The shift Boorstin illuminated was, in his opinion,
caused primarily by the growing advertising and public
relations industries. People became personalities, events
became media opportunities, and campaigns became
smoke and mirrors. The public bought into the “fake”
illusions of reality, allowing pseudo-reality to triumph
over concrete reality. Boorstin coined the term “pseudo-event” to describe over-dramatized happenings that were driven by public relations, with little other purposes than
a sheer “media moment” (Rushkoff, 2012). These events
and activities contributed to a false sense of reality, a
“facsimile of life” (“Daniel Boorstin,” n.d., para. 2).
Boorstin pointed out that pseudo-events “tend to be more
interesting and more attractive than spontaneous events,”
as they are more controlled, more calculated, and less
“real” (p. 37). This idea of a media-constructed reality
was later termed “hyperreality,” and further illuminated
by scholars such as Jean Baudrillard and Guy Debord.
Boorstin discussed pseudo-reality with regard to
celebrity and fame, political figures and campaigns, and
even tourism, among other aspects of American culture.
Fame, according to Boorstin, is constructed in such a
the way that celebrities are well-known simply for being
well-known. Applied to politics, Boorstin highlighted
the Kennedy-Nixon debate of 1960 in The Image,
explaining that the campaign events and candidates’
performances became more important to the public than
their qualifications. Pseudo-events highlight pseudo qualifications (Boorstin, 1962). While more recent
media theorists attest that older media criticisms are
inevitably less relevant than they were decades ago,
Boorstin’s concern with hyperreality is still on the table.
The Image, according to some, remains a classic
example of an “older” media criticism that is still
pertinent. In Interface Culture (1999), Johnson states
that
“The older tradition of media criticism – Daniel
Boorstin’s classic work The Image being the
ultimate example – sees the tendency for self-reference as a kind of hall-of-mirrors effect, where
the real body politics of face-to-face existence
slouch toward a vanishing point of endless
reflection (p. 29)
This notion of “unrealities” reflecting further
“unrealities,” or constructed realities, is now
commonplace in media literacy. In media scholarship,
the concern is constantly echoed that, due to mass
media, we are never quite getting to the “real reality,” if
such a thing does exist. Applying this concern to
technological advances and literacy, it can be argued that
new tools, gadgets, games, websites, and apps are
contributing to a smoke and mirrors effect, diminishing
true, “real” content.
As a fan of printed literature, Boorstin believed
that technological advances in television, film, and
cinema would further distance Americans from reality,
particularly in the absence of grappling with written
language. Books and literature, according to Boorstin,
take time to ingest and to think critically about. Images,
like those on television and in advertisements, were
everything all at once: what you were supposed to see,
how you were supposed to feel, and what message you
were to take away. However “pseudo” these images may
have been or may still be, they enable the audience to
subscribe to a very rushed, very realistic series of
emotions and ideas. “While words take time to utter and
hear,” Douglas Rushkoff says of Boorstin’s position,
“the image is frozen in time – its impact immediate, and
its influence decadent” (Rushkoff, 2012, “Afterword”).
In the final chapter of The Image, Boorstin
describes the threat of hyperreality to America as “the danger
of replacing American dreams by American illusions”
(p. 240). Media scholar Douglas Rushkoff, in the
Afterward he wrote for the 50th edition reprint of The
Image builds on the shift in American dreams described
by Boorstin. He explains that we went from one dream,
before images and pseudo-events and constructed
realities took over, to the subsequent dream of
hyperreality from which Boorstin was imploring us to
wake up. Prior to the shift, Rushkoff explains, human
beings were utilizing their own creativity in the absence
of image factories. He describes The Image as an
“analysis of how we were lulled to sleep” (Rushkoff,
2012, “Afterword”). According to Rushkoff, the
slumber that we are now in is characterized by the
inability to reach the greater narratives of humanity.
We are stuck in the present, caught up in the
“now” that Boorstin warned us about. Rushkoff
describes this current presentist state of society in his
book Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now
(2013). While focusing on the present may seem like a
a nod to conscious living, we are living unconsciously in
the sense that we are more aware of a cell phone
buzzing, a pinging inbox, or an incoming tweet than of
grander life schemes with beginnings, middles, and ends.
We are oblivious to the story. This shift into oblivion is
what Boorstin would consider a shift from “the world of
language and text to the world of the image” (Rushkoff,
2012, “Afterword”). Aligning Boorstin’s notion of the
“image” as a real-time moment of impact with
Rushkoff’s presentist idea of the “now,” we might say
that words and literature, in the Boorstinian sense, are
the key to maintaining creativity, narrative, and
consciousness. Boorstin’s belief that words require
critical thought, contextualizing, and a deeper
understanding of how a text is situated into one’s life is
similar to Rushkoff’s idea that we need to awaken our
creativity and open our eyes – to do more than just
shallowly experience whatever sensory information is
coming at us right now.
Examining these ideas through the lens of
current trends in literacy, education, and popular culture
illuminates several areas of inquiry. Are we being pulled
away from critical thinking and narrative thought by the
“gee whiz” factor of flashy texts and tools? Is our
digitized, present-focused state robbing us of basic
logical reasoning and problem-solving skills? Will
students be able to see the long-term value and
applicability of their lessons? Will there be long-term
value and applicability? Boorstin is credited with
illuminating the detrimental shift that was just beginning
in his time. The shift into hyperreality that Boorstin
described is analogous to the shift that is intensifying
today: to a fast-paced, always-on culture. Like Marshall
McLuhan predicted the global village, Boorstin
predicted a mass-mediated disconnect from reality. Our
connection to technology disconnects us from reality.
New ideas in media literacy education can serve
to create a connection where there was once disconnected.
With strategic planning and practice, educators can
enable students to think critically and to find long-term
value with tools and texts that have previously been
considered shallow. Boorstin was one of the first to warn
us of an impending loss of creative human qualities. By
taking full advantage of the array of gadgets, texts, apps,
games, and tools at our disposal, we can intertwine
creativity and literacy.
During Boorstin’s time as Librarian of Congress,
he made a controversial order to open the majestic
bronze doors of the Main Library of Congress to the
public, a request that was met with a rebuttal by his
colleagues. His response to the rebuttal captures his
character and contribution to media history: “They said
it would create a draft,” Boorstin told reporters, “and I
replied, ‘Great — that’s just what we need’” (“Daniel J.
Boorstin,” 2004).
References
Billington, J. H. (2004, March). Eulogy Librarian of Congress Emeritus Daniel J. Boorstin.
Boorstin, D. J. (2012). The image: A guide to pseudo-events in America. Random House Digital, Inc..
Daniel Boorstin. (n.d.). In Hyperreality. Retrieved from http://enterhyperreality.weebly.com/daniel-boorstin.html
Daniel J. Boorstin, RIP. (2004) The New Atlantis. Spring 2004.
Gabler, Neil (2012, April 15) Daniel Boorstin got it right in 'The Image'. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/15/entertainment/la-ca-neal-gabler-20120415
Johnson, S. (1997). Interface culture: How new technology transforms the way we create and communicate. Basic Books.
Rushkoff, D. (2012). Afterword. In D. J. Boorstin (1962), The image: A guide to pseudo-events in America. New York:
Vintage
The Hyperreality of Daniel Boorstin
Stephanie Viens
Harrington School of Communication and Media, University of Rhode Island
No comments:
Post a Comment