Talk:Hyperreality

message: Kenneth Burke probably deserves a mentionWblakesx (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hyperreality describes the non-distinction between reality and fantasy in a technologically advanced society where media shape and filter what we consider to be real. For Baudrillard, the hyperreal manifested itself in a variety of ways, from media (television or movies) to experiences (politics or the Gulf War) to objects (money or art) (Gane, 1993; Hegarty, 2004).  
“[Hyperreality] is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real, that is to say of an operation of deterring every real process via its operational double…” (Baudrillard, 1994, p. 2)
“Everything is destined to reappear as simulation. Landscapes as photography, women as the sexual scenario, thoughts as writing, terrorism as fashion and the media, events as television” (Baudrillard, 1988, p. 32)  
Baggott (2005) notes: “We now live within a reality that has become a complete invention of our postmodern urban, industrial society and media culture. To some it has become a dreamworld, a hyperreality, no longer based on anything identifiably real” (p. 19). In this manifestation, society manufactures the real from the unreal: “We construct a reality based on models of how we would like that reality to be, not on reality itself” (Baggott, p. 21)  --Roekeloos (talk) 14:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyperreality Definitions --''must have reference'' 

message: "Hyperreality: the inability of consciousness to distinguish reality from fantasy, especially in technologically advanced postmodern cultures." => Can we consider the investigations of the 9/11_Truth_Movement to be part of a Hyperreality? --Rougieux 22:51, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is hyperreality in the technical sense as far as I'm concerned, but it isn't really in the spirit of the theory.--69.37.130.53 (talk) 02:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyperreality in the 9/11 truth movement 

message: I think another good example of hyperreality might be found in "fine art" a painting that of say a landscape where the viewer can see more acuratly what the lanscsape actually is than they could see looking at the real landscape.   —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Leroy1213 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyperreality in Art 

message: I'd like to see more thoughts on Wikipedia as hyperreality.
- I would too, will include Wikiality on the Hyperreality page -Psychologesetz 18:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia as Hyperreality? 

message: That bold part in the middle is really preachy. It made me immediately think the writer was a wacko. The crazy emphasis didn't help the explanation at all. However, I will leave this revision to someone with at least one clue. Otherwise, thank you! This article was very interesting.
I agree with the above writer - what should be a straightforward definition comes across as a paranoid rant against technology...  There are a lot of assumptions and politics couched in this article...  It badly needs a more balanced rewrite IMHO...
I agree totally, to many assumptions not enough hardfacts. Buts thats the problem with most of wikipedia, to many 'enthusiasts', not many impartial academics. RoloTamassey 12:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What part is being referred to here? -Abscissa 16:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whoa 

message: Seems to me that there are much better examples of hyperreality than Las Vegas, as set forth in the article.  The Gulf War is interesting and very well substantiated by Jean Baudrillard in his book 'The Gulf War Did Not Take Place'.  Is Las Vegas referred to in the literature base?
--Furste 22:42, 5 December 2005
:Yeah, he writes about Vegas in America.  -Seth Mahoney 22:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll second that. Las Vegas is an essential example for Baudrillard's postmodern theory. Szpak 07:01, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See the official Las Vegas motto, "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas." Kevin143 08:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Definately -- Las Vegas and Disneyworld are two places Baudrillard loves to pick on. Think about it... can you get more simulated than either of those places? -Abscissa 16:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dubai..? --Exformation.info 23:28, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dubai isn't really "designed to be fake" the way Las Vegas is. I disagree that it is an illustrative example, but we sorted this out before and I agreed to leave it. - Abscissa 04:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Las Vegas? 

