Fall ’11

As I contemplate what to write for my last blog for English 475, also known as “Writing for New Media,” I am at a loss for words. So far, I have written about re-makes and re-dos, which is the message that I’ve received this semester from the texts we’ve read.

First we read Left to Right by David Crow, a British author (I do love British authors), and he described the cultural shift from text to image (left brain thinking to right brain thinking). It was great to have both offbeat and mainstream examples with explanations accompanying his theories. I am truly convinced this is the case, and I do not see there being a cultural shift from image to text. If Fahrenheit 451, 1984, Brave New World, or any other generic science-fiction dystopian novel has taught us anything, it is that knowledge is power.

I am in no way implying we are unconsciously entering a totalitarian regime (I wouldn’t know, would I?), but with these technological advances comes accessibility to knowledge and, therefore, more opportunities to control the influx and output of “knowledge.” This is one of many thoughts that occurred to me while reading this first Crow book, but many of his examples utilized the image to communicate an additional or enhanced message. (For example, see my first post about book covers through the decades.)

The introduction of fonts was a major theme in Left to Right. Fonts were illustrated and more animated than your basic “Courier” and this affects the tone of the product (i.e. whatever that text is representing). The font of my blog, for example, affects the overall tone of this post and the webpage. If it were in a more masculine font, it might appear the author has internal conflicts regarding the balance between fun and business and it overflows into my virtual life in such a way I subconsciously let it seep into my blog. The bottom line is we live in an image-based culture and that is the way it has always been (in my opinion). The only difference is we learned how to embrace it – and by “embrace” I mean manipulate.

The next book we read was Visible Signs, also by my British man Crow. The content of this book was little heavier in that it introduced theories instead of focusing on one general theme (i.e. cultural shifts). One thing I really enjoyed about the Crow books is that he really invests in the visuals. This man has mastered his style. He practices what he preaches. He enables me to use clichés in reference to his writing.

He doesn’t just write about these visuals, but the layout of the book mirrors what he says. According to my senior seminar professor (and he is a VERY smart man), a master of writing can make his/her form subtly reflect the content. Writing is an art, meaning it is an acquired skill, meaning it takes time, effort and dedication to learning the rules and manipulating them to your advantage.

We also read Remediation by Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin, which was easily the most boring books of the semester. I am not sure if this is because it was read immediately following the intellectually and visually stimulating Crow duo or because it was written academically for use as a textbook or the content was uninspiring in general, but something about this book was not working for me.

After I got over my initial dislike and managed to keep my eyelids peeled open, I found the theories introduced informative. It definitely gave me a different lens when viewing any of the ways media surrounds us in life. The book is centralized around a theme of virtual reality, which can be as fantastical or technological as you want.

(Dull cover to match the style)

I prefer the practical application of the term rather than the versions presented in numerous films. Bolter and Grusin really work to illustrate (with black and white pictures – Crow would be ashamed) how films, television and art work to blur the line between reality and non-reality, life and imaginary portrayal. Producers do this via content, writing, shooting, location and every other detail. Their goal is to sell their product and they do this by making the product as relatable as possible.

Finally, we rounded out the semester with Visual Storytelling by Ronald J. Osgood and M. Joseph Hinshaw, a textbook about how to produce a film (which was our final project). It emphasized the importance of how to capture on film (a term I use loosely) what was needed to communicate the story on screen. The authors stressed the need for the story to be communicated. It is meaningless to have great shots and lighting if they do not move the story along.

All in all, it has been a fun semester. Twelve posts later and I’m still learning. I have had the opportunity to work with Photoshop, MovieMaker and Premiere… And I have come to the realization that technology is not my strong suit. However, I do feel much more experienced in these programs – a quality necessary to work as a journalist, which is more than my other courses have provided me. It’s been fun, but I am ready for this semester to be over and start celebrating Christmas the way it deserves to be celebrated.

(Not trying to be depressing, but definitely worth remembering as we overindulge in the luxuries this season brings.)


I recently had the opportunity to visit my favorite place in the world (kind of) – New York City – on a whim. The reason NYC is “kind of” my favorite place in the world is because my world travels are very limited, but out of my extensive travels of the east coast of the wonderful United States of America, New York is easily my favorite. The city is just so wonderful; it sincerely baffles me when people say they could never live there (common response) or they don’t like the city at all (rare, but not unheard of).

