‘Playful Identities’ research blog

A recent ethnographic study done in France says young people have a different relation with their phone than most adults. Or rather, through their mobile phone young people relate to their peers, whereas for most adults the mobile phone is a very personal and private item.

The researchers also looked at the practice of mobile sharing:

“There is a growing trend of sharing with teenagers. Phones are more and more objects that circulate within a group, in particular when they have lost their own phone, when it is broken or stolen. The Gripic researchers were surprised to find that a fair number of teenagers didn’t even have their own mobile phone, but just a “replacement mobile”: an object that was ephemeral, non-sacred, cheap and aimed at circulation. The only thing that matters is that it works.” [...]

“In fact, for adults the mobile is a hyper-personal device, an intimate black box with data that absolutely need to be protected. For teenagers on the other hand, the mobile is often as little confidential and intimate as their blogs. They are instead identity and exhibition spaces of oneself, with “museum galleries” of photos, ringtones, videos, and music to share with a community of peers: archiving makes only sense if it can be shared.”

Gripic sees teenager usage of the mobile no longer as “emblematic of an individualistic society”, but rather as “a reflection of collective and collaborative behaviours”.

(English translation from Putting People First)

This supports the idea of gift exchange through the mobile phone, written about by amongst others Taylor & Harper (and by me).

Another interesting finding is that young people learn to use the phone by experimenting, and that they deal with glitches in a “non-dramatic” way.

(Via Small Surfaces)

This BBC article “The power of play on the internet” is interesting in the light of our overarching “Playful Identities” research question: How do new (group) identities appear or how are old identities articulated and experienced? What is the role of digital media in this proces? And how can this be understood as “playful”?

The claim is made that online social networking is a type of game (not really a new idea). Impicitly it is suggested that gaming is the form of contemporary social bonding. Additionally, the relevance of online gaming for “real life” is underlined. This further undermines the old dichotomy between an isolated cyberspace versus real life as two separate domains. Interesting as well to me is the fact that there are reputation systems built into these social networking games. These become mechanisms to enforce reciprocity, which is an important term in theories about gift exchange (Mauss).

Some interesting quotes from the article:

Game design and social networks are merging into one of the most persuasive forces on the net. That assertion was made by a string of speakers at the Web 2.0 Expo in San Francisco.

“Social networking is a game in and of itself,” explained Jennifer Pahlka, co-chair of the conference.

….

“Social networks offer a revolutionary way for people to play with friends and communities that have meaningful value to them in their real life,”

….

“Logging in and playing with strangers was exciting when the internet was new but the modern web is personal and social and it is clear that the internet is being used for social purposes to connect people rather than isolate them.”

….

“We build up these reputation systems with levels and rankings just as you would if it was a game and by applying these gaming principles it helps build these thriving successful communities.”

I got this pic a little while ago from a colleague (thanks Tina!). I think it’s very funny.

(source appears to be PersianHub.org).

Yesterday I went to Urbanfest ‘07 in “Dreampark” Ancol, north Jakarta. This festival, organized for the first time, had lots of contemporary culture such as Indie music and hiphop, street games and sports, graffiti, harajuku & cosplay competition, modded bikes, scooter stunting and more. The Ancol website has the full program (basically a whole list of activities with the word urban in it, haha!)

The general impression I got was that this festival was an experiment to create a setting in which new modern urban identities can be explored, partly influenced by global culture, partly localized and typically Indonesian. I enjoyed it a lot!

Many people used their cameras, DV cams, and handphones to capture a sense of ‘being there’.

Some interesting quotes from an article in Jakarta Post:

“As youth, we present something new, something different from the mainstream. That’s what people call the indie spirit. Now a group is considered indie, maybe later it’s not indie,” Jimmy, a member of The Upstairs [one of the bands playing], told a press conference Wednesday [that must have been August 22, 2007].
…
IKJ Rector [Jakarta Arts Institute, one of the organizing parties] and noted dance choreographer Sardono W. Kusumo said the festival was part of efforts to give young artists space to display urban cultures far removed from those found in the nation’s countryside.

