Week 11: Sirenomelia

Posted on by
1

After viewing this video I was honestly left slightly confused but also interested. Analyzing the video led me to realize that it exemplifies how humans tend to only look at the surface and not dive into “the deep” or what is below the surface. While there is a lot to explore on the surface, as seen through the mountain ranges and roads, there is so much below the surface that humans have not yet discovered. The mermaid in the video represents this unknown world. Through developing technology and investing in research humans can learn so much about the ocean and what life is like below the surface. Whether it is because of fear, disinterest, or lack of technology, humans have not put the effort into learning about the ocean as they have in learning about space and all things above the surface. The mermaid in the video is seen swimming through a river and looking up at a bridge. They are looking at manmade items and connecting themselves to the human world. The camera angle of the mermaid looking up represents their interest in the human world. If humans would look down, we would be much more connected to what makes up over 70% of the Earth, the Ocean.

Sirenomelia

Posted on by
2

When watching Sirenomelia, the visuals and sound effects in this were quite interesting. I was intrigued by the interaction with the glaciers and human-made disk. I feel this represents the relationship between the Ocean and humans, and how we interact with it does affect it. Just because we only see the surface doesn’t mean the deep isn’t important, or doesn’t have its own history. The underwater shots the camera got, versus the above ground shots of the glaciers were really interesting to me. I felt that they paralleled each other and the underground shots felt more intimate and scary. When we saw under the Ocean it felt more sort of ominous and alive, then the top of the Ocean where we see the glaciers. I believe this is represents our own relationship with the humans, and how it might be easier to disregard something when you can only see the surface. I think this video was trying to show this parallel, between the surface of the Ocean and the depth of it. I think it is showing that the Ocean has history, and us humans usually disregard it because OUR history is not in the depths of the Ocean. Yes we have history with exploring the surface of the Oceans and using it as transportation, but our own history does not include the Ocean. I thought it was interesting to think about this aspect when watching that video.

Not only this, but the underwater shots from the water, looking up at human made balcony or bridge, is also showing the effect humans have on the Ocean and the water. The relationship between the two in important, which is what this video/artwork is trying to show. We might not notice it because we are not underwater or looking up: We only see the surface. I also believe that this video , when underwater is in the perspective of the Sirens, as we see snippets of them swimming underwater. The curiosity they have of us humans, and the surface. This shot towards the end not only reminded me of the relationships between humans and the Ocean, but also humans and the unknown. I thought this depiction of Sirens and their perspective of looking through the surface of the water was very interesting to see shown, changing the narrative of only seeing the surface- as us humans do.

Week 11: Sirenomelia

Posted on by
2

This short film left me with wonder and confusion while it also demonstrated a great sense of complexity. I felt that it was a bit difficult to follow, but the key idea is the depth of the oceans and how much is left unknown. It brings forth examples of climate change by showing the warming temperatures affecting climates around the world. It is a common idea that we know the effects of climate change, but it reality we only know bits and pieces. Sirenomelia reminded us how big the ocean is and how much life can be held within. Hard to say that humans will ever fully comprehend the ocean and all the organisms that come with it. With that being said, I think this film strives to encourage proceeding with caution and be intentional in our involvement with this underworld.

We often discuss how humans intend to dominate, maintain control and are of a higher power than nonhumans. The constant comparison, especially in literary work we have studied, goes to show how humans comprehend this power dynamic. When really there is clearly a lack of understanding, and maybe even misunderstanding when it comes to other creatures. This can be demonstrated through mermaid, but also through ocean dwelling animals. There is a lot to understand in this film that can surely be brought back to the relationships with climate and humans.

Week 11: Sirenomelia

Posted on by
2

Watching this video reminded me of one of the terms we discussed last week, distortion. This ocean centric language proposal in Deterritorializing: Preface mentioned switching from clarity to distortion, as many things underwater are distorted and how this distortion should be a baseline condition. I saw this distortion in the video we watched this week, as there were both visual and auditory distortions when the camera was underwater. Looking up at the land, one could not see as clearly as one should be able to, and there were light distortions through the water. When an audio clip of someone talking played, it was muffled and incomprehensible. It was interesting to see the world from what a mermaid’s perspective might be, and how separated from the human world this perspective is. When the camera was underwater and pointed up at the surface, the land beyond seemed so far away. If we did switch our language from clarity to distortion, it would allow us to consider other perspectives, and perhaps understand that our personal perspective is not truly clear; rather that it is distorted, as is everyone else’s. 