To me the city is this big island of life, and who doesn’t love life? It is the best place ever, especially if you have money to blow. If not, it’s still awesome. There is never a shortage of activities and just walking around is a rewarding experience in and of itself.

So, the reason I was in the city spans back to my Harry Potter obsession. I entered a Facebook contest to win a ticket to see the Broadway musical How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying starring Daniel Radcliffe.

How to Succeed in Business without Really Trying

Needless to say, I won a ticket to the Tuesday night performance (the night before my birthday, I might add), which brings us to my reason for my impromptu trip. Wednesday before my plane left to bring me back to South Carolina (I love SC, but it could never be to me what NY is), my mother and I decided to walk over 40 blocks to THE Metropolitan Museum of Art. On our last trip together (I came up another time, of course) we visited the American Museum of Natural History. It was fun, but I definitely consider myself more of an art person, at least when it comes to museums. 

We explored the museum for around four hours – that place is massive, the exterior of the building does not accurately express the interior’s capacity. There are ten wings not including the gift shop (I use that term very loosely as the shop is bigger than most Targets) or restaurant. Out of those ten wings, my mother and I whizzed through four of them intentionally and the other six out of sheer confusion.

As we were browsing through everything history has to offer, I had a couple of revelations.

  1. These pieces (particularly those of the Greek & Roman Arts wing) are old. Older than I can imagine. Thousands of years old. Old. And looking good for their age, if I may be so bold.
  2. A lot of these old pieces do not look very different from design today.

First, there is a celebrity appearance by the alien dog from The Neverending Story on some Egyptian relics.

Look closely (my zoom is not very good with phone pictures)

Clearly, these people had skill. And one can safely assume Wolfgang Peterson had an interest in ancient Egyptian art on display at the MMA.

Next, I’d like to show some historic jewelry from Africa.

African Jewelry/Art

If someone wanted to sell these, I’m pretty sure the average art collector would have some stiff competition from stylists and fashionistas.

I could go through all my pictures and say, “Look at this old junk! Doesn’t it look like the same stuff we make today?” But I think this is the point. In my classes this semester, several of the texts we’ve studied have inadvertently shown me that originality isn’t something that’s never been done before. That statement is itself a fallacy and its implications an urban legend. I tend to relate to Plato with his theory of archetypes outside of space and time for several reasons, the most obvious one being I’ve never seen otherwise.

This unintentional theme of originality that’s permeated my blogs thus far has confirmed what I already believe. The goal in making something “original” is not to make something new, but make it your own. Fashion designers, filmmakers, architects, painters and all artists alike will likely tell you the same.  To be truly groundbreaking you must first acknowledge the “ground” your “breaking” is not your creation – you’re building off of someone else’s work.

Finally, and this is my favorite, if you do not see the similarities between this ancient Greek bust and a certain film representation of a literature character, you are voluntarily deluded.

Get it? NO? Well then….

Since I created this blog as an online journal for one of my classes this semester, I’m going to use this post to talk a little bit about the final video project. The requirements of the group project are

  1. We must work in groups four
  2. The video must be no longer than 15 minutes, no shorter than 10
  3. The video must use original footage (it can’t be a montage)

The third requirement really limits the scope and makes the project a little more challenging. Let  me frame it this way: I was unable to make a documentary chronicling Lady Gaga’s fashion evolution (revolution, if you prefer) because there is no possible way I could capture original footage of Lady Gaga.

With my first idea dashed, it was time to get serious. I found my group and submitted some ideas to them, one of which was to re-create the opening scene of a book, and the specific book I suggested was the F. Scott Fitzgeral classic, The Great Gatsby. Who doesn’t love the novel short in length, extensive in symbolism and required in tenth grade honors English classes everywhere? Please, keep your answers to yourself because that was one of the few books I enjoyed reading in any of my English classes, college included, and it has very little to do with the Leonardo DiCaprio adaptation coming in 2012.

Some of the other ideas that were tossed around included a documentary of “A Day in the Life of…” with possible people including celebrities, slobs and divas; and a Quality Value & Convenience/Home Shopping Network segment selling a fictional product no one needs or cares about. Needless to say, The Great Gatsby premise was my favorite option. The team reached a comprimise, meaning I changed my idea a little to please one member of the group. We decided to focus on a particular character of the story and make a condensed E! True Hollywood Story.