message: I removed "pornography" from examples of hyperreality.  Though I certainly understand what the author was thinking, not everything considered "pornographic" by everyone's standards is necessarily "hyperreal."  Without delving into the differing definitions of pornography, there's a specific example I can think of which illustrates my argument.  Let's say that someone makes an amateur video of him or herself having intercourse, and let's postulate that this person decides to sell said video for whatever reason.  Since it's a depiction of a sex act and it's being distributed, this video would be considered pornographic by most definitions.  Nothing about this particular example, however, is inherently hyperreal.  This might be an odd example, but I think it serves to illustrate that "pornography" is too vague and subjective a concept to consider implicitly hyperreal.
In addition, it seems to me that there is a clear distinction between something which is simply meant to arouse, and the hideously garish mainstream pornography which you'll find in your local "adult" video store.  A lot of pornography is indeed designed and marketed to be "better" and more erotic than sex; this brand of pornography--the stuff with the bowling-ball sized implants and big budgets--is very clearly hyperreal because it's an artificial over-sexualization of sex.  However, I don't see how watching a depiction of intercourse for the purpose of stimulating sexual arousal is inherently more hyperreal than watching someone get kicked in the groin to stimulate laughter, or than going to the orchestra or a concert to stimulate euphoria.  I've always read Baudrillard as referring to the garish, hyper-sexualized variety of pornography, and not representations of sex acts in and of themselves, as being hyperreal.  This would disqualify "pornography" as a blanket term from being included under examples of hyperreality.  But perhaps I'm totally wrong.
:I have re-inserted the example of pornography. THIS IS BAUDRILLARD'S EXAMPLE. It is also **THE BEST** example of hyperreality. I appriciate your argument but it doesn't really relate to what Baudrillard has to say. - Abscissa 04:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment - the nature of pornography is to simulate sex. More specifically -- the act of watching pornography. This does not necessarily include masturbation, but unless you have a specific fetish that relates to the viewing of pornography, you are engaging in hyperreality. - Abscissa 04:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that anyone could take pornography to be a real dipiction of sexuality at all lends more creedence to the concept of hyperreality... --DanielCD 18:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I rephrased the example to reflect film in general.  I also gave direct credit to Baudrillard for the pornography example. 69.140.33.146 (talk) 19:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The pornography example is much more relevant than film in general. It makes the point a lot better. People don't enter film in general the way they do with pornography. --DanielCD (talk) 20:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Again, I don't see why this is being changed to "film". Film may be an example of this, but it is in no way as good an example as pornography. People don't engage film the way they do pornography, and trading the examples makes the article more confusing. Pornography is perhaps a perfect example of hyperreality. If it's taken out here, it needs to be reemphasized somewhere else. Therefore I see no reason to change it to "film" in general. It's not *just* Baudrillard's example either; it is the best example. Perhaps some expansion or rewording might make a stronger article, but the pornography shouldn't be de-emphasized. --DanielCD (talk) 16:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That it is "perfect" or "the best example" is your opinion.  The pornography example is compelling due to social norms and attitudes more than relevance, in my opinion.  The level of hyperreality in a medium really depends on how it is approached by the creator and the observer, meaning the experiance could very widely from one individual to another, one map to another.  Moreover, watching pornography isn't as universal as watching plain old movies, something to which everybody can relate.  As this is an introductory example, I think the article should use something that applies as widely as possible to maintain neutrality, even at thee expense of depth.  I don't have time to hunt down sources or cite Baudrillard to reemphasized the pornography example latter in the article, though, so I'll leave this for now.  I do, however, want to strengthen examples of social actions and combat.  Any comments on that?  69.140.33.146 (talk) 20:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: In reading Baudrillard's own definition of hyperreality: "the simulation of something which never really existed," I do not understand how this argument can continue. I understand Baudrillard did in fact make a statement about pornography, yet the example of pornography undercuts his own argument. Saying that in general pornography (without masturbation as the article is currently geared towards)is hyperreal is the same as saying watching pro football at home is hyperreal.  Just because the representation surpasses your personal experiences does not mean it surpasses all experiences. After all, the people being filmed are having sex.  In the course of reading this article I am reminded of René Magritte's famous painting, "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" (This is not a pipe.) All media is a representation, simply viewing pornography is no different from viewing other media. The only real discussion left pertains to metaphysical beliefs surrounding truth and reality (simply what exactly are fiction and nonfiction, and how do they relate to the concept of hyperreality.) And that discussion is stick and gross, and I do not want to participate in another metaphysical discussion.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.169.6 (talk) 19:03, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pornography 

message: The Mexican Election is not an appropriate example because it not only is a specific event, but it is not represnted by a signifier that confuses reality (McDonalds = M arches, Pornography = TV, Las Vegas = Decor, etc.). While I happen to agree that the election (and elections in general) are "fake" in the sense that they are driven by spectacle and meaning, it is best not to make this article more confusing and it doesn't really belong here. People unfermilliar with the topic have enough time understanding it as it is. - Abscissa 19:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to (belatedly) concur. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 14:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mexican Election 

