Reaction to "...Simulations"

This reading is, by far, one of my least favorite. It has very few moments where everything is stated clearly and understandably, but for the most part, it was incredibly tedious. I wish there was some type of precursor or something that sets up the reading before I started reading it. It was very difficult to follow the piece. If there was a better foundation to start with, I might have gotten more out of it.

I can agree with some parts of this reading, but not everyone and everything is a simulation. Walt Disney had nothing to do with the empty feelings and emotions one might experience once they leave Disneyland. It’s a place for kids to have a good time, not to cover up the fact that Los Angeles is not real. If I were from Los Angeles, I might be offended by some of this. I would definitely resent my hometown being described as “nothing more than an immense script and a perpetual motion picture.”

Maybe I just do not fully comprehend what this person is talking about. Are they saying that Watergate was all a simulation and only an attempt to make Nixon look bad? Then it was a very successful simulation.

I like to believe that when a person says something to me, they mean what they say. I don’t catch all of the hidden meaning behind “We mustn’t be frightened of seeing the communists seize power in Italy.” I guess if this were to be a metaphor of some kind you could create different meaning. But when you create meaning out of a phrase, there are infinite possibilities as to what is behind what the person is actually saying. So why does the list stop at five?

I also like to believe that not all of our presidents are puppets. To say that they are “nothing more than mannequins of power” is really negative. Presidents pretending to die? It’s all so dramatic.

How can a person distinguish between the real and the simulated? I think this person is saying that we already assume that everything is real. It has never occurred to me that everything is fake. What if that were the case? Who would you be able to trust? If everything is a simulation, than I would like to know who is behind it all. Surely it is not all the presidents faking their own deaths so they can be made heroes. That might make a good movie.

I need to take a step back from this piece and really try to understand what is being said. Maybe I am just being stupid, but I need someone to explain it to me. Between all the “fiction of the real” and “metamorphosed into its inverse” and other confusing wording, I am just lost. We should read simulation for dummies if it exists. And all of the typos don’t help with being very clear. Is “mclme” a word? Everything needs to by tidied up and pieced together a bit more clearly.

Maybe this whole reading is a simulation…