Here is a concise summary of The Great Gatsby. If you are anything like me, you remember the enjoyment of being submerged in Nick Carraway’s world, the sadness at Gatby’s death, and little else. Nick Carraway is the narrator who moves in to the West Egg of New York, the suburbs of the newly wealthy. His cousin, Daisy, lives in the East Egg (the suburbs of the always wealthy) with her husband and Nick’s former classmate, Tom Buchanan.

Nick spends much time with the unhappy, physically and emotionally abusive Buchanan couple and learns much about the ugly side of “happiness.” He learns Tom has a lover, Myrtle Wilson, a married resident of the Valley of Ashes; Gatsby, his eccentric neighbor, was and is still in love with Daisy; and the American Dream is much more about lies and cover-ups than dignity. Through an abnormal series of events Gatsby is killed and Nick leaves the West Egg disgusted by life.

The E! True Hollywood Story of Tom Buchanan would focus briefly on Tom’s childhood and focus heavily on life after Gatsby’s death. There will be interviews with Tom, Daisy, Myrtle (before her death) and Nicki (in this version of events Nicki Carraway was and is a female). It isn’t the most original idea, but everyone loves good gossip and Tom, though fictional, provides a hefty helping of it.

Just for some visual fun, here is a look at the actors who have portrayed Tom through the ages:

Top to bottom: Bruce Dern in the Robert Redford film version; Paul Rudd as Nick Carraway & Martin Donovan as the alcoholic Tom Buchanan in the A&E TV version; Joel Edgerton as Tom & Tobey Maguire as Nick in the soon-to-be-released Baz Luhrman remake.

Just for some visual fun, here is a look at the actors who have portrayed Tom through the ages:

Due to casting limitations, Nick had to be performed by a woman, but it will not compromise the integrity of the story any more than turning it into an E! news spectacular. Some lines of respect have already been crossed, but all is fair in the land of grades and grade point average.

We have written the scripts and have scheduled a filming time, but we still have to find a location, film, edit and record the narration. It’s a lot, but it’s only the middle of November. Fall hasn’t even hit yet.

P.S. If you would like to work as an unpaid actress, let me know. The less time I have to spend in front of the camera, the better off our project will be.

P.P.S. If you want to see the latest video project I completed with my partner and/or love Leonardo DiCaprio and/or Inception, check out this link: .

We can all agree most people consider originality to be a good thing. And, for the most part, the general public considers unoriginality to be unworthy of comment. It’s the lukewarm of originality, the middle on the originality scale. Copying others, however, is being seen less and less as flattery and more like infringement.

This resembles the concept of remediation, in that both are based off of something that has already been done. The concept of virtual reality is based on reality. I am aware that was both an obvious and simplistic statement, but it needed to be made. I believe is credit is given where due, a re-creation of someone else’s creation can be great and different. To illustrate what I mean, I am going to use a recently released music video.

“Countdown” by Beyonce:

The song itself counts down (get it? Yeah, me either) the things she loves and/or does with her “boo” (her words). The visual that is the music video goes through the decades with Beyonce dressed as Audrey Hepburn from Funny Face (see my older blog post from September “There and Back Again (and Again)”), classic Vogue photo shoots, Brigitte Bardot, Michael Jackson, Jennifer Beal in Flash Dance (arguable), German experimental dance and the always classy West Side Story.

Beyonce received much criticism with how heavily she borrowed from the aforementioned German experimental dance “Rosas danst Rosas,” choreographed by Anne Teresa de Keersmaeker. This 30-second clip shows the most obvious resemblances to the extensive, much longer dance.

I, however, do not believe this is fair putting my bias toward Beyonce aside. What is an original work if not to inspire originality in others? Some people simply struggle with expressing themselves in imaginative ways, so they copy others. It is still expression, and Beyonce is not trying to steal credit for De Keersmaeker, but rather call positive attention to her work that is probably not known outside of the dance world for several reasons including the inception of the dance (circa 1980).

“Countdown” received no such criticism from its heavy reliance on the epic Funny Face reference. Why? Because it was epic. Nor was she attacked for her throwback to Diana Ross, Twiggy, or her 60s-inspired makeup. It is clear from the video she is not trying to take credit for other people’s work, if only because she referenced so many of them. And when approached about her “stealing,” she admitted to “borrowing” the dances and looks from icons. It was her intention. No one caught her in the act because she was not hiding anything she was embracing it.

