that meets for the first time one of these.

203

Another issue that raises from the discussions made is the problem of identity: especially in the twentieth century, a lot of reflections made have often focused on the problematic nature of the self and the interaction between multiple identities. And now, with the advent of robots, this problem gets even more complicated. Answers related to this are still wide, different and a bit unclear. An interesting example, even if extreme, is the one of Hiroshi Ishiguro, professor of robotic, that thinks that a robot identical to the personal self is useful and it is an extension of the personal consciousness and physicality.

It is an extension that permits him to be in multiple places simultaneously and that, one day, will carry on the life for him, when Hiroshi’s death will occur (Re, 2018). And this is only one example within this complex frame; for sure, it doesn’t exist a single answer or solution, but what is needed is the continuous research.

The next ethical issue concerns the autonomy and the freedom of action given to robots: we, as humans, want robots to have no weaknesses or imperfections in carrying out their tasks; however, as far as autonomy is concerned, we want these robotic agents “to be and not to be autonomous” (Dumouchel, Damiano, 2019). A certain level of autonomy, in fact, is necessary for these devices to be able to perform the specific functions for which they has been produced. However, too much autonomy causes humans to fear a potential replacement. A too high autonomy means danger, since it implies the possibility for the robot to modify certain rules and limits that bind it. The general anxiety of people is that robots could substitute what they do, or even, do more. On the contrary, the authority of the action should remain on the people; from this it can be understood that autonomy is not only an intrinsic property, but it derives also from the context the robot is inserted in.

The last issue faced is the one of authenticity within the relations between man and machines: in fact, we said that the direction robotic is undertaking is to try to involve robots in processes of growth and co-evolution with people, in an emotional exchange. But, it is then automatic to interrogate the authenticity of these emotions. Are these synthetic emotions authentic? How can empathy be transmitted by an artificial device? For sure this type of relation implies new relational shapes and methods, with a set of specifics that are different

204

THE GENERAL ANXIETY OF PEOPLE IS THAT ROBOTS COULD SUBSTITUTE WHAT WE DO, OR EVEN, DO MORE. WE WANT THEM TO BE AND NOT TO BE AUTONOMOUS.

205

from the ones of a man-man conversation. But, even if it is clear that this frame requires reflection and clarifications, it is not necessary even to rush for having answers. Probably also time is needed, time for practice and experiments, time for trying out various possibilities without closing a priori some paths. The creations of these robots should, in fact, be seen as a possibility for enriching our condition and the plurality of actors around us. All these ethical points are challenging the role of foreground that humans have in the world at the moment, and, that, probably should be revisited. This does’t mean that our world will be surrounded with robots or only invasive technologies, but we have to take conscious that they exist, and, more specifically, that they are products of our hands and minds.

So, within this ethic frame proposed, or better, “synthetic ethic” (Samuel, 2019), since it is inherent to co-evolution of human and artificial actors, the key point is to try to integrate their presence with our world, but limiting potential consequences, sometimes, unpredictable, of their actions.

Also lack of knowledge is one of the first things to fight: in order to accept their introduction in a genuine way, it is important to have a basic understanding on the theme. More specifically, the introduction of specific robots into social contexts should be accompanied by clear communication about their benefits and deficits.

Their impact into society is an ongoing debate, especially because we consider them too similar to us for certain aspects, and this, as said before, makes scare. But processes of anthropomorphism and humanization are tendencies that from long times ago have distinguished the human genre and keep on distinguishing it. As Janina Samuel says (2019): “anthropomorphism is the human tendency to ascribe human-like features to nonhuman entities, while humanization refers to a psychological state in which a robot is perceived as a person, not just described as having human-like traits”. And this is what is happening nowadays: not only anymore devices with human traits and a setting far from us, but a complex and intelligent system that is able to communicate and have interactions with us.

206

This is an ongoing debate on how developments in this field could go, either harmless and interesting, or problematic and potentially dangerous. Anyway, what is clear is that this situation is marking the beginning of a side by side relationship between man and other type of beings.

Figure 38. Hiroshi Ishiguro and his android twin, Ishiguro Lab, Osaka University, 2015.

Following pages.

Figure 39. Personal Screenshot taken from the film “Blade Runner�, Ridley Scott, 1982.

207

208

209

6.6

Potential dystopian futures.

From what expressed till now, it is automatic to think a possible future scenario dominated by angst technologies.

Futuristic dystopian futures are, nowadays, object of narration and also weird fascination. The same film Blade Runner 2049, or also the previous Blade Runner, tells the story of a future world, always dark, rainy and depersonalized, where the war between technologies and man is on going.

This scenario allows reflections over science and technique, seen as a medium for replacing human activities and lacks. Born as “natural” prosthesis and originally connected with the human nature, they will become, talking dystopian, an inevitable center of gravity around which everything will revolve. Where man, from creator, will become only a pawn in the game.

Probably, the most exhaustive example of dystopian future, for depth of narration and completeness is Black Mirror, a Netflix series originated in 2011. Black Mirror is a science fiction series about a near-future in which new technologies reap terrible unintended consequences on our lives; they strip away personal independence, undermining social and cultural values and sometimes leading to uncontrollable consequences. The series is, for sure, a revelatory of the human side full of fear for technologies and algorithms. “It is like humanity has developed tools powerful enough to destroy itself” (Hussain, 2018): the intrinsic logic of these new techs lies in the fact that their strength can bring to the destruction of their owners. Moreover, social media and the digital realm are accentuating all of this, creating an environment of increasing pessimism. The provocations offered by Black Mirror, I believe, are useful to reflect on how we got to this point. In fact, we already have sacrificed much of our personal autonomy to technologies. Till which point are we going to go?

Black Mirror shows, in concrete, examples of technologies that we would never see in real life: examples between these are devices for controlling senses, recording life, bringing

210

back death people or for having a remotely controlled consciousness. All of these, super invasive, enter the most private area of human being, taking control over it.

Talking about my personal experience, during my path of study, at the first year of my Master Degree in Product Service System Design, I had the opportunity to work exactly on this thematic. More specifically, the idea of the course “Visualization & Prototyping” was to start from an episode of Black Mirror, and transforming its dark scenario into a light scenario. This implied a revisitation of the story of the episode, of its narration and a new interpretation of the role of technology. From something angst and dystopian, it had to become something useful, or, anyway, more harmonic for the humans. Me and my group worked on the episode 2x01 “Be Right Back”, that was facing the tough theme of relationship between life and death.

The original episode, to overcome the death of a close person, develops the implementation of an avatar that mirrors the lost person; but if physically it totally reflects the original person, on a psychological level thoughts and actions are recreated in a limited way, and, consequently, the avatar the real people is interacting with gets annoyed and unsatisfied quite soon. The general result doesn’t help to overcome and recover from an important lost in a deep way; and if this is the starting point, with “Through Me” the thematic is seen with another perspective. With this service, a person can be in contact again with the presence of someone that has recently been lost, by the stimulation of the five sense. What stands at the core of this service is a virtual yet immersive connection that recreates sensations and emotions, and recall experiences. The physical presence is eliminated: everything happens in the mind of the person using the service. Here the full project: http://www. ilariacastelli.com/throughme.html The analysis of strength and weak points of this scenario permitted us to overcome the limited dystopian view we had at the beginning, by opening up new possibilities of interpretation and action.

This is what I think should be, in a more broad and clearly more complex way, applied to the general cultural situation.

211

Without a strong socio-cultural context that determine what should be invented and why, we risk only to undermine our personality and our values in the face of powerful new technologies that operate according to their own logic. In this regard, in 1992, before the spread of the internet, American cultural critic Neil Postman said: “Rather than creating inventions to fulfill our needs, we might soon begin adapting ourselves to meet the needs of our inventions” (Postman, 1992, quoted in Carella, 2019).

This series portrays how, in our optimistic belief that our technology would have conducted us in a new age of freedom, we are discovering that we are subordinate to those technologies. Far from us controlling our technologies, we find that technologies themselves end up in ruling us.

6.7 The Futures Cone and further considerations.

What it is shown in this graph (see followign page, Graph 8.) is the Futures Cone, a model used to portray alternative futures by Hancock and Bezold (1994). This concept, together with the idea of “P” futures (Possible, Plausible, Probable and Preferred), is a visualization proposed for speculations over themes that will probably have a big importance in future. I thought it was nice to insert it as an instrument of debate within the frame I’m discussing, in this chapter especially.

This cone, by starting from now-present, shows how the future could evolve. I’ll use it to reflect and to express my point of view on the situation. Firstly, it has to be said that outside the cone there is an area of “unknown”: since we are located in the real world, we can make predictions about it, but there will always be something we cannot predict or that is still mysterious and not known. It reflects the feeling perceived when we face a surprising, in good or bad, event that we totally didn’t expected. On the contrary, all within the cone represent the

212

Figure 40. Personal Shot of the helmet prototype of the light scenario Through Me, 2019.

“possible” area, since it concerns all the possibilities we have and that we can predict from analyzing and interpreting the sources we know and we experience daily. All the speculation done till now over technology and society represents this: an analysis with some cornerstones, but with still lots of implications, doubts, open questions and so on. Within the “possible” area we can list all the hypothesis that come into our mind; for example, technology that could bring a dystopian future, as well as technology that could become an allied or that could bring a new species of organisms.

However, we know that, by common sense, within all the alternatives some of these are further then other for their possibility of realization. We are entering now the area of the

213

“plausible”. In this area we find the scenarios that are logically acceptable; reliable, credible, convincing. For example, imagining a future exactly like the Black Mirror one is basically outside this zone. It’s too extreme and dramatic and, maybe something within this theory could become true, but in general, it is a vision that appear implausible. Let’s focus now on the two inner parts of the cone, that are also the smaller. Inside the plausible area, so inside the logical level of reasoning, we find the “probable” area and the “preferable” one. As it can be seen from the graph, this two area are close, but they don’t intersecate with each other. This for me has a clear meaning: it stands for the fact that what we hypothetically prefer, basically, it is no going to become the true as it is.

The preferable area stands for the desired future, for what we want to happen. Instead, the probable future follows less the emotional part of human being, and it is more based on the interpretation of current trends, and so it can be defined as what it is likely to happen.

Projecting this on our frame, we can make falling into the probable area that technological organisms will have a predominant role into our lives, even if, uncanny valley and other ethical implications show that, in our inner part, it is something we are not totally ready for at the moment, and that, still, it scares us for some reasons. What can we do now, so, is trying to embrace technology’s positive part while mitigating its less desirable impacts.

Let’s now go back to the flow of the discussion: new technologies inevitably bring new opportunities and new challenges.

So, Artificial Intelligence and other advanced technologies are integrated into our daily lives more quickly and deeper then ever. The benefits, as we already saw and discussed, are enormous. As enormous are the challenges and the potential dangers. Technology irruption is happening in an unprecedented way, reshaping the way we live, work and interact.

In a report written by Deloitte (2018) it is explained why it is so difficult to keep up the times with these technologies and, in

214

THE FUTURES CONE Time

plausible

probable preferable

Unknown

possible Now

Graph 8. The Futures Cone, Hancock and Bezold, 1994.

215

consequent, to regolate their use. It is because, if on one side technology is rapidly changing, on the other side regulations and analysis take time to proceed. Moreover, understanding how is it possible to create technology only for good is really difficult, since nowadays is even complex defining the concept of “good”, viewing it as something relative and individual.

Even if there are some “good” more universally accepted, pursuing the good is difficult, and it implies to choose among different possibilities which one is the best. But the, the best for who? A correct use of technology and other advances devices implies to recognize their potential impact, both positive and negative. And this is something that can be done. Accessibility, communization and equality, without compromising social and cultural values. Building an effective framework and create meaningful mechanisms that permit people to trust the technologies they are using is the wish we make for the future, and it is, I believe, the “preferable” future we have.

Lastly in this context, I want to mention a fast case study, that demonstrate how speculations and experiments on this regard are being done. It is the case of Ars Electronica, a festival and a sort of museum center with a permanent online platform, defined by the founder Herbert W. Franke “a festival for experimentation from the future”. In fact, with a futuristic approach, it doesn’t see technologies only as an addition to our lives, but trying to integrate them, it proposes the mission to understanding what technologies mean for us, without asking what is the extreme potential they have, but investigating what they can do and should do for us. And, for concluding, when I was exploring their website, my attention was catched in particular by a sentence, that was affirming: “We are in the digital humanism: we must set the course for our digital society to remain committed to fundamental values such as human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights”. I believe this can synthesize properly the discussions we did till here: interrelation and co-evolution between man and machine seen as new methods of interacting between each other, but that shouldn’t end up in the supremacy of disruptive technologies and in the deprivation of specific set of values for the humans being.

216

Conclusion of the chapter.

The transformation of the world is inseparable from the act of exploring it, since the world is not something predefined.

All the reflections made in this chapter lead us to think that we are not the only type of conscious being. Human mind has its own specificities, but it is not anymore the only one.

Moreover, the artificial creatures we are designing and building reflect the fundamental aspects of human society. The challenge of the creation of robotic devices able to successfully participate in coordination and relational dynamics, and to be able to accommodate the specific needs of their human interlocutors is what we are working on nowadays.

Of course, as already said, this man-machine co-evolution will lead for sure to new relational modalities. In fact, what stands at the core of this is a mutual influence on the respective behaviors.

There is still much we not’ know: the idea is to don’t judge them in advance, but to explore the ongoing developments and to give them the opportunity to improve our social life and our fabric of relationships.

This is the starting point for the last chapters, that will not consider definitively anymore human as the only being at the center of the world. If what has been said so far has presupposed an investigation from an anthropocentric point of view, I will try, in the next sections, to shift the point of view as much as possible, starting to analyze where this anthropocentric vision comes from, what it entails and where it is going.

217

HUMAN IS NO LONGER AT THE CENTER: DE-ANTHROPOCENTRIZATION.

218

07 CHAPTER SEVEN

219

Introduction to the chapter.

7.1 Where this anthropocentric view come

from? The central role of narration.

7.2 Anthropocentrization as an human

fictional construct.

7.3 Building imaginary worlds.

7.4 How does design use narration?

7.5 Within the framework of identity building.

But, are we happy of how we are?

7.6 Reimagining the human: where are we

going?

Conclusion of the chapter.

220

Introduction to the chapter.

After having investigated relations and communication modes between man and other type of organisms, in particular technical ones, the focus is now moved on to the exploration of this anthropocentric view we have, that put us, humans, always at the center, intending all the rest as a surrounding element.

The chapter opens in 7.1 explaining that to communicate and, more precisely, to narrate is a deliberate human activity that we cannot avoid to do. But, at this purpose, narration doesn’t have to be considered only as stories creation; it is a much wide term that refers to acquiring, organizing, storing and sharing knowledge. In 7.2 the discussion goes on by explaining that human evolution, seen as the evolution of the dominant species on Earth, has caused the

221

construction of a series of beliefs; and these social and cultural constructs are the world we live in. Anthropocentrism itself is a fictional construct, developed by man, with roots a long time ago. Also, the correlation between culture and biology, into the evolution of humans, is investigated. In 7.3 it is deepen how the construction of these imaginary worlds and structures works, considering that there are rules to follow in order to achieve a good result, for example a fiduciary agreement (Pinardi, 2018), that has to be metaphorically stipulated between the actors of a narration. A parenthesis over narration and its usage in 7.4, explaining the role of the designer as storyteller.

