Compost me!

compost

This could be me some day!

Years ago, staring towards the property across the street from a neighbor’s house and pondering mortality, a friend and I talked about the absurdity of conventional burial. As discussions between friends often are, the conversation was frank and detailed. We concluded that embalming, entombing, and trapping our bodies in graves seemed ridiculous in the context of cyclical natural processes. Why shouldn’t worms eat my brain when I’m dead? They would need the nutrition, and I would not.

The bereaved, of course, benefit more from burial ceremonies than the deceased. Graves and tombs, as my girlfriend once mentioned, aren’t for the dead but for the living.

As a sort of halfway solution to this contradiction, my friend mentioned that the old farmer who had worked the land across the street had been buried there. Planted atop his grave, in lieu of a gravestone, was a baby oak tree. As my friend talked, and I looked at the now mature tree–it’s roots piercing through the dirt that once was a man–the beauty of such a burial washed over me.

It was winter, but the brown, crispy leaves of the previous summer clicked and clacked in the cool winter breeze. Perhaps this characteristic was the manifestation of the tree’s special fertilizer, as my friend joked; who can say? But, magic aside, the fact is that the tree HAD used that old farmer’s body to grow.

My mind reeled for awhile that day, and I often think back to that conversation. Since then, I’ve learned that “natural burial” is a growing trend, even warranting it’s own howstuffworks article, and plenty of eager companies are lining up to provide such a service. Another friend, who briefly worked for a tombstone and funeral company, told me that people can even get their ashes fused with tree seeds and planted.

While being a tree seed doesn’t seem reasonable, being buried in a biodegradable casket or simply “planted” in a grove of trees does. Such a burial would, if I could look down and see myself, bring me peace. Knowing that my nutrients would return to nature just as they came from nature actually brings me joy in the face of the big empty.

So, it was with both bemusement and gratification that I read an article published by the New York Times today. “A Project to Turn Corpses into Compost” discusses one attempt to balance mourner’s needs with environmental concerns and spiritual preferences. In essence, facilities would be built in which bodies would decay into compost–with the help of wood chips and microbes–to be reclaimed by mourners who would have both a place to mourn and a practical byproduct to use.

Gruesome, perhaps, but also quite beautiful if we’re able to surmount cultural, religious, and practical barriers (what about all those heavy metal fillings, ingested preservatives, and stomach staples?). Though some people might fear a soylent green sort of situation (IT’S PEOPLE!!!), the idea of helping a tree, tomato, or flower grow when I’m gone brings me more comfort in life than any casket or cremation could.

Science Daily: Existing Power Plants Will Spew 300 Billion More Tons of Carbon Dioxide During Use

Existing Power Plants Will Spew 300 Billion More Tons of Carbon Dioxide During Use

Will anything stop us from demanding more energy? Is humanity destined to watch itself and the planet burn, only to crank up the AC for as long as possible? Robert Socolow of Princeton doesn’t seem optimistic.

“‘We’ve been hiding what’s going on from ourselves: A high-carbon future is being locked in by the world’s capital investments,’ said Socolow, professor emeritus of mechanical & aerospace engineering. ‘Current conventions for reporting data and presenting scenarios for future action need to give greater prominence to these investments. Such a rebalancing of attention will reveal the relentlessness of coal-based industrialization, long underway and showing no sign of abating.'”

Inside Higher Ed: Adjunct Pay and Anger

Adjunct Pay and Anger

This is a fascinating article because it addresses two tropes in the growing clamor surrounding adjunctification. First, Shonda Goward makes a convincing argument for avoiding the “adjuncts are slaves” mentality:

“No one is forcing one to remain an adjunct. There are other work opportunities where the doctorate may be useful and even desired. Not liking those choices does not make one a slave. Not liking that a dream job is no longer available does not make one a slave.”

The other important point here is that adjunctification–making previously full-time jobs into several part-time jobs–isn’t restricted to professors at the university. Everyone (except senior administrators, it seems) from facilities workers to advisers are affected, as Goward points out:

“Facilities and food services have long been privatized on many campuses, with the result being lower wages. In addition, lower levels of administration are on their way to adjunctification as well. Plenty of professional positions, such as advising, are now part-time, which means that students have less of an opportunity to meet with one person consistently to help them track their degrees.