It is important to address copyrights and plagiarism is an era where so much is readily available and artists (for lack of a better word) are exploited by people with more power and pull, but it is equally important to remember this is not always the case. I’m pretty sure no one accused the team working on “virtual reality” of not being original enough or stealing ideas from actual reality. These scientists were upfront about digitally recreating reality. [Disclaimer: I am in no way equating Beyonce’s music video to virtual reality in importance, they both serve good examples for my argument.]

The content in this post relates closely to “There and Back Again (And Again)” because it is a pressing issue. When does flattery turn to plagiarism? If this could be clearly defined, then there would be no need for such arguments because people would know when their work would be considered plagiarism and either avoid or embrace it.

This blog is unoriginal. The topics I write on have already been addressed and heavily discussed. And much like a research paper, that is the intention: to think about things even if I am not the first person to do so. It’s quite a twisted logic, the idea of originality, and this is why it causes so much controversy in all areas, not just four-minute music videos. The issue is prevalent in politics, film, music, poetry, literature, etc.

Enough of this ranting. Let me leave you, my lovely reader(s), with some pictures of the people Beyonce chose to honor in “Countdown.”

I have recently started using a new social media site. You may have heard of it. If you haven’t, you should stay away if you ever want to accomplish anything again. It is more addictive than Facebook was back when Mark Zuckerburg owned the company. Take a deep breath. Pinterest. Pin your interests. It is the worst thing to happen to my GPA since I was a science major.

Pinterest is literally an online bulletin board where the users can “pin” things they like from anywhere on the Web. There are 20+ categories and as many boards as any one person could desire. It is predominantly female now, but I could easily see it having a masculine appeal if ¾ of those categories were erased and some subcategories (i.e. football, baseball, golf, etc. rather than “sports”) were established. Pinstripe, if you will.

As I was recapping, users can pin anything, but they also follow other users. Here is where it becomes like Twitter, instead of status updates, the homepage (a neverending bulletin board) shows “pins” (thumbnail image with embedded links to the original source) as they are pinned. This is an especially cloud-like way to store craft, recipe and classroom ideas, as well as virtually scrapbook.

For example, many users have a “board” – please, don’t get me started on these metaphors – for future home decorating, weddings, outfits and vacations. What interests me most about this highly addictive interactive media site is how the theme of every book read thus far in my “Writing for New Media” course is reflected.

As I sift through “pins,” I’m reminded of why this site is successful. An image is more appealing and has a stronger impact than text. This is why Pinterest is like a visual Twitter. How hard can it be to read 140 characters compared to an entire article? Not hard at all, but how much easier is it to glance at an image and move on? With a single look at an image, there is an immediate reaction that can be placed in one of two categories: emotional connection or lack of emotional connection. This is a relationship that is quicker and easier to establish than reading text, even if it is limited to approximately 2 sentences.

The relationship between the user and the image also compartmentalizes the image as something of value or “rubbish,” as our [English 475 peeps] beloved Crow [, David] writes about. For example, a high school classmate of mine “pinned” several images within a short span of time and added “artsy” descriptions to them, such as “ethereal,” “great colors,” “nice colors” and various other single-adjective descriptors. I could care less about any of this “art.” I’m not trying to be snobby, but I feel no connection to it, though she does. It’s still art, regardless of your definition of it, but it might as well be “rubbish” as far as its emotional appeal to me goes.

Finally, remediation. How could Pinterest possibly relate to remediation. Hmmmm… Considering the purpose of the sight is to bring in all types of media from across the Web, it seems safe to say Pinterest exists solely on the idea of remedation.

Here are some things I have recently pinned along with the name of the “board” each “pin” was “pinned” to and the description, as well as a comment on the original source.

Board: Products I Love. Description: Best. Dog. Ever.

I took this photo from my Facebook account, which is a little sketch in Pinterest etiquette. I let it slide for this one because she is precious.

Board: My Style. Description: The Kennedys are to blame for these horrible dresses!

