Levels of Narration

Several class sessions ago, Tony posed the question, “Who are we when we write?” We’ve discussed our multiple identities between plurk, Facebook, MySpace, even Blackboard or just printed words on a page. Depending on our level of trust, we either take these means of social networking seriously (truthfully?) or we don’t. The example was used that someone might post: “I was so hammered last night.” It is our interpretation whether we believe that individual was actually drunk, they were lying and looking for attention, or they meant something else entirely.

Some people think that social networking sites are all about ego: bragging about who you scored with, “camwhoring” your new haircut, or trashing other people. There’s even a subsidiary of icanhascheezburger.com called failbooking.com, wherein people share ridiculous Facebook status updates, or the ultimate burn someone pulled on someone else through their social networking identity. This showmanship is a careful balance of ego and embarrassment (although it is delightfully amusing, so long as you don’t recognize your own post on there).

On the other hand, there is the issue of modesty. Perhaps the same people who find social networking sites to be egotistical don’t even use them, or have a strong aversion to them. Perhaps they don’t update often, only have up one or two pictures, and never brag about anything or fish for compliments. Perhaps this in its own way is just an expression of ego: “I’m too sophisticated for this kind of thing.”

The tomcat Murr is the perfect example of how one being can clearly exhibit both ego and modesty. The Author’s Preface shows Murr “bashfully” questioning his merit as a writer (“Shall I, can I, hold my own before the stern tribunal of criticism?”) and signing the note “Murr (Étudiant en belles lettres)”, or “Murr (Student of literature)”, a modest title admitting the cat’s limited knowledge. The adjacent Foreward (Suppressed by the author) shows Murr’s more honest view of his subsequent autobiography. In it, Murr dictates that the reader should find him to be a fully charming and intelligent cat, and even “worship [him] a little.” Instead of his earlier bashful confession that harsh criticism may arise and he begs a kind thought from the reader to console him, Murr now reminds the reader that he has claws and knows how to use them. He signs this scathing Foreward “Murr (Homme de lettres très renommé)”, or “Murr (Very famous man of letters)”. His student status has disappeared and left behind omniscience. Of course, the egotistical Foreward was supposedly not meant to be published, while egotistical status updates are often quite intentional.

Then again, sometimes not.

Ego vs. modesty online gets another layer of interest when we examine “jk”. My feeling is that it’s a clarification of modesty or embarrassment about whatever was just said. Or, as nerbiotxiste put it, “i retract”. It indicates something perhaps you wish you had not said. I think that everything attached to “jk” was meant to be said. If you truly had a secret you wanted no one to know, you would have had the glimmer of foresight not to say it. “Jk” just clarifies that this was something you maybe wouldn’t say to that person face-to-face (in rl), so if you cover it with the notion that you were “just kidding,” it’s a little easier to reveal. “The previous statement leaves me uncomfortably vulnerable.”

I don’t think anyone takes “jk” for its literal translation of “just kidding” anymore. You should be careful if you say something like, “i just killed my neighbor. jk!” I don’t think people will be convinced that you didn’t really do that… or at least that you aren’t planning to. Incidently, “just killed” is the same acronym as “just kidding.”

Delving deeper into our split techno-personas, nanotext guided us in an experiment. On January 22, the class experienced what it was like when nanotext took over the teaching position of Tony Prichard. Participation was hesitant and uncertain. Some showed up to cyberclass from their desks on their laptops or phones. Some from the 2:30 class were able to participate through this method of teaching. nanotext is a facet of Tony, just as lucemart is a facet of me. Some students responded in a way that questioned nanotext’s “instructor” status more than the same students may have questioned Tony’s “instructor” status in the physical realm of our class. awritedesign wondered “if no one is talking because they have completely lost the flow of the ideas nanotext is proposing.” But who would have raised their hand and said aloud with their own vocal chords, “Tony, I have no idea what you’re talking about”?

Who are we when we blog? Who are we when we plurk? Who are we when we tweet? When we [Google]wave? When we… FB? (Is there a verb for Facebook? Is it just update?) Are we honest, modest, egotistical, false? Are any of these things wrong or right? Can anyone make that judgment?

How to do things with Parasites.

