STRUCTRALISM & BINARY OPPOSITION

For this blog I have decided to look at both subject matters and break them down in a attempt to understand their origins and core beliefs.


Structuralism looks at the way people conceive the world by means of investigating the way they organize their knowledge and understanding of the world around them.
Structuralism is an evolution of semiotic principles and some original ideas appeared in the studies of  Linguistics (Ferdinand de Saussure), Narratology (Vladimir Propp) and Anthropology (Claude Levi-Strauss).

*Structuralism was founded on the basis of opposing ideas that related to humanistic characteristics.

Structuralism deviates from Ontological and Epistemological ideas to create a new perceptive direction in which to observe meaning. Certain human behaviours are perceived in a anti-metaphysical manor to determine the motive of the action, which (in structuralism) is said to derive from deep rooted structures.

Ontology - study of  "Being" (ideas come from a higher existence)

                      *Plato believed in the ultimate ideas and essences of everything existed in the heavens, he believed that ideas and thoughts were not man made but were a product of some divine power.

Epistemology - study of  "Knowing" (ideas come from within)

Early Structuralism cited that metaphysical meaning (philosophical and theological) does not come from above but proceeds upward from material structures. Proto-structuralist Karl Marks believed that certain elements 

(Art. Religion ect.) in life are not produced due to divine ideas and concepts but are products of physical, material and socio-economical forces which are then be developed upon.  

Structuralism also rejects the "subjective self" (conciousness/ego) as the final source of meaning, instead conciousness itself could be said to be an outcome of the structures within our unconscious. This would make our concious mind a product of structuralism as a posed to a source of knowledge.

**These "Structures" that are spoken about are not made up of certain 'things' but are defined by the differences that are created when they are combined/grouped.

Example; when looking at Binary, the numbers which make it mean nothing on their own,

once combined however the differences between the 1's and 0's make a meaningful structure.

Binary Opposition splits everything into two opposing categories i.e. Life - Death

                                                           Hot - Cold

                                                                Male - Female

                                                           Land - Sky

These Binary Oppositions allow for ease of explanation and comparison in communication.

Basic structuralist ideas use the rigid boundaries of  Binary Opposition and in turn share principles with  Ideological concepts. Binary Opposition is very ideological by the way its uses the strict "one or the other" method of finding meaning, that things are very certain and can be divide because of this.
These methods can not always be seen as accurate as they dont take into account personal experience, social trends ect. which is a necessary process in certain circumstances.

Once these elements of Binary Opposition have been understood it is now possible to question them, this is where the rigid structures can become more blurred. Examples of this in the lecture were heavily focus on the idea of "Cyborgs" which involves the merging of 'human' and 'mechanical' aspects. 

VIOLANCE: Intention and Impact

The debate on violence in video games is not a clear argument. First the definition of "violence" needs to be established within a gaming context.Violence has been explained as; "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation." World report on violence and health (WRVH)


However violence in a broad sense is not just limited to the likes of physical force but can also apply to forms of mental and verbal abuse. The latter are not usually concerns when looking at examples of violence in TV, film and games. Violence in these mediums is a substantially larger issue due to the argument of whether this violence is impacting on our society. 

The main issue when analysing the problem with violence in games is that of the realism of certain actions and whether this insights violent tendencies in its consumers. It has been argued that in certain circumstances scenarios in gaming have become so graphic to the point of almost a `simulation level`. 



The trend of creating games with hyper realistic graphics has made the experience of performing certain actions (namely violance in this example) more realistic by being more visually accurate. The inclusion of upgraded graphics has seen the rise of blood in acts of violence. You can see this in GTA IV, when you mow down an innocent pedestrian and their body crash's into your from bumper and dents your bonnet, leaving 
a blood stained mess across your windshield. This isn't photo realistic but is pretty close. GTA has always been known for its sex, drugs and violence but by todays standards the original Grand Theft Auto (1997) wouldn't really be considered a big issue.This may be down to the level of realism in it but the actions you can commit are fundamentally the same.

Grand Theft Auto

        

Grand Theft Auto IV

GTA: Lost & Dammed (Expansion)

"Up on thee sidewalk"

MISFITS' "Gameover" episode has taken the idea of life imitating games by implementing a character that believe he lives in a video game. Imitating the GTA series in direction of this characters view complete with map and mission updates. This episode was really enjoyable and definitely tests the boundaries of violence in games.

*SPOILERS

Tim thinks hes living in a game.

Use of CGI to implement the game aspect.

*Tim's POV; he believes Kelly is his ex Roxy that betrayed him on their wedding day so knocks her out and kidnaps her. 

Thoughts

I feel that the distinctive subtraction of actual transferable psychical input within a game creates a natural barrier between the direct simulation of certain violent actions. You're aware that your playing a game. Not to say the visual stimulation from a game isn't the reason why certain extreme violance is more widely available to audiences that may not of been aware of such actions. I personally feel that games can not be blamed as a sole reason for an individuals actions, the interactive nature does not implement anymore influence then if you where to watch a movie with a high level of violence.

Saying this whilst researching about the impact of  game interaction on players I stumbled across a blog entry by  mandytoomy that got me thinking. In the blog she speaks about going on a retreat as a high school teacher with students and performing an exercise where by they separate the boys and the girls and then asked them to talk about negatives messages they had encountered about the opposite sex. Some of the examples that were given where `Rape Simulation Games`. I wasnt really aware of these really existing, it was really a major shock to hear that they had been made (I mean if theres an idea its bound to of been made) but what shocked me more was that it was commonly played and joked about amongst assumable young boys. Whether these jokes were in jest or not isnt really the point but more the fact it was acceptable and `normal` to simulate violent sex. 


I personally dont think violence in games strongly encourages anyone but with the likes of these `Rape Simulations` perhaps games help to normalizes the concept of a recently inconceivable act.