Reactions to “The Sacred and the Virtual’ in Relation to Bogost’s Procedural Rhetoric

    After reading the paper published by Schroder, Heather and Lee, some of Bogosts thoughts on what he calls Procedural Rhetoric are applicable to the E-Church VR world. It seems as though elements of the procedural rhetoric have taken hold within this virtual community, while others have been preceded by a different sort of atmosphere, one more specific to multi-user worlds, or ‘gamers’. It is clear through the article that the action Bogost describes as “authoring arguments through processes” is substantiated not in the E-church itself as a program or VR world, but in the role of the ‘Leader’ within these worlds whose responsibility it is to instruct and preach thorough the text based format. It seems then, that it is not the E-church itself which is creating this form of religious ritual but it is the people willing to participate. The E-church is simply a converging point, but an important one. The space automatically through its name and intended use creates a new religious space within which to gather. However, the author is quick to point out that the space is often invaded by immature action not to be found within a real church. Here is observed a limitation to Bogost’s procedural rhetoric within the E-church, in that it is only as effective as those individuals who chose to interact within it.

Article Link Available Below

http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue2/schroeder.html

‘The Sacred and the Virtual’ Article Summary

The Sacred and the Virtual: Religion in Multi-User Virtual Reality

            -Ralph Schroder, Noel Heather, Raymond M. Lee.

            This article explores the interactions among participants in an Electronic Church (E-Church) outlined by the authors as a Virtual Reality ( VR) space in which multiple users can engage in simulated church services.  The paper begins by outlining the general characteristics of  such a multi-user VR world, including such things as the avatar, human-like characters which are a surrogate for moving throughout a three dimensional space as well as a means for text-based chatting and prayer.

            The authors then outline what sets and E-Church VR environment apart from other VR worlds. The focus is primarily on the social interaction of participants within an ‘e-service’ and how it is similar to or differs from standard interaction within non-religious VR worlds. Highlighted are the ideas that the social interaction is more tightly structured within the E-church, with participants in a service following the instructions or cues of an assigned Leader of the service, serving the role of a priest, rabbi or the like. This religious VR world is also regulated by real world time, with meeting times posted on bulletins within the world. The avatars within the service restrain their movements as one would in a real world service, within limited movement during the service as they tend to sit and listen. It is noted within the article however that prominent influences of a newer technology based society often set the services apart from a real world service. The three mentioned influences are the “healing powers” of the leader being modeled after tele-evangelism, the text based smiley faces and other abbreviated forms of communication arising from the online community, and the frivolous and often immature behaviors witnessed within the service being derived from gamer culture.

            The paper then goes into a lengthy discussion of the ethical dilemmas facing a researcher in observing and reporting the actions of others within the VR E-church. What amounts from this discussion is little more than an outline of how the authors went about the research, and the reasoning behind not revealing names of participants or times the interactions reported had taken place.

            Language used within the E-church is latter part of the paper. Being the primary form of communication in such a text based E-church; the subtleties of the religious languages used gave the authors great insight into the form of worship used. The authors categorize it as “informal, interactive, charismatic-style worship” and point out its similarities to worship developed in parallel to 1960’s American Radicalism. Highlighted are inverted gender roles, as well as the importance of a sense of self within the avatar representing the human counterpart, Brought into this discussion is a skepticism of how ‘real’ a VR service could be if the participants are masked behind an avatar, and if the weight of a soul seeking service can be transported across digital lines. Important to this discussion are the parallels between the text used within the E-Church and what could be found in a real service, and how little they differ.

            The paper closes with an introduction of Durkheim’s definition of a ritual as contain three important elements:  the physical co-presence of people, the ritualization of actions in coordination of gesture and voice and symbolic sacred objects. The authors then reconciles these with the E-church, pointing out that while the physical limitations are there, if absorbed into a VR Church, the absence can seem negligible.

 

-John W. Borchert

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!