Baudrillard and Nature

K this is my try at connecting simulacra with nature… its obviously not in depth but it may be the start of something

A Brief History of Simulacra and Human Nature

In the book Simulacra and Simulation Jean Baudrillard discusses significant aspects of contemporary culture. His essays The Precession of Simulacra and The Animals: Territory and Metamorphoses share a common theme; both essays can be applied to human interactions in the natural world. If we examine Baudrillard’s works we can develop an understanding of the state of modern man and his place in nature. It is my argument that simulacra is interconnected with socioeconomic structure, which I will commonly refer to as “states of affairs”, and with how humans, (specifically the west), see themselves in the natural world.

In The Precession of Simulacra Baudrillard discuses a story presented by the author and poet Jorge Luis Borges, in which he describes a fictional empire. The Empire has its cartographers create a map that covers the entire territory and that lies directly on top of it. As the Empire loses its power and grasp over the lands the map begins to fray and tear. Its decomposition also brings about confusion for the subjects of the land as it becomes difficult to distinguish the rotting map from the actual landscape.

It is Baudrillard’s thesis is that we are living in a “desert of the real” (Baudrillard Simulacra and Simulation 1) where western culture is the map and its fraying only reveals that the map is reality. In essence the west’s obsession with the media is far more real than the physical world we live in. To examine this phenomenon more in depth we can consider Baudrillard’s description of the Orders of Simulacra, found in Simulacra and Simulation. From the Orders of Simulacra we can also discover a connection and flux in human relations with the natural world over time.

Baudrillard believes that before Simulacra began to take place in society there was a hierarchy or Symbolic Order as he describes it. If we look back to the feudal age we can come to understand the Symbolic Order. During this period reality was never questioned. Social structures were always predetermined by a powerful force, a kingdom or some sort, or more generally, by god. A pattern is revealed: humans less obsessed with Symbolic Order tend more in tune with nature. For a clearer example we could examine a culture with the purest form of Symbolic Order, the Natives of North America. The Native North American culture has always strived for an annihilation of the Symbolic Order. In the social structure of the Natives, for instance, there is only one Chief or wise man of a tribe; all others are seen as equals who play an active role in ensuring the survival of the tribe. These social views and the annihilation of the obsession with simulacra and hierarchy allow for a more personal connection with nature. The general belief with most Native American cultures is that they are completely within nature. They demonstrate their respect through constant ritual. No culture in history has ever been as closely linked with nature in comparison to the Native North Americans.

Baudrillard then begins to describe what he calls The First Order of Simulacra. He believes that simulacra begins to emerge in the Renaissance period. First Order Simulacra is an attempt to create an ideal image of nature. In the Baroque period we see the emergence of theatre and works of art attempting to emulate nature. The theatre emulates real life while paintings, such as a Rembrandt self portrait, attempts to create an image that is as real as possible. The essence of First Order Simulacra is that there is an underlying reality of truth to the copy. First Order Simulacra remained the dominant form of simulacra until the industrial age. If we then come to understand the state of affairs of this period we can establish connections with the emergence of simulacra and the human condition.

The Renaissance initiated the destruction of the feudal system and brought all previous hierarchies into question. The “Divine right of Kings” and socioeconomic order was disrupted by the signing of the Magna Carta and the new economic practice of Mercantilism. This new state of economic affairs brought a newfound freedom to more social classes then ever before. People began to question religion and develop new ideas and innovations as the focus began to shift towards technological development. Here we can see the beginning of the obsession with control over the natural world. Man begins to separate himself from nature with the rise of Humanism.

The Second Order of Simulacra emerges in the Industrial age. Humans have conquered machinery and mastered the art of production. The nature of Second Order Simulacra is that it is based on a prototype. In truth, it is a copy of a copy. An example could possibly be the mass production of the automobile; or a photograph of a painting would also be considered a Simulacrum of the Second Order.

The Industrial age brought new modes of thinking to the western world. The central focus of human identity became the conflict between capitalism and socialism. The western man had finally lost touch with nature. Nature had become a means to an end. Man began to view nature only as a provider of resources, a tool to be taken advantage of. The focus on technology and economy forced man to define himself through his labour relations.

In handicrafts and manufacture, the worker makes use of a tool; in the factory, the machine makes use of him. There the movements of the instrument of labour proceed from him; here it is the movement of the machine he must follow. (Das Kapital 548)

Political movements in Marxism and in capitalism became the center stage of attention for humanity. Humanism in its truest sense comes out here in that man is completely engulfed by self-determination.

