Facebook as a symbolic fiction /// Spectators 2.0 as the feeding material of that fiction.
So we all know that fiction is a way to structure reality. It enables me to perceive the reality and is a condition of my accepting it. And we use fiction as a way to interrogate it.
Ex : Like when an event is too traumatic or too violent, (whether it is overly happy or horribly sad), it shatters the coordinate of our reality, so you have to fictionalized it.
If on the contrary you take away from our reality the symbolic fictions that regulate it, you can’t get hold of reality anymore… you lose ground
Facebook is for me a machine for fiction, or I should rather say, it is a machine that process events into a strange form of fiction. A kind of written (or multimedia, but not as often) fiction that is unstable and that fluctuates all the time. And a fiction without authors.
Variable & interactive narrations is often seen as a way to get to the structure of narration itself (instead of being an occurrence of a story). It reveals the archetypes and also enriches the questioning by multiplying it. But here, we are beyond variable, and as Camille noticed, we are in a totally instable fiction, that rearrange itself all the time.
So I am asking myself : if a fiction rearrange itself all the time, how can it fulfils its regulating role?
Finally, if I have enough distance and observe Facebook, it becomes a tool that allows me to perceive, not the reality behind the illusion but the reality in illusion itself. Facebook is like Wonderland: if you stay an outsider (a spectator) you can see reality “through the looking glass”, that is to say you can read reality that is contained into illusion. If you become an actor, then you are fucked! You become the thing Facebook feeds on.