The part of 7.5 shows that anthropocentrism means community building, and that this, in consequent to the narrations that take place within it, implies the automatic

222

construction of a common identity. The discussion is moved even further by asking if, after all the achievements obtained, we have finally reached a state of happiness or not. The chapter concludes (7.6) with a reflection over meta physical questions and insight that illustrates how humans, never totally satisfied with all the progresses done, are overcoming even biological rhythms and nature ones. It is explained the growing need of building a renovated community, to be done also with the integration of other organisms, not only with man at the center.

223

7.1 Where this anthropocentric view come from?

The central role of narration.

The first axiom of Watzlawick’s theory of human communication (1978) affirms that it is impossible to not communicate. The essence of our being it is, in fact, not based on things, but on the relations we have with these things.

Behavior has no opposite: we cannot not behave. In any case, we always have a behavior. And if, as widely discussed in previously chapters, we agree in defining the entire behavior as a sequence of interactions, then it follows that it is impossible not to communicate. We cannot escape the communication.

This is the heart of Watzlawick works and researches, that, already in the last century, was facing these aspects in the discipline that is now defined as Pragmatics. Pragmatics, in fact, studies the effects of the communication on the human attitude and conduct. It is the research of models that can explain what happens during interactions, that, of course, don’t have to be only verbal. Also the school of Palo Alto is investigating this theme, defining the human mind as a “Black Box”: it cannot be explored, and perhaps, even if it could, it would not be necessary. We can interpret human behavior exclusively by observing its pragmatic effects (Hayashi, 2020). So, from this we understand that communication not only conveys informations, but it is a much more wide area of investigation.

From this starting consideration we then get closer to the point of interest of this part of the chapter: the idea of narration. Various sources investigated, such as “Sapiens” by Yuval Noah Harari or “Narrare” by Davide Pinardi, that later will be deepen, show how the human genre has constituted and developed itself through this essential construct, that is, exactly, the concept of narration. Following the definition of one of the most used and recognized dictionary,

224

WE CANNOT NOT BEHAVE. IN ANY CASE, WE HAVE A BEHAVIOUR. Treccani Dictionary (2019), narration is defined as an ordered story, a series of linked events, that can be oral, written, or also figurative, carried on with the intent of sharing experiences and values common to a culture.

Anyway, the bibliographic set I used for being able to discuss this topic shows that, on a cultural level, there is much more behind this term. Let’s take for example the theorist of media Marshall McLuhan. Already in 1994, in one of his papers, he was writing: “language and narration have always been man’s richest art forms, which distinguish him from the animal creation”. It enables humans to move from thing to thing, to evolve and to extend faculties. Also Lev Manovich, some years later, still talking about the same issue, was defining language as an “umbrella term”, utilized to indicate a series of conventions and rules used to structure people experiences (2002). Years pass, but this concept assumes always more and more importance. Language and narration are seen as something basilar for the human evolution, not as something additional used only for transmitting stories.

Davide Pinardi, in his book “Narrare. Dall’Odissea al mondo Ikea” gives a complete explanation on this thematic.

Let’s try to follow the general steps. The book opens with a peremptory sentence: “all are, simply, narrations”. Narrations of imaginary projections, virtual worlds and fantastic visions or narrations of parts of reality that surround us.

They constitute complex images of the world that humans construct and transmit for themselves every day, in order to live together. They are like mental theaters, individual and collective, to try to understand each other (Pinardi, 2016).

They seem to be not the result of randomness and accidental

225

facts; on the contrary, narrations are rooted in the depth of the history of humanity (Harari, 2015). If, in fact, on one side narration brought the creation of mythologies, sagas, legends, stories and epics, on the other side it has been and still it is the bearer of daily rituals and constructions. But if, in ancient times, constructing and transmitting narrations was much more difficult and laborious, today something has changed: in recent decades the quantity of social narrations has multiplied exponentially and every area of social life is colonized by these same stories, in an incessant flow. A continuous and planned set of narrations surrounds and envelops us, in a confused mass, and it is difficult to extricate one self. The brands themselves are shifting their production axis from physical products to narratives and alternative worlds, where consumers can set their own stories. To better understand how to orient ourselves in all of this, it is useful to investigate how these narrations work from the inside, in order to evaluate them, at the same time, as narrators and as users of these.

The word narration is finding, I believe, these days, a very intense use, almost inflated in what are the media and cultural fields. And, if it is already difficult to define terms connected to precise objects and contexts, think about what can happen for words that define transversal concepts and blurred semantic fields. Furthermore, by coming into contact with each other, words themselves become contaminated, deformed and influenced. Often used just to indicate suggestions, the word narration, as we have already understood, brings with it something much richer and more complex. And therefore, starting from the research done and what has been said so far, we can define the narration as the act of constructing images of reality and transmitting them to other human beings. As Pinardi himself states, it is “one of the essential forms of human activity; it is one of the operating modes of cognitive processes that allows us to organize and understand the world� (2016).

With this discussion we have consolidated the idea that we all, as humans, use narrations; narrations that have been created, starting from vital needs of expression, up to improving our existence, with a long process of development and refinement.

Acquiring, organizing, storing and sharing knowledge.

We build and transmit to the people around us our visions of the world, both about our external and internal spheres, to receive in return their visions, with an action of feedbacks (Watzlawick, 1978).

226

Figure 41. Imagined cities. XVII International Exposition, Triennale Milano Archives, 1988.

Narration after narration, we stratify informations and experiences one above the other, where each of them influence and is in strict correlation with the others.

It is through the narrations that we have become a human community. A large part of our existence is based on narration (Pinardi, 2016): as social animals, we use it to confront and relate to what surrounds us, with a dynamic and continuous process. Every day we modify, transform and recreate narrations.

227

7.2 Anthropocentrization as an human fictional construct.

“Our language is amazingly supple. We can connect a limited number of sounds and signs to produce an infinite number of sentences, each with a distinct meaning” (Harari, 2015).

Till this point we said that the concept of narration is an essential construct for the human species; but the discussion isn’t exhausted here: in fact, by reading the bestseller “Sapiens” by Yuval Noah Harari (2015), a new perspective on the analysis of human genre, also for the context of my thesis, has been open. Narration is pushed onto another level, higher, and it is considered as the main cause of the phenomenon of anthropocentrism that, dominating for many centuries till now, it sees the rise of man to the center of the terrestrial globe.

Harari’s thesis is simple: Homo sapiens dominates the world because he is the only animal species to believe in things that exist purely in his imagination, such as gods, states, money and human rights. And these constructs did not become part of the human imagination by accident, but were transmitted from man to man, from ancient times until now, by means of narrations. Starting with this provocative idea, the book tells the history of our species from a whole new point of view. The book, by combining profound insights with particularly vivid language, explains that money is the most pluralistic mutual trust system ever created, that capitalism is the most successful religion ever invented, that the treatment of animals in modern agriculture is probably the worst crime in history and that even though we are much more powerful of our ancestors we are no longer happy. “A hundred thousand years ago at least six species of beings inhabited the Earth. They were insignificant ani-

228

Figure 42. Pilgrims circling the Ka’aba in Mecca, findGlocal, 2019.

mals, whose impact on the planet was no greater than that of gorillas, fireflies or jellyfish. There is only one species of human being on Earth today. Us. Homo sapiens. And we are the lords of the planet �(Harari, 2015).

Imaginary constructs exist from long time ago; just think about the Hammurabi code: this, written being inspired by a divine power, as a set of rules, was already creating a society based on a fictional structure. Social constructs and imaginary realities where people find themselves living from birth, without even realizing it. Fiction and collective imagination that, day by day, got always bigger, since becoming something taken for granted and not object of discussion. So, from this it can be understood that the ability of humans consists in the transmission of informations about things that don’t exist at all. Homo sapiens can talk about entire kinds of entities that they have never seen, touched or smelled.

229

Our collective imaginary about nations, money and justice have enabled us, unique among all animals, to cooperate among billions. This is why we dominate the world, while chimpanzees are locked up in zoos and research labs. “Sapiens” explains how we teamed up to create cities, kingdoms and empires; how we came to believe in gods, nations and human rights; how we built trust in money, books and laws; we found ourselves slaves to bureaucracy, consumerism and the pursuit of happiness. “Sapiens” focuses on the key processes that have shaped humanity and the world around it, such as the cognitive revolution, the advent of agriculture, the scientific revolution, the spread of religion and the rise of the nation state. It is not only a matter of explaining what and why something happened, but also how these facts affected people.

One explanation that I like to remember about this book is a fact used by Harari to discuss the cognitive revolution. Cognitive revolution is the period that goes from seventy thousand to thirty thousand years ago, and that sees the emergence of new ways of thinking and communicating. In particular, language developed as a means of sharing information about the world. But the majority of the informations that needed to be conveyed concerned humans. So, affirms Harari, it is like to say that our language was therefore formed on gossip. This could sound like a joke but, if we reflect on this, even today, much of human communication, in the form of emails, telephone conversations or newspaper columns, is gossip. Chatting comes so naturally to us that it makes us think that our language has developed precisely for this purpose.

By passing really fast the three big revolutions that characterized the development of the human species, we can say that this cognitive revolution permitted it a first detachment from the other beings; our genre started to be considered as superior and as the most intelligent being.

The following big revolution, the agricultural one, instead, permitted the dominance of the human species over the other being. The agricultural revolution resulted in a demographic explosion and in the creation of spoiled elites. In fact, since humans felt so intelligent and capable of exploiting the secrets of nature, they abandoned hard works, creating stable settlements. This completely transformed the

230

Figure 43. Negative of a human handprint on the wall of the Chauvet-Pont-d’Arc Cave in southern France, French Ministry of culture, 1994. Already 30,000 years ago, somebody tried to say, I was here!

Figure 44. A wall painting from an Egyptian grave, dated to about 3,500 years ago, depicting typical agricultural scenes, from “Sapiens. A brief history of humankind”, Yuval Noah Harari, 2015.

231

Figure 45. Screenshot taken from the film “Modern Times”, Charlie Chaplin, 1936.

Figure 46. Alamogordo, history.com, 1945. 16 July 1945, 05:29:53.

Eight seconds after the first atomic bomb was detonated. The nuclear physicist Robert Oppenheimer, upon seeing the explosion, said: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”.

232

ways of life. So, by doing this, the agricultural revolution allowed man to associate and cooperate. Over the time, this provoked and accentuated the purely anthropocentric vision that over time has made other living species marginal.

The agriculture revolution, in conclusion, can be seen as the big social construct that caused the union of thousands of unknown people, collaborating towards common goals.

After the agricultural revolution, human societies grew even larger and more complex, while also the imagined construct became more elaborated. Fictions accustomed people to behave in certain ways, in accordance to specific standards.

From here it originated culture (Harari, 2015).

We then reach, with a jump forward, the scientific revolution, that Harari defines as the “discovery of ignorance�. During this period humankind obtained enormous new powers by investing new resources in scientific research. With increased capabilities, humans admitted their ignorance, in the sense that they found out to not know everything yet. The admission of ignorance made this revolution particularly dynamic and active, since the Homo Sapiens tried, and still tries, to expand himself always more and more. Science started to solve one problem after the other, and this leaded to an incredible progress. But this expanded so far, that humans started to go beyond their limits, investigating big thematics and questions, such as the ones of life and death.

And with this we come closer to our age, characterized by meta physical open issues, to which we are trying in every mode to answer. This, if on one side shows the power of man, demonstrate also his weakness, as an organism that still is in transformation, looking for answers.

So here we come to the conclusion of this brief recall of the major step of human evolution, that consisted in a permanent revolution where the world has been modeled in order to adapt itself to needs and desires of the Homo Sapiens.

Here, anyway, a precision has to be done: this discussion doesn’t have to lead to the point of confounding imagined realities with lies or fakes. An imagined reality is something everyone believes in, and, as long this is common belief per-

233

sists, the imagined reality exerts force in the world. It is just that, since when the cognitive revolution happened, humans started living in two dimensions: the one natural of tangible things, and the other one, of constructs and beliefs. It has to be noticed, so, that anthropocentrism is not a matter of pure biology, of the big brain and power of humans; it is something we build and transmit day after day among us, within behavioral patterns.

The idea that cultural is radically different from biology was already investigated by the philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, that, operating in the lat century, was comparing the sphere of biology and the sphere of culture in his book “Il posto dell’uomo nella natura” (2011). Following his reasonings, these spheres are, somehow, mysteriously united, because both of them are affecting deeply the human expansion. If the first one concerns the change and evolution of the genetic patrimony, the second one refers to the massive cross-fertilization of large groups of people who have suddenly joined, based on the randomness of their migrations or their expansion. And with the connected action of these two dimensions, “humanity finds itself drawn, as in a gear, into an increasingly accelerated vortex of totalization” (Teilhard de Chardin, 2011).

So, concluding, we, as Sapiens, dominate the world because we are the only animals who can flexibly cooperate in large numbers. We can create mass collaboration networks, where thousands upon millions of complete strangers work together towards a common purpose. This mysterious glue that keeps us together is made up of stories and narrations.

And we believe in a particular order constructed not because it is objectively true, but because the belief in it enables us to cooperate effectively and forge a better society. As also Mc Luhan was writing about the spoken world and narration, it offered men a sudden transfer from the magically discontinuous and traditional world of tribals into the cool and uniform visual medium.

All this exposed can be considered as the power of anthropocentrism, that with the time created a stable order of conventions and rules; an order that, probably, now has to be changed in some ways.

234

ANTHROPOCENTRISM IS NOT A MATTER OF PURE BIOLOGY, OF THE BIG BRAIN AND POWER OF HUMANS; IT IS SOMETHING WE BUILD AND TRANSMIT DAY AFTER DAY, WITHIN BEHAVIORAL PATTERNS.

235

7.3

Building imaginary worlds.

All what said till now could, anyway, alter the perception we have of anthropocentrism: in fact, the idea that it is mainly a fictional construct built throughout the centuries doesn’t have to mean that it has to be seen in bad light.

Anthropocentrism means also evolution, through culture and communication.

On this regard, I was recently at Pirelli HangarBicocca, for the opening of a new exhibition, a personal exposition by the artist Trisha Baga, called “The eye, the eye and the ear”, that will be ongoing till the beginning of next year, 2021. In one of the installations proposed, that, later, I found out to be one of the most famous within her production, and that has been exposed in more contexts, recurs the theme we are talking about in this chapter. It is “Orlando” (2015-2020), a video installation that studies the concept of language.

Through this installation, the human figure is represented, in its transformation and evolution. Often, pieces of video are overlapping one with the others, as to show the layering of the progress. Nothing comes from new. This installation shows the relevance of this theme, always in continuous discovery and subject of investigation. Trisha Baga engages individual perception in a technological environment characterized by accelerated attention timing. The same layering subjects, mediums, and themes against one another, push the perceptual experience to the foreground, staging a dialogue between objects in real and digitized space (Pirelli HangarBicocca, 2020). The name “Orlando” has a specific meaning: it is an exhibition that takes place in a far future, in the homonym city in Florida. In this hypothetical temporal landscape, Florida has flooded and Orlando is one of the last cities to go. With a catastrophic view for the dominant species on Earth, Trisha Baga opens up a frame for reflections and interpretations. The construction of imaginary world, anyway, even if it is done for various purposes,

236

Figure 47. Photo taken from “Orlando� installation by Trisha Baga, ArtBasel, 2015.

doesn’t work always: as Davide Pinardi explains in one of his talk (2018), narration implies a fiduciary agreement between the narrator and the receiver of it.