In Austin's How to do things with Words, he argues that:

"…a performative utterance will, for example, be in a peculiar way hollow or void if said by an actor on the stage, or if introduced in a poem, or spoken in soliloquy. … Language in such circumstances is in special ways—intelligibly—used not seriously, but in ways parasitic upon its normal use—ways which fall under the doctrine of the etiolations of language" (23).

Austin here seems to acknowledge the place fiction and creativity hold in language by bestowing them with his honor of intelligible use, but then categorizes them as parasitic, an "etiolation". Whether you believe playwrights live in harmony with language or use language to their own advantage, thus enfeebling the "serious" usage of language, is all a matter of context.

Context, point of view, and opinion all similarly contribute to the ways in which we view all parasites, be they language, technology, or biology. The movies we've seen thusfar during our class are perfect examples, and the clips linked below will help to solidify my point.

1. In Shivers, and in Aliens, the parasite is a disgusting being that needs to feed off of humans to survive. It impedes human development, and is in general working towards the destruction of humanity: humanity needs to defend itself by destroying the parasite.
   
2. In Shivers, and in Aliens, the parasite is a fascinating creature that adapts through all kinds of adverse situations in order to survive. It seeks out a host with great precision and discrimination, looking for adequate shelter. As Tony pointed out, from the point of view of the aliens, the chestbursting scene in the movie Aliens is like a home movie of birth. Also, in Shivers, humanity is actually better off with the parasite: happier and freer, as they drive off calmly to spread the parasite (or symbiotic being?) to the outside world.
   

Most of us hold a negative connotation in our heads when we hear the word "parasite." I tend to think of something a lot smaller than the creatures in those two movies; usually something small enough to course through your bloodstream. It shuts down your organs. It makes you sick. It makes you insane.

But Radiolab's show on parasites provides insight to the idea that a parasite can be harmful or beneficial, depending on your point of view. They analyze the intricate ways in which parasites spread (a good example is the nematode, which disguises itself as a berry by swelling up and reddening the rear of an ant: birds eat the ant and fly away, spreading the parasite through excrement as they travel) and the benefits of parasites (Jasper Lawrence's discovery and subsequent business surrounding the medical use of infecting oneself with hookworm to treat a variety of ailments from allergies to multiple sclerosis). They praise the blood fluke's lifelong monogamy, which certainly rivals the capability of many humans. They marvel at the advanced inner workings of Toxoplasma gondii—a parasite found in cat droppings—on the brain: is it possible that humans infected with "Toxo" are actually in love with cats, the way Toxo trains rats to respond sexually to feline smells? That brings a new consideration to anyone we know who's a "cat person"…

Of course, along with the praise comes a degree of reservation. Hookworm gnaws away at your insides, causing diarrhea, intestinal cramping and anemia. Toxo is thought to contribute to schizophrenia in humans, and can be harmful or fatal to fetuses if a pregnant woman is exposed. A study cited in the Radiolab episode even seemed to show that Toxo-infected people have a lowered sense of risk and are more likely to die in car accidents!

And Toxo isn't the only pet-related parasite we have. The flea is another example of something most people have absolutely no tolerance for, much less an affinity. Fleas are a carrier of Bubonic Plague (using our good friends the rats once more), a parasite, a bloodsucker. And yet…

Barry Sanders in Colors/Puce explains how the flea in French culture is actually closely linked to feelings of love and sexuality. Avoir la puce à l'orreile; to have a flea in one's ear; to itch or yearn for someone. And today the color puce, originally named for resembling the purple-red stain left behind when one kills a flea, is thought of as disgusting, even a different color than it once originally meant… a parasite in our Crayola box?

For some, the benefits of parasites seem to outweight the risks. Lawrence's business is still around, and he says many of his customers have reported remarkable improvement in their ailments. And as shown by icanhascheezburger.com, humans can't stay away from cats even knowing what Toxo could do to them. And knowing how prevalent parasites are—after all, bacteria is everywhere, so are parasites, and not even hand sanitizer can save us from that—it's kind of an uphill battle trying to eliminate them from our lives. Besides, modern science is working to ensure that we can make parasites work for us.

So read and believe the performatives in plays and poems! Extend your arm to that mosquito, pet that flea-ridden dog, don't shy away from the litter box! Those parasites might be just what you've been searching for.