Why does architecture in SL lag so far behind fashion?

I have an idea that it really boils down to a psychological phenomenon. Essentially, people in sl try to promote and ideal image of themself. This is done with wearables, skin tones, body shapes.. irl, Im not 6'10 for example.. not do I have a mohawk, but thats what I like to dress like in sl. I take pride in that. I have a couple nice houses scattered around sl.. but they are more for private enjoyment than to show off. Just as irl, there are a few different kinds of people, those who care about their appearance, those who car what toys they have, and those who care about what neighborhood they live or what their house looks like.

For me, I never wanna mix my career with my sl life because I come to sl to escape all that rofl. I definately don't want an architectural review board or homeowners association telling me how to decorate, build or whatever.. if they pay for the land and allow me to build there, then and only then, would I acquiesce to that. Until then Ill buy or make clothes that make my av look cool to me and build as I feel or is prim feasable.

I can be frequently heard to say 'The trouble with a user-created world is that the vast majority of users shouldn't be creating worlds.' It's the freedom that makes SL what it is though, and we have to put up with other people having freedom to enjoy our own.

SecondLife is really no different than the web in that regard though. There's a lot of really nice websites out there, but they're buried in with all the rest of the web that looks like shit. SL is the same way, if you're willing to sigh and move past the crappy builds, there's some really amazing ones out there. Especially if you go island hopping out there. I've run into some builds that just knocked me over and left me going 'Wow...I just want to stand here for a few hours and take it all in...' And then I've run into some builds that left me momentarily blind with agony, too. I was part of a group once that thinks a building composed entirely of neon pink leopard-print textures is pretty fantastic.

expectations for architecture should always be the highest. architecture is the medium for Life.

Not for a lot of people, unfortunately.

For many it's "how I look is life."

Even more unfortunately a lot of avatars are overpainted, overblinged (overblung?), and overgelled.

An avatar with natural beauty is way too rare.

Good fashion designers, lousy architects?

Just a possibility.

that's ... profound...

wu-had

builders manifesto

in the virtual world, the fundemental architecture is the platform itself. it's network, and how we are allowed to navigate it. the image of architecture in 3d is merely a suggestion in comparision. however it is still a very power as a guiding force. the architecture of the virtual world sets the tone for the activities it encapsulates, it creates a mood, it compels fantasy. virtual architecture shares with real architecture it's evocative presence.

architecture is paramount in fulfilling the escapist ambition of secondlife. virtual worlds are a form of tourism. they allow us to escape the reality of our everyday and venture into the unknown of cyberspace. more obliging than any real vacation, secondlife is available after dinner every night! that tourism however requires immersion. it requires one to feel that one has just stepped out of their home office and into a whole new world. the environment must be compelling. it must be fulfilling.

what we find in secondlife is merely pockets of immersion. there are little spots along the grid and on islands where skilled and visionary building teams have descended on the mesh and put together moments of transcendence where for an instance i forget that i am sitting at my computer and actual begin to fly through the ruins of af a dystopic future of explore the secret pirates lair. how quickly it ends as i turn the corner into a see of flicker and seams. and so i push my immerssion agenda on anyone willing to hear my thoughts.

immersion requires seamlessness and attention to detail. architecture in secondlife, like the surface of the av, should be scrutinized down to the very last pixel. the best fashion designers wrap their avs with textures with acute attention to details. some of the details may go unnoticed to our concious eye, but the subconcious eye is much more discerning. any discrepency will break immersion. so it is true for architecture.

an immersive building is more than floors, walls and roofs. our eye is trained in rl and is accustomed to seeing structure, decoration, decay, trims, materials, light and shadow. our eye rejects the virtual world without these elements. there is a reason why the virtual world is built in the image of the real world. it communicates quickly and comfortably to us. it helps us move past the virtual world as an image constructed on our screen to a shared world to inhabit. part of that comfort is from light and shadow that helps us see forms and depth. part of it is from structure that gives weight to the virtual architecture. part of it is water stains, moss, or grass growing between flagstones. it gives the illusion of history and permanence, that the virtual world is not just a space but a place.

immersion requires depth. it's not sufficient for one enclosed space to be finely constructed. it requires that the next space be so as well. and the space after that. immersion works better when the surface of one space frames the next. it reinforces the notion of world.

what does immersion look like? immersion doesn't look like anything. immersion is an experience.

"sea" not "see"

Artist's rendering of immersion.

Perhaps immersion is not all it's cracked up to be.

thanks! you're command of the english is quite impressive!

no capita/ols in second life, i see. a subtle vision of e.e. cummings-world, embedded in your text? a punny call for no doric columns or marble?

just wa/ondering.