This agreement establishes a relation among the parts involved, based on trust and coherence. In particular, the narrator activates the relation, building, with a system of signs, specific elements of the context that will be recognized by the other person, enabling the entrance to the fictional world he is producing. These elements are considered sufficient but necessary for the codification and de-codification of the narration; they have to stay in a correct balance between them. It is necessary, in fact, to maintain consistency within the pact: when an inconsistent element is inserted, the pact is broken.

And also the imaginary world. This assumption, as we can understand, has lots of importance: in fact, it concerns both narrations used for inventing stories and fantasy world and narrations of reality, the ones also Harari was talking about.

If the first case contains narrations that create virtual wor-

237

lds, used to dream possible or impossible alternatives to the existing and to tell invisible dimensions, the second case, instead, creates new frames for our vision of reality and it serve to modify our points of view on what surrounds us, to change our relationship with the world, to transform the scales of values and the models of behavior.

In short, narrating is not only inventing imaginary worlds but also describing, interpreting and transmitting real worlds. Narrating means sharing virtual and material representations, fantastic and concrete, infinitely small and immensely large. Thanks to narrations we, as human beings, build our personal and collective identity structures. Through the narrations we relate to the existing to transform it.

So, the “science of narration”, as Pinardi defines it (2018), teaches that a narration needs some fundamental elements to be followed, and it is not just a play or rhetorical experiment actioned sometimes. Within the imaginary worlds we are living, there is always coherence, continuity and harmony. And, in sight of this, anthropocentrism, seen as a huge narration where all of us is involved, I believe, works really well following all these principles.

Actually, the term “imaginary worlds”, that we are using quite often in this discussion, has origin from another author, Mark J. P. Wolf, that in the book, precisely, “Building Imaginary Worlds” (2012), describes them as dynamic entities that, rooted from the Homer’s Odyssey, have seen huge advancements and developments over the centuries.

In particular, Wolf’s study of imaginary worlds theorizes world-building within and across media, including literature, comics, film, radio, television, board games, video games, the Internet, and more. Since the advent of daydreaming, the same media have drawn us away to fictional realms driven by endless possibilities of exploration and have opened up portals for investigating these worlds. Worlds building, so, if was born as a need of transmitting informa-

238

IMAGINARY WORLDS ARE TRANSNARRATIVE, TRANSMEDIAL AND TRANSAUTHORIAL. tion, evolved then for much more, as a deliberate activity and a distinctive trait of humans. These worlds, says Wolf, are transnarrative, transmedial and transauthorial in the form: a transmedial story unfolds across multiple media platforms and, most often, transmedial stories are based not on individual characters or specific plots but rather on complex contexts which can sustain multiple interrelated characters. For the author of the book, imaginary worlds are an interdisciplinary subject that can be approached from many angles; anyway, media studies provide the best basis for examining them as entities in and of themselves, since they also are involved in the definition of the windows through which the world is seen and experienced. So, if before this was something only considered by poets or writers, now it is something, metaphorically talking, more concrete and pragmatic. This ability to simulate seems to occur innately in the human species; we, as humans, seem to find extremely interesting these intrinsic imagined worlds. Worlds within the world, this is the essence of this speculation: a sort of continuous recombination of concepts, for building new assets and, in consequence, new contexts and situations that layer over the physical world of default.

Following pages.

Figure 48. Riccardo III by Shakespeare, Luca Ronconi, 1968.

239

240

241

7.4

How does design use narration?

All the discussion done till here on narration can open up a frame for investigating what narrate means specifically in the design field. I believe narration and design merge together within the concept of storytelling. We all designers are storytellers in every work we do, building an imaginary story for telling what we are developing, and also what stands around it. Storytelling becomes then a tool for narrating complex stories and situations, which otherwise it would be too difficult to represent. The storytelling activity isn’t built on improvised stories, but, as a full design practice, it is based on expertise and knowledge. Storytelling represents one of the different ways for developing design actions, especially when we have to collaborates or deals with different people. When storytelling is seen as a design tool, it provides the opportunity to tell stories of research and innovation in an effective and clear way.

However, as explained by Ezio Manzini in the introduction of “The Pearl Diver�, book by Bertolotti, Daam, Piredda and Tassinari, there are two aspects to focus on within this discussion, two layers of the same matter. The first one is a comparison of experiences from which every designer can learn how to use storytelling in a better way.

We can build on the experiences of others because there are differences in the storytelling techniques used in the different experiences. It is a fertile ground, with a huge potential of growth. The second aspect that is emerging, is the fact that telling stories is a powerful and sometimes dangerous weapon, as it, in fact, introduces ethical matters (2016). Considering storytelling as a full design tool implies, in fact, that we also need to reflect on this tool.

Storytelling can become the medium for moving inner feelings of people and for enhancing a change of perspectives and actions in the world we live in. In our contemporary age, we can all agree on the need of positive narrations: our work, thus, is not only to provide a specific and technical solution to different issues; we need to create stories that

242

can provide a common sense and envision future possible ideas for society and people. Storytelling can become an engine for change, in the sense that it can open our mind and raise questions that, maybe, we never thought about. It can make us looking at reality from a different point of view.

Lastly, by seeing it as a collective process, it can be used to involve, engage and create a fruitful dialogue, as a tool for building reflections within specific contexts.

One design studio working exactly on this is Pantopicon, a Belgian agency which promotes the vision of making the future tangible through narratives, objects and spaces as to transform perceptions and enable better ways to anticipate possible tomorrows today. Defined by itself as “Foresight”, in fact, it sees future as a tool and a process to reframe challenges and to enrich the imagination space, in order to spark debate and catalyze change. Enabling people and organizations to see through stories and strategies permits, thus, to inspire them to explore and understand the new meanings current developments are bringing.

7.5 Within the framework of identity building. But, are we happy of how we are?

The thematic of anthropocentrism and its impact, I think, is really actual: during the month of September I had the occasion to follow an online symposium called “Reimagining the Human”, hosted by the Vilnius University, a place that I discovered during some previous trips. A two days of talks, spacing from communication to anthropology, from philosophy to neurosciences, all giving a different but complementary perspective of this complex, yet fascinating, theme. This symposium was a part of the European research project “The Future of Humanity: New Scenarios of Imagi-

243

nation” (Vilnius University). Moreover, this project has received funding from European Social Fund. Already during the introduction a clear frame was given: we, humans, are the products of biological intertwining with socio-historical imaginary. Homo Sapiens has never been merely an organic concept; the definition of our species was dependent on the understanding of a community driven by commensurate imaginations and social structures that determine the roles of the parts that constitute the whole. Aristotle conceived the slave as an animate machines. European colonizers propagated the idea of indigenous Americans and Africans as less than human or even inanimate objects.

The history of the exploitation of nature is marked by a denial of the dignity of other species, transformed into a simple field of resources and the components of human economy.

Philosophically, historically and culturally, everything has always been embedded in us. Hence, genetics plays only a partial role in describing the nature of a species. The epigenetic trajectory of all forms of living beings is formed by the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion; dynamics that are governed by imagination of goals and progresses (Vilnius University, 2020).

By saying this we understand that, biology plus culture are the elements that confer identity to our genre, and to all the subcategories of it. They are the elements that permitted the creation of all our universe, in which we are located, made of rules, structures and interaction. And this common identity goes back to the same construct of anthropocentrism.

Identity is a concept that, for sure, it is emphasized within community and society. In fact, as explained in a paper by Frølunde, Pillan and Piredda, “words like community, common, communion and communication stem back to Latin communicare: to share, divide out; communicate, impart, inform; join, unite, participate in” (2018).

So, communication is the emphasis of connectivity, union and participation, and it highlights the social dimension of the interactions. With anthropocentrism we built a specific identity,

244

Figure 49. Cover image of “Reimagining the Human” symposium, Vilnius University, 2020.

that now distinguishes us from the other, for good and bad, and that it is difficult to change, modify and overcome. The question is if, within this frame, after all, we are happy of how we are and of what we have.

It is common view that human capabilities have increased throughout the history. And since humans generally use their capabilities to alleviate miseries and fulfill aspirations, it follows that we must be happier then our ancestors (Harari, 2015). But, on the contrary, it seems that the increased capabilities have provoked the raise of always more and more needs, constantly bigger then the previous and even more difficult to satisfy. Power and ‘centrism’ don’t imply necessarily happiness. I believe that happiness is related more to a subjective well-being, a state of peace and pleasure felt inside us. A state in which we feel without concerns or anxiety. But, according to what has been said in all the previous chapters also, man is not at the moment in this condition. Various external conditions and issues afflict human beings, mainly because of technological progresses

245

and socio-cultural problematics. Moreover, it seems that nowadays people are feeling kind of inadequate for the high standards promoted by the society itself, and that they are trying to run for following it. At the moment, despite the incredible things we, humans, are able to create and do, we remain unsure of our goals. We are more powerful then ever, but we don’t know what to do with this power.

This is the reason why, within our progresses, we shouldn’t lose the focus on people, and on what is meaningful for them. Meaningful and pleasant, this I think is the synthesis of what should be researched nowadays, after that, for centuries, we had overcome mostly all limits of discovery and, even, nature. Anthropocentrism shouldn’t become boundless power, but a safe view for living in. And if this seems to be complicate at the moment, probably it is the time for enlarging this vision, by introducing new positive elements and a breath of fresh air.

7.6 Reimagining the human: where are we going?

The other day, while scrolling my Instagram feed, I bumped into an editorial work on the essence of human being, that was reporting an aphorism by Einstein: “A human being is a part of the whole called by us ‘Universe’, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few person nearest to us. Out task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty”. Basically this means that, the stable order constructed by anthropocentrism is acquiring a malleable nature, and it is changing. People, in consequence, are now always in a sta-

246

ANTHROPOCENTRISM

a

Graph 9. Converging Through Center, personal visualization of anthropocentrism, 2020.

247

te of flux. Going back to the online symposium I mentioned before, there are some concepts that could reveal some useful insights for this conversation. An interesting talk was called “Rehumanising the Imagination�, and it was held by Pietro Montani, professor of philosophy. In his intervention, Montani said that before going over the construct of anthropocentrism, seen as a persistent cultural claim, but that can be dismantled, it is necessary to resort again to the use of imagination and narration, in order to be able to investigate it without prejudice and subjectivity (2020). Thanks to the freedom of the imagination, in fact, the plastic human cognition can relaunch an endless and creative project of rediscovery of the human. Thinking and perceiving reality in human terms implies that it is hard to imagine how we would live without thinking within these ideas, but, still, it is the challenge of our days. We are used to think with our technical extensions, that we created for ourselves; and through these we interact with the material world.

Seen what has been achieved and reached with efforts through the centuries, now Homo Sapiens is even experimenting to transcend the limit of biology and nature, trying to replacing them with technology and human design. In laboratories, humans are engineering other living beings, creating other type of consciousness and cognitive organisms. But, are these real living creatures? It depends on what we mean by living creatures. For sure, they have been produced by a new evolutionary process, completely independent of the laws and limitations of organic evolution. But the point is that, probably, at the moment, they have been produced again for accomplishing human desires and needs. But, anyway, this is a real biological revolution, that opens up previously imaginable scenarios and possibilities, together with lots of ideological questions. Man, at the moment, is stepping into nature’s shoes; this causes that the next stages of evolution will not only include technological and organizational transformations, but fundamental transformations also in human consciousness and identity.

248

So, with this scenario open in front of us, lots are the questions that can make us think and reflect: how can we imagine communities that are not shaped by the human superiority? Who are the others that are to be included in our community? What do we want for human life? How can we adapt to live with other individuals?

Unfortunately, at the moment, we have no answers on this; the only thing we can do is to speculate and debate for a common consciousness around the topic. Reimagining the human has no end and it offers endless possibilities. The nature of man has been, for ages, an important topic and a challenge for different field. Now it is the moment to reframe the problem, to move the investigation on the nature of man on another level: it has to be investigated towards the relationship between humans and other individuals. It is the discussion around a renovated concept of community and a new role for humans, that should consider more the other organisms around. Not only exploitation of them anymore, but integration for a new common ecology. We can say that till now history has always meant human history; but this is no longer enough. We, as humans, are a big force of nature, but, at the same time, we are only a part of it. It is a process that has to start, probably, from the inside, from our minds, as mediators between biology, history, culture and nature.

There is no a perfect or given solution for this issue. Rather, we can define a true and consistent fit as a constant adaptation around the changing individual.

For concluding, the challenge, above all this research and dialogue, is to try to reflect on the series of questions exposed, that can help us to understand which areas of human knowledge are still indecipherable, starting from our relationship with the sphere of the natural phenomena. Transforming the fragility of our age and our doubts in a new great cognitive impetus, starting from asking to us today how to decentralize our point of view as the dominant species in the life of planet Earth.

249

Conclusion of the chapter.

In this chapter we have seen how Homo Sapiens conquered the world thanks, above all, to its unique language and ability of narration. But, anyway, humankind ascended to the top so quickly that the ecosystem was not given time to adjust and follow its rhythm. Especially now, human evolution is making a new leap forward, with a radically new capacity of expansion; the human genre, still, has not reached its full expansion and exploration and it is, more now then ever, progressing forward. But this, if one side shows the enormity of human greatness, that could, hypothetically, prolong the expansion forward forever on, on the other side is a clear sign of a need of change, since humans are no longer able to dominate and control their achievements.

Also, we are not even so happy of our condition.

Human species can move its vision only if collectively, starting from a more objective analysis of where we are now and the reasons of our dissatisfaction. And, according to what expressed till now, it seems that the next logical step is to extend our language in favor of a general cosmic consciousness. A more integrated ecology, restored and clean, raising from the research and dialogue that is really needed at the moment.

This is part of the next, and last, chapter of my thesis.

In fact, the next chapter will push till the limit of human condition, exploring, among the others, area like trans humanism and post humanism, recent and emerging currents that goes for an hybridization of species.

250

Figure 50. Night Sky Photography, Babak Tafreshi, 2014.

251

TOWARDS A POST HUMANISTIC PERSPECTIVE.

252

08 CHAPTER EIGHT

253

Introduction to the chapter.

8.1 Transitory and Trans Humanism.

8.2 The affirmation of Post Humanism.

8.3 Ethic of Post Humanism.

8.4 Aesthetic of Post Humanism.

8.5 Post Humanist thinking and design.

8.6 Hybridization of Species:

a new place in nature for man.

8.7 Animal, Human, Robot:

a visual narration.

Conclusion of the chapter.

254

Introduction to the chapter.

From the last chapter we understood how language represents the cultural and linguistic complexity within each man is placed and that it produces a form of alienation that separates man himself from the chain of meanings and from other beings that surrounds reality. Humanism, seen as successive sedimentations of many currents and thoughts, has gradually led to a human apogee, making him becoming a sort of guarantor of reality and truth and as a reference principle for all the other living creatures.