Man would not be satisfied with controlling himself and nature. He began to create new worlds, thus Third Order Simulacra. Baudrillard describes Third Order Simulacra through the literary lens of Borges tale:

Today abstraction is no longer that of the map, the double, the mirror, or the concept. Simulation is no longer that of a territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal. The territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive it. It is nevertheless the map that precedes the territory–precession of simulacra—that endangers the territory, and if one must return to the fable, today it is the territory whose shreds slowly rot across the extent of the map. It is the real, and not the map, whose vestiges persist here and there in the deserts that are no longer those of the Empire, but ours. The desert of the real itself. (Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation 1)

This is Baudrillard’s understanding of modern human culture. With new technological innovation humans can now create the world as they see fit in virtual reality and even bring things of the imagination to life. He believes in the present day Third Order Simulacrum is on a path leading to the destruction of the real. The mind no longer makes use of the “charm”(Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation 2) of the real. No human reflection is necessary when Third Order Simulacrum only makes use of other simulacrum which bears little relation to the real world.

The real is produced from miniaturized cells, matrices, and memory banks, models of control-and it can be reproduced an indefinite number of times from these. It no longer needs to be rational, because it no longer measures itself against either an ideal or a negative instance; it is no longer anything but operational. In fact, it is no longer really the real, because no imaginary envelops it anymore. It is a hyperreal, produced from a radiating synthesis of combinatory models in a hyperspace without atmosphere. (Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation 2)

Reality is thus conquered by the hyperreal. Hyperreal is simply simulated stimuli craved more by humans then actual reality. For an example: pornography has become “sexier then sex itself”, it is craved more then the actual act. Or why travel to the Amazon rainforest when one can make the twenty minute trip to the local zoo. Animals are placed in small simulated habitats where humans can observe a hyperreality which is far more convenient and safe. Behind the lure of hyperreality is the concept of his object value system.

[i]In quintessence “things” lose their fundamental nature, in the object value system our society creates. The object value system demonstrates an evolution of metaphysical economic attachments to all “things”.

  1. The functional value of an object is its instrumental purpose. (A pen writes. A diamond ring adorns an otherwise empty hand.) This is what Marx referred to as the ‘use-value’ of the commodity.
  2. The exchange value of an object is its economic value. (A pen is worth three pencils. A diamond ring is worth three months’ salary.)
  3. The symbolic exchange value of an object is its arbitrarily assigned and agreed value in relation to another subject. (A pen represents a graduation present or a speaker’s gift. A diamond ring symbolizes a public declaration of love between two individuals.)
  4. The sign exchange value of an object represents its value in a system of objects. (A pen is part of a desk set, or a particular pen confers social status. A diamond ring has sign exchange value in relation to other diamond rings, conferring social status to the person with the biggest or prettiest ring.).
    (Baudrillard, For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign, 66, 123)[/i]

In a world dominated by Third Order Simulacrum all that remains of “things” are the symbolic exchange value and the sign exchange value. All focus is placed on meaning and representation, truth becomes lost in the mix.

It is obvious how damaging hyperreality is to the way humans view themselves in the natural world. One who is completely consumed by hyperreality has no need for relations with the natural. There is a complete desensitization of reality and the natural. In fact one might be more compelled to raise money for an internet website then to spare their local forest from being rolled over by bulldozer to create more housing units. The natural has become increasingly scarce and rare in the past decade. In an earlier age a farmer could grow his crops year after year and make a decent living, but now ever increasing demand for product requires that he use genetically modified hyperreal crops that grow faster, more resistant to disease and have a higher yield then ordinary crop. If he wishes to grow “organic” food he must be prepared to put in ten times the amount of labour to ensure his survival.

In Baudrillard’s work The Animals: Territory and Metamorphoses, he expresses one of the consequences that nature suffers from a society obsessed with symbolism, meaning and value. Animals in laboratories and breeding suffer from the most torturous of circumstances; they suffer in the name of science. It is Baudrillard’s belief that man continues these practices not for intellectual reason, but for never ending affirmation of the symbolism of science. The destruction of the natural order in breeding farms lead to “psychic” disturbances, cannibalism and sterility. Humans seek the personification of nature. Baudrillard describes the “democratization” of the natural “pecking order” in a chicken farm:

In birds there is a hierarchy of access to food-the pecking order. In these conditions of overpopulation, the last in the order is never able to get to the food. One thus wished to break the pecking order and democratize access to food through another system of distribution. Failure: the destruction of this symbolic order brings along with it total confusion for the birds, and a chronic instability. Good example of absurdity: one know the analogous ravages of good democratic intentions in tribal societies. (Baudrillard Simulacra and Simulation 131)

All of these actions are performed in the name of profit. In this instance we have reduced ourselves to something no better than the machines we create. What is done is done without consideration of morality and in the name of extreme efficiency. Only when the animals begin reducing profits from their unnatural deaths minimal morality is considered.

