Mirror, Mirror, Who's the "Uniquest" of All?
Written by Raouda Njimogna
Stare deep into these words. Follow the flow of this sentence as it reveals its purpose. It's flattering to a creator that a viewer disposes their nonrenewable and fleeting time to trust that they'll add value to their life. That value being entertainment, information, or contemplation, all forms influence how one views an aspect of their life. We've always needed a helping hand in trying to find ourselves, and technology is not unique in its ability to influence. Human beings have cultivated their culture and behavior through one another; it is obvious anthropologically and biologically that we are social beings. Somewhere deep within the fissures of our brain (the premotor cortex, the supplementary motor area, the primary somatosensory cortex, and the inferior parietal cortex, for those interested), we contain mirror neurons that work to make sense of others’ actions, emotions, and behavior in relation to ours. Through these neurons, we have derived the ability to enforce language, cultural norms, and social etiquette. A group bound by the same social conventions, culturally, locally, or even generationally, is bound to fire the same mirror neurons when encountering similar stimuli or exhibiting certain behaviors. Social media and the internet allow for these mirror neurons to transcend beyond physical imitation and occur remotely with the media we consume. They fire in these digitalized settings, however, not similarly to in-person interpersonal communication. We undergo more mentalization and theory of mind processes (our ability to understand that others have unique feelings, emotions, and motivations to ours) as we don't have tools to truly encode people's emotions in totality. With the lack of body language, aided with natural conversational tonal inflection, we lose this complex evolutionary mirroring ability and replace it with one that is surface-level and riddled with overthinking. And yet, we still choose to chemically engage superficially and create a shared culture and perception of the digital zeitgeist. Tricking ourselves into believing we are closer and more understanding of each other, we create oversimplifications of our beings and backgrounds, and in return, oversimplify our own beings to be easily digestible. We influence each other with no understanding of one another. From finger taps to clock it, to mass unfollowings of users, what trends or appear frequently in our digital spheres, become a part of you, me, and us. It is to be noted that these "trends" all do come from genuine displays of one's background, often culturally and sub-culturally. AAVE, African AmericanVernacular English, is a result of the mirror neurons of Black Americans linguistically syncing to create a language filled with not just phrases and words, but specific tonal mannerisms and gestures when saying certain words. Passed down from generation to generation, there is a chemically shared culture that cannot be denied behind words like "period," "finna," and "tea." And even within these cultural groups lies a greater linguistic mirror neuronal connection, such as the Black LGBTQ synchronization of "serving," "slay," and "trade." Once a digital citizen shares these instinctual connections online, and it's deemed either funny or so "bizarre" yet intriguing, it trends and slowly influences others to chemically integrate this language into their lexicon. However, keep in mind that there is a lack of in-depth socialization with these digital interactions; we are mentalizing heavily here, ascribing our own meanings to what we believe to be the definitions of these foreign yet "catchy" terms. Soon, the words/phrases lose their cultural significance and hold lesser significance onto us. This cycle of influence is certainly not novel or even indicative of Gen Z. Cross-cultural influences have always existed through various technological mediums, such as reality TV shows, where parasocial connections can lead to one adopting the vernacular, style, and mannerisms of their favorite personalities. The Simple Life, a show starring socialites Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie, and MTV's Cribs helped to further popularize the "McBling" aesthetic and celebrity/pop-culture onto the emerging youth. Certain language, styles, and behaviors were mimicked to achieve likeness to these stars; some fans were so extreme that they robbed to have a taste of their lifestyle. (Look up the Bling Ring. I can't lie, the Sofia Coppola movie makes them look cool.) The media has always been so powerfully pervasive among the youth, and we are becoming aware. We want to break free and be unique, but how freely unique can we be when we still subject ourselves to the instantaneous chemical conditioning that happens from mere observation of others? And when the creator is conscious of the power to influence, how free are they themselves if they wish to appeal? Icebreakers. We go through them every year, anywhere. Questions meant to set you apart from everyone else. How different you are makes you stand out. There may be three Kaylas in the class, but are you the Kayla who's been to all seven continents? How about the Kayla who has three siblings? Wait, there's another Kayla with three siblings. Quick! Bring up your love for Frank Ocean; they don't get him like you do. Or do they? When encountering these prompts, we're subjected to reducing our beings to bullet points. It's hard to encapsulate your soul when it has been impacted by the many beautiful things life has had to offer, but these icebreakers, despite the name, ask us to freeze life, look back, and ask, "Who can I be to these people?" I argue that social media is one big icebreaker. With icebreakers, we are conscious that everyone is putting their best-unique-foot forward, and we know we are too. This collectively consciousevent intertwines with our current integration of postmodernism in social media spaces. We all know that people only post the distinctive highlights of their lives, and that we choose to engage with certain posts based on our own tastes. Meaning, when we seek to surveil the lives of others who fall within our perceived curation, or algorithm, we see "the best" of our subculture performing their best, and we often compare, imitate them (per our mirror neurons), or even point out this performance. All reactions are indicative of our need to set ourselves apart, to be marketable. We are asking ourselves the very question we have been doomed to answer every first day of class, "Who can I be to these people?" In a society where humans have become products themselves through the now-established titles of influencer or "micro-celebrity" and the aesthetics they encompass, how different or similar you are derives from how marketable your being is. Knowingly or unknowingly, you are content for us to consume and be influenced by. Our mirror neurons have been doing this for ages, but when the camera turns on, so do the effects of this self-marketability of the human identity. We are very vigilant of this perception and judgment of ourselves, so we either accept conformity and "follow the trend," or explicitly rebel and "be different." Either way, whether organic or not, we are still performing for fear of judgment of our total soul and boxing our immaterial souls into compressed labels. If we are to abandon this fear altogether and just be and exist as ourselves without a screen, we become too much to digest and no longer convenient for consumption. Rather, we will rely on in-person mirror neuronal connections, active communication, and observations of each other to gradually influence and learn from those part and outside of our community. For as long as we have been in a society, being completely individualistic and original has been rare; it is our human nature to mirror each other. The real issue isn't the death of individualism, but more so, the consumerization of humanity as a replacement of identity cultivation and cultural connection through our screens. To seek originality, you must rid yourself of any outside influence. The mirrors living in your mind simply cannot allow this. But for every person, song, movie, art, thing that touches you, it curates a detailed, unique, and authentic portrait of you. Snapshots, short videos, and icebreakers will never capture that authentic portrait, for they force you to be judged on how you, are you. References:
Doheny, M. M., & Lighthall, N. R. (2023). Social cognitive neuroscience in the digital age. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 17, 1168788. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1168788
Acharya, S., & Shukla, S. (2012). Mirror neurons: Enigma of the metaphysical modular brain. Journal of natural science, biology, and medicine, 3(2), 118–124. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.101878
Hickok G. (2010). The role of mirror neurons in speech and language processing. Brain and language, 112(1), 1–2.