In this last chapter the scenario is open up to new perspectives of action, that can lead to a reconsideration of the role, the place and the meaning of human. In 8.1 it is analyzed the philosophical current of Trans Humanism, that promotes the use of technology and science to improve the well being of mind and

255

body of human, in order to insert him better within the surrounding environment (Vatinno, 2011). But Trans Humanism is considered only a transitive condition, a current of thought that is exhausted in itself, like a drift, that experiments upon the human condition and its affirmation. The big jump we have for abandoning an anthropocentric perspective leads to to Post Humanism, the condition in which man and other beings will finally constitute a shared common ecology, without exploitation or hierarchies. The followings parts are, so, dedicated to the analysis of this movement: part 8.2 explains its characteristics and features, 8.3 faces ethics implications and issues and 8.4 focuses on its aesthetic, reaching the conclusion that Post Humanism is a plural contamination of hybrids. In 8.5 Post Humanism is put in correlation with design, my discipline, pro-

256

viding some reflections and explaining how since design till now has been human centered, now with Post Humanism it also has to adapt its practice. The chapter goes towards the conclusion with 8.6, the section that finally gives a frame in which the human is located, within this potential Post Humanist condition, placing the analysis and reflections on a cultural level, more then on a physical and material one. The part 8.7, conclusive of my research, provides a visual narration of some interesting step of human evolution, related to the relations the pass between him and the other beings. Also a personal visual contribution is presented.

257

8.1

Transitory & Trans Humanism.

We left the last chapter with a reflection over the renovated role that humans should start to assume from now on. In order to go on with this discussion, it is the moment to analyze the current of Trans Humanism, a movement with a specific philosophy born in the USA at the end of last century, from the work of the English philosopher Max More (Pelanda, 2011). This movement, during the years, started to assume importance also thanks to the global organization H+, Humanity Plus.

The term Trans Humanism, still quite unusual, refers to the improvement of the human condition for reaching a more advanced evolutionary state (Vatinno, 2011).

This movement has its roots in Humanism and in its values, and, starting from this, it promotes a futuristic theory, which involves the systematic use of science and technology to improve the quality of life. The Trans Humanist mission is, in fact, to use technology ethically to expand human abilities, in order to have better minds and better bodies and, therefore, better and more meaningful lives. The ultimate goal of this philosophy is, shortly, the achievement of happiness. With things like this, we can define the humans within this current as “augmented humans� (Szu-Wen, 2016), where the cognitive and sensory performance are enhanced to the maximum stadium. Furthermore, Trans Humanism also aims to act on the surrounding environment. An intelligent ecology, the one we were already talking about in the last chapter, returns here too: Trans Humanism, in fact, proposes to integrate the same environment together with man’s progress, with intelligence and caution. Homo sapiens, unlike all the other species present on Earth, can consciously influence the environment that surrounds and hosts him. He already affects it somehow, but he could even do more. For this reason it is necessary to understand how to do it in a positive and useful way. It is incorrect to think

258

that on one side there is man and on the other there is nature; they must be seen as an integration: human action is nothing else than the continuation of the nature one, in the constitution of a sort of global organism.

It is clear that these ideas can cause, at first glance, in the great majority of people, a real shock which, in fact, is defined as FSL, or future shock level, considered as an indicator of people’s ability to accept future developments in technology (Vatinno, 2011). However, this vision should not be considered dystopian; it is, in fact, good to remember once again that Trans Humanism wants humanity to be healthier and happier, having clearly in mind its desires and precise goals.

One ethical question that could raise within this discussion is that Trans Humanism could cause the loss of equality. Anyway, since we are considering the potential increase of bodily or sensory qualities, it must be remembered that man are not born the same among each others, and that they are never equal to another in any case. And it is precisely the different nature that exists between us that creates complexity and fascination in the analysis of human nature. The only thing that Trans Humanism wants to fight is an unsatisfied, unsatisfactory and unbalanced life, a bit towards where it seems we are going at the moment. The promotion of a culture of happiness and well-being is proposed as something to be achieved in this life, and not, as typical of religions and spirituality, which must be expected and reached only in future lives or in the hereafter. And if, within this context of research, Trans Humanism is considered as a philosophy for speculation, in reality it is much more: it is a practical philosophy that invites action. In addition of being an interpretative philosophy, it aims to be a new vision that can directly affect reality with concrete and achievable projects (Vatinno, 2011).

From what exposed till now, we can understand that Trans Humanism implies within it a complex relation between what is natural and what is artificial. In fact, it is difficult to establish the boundaries of the integration between the-

259

se spheres. If, for example, we consider the literal use of technique for enhancing human capabilities, we could, for a while, think that even a man with a pair of glasses is a Trans Humanist. But, of course, here we are intending much more.

With this philosophy it is proposes to transcend the current condition of man, to make it become something different and better than the current condition. This transitional condition aims to maintain the positive aspects of nature, while at the same time tries to combat those more negative and undesirable. Trans Humanism is a challenge, a challenge placed at the limits of nature but no longer against it. It is a challenge posed in a hypothetical but well-defined social framework, where scientific and technological research no longer overwhelms the natural sphere, but that tries to integrate with it.

It can be seen as the possible evolutionary continuation to be undertaken, which, in some way, raises a self-awareness of the human species, making it, finally, an entity aware of what it is building and where it is going. To return to the words already mentioned by the writer and philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, it is as man, with this process, could reach the Noosphere, the sphere of knowledge, while maintaining the basic values of ​​ traditional humanism.

Humans, or as defined by Giuseppe Vatinno (2011), Homo Notices, use their intelligence to guide the improvement of society as a whole. Our happiness can be here and now; it just depends on our social and cultural commitment. Trans Humanism, anyway, should not be confused with a discussion that revolves only around science and technology; in fact, it must be thought in a broader framework: it must be able to give answers to the fundamental questions of humanity, as well as to the practical problems of every day,

260

Figure 51. For whom the computer graphics, Structure & Narrative, 2018.

favoring rational thinking and a positive method of action.

It is, for concluding, a way to give hope and meaning to human action, after all the discoveries and advances made, with substantial changes.

Anyway, within the landscape of my research, Trans Humanism has to be considered as a sort of parenthesis: it is the analysis of a current of thought that shows a possible way for reconsidering the human position within the world but, that, at the same time, remains exhausted in tiself. And this is why, after this excursus over Trans Humanism, I’ll move the focus over Post Humanism, a much more wide, complex and varied phenomenon, useful for the proceeding of the discussion.

261

8.2 The affirmation of Post Humanism.

Can a new kind of humanities, called Posthumanities, respond to the redefinition of humanity’s place in the world by both the technological and the biological continuum in which the human is one life form among many?

This is what investigates Cary Wolfe in his book “What is Post Humanism?” (2010), by exploring a radical repositioning to our changing understanding of ourselves and our world. Till now we investigated the current of Trans Humanism; but, as we said, this concept is only a transition that, even if it starts to reinterpretate the role of human within the environment and the world, it still doesn’t go beyond traditional humanism and anthropocentrism.

Here it is placed the current of Post Humanism, that, instead, could be considered as the last step of the continuum evolution towards a De-Anthropocentrization perspective for the future. Firstly, in order to understand what Post Humanism is, it’s important to recall the concept from where it has departed from. The starting point, that then will be largely overcome, is Humanism, a term that is synthesized in one single belief: the unique value and moral supremacy of human beings. Post Humanism, on the contrary, which is a set of ideas that have been emerging since the 1990s, challenges the notion that humans are and always will be the only agents of the moral world. The term ‘Post Human’ was coined by Jeffrey Deitch in 1992 during an exhibition with the same name, that attracted several artists whose works were characterized precisely by questioning the essentialistic and impermeable roundness of corporeality and of human identification (Marchesini, 2017).

And although the term humanism may be applied to a complex set of assumptions developed over centuries (from the early Renaissance to the late 20th century), Post Humanism

262

focuses on a few core characteristics: above all, the notion that the proper study of man is man. Post Humanism argues that in our technologically mediated future, understanding the world as a moral hierarchy and placing humans at the top of it will no longer make sense (The Ethics Centre, 2018).

One of the key figures in exploring this philosophy is probably Donna Haraway, which explains that the fusing of humans and technology will not physically enhance humanity, as discussed for the Trans Humanism, but that this will help us to see ourselves as interconnected from non human beings.

For the philosopher, Post Humanism is an ethical position that extends moral concerns to things that are different from us and in particular to other species and objects with which we cohabit the world. “Our post human future will be a time when species meet, and when humans finally make room for non human things within the scope of our moral concern. A post human ethics, therefore, encourages us to think outside of the interests of our own species, be less narcissistic in our conception of the world, and to take the interests and rights of things that are different to us seriously� (1991).

Nowadays the term Post Humanism, as explains Jay David Bolter, from the Georgia Institute of Technology, is applied to a wide range of contemporary positions and thoughts; what all of these groups have in common is the designation of a series of break points with the fundamental assumptions of modern western culture and, in particular, a new way of understanding the human subject in relationship to the natural world in general (2016). From this, it derives that Post Humanism claims to offer a new epistemology that, firstly, it is not anthropocentric and, therefore, that undermines the traditional boundaries between the human, the animal, and the technological. In fact, if a central feature of humanism is its insistence on an unbridgeable gap between the human and the animal, seeing these as merely machines part of the material world, over the superior world of the mind, reserved only to humans, with Post Humanism the concept changes: “nature set any boundaries on the continuous spectrum of the biological species. Humans are not set apart by nature, and

263

animals together with all other organisms are treated as a serious philosophical and sociocultural issue” (Bolter, 2016). As also Roberto Marchesini explains in one of his essays, the entire technological progress of human society is directed towards the same transformation of the human race, in an era where humans are understood to have a finite capacity to control nature, and so, they are integrated harmoniously with it, in the constitution of a new complex environment (2017).

The extreme point reached by Post Humanist theories is a concept explained by Donna Haraway in her book “Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature”, in which she exposed a curious interpretation about robots and, more in particular, cyborgs. Haraway explains that becoming cyborgs, so strange assemblages of human and machine parts, will help us understand that the oppositions we set up between the human and non human, natural and artificial, self and other, organic and inorganic, are merely ideas that can be broken down and renegotiated. And more than this, she offers the cyborg as a contemporary cultural metaphor, as a rejection and a reconfiguration of the values of the traditional humanist subject (1991). I believe that Post Humanist philosophy is a good point for reflecting over our current sociocultural condition, for opening up new possibilities of action. Of course, probably this current, taken and considered in its complete theories, it’s maybe too extreme, but it is still useful for shake up our beliefs.

8.3

Ethic of Post Humanism.

As already done for the analysis of other concepts or movements, the promotion of proactive principles or theories has to be accompanied by ethical and precautionary considerations, which can carefully evaluate the pros and cons of the situation. The discussion about the potential affirmation of Post Humanism shows the need to get out of the boundaries of humanism; in fact, the human being has entered a new evolutionary stage, which goes beyond the condition

264

Figure 52. Enlargement of cells of the human oral mucosa, Grant Heilman Photography, 2015.

Figure 53. Enlargement of Elodea Anacharis plant cell, Grant Heilman Photography, 2017.

265

of existence promoted up till now. Among the main ethical doubts that emerge in this framework we find questions relating the discussion and the consequent redefinition of the concept of identity (Lacarbonara, 2011). For millennia, philosophy has questioned the relationship between man, his self and his world. And, if until recently the human ego has always been well defined, as the undisputed agent of the actions and a as the great force of knowledge, this paradigm is now put even more into question, as the relationship between Self and Other is opened further, going over strict boundaries and leaving apart that condition where the Self was treated to the detriment of the Other. This new conception sees man as an open possibility, in a new system of contamination and indeterminacy. New thoughts are forming in the direction of an improvement, both of the human dimension and of the existential space, going to rewrite the cultural and social paradigms of the global coexistence between man and other organisms.

Before, while mentioning Donna Haraway, in one of her sentence she was claiming that, in order to achieve this condition of Post Humanism, we have to be less narcissistic about our condition. The myth of Narcissus, already mentioned also by myself in this research earlier, turns out to be quite contemporary again, as it places the philosophical problem of identity at its center. Indeed, Narcissus has always been seen as the triumph of undisputed worship of the human form. Narcissus, as an emblem of humanistic culture, is the symbol of a human attitude that knows how to love only its own being, excluding and elevating itself from the rest of the world. And it is at this point that even the narcissus myth should take on new values: it suddenly becomes a symbol of an uncertain existential condition, emotionally unstable, aimed at a continuous redefinition and search for the self, a new self. The search for identity, therefore, no longer simply means finding oneself, but finding oneself in relation to others. De-Narcissization and the advent of Post Humanism.

Thinking about the advent of the post human means, moreover, thinking about the concept of difference (Lacarbonara, 2011), and, so, about the fragmentation of knowledge. Difference seen as personal enrichment, as “different from�, as a

266

WE HAVE TO BE LESS NARCISSISTIC ABOUT OUR CONDITION. being different from others, but placed, finally, on the same level. In fact, by overcoming the anthropocentric dimension and starting a process of decentralization, identity itself opens up to an enlargement, recognizing the value of the other and of heterogeneity.

Another ethical aspect that is worth considering is the sense of emptiness and disorientation that could affect people while facing this perspective. But, as Nietzsche teaches with the creation of the Overman, when man ends up feeling the dismay of nothingness in front of himself, it means that it is necessary to give life to an Overman, ready to face existence through opportunities and differences. The current nihilistic condition, therefore, is precisely an indicator of the need to go further, to overcome the current situation. The acceptance of one’s condition is, in fact, the only starting point to be able to face the new ands the becoming. The man himself, who until now has always been the one who manipulated the environment around him, is now himself the object of manipulation (Vatinno, 2011). This really means redefining the terms of the human species, in the light of being in the world together with other organisms. This speculation on Post Humanist ethic, as we can see, is full of profound questions rooted directly in the history of man. In this context, ethic aims to present itself as a practice of openness to the future and to the possible. It can be defined as an ethic of acceptance, using the name given

by Roberto Lacarbonara in his book “Oltre l’identità” (2011).

An ethic that invites us to rethink the concept of belonging, the idea of being together with others and also to promote a new sense of community.

267

8.4

Aesthetic of Post Humanism.

The Post Human world, as we have captured till now, opens up as a new fragmented and differentiated scenario of knowledge.

In fact, if the tendency of human action that reigned until the last century was trying to research totality and unity, towards the achievement of absolute answers, for obtaining a human sovereignty, now this tendency is starting to get reversed. What we are entering now is a thought of deconstruction, a process of breaking down, diverting, adapting and renewing what are the traditional constructs. Deconstruction as a decomposition of hierarchies, by virtue of a general openness.

As explained by professor Alberto Abruzzese, the basic strategic concept for being able to think of man within Post Humanism is to acquire and internalize the idea of part ​​ as opposed to the idea of ​​totality. The process that goes from totality to partiality is quite clear: if, until now, man has believed to have the totality of the world, dominating it, now he begins to be convinced that also the world dominates man; humans are only a part of a whole in which everything is related to the other (2005).

The idea of being involved in a common ecology with different organisms provokes the need of a continuous research of the relationships that pass among these. It is, more specifically, a practice of postponement and continuous discussion of any rigidity: a process of “crossing conceptual bridges, for achieving a feeling of indefiniteness on the border between a past with which the rupture is evident and a future without identity” (Lacarbonara, 2011).

