This is the first avatar I created in Second Life. It really doesn’t look anything like me but it was the best I could do with the tools available.
When I first arrived in SL I faced a question common to professionals venturing into virtual spaces: Who am I this time? The conventional response is to choose an appropriate, professional-looking representation of yourself.
But what does professional and appropriate mean in virtual spaces where the possibilities for self expression are almost unlimited? Particularly when:
A) Traditional professional norms are increasingly out of date/changing
B) Virtuality allows for forms of individual expression not possible in real life
C) If Steve Jobs gets to wear jeans to a conference why can’t you and I?
[Post continued below]
Before you answer the question above, please consider the following narrative of my recent explorations of “self.”
Freebie heaven, power and the jeans factor
Given the limitations of my avatar I was delighted when I found out about places for newbies to get FREE hair, clothing and skins. Though I generally hate shopping, especially for clothes, I was excited to be able to personalise my avatar. That said, FREE = limited choices. I found myself choosing from one of three distinct fashion looks: 1) sleazy disco 2) fairy tale princess or 3) faux urban “hip” (flippy hair, low rise jeans, etc).
Given that I wasn’t planning on spending time in a virtual disco, looking to pick up or in need of a Barbie hairstyle I chose the following: Anime hair, a leather jacket and jeans. I felt these choices reflected how I “think” rather than how I look. In essence, that my thinking is unconventional/emergent and somewhat irreverent and my work look is non-corporate. This was the result:
I’ll admit, I’m not nearly so unconventional in real life. Though I would be if I could be.
The reality for me is I can’t take a lot of real life risks with my look and feel because I simply cannot count on conventional HR people or employers to be as forward thinking, unconventional or sophisticated enough to hire me for my skills, reputation and knowledge alone. And though I spend part of my professional life working in education - a far more relaxed environment than the corporate world - I’m still likely to face the same requests to abide by a professional look and feel that reflect conventional norms than my own personal expression. This will likely change when I make my first million. But for now, I’m somewhat compromised.
Or am I?
Exploring my cyborg side
A day or so after my shopping experience I found out about Grendel’s Children, a shopping mall for some of the most incredible non human avatars in Second Life. And like many other places in SL, they had a freebie section. I found several cool avatars including a flying robot, female satyr and a cyborg. The nice thing about these avatars is that I can mix and match different parts to create something all my own. So long low rise jeans and disco hair, hello antlers and jetpack!
Here’s my satyr look, conventionalised with some clothing on my upper half (note: female satyr needs clothes if you wish to take her to a meeting :). Dressed as the satyr I received an invitation to go to the beautiful role playing world of Avilon where I was offered a wonderful “dream dance” animation that allows me to spin around in a kind of dance in the air. I had a wonderful time there.
And this is me as a cyborg.
I explored various places in my cyborg avatar that seemed fitting - including the incredibly dystopian and amazing Kowloon. For me, these guises and explorations ARE the very meaning of virtuality. The activities that don’t happen in the real world. And the very reason I started playing video games and exploring virtuality in the first place. To be something else, do do something else. To explore new possibilities and experiences.
So why are we so busy reproducing the world we’re already living in?
While I have no objection to the need for life like spaces - spaces we’re all familiar with - I reject that idea that such spaces are more comfortable, natural or necessary for all of us. In fact, I had a debate with another newbie SL educator the other night in which he stated that students would be more comfortable interacting with a “normal” looking person than a non human avatar.
While I felt that this logic might apply to other adult teachers (new to avatars and game spaces) I felt that young people would likely be far more engaged by an avatar (i.e., think Super Mario) than plain old adult authority figures they already find boring. We’re the ones who are threated by these new worlds, not our kids. I asked him if he’d ever been to World of Warcraft. No, he had not. Perhaps if more teachers actually played video games (especially the games they most fear - like GTA, for example), they’d gain a better appreciation for mindset of those who play them.
In saying the above, I’m not judging those who choose to represent themselves in a human guise - that’s their choice - but that it isn’t the only choice, nor is it necessary more respectable, appropriate or professional than non human avatars.
To me, it is obvious that many people - especially young people - are actively interested in the possibility of doing regular things like learning and doing business without the need of having a regular look and feel. I’d argue that it is not only feasible but preferable to do so.
Required viewing: Second Skin - a documentary about MMOs
Great post, Melanie! One of the draws of virtual worlds, I think, is that you can actively craft a visible embodiment of yourself that matches your internal persona. Or multiple embodiments of yourself, depending :) One of my fav parts of being in Second Life is that I can experiment with different “physical” avatars and find one that suits my mood or my persona *right then*. The cost of change and experimentation is so low - why wouldn’t you do it? Kudos on encouraging educators to try!
