(cont…)

Once social participants have taken a line and assumed a face, the problem now turns to the reliance on the other person to be truthful. Bourdieu explains in the section of Language and Symbolic Power entitled, “Authorized Speech” that, “[t]he power of words is nothing other than the delegated power of the spokesperson” (Bourdieu, 1991: 107). The majority of online message boards or chat rooms contain some form of moderator, which is the delegated voice of reason in such areas. They often have some form of power to ban particular users who have used anonymity and the lowered value of face to annoy the regulars of such chat rooms. While most people who have ‘authorized speech’ use “a rhetoric which characterizes all discourses of institution” (Bourdieu, 1991: 109), this is untrue for the moderators of Internet facilities. They often use regular vernacular and engage in the same discussions as other users – themselves, beings regular users at one point in time as well.

However, the problem is not with the moderators that possess ‘authorized speech’, but in recognizing who is telling the truth in relation to regular users. To explain my point I have taken another excerpt of a Cyber-Sex chat log including the user ‘bloodninja’:

bloodninja: Don’t ******* laugh at me!
bloodninja: This **** is serious!
sweet17: What are you hiding from?
bloodninja: The cops.
sweet17: gimme a ******* break
bloodninja: I’m serious.
sweet17: I don’t get it
bloodninja: The cops are after me.
sweet17: For what?
bloodninja: I’m wanted in three states
sweet17: For???
(http://nerve.fugacious.net/drf/archives/cybersexchatroll.htm)

Once again, ‘bloodninja’ is using his anonymity to play a joke on another unsuspecting user. He is trying to explain that he is being followed by the police, originally creating doubt in ‘sweet17’ who expects that he will enter the chat room taking the line of wanting to engage in Cyber-Sex. Once she finds that her assumption is wrong – due to the continual pressure of ‘bloodninja’ that he is indeed being chased by the police – she begins to question the authorization of his speech. Perhaps in real-life she would be able to guess by his appearance and mannerisms, based on Bourdieu’s idea that ‘authorized speech’ “ must be uttered in a legitimate situation, that is, in front of legitimate receivers” (Bourdieu, 1991: 113). Yet, due to the anonymity of the Internet, ‘bloodninja’ can somewhat successfully fool ‘sweet17’ into thinking that he is being chased by the police by making her prove that she is not a police officer herself:

bloodninja: When really you were notifying the authorities.
bloodninja: Weren’t you!?
sweet17: thats not it
bloodninja: Then what?
sweet17: I don’t want to send you the picture cause I’m not pretty
bloodninja: Most cops aren’t
sweet17: IM NOT A ******* COP YOU ********!
bloodninja: Then send me the picture.
sweet17: fine. What’s your e-mail?
(http://nerve.fugacious.net/drf/archives/cybersexchatroll.htm)

Once ‘bloodninja’ starts threatening the idea that ‘sweet17’ is a police officer, she must then prove herself to have unauthorized speech by showing ‘bloodninja’ a picture of herself. In this manner of unauthorization, ‘bloodninja’ has successfully authorized his own speech in relation to the line that he is escaping from the police.

Conversely, the problems that I have dealt with in regards to ‘face-work’ and ‘authorized speech’ are often only a small percentage of the problems with online communities. Bourdieu’s theory that, “sociology presents itself as a social topology [. . .] the social world can be represented in the form of a space constructed on the basis of principles of differentiation” (Bourdieu, 1991: 229) reflects three forms of capital – economic, cultural and social. Capital then symbolizes power over a particular field (Bourdieu, 1991: 230) – the Internet being a place where a large amount of social capital is held.

For many people, the anonymity of the Internet allows them to express themselves much more freely without the worry of being prosecuted or laughed at. While the lesser value assigned to face allows certain people – such as ‘bloodninja’ – to use social interaction for destructive or humorous reasons, it becomes a way of making regular users’ social interactions less important in a positive manner. Their conversations do not have the same sort of implications inherent in regular face-to-face interactions due to anonymous circumstances. These people then use ‘face-work’ and ‘authorized speech’ to create social capital over the Internet, creating vast Internet communities. Each community possesses it’s own form of lines that one person may take. If a website deals with videogames for example, the amount of lines available to a user will most likely reflect a certain stance towards videogames and their position in the community will rely on their ability to keep and maintain the face they have presented through their ability to preserve some form of authorized language – often by backing up their statements with references to news articles. Even with the problem of anonymity in online social interactions due to an ongoing reliance on the Internet, ‘face-work’ and ‘authorized speech’ – while still beset with difficulties – may be used in the same manner as face-to-face communication to create social capital on the Internet – without any sort of personal interaction at all.