All this leads to the definition of Post Humanism as a plural contamination, also visual, which sees the opening of unprecedented points of observation, decentralized, indefinite and above all transitive. This condition, anyway, doesn’t have to be confounded with the contemporary condition explained at the beginning of chapter two that sees humans as flaneurs, wondering around with elusive perceptions and undifferentiated fluxes of interaction. What we are entering and considering now is a process of discovery guided always by critical sense.

268

Figure 54. Nightlife green Japanese mushrooms, greenlane.com, 2019.

All what discussed till here leads us to say that the aesthetic of Post Humanism is the aesthetic of the invisible: it is the mysterious fascination of what awaits us, of what lies beyond the representative possibilities that we see now (Abruzzese, 2005).

Moreover, Post Humanism, according to its theories, seems to promote the idea of hybridization: a metamorphosis between different forms and identities. Post Humanism welcomes scenarios in which man changes his own identity, in order to hybridize it with the ones of other different species. At this point, man is not only the result of the evolution of his genre, but he is also the result of his own manipulations, which are reaching ever wider spaces and contexts.

So, for concluding, the abandonment of the personal point of view and the consequent acquisition of a transitive and intersubjective point of being, together with the openness and the desire of a cross fertilization are what, in summary, distinguish the aesthetic of this philosophical current.

269

8.5 Post Humanist thinking and design.

These emergent discussions around Post Humanism from different perspectives emphasize, in any case, the interrelation between human and non human actors. And, in the frame of my research, it comes automatic a further discussion: in fact, if what defines design from the end of last century is the concept of human-centric design, what is going to happen now, with these reflections? The user-centered paradigm is currently suffering the implications of the ongoing technological and environmental transformations; in consequence, designers are being challenged to focus on even more complex socio-technical systems.

It is then necessary to consider and evaluate potential new design perspectives that might better support values such as equality and justice for humans and also non humans, that have been traditionally ignored in design processes.

As also stated by Victor Papanek in his famous book “Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and social change”, “we are in the business of exporting lifestyles”, in the sense that we are acting at the core of the human (or, in this case, non human) life experience, building it, for some ways, and influencing it, for others (1985).

We said that the developments we are promoting blur the boundaries between the familiar binaries of human and non human, culture and nature, and human and animal that have dominated western thinking since, at least, the Renaissance. Non humans, either environmental or technological, present a new kind of agency in the world. And, so, they open up and reveal new perspectives and questions about what, how, and why we can engage in the design of a world over the human. Hybrid and non binary modes of thinking, better design methods, frameworks, and practices

270

that can address the challenges we are facing as a planet.

Let’s consider for a while, for example, the process of ethnographic research: this tool, we can say, is a clear example of the human-centered approach that design is using these days. In fact, methods such as observation and interviews allow us, as designers, to deepen user needs, wishes and directions to follow in the design process. So, here is the point: what new languages, methods, and alternatives systems should we embrace, for an even more inclusive, and Post Human, design? For sure, this requires new forms of expertise and, at the same time, it opens up new problems, as well as opportunities and solutions.

Some questions from where we could start reflecting on could be: Who or what, human/non human, human/animal, individual/network, are the users, and for whom or what should the design process be undertaken?

Which is the relationship, competitively/collaboratively, hierarchically/horizontally, that passes between human, machines, and natural systems in a specific context considered?

What new assets, as well as stakeholders, are needed in order to adequately design for this problem?

How are ethics, values, and responsibilities reflected and embedded throughout this new design process?

How do we build empathy for every participant in a specific complex system? (Baumgardner, Stern, Donahue, 2017).

These questions show how the focal point is the emerging of hybrid configurations of action, in order to integrate human and non human: “to talk about design is to talk about the state of our species” (Colombian, Wigley, 2016); and if, the totality of species is not made anymore only by humans, it follows that also design should be not tailored only on us.

Laura Forlano, in one of her paper, explains how there are already some signs and ideas of projects working into the field of design and drawing on these varied lineages with discussions about decentering the human, non anthropocentrism, and human/non human relations. This shift towards the Post Human includes the consideration of animals, machines, and, drawing on Tim Ingold’s

271

more expansive definition (2010), other things such as trees, rocks and other kinds of everyday artifacts and objects.

But, the designer goes on, understandably, many of these emergent projects, at the moment, are drawn on speculative design and design fiction. Anyway, as we continue to extend all of these emerging conversations, the process will become for sure less speculative and more based on common modes of the concrete world (2016). In my opinion, a Post Human design is a practice that combines the interests of humans with the well being of an enlarged community. It is a process that follows equality, that has respect for the surrounding, without exploitation. And, after this, it also includes the creation, in a general sense, of a better environment for all beings.

Let’s go back for a moment to the questions that I was reflecting on a couple of paragraphs above: the first questions are already been discussed, the ones that concern the type of users that could be the users of a specific design outcome and the relations that pass among them, together with the assets needed for an adequate design. The deepest part, and also the more open, is the one that regards ethic and values. The issue of giving the right values to design is also a contemporary matter, since it is no more enough to design something without knowing why we are doing it. The evaluation of the impact of our design is the core of our work nowadays. And correct values, based on true needs and insights, is the driver of the design production: the reshape of environments, tools and processes is only a consequence of this. More practically, a good intention in design means to establish a relation of trust with users. And, in this framework of Post Human, at the light of what expressed till now, trust that has to be intended as the bridge between known and unknown (Vittrup Christensen, 2020).

With a Post Human design, it is then creates a force we can give to people in order to explore the unknown in front of them, and in front to all of us. Establishing trust with people means to truly engage with them, human and non humans that they can be. And this concept of trust is basilar: as explains Giuseppe Vatinno (2011), “give a man a belief and he will do anything, because, in reality, humanity only suffers in the face of the great sense of emptiness of a lack

272

of meaning”. And this, by observing the evolution throughout the history, is true: humanity has always needed to believe in something that surpasses and transcends the inherent weakness of his condition, in a sort of mass psychology.

So, from this we can say that design, acting as a cultural mediator and enhancer, could be the coordinator as a collective strength and intellect. Moreover, as said, it has to go beyond the pure rational and logical thought, even if it is based on this, in order to build also beliefs for human and non humans. They have to perceive that his life has a meaning. And with a trustworthy relationship, firstly they can have consciousness and clarity about what is happening; furthermore, they can believe in it.

As new technologies continue to advance, the design industry will need to grow and evolve along with it. According to design educator Anastasiia Raina, it’s not too early to begin considering what the roles of designers might be in a future where tasks like layout and production are completely automated. What would “human-centered design” mean in a future where our client-partners are robots, or even non-human lifeforms? To Raina, Post Human Design is not so much an aesthetic as a design methodology with roots in Postmodernism. It implies the importance for creating empathy for the Other through design practices.

(Andersen, 2019).

Since our understanding of the world and of design has always been shaped by the act of elevating man over the nonhuman realm on a hierarchical scale, the measure of all things, as it can be seen in Leonardo da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man or in Corbusier’s Modular Man, we now have to enlarge this assumption, in order to be prepared to face new challenges also in design field. We are gradually becoming aware that man is not the center of the universe, and that we need to expand our understanding of what it means to

273

274

Figure 55. The Vitruvian Man, Leonardo da Vinci, 1490 ca.

Figure 56. Modulor, Le Corbusier, 1900.

Both of these are examples of normative of human body as a universal calibration standard. They are typical anthropocentric constructs developed throughout the centuries.

275

Figure 57. Scanning Hands, Ji Kim, 2019. The advent of biometric technology made our body equal to our identity and we see our digital counterpart online. This website visualizes the moment a physical and a digital body meets.

276

be human today. Following this line of thought, it can be noticed how these notions seep into all fields of design. Design is founded on the understanding of the human as a discrete, individual subject. However, a modern understanding of biology and our relationship with advanced technology, along with a recognition of the historical injustices that have marginalized certain voices, are beginning to call into question the centrality of human beings as it’s traditionally understood in the natural order.

I see Post Humanism as a methodology and a conceptual framework that can be applied to the field of design to develop methods and strategies that allow us to co-navigate the constantly evolving design landscape.

Human design with all of its imperfections and flaws is an important distinguishing component in the age of technology, and it needs to be made visible in the design work that we produce. Faced with machines that outperform humans in a variety of tasks, we are forced to re-examine the roles and design methods for the Post Human epoch and develop radically human creative approaches to pave the way for formal experimentation in the age of the algorithm. Interfacing art with science, for encouraging radical thought, free from the pressures, coercion, and limitations of the pure commercial design. Post Human design facilitates spaces where we build an understanding of our contemporary issues through a multidisciplinary approach.

277

8.6

Hybridization of Species: a new place in nature for man.

The diversity of races, religions, sexes, orientations and points of view are trying to become an accepted norm of today’s society. Moreover, teams of humans and artificially intelligent creations worth together in many fields and occasions. But now the discussion is going even further then this: are we determined to acknowledge biodiversity? Can the society now be called multicultural as well as multi species? Throughout the world, people live in various forms of mixed communities. And more, animals are also an important segment of our society because they are an inseparable part of our system of culture and symbols, populating our literature, art, cinema and mass culture and everyday language. But, imagining a life in such a wide system sometimes still seems to be an utopian vision.

And here a scenario can be open: the specific Sapiens environment consists not only of an objective physical space, but also it implies a dimension of symbols and culture. So, even if this multi species idea seems to be difficult to accept in a physical space, at least in the cultural realm, we might have to abandon the anthropocentric view and begin to view the other organisms as our equals, acknowledging their otherness (Mo Muziejus, 2019). This theory is also supported by professor Vittorio Gallese, which claims that our entire living experience is based on two different level: the one of presence and the one of meaning (2020). The biodiversity and the continuity that unites all forms of life has to start to take root on the meaning level, in order, in future, to achieve also the physical one. So, we can say that all the reflections we are making have to be post on to a cultural and cognitive level, more then thinking it as something concrete in the material world. Also all Post Humanist trends of thought speak very transparent: they assert that any categorical difference between humans and animals and man’s supremacy is not a natural or physical issue

278

issue, but it is mainly the result of a cultural arrangement.

Many are the different environments that exist within our world: thus, at this point, species have to try to enhance their capacities for the creation of hybrid environments (Haraway, 1991). And this, for sure, is a challenge for our fundamental belief of reality, self and human capabilities.

In order to reimagine the human in his new place we need to unpack the ontological presuppositions that enables us to be at the top of the chain of being. The shift that has to be done goes from the concept of individuality of species to trans individuality, seen as a mutual constitution between living organisms and the collectivity. Trans individuality implies that an organism is not understood as an independent entity, but as within processes of affective and social association (Bottici, 2020). We cannot reimagining the human without reimagining the entire world.

The imagination of a multi species environment implies that inanimate things will acquire identity and presence in our lives. Enabling the living and non living things around us to communicate on our terms and in our language allows us to better relate to non human processes and phenomena by providing a framework for reciprocal communication. In fact, when something speaks a language different from the one in which we are naturally fluent, we are less likely to pay attention to it, or often, simply we don’t have the ability to communicate with it. So, from this we understand the need of a shared environment, with updated modes of relations and communications. In this context of new perspectivism, it would be incorrect to imagine the others as humans, considering them as anthropomorphic; they have to be intended as organisms with specific characteristics and interests, and, on the contrary, they shouldn’t be thought with the attribution of human characteristic. Something that for us, as human, is considered marginal or of less importance, in fact, can be put at the center by other beings. So, a common ecology of multi species means also to take the perspective of the other, merging boundaries and shifting point of view (Satkauskas, 2020).

279

Even if it is difficult to speculate around this theme, I believe that, if we suspend for a moment our life and we reflect on this, we understand that this is the direction to be followed, especially if we look and learn from the past. Some threads, in fact, are part of our common culture: humans are now aware of the impact of their activities and technologies on the entire planet. As we live thought environmental disasters, we have lost faith in our moral authority and in ourselves as creators of a sustainable civilization. The rapid development of biotech and information technology in the XXI century has now given humans the opportunity to actively participate in the creation of new life forms and to imagine a hybrid society of the future populated by organic and mechanical beings. But, at the same time, we know that mechanical organisms and their growing power may soon transform us into a lower life form. The necessity of repositioning is clear to everyone, as well as the living together with such novel forms of life will require humans to find new ways to deal with our own existence and its meaning. So, the hybrid coexistence proposed for sure is a challenge that has to be embrace, full of doubts but also full of possibilities. In fact, why must humans be limited in their one anthropocentric reality? The margin of growth is potential unlimited.

I want to conclude this last chapter with a quote by Nietzsche that, already in the last century, I thought he was having a super contemporary attitude towards man, society, culture and environment: “Man is a transitive condition, complete but incomplete. We are called to a re-socialization of our habitat, in the spaces and in the dynamics of everyday life. The greatness of man is being a bridge and not a purpose� (Nietzsche, 1883).

280

Figure 58. Galaxy Shot, Hubble Space Telescope Images, Nasa, 2020.

281

282

Figure 59. From aliens to ancestors: the definition of an universal language, personal scan of pages 142-143 of the book “The Politics of Design�, Ruben Pater, 2016.

283

8.7 Animal, Human, Robot: a visual narration. “Animal, Human, Robot� is the title of an exhibition hosted at Mo Muziejus, center for modern art, in Vilnius, during the last year. I found out this exposition while I was living and doing an internship in Vilnius and also, while I was looking for inspirations for my thesis topic. And this is exactly what I got. When I bumped into this museum, I found really interesting the selection of masterpieces, as well as I was fascinated by the thread chosen for the narration of all the exposition. So, it is in this context that, after all the speculations done, I want to re-present in synthesis some of the main steps of it, the ones that I consider more related and pertinent to this framework. In this way, I can consider this exhibition both as the starting and the ending point of my research, in a sort of circle of thoughts.

HORIZONTALITY OF SPECIES (1): In the ancient times, everyone was animal.

ANTHROPOCENTRISM AND HIERARCHY (2): Centuries passed, and the coexistence between man and other living creatures becomes unpair: man above, everyone else below.

HYBRIDIZATION OF SPECIES (3): In the comtemporary age, man is building relations with technological organisms, as well as other living beings.

284

THE PROGRESSION OF SPECIES

1

2

3

Graph 10. The Progression of Species, personal visualization, 2020.

285

MYTHS AND NARRATIONS Depiction of imaginary and multifaceted creatures as a modern interpretation of ancient narratives, with visions and symbolic meanings. It is an opportunities for interpretative psychologization and moralization.

Figure 60. Sagittarius, Algis Griskevicius, 2006.

286

NATURE MORTE Depiction of other organisms is often associate with their death.

Modern humans wants to observe living animals from a safe point of view. Also, it presents interest and opening towards exotic creatures.

Figure 61. Tradition, Aiste Kisarauskaite, 2012.

287

OBJECTIFICATION & FUNCTIONALIZATION The exploitation of living creatures. From here the way of saying: “treat something like an animal”. Today, the view that animals must serve humans and that we can use them to meet our needs is coming under increasing criticism.

Figure 62. Mandala with Chickens, Robertas Antinis, 2008.

288

TAXIDERMY MUSEUMS After the classical paradigm of knowledge, animals began to decline, restricted to live in specific contexts, becoming a thing to see (museums, zoos).