I also thought the locations chosen by the director were interesting. There was a sharp contrast between the snowy land, that was just nature for miles and miles, untouched by man. Then, where the mermaid was swimming, there was concrete and industrialization. As it states in the description, the mermaid is exploring an old, decommissioned NATO base, which also goes to show that even when humans think they need land, they are willing to just abandon it after it has served its purpose. Perhaps this contrast is making commentary on mankind’s effects on the environment. While some parts are unscathed, others are dominated by the effects of industrialization and humans’ need for land. And by changing the raw environment, it makes it more difficult for the natural world to navigate. Instead of this mermaid having the ability to roam in an open space (as shown in the video at 4:53), the mermaid is confined to tunnels and canals. As humans, we are able to manipulate the world in a way that affects many more species than just our own. 

The “Emptiness” of the Ocean

Posted on by
1

The Ocean is a expansive world that contains multiple different dimensions that we have not yet allocated the resources to explore. This wide mass holds mystery, beauty, and overarching powers that defy our slightest comprehension of the Ocean’s potential in the world. As stated the Ocean heavily surpasses our comprehension as we, at first glance, may perceive the ocean as an empty void yet these infinite expanses, contain life beyond human understanding. In humanity’s typical approach to Earth we perceive ourselves as the masters of the world and the rulers of our environment. Although this idea immediately crumbles when humans are confronted with the magnitude of the Ocean and face the struggle of being humbled by our own egos. We are nothing in comparison to the Ocean and its vastness, the depth of society has no comparison to the depth of the Ocean.

While we conquer society on land we have failed to conquer the ocean. In my opinion I don’t think we will ever have the potential to fully dominate the Ocean and unfortunately do not think that society will delegate the resources to do so. I include the image of the mermaid swimming in the Ocean because it barely scrapes the surface on how big the Ocean truly is, in comparison to our own bodies. The world is 70% water, in which we are surrounded and dominated by its power. The image is directly from the video and I think it is an emphasis of our position in the world, even all powerful mermaids do not compare to the size of the Ocean. While our comfort is in the land, we must force ourselves to explore the vastness that proceeds us as it is the bane of our existence. The Ocean serves as a timeless entity that is everything but “empty” as it is filled with every reminder of our creation and adaptations. Rather than view the Ocean as an empty vessel we should view it as a space of infinite potential and opportunity. We must allow ourselves to erase our egos against the Ocean and acknowledge our existence as “less than” in the face of the Ocean, as once we recognize the power the Ocean has, we can learn to join our powers and work in unison.

EC – Snatching Joy: Black Feminist Approaches to Digitial Humanities

Posted on by
Reply

This presentation with Catherine Knight Steele was an interesting presentation but also one that was difficult to follow. Steele was providing a significant amount of information and examples throughout the entire presentation but what I thought was the clear message was seeing how society views the life of Black Americans through a “white lens”, meaning we see things (movies, TikTok, videos, media, etc.) in a more concealed way, which results into encouraging Black Americans into taking back or “snatching” their culture back.

She provides a significant amount of information through the use of TikTok, which is relatable as it is something that is almost embedded in the younger generation. An example that resonated with me was the use of certain dances such as the “Renegade” dance that was originally made from Black Americans but only became popularized due to other “influencers” who are Non-Black Americans. Steele makes this comment as she was able to say something along the lines of not accrediting the rightful creators. This is an ongoing problem as many things today that originate from Black Americans are not getting the rightful credit they deserve, and only become popular or apart of the “trend” because other Non-Black Americans are able to popularize trends.

Overall, I thought this presentation was impactful as Steele was able to provide relatable examples that multiple generations would understand or even know a bit about, and it leaves you with thoughts of how majority of things can be seen through the “white lens” she speaks of. Speaking for myself it left me with a number of questions about how media is constantly using a “white lens” meaning, in some forms of media such as movies there isn’t an actual representation of stories but instead are made into a way that will satisfy and leave people on a good and uplifting note. I believe it does encourage more of rightful accreditation and to be properly informed to begin as it is something that is lacked when all forms of media are being produced.

EXTRA CREDIT–PANEL ONE: Humans’ Very Real Relationships with Not-So-Real Relationships

Posted on by
Reply

I attended the first panel of Networked Narratives last Friday, March 15th. Presenters Warner Stoddart II and Micah Sakado talked about volunteering abroad with various foreign armies and the parasocial relationships created in V-tubing, respectively. At first, I wondered why these two wildly different presenters would be put together. What does volunteering for an army fighting battles that are not your own and engaging with a live stream of a fictional, motion-captured anime character have in common?

Only after their presentations did it occur to me that the common thread between Warner and Micah’s presentations is parasociality.

Thanks to social media, parasociality and parasocial relationships are regarded as symptom of delusion, a malady of the brain. Having a parasocial relationship with a celebrity or a fictional character can be met with at best, disbelief, and at worst, disdain or disgust. Why are these parasocial relationships met with such negative reactions when everyone in some way, shape, or form engages in these relationships? Sports fans buy their favorite athletes’ jerseys and music lovers attend their favorite artists’ concerts, so why the negativity?