Clearly, I am not a fan of Lilly Pulitzer – at least not the apparel. I love the accessories, but there are just certain patterns that do not belong on anyone’s body, even political royalty (like the irony?)…. And Lilly Pulitzer created them all. This came from (my favorite magazine), and is a society photo from the 60s/70s compiled with other pictures of the Kennedys into an album entitled “From J.F.K. to Ralph Lauren Models, the Hallmarks of Preppy Style.” So, does this mean its been remediated four times now (life to photo (1), print to Web magazine (2), magazine to Pinterest (3), Pinterest to blog (4). Now, one more for the road.

Board: Things Worth Tweeting About. Description: So glamourous.

Why did my parents never dress me as Holly Golightly? I was always a Disney princess. This is from which is to me the Walmart of all online girly shopping. It has everything and then some. But let’s take a step back. This child is dressed as the iconic Holly Golightly (I’m itching to deconstruct the symbolism in her name – darn you, Capote!), though most passerby would say she’s dressed as Audrey Hepburn. They are wrong. End of story.

First, Holly Golightly was the star of Breakfast at Tiffany’s a novella by Truman Capote. Then, it was made into a Hollywood classic fifty years ago this month. Then (!) someone made this adorable costume and dressed up this little girl. THEN a picture was taken. This picture was published to the Internet. Someone “pinned” it, I “repinned” it, and now it is on this blog. Seven times remediated.

Will there ever be originality again? We have enough stuff to remediate to keep us occupied for several centuries. Think of remediation as a circle that technology introduces upgrades to every so often. It’s not so bad.


Left to Right and Visible Signs by David Crow

Remediation by Jay David Bolter & Richard Grusin

Breakfast at Tiffany’s by Truman Capote, &

P.S. That’s a Lion King quote as the title.

“The Web browser itself is about to croak. And good riddance. In its place … broader and deeper new interfaces for electronic media are being born. […] While the traditional forms – broadcast, print – show few signs of vanishing, the Net is being invaded by new media species.”

As far as the Internet goes, you will never hear anyone refer to it as “unoriginal” or call it a “copycat” of other medias. Sit down and think about it. What does the Internet do that has not already been done by another medium? Television and news programs: available on the Internet – you even get the commercials! Magazines and eBooks: available on the Internet. Shopping and browsing: available on the Internet.

You may have noticed a trend here. You may have thought to yourself, “Yes, the Internet does these things, but the Internet is more interactive.” This is true. It is also true that the Internet would not be what it is or successful without improving upon its predecessors. The Internet does nothing that has not already been done; it does, however, do everything better and focuses on the user.

Let’s explore the aforementioned examples. When it comes to television programs, people generally are unable to watch all the programs they want at the designated time. There are several alternatives including recording the program onto a VHS [ghetto], recording the program onto a DVR [practical], or watch the show online [easiest]. There are pros and cons to each – the most obvious being the recent extinction of VHS tapes, players, and recorders – but it really comes down to preference. The same goes for news programs.

Nowadays, its commonplace to find hash tags (#) scattered across the bottom of screens so the viewers can tweet about and tag the program on the social networking site Twitter. The television brings the Internet into their programs, but really only acknowledges the ability of the Internet to further establish their presence in pop culture. Viewing these programs on the Internet, however, allows the user to view other items pertaining to the program. So, if I watch Gossip Girl on the official CW website, I can play the GG-themed games, read fictional articles about the characters, or shop for clothes and accessories similar to theirs as well as purchase previous seasons on DVD.  On a third party website such as Hulu, I can watch the same show, view photos, and read news articles (nonfiction) about the show, actors and producers.

Magazines and eBooks have become increasingly popular, while increasing the popularity of the print versions of themselves. The advertisements and articles in the print version of the magazine refer the reader to the official website where there is additional media or perhaps a promotional contest the reader could not enter by simply staring at the magazine regardless of the brainpower emitted. If the reader attempts to, however, read the magazine online rather than purchase a copy of the print version, he/she will be shown an article, but not the one in the magazine.

Vanity Fair urges you to subscribe to the magazine before, during and after the attempted reading of a cover story. In fact, I once tried to forward an article I was writing on to a professor rather than copying it because of its insane length, but when I clicked on the link to the article it was something completely different. The same author wrote it, but it was not an excerpt from the article, but a small write-up that focused on a subject hardly mentioned in the print article. Clearly, you cannot have it all for free. There has to be some incentive to buy the paper/hard copy, otherwise the printing and publishing world would have died long ago.