message: Video Games have previously been suggested as an example but, frankly (once again), they do not belong. I am not fermilliar with any of Baudrillard's work talking about video games. Also, the video game user is interacting (at a sub-basic level) with real-reality -- since he does know that he is interacting with it (and by choice). 
However, I do agree that research in this area is out of date because the current video games are extraordinaraily realistic, i.e. they involve combat operations, going in and resucing soldiers, other sorts of nonsense. I would be interested to hear from anyone who has up-to-date information from someone in this field. - Abscissa 09:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to suggest to you that is one example of a particular individual with a psychological problem rather than an example of a cultural phenomena. In general, "hyperreality" is like a fine wine and should only be brought out for those cases -- i.e., the Iraq war on TV -- where the general public has no idea what is really going on... instead they are excited for the bombs, the tanks, etc. which are thousands of miles away. I would say that 99.99% of the public understands what happens when they play a video game, and the video game is meant to hypnotise them for a bit and perhaps escape from reality but it does not substitute for reality. - Abscissa 12:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

text: First, there is absolutely no way, none, zero, none at all -- nil -- that video game revenue exceeds that of the movies. But that is not relevant. I also was not aware that I spoke to the relevance of the "infuence" of video games, since that would be irrelevant also. You claim that "It is about what artifacts contemporary culture produces that mould our environment" is worth addressing, especially since that definition is highly specific and easily refutiable. I would propose to you that hyperreality is instead about how reality is confused by contemporary culture. Watching the Gulf war on TV (Baudrillard's most famous example) does not produce "artifacts", the entire idea behind it is that it confuses an entire nation of people about what a war is, what is actually happening, what is going on, etc. Video games do not have this effect, at least not permanantly for most people. And when people do choose to play video games, they realise that they are engaging in a fantasy world. - Abscissa 17:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But another frequently cited example is Las Vegas. I think that most people playing roulette at Caesar's Palace are aware that they are not in ancient Rome. — Gwalla | Talk 19:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Just as in any other medium, it depends on what we are analyzing (particular type of Video Games), no? Take Assassin's Creed 2 for example. While it may be obvious that the gamer knows he's playing in a fantasy world, where people plug into a system and explore past lives, jumping and falling from incredible high heights, the user might think that he really is exploring accurate replicas of the historical Venice, Firenze or whatever. That, imho, could qualify as hyper-reality.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrandre2u (talk • contribs) 12:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video Games 

message: [T]he McDonald's "M" arches create a world with the promise of endless amounts of identical food, when in "reality" the "M" represents nothing, and the food produced is neither identical nor infinite. Am I missing something here? How do you get a "promise of endless amounts of identical food" from a pair of giant yellow arches? Strad 19:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you think McDonald's is successful? If I go to Toronto, or Vancouver, or San Diego, or New York, I *know* I can get a Big Mac whenever I see the yellow arches. And I know my Big Macs will always be there. Why do you think they call it "McDonald's" everywhere with the exact same identical "M"? They could open tens of thousands of different menus, with local food, local tastes which change according to the seasons, etc. -- they would never be as successful. - Abscissa 22:58, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Got it, thanks. I was trying to find symbolism in the arch itself, not the fact that it appears everywhere. Strad 03:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is the point when I see the "M" not for what it is, (a big yellow M) but for these things, I engage in the world of the hyperreal. - Abscissa 04:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

text: And lest anyone suggest, "but it is the same everywhere", I can assure you that it is not.  I'm quite well traveled and can personally attest to vast differences in beef quality, as well as the overall "McDonald's experience".  McD in New Mexico is characterized by green chile being almost a de rigeur condiment. Meanwhile in Dublin, Ireland the concoction of a typical burger is almost sickeningly sweet to American palates due to the lack of any vinegar in the local variant of ketchup/catsup (pick your spelling; in the ROI and I seem to recall the UK as well, it is tomato paste, salt and sugar with no acidic quality at all).  And so on.  I've never had a consistent McD burger (or fries - different story) outside of about a 1000-mile radius. As Pulp Fiction lampooned, even the product names vary, for the same item, in these global fastfood chains.  And in recent years, the very nature of the products has been shifting more and more, on a regional basis.  McD is becoming hyper-hyper-real, not unlike the concept of "Disney".  It is no longer even the expectation of a consistent menu and product, but the expectation of a consistent level of (sheep-like, but efficient) treatment, of (disposable but recognizable) presentation and packaging and of (immediately urge-satisfying, but ultimately unhealthy and non-nutritious) alleged quality. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 14:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

