Avatars
What it is, Part One was interesting to me, as I had never really given much thought to avatars, and the varied levels of complexity in their existence. Thinking of Mario, for example, as an avatar was a concept that never would have been something that I’d thought about, or tried to put a name to. The section made the idea of avatars more complex than I had previously thought about – what their interaction could include, how much control we really have over our avatars, and why people might make certain decisions about their avatar.
What it is, Part Two also expanded the concept of an avatar. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t use that word to describe the YouTube videos and personas detailed in this section. I would normally think of them as characters or personas. However, this broadened my ideas of what could be considered an avatar – not necessarily just a computer created, animated little character, but any identity that users choose to assign to represent them on the web, as opposed to their truer and simpler self.
What it is, Part Three was for me the least revolutionary. It seemed to mainly list the different points of view that could be represented through an avatar, and the progress that has been made in expanding avatars from simple 2D representations to 3D beings. I’m no afficianado on virtual worlds, but I’ve played enough video games that all the avatar types discussed were familar to me. This was sort of nice in that I didn’t feel over my head, but also didn’t really present much new information.
What it is, Part Four began to explore the ideas about avatars that are harder for me to easily grasp. Here, the avatar is described as an interactive character, a social representation of the user. While these concepts are logical, the practice of them is sort of foreign to me. I suppose it’s just never occured to me to enter a virtual world and create an online icon that serves as a social messenger for myself. Avatars are described as making friends, defining themself, and making decisions. As animated characters controlled by a user, this almost seems like too much personification given to something that isn’t actually real. However, maybe that’s just my inexperience with complex avatars talking – perhaps our experience with Second Life will help me to understand more about how people become so attached to their avatars, and stake so much of their own representation in them.
