Split Second
dena yago interviews nonny de la peña and peggy weil
S econd Life, launched by Linden Research Inc., is fast becoming the new virtual sensation. As a 3-D downloadable client program that allows its “Residents” to interact with one another through avatars, or virtual representations, some times from thousands of miles away, “the World” is no longer limited to gaming or chats. Users often use Second Life to create virtual stores and markets where items are bartered, and with more and more advanced technological advances, even educational purposes. That’s the idea behind Gone Gitmo, a virtual representation of Guantanamo Bay and the habeas corpus abuses that occur there. Nonny de la Peña, director and producer, and Peggy Weil, of the University of Southern California, launched the program on Second Life as a companion piece to Peña’s 2004 documentary Unconstitutional. Dena Yago spoke with Peña and Weil about the opportunities for online education and interaction, and the ways in which virtual realities can shape our physical one.
What was the motivation to make a interactive education center on Second Life, particularly for Guantánamo Bay?
nonny de la peña: In 2003, when I was working on the documentary about civil liberties issues post 9/11, Unconstitutional, there were few stories in the American press about the prison. I had a good friend who would regularly call up reporters at NPR and say, “Hey, I really liked that story about Guantánamo Bay today.” The reporter would reply, “What story?” And he would shout back, “EXACTLY!” It was the kind of phone call I wanted to make to everyone in the nation. Instead, I dialed my good friend and creative collaborator Peggy Weil. There was this grant I just found that I was thinking we ought to apply for…
peggy weil: I start to probe: I know what is wrong with Guantánamo but there is so much that’s wrong —where do we start? I asked her: “What is the fundamental concept you’d like to get across?” Nonny’s answer was immediate, “Habeas Corpus. Our nation is denying the basic right of habeas corpus to detainees.” I asked her to drop any ideas of using the computer and envision how it would work. She told me that she’d love to have a kit to give to teachers that would let kids inhabit a prison cell and feel what it is like to be stripped of their habeas corpus rights. Build the prison, inhabit it and then, tear it down… Then Eureka! I’ve got it: a virtual Guantánamo! We can build it in Second Life! We can build an experiential, virtual Guantánamo Prison which students, whole classrooms, people from around the world, can visit. “And they can tear it down!” Nonny said.
Why did Second Life seem like the best vehicle for this project, and not other interactive media sources?
peggy: An online virtual environment allowed us to make an otherwise inaccessible place accessible. We chose Second Life in particular because it already has a thriving community dedicated to non-profit causes.
Second Life is usually used to sell virtual “land” for shops or gaming centers. What do you think that the implications are of widening this program for education and international dialogues?
peggy: Using a real estate model [selling land for “Linden dollars”] provided an income stream, but I wouldn’t characterize Second Life as merely a real estate experiment. I believe Second Life was inspired by sci-fi visions (Vernor Vigne and William Gibson come to mind) of the metaverse and cyberspace, which encompass the full spectrum of human endeavors. As in much of media history, media, gambling and porn were the first to exploit the territory, but just about everything else has followed.
nonny: For example, every Friday morning, non-profit organizations from across the globe come together in Second Life at Non-Profit Commons to share ideas and discuss ways of building community. At an event a couple of weeks ago, 86 individuals attended from different organizations around the world.
What do you think that the next step is for this form of avatar based interactive media? What is going to go beyond Second Life?
nonny: I believe that everything will be 3-D in the future and there are baby steps being taken toward that end. For example, recently Linden Labs, IBM and others agreed to try to unify avatar code so that avatars can cross platforms. It would mean that avatars won’t be restricted to Second Life or any other world, which would help institute a 3-D environment in a similar way that the 2-D world wide web exists today.
How would you describe the difference between gaming-based programs like World of Warcraft and Second Life?
peggy: Second Life, unlike a game, is not characterized by an accepted set of rules or behavior leading to one favored outcome. Instead, it is an open-ended base or environment with many different user-defined communities, each with its own set of objectives. While games have enormous potential for education and social change (and there are game environments within Second Life) non-gaming communities may have less barrier to entry and allow a more contemplative and exploratory experience.
Will there be a point where the educational resources in Second Life have reached their capacity? Is there a limit, other than physical server space, to how far the opportunities in Second Life can expand?
peggy: I wouldn’t limit this question to Second Life in particular, or to server space in general. There’s a direct sense that RL (real life) will continue to bleed into VL (virtual life), and that the overlap between local, physical community will overlap with virtual communities of interest with huge potential to affect the way we communicate, govern and learn. \\\