text: You're not alone.  When reading this article, I thought the McD's example came out of nowhere almost as an attack on the brand.  I think the example here can be generalized to any fast food restaurant and perhaps any proprietary eponym where the brand evolves to somehow represent more than the underlying product.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not a McD's apologist, I'm just calling this one as I see it -- a generalization that unfairly calls out a specific example. Does Wikipedia have a term for that?  Jomofo7 (talk) 07:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  McDonald's 

message: I don't understand what "a map so detailed that it covers the very things it was designed to represent" means. Specifically, I can't figure out the sense in which the word "covers" is being used. Iridius 10:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In this quote, the word "covers" is being used in a literal sense.  The idea is that the map is a perfect representation of the real land.  It is detailed and accurate down to details of size and space.  As you can imagine, a map like this would actually cover the land itself.  You can read more about this in  Jorge Luis Borges' On Exactitude in Science.--Audreyhorne 18:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map Example 

message: It's all perspectival isn't it? It would be no less valid for a person whose consciousness has developed in a time when the phenomena in question are common to view the world which these authors view as 'normal' as hyporeality, i.e. if you will, 'devoid of the intensity and generality of the sign common the modern epoch'. This I think shows the worthlessness of much/most of this philosophy (postmodernism) and it's parochiality. As a constrast I am working on a short essay based on highlighting of Husserl Paris Lectures which is relevant to the underlying topic but addresses it in a manner worthy of the Western tradition and therefore as relevant now as it was in 1929.Lycurgus 09:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to be harsh, but Wikipedia isn't interested in your upcoming work unless and until it becomes notable in philosophical circles as a valid challenge or adjunct to the subject of this article.  Our articles are not concerned with whether you think the subject in question is "worthless".  If you can cite notable, independent, reliable sources that have already established a counter-position to the concepts of hyperreality discussed in this well-sourced article, then you may have a point to make here. Wikipedia is not here for advancing your novel viewpoints nor for promoting your views. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 14:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I have a serious issue with this sentence (aside from the lack of source citations):
Baudrillard's idea of hyperreality was heavily influenced by phenomenology, semiotics, and Marshall McLuhan.
This is just dreadfully out-of-synch.  Phenomenology is a philosophical paradigm. Semiotics is a philosophical paradigm.  Marshall McLuhan was a writer and (sometime) philosopher.  This sentence reads something like "The most important experiences in my life were: learning to read, going through puberty, and George Lucas."  Lucas is not an experience, and McLuhan is not a philosophy. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 14:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It should perhaps be something more like "the philosophies of Marshall McLuhan", though I think that's implicit in the sentence as it stands. I think whoever replaced "Marshall McLuhan" with "Dean Gaffney" probably isn't helping, so I undid their edit.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.159.166 (talk) 16:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's fix this sentence 

message: I think that the article should at least mention that the idea of hyperreality is not necessarily a new phenomenon.  The definition of hyperreality suggests that it would apply to any environment, as one must always interpret the actions and words of those around them in order to determine what reality is, which very well may be fantasy.  
For reference, I'll cite Manuel Castells, who according to wikipedia (citations available though) is the 5th most cited social scientist between 2000-2006, and is the most cited communications scholar.  In "The Network Society" (2000:403) he says"[R]eality, as experienced, has always been virtual because it is always perceived through symbols that frame practice with some meaning that escapes their strict definition.  Thus there is no seperation between reality and symbolic representation."  
I understand that it was defined by Baudrillard and applied most specifically to modern media and technology, but I've found that most definitions provided by the 'famous theorists' listed on the page are consistent with that presented by Castells.  I've seen both Castells and George Landow criticize the theory as 'fashionable,' something that has gained a large amount of unmerited focus and applied only as a 'new' concept, a recent development of society, when it has in fact always existed.  Perhaps these perspectives should be considered in the article? OpEd (talk) 11:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: The part about casinos switches from 'one' to 'you' and then starts sounding pretty informal. I was just going to switch all the 'you's to 'one's but I don't think that would fix it. I think it makes a good point, though, so I don't want to delete it altogether. What to do? GIBBOUS3 :D (talk) 16:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significance 