…Mice.

Yea, they’re still here. A moment ago I was actually in possession of a small, brown mouse that had found it’s way into my garbage can.

I’d like to say that I slaughtered him with the ruthless fury of a thousand suns, viciously pounding him into the underworld whilst sending a message to all mouse-kind.

But in reality, I did none of those things.

Instead, I spent too long looking down at the cute helpless figure in front of me, thinking that this was perhaps a baby mouse. And I am no baby killer.

Some of my more stereotypically “macho” friends would call me a pussy. I prefer the term Buddhist, but I suppose it’s all semantics.

Regardless, this mouse managed to perform a reverse Stockholm syndrome on me; while I was his captor, he most certainly had captured me. I began to sympathize with his situation. I thought of his family, and how upset the other mice would be if somehow this one didn’t make it home (which is also coincidently where I live). And I thought that I couldn’t bring myself to stomp on this little mouse.

With no resolution forthcoming, I decided to walk into the kitchen with this little mouse trapped in my garbage can. Had my female roommate berated me for not killing the mouse or brought to light social stigmas against men who do not kill mice, I may have ended this poor mouse’s life right then and there. But, likeminded in sympathy she asked me what I was going to do. And in my most manly moment of the day, I answered in the most stereotypically ‘guy’ fashion that I know: “I don’t know”.

We finally came to the conclusion that we should trap him in one of the garbage cans outside, which is where I assume he is now.

I imagine that he’ll live off the food in the garbage can until he gets taken to the local dump in a pile full of garbage – his garbage. He’ll grow up to have a vertiable mouse kingdom over the dump and be reunited with old friends. Regardless I’ll know that I didn’t end this mouse’s future, but instead put him on a course where he can truly make the most of himself…

…Or get killed by the dumptruck. Either way.

I’ve been a terrible blogger.

I’ve managed to completely ignore my blog and the (few) readers who decide to take time out of their extremely busy existence to read it.

I’m a monster.

But I also have a good excuse: I’m really busy. Summer’s a busy time for me as I usually manage to fill it full of both work and school. I know, smart.

Regardless, to give you all your desired taste of my immense literary power I have decided to post serial excerpts of an essay I wrote in my 3rd year at UBC, the idea given to me by my roommate who also attended the class with me.

I bet you’re all thinking “Wow, this will be boring”, and that’s partially true. Some of it will be boring. The interesting parts, however, are extremely interesting due to the content of the essay.

During the period of which I was writing the essay I was a little, shall we say, cocky? I’d gotten a couple A’s on some papers and really decided to flex my capacity for writing academic bullshit.

If you’ve ever heard of “Bloodninja” and his cyber-sex exploits you’ll see where this is going. If you’re not, go here to acquaint yourself: Bloodninja

That’s right, I wrote an academic paper on Bloodninja.

I’m extremely embarrassed as all writers are of posting old work; it sucks, and reading the essay over I already notice countless rookie mistakes in grammar and logic.

Some things need to be read, however, and this might just be one of those things.

So complete with errors and all I present my 3rd year paper on Bloodninja.

Enjoy

————————————————————————————-

Speaking Without A Face:
A look at social interactions over the Internet in relation to the theories of Erving Goffman and Pierre Bourdieu.

The popularity of the Internet has greatly changed the way that social interactions take place. Instead of speaking directly to people in person – or even over the phone – computers are being relied upon to enable a direct link between people from all over the world. Yet this style of conversation brings many new problems to the realm of social interactions. Using Erving Goffman’s theories of ‘face-work’ from Interaction Ritual: Essays On Face-To-Face Behaviour and Pierre Bourdieu’s Language and Symbolic Power, I will examine the problems of online ‘face-work’, the authorization of language and how these theories essentially lead to the creation of social capital inherent in Internet use regardless of their online difficulties.