Figure 63. June, Kristina Inciuraite, 2015.

289

BIOLOGY & TECHNOLOGY Interspecies organisms and dismembered mechanical hybrids imbued with female and male characteristics, where biological features are combined with geometric or inorganically shapes.

Figure 64. Quarantine, Rimas Sakalauskas, 2018.

290

COMPANIONS Human-animal symbiosis as a sort of metamorphosis and harmonious coexistence. these are surrealistic forms of inextricably conjoined multi-species organisms.

Figure 65. Extrakorporal, Pakui Hardware, 2018.

291

VISIONS OF THE FUTURE Final turning point: what we consider a vision of the future may already be in existence, just not ye accessible to everyone.

Figure 66. IsourceD, Daiga Grantina, 2015.

292

Figure 67. Pathfinder, Daiga Grantina, 2015.

293

Personal Contribution.

Playing with the concept of perspective, it is shown that this is only a relative concept, that often doesn’t allow us to see everything. It is enough just to look from another point of view in order to notice new aspects. Anyway, we have to be aware that there will never be a moment or a case where everything is visible and known. The inspiration that has been used for the production of this sequence are the Zen Gardens, where there is no point of view from which it is possible to see everything. Any point of view, in fact, excludes some elements for sure, promoting and enhancing a process of continuous change and adaption for discovery. Also the “Progetto Disequilibrante” by Ugo La Pietra, that tells a journey where the audience is invited to forget sense of direction for finding the heart of the work, has been a sparkling case. With this collection, where the boundaries between the pieces are more than blurred, the author build an heterogeneous collection of different experiences around man and the way he experiences his environment.

Going back to my personal work, the aim of this sequence of 5 pieces is to take the speculative design to its last step, that is to involve the interlocutor in the debate, in order to stimulate a reflective process together. This role of “activator”, that speculative design covers, permits to not consider the discussion as far from us, but, instead, to be participant in it.

The setting chosen is extremely minimalistic, with a metallic aura that places it in a timeless atmosphere. The focus is posed on the few objects present on the scene. The concept of perspective is also accentuated by the choice of using a 3d aesthetic, that is, for excellence, the type of environment where it’s possible to control to millimeters the perspective chosen. This contribution has been inserted here, at the end of the speculation done over Post Humanism, for providing a reflective framework with a sort of personal identification in

294

it. The change of point of view, that characterizes each step of the sequence, should appear as a game for the observer, that, following it step by step, is able to see the progression of the case. The observer, while being still, can watch all the changes that take place in front of him, in all the works of the sequence. The design of this series started from an unconscious flow of thoughts in my mind, that I was doing while looking for inspirations for my research; after that I noticed that this sequence, adjusted, was assuming coherence, I decided to make it an integral part of the work, as an enhancer of the meanings I’m trying to transmit in this part of the thesis.

Each element represented in the scene has a specific purpose: the curtain stands for the metaphorical division between the part of what is visible for us and the part of the invisible. It also represents all the anthropocentric constructs that lead man to divide him from other creatures, raising him above them. The headless mannequin identifies the man itself, who finally frees himself from mental constructs and lets himself go to explore the unknown. This is the condition sine qua non for starting the narration of the series. In fact, being anchored to anthropocentric constructs doesn’t allow us to proceed towards future directions. The mask represents our perceptions, and the important role they have for us. They are the set through which we experience the world. The sea urchin and the stone stand, respectively, for the animal world and the mineral one, intended as symbols of other beings.

Lastly, the human hand, present in the last picture, represents the human action, that actively intervenes for defining future directions.

295

The first step of the sequence has only anthropomorphic elements: man understands that his place in nature is going towards a redefinition; anyway it’s just the beginning: he is still dedicated to the exploration of his surrounding context, paying attention to his interests, without looking at what stands hidden, metaphorically, behind him. It is a reflection on how humans, till nowadays, have been only concentrated on them, being posed at the center. But, things are starting to change.

296

1/5

Figure 68. Perspectivism-sequence1, personal visualization, 2020.

297

The second step, with a zoom out, clearly shows the hidden part I mentioned before. Other beings are present on our world, living on our same ground, but, with all the constructs we created in the centuries, it is like they are below, left apart. Just think for a moment to remove the curtain that stands in the middle: we would all be in the same ecology, without differences.

298

2/5

Figure 69. Perspectivism-sequence2, personal visualization, 2020.

299

This scene is the exact scene 2, but turned the other way around: what before was the background is now the foreground. Non-human creatures, speculating in a Post Humanist context, are assuming importance.

But here’s the point: none of the elements changed or evolved, only the perspective of the vision.

300

3/5

Figure 70. Perspectivism-sequence3, personal visualization, 2020.

301

With a new perspective, taken from above, all the elements are finally clearly depicted and shown: this wide perspective opens the boundaries that till this moment were present. The curtain is still there, because, as we said before, it is not possible to see everything from a single point of view. But this step of the sequence stands for a mental opening of knowledge, for the acceptance of a new common ecology.

302

4/5

Figure 71. Perspectivism-sequence4, personal visualization, 2020.

303

The last step returns to a perspective similar to the first one: man has assumed more awareness on his condition. Anyway, something new is always ready to come, and so, this sequence could be considered as a circle, that, never ending, always brings additional knowledge on some aspects of our living. In this last shot the mask is substitute with an hand: perceptions are, for a while, left apart, while the human action is taking over. Acting over being limited to passive perceptions. Acting for proceeding forward, acting for improving, acting for reaching better conditions.

304

5/5

Figure 72. Perspectivism-sequence5, personal visualization, 2020.

305

Conclusion of the chapter.

The evolution of human, together with the relations that he establishes with the other organisms and all the social constructs around, has always made automatic the individuation of specific ages through the different centuries. In fact, the need to mark the periods of the past, of the present and also of the future with codified nomenclatures seems indispensable. It is a tautology that sees a proliferation of prefixes such as anti-, post-, neo-. Each of these paradigms tends to connote and to delimit specific cultural languages within precise categories. In particular relation to our discussion, by the second half of the XX century, lots of post-something movements started to raise: poststructuralism, postmodernism, and, of course, post humanism, from the 90s. All of these currents have a common trait: rejecting, deconstructing and reacting over some aspects of the everyday life of the past age.

All the deconstructive theories of last century show a common need of change: especially now, it is a moment of discontinuity and of substantial change of cultural paradigm. It is the moment of an anthropologic repositioning. It is the time where man, always fascinated by all types of existing forms of life, starts to considering them establishing horizontal relations, and not anymore hierarchically being at the top.

It is also clear that, on the other side, thought evolves so rapidly that, from the inside, it is seen as a fluid perspective of what is happening, that it is difficult to confine and bound in specific periods. So, in consequence to this, we also see humanity as an always transitional entity in the continuous evolution of life and world. At this point of the evolution, humans as well as other being are developing awareness of thoughts, emotions and intentions of a common and shared ecology. We can say we are a step towards Post Humanism, in the sense that we are trying to overcome the socio cultural crisis of nowadays, in order to open up a new scenario more meaningful and integrated for our life.

306

IT IS A MOMENT OF DISCONTINUITY AND CHANGE OF CULTURAL PARADIGM. IT IS THE MOMENT OF AN ANTHROPOLOGIC REPOSITIONING.

307

CONCLUSION OF THE RESEARCH

308

309

Conclusion.

We come here to the conclusive section of this research thesis, in the part in which I intend to show the links between the various topics faced with the discipline of design, in order to provide a systemic view of what has been a broad and multifaceted discussion. What has been done with this work has been to grasp some new and emerging issues, trends and themes, discussing them and creating a narration combining some classical and traditional references with other more new, futuristic and also multimedia contents, for having an original mix of perspectives and points of view, for gathering different insights and for building up also a new ecology made up from different fields of research and investigation. All, at the end, has been reported to the discipline of design, showing how any aspect treated has correlation with this discipline.

Let’s start by saying that design is a discipline that, especially nowadays, ic characterized by flexibility and constant changes: we often don’t work in a specific field but, as a continuous flow, we blur the boundaries between all the different sub categories. Moreover, acting and working while adapting to changes implies that our role is not only to design, but also to understand what designing means and, more important, what it affects. And this assumption works in both directions: socio cultural changes affect design, that adapt its practice in consequence, as well as design, with its constant innovative approach helps to shape and modify society, people and the environment around.

As explained in chapter 2, in fact, we are in the middle of a change of paradigm, where the information society we are living in is provoking a sensation of fake freedom and continuous surveillance, where people are mass-communicating online and offline in digital swarms (Byung-Chul Han, 2015), but where at the same time they feel lonely, frustrated, over exposed, and so they just fluctuate around without precise aims. On the contrary, they are desiring authenticity, higher matters and values that go over the material things. They want to feel realized within the society, having meaningful experiences, not being manipulated. So, within this frame, we understand a first new role of design: going over the pure production of products or services, it has to look at higher purposes, understanding which are the values we are designing for, and, in consequence, which is the framework we are creating for action.

310

Why are we designing? What are we designing? What are we designing for? We have to understand which are the impacts of every design we make.

Since we are constantly reframing our approach and continuously acquiring knowledge, we have to build our own story of designing, having at the base clear what are we affecting and impacting when we are designing. Designers are, for sure, involved in all the consequence, good and bad, mass communication has brought to our lives: we have to try now to leverage on positive values, now more then ever listening to people, designing for meaningful experiences, innovating and bringing change.

Chapter 3, with its reflections over blended reality and new media, showed us how nowadays communication is based on dynamics performances, where people are not only consumers, but they are “prosumers� (Manovich, 2013), in the sense that they also contribute, with their interactions, to the building of a specific process of communication. And this, referring back to the design field, is for sure a positive aspect, since it implies the constant introduction of ways of acquiring and distributing knowledge. The idea of enabling experiences can be linked to the co-creative processes used a lot in design, especially in service design, which consider the participative approach as an enhancer for analyses and development. It gathers lots of points of view and inspirations for proceeding with the work: in this case, regarding these aspects I don’t think design should change, but, even, should embrace them more. Over this, we also have to consider that we are working in strict contact with these new media and, in particular, I believe we are affected by two of the characteristics they have: remixability and hybridization. These affect both people and us: for people, as already explained, these cause always new type of behaviors and experiences. But, what can be interesting to consider, is the mirror of these concepts on our role: we also have to become, in our approach, hybrid and vertical. For being effective, in fact, we have to contaminate ourselves from different fields and situations, in a continuous upgrade of knowledge

311

obtained from the most various sources. By doing this, we can go beyond what is our current state, and blend with much more. The idea of a “one kind” designer is not enough anymore, since he cannot deal with the complexity of nowadays. We have to learn how to manage this complexity and we have to build our own design identity, with an original and personal mix of skills.

Going on with the flow, let’s now consider chapter 4, together with chapter 1, that we left apart previously. The choice of focusing part of the analysis on synthetic media derives, firstly, from a personal fascination, and, after, because of some deep issues that they are leveraging with their raise. Without recalling all the context around them, I’ll go in this case straight to the heart of the discussion: with their revolutionary new language of expression, they brought a breath of fresh air in the media landscape, together, with specific issues. With synthetic media the concept of real is posed under discussion, losing the boundary with its opposite concept of fake. The real-fake issue provokes the need, in our era of post-truth, of a redefinition of these concepts. We can affirm that is no longer possible to define as real what we touch or smell, what is tangible and material.

It is a definition that is no longer enough. What stands at the core of this, and that also implies the role of the design, goes around the concept of trust. Providing trustworthy media, experiences and performances is what, nowadays, can permits to perceive them as real, authentic and solid.

Defining trust is, as well complex as it was for the previous concepts; it is difficult to provide a complete definition but, anyway, each of us has in mind what trust is. Trust is what we, as designers, can use to build relationships with people, and through trustworthy relationships we can then build great products or services. Trust has to become a fundamental and integral part of every interaction we work on.

So, leveraging from the emotive part of people, trust is the medium used by designers and others to achieve persuasion, to move people and users towards specific directions: it is the core of the experience. From all of this we understand why it is difficult to define trust: it is much more then a single word. But without trust, people feel vulnerable.

Trust means care, safe, confidence, belief, solidity, honesty and more.

312

THE RETHINK OF TRUST ENHANCES THE ETHICAL PART OF DESIGNING. This rethink of the concept of trust enhances which is the ethical part of design: a good intention in design is what should be the driver for the design process itself; understanding it is at the core of our work. It is not enough anymore only to design a product or a service without looking at the implications of it. We need to investigate the impacts of our design, trying to mitigate the negative aspects, while leveraging on the positive ones. Trust, so, is intended as a mutual relation between people and designers, for achieving real experiences. Reaching this step, we can say, in a provocative way, that trust becomes a willingness to make ourselves vulnerable because we expect the broader system to act in ways that support our values and interests.

Chapter 5, with the discussion of the virtual dimension, goes on by introducing new interesting elements of discussion: in particular, related to the design field it has been discussed the link between reality and representation. Representation, in the discipline of design, can be associate to the practice of prototyping, used for proposing solutions and investigating future scenarios. Using the technique of representation is a visual mode for exploring future alternatives, by providing a concrete framework for work and research.

Becoming a real tool, representation can also be used in participative scenario building, with activities of co-design and open brain storming. In fact, involving people within the design process, and doing this by providing a visual context to work on is much easier and effective. They can have an impacting vision, making more simple to find strengths, wea-

313

knesses and insights. We can say that representation can be seen as a potential model for providing solution in the design field and in research projects, providing lucid visualizations of states that are still not concrete and real, but that are potential and possible in our next future.

Chapter 6, by facing the analysis of the relationship between human and non-human, in particular robots, avatars and tech devices, illustrates implications on the design field that can go around the keyword “envisioning�. The progresses made by technology, that has lead to the development of these type of relations, in fact, has caused also a lot of questioning, ethical debates and doubts. And, in particular, since this area of investigation is quite new, what is happening is a proliferate of theories and models that are trying to provide explanations of what is around us, and more important, what is likely to happen in the next future.

Envisioning is an implicit part of design that has to gain back its importance: it’s fundamental to investigate reasons and possible consequences of a specific situation.

It is the fertile ground where we can build on. As already said, intending design as a continuous flow means to be always ready to assume specific insights and to challenge them for a new reframing. The phenomenon of Uncanny Valley (Mori, 1970), the theory of emotional coordination (Dumouchel, Damiano, 2019) and the Futures Cone (Hancock, Bezold, 1994) are just examples of how design can bring innovation, by speculating on emerging aspects and by proposing new alternatives and explanations over them. Also, the case mentioned of Black Mirror, together with the hypothetical construction of dystopian futures is an example of activity of envisioning: the production of provocative media contents leads people to reflect on future possibilities, for helping them to orient their choices and actions.

We come now almost at the end, with chapter 7, focused on the role of narration within the socio cultural environment, seen as the cause of all constructs built by man, such as the anthropocentrism itself. Narration is a deliberate human activity: it is consequent that, also while designing, it covers an important role. To narrate means to represent reality; moreover, it is also a tool for identity building, either individual or collective (Venditti, Piredda, Mattana, 2017). We, as designers, have always been storytellers, building an imaginary story for telling what we are developing, and also what stands

314

around it. Storytelling becomes a tool for narrating complex stories and situations, which otherwise would be too difficult to represent. The storytelling activity isn’t built on improvised stories, but, as a full design practice, it is based on expertise and knowledge. Storytelling represents one of the different ways for developing design actions, especially when we have to collaborates or deals with different people. Storytelling can become the medium for moving inner feelings of people and for enhancing a change of perspectives and actions in the world we live in. In our contemporary age, we can all agree on the need of positive narrations: our work, thus, is not only to provide a specific and technical solution to different issues; we need to create stories that can provide a common sense and envision future possible ideas for society and people.

