« Human intelligence (sic) | Main | No human system ever scales »

Three score and ten, or the matrix voided

It's the 70th post of this blog which is a milestone, and it's also a pleasant surprise that we are averaging over 3 comments per entry and climbing the technoranti list fast - so thanks to everyone who has contributed on and off line. At 70 one is allowed some indulgence so I want to return to the theme of the poverty of the purely virtual and symbolic.

We had a big television film premier in Singapore this weekend on Channel 5: The Matrix reloaded: you know the one that really looses it in a weird form of pseudo-mysticism (yep, I know that's my opinion, but I liked number 1, tolerated number 2 and thought that number 3 went gaga). The Matrix represents, in its early versions, the question of choice between reality and virtuality: which pill will you take Neo?

At the same time we had two news items on the BBC’s web site. The first has Rowan WIlliams talking about a crisis in modern childhood. For those who don’t know him, Rowan is a highly intelligent and wise social commentator/thinker, but is currently trapped in a role that does not make the best of a humane intelligence, namely that of Archbishop of Canterbury. The other item is on claims of a poisoning of childhood linked to Phillip Pullman, Dr Penelope Leach and environmentalist Sir Jonathan Porritt amongst other notables. For those who don’t know Pullman, he is one of the great child/adult authors of the modern day. His books are multi-layered in meaning. I cannot recommend too highly his trilogy, His Dark Materials which took me back to Milton and Blake with a fresh eye. Like many others I am waiting for the film with the same fear and anticipation as I had waiting for Lord of the Rings.

Poetry and art aside. My point here is that Williams, Pullman, Leach & Porritt are not a bunch of people you would associate with a over romantic view of the past: in my young day children were …. and other such statements. On the contrary these are people who live in the modern world are liberal and progressive in attitude but they are worried. I had been feeling a bit isolated in my earlier nostalgia, however these items provide some serious support for that view point.

Comments (5)

Marix: yes, the problem of sequels, may be? Or: after deconstructing false hopes (of stability, security, identity...), there seems to be a need to nevertheless re-establish some new "sense", even if very strange indeed? It's even in the Cynefin model: from anywhere to dis-order and then to where we feel most comfortable, right?
My favorite work of fiction about this "virtual reality" is Stanislaw Lem's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Futurological_Congress . It's short, it's really funny, it's well thought through. And it's based upon chemistry, not electronics or implants.

Dave

It's been fascinating watching this issue build over the past week - and the various responses I've heard to it, tending to switch between a) dismissing reports from wishy-washy; b) blaming governmental changes in education; and c) putting it down to too much Playstation and internet. (The social downside of Tebbo's recent postings perhaps?)

The piece that struck me - as it always has - is the degree to which patterns of perceiving the world are framed by the way media portray issues and stories. The focus on fear and danger towards children, the demonisation of teenagers and the dismissal of examination achievements as "easier than in my day" create an atmosphere in which young people (God I sound old when I type that) are constantly belittled or scared.

Surrounded by that negative environment, is it any wonder that mental health problems are cropping up?

Dave Snowden [TypeKey Profile Page]:

Its a complex system - its all of those things and they are starting to interact
The media acts as a stabilising influence on a particular pattern - maybe premature convergence.
I think stress has always been there on teenagers - but at the moment the old support networks of the extended family are gone

Ana Connor:

Teenagers became visible most recently in the 1950s I think (as a cultural demographic). Talking with my father in law about his experience growing up in the 1940s, it seems that children were children until 16 or 17, then they were adults (this kind of fits with your comment regarding short vs long pants on an earlier post Dave). In the 1950s in the USA, and maybe a little later in NZ, Britain, Australia, it seems that teenagers became something that their parents were not able to understand.
My mother experienced the "generation gap" while in her teens in the 1960s - she has told me many stories that illustrate how her actions were incomprehensible to her own parents. Perhaps the growth of the middle class in the mid-20th century resulted in more time or money (which could be the same thing) for teenagers to express themselves as a distinct group - not yet adults, but not children either.
I often look at the latest cultural manifestation (video game /rock group / hip hop "artist") causing parental concern and outrage and see that what they do has been done before, but to shock a generation that has seen war on prime-time tv and Ozzie Osbourne bite heads off bats, they need to ratchet up the offense factor to make an impact.
Teenagers have a need to express themselves as separate from their parents, establish their own identity. I hope that when my child becomes a teenager I can offer space and guidance, along with boudaries to give some comfort, without being too stifling and causing a major emotional rift between us.
Time will tell.

Dave Snowden [TypeKey Profile Page]:

I agree with most of this Ana, and I think we all agree with the final paragraph. However I have one soon to be ex-teenage, and one about-to-be teenager and harsh reality intrudes somewhat! One piece of advice I was given by a psychologist who specialises in this area was "Add three years to their age before you react", she then added, "well two in Canada, one in New Zealand". Now my observations would support that. My visits to New Zealand are always welcome, for the people, the land and the cafe culture of Wellington (not to mention religious matters such as Rugby). One of my observations from visiting friends homes is that the family connections are tighter than in the UK. My worry about the "rebellion" via the virtual is a step change, or just more of the same. My worry is that it is a step change for the worse.

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)