“We are open to and ready for even “the craziest” ideas,” Sardono told the conference.

Sardono said there were no “genuine” Indonesian cultures, since the nation’s history has long been open to foreign influences.
…
Organizers said the festival, carrying the slogan “All You Can Act!!!”, are aimed at promoting freedom of expression in the face of rising conservatism in much of the country.

Some of the grafitti art at Urbanfest ‘07.

Guys doing motorbike stunts

East meets west when a hiphop group from Yogyakarta invites a dangdut singer on stage for a jam at Urbanfest ‘07.

Japanese cultural influences: harajuku & cosplay competition at Urbanfest ‘07.

Today, 17 August 2007, Indonesia celebrated the 62th year of independence from Dutch colonial rule. Although my 3rd time in Indonesia, it’s the first time I am in the country during hari kemerdekaan (freedom day). A great day to do some fieldwork on (playful) identity construction ☺.

Together with Lisa & Dini, two girls from my rumah kos, I went to Monas (national monument) in the morning. Under a blistering sun we walked to the Istana Negara (state palace), just north of Taman Merdeka (freedom square). Along the road we saw military units parading. At the palace, young people from all current 33 provinces were present, wearing regional ethnic costumes, featuring on pictures, and busy taking pictures themselves.





Ethnic and national identities at Istana Negara. Mobile devices all over the place to capture “unity in diversity” (Indonesia’s national motto). Tradition and modernity go hand in hand.

After that, Lisa and I went to kampung Melayu, one of the poorer areas in Jakarta. Some friends of her organize a three-day series of festivities in the neighborhood of bukit duri, as part of an effort to make freedom day a real people’s festival. All kinds of traditional games here, vaguely reminding me of the kind of ludic activities that take place on Dutch “koninginnedag” (queen’s day). These kids compete to run three slippery eels from one bucket into the other as quick as possible.



Eel race in kampung Melayu. In the background an activist painting claiming the rights of poor people in Indonesia. The proclamation in the painting reads “Children of poor families are the responsibility of the state. Children at the edge [referring also literally to bukit duri’s location near the Ciliwung riverside] are not sewer rats!”. The painting is part of a campaign in the neighborhood to voice social and economic awareness and identity, as the slums are planned to be cleared due to recurrent floodings.


Pre-paid card infrastructure has penetrated deep into the kampung!

Meanwhile, a bit further uphill, young guys try to climb the greasy pole, in the hope of getting one of the handphones dangling from the top as a reward! I somehow got the sense that in this image, some central notions in my research (identity, play and the mobile phone) come together and lose some of their slipperiness…



Play in front of the quarter’s main Mesjid (mosque) on national freedom day: who wins the mobile phone?

In talking about identity, I feel like adding a more personal note. Today has also been a day to consider my own history and relation to Indonesia. A week back or so I was in a book shop at Taman Ismael Marzuki, and picked up a Soekarno (Indonesia’s first president) biography by Bob Hering. Paging through the book, I noticed my great grandfather figures as one of the prime informants. He apparently was very well-acquainted with many of the key figures who founded Indonesia, and who are commemorated today. From the scarce stories, I know he spoke several indigenous languages fluently and was part of the so called ‘ethical’ movement which tried to reform colonial rule. Yet still part of Dutch colonial system… 62 Years after Indonesian independence, I cannot help but feel both continuity, by temporarily living here and becoming close to this country, as well as rupture, for I am here in a completely different situation and role, as the paths of Holland and Indonesia have split.

“Take fun seriously” - great motto for our ‘playful identities’ project !

Taken at transit busway Dukuh Atas, Jakarta, August 15 2007.

One of the most interesting and dynamic discussions in Indonesia is how to combine Islam with modernity. It is a complicated debate, which would merit a study on its own… It does however influence my research about the mobile phone, Indonesian modernity and identities.

