Jameson talks about history as an "absent cause" because it does not tangibly exist in our physical, and daily lives that we experence as "the present". Howerver, history still causes things to happen. It causes debates, controversy, leads us to draw conclusions. History is used pervasively in understanding current phenomenon (MCM deals with historical modern ideology to understand the present state of our culture). history creates racial tensions in the present. We look to history to understand how to act and not to act in natural disasters like Katrina and Hati.
This idea that the imaginary force of history can and does drive real world consequences, relates to the earlier class discussion of representation in so far that representation can shape real world outcomes.
Jamesone also quotes from Althusser's definition of ideology; "The representation of the subject's imaginary relationship to his or her real conditions of existence". So how do we even begin to define: "Real conditions of existence". If it is everything experienced first hand then, second hand experiences like language wouldnt be considered part of our "real conditions of existence".
Manovich's uses in narratology to understand some aspects of how navagable spaces function.
For me its interesting to think about navagle spaces as immersion without language. In video games it uses visual cues that substitue for language. So does that mean that by minimalizing the use of langauge a person can more readily access an expereince closer to the real? Do navagable spaces reflect an individuals relationship with his "real conditions of existance"?
How does the relationship of the imaginary to the real "map on" to our expereience and attraction to new media forms as an ALTERNATIVE to langauge? Why do so many people seem to be putting down the book to watch film, play video games, use the internet, their iphones, and other more "navagable" spaces?