Above all, reader, reader, I want to warn you that I will try to address this concept in a more socially and psychologically. Far be it from me to attack the monument of the Freudian "it myself, and superego. It would be pretentious, do not you think? And that is why, in all modesty, I accompany the text with a picture of Emile Durkheim, who I hope would not disown these ideas. Emile, if you listen ...
The construction of 'self' office is something particularly complicated. Submitted for your education, your influences, people who mattered, your relationship to the world, the image of you that the eyes of others you back ... In short, we will not attempt to make the sociology of low floor, but it is quite exciting to dive in, know that we can reconstruct at any time if we have the strength, time , envy.
And with the incredible speed of development of the digital age, more and more people have developed a new "self", a purely virtual entity they are trying to impose on the world. It is a phenomenon that had already seen long before the advent of the Internet among some writers : The contrast between this enormous profusion interior, powerful, imposing, which transpires in their writings, and a shy, even, a chronic and latent conflict between the author, his character and what it IS in its configuration the most social. To return to the "emoi" How many times have we heard: "Oh, you know, the Internet is a sucker, but in truth, he is adorable?
This "virtual me", we will call " emoi " (for lack of better). Its existence is often stimulated by interfaces as twitter or blogs such as your humble servant, but also and, more surprisingly, in this how Facebook tends to evolve today.
[Note] : at this precise moment in the story, it would be stupid as the reader a bit lost imagines that "emoi" have anything to do with an emo . Indeed, the "emoi" is the clever juxtaposition of the letter "e" we deliver "i", which is the diminutive of "electronic" and the word "me", referring to the ego. The "emoi" not listen to German music, do not cut the veins, and has no a priori unhealthy obsession with vampires teen shining in the sun. [/ Note]
I told you that being a "self" in the world becomes easier when we distribute the cards themselves. We can dispense with face, becoming a virtual being means that we will show preference for images that are supposed to define us: avatars, quotes, pictures showing only part of his anatomy ... Stripped of his physical appearance, the person can become a being sublimated, fantasized, or perfectly "I-me-largely unpolished. I try to go over all these categories later.
For in fact, I wonder more about the purpose of this "me" virtual its superimposition to the "I" pre-existing, and the risks that entails. Let me explain:
How many "people in the world" no longer define themselves in most of their social relationships that through this "me" who is not, especially when possess an ounce of notoriety. How will acquire the certainty that this "me" has more substance, tangibility of the other, because it is multifaceted, more malleable, less subject to censorship, it may simply be easier to deal required. For this "emoi" I'm talking about, not encumbered criticism. He did not also suffers, he argues, continuous, it only looks for approval, recognition, and gargling never be chipped when falling insults. You will notice when a breach of your virtual personality, you do not respond if you feel that the comments are displaced inappropriate. For example, take a wife. After an article, a reader responds, and decides on the fact that the article is necessarily bad, since it is a woman who wrote, in attacking her sex, he separates the two entities . Then in his "me" that the woman is attacked. His "emoi," he reacts spontaneously with contempt, or dialogue. But it remains untouched.
I'll give you a concrete example, this should help you understand the depths of my thoughts:
- There will be what I call the "emoi royalist" : This is the one that we found most often in the blogosphere, and / or from those that might be described as "influential" (and here I'm tired). It is one which is termed an imperious, conceited, contemptuous. The principle is simple: no matter how many critics, even if they are virulent, the emotion he knows he will have a majority blissful, innocent and will continue to be subject to approval. The best evidence that they: the more you insult, and it generates more traffic, the more visible, and the more you talk to him. He did not even need to defend itself really. Others will for him. Other that, moreover, he despises for not belong to the influential elite to which he belongs. To further support my argument a bit (and avoid going for yet another haters), I suggest you go see this article on the blog of William with whom I share many views, some specific examples .
- Then, there is the "emoi princely" the principality in what may have popular today : The latter is a variant of the "Royal emoi. We might as well have the name "People emoi . When I call this category, I think people like Monsieur_Dream or Marion_mdm . It's this whole segment of people who do "not mean to" become virtual luminaries, BUT, unlike beings with a "virtual self royalist", they know it. They are not "influential" in this case, but "visible". This is one of its category that suffers more than others his "emoi. Facing the audience, expectations, potential benefits blogger world-media-politico-social "me" will be diluted in the words of "emoi. He joined in this next categorization that I'll try to describe.
- the "emoi Democrat" : This is the "emoi" the more frequent now. the "emoi" consensual, who, unlike other categories, refers only to the other to exist: it needs the weight to anything. Often, it needs the approval of his peers, or those who have more experience than him. Because the virtuality is a mirage in which some stray. Many seek in their articles, stories, or behavior, approval, anything that could support their legitimacy to take action. Yet the reader does not have, since the author does not give him all the keys of interpretation necessary to take certain decisions. Many "Democrats" accuse their late arrival at the virtual speaker. Thus, their "emoi" is defined at the outset by the decision of the "old hands" of the blogosphere. Hard for someone like @ AnnaMinou out of his role lolita pre-pubescent when it was introduced into the environment is vividly. But those who suffer from a lack of personality on the canvas are not as those who must deal with a reputation sulphurous. Consider the blogs operations such as that sponsored by Anne-Laure and Benjamin, the "famous" H2. To summarize the situation, I refer you once again on the site of William . And you can also read this article .
- It would be difficult to cope without "emoi totalitarian" : He who tries to win by simple characteristics, often even rude, and which tolerates no criticism. Often it is listened to say nothing. I do not want to cause harm to anyone, let alone to throw stones. So, far be it from me to highlight the fact that Carl from Canada, aka @ mixbeat proves to be a prime example! To summarize, what kind of person boasts a huge " ePen . There ...
- Finally, there is the category of "emoi anarchist" or - eMoinarchiste - : In general, it is the one that clings most to its editorial line, against all odds. It does not matter the lure of fame, or criticism. The drift of this kind of "emoi" is that it is diametrically opposed to "me" original in most cases. For example, we can appoint people such as @ soymalau , @ ToitagL but also XoxobCapucine . The category is broad enough to accommodate the old troll family, or the uncompromising beauty blogger.
On paper, these theories seem closed. In fact, they are relatively permeable, and many find themselves rooted simultaneously in two or more categories. I would say they are temporal.
So today, everyone has the opportunity to become the author of his existence in the eyes of the world we see that creating this new virtual me, this "emoi" as unconscious it may be, can not be socially just. Whatever it is, he always smooth the snags: a lack of objectivity found in both its author and its readership in the refusal of criticism, his inability to stick to the real bias of his research a truth that confirms its status, and finally, an adaptability that goes into decline.
I must admit not knowing in which category I fall, I never write that without having to watch a dozen times in the final World Cup 98, which I am unable to have any idea before 1:40 p.m. ET newspaper late Jean-Pierre Pernaut, him flipping me my little copy of Hitler's famous book to verify that I am no grammar. In short, I who am finally a man like any other.
For this reason I appeal to your innate sense of right, my dear little friends. And, I'm fond, do not forget to support your comments by any objective justification!