These contributions to the adjunctification clamor seem significant, and I’ll be sure to avoid the language of slavery and the mentality that adjuncts alone suffer from exploitative labor practices in academia.

NY Times: Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

Sad that Obama has to sidestep our gridlocked (to put it politely) congress to do anything about climate change. Here, he wants to “name and shame” polluters (including the US, presumably) since anything legally binding would have to get 67 votes in the Senate–an impossible feat considering the climate change denial party’s position. It’s also disturbing that the climate change denial party is “poised to pick up more seats” in the Senate. Meanwhile,

“The strategy comes as scientists warn that the earth is already experiencing the first signs of human-caused global warming — more severe drought and stronger wildfires, rising sea levels and more devastating storms — and the United Nations heads toward what many say is the body’s last chance to avert more catastrophic results in the coming century.”

A new direction for this blog

Reframing the content this blog seems to be an appropriate step right now. In an effort to hold myself accountable to managing and producing content for this blog, I’ve worked up a schedule of what I’d like to do. The purpose of posting what are essentially my preliminary plans is to make myself more accountable.

Daily

Repost something

Link to this on Twitter/fb?

3-4 sentence reaction/connection to my work

Topics: MC, Monsanto, science, teaching, higher ed, NYT articles, videogames generally

Weekly

500-1000 words by end of day on Friday (earlier is fine)

Reaction to something newsworthy: mc, teaching, higher ed, game experiences, politics? Environment, climate change, videogames

Developed idea about something; basically an expository essay

Game review

Close reading of a game

Monthly

~2000 words by the 31st

Theory + videogames; read some stuff in game studies, games and culture, etc.

Theory + teaching/higher ed/composition

Extended criticisms with sources

Maybe focus on stuff related to my thesis

Use pictures/graphs

Would be good to make some of these extended articles focused on climate change/environmental issues

Post/paper ideas about Everquest Landmark

EverQuest: the game that started the MMO revolution and paved the way for the astounding popularity and resilience of World of Warcraft. EverQuest was my first MMO, coincidentally played around the time of my first meaningful kiss with an intimate partner, so thinking about this franchise makes me wax nostalgic every time.

EverQuest 1

Laughably simplistic graphics aside, this game remains a major milestone in videogame history.

It should come as no surprise, then, that I also played EverQuest II for some time and that I’ve become quite interested in the newest iterations of the franchise: EverQuest Landmark and EverQuest Next.

As of now, Next is only a distant dream; development is in the early phases, but I already know that much of my free time will be taken up by it. From my understanding, Next will be a reinvention of the MMO wheel: leveling, questing, raiding, deep lore, and so on. So far, SOE (the developer) is putting forth a few key differences between Next and cookie-cutter MMOs, including destructible terrains, permanent changes to the world based on player activity, and a hybrid class system of some sort. It’s still the early days, though, and speculating on what Next will look like is a zero-sum game without a close look at Landmark, which is further along in its development and obviously positioned as a precursor to Next.

mansion

This and other mind-blowing player creations only hint at the full range of interesting stuff going on with Landmark.

Whereas Next will likely satisfy expectations for hardened MMO fans, Landmark was made for sandbox gamers who probably still play Minecraft. Indeed, there can be no doubt that Landmark is inspired by the world’s most popular sandbox videogame. Almost everything in the natural landscape of Landmark is made of raw resources that can be mined, processed, and recombined to make new stuff. The primary player tool is a pickaxe. There is no narrative beyond what’s implied in the landscape and game mechanics. This is all very Minecrafty. Major differences emerge, however, in the artistic style, the intricacies of the mining/crafting system, and, importantly, in the business and game development plans that surround Landmark.

It became clear to me, quickly as I played for the first time, that Landmark is a game that deserves some attention from videogame researchers. Even though Minecraft is still an important videogame, especially in light of its increasing popularity as an educational tool (Google it), Landmark is emergent (its still in beta), interesting, and representative of many trends in contemporary videogames. As a result, I wanted to write a little introduction here about my interest in this game as both player and researcher and to list some potential topics for further exploration.

So, here are some topics that I hope to explore with respect to Landmark.

Landmark and Minecraft comparison/contrast

Landmark as a new model to examine the ideas found in my thesis (this post is already halfway written), namely the idea that sandbox games tend to privilege the sort of amoral ecological imperialism that has led to problems such as deforestation, pollution, and, lest we forget, climate change.

