Hologram Tupac Was Inevitable
theatlantic.com
theatlantic.com
While I agree that after death, Tupac image has been "manipulated", but it is the fans doing it more than anyone else. They remember their version of 2Pac and casually dismiss his life contradictions. 2Pac made a lot stupid decisions but also had moments of genius. He was the image of youth rebelliousness but too often crossed the cavern of casual disregard of others. That is a thin line and at times he walked it poorly. And now that I am ten years older than when he died I can see why. At 25 years old you do a lot of dumb shit.
I think a lot of fans reacted as they did to that hologram because 2Pac has never really had a proper public memorial. Biggie had the big MTV awards spectacle with Puff, a gospel chorus, and Sting. He had big budget movies made of his life, tribute albums and a whole host of other tributes. Basically a lot of chances for his fan to mourn his passing while also celebrating his life. 2Pac has had a couple of tribute albums and a few really low budget documentaries. Nowhere near even especially considering how even they were in stature in both the hip hop and the music community as a whole.
Even though I was aware of the tech behind the "hologram" and hated a lot of what 2Pac became towards the end of his life I was still amped up and moved by the show. I wouldn't want to see it again because then I would feel his image really was being exploited. But as a DJ and fan of hip hop for about 29 years, I was glad to see it.
It's exceedingly silly that people are freaking out about this, Elvis impersonators have been a cultural cliche for decades and I'm sure there are Tupac impersonators.
I am under the impression that the advent of a globalized internet culture has fostered the nostalgic phenomenon. If you are a regular reader of any social websites where people can publish content you can see the extent of this among people from "Generation Y": clothes, old games ( Prince of Persia on Apple 2 anyone ?), actors, movies, music, etc... It doesn't even have to be good, it will be put on a pedestal anyway.
What enables us today is that these old things which use to be forgotten by previous generations can now be accessed at will: old videos are put on Youtube, old pictures are backed up everywhere, memories are slowly becoming immortal.
I am absolutely not a nostalgic person myself so I don't feel the impulsive to think about oldies but I think it's a very interesting thing to analyze, maybe it's even a bit worrying: Could these fond memories hold us back?
Then, starting in the 90s, our generation started to do the same thing, looking back nostalgically at childhood favorites like the Muppet Show, Gilligan's Island, and the Brady Bunch.
So I would say that this sort of nostalgia has a staple of modern life for at least several generations.
And yet, here in the UK, Oasis and the Britpop movement were bringing back 1960s style and music.
I have to call you out on this. What the heck are you talking about?
Or sometimes we it seems...
Not only on the internet space, but "80's/90's parties", reliving the experiences, etc.
In a sense, it's very important. The 70's, the 80's and the 90's have been a period of extreme experimentation and learning in culture and technology. In music, cinema, computers, technology, etc
The appeal of this era, I believe, comes from the limitations and the 'quirkiness' of things evolving. See how 8-bit limitations have created a culture and a aesthetics of its own.
Games don't need MIDI music anymore, resolution is not a limiting factor and we can get almost picture perfect images in real time.
How games were designed on the Apple II has its relevance, in both cultural and technical terms.
The main point of the 'internet culture' is facilitating the storage and sharing of these old contents. In a culture preservation sense this is very important.
How much money is spent by studios to conserve a copy of their old movies. Try playing the old VHS tapes in your (or your parents) basement. Oh you don't have a VCR anymore?!
Storing them in YT (or in a digital format) and sharing can preserve the cultural value of the content.
I just 'forgot' about The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan (amongst others)
"Hologram Tupac is an inheritance of arena-rock one-upsmanship, the latest step in rap's forced march on Spinal Tap-ism."
This, to me, just screams that this writer knows nothing of rap/hip-hop and it's current trends. Sure, people who don't actually pay attention to the music may see it that way because of artists and performances like Kanye and Jay-Z's "Watch The Throne" tour but currently hip-hop is coming back to the point it was at in the mid-90s, with thought-provoking poetry on one side and money/cars/girls anthems on the other.
"Over the past 16 years, a lot of Tupac's music has been gradually sullied by all that's followed. "Dear Mama" is held up to make him a sensitive feminist, which he wasn't, while "Hit 'Em Up" is held up to make him a hyper-violent gangsta, which he wasn't either. "
What does this writer know of Tupac's actual life or his reasons for writing and performing those songs? Hip-Hop is a way to express not only one's own opinions, but also the viewpoints and stories of others that we wouldn't normally see in our lives.
I understand where the article is coming from but it seems like a lot of over-analysing. It seems unnecessary and a grab at a few reads just because this whole "hologram" is currently trending. Hip-Hop is and will always be a large part of my life and I just don't think this guy really gets it, just my two cents.
a. As the person above me mentioned, Tupac is dead, but not only that, his death is considered (by some) to be fake, so his "appearance" scratches a very strange itch for some. Had his killer been in the audience, he might've started worrying about having to give a refund.
b. There was little to no fanfare surrounding the event, so when he "took the stage" it was shocking. Imagine how different this would've played out if, for months, we'd been hearing about the hologram performance of Tupac at Coachella? All of the press would've been "Not as lifelike as expected." "Overhyped." Etc.
c. "Cool Factor" -- Coachella is a fairly large event with tons of influencers/connectors & "cool kids", who all ran home and tweeted/blogged about it after it happened...as it happened.
d. 4 Technical Feats for the price of one -- Will.I.Am just taped a performance. The Tupac performance required.
-- a company to digitally recreate him -- an body actor to perform -- a company to then map his face onto the actor -- another voice actor to do the greeting.
This may be the first time that all of these factors lined up at once. You would've heard similar things if the Cirque Du Soleil Michael Jackson show had surprised everyone on the last song with a similar move.
Seeing the impossible is nothing new, making it stand next to a real-life something - thats new.
Edit: I also remember the pinball game "Revenge from Mars" from 1999. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA7Cgzk-y1U
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/18/hatsune-mik...
I think it's interesting to see this as a technology and it has cool uses (like above I suppose), but are we, as a society, prepared for something that takes this to the next level?
I'm thinking something like "The Nirvana 2015 Reunion Tour" with a holographic CGI Kurt Cobain.. I'm not sure that would be as well received..
Digital recreations of the dead have been with us for awhile. And art of this nature has been around for much of human history. I wonder how different this will be from the Renaissance technology of painting? Perhaps the difference will be that, with the help of computer technology, such recreations will be able to pass the Turing Test, at first in limited contexts, then more generally.
I think digital Tupac fell into an Uncanny Valley of a different sort. His appearance was almost flawless, but the context was still unsettling to many of the audience. I wonder how long it will be before we have the first "Digital Resurrection" cult?
How about a novel where a terminally ill iconic business leader and entrepreneur, instead of faking his death, fakes his continued life? Everyone just assumes that he's never seen mingling with the public because he's gotten Howard Hughes eccentric in his infirmity. By the time humanoid robots are ready for him to "meet" people and shake hands, his age and frailty make it easier for the technology to pull off the performance.