| Username |
Post |
| saroj |
Posted
on 28-Apr-04 08:31 AM
I had been a silent reader in sajha for a while before I started posting. During the time I was a reader, I did not realise the dynamics of the online psyche. People arguing their cases emphatically. Poems, articles galore.
Then one fine day, I posted my first comment. And it all became all so clear.
The sustenance of sajha lies in the trip to the center of one's ego. As soon as I posted something, I became important to myself. People talking about my posting, replying to my postings, arguing with me, agreeing with me - I was making a difference no matter how miniscule in the grand scheme of things, which was entertaining and time pass as well as a sense of fulfillment.
It is especially interesting to see unsolicited fan clubs emerge out of nowhere. Giving each other the ego boost that one desires consciously or unconsciously. Maybe that explains why people keep coming back with creative pieces. It's a feel good do good kinda place. Your ego is fanned all the way up to the sky, then because of one rotten comment, your ego goes underground. Such is the nature of the ego. The boost that 20 good comments give to your ego, is brought down on its knees by one negative comment. The ego frowns upon these, in spite of carefully worded optimistic retorts.
Are we secluding ourselves from the real world when we immerse into an online personality? Are we dependent on this online existence more than we need to be? Does society impose too much expectation from you, that you have to withdraw into a virtual community? These are all questions I ask as a student of cognitive and communicative psychology.
Saroj
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
|
| scatterbrain |
Posted
on 28-Apr-04 12:24 PM
You are probably right about the fact that many write to please their own egos, seeking acknowledgement of their works regardless of substance contained in their writings. But that, in and of itself, can not be frowned upon by others as a deplorable action that only aims to bolster the person's egotistical creative sense. It's human nature in many to crave attention, in ways blatant and discreet, and to feel disheartened or angered by offhand remarks not so pleasing. Despite that, there are many who write out of their love for writing and share it with all without coveting fuel to boost their egos. The "Creative Corner" here is just a small example.
Richard Bachman, George Elliot, George Orwell, Mark Twain ... These are nothing but pen names used by famous writers. They were probbably "immersed into their [virtual] personality" because they were "secluding [themselves] from the real world" but not because the society imposed upon them outlandish expectations. Some were trying to test the conscience of society as Stephen King did as Richard Bachman after being famous. Mark Twain is a local reference to a measure of safe water depth of two fathoms for riverboats in Mississippi.
So, is it any different thesedays when we use pseudonames for ourselves in cyber space? In this virual reality, you are as real to me while you read this as I am while writing these lines. This place is not where one withdraws into by secluding from "reality" but rather a place where one extends a dimension in addition to his/her "real" life. The reason you are seeing folks write here is because this is an affordable and convenient medium where one can write freely without having to face the hurdles of publication outside in paper medium. This is a result of society's imposition of restrictions rather than an imposition of expectations beyond one's limits. But, of course, this line of reasoning would not be valid if one is merely seeking attention.
- Scats
|
| MunnaBhai |
Posted
on 28-Apr-04 01:54 PM
*yawn*... bahut badi badi baat kare ho aap log bhai sahib log..hamar ko kuch samaj mein nahi aa rahye hye..
|
| bisun |
Posted
on 28-Apr-04 02:13 PM
Saorj wrote:
"Are we secluding ourselves from the real world when we immerse into an online personality? Are we dependent on this online existence more than we need to be? Does society impose too much expectation from you, that you have to withdraw into a virtual community?"
I find the phrase "virtual community" problematic as it relates to internet/online community. The online community as as real as any thing else. If ideas/words we read of dead authors can be real, then why not the words/ideas of the people we actually can communicate directly online? Here at least, we can keep in touch and get direct feedback from each other. Doesn't this "two way street" medium make it more real than "one way street" medium of paper print materials.
Anyway, what you call "virtual community" doesn't have to come at the cost of what you call "real" community. When participating in online disucsussions (including chat), one is not necessarily "withdrawing into virtual community," but is rather EXPANDING into it. Being "dependent" on online community is not necessarily a bad ( I guess you are not implying so either). We are always dependant on something whether we admit or not. As time changes, we become dependent on new things. Many might look at this "denpendence" as a progress. At one time we could do without shoes (even clothes), cars, planes etc, but as those luxury came into existence, they slowly became our neccessities-- we became dependant on them.
|
