Reading Response to Simulacra and Simulation

The article on Simulacra and Simulation was, put lightly, mind boggling. Throughout the whole article I felt as if my mind was disappearing and being mixed up both at the same time. In other words, I was utterly confused and really didn’t know what to think these two subjects. It’s as if they were just concepts on this Earth that were meant to thoroughly baffle any human being who decided to try and understand them. It’s so hard to explain Simulacra and Simulation; I don’t even know where to begin.

Primarily, Simulacra and Simulation go very deeply into the idea of reality and the signs in which are embedded inside that idea. The definition of reality is “the state of things as they actually exist.” This is saying that everything in this World that humans classify as “real” or “true” is seen as reality, as opposed to something that is imaginary. Everything that we can prove with unquestionable evidence to be factual is defined as reality. However, Jean Baudrillard took this concept and stretched it and expanded in order to prove the “realness” of “reality.” He believed that reality was just a simulation of reality expressed through symbols and signs, meaning that there is really no such thing as reality. What? Can this subject get any more confusing? Jean would rather look too hard into one complex subject than just let it be what it is and let it go. In my opinion, he was just a weird, lonely man with a lot of time on his hands and nothing to do but think.

In my frame of mind on this subject, I just think that reality is what us humans think of as everything that is “authentic” and “true” around us. We have to have one word for everything we want to describe because that is just how human beings have found language. If you really wanted to, you could break down every single word in the English dictionary and make up or pretend it is of something from a different realm. I find it as a waste of time and rather preposterous, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Simulacra and Simulation just seems like a bogus subject that was produced to contract realism itself. I honestly do not agree with this whole article, hence the utter confusion and bewilderment.

Although many intellects may think this intense subject is one that should be elaborated on more often in society, I would have to disagree. Some things are just better left on a simple playing field, and Simulacra and Simulation is one of them. My full reaction after reading this article included, as I said before, complete confusion, obsessive focus on the beyond, and a rude awakening to over thinking. I guess I just can’t wrap this idea around my mind but, in a positive way, I see no reason that I should have to. I will, however, give major props to this deep thinking author for his profound thinking on reality in addition to symbols and signs.