New technologies like the mobile phone lead to new discussions:

from the {belajar-islam} [= "study Islam"] mailinglist: http://www.mail-archive.com/belajar-islam@yahoogroups.com/msg00092.html

Antoniobandalem wonders whether muslims are allowed to use products that are made by non-muslims (kafir), such as the handphone. He gets a reply from Chandraleka, an independent IT writer, who says something like (freely translated & abbreviated):

20 May 2006

“Wah! Don’t be too extreme! As long as the product itself is halal, it doesn’t matter who produces it. Extreme ideas like these are caused by ignorance about Islam. This idea would make modern life nearly impossible: you cannot drive a car, cannot use a computer, cannot use light bulbs, cannot use a mobile phone… Muslims are allowed to use ‘kafir’ products, thank God! It makes life much easier!”

Another outdoors advertisement, shot already a few months ago in Amsterdam. The ad says “Who do I want to be today?”. Options are: kroegtijger (don’t know how to translate this, binge drinker or bar fly is a bit too negative), fashionista, paparazza, night butterfly, supermodel. All very much consumer identities. All identities that are mediatized. All ‘global’ identities, that is, recognizable in many different cultural contexts. And all identities in which the mobile phone can be an aid in the pretense to be one of these, to play a role, as if… The ad plays upon the idea of wearable identities: identity as a jacket that you put on or off.

(click to enlarge)

Also, Nokia can be added to the long list of corporations who think we should “be yourself, and do it in style”. The imperative to be yourself paradoxically is a pressure nowadays from which there is no escape…

A week or two ago (just before the migration of this blog the a new server) I walked past an outdoors advertisement in Amsterdam, near where I live. It is an ad for the Dutch Open Air Museum in Arnhem. It says “Vrij als vroeger - Even terug naar de jaren ‘60″ (something like “Free as once before - briefly back to the ’60s“).

(click to enlarge)

A brief look at their website tells me it’s an exhibition about leisure time in the 60s. What made me take a snapshot of this was that the picture shows a mobile phone being crushed by what appears a miller’s stone, or a giant tractor tire, I don’t know. So this advertisement basically says that freedom is to be without the mobile phone. It plays upon popular opinion that the mobile phone, handy is it may be, is also a burden and a restraint on freedom. Crush your phone and you’ll be free again :).

What strikes me now as I am writing is the addition of the word “Even..” (briefly, or just a little moment) in the subtitle. It suggests the possibility of temporarily escaping modern day pressures (the obligations imposed by the mobile phone) when visiting this open air museum. Why would we want/need to do so? Why go to a museum for this? And what is good about a temporary solution? I mean, nobody is really going to crush his mobile? I think the ad tries to appeal to the possibility of imagining and actually visiting a time and place when things where not so complicated. The museum then creates a temporary playground for our imagination. We can actually undergo the experience of living an ideal simple life, albeit temporarily.

And here’s another advertisement I found on their website, burning a remote control:

Source - via Textually.org.

A study by Nielsen Media Research suggests that the type of phone you wear says something about your personality:

What your mobile phone says about you:

Nokia

• Family-minded
• Middle aged managers
• Balance seekers
• Health conscious

Motorola

• Fashion conscious
• Under 24
• Fun seekers
• Individualistic

Sony Ericsson

• Ambitious young men
• Professionals
• Success driven
• Individualistic

LG

• Favourite of mums
• Stay-at-home parents
• Success driven
• Harmony seekers

Samsung

• Young women
• Career focused
• Success driven
• Fun seekers

Whatever your opinion about such research (what do you mean LG is both for “stay at home parents” and “success driven”?), most telling are the comments by readers. The majority of commenters think it is utter crap to see a communications device as part of your identity. They think it is rather sad to judge someone based on what he uses for calling.

They seem to miss the point of the article, however, that your mobile says something about you, even if you do not choose them consciously. These kinds of articles do raise the interesting view that even though we all despise being easily identifiable by the brands we use, we nevertheless are continuously making choices (yes, also subliminally) and rationalize them as ‘functional’ (like the guy who says he always buys Nokia so that he doesn’t have to relearn navigation from scratch). The interplay of brands and identities, of marketing/production and consumption, is far too complicated to just push research like this aside as nonsense…