Goffman’s theory of ‘face-work’ relies on two directly related ideas – lines and face. When a person is engaged in a social interaction they choose a line, “that is, a pattern of verbal and nonverbal acts by which he expresses his view of the situation and through this his evaluation of the participants” (Goffman, 1967: 5). Once a person has taken a line – determining their position in the social interaction – they are then presented with a face: “face may be defined as the positive social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken”(Goffman, 1967: 5). Therefore, due to the “positive social value” given by face, a person takes great care to keep such a positive image for themselves in relation to the other social participants.

Yet, Goffman’s ‘face-work’ theory assumes that a social interaction is taking place in person. When a social interaction takes place over the Internet there are certain variables which are not a factor in an anonymous setting. Certain social pressures like appearance, nervousness, and the importance – and possible fear – of eye contact are mostly non-existent during social interaction over the Internet. Due to the lack of facial expressions and the difficulty in understanding sarcasm without tone of voice, the Internet suddenly becomes an extremely misunderstood area of social interaction. Nonetheless, in a chat room setting, the rules of ‘face-work’ still apply; people enter with a line and try to keep face, as they still gain a “positive social value” by keeping their face and gaining acceptance from others in the chat room. However, due to the anonymity of the Internet, the actual idea of face has a lesser value, as it does not reflect nearly as personally on someone’s feeling of self worth. For example, I have excerpted a segment of a conversation from an online Cyber-Sex chat room:

bloodninja: Baby, I been havin a tough night so treat me nice aight?
BritneySpears14: Aight.
bloodninja: Slip out of those pants baby, yeah.
BritneySpears14: I slip out of my pants, just for you, bloodninja.
bloodninja: Oh yeah, aight. Aight, I put on my robe and wizard hat.
BritneySpears14: Oh, I like to play dress up.
bloodninja: Me too baby.
BritneySpears14: I kiss you softly on your chest.
bloodninja: I cast Lvl. 3 Eroticism. You turn into a real beautiful woman.
BritneySpears14: Hey…
bloodninja: I meditate to regain my mana, before casting Lvl. 8 Cock of the Infinite.
BritneySpears14: Funny I still don’t see it.
bloodninja: I spend my mana reserves to cast Mighty F*ck of the Beyondness.
BritneySpears14: You are the worst cyber partner ever. This is ridiculous.
bloodninja: Don’t f*ck with me bitch, I’m the mightiest sorcerer of the lands.
bloodninja: I steal yo soul and cast Lightning Lvl. 1,000,000 Your body explodes into a fine bloody mist, because you are only a Lvl. 2 Druid.
BritneySpears14: Don’t ever message me again you piece of ****. (http://nerve.fugacious.net/drf/archives/cybersexchatroll.htm).

In this conversation the user ‘BritneySpears14′ enters the chat room expecting the user ‘bloodninja’ to assume the line of someone interested in Cyber-Sex. At the beginning of the conversation, even when ‘bloodninja’ has, “put on [his] robe and wizard hat” (http://nerve.fugacious.net/drf/archives/cybersexchatroll.htm), ‘BritneySpears14′ continues to assume that he is still following the non-verbal – and verbal once she assumes he is playing “dress-up” – line of expecting to engage in Cyber-Sex. Yet, once ‘bloodninja’ completely abandons the line by engaging his wizard scenario, ‘BritneySpears14′ becomes annoyed that she has been tricked into following his line. In a normal conversation this would lead to ‘bloodninja’ losing face, but since the idea of face has lost it’s value due to anonymity, ‘bloodninja’ does not feel what Goffman explains as the personal attachment of face: “A person tends to experience an immediate emotional response to the face which a contact with others allows him” (Goffman, 1967: 6). ‘[B]loodninja’ essentially creates two faces, one being his real-life face which feels no sense of consequence over the Internet and another which he uses solely on the Internet to trick people into thinking he does in fact need face – indicated by ‘BritneySpears14′ annoyance once she learns he does not need face, and is using it for the sole purpose of making fun of her.

…To Be Continued