Storytelling can become an engine for change, in the sense that it can open our mind and raise questions that, maybe, we never thought about. It can make us looking at reality from a different point of view.

We then reach the last chapter of the research, chapter 8, the one that is more futuristic and open towards new perspective, the one that, by investigating currents such as Trans Humanism and Post Humanism, explains the need of a new common ecology, in which man stands no longer alone at the center, but it is well integrated between the other beings. This, in consequence, causes changement also in the role of design, that has also to be re interpreted in a Post Humanist design thinking. This, as well explained in 8.5, shows that the user-centered approach has to be overcome, starting not only to consider the needs of people, but also considering all the organisms around. It is no longer possible to satisfy people causing damages to other beings, and exploiting them. What is needed is an hybrid and non binary mode of thinking, better design methods, frameworks, and practices that can address the challenges we are facing as a planet. Talking about design now means to talk addressing to human and non human, to an enlarged community. I’ll recall here some questions explored in chapter 8, for understanding how deep is the transfor-

315

mation that design is encountering.

Who or what, human/non human, human/animal, individual/network, are the users, and for whom or what should the design process be undertaken? Which is the relationship, competitively/collaboratively, hierarchically/horizontally, that passes between human, machines, and natural systems in a specific context considered? What new assets, as well as stakeholders, are needed in order to adequately design for this problem? How are ethics, values, and responsibilities reflected and embedded throughout this new design process? How do we build empathy for every participant in a specific complex system?

With this perspective, the one of Post Humanism, still so open at the moment, design becomes a bridge between known and unknown. With a Post Human design, it is possible to explore the endless possibilities we have in front of us and that we can embrace; also, this force can be given and transmitted to people in order to be able to explore the unknown in front of them. Design, we can say, acting as a cultural mediator and enhancer, could become the coordinator of a collective strength and intellect. It has to go beyond the pure rational and logical thought, even if it is based on this, in order to build also beliefs for humans and non humans. Design can build awareness and meaning, it can become the catalyst of a collective consciousness, ready to face what is going to happen in the next future.

So, after having better explicated the correlation between design field and the different arguments mentioned, we can go back to the thesis questions expressed in the introduction part and provide a final and synthetic answer.

Concerning the first part, related to the role that emerging technologies, such as synthetic media, play on a cultural, social and ethical level, we can say that they are fostering new ways of expression, provoking the raise of new type of relations that intervenes between man and other organisms. All of this, I believe, helps us to define the most desirable future for us, in a new and shared common ecology. And, within this, the role of design is inserted: in a context that is always changing, design has to change and adapt, following the flow of the events. At the same time, it also has to affect these, directing the growth towards positive and fertile directions.

Design contributes to identity building and to the reification of values of commu-

316

nity and society, practicing and producing artifacts and intangible relations that have a transformative potential. I believe the elements able to change and adapt the role of the designer are the values in act, in which people believe, or the values emerging that need attention. Also, the awareness of specific conditions is another element that can better direct the practice of design, by trading and exchange meanings. The design impact is a dynamic response to a community, based on active interactions and activities between the parts. And even if design cannot be bounded in a specific definition or area of action, the skills and expertise of it, I believe, have found an appropriate, clear and evident way of action.

Lastly, by understanding these changes we get that design and communication are never neutral, since it affects and it is affected by the contexts in which it is operating. And it is only by being aware of what is happening around us that we can try to overcome biases and inequalities; since nowadays societies are becoming complex and diverse, designers can no longer assume that all their audience shares the same visual language and values. Acting and adapting, this is what we have to do.

So, here it comes to conclusion our exploration: it is clearly visible that our work doesn’t exist in vacuum.

We cannot delete the concrete environments that is around our design activity, but, on the contrary, we have to build on it, enhancing change. Of course, there is no a correct or unique point of view on the discussion, since lots of aspects are still emerging and developing, and no-one known where we are exactly going. Anyway, as Papanek was saying in his book “Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and social change�, already in 1985, we, as designers, are in the business of exporting lifestyles, meaning that design practice is basic to all human activities. The planning and patterning of any act towards a desired and foreseeable end constitutes a never ending process, a challenge of research and a fulfillment of knowledge.

317

BIBLIOGRAPHY

318

319

Bibliography.

AdEspresso by Hootsuite. (2018, August 2018). “CGI Instagram Influencers: 3 Strategies Marketers Can Learn From Lil Miquela”. in “https://adespresso.com/”. [https://adespresso.com/blog/cgi-instagram-influencers/, consulted on: Septemer, 16th 2020].

Affabile, L. (2020, April 14). “Film da rivedere in quarantena. Her di Spike Jonze e il nuovo valore della tecnologia”. in “Artribune”. [https://www.artribune.com/arti-performative/cinema/2020/04/ film-her-spike-jonze-tecnologia/, consulted on: October, 19th 2020].

Andersen, M. (2019, March 11th). “What Does “Posthuman Design” Actually Mean?”. in “https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/”. [https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/what-does-posthuman-design-actually-mean/, consulted on: November, 16th 2020].

Ars Electronica. (2020). “Ars Electronica Festival”. [https://ars.electronica.art/news/de/, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

ArtCenter College of Design, (2017). “Defining Practices”. [https://www.definingpractices.com/, consulted on: November, 4th 2020].

Baudelaire, C. (2017). “Il pittore della vita moderna”. Abscondita.

Berger, J. (2008). “Ways of seeing”. Penguin Classics.

Bertolotti, E.; Daam, H.; Piredda, F.; Tassinari, V. (2016). “The Pearl Diver. The designer as storyteller”. in “https://archive.org/”. [https://ia801604.us.archive.org/22/items/ThePearlDiver_DESIS/ThePearlDiver_DESIS.pdf, consulted on: November, 10th 2020].

Blanton, R.; Carbajal, D. (2019). “Not a Girl, Not Yet a Woman: a critical case study on social media, deception, and Lil Miquela”. in “https://www.igi-global.com/”. [https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/nota-girl-not-yet-a-woman/230747, consulted on: October, 13th 2020].

Bojanic, F. (2019). “The virtual other: negotiating personhood in the digital age”. in “Central European University Library”. [http://www.etd.ceu.edu/2019/bojanic_filip.pdf, consulted on: October, 12th 2020].

Bolter, J. D. (2016). “Posthumanism”. in “https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/”. [https://onlinelibrary.wiley. com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect220, consulted on: November, 2nd 2020].

Bolter, J. D.; Grusin, R. (2003). “Remediation. Competizione e integrazione tra media vecchi e nuovi”. Guerini e Associati.

Bonami, F. (2019). “Post. L’opera d’arte nell’epoca della sua riproducibilità sociale”. Feltrinelli Editore.

Borthwick, J. (2018, July 29). “Synthetic Media”. in “https://medium.com/”. [https://render.betaworks. com/synthetic-media-d0adcc53800a, consulted on: October, 7th 2020].

Bottà, D. (2019, September 25). “Speculative o critical design: immaginare possibili futuri per agire nel presente”. in “https://medium.com/”. [https://medium.com/uxlab-it/speculative-o-critical-design-immaginare-possibili-futuri-per-agire-nel-presente-769afa956779, consulted on: November, 6th 2020].

320

Brud. (2020, July 25). “Miquela may seem like your average pop star, but she’s not even real”. in “https:// www.instagram.com/”. [https://www.instagram.com/tv/CDC_sq7D7tJ/, consulted on: Septemer, 16th 2020].

Byung-Chul, H. (2014). “La società della trasparenza”. Edizioni Nottetempo.

Byung-Chul, H. (2015). “Nello sciame. Visioni del digitale”. Edizioni Nottetempo.

Caputo, S. (2019, December 13). “Lil Miquela: l’influencer virtuale con 1,8ml di follower”. in “https:// beyondhumanity.altervista.org/”. [https://beyondhumanity.altervista.org/lil-miquela/, consulted on: Septemer, 17th 2020].

Carella, M. (2019, August 20). “Black Mirror: 10 technologies we never want to see in real life”. in “https://www.eu-startups.com/”. [https://www.eu-startups.com/2019/08/black-mirror-10-technologies-wehope-to-never-see-in-real-life/, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

CGI. (2013). “Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus”. Cambridge University Press.

Chandra Babu, S. (2020, January 17). “A 2020 Guide to Synthetic Media”. in “https://blog.paperspace. com/”. [https://blog.paperspace.com/2020-guide-to-synthetic-media/, consulted on: October, 7th 2020].

Crang, M.; Graham, S. (2007). “Sentient cities: ambient intelligence and the politics of urban space”. in “Durham University”. [http://dro.dur.ac.uk/5154/, consulted on: October, 10th 2020].

Crinò, L. (2020, September 22). “Stefano Boeri: ‘L’insondabile sarà in mostra alla Triennale’”. in “https:// rep.repubblica.it/”. [https://rep.repubblica.it/pwa/robinson/2020/09/22/news/stefano_boeri_l_insondabile_sara_in_mostra_alla_triennale_-268211047/?ref=search&awc=15069_1601104386_712689c106e1c88d960e1e76cb8be216&source=AWI_DISPLAY, consulted on: September, 29th 2020].

Daga, M. C.; Barletta, G. (2020, May 26). “Fake news e disinformazione online. Riconoscerne il valore informativo”. in “https://www.milanodigitalweek.com/”. [https://www.milanodigitalweek.com/fake-news-e-disinformazione-online-riconoscerne-il-valore-informativo, consulted on: October, 11th 2020].

Danae. (2019, January 31). “Net Art, Post-internet Art, New Aesthetics: The Fundamentals of Art on the Internet”. in “https://medium.com/”. [https://medium.com/digital-art-weekly/net-art-post-internet-artnew-aesthetics-the-fundamentals-of-art-on-the-internet-55dcbd9d6a5, consulted on: October, 10th 2020].

Debord, G; Vaneigem, R. (1998). “Situazionismo. Materiali per un’economia politica dell’immaginario”.

Massari Editore.

Deloitte Insights. (2020). “Tech Trends 2020”. in “https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en.html”. [https://www2. deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/pt/Documents/tech-trends/TechTrends2020.pdf, consulted on: November, 6th 2020].

Desis Lab. (2020). “Interview with François Jégou”. in “http://www.desisinthemirror.polimi.it/”. [http:// www.desisinthemirror.polimi.it/interview-with-francois-jegou/, consulted on: November, 10th 2020].

Digital Guide Ionos. (2020, March 10). “Deepfake: la contraffazione della prossima generazione”. in “https://www.ionos.it/digitalguide/”. [https://www.ionos.it/digitalguide/online-marketing/social-media/deepfakes/, consulted on: October, 9th 2020].

Diodato, R. (2005). “Estetica del Virtuale”. Bruno Mondadori.

321

Diodato, R. (2012). “Reale e Virtuale” in “PubliCatt”. [https://publicatt.unicatt.it/handle/10807/42146#.

X3yJLpMzYY0, consulted on: October, 13th 2020].

Diodato, R. (2014). “Relazione, sistema, virtualità. Prospettive dell’esperienza estetica”, in “Italian Journal of Aesthetics”. [http://mimesisedizioni.it/journals/index.php/studi-di-estetica/article/view/136, consulted on: October, 13th 2020].

Donato, S. (2019, September 26). “Il “falso Renzi” era un deepfake. Cosa sono e perché tra qualche anno potrebbero essere un grave problema”. in “https://www.dday.it/”. [https://www.dday.it/redazione/32500/ deepfake-video-renzi-intelligenza-artificiale, consulted on: October, 8th 2020].

Donato, S. (2020, April 28). “Impressions è l’app per iOS per creare deepfake ed è fin troppo semplice”. in “https://www.dday.it/”. [https://www.dday.it/redazione/35161/creare-deep-fake-video-ios-impressions, consulted on: October, 8th 2020].

Dumouchel, P.; Damiano, L. (2019). “Vivere con i Robot. Saggio sull’empatia artificiale”. Raffaello Cortina Edizioni.

Dunne, A.; Raby, F. (2013). “Speculative Everything. Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming”. MIT Press.

Festivaletteratura. (2017, September 7). “Ugo La Pietra: intuizione, progetto, azione”. in “https://www. festivaletteratura.it/it”. [https://www.festivaletteratura.it/it/racconti/ugo-la-pietra-intuizione-progetto-azione, consulted on: October, 24th 2020].

Floridi, L. (2018). “Artificial Intelligence, Deepfakes and a Future of Ectypes”. in “ResearchGate”. [https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/326750043_Artificial_Intelligence_Deepfakes_and_a_Future_of_ Ectypes, consulted on: October, 11th 2020].

Forlano, L. (2017). “Posthumanism and Design”. in “https://www.sciencedirect.com/”. [https://reader. elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S2405872616300971?token=4B64D102D1BC77EF51688BD2A9A3514E95E381338EC2DF34F55E64EF0E27815C09B25173AA50EFD51E63245B8FBAB43F, consulted on: November, 2nd 2020].

Frølunde, L.; Pillan, M.; Piredda, F. (2018). “New paradigms related to community building and identity in service design: Exploring global and local design initiatives”. Linköping University Electronic Press.

Funkhouser, G. R.; Shawy, E. F. (2019). “How Synthetic Experience shapes social reality”, in “Journal of Communication”. [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990.tb02263.x, consulted on: October, 8th 2020].

Gardiner, B. (2017, October 17). “The most profound technologies are those that disappear”. in “https://www. popsci.com/”. [https://www.popsci.com/biometric-software-innovation/, consulted on: October, 1st 2020].

Giorgi, E. (2014, December 14). “Ugo La Pietra, Progetto disequilibrante”. in “https://www.abitare.it/it/”. [https://www.abitare.it/it/eventi/2014/12/09/ugo-pietra-progetto-disequilibrante/, consulted on: November, 11th 2020].

Gutenberg, J.; Metzinger, T. K. (2016, February 19). “Real Virtuality: A Code of Ethical Conduct. Recommendations for Good Scientific Practice and the Consumers of VR-Technology”. in “https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/robotics-and-ai”. [https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frobt.2016.00003/full, consulted on: October, 15th 2020].

322

Harari, Y. N. (2015). “Sapiens. A brief history of humankind”. HarperCollins.

Haraway, D. (1991). “Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature”. Routledge.

Hayashi, K. (2020, April 15). “Book Review: ‘Black Box Thinking’”. in “https://www.paloaltonetworks. com/”. [https://blog.paloaltonetworks.com/2020/04/cyber-canon-black-box-thinking/, consulted on: October, 25rth 2020].

Hitchcock, A. (Director). (1954). “La finestra sul cortile” [Film]. United States: Paramount Pictures.