message: Could it be possible to list some of the art and writing influenced by the concept of the hyperreal? Personally I would like to see Philip K. Dick mentioned on this page, since he explored the deep end of the hyperreal in the sixties and seventies. 
(Squareape (talk) 09:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence on Popular Culture 

message: Could a grouping of synthetic flavours under a single banner, for instance 'Oranges', be seen as hyperreality? Here various flavours are sold as 'Orange', but are not the natural 'Orange' flavour. This group of synthetic chemicals then constitutes a 'fake' reality, that has replaced the natural flavour. 
If so, could this be incorporated in the examples list?
(Squareape (talk) 10:23, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example of Hyperreality 

message: ”The simulation of something which never really existed.” This quote is attributed to French philosopher Jean Baudrillard's. However, it DOES NOT appears neither in the book Simulacra and Simulation nor in the article "The Precession of Simulacra". If source cannot be found, this quote should be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parneix (talk • contribs) 17:54, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baudrillard's quote is missing a correct source 

message: "Baudrillard borrows, from Jorge Luis Borges (who already borrowed from Lewis Carroll), the example of a society whose cartographers create a map so detailed that it covers the very things it was designed to represent." - Isn't the example here actually a reference to Alfred Korzybski's map-territory relation? Perhaps add a citation to where it is mentioned he borrows from Borges (Simulacra and Simulation “On Exactitude in Science”[ii]), to avoid confusion.
"Baudrillard's idea of hyperreality was heavily influenced by phenomenology, semiotics, and Marshall McLuhan." This sentence sounds odd with Marshall McLuhan tacked onto the end. If mentioning McLuhan, perhaps others such as; Hölderlin, Artaud, Barthes, Bataille, Benjamin, Borges, Brecht, Calvino,Canetti, Heidegger, Heisenberg, Jarry, Lichtenberg, Marx, Nietzsche, Orwell and Sartre ought to be mentioned.For reference - perhaps this: http://www.nobleworld.biz/images/Coulter.pdf
"Hyperreality tricks consciousness into detaching from any real emotional engagement." Such a significant statement requires a citation, I think. 
"(although Baudrillard himself may balk at the use of this word)" Seems a little subjective.
No citations for any of the definitions?
Only one quotation in the quotations section?
In the 'see also' section, the 'allegory of the cave' is mentioned. Baudrillard specifically states that the allegory of the cave is no longer applicable in "The Perfect Crime". 
The external link: "Why Las Vegas is "Hyperreal"" no longer leads to the article. 
I didn't want to personally change anything, since I'm new here. Just a few ideas.
GenericAccountName (talk) 04:53, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some general issues 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hyperreality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130521085018/http://public.callutheran.edu/~brint/American/Eco.pdf to http://public.callutheran.edu/~brint/American/Eco.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hyperreality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060903064302/http://strata.unlv.edu/smith_bugni/pomo.pdf to http://strata.unlv.edu/smith_bugni/pomo.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:35, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Disneyland is the only explained example in the article. But I do not understand why it counts as hyperreality because I have never been to Disneyland. I am familiar with Disney movies but have never been to their land. There should be an objective description of the place before going on to why it is an example of hyperreality.
For example:
" . . . with its settings such as Main Street and full sized houses has been created to look "absolutely realistic", taking visitors' imagination to a "fantastic past".
Please describe Main street and the full-sized houses. I see full-sized houses all the time in the real world so don't understand what is special about them here. 
". . .for example, the numerous simulated rides, including the submarine ride and the Mississippi boat tour."
No information is given on these rides. The article says they are "simulated" but surely not all simulated things are hyperreality.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:BB6:315F:3658:9442:73D:4F90:9B8D (talk) 19:28, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone who has been to Disneyland improve the example please?  

message: In the section "Origins and Usage", the third paragraph mentions an "American author Micah Dunham", and the footnote (10) points to an Umberto Eco book which contains no reference to a Micah Dunham. Furthermore if you google anything like "Micah Dunham author", all results are just the same paragraph from this article copied and pasted. Does this author even exist? Can we get a real reference here? 70.54.21.71 (talk) 22:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Micah Dunham reference