-The economics of Landmark, especially how it models free-to-play MMOs, alpha/beta pay-to-play trends, crowdsourced (read: free for developers) development and creative input, microtransactions and real-money-trading, and social media marketing (there are surely more)

-Convergence; Landmark is more than just an isolated videogame

-Niche marketing or audience fragmentation; Landmark for Minecrafters, Next for MMO loyalists

Landmark and public demands for transparency (Landmark’s business model is available on the forums)

-Fantasy representations of real world stuff and the associated meanings: plants, landscapes, people, tools, creatures, etc.

-Gameworld analysis; what’s the meaning of the big picture in Landmark?

-Legacy fantasy lore and the purpose of fantasy narratives in an increasingly “rational” and “objective” world culture

Landmark and addiction; how do they keep players playing? how do they get players to buy stuff?

-What cultures does Landmark privilege? What social structures?

-Nature’s role in Landmark–passive recipient of change or active progenitor?

-Weather, landscapes, and the sublime in Landmark

Landmark’s haves and have-not; pay-to-win or play-to-win?

-Social interactions, colloquialisms, jargon, behaviors, and cultural artifacts unique to Landmark

-The language of Landmark more generally

-Trolling in Landmark

-Aesthetic and formal analyses; visual rhetoric analyses of gameplay and related digital/physical artifacts

Landmark and other games where work is “play” (such as Minecraft)

Landmark and big numbers; Minecraft privileges hundreds, whereas landmark seems to privilege thousands

That’s all I have time to list right now. My plan is to return to this post and add new ideas as they come. Any suggestions would be most welcome.

Female Player Characters

Shadowrun: Dragonfall Cover

The centerpiece of an interesting article, this videogame seems to buck many long-standing trends in videogaming.

It’s always good to read feminist discourse about supposedly patriarchal subjects, such as videogames. I think we may be moving beyond the stereotypes discussed in the article by Katherine Cross of Feministing, and her discussion of the gradual dissolution of those stereotypes is another positive step forward.

To add another example, my students are writing their papers about videogames this semester. It has been fascinating to find out that so many of the women in my classes play “hardcore” videogames–games such as Call of Duty or Halo–generally thought of as the domain only of the stereotyped 18-25 year old (or wherever you’d draw the line) male demographic. I am, actually, a bit ashamed that my reaction to this reality was surprise; I guess escaping patriarchal ideologies is more difficult than I thought.

Still, the perspectives that female and transgender players could bring to the medium might offer the breath of fresh air badly needed in a medium often lacking real innovation (who REALLY benefits from another Call of Duty or World of Warcraft clone, anyway?). To avoid the risk of creative stagnation, game designers and publishers should put more diverse individuals in charge of the narrative, art, and overall design of more videogames.

Aion’s Complexity

While attending an open world, player-versus-player event that had hundreds of participants, I was struck by the complexity of the task we had before us. I thought about how one screenshot contains such a huge amount of information. One screenshot of incredible complexity.

Here it is:

A battle which we lost.

The complexity found in this mundane task in Aion struck me as fascinating. Unfortunately, we lost this battle.

It’s useful to think of this image in two parts: the user interface (UI) and the battlefield.

On the battlefield, one group of players is fighting another group of players in a fort. The floating words in various shades of blue are “nameplates” for the players on my team. The mass of red is the result of hundreds of enemy players and their nameplates. All of those players have certain “classes” that are predetermined by the game but that players choose when they make a new character. Each player’s in-game character is wearing a set of “gear” that he or she probably worked many hours to get and which, to some degree, can be customized as a form of in-game expression. Each character, since we are engaged in heated combat is casting a range of spells and using many skills and gorging on a range of consumable items to participate. Consider, for just a moment, the sets of boxes floating around the bottom of the screenshot in the game’s user interface, and the box hanging out on the right side. Each box is filled with some spell, skill, or item that I need to survive. Each character has this many if not more abilities and his or her control, and everyone is using these abilities in a specialized way to maximize the chance of success.