Simulacra has had a significant impact on human relations with the natural world. In humanity’s unquenchable thirst for power and control of his destiny he is forging a path of destruction for the natural. His obsession with simulacrum has lead to the creation of a new order. Morality has been traded for efficiency; truth has been traded for symbolic meaning. Everything in modern society has been reduced to its economic value. Man is not longer part of nature, as he wishes to replace it with himself. Ironically it may be part of “human nature” to perform the annihilation of the natural.

Thank you for that great essay, it helped clear up some things for me about Baudrillard.

Now, to get to buisness. Have you not (or Baudrillard) placed a value upon the “natural”? What I mean is: what makes the natural more valuable than the simulation? Does it have value in-itself? I, for example, don’t think it does. It may very well have a different type of value, mainly, that of not being strictly about effeciency or ‘smybolic meaning,’ though I question the latter, but that doesn’t mean it has value in-itself.

On the other hand, have we become like machines, complete automations? Well, yes, but not all of us, most of the time. Society in general however, well, Camus painted them best: “robots.”

Although – it just hit me – I know exactly what Baudrillard is talking about, I think. Recently I went “camping” in upstate New York, only to find out, to my horror, that camping was comercialized. The “camping grounds” resembled more of a theme park than actual woods; permits were needed to go “camping,” the lake was full of activities set up by the camp grounds, etc.

We were given, perhaps, a 20x20 piece of land, surrounded by other campers, most of whom had trailors, and no one who I was with, noticed how absurd it was to call this “camping.” It was so artificial that it disgusted me, but it seems that the robots were so caught up in their hyperreality that they did not notice. A perfect example of simulcara, right? Yes, though I stick to my point earlier about nature having intrinsic value, I am nevertheless disgusted by the hyperreal as well.

1st off this essay is far from great lol

But thank you for your kind words!

I may have suggested that the natural has more value… I can’t remember but I probably didn’t mean it.

The deal behind his philosophy is that we, as a society, place a value on certain objects. So essentialy the natural is not more valuable in the sense that society constructs what has more significance. Value is ever changing and relative to culture and society. So the fact that I or Baudrillard place more value on the natural really makes no difference…even if that were the case. Quote me on that and I’ll formulate some sort of defence…if necessary!

So the real question here is the question that concerns reality.

I didn’t get what you meant about the symbolic exchange and the value in itself?

wow holy edit batman! gimmie a minute

You are right,

That is an example of simulacra! You see that simulacra distorts reality. The people in the campsite believe that they are camping…when in fact the idea of camping is being used to describe your experience that is something else. Its symbolic exchange has been distorted…

Hopefully door will post here and describe some media realations a little further.

I’ve been asked to post here by Szpak but I’ll answer Underground Man’s comments from my brief knowledge of Baudrillard in the hope of clarifying a few things. As such this post is addressed to anyone interested in this thread.

It doesn’t seem that Baudrillard does place an inherent value on the natural, for the simple reason that any such valuing would take place in the realm of simulacra, of symbolic exchange, not in the realm of pure, natural, visceral experience. The simulation, if accepted as such, is the natural. However that Baudrillard is using one set of simulacra (analytical linguistic discourse) to talk about simulacra itself is a criticism that is (in my opinion fairly) at his work…

This would (seem to) assume that something organic has been lost, whereas we are no less organic than Socrates, Christ, Moses…

We have become more mechanical perhaps, but whether or not this at the cost of something natural or organic is dubious. We are different to our ancestors, sure, but I’m not convinced of the schema by which we, like Rousseau, rank the natural as the pure thing, the thing that is corrupted (by technology, usually).

I once saw on Porn: a family business that Adam tried to take his kid camping and they were held up because apparently they needed to book 6 months in advance…

I know that it isn’t quite the same thing but I was amused by this.

A perfect example of simulacra, because it is the hyperreal accepted on what are apparently the terms of the real. To the happy campers they are camping in as true a sense of the word as those idiots who go and sit in damp tents in the Lake District in November. Simulacra isn’t aritificial, isn’t morally repugnant for Baudrillard. Or at least not in anything that I’ve read, I’m not really into his work so perhaps someone else can shed some light…

Thanks alot for posting door!

I’ll stop being soo pushy lol…

Basically what you said was right on the money with what I was trying to get across! thanks!

That wasn’t at all pushy, don’t worry. I should really resume me commentary on ‘differance’…

Ooo ya I can’t wait to start reading Derrida at christmas!

You are misusing the terms. By hyper-reality, you really mean fantasy which we all have. what do you mean by reality, but by our vision, what we hear, what we experience in short.

Chuckle, but camping is an artificial way to return to nature, perhaps a priomordial need to return to nature, or perhaps just escape our frantic lives?