Hussain, M. (2018, January 7). “Black Mirror reveals our fear of robots and algorithms we can’t control”. in “https://theintercept.com/”. [https://theintercept.com/2018/01/07/black-mirror-season-4-netflix-metalhead/, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

Institute for the Future. (2009, February). “Blended Reality. Superstructing Reality, Superstructing Selves” in “https://www.iftf.org/home/”. [https://www.iftf.org/uploads/media/SR-122~2.PDF, consulted on: October, 1st 2020].

Jonze, S.; Ellison, M.; Landay, V. (Producers), & Jonze, S. (Director). (2013). “Her” in “https://www.netflix. com/it/”. [https://www.netflix.com/it/title/70278933, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

Kaegi, S. (Producer and Director), & Melle, T. (Actor). (2019). “Uncanny Valley” in “Triennale Milano, Fog Festival”. [https://www.triennale.org/eventi/rimini-protokoll-stefan-kaegi--thomas-melle/, consulted on October, 18th 2020].

Kaipainen, M.; Ravaja, N.; Tikka, P.; Vuori, R.; Pugliese, R. et al. (2011). “Enactive Systems and Enactive Media: Embodied human - machine coupling beyond interfaces”. in “Research Gate”. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254925814_Enactive_Systems_and_Enactive_Media_Embodied_Human-Machine_Coupling_beyond_Interfaces, consulted on: October, 19th 2020].

Katz, M. (2018, January 5). “CGI ‘Influencers’ Like Lil Miquela Are About to Flood Your Feeds”. in “https://www.wired.com/”. [https://www.wired.com/story/lil-miquela-digital-humans/, consulted on: Septemer, 17th 2020].

Keo, S.; Piculell, S.; Stanziano, S. (Producers), & Orlowski, J. (Director). (2020). “The Social Dilemma” in “https://www.netflix.com/it/”. [https://www.netflix.com/it/title/81254224, consulted on: September, 27th 2020].

Khan, R. (2011). “Media Ethics in 21st Century”. in “ResearchGate”. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307994022_Media_Ethics_in_21st_Century, consulted on: October, 15th 2020].

Kozinets, R. (2009). “Netnography: doing ethnographic research online”. Sage Pubns Ltd.

Lacarbonara, R. (2011). “Oltre l’identità. Etica ed estetica del post-umanesimo”. Alpes Italia.

Lampen, C. (2020, March 5). “CGI Influencer ‘Consciously Uncoupling’ From Human Boyfriend”. in “https://www.thecut.com/”. [https://www.thecut.com/2020/03/lil-miquela-cgi-influencer-breaks-up-with-human-boyfriend.html, consulted on: October, 5th 2020].

Le Bon, G. (2019). “Psicologia delle folle”. Shake.

Maldonado, T. (2015). “Reale e virtuale”. Feltrinelli Editore.

323

Manovich, L. (2002). “Il linguaggio dei nuovi media”. The MIT Press.

Manovich, L. (2020). “L’estetica dell’intelligenza artificiale. Modelli digitali e analitica culturale”. Luca Sossella Editore.

Manovich, L. (2001). “Post-media aesthetics” in “Manovich”. [http://manovich.net/content/04-projects/032-post-media-aesthetics/29_article_2001.pdf, consulted on: September, 29th 2020].

Manovich, L. (2013). “Software takes command”. Bloomsbury Academic, 2013.

Marchesini, R. (2017). “Possiamo parlare di una filosofia postumanista?”, in “Lo Sguardo, rivista di Filosofia”. [http://www.losguardo.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/2017-24-Marchesini.pdf, consulted on: November, 17th 2020].

McLuhan, M. (1994). “Understanding media. The Extensions of Man”. The MIT Press.

Medium. (2000). “American Heritage Dictionary”. Houghton Mifflin.

Michael, T.; Benito-Ruiz, E. (2009). “Infoxication 2.0” in “Research Gate”. [https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/314245174_Infoxication_20, consulted on: September, 25th 2020].

Mimesis. (2019). “Vocabolario Treccani”. Giunti TVP.

Mo Muziejus. (2019). “Animal, Human, Robot”. Mo Muziejus Publishing.

Morency, C. (2018, February 5). “Meet Fashion’s First Computer-Generated Influencer”. in “https:// www.businessoffashion.com/”. [https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/intelligence/meeting-fashions-first-computer-generated-influencer-lil-miquela-sousa, consulted on: Septemer, 17th 2020].

Moyers, B.; Pellett, G. (Producers), & Pellett, G. (Director). (1989). “Consuming Images. The Public Mind with Bill Moyers”. [https://gailpellettproductions.com/consuming-images/, consulted on: September, 23rd 2020].

Narrazione. (2019). “Dizionario Treccani”. Hoepli.

Pantopicon. (2019). “Pantopicon”. [http://pantopicon.be/, consulted on: November, 10th 2020].

Papanek, V. (1985). “Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and social change”. Academy Chicago Publishers.

Patel, S.; C, J. (2018). “Ethics in the age of technological disruption”. in “Deloitte”. [https://www2.deloitte. com/content/dam/Deloitte/ca/Documents/deloitte-analytics/ca-en-analytics-FCC-true-north-aoda.PDF, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

Pater, R. (2016). “The Politics of Design, A (Not So) global manual for visual communication”. Bis Pub.

Perniola, M. (2005). “I situazionisti. Il movimento che ha profetizzato la società dello spettacolo”. Alberto Castelvecchi Editore.

Personette, S. (2019, November 4). “18 trends that highlight fundamental shifts in culture”. in “https:// blog.twitter.com/”. [https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/insights/2019/18-trends-that-highlight-fundamental-shifts-in-culture.html, consulted on: September, 28th 2020].

324

Petrarca, E. (2018, April 18). “Everything we know about the feud between these two computer-generated Instagram influencers”. in “https://www.thecut.com/”. [https://www.thecut.com/2018/04/lil-miquela-hack-instagram.html, consulted on: October, 5th 2020].

Petrarca, E. (2018, May 18). “Miquela Sousa has over 1 million followers on Instagram and was recently hacked by a Trump troll. But she isn’t real”. in “https://www.thecut.com/”. [https://www.thecut. com/2018/05/lil-miquela-digital-avatar-instagram-influencer.html, consulted on: October, 5th 2020].

Pinardi, D. (2018, December 21st). “Design e narrazione”. in “http://www.davidepinardi.com/”. [http:// www.davidepinardi.com/, consulted on: October, 25th 2020].

Pinardi, D. (2016). “Narrare. Dall’Odissea al mondo Ikea. Una riflessione teorica. Un manuale operativo”.

Book Time.

Pirelli HangarBicocca. (2020). “Trisha Baga. The eye, the eye and the ear”. in “https://pirellihangarbicocca.org/”. [https://d2snyq93qb0udd.cloudfront.net/HangarBicocca/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Guida_alla_mostra_ITA_Trisha_Baga_Agg.pdf, consulted on: October, 25th 2020].

Pocosgnich, A. (2019, May 15). “‘Se siete venuti per vedere un attore, siete nel posto sbagliato’. Uncanny Valley di Rimini Protokoll”. in “https://www.teatroecritica.net/”. [https://www.teatroecritica.net/2019/05/ se-siete-venuti-per-vedere-un-attore-siete-nel-posto-sbagliato-uncanny-valley-di-rimini-protokoll/, consulted on: October, 20th 2020].

Pomerantsev, P. (2020). “Questa non è propaganda. Avventure nella guerra contro la realtà”. Bompiani.

Prado, L.; Oliveira, P. (2014, February 4). “Questioning the “critical” in Speculative & Critical Design”. in “https://medium.com/”. [https://medium.com/a-parede/questioning-the-critical-in-speculative-critical-design-5a355cac2ca4, consulted on: November, 6th 2020].

Rappresentazione. (2019). “Vocabolario Treccani”. Giunti TVP.

Re, A. I. (2018, January 17). “La valle perturbante e il problema dell’identità”. in “https://www.cronacheletterarie.com/”. [https://www.cronacheletterarie.com/2018/01/17/la-valle-perturbante-problema-dellidentita/, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

Rehkopf, F. (2019, April 3). “Attention Communicators: “Synthetic Media” Is on the Rise”. in “https:// www.ubermetrics-technologies.com/”. [https://www.ubermetrics-technologies.com/blog/attention-communicators-synthetic-media-sm-is-on-the-rise/, consulted on: October, 8th 2020].

Revonsuo, A. (2015). “Dreaming, Consciousness and Virtual Reality”. in “https://www.interaliamag.org/”. [https://www.interaliamag.org/interviews/antti-revonsuo-dreaming-consciousness-and-virtual-reality/, consulted on: October, 13th 2020].

Riparbelli, V. (2020, January 16). “5 Predictions for Synthetic Media in 2020”. in “https://medium.com/”. [https://medium.com/@vriparbelli/5-predictions-for-synthetic-media-in-2020-1682507805fa, consulted on: October, 7th 2020].

Ritorto, D. (2020, July 16). “Come l’Intelligenza Artificiale può trasformare l’influencer marketing e non solo”. in “https://www.linkedin.com/”. [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/come-lintelligenza-artificiale-pu%C3%B2-trasformare-e-non-solo-ritorto/, consulted on: Septemer, 16th 2020].

Rosch, E.; Thompson, E.; Varela, F. (1991). “The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience”. Feltrinelli Editore.

325

Rosenbaum, S. (2019, September 23). “What Is Synthetic Media?”. in “https://www.mediapost.com/”. [https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/341074/what-is-synthetic-media.html, consulted on: October, 7th 2020].

Samuel, J. L. (2019). “Company from the Uncanny Valley: A Psychological Perspective on Social Robots, Anthropomorphism and the Introduction of Robots to Society”. in “Research Gate”. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336416548_Company_from_the_Uncanny_Valley_A_Psychological_Perspective_on_ Social_Robots_Anthropomorphism_and_the_Introduction_of_Robots_to_Society, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

Simonite, T. (2020, July 7). “Deepfakes Are Becoming the Hot New Corporate Training Tool”. in “https:// www.wired.com/”. [https://www.wired.com/story/covid-drives-real-businesses-deepfake-technology/, consulted on: October, 8th 2020].

Simulacra. (2019). “Oxford Languages Dictionary”. James Murray.

Structure&Narrative. (2018, July 23). “For Whom The Computer Graphics”. in “https://sjef.nu/”. [https:// sjef.nu/for-whom-the-computer-graphics/, consulted on: October, 9th 2020].

Structure&Narrative. (2016, February 13). “Theory of Change and the Futures Cone”. in “https://sjef.nu/”. [https://sjef.nu/theory-of-change-and-the-futures-cone/, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

Synthesia. (2020, June 4). “A Framework For Ethical Synthetic Media” in “https://www.synthesia.io/”. [https://www.synthesia.io/post/a-framework-for-ethical-synthetic-media, consulted on: October, 9th 2020].

Szu-Wen, F. (2016). “Blended Reality: Extending Existence to Multiple Realities” in “Graduate School of Media Design, Keio University”. [http://koara.lib.keio.ac.jp/xoonips/, consulted on: October, 7th 2020].

Teilhard de Chardin, P. (2011). “Il posto dell’uomo nella natura. Struttura e direzioni evolutive”. Jaca Book.

Tentorio, G. (2019, May 14). “Artificio e realtà nell’inquietante Uncanny Valley dei Rimini Protokoll”. in “https://www.paneacquaculture.net/”. [https://www.paneacquaculture.net/2019/05/14/artificio-e-realta-con-linquietante-uncanny-valley-dei-rimini-protokoll/, consulted on: October, 20th 2020].

The Ethics Centre. (2018, February 22). “Ethics Explainer: Post-Humanism”. in “https://ethics.org.au/”. [https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-post-humanism/, consulted on: November, 2nd 2020].

ThoughtWorks Arts. (2020). “SIMULACRA & SIMILITUDE: Synthetic Media open call”, in “https:// thoughtworksarts.io/”. [https://thoughtworksarts.io/open-call/2020-synthetic-media/, consulted on: October, 12th 2020].

Triennale Milano. (2020, September). “Quello che non sappiamo di non sapere” in “https://www.triennale. org/”. [https://www.triennale.org/scopri/quello-che-non-sappiamo-di-non-sapere/, consulted on: September, 28th 2020].

Triennale Milano. (2019, May). “Rimini Protokoll (Stefan Kaegi), Thomas Melle. Uncanny Valley”. in “https://www.triennale.org/”. [https://www.triennale.org/eventi/rimini-protokoll-stefan-kaegi--thomas-melle/, consulted on: October, 20th 2020].

Triennale Milano. (2020, September). “Unknown Unknowns” in “https://www.triennale.org/”. [https:// www.triennale.org/eventi/unknown-unknowns/, consulted on: September, 28th 2020].

326

Van Doorn, M.; Duivestein, S.; Pepping, T. (2018). “The Synthetic Generation” in “SogetiLabs”. [https:// labs.sogeti.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-Synthetic-Generation_DigitalHappiness-3-E-LR.pdf, consulted on: September, 28th 2020].

Vatinno, G. (2011). “Il transumanesimo. Una nuova filosofia per l’uomo del XXI secolo”. Armando Editore.

Venditti, S.; Piredda, F.; Mattana, W. (2017, September 6). “Micronarratives as the form of contemporary communication” in “The Design Journal”. [https://re.public.polimi.it/retrieve/handle/11311/1031909/226295/Micronarratives%20as%20the%20form%20of%20contemporary%20communication.pdf, consulted on: November, 11th 2020].

Viglino, R. (2019, January 9). “HER, un film “parlato”: analisi della sceneggiatura originale, Premio Oscar 2014”. in “http://www.psychiatryonline.it/”. [http://www.psychiatryonline.it/node/4921, consulted on: October, 19th 2020].

Villeneuve, D. (Director). (2017). “Blade Runner 2049” [Film]. United States: Columbia Pictures.

Vilnius University. (2020, September 17-18). “Reimagining the Human. Online Symposium”. [https://www. vu.lt/symposium/, consulted on: October, 23rd 2020].

Vittrup Christensen, L. (2020). “Talk | Trust as a Design Material”. in “Service Design global Conference 2020”. [https://next.brella.io/events/SDGC20/schedule/193438, consulted on: November, 4th 2020].

Walker, L. (2018, June 27). “Lil Miquela. Not a girl, not yet a woman”. in “https://www.wonderlandmagazine.com/”. [https://www.wonderlandmagazine.com/2018/06/27/lil-miquela/, consulted on: Septemer, 17th 2020].

Wang, S.; Lilienfeld, S. O.; Rochat, P. (2015). “The Uncanny Valley: Existence and Explanations”. in “Research Gate”. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287797484_The_Uncanny_Valley_Existence_and_ Explanations, consulted on: October, 18th 2020].

Watzlawick, P.; Beavin, J. H.; Jackson, D. D. (1997). “Pragmatica della comunicazione umana”. Astrolabio Editore.

Wilson, M. (2020, September 14). “Ikea product shots have been fake for years. Now it’s taking CGI even further”. in “https://www.fastcompany.com/”. [https://www.fastcompany.com/90549587/ikea-product-shots-have-been-fake-for-years-now-its-taking-cgi-even-further?partner=rss&utm_source=facebook. com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=rss+fastcompany&utm_content=rss, consulted on: October, 8th 2020].

Wolf, M. J. P. (2012). “Building Imaginary Worlds: The Theory and History of Subcreation”. Routledge.

Wolfe, C. (2010). “What is posthumanism?”. University of Minnesota Press.

327