[Reply]
Thanks very much, Kate.
I really like what you’re saying about the experimentation. That’s absolutely how I see it. And, as I’ve added above, I’m not down on people who choose to be human and look like themselves I just don’t want that being defined as the default setting for academics in virtual spaces (which it currently appears to be - along with the buildings and spaces we’re meeting in … ).
As for my non human looks, the satyr and robot are quite arbitrary right now - just opportunities for me to be something unlike my usual self. But if I had more choices, I’d definitely inhabit a identity suited to the task at hand. For example, I might like to take on thematic representation that connects with a particular lesson. Like, if I was teaching Shakespeare we could all dress in period looks or teaching Orwell we might experience what it’s like to be non-persons with no individual expression.
I would like to extend the idea of professionalism might be redefined to “appropriateness” according to the nature of the “work” and audience expectations. Right now, we are making an assumption about appropriateness that is largely based on real life expectations.
Where I personally draw the line is with avatar looks that are overtly sexual or seductive - in relation to educational contexts. Sadly, many of the outfits/looks available for women in SL are very sexualised. These looks are fine if you’re out socialising or at a disco but raise ethical questions in the context of teaching - am I wrong here?
I’d be open to hearing a solid challenge to my above statement. Thus far, most seem in agreement about sexual looks.
[Reply]
Hi Melanie,
Interesting post, and I have to say I agree with you, and the newbie SL educator in question. The issue is the age of the student in SL.
My experience on the teen grid is, simply, the wilder, the less human, the more extreme, the better. It’s more natural to be unnatural when working virtually for teens. This makes sense, given the complex identity issues teens are dealing with every day.
On the main grid, I’ve found, people tend to interact more positively with reasonably human avatars. In fact there was a study done a while back that actually quantified reactions people had to human and non-human avatars. I’ll dig up the study if you want, but it showed that non-human avatars were either ignored or treated rudely, particularly ‘furries,’ a group that as you know has a bit of history in the virtual world.
There are exceptions to every rule, the best one I can think of being Alan Levine’s (NMC) CDB Barkley avatar, which, last I spoke with him was still something dog-like. He was thinking about changing it, but I haven’t seen him in a while. Might be good to touch base with him…
Take care,
-kj-
[Reply]
Thanks for stopping by Kevin!
Great examples and commentary. I will think about what you’ve said.
You know, I should have said it above but I *do* appreciate where the other guy is coming from, I just don’t understand why we’re attempting to reproduce real life to the degree that I’ve seen in edu spaces. While I appreciate that dealing with a human form may feel more comfortable I also have to question why we would ignore non human looking avatars - or treat them rudely - given how little we might know of a perfectly respectably looking avatar. Who’s to say what lurks beneath either? :)
[Reply]
First, I’ll have to try Grendels, maybe I’ll find something interesting to play with.
Second, I think there’s need for a middle ground between, say, Super Mario Bros (highly structured, goal oriented, minimal choice of self-representation [i.e., no shopping]) and Second Life (negligibly structured, negligibly goal oriented [unless you're looking for furry sex] and nearly endless choice of self-representation [shopping, shopping, shopping].)
Third, my biggest beef with SL is the amount of energy and time spent recreating the most tawdry of post-industrial commercial consumer society. “Why, I can dress my avatar in genuine American Apparel ™ for just five bucks US!!!”
That said, the presence of folks like you and Howard Rheingold and Intellagirl and Typewriter Tackleberry keep me from giving up on SL. On the other hand, I recall a couple of years ago trying to get into a lecture by some Harvard law prof, only to learn the seating was limited. WTF? I that experience fits with your question, “So why are we so busy reproducing the world we’re already living in?”
To the extent that “anything is possible” there will be contexts in which “anything goes”. To the extent that SL residents are not natives to the net age (e.g., a 40 something like me) then folks are likely to bring their real-world frames of reference with them and cling tight (like having limited seating in what can effectively be deemed a chat session hooked to a cartoon generator.)
The problem you open with, “Who Can I Be Now” is born of the fact that our virtual worlds still have hooks to meatspace and choices in one have ramifications in the other. And maybe because of the extensive recreation of real-life in SL we’ve limited ourselves. In Guild Wars I get four character slots, and there’s no reason any two have to be the slightest bit consistent with each other. Do we have that kind of freedom in SL? Not at all. But why? Because SL is framed as serious and important, either for education or commerce, because many intend their use of SL to prosper them in some fashion other than the pleasure of diversion.
[Reply]