Catherine Colman Says:
February 7th, 2007 at 01.48

Angela-

I agree with your comment about the ad campaign. I think this directly relates to what we were discussing in class about context. This seems to be a perfect example of something that could have unintended consequences because it is taken out of context. Just because something is unexpected or shocking does not mean that it will provoke an easily identifiable emotional response. It also seems to me that placing these images on a door is a very odd choice. I’m not sure how much these images would serve to desensitize people, however. To a certain extent I think that our media overloaded culture has already done that to a certain degree.

# Catherine Colman Says:
February 7th, 2007 at 02.01

“if you don’t know about the damn thing, the door doesn’t exist - that which is blocked by the door is not even conceivable.”

I found this to be an interesting statement. I agree with the second part but not so much the first. One person’s individual lack of knowledge of a door, especially a virtual one, does not by any means mean that it does not exist. I would argue that access to the internet, or to various aspects of an online experience, is very much a door. And that one’s lack of access or lack of knowledge of the various virtual doors involved does not mean that they don’t exist. And the fact that what lays behind the door is not even conceivable is the problem. There are many virtual doors that we probably pass through unaware of on a daily basis (and if not we will), which leads to the questions: what rights of passage are we participating in that we don’t even know of? what information is required to enter these doors? where are these doors leading us? etc.

I think this also relates to the question of how far open we leave the virtual doors that lead directly to our physical selves (online profiles, media sharing sites, blogs, social networks, etc.). Who is coming in? It seems that many people’s relationship to these kind of doors is to shut them completely (non-participation) or leave them wide open. Maybe neither one is the answer. Perhaps the answer is finding a way to re-gain control over who has the key. But how does that happen?