The point I’m trying to make is the Internet is just ” _____ [choose your medium], but better.” It is more geared to the user because it isn’t held back by traditional limitations. In a sense, it is the virtual reality of all mediums. It caters itself to the user and allows the user to choose his/her path.

Works Cited:

Quote is from Remediation by Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin with MIT press, page 221.

The quote was originally from the article “Kill Your Browser” in the March, 1997 number of Wired, written by Kevin Kelly, Gary Wolf, and the other editors.

Virtual reality is currently the ultimate form of transparent immediacy according to Jay Bolter and Richard Grusin, authors of Remediation. It seeks to integrate the viewer completely (immediacy) and seamlessly or seemingly without a medium (transparency). As I read this I tried to apply the theory to something relevant to my life, which is the best but not most effective method I use to finish my course readings. Regardless, the thoughts that came to my mind were slow at first. The über-popular Wii game “Just Dance” occurred to me as a family-friendly relative to the science-fiction reminiscent “virtual reality.”

As a devoted fan (and frequent champion) of “Just Dance,” I thought about the characteristics of “Just Dance” that attract me to the game. I could dance along to a video on YouTube, but there was something different about this game.

  1. The people dancing with you – or instructing you, whichever phrasing you prefer – are very encouraging. They are brightly colored and move enthusiastically. Their faces are indistinguishable as they are just outlines. This connects with the player emotionally in a way dancing to music videos can’t: these dancers aren’t trying to be fierce, they’re just having fun and they want the player to have fun too. There’s no judgment from the brightly outlined mystery dancer.
  2. The responses are immediate. When moves are executed correctly, points are added to the player’s score. Clearly, this standard of measurement is the only fair way to settle which dancer is better.

Because the player’s are encouraging, it makes being a bad dancer okay. It’s as if the dancer is saying to the player, “It’s okay if you suck because I have both of us covered.” Sure, the score will show the accuracy of the player, but that’s not a true indicator of the player’s heart, which the dancer ensures all watching the player has.

Just Dance in action.

The problem of the medium comes in when the player is refused points for accuracy because he is not directly in front of the sensor. Various situations fall prey to this problem, which is unfair no matter what the reasoning, like Player 2 hogging all the space, the sensor falling down, etc. This is where the quest for transparent immediacy hits a roadblock.

Everyone’s favorite Asians demonstrating how to successfully complete a dance on “Just Dance.”

Xbox recently released the state-of-the-art add-on to their already complex system: the Kinect. Hook this snazzy little camera up to the Xbox and it follows the player’s every move without a controller. I have tried to use this creepy camera and while it’s pretty nifty to touch the air and achieve a command with the system or tell the Xbox to perform a certain action and have it follow my directions, it’s still weird how the camera turns to follow you until you leave the room. I’m still convinced it follows you past there too. Big Brother… Enough said. The Kinect wants to break free from the boundaries previously held by video game systems and adopt and interface that responds to movements as well as commands.

Another characteristic of virtual reality I would like to explore is introduced in the following quote from Remediation: “In the name of transparency and presence, virtual reality applications are refashioning point-of-view editing, as it has developed in the Hollywood film tradition.”

I’m not quite sure in what ways virtual reality refashions point-of-view editing other than the obvious. The obvious being films in which the camera depicts the created world from a character’s point of view (get it?) parallels the view of a participant in virtual reality. But virtual reality takes it to the next level in the way it responds to the user, allowing the user to take on a new active role instead of the monotonous hat of passive viewer.

Since I do not have access to the secret chambers of virtual reality footage, it is my pleasure to share a clip from a certain award-winning film that captivated me and exquisitely manipulates the point-of-view editing virtual reality aims to replace.

This clip demonstrates the technique used throughout the film Black Swan (directed by Darren Aronofsky). Nina sees her reflection in the mirror, but the viewer only sees the front of Nina through the reflection as well, uniting the viewer with Nina as she experiences the phenomenon. As she travels to identify the voice of her understudy, the camera follows her rather than cutting or panning out, again uniting the viewer with Nina.

Obviously, the best of both worlds would be to have a choose-your-own ending film, where the main character is the viewer! The film would lead to its own conclusion – which would be limited in possibilities – but the paths to get to said conclusion could be unlimited. Alas, this seems to be a shallow adaptation of the goal of virtual reality created by a girl with not intentions to ever participate in such technological craziness.