Micah redefined a parasocial relationship as an “asymmetrical relationship with critical distance,” rather than a one-sided illusion of a face-to-face relationship. Defining a parasocial relationship as “asymmetrical” removes power from the “one-sided” aspect of the initial definition, as both parties contribute to the relationship in some way but there is considerably more effort being exerted from one side than the other. Micah noticed that the key to having a healthy parasocial relationship is for the individual to recognize that the relationship only evokes the feeling of having the relationship they desire rather than having the actual relationship. His interviewees said that they got into V-tubing because interacting with their favorite V-tuber was “like having a friend” or “like having a crush on someone”–the key thing to note is that these interviewees differentiated between having a friend in real life and a friend through the screen.

Warren, who presented on volunteering for the YPG Kurdish militia and Ukraine, among many other foreign armies, touched very briefly on the volunteers’ motivations for volunteering. For some of them, their reasons for joining were political, but quite a few said they felt a calling to “chase the dragon of combat.” I wanted to ask if there was also an altruistic approach to volunteering for foreign armies that these volunteers took. Did some volunteers feel like this was the best way to help the civilians affected by the terrorist groups? Did they feel a connection to these civilians, despite not knowing them personally? In a way, I can see some form of parasociality in the decision to volunteer.

Week 10: When is the ocean’s birthday?

Posted on by
2

Helen M. Rodzakowski’s Vast Oceans made me think and rethink my perception of so much more than the ocean. It also made me rethink the things considered just as timeless as the ocean–for example, Barbie. Barbie dolls and Barbie movies were a personal childhood staple. There wasn’t a day that went by in the first six or seven years of my life that I didn’t watch Barbie’s “Rapunzel” or sing the songs from Barbie’s “The Princess and the Pauper” or happily receive a new Barbie doll from my aunt. Barbie’s presence in my life was a constant, so it didn’t occur until later in life that Barbie wasn’t always a constant in every kid’s life. We can trace Barbie’s beginnings back to the 50s, down to the name of her creator and why she was named Barbie in the first place. Barbie has history, but in the eyes of time, Barbie is barely a twinkle in it.

One of the quotes that stood out to me in Rodzakowski’s Vast Oceans is: ““…the connections between people and oceans, though ancient, have tightened over time and multiplied with industrialization and globalization. Although we think of it as being starkly different, in this sense the ocean resembles the land. This trajectory runs counter to wide-spread cultural assumptions of the ocean as a place remote from and immune to human activity.” (9) The ocean has seen all of human history, existing long before humans even became humans. If the ocean were a person, it would know more of our history than we know of it. Even though our knowledge of the ocean’s history is limited, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

The Ocean Reader

Posted on by
2

The opening paragraph of this reading caught my attention. Because it’s impossible to cut trees or mine the surface of the ocean, it seems “impervious to the onslaught of the harvesters.” I had never before considered terracentrism.

I’m not sure how relevant this is to the reading, but I can somewhat relate on a personal level to the concept of terracentrism. A few years ago, I watched a documentary called Cowspiracy. As a result of that film and Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma, I became a pescetarian. For 2 years, I didn’t even consider the ocean or the beings affected by my consumption of fish. It wasn’t until I learned more about overfishing and the exploitation of dolphin populations in places like Japan that I even considered cutting out fish from my diet. Although I don’t believe it is up to the individual to change the environmental destruction on a large scale, I somewhat disregarded the ocean as a productive ecosystem.

The concept of the Ocean being one interconnected system without boundaries fascinates me. By naming different parts of the ocean as their own ocean, we have artificially separated a singular connected ecosystem into different parts. By doing so, we forget that species like birds and whales travel across these permeable “borders” for their migrating patterns. We also forget that there are countries that are disproportionately affected by the overconsumption of goods in wealthy countries. For example, the trash that the US sends to China and subsequently the Philippines affects the populations of people and animals all over the Pacific. A plastic bottle I throw into the Pacific won’t magically stop at the edge of the next ocean over.

Ocean Lingo

Posted on by
3

I found the reading, “Deterritorializing Preface” interesting as it tries to shift our perspective of life by changing commonly used “ground” words and metaphors in to ocean related vocabulary. I was surprised to see that the seven words Steve Mentz provided were quite similar to the words he replaced them with and how he managed to relate them to modern day events. For example, he replaced the word “state” with “ship” and explaining how both can be related to the political environment as ship-to-ship encounters comprise of trading, fighting, hailing, and sighting similar to the activities “state” governments conduct (xvi). I think the idea behind changing our vocabulary from land to sea terminology is neat given that it is something we don’t use as often. Even though we will most likely spend our life on land and are fortunate enough to live on the coast, we or at least I sometimes forget that the ocean takes up the majority of the surface area on Earth. What I think Mentz was trying to say was we should be more considerate towards the ocean and can start with simple changes like tweaking our vocabulary.