Further unpacking would be easy. Each character represents the culmination of an individual life narrative, the combination of virtual and physical behaviors. The battlefield position of each player/character is carefully choreographed based on his or her class. As a healer, I’m on the back lines with all of the ranged classes (rangers, sorcerers, bards, etc.). Heavily armored “tanks” go up front to absorb the largest amount of damage; they are joined by other melee classes such as assassins and chanters who act in specialized ways to maximize their class potential. To get to this part of the battlefield, we had to destroy and pass through gates and hordes of enemy players. We were successful getting here, but failed miserably in the long run.

So the complexity on the battlefield comes not only from the behaviors of player/characters but also from the landscape which is hard programmed by the game designers, distributed by a publishing company, and so technologically advanced that it defies complete understanding (especially when not long ago we thought the Earth was the center of the universe because we had no tools to tell us otherwise). In short, the technological/sociological/psychological/behavioral/aesthetic/tactical complexity of the battlefield is already a marvel of mere electrons on a screen. There is so much to talk about on the battlefield alone that I have to simply stop here and move on, since web content is supposed to be short and sweet and move on to another layer of complexity.

The user interface is how I get much of the important information in the game. What is interesting is that an MMO player will likely recognize most of what is going on in the UI on some base level; “sure, sure those are skills and those are health bars and I see you’ve got a map and potions too.” Familiar, to some degree, but unique to Aion, of course. On the right side there is text indicating quests that I need to complete to get tokens that I turn in for specific armor that, because I’ve researched and asked the community, I know will be worth the effort (for the record, it’s gear that would make me heal better). In the bottom left is an important window containing text. It’s just dawning on me how important text is in this game; the bottom left window shows me information such as in-game typed speech, the acquisition of money or experience or abyss points (all of which rely on complex systems to be meaningful), player/character deaths, system messages, and a whole range of other information. As a healer, however, the most important windows in this screen at this particular time are the red and blue bars that indicate other players’ health and mana, respectively; as a healer, I have to keep those red bars full. In the center of the screen is more text, in orange, that contains a humorous message:

[Aftershock] ON THE DUX

[Aftershock] NOW

A duckling. Aww.

This is a duckling. It has no relationship to DUX but it is cute. When very serious people are shouting in voice chat, saying things like GET ON THE DUX or START ATTACKING THE DUX, I laugh.

What Aftershock, who is a player chosen alongside another player to lead our entire faction (our side or team in the game that consists of thousands of players), refers to in the screenshot is the in-game, non player character (lovingly known as an NPC) that we have to kill to win the battle. Aftershock’s message, still humorous to some, is the result of complex political and tactical conferences conducted via a chat program and TeamSpeak 3. His job, essentially, is to coordinate the hundreds of players on our team based on a predetermined strategy alongside a flexibility to adapt to battlefield conditions. When I took this screenshot, he was talking in this program and simultaneously typing the same messages. It is incredible to me that these kinds of complex social negotiations are going on every day for thousands, probably millions, of players (considering the volume of World of Warcraft’s subscriptions alone combined with countless pay-to-play or free-to-play games such as Aion) across oceans and basically among total strangers. Yet coordination happens, battles feel like battles, and defeat feels like defeat.

I don’t think we fully understand the complexity of these games yet.  I don’t think we will for some time. What seems mundane to me and other Aion players (after all, we usually participate in these scenarios every single day, though the screenshot here represents an unusually significant failed effort) is actually an incredibly complex affair with implications far-flung in contemporary reality.

Obama’s Pipeline, or The Tension Between Oil Addiction and Environmental Instability

Obama’s Pipeline, or The Tension Between Oil Addiction and Environmental Instability

Two sides to this debate appear clearly in the comments of this article. I think such positions are common in the global debate about our future:

1. The pipeline, and tar sands extraction, is a death knell for carbon emissions. Climate change would be unstoppable if we commit to this dirty source of energy. If we can’t set the example here in the USA, and with the recent failure of the EU to continue with its ideologically charged policies, then no one else will.

2. Too bad. We need the oil. If we don’t use “domestic” sources of oil, we’re susceptible to the political will of organizations such as OPEC and to a global marketplace increasingly strained by burgeoning demands (think China and its industrial smog).

Can we clear this logjam? It’s difficult to see how, especially when this binary forms so frequently in public debate. Another cliché in this debate about sums up my current perspective. Here’s my interpretation:

Until the house is burning, we’re not going to buy a fire extinguisher.