Journals / Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Issue: 51

“The Simulation of Reality” as a Media Topos: Tracing the Historical Trajectory of VR

Bir Medya Toposu olarak Fiziksel Gerçekliğin Simülasyonu: VR Teknolojisinin Tarihsel İzleği

A. Hümeyra Hüsmen(GAZİANTEP ÜNİVERSİTESİ, GÜZEL SANATLAR FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-6582-1411
Pages
25–43
Publication Date
2026-03-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Originality/value: This study is the first to examine VR through the lens of the simulation of reality topos, situating it within a historical trajectory rarely considered in previous research.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: This study argues that contemporary VR technology reflects a longstanding media topos: the simulation of reality.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To support this claim, the historical trajectory of VR technology is traced across eight stages, from the 19th-century panoramas to contemporary VR.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Originality/value: This study is the first to examine VR through the lens of the simulation of reality topos, situating it within a historical trajectory rarely considered in previous research.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sanal Gerçeklik · Topos · Medya Arkeolojisi

Abstract

Purpose: This study argues that contemporary VR technology reflects a longstanding media topos: the simulation of reality. To support this claim, the historical trajectory of VR technology is traced across eight stages, from the 19th-century panoramas to contemporary VR. Design/methodology/approach: This study is based on a review of canonical scholarly works on VR, from which eight stages are identified as the trajectory of the simulation of reality topos. Drawing on Erkki Huhtamo’s media archaeological approach, a topos is understood as a recurring cultural pattern that shapes how media technologies are perceived. For each stage, the study examines the key technological developments using available sources, including patents, technical research by innovators, and publicity materials. Findings: Recreating and simulating physical reality have often been presented as a novelty of VR and promoted as its primary affordance. However, this analysis reveals that VR is only a 21st-century manifestation of a centuries-long endeavor. This study shows that VR technology is not a novel development; rather, it is a continuation of earlier technological and discursive efforts, shaped by a specific sociotechnical imaginary and topos. Research limitations/implications: One limitation of this study is its focus on canonical texts and mainstream technologies, which leaves peripheral forms outside its scope. Future research could examine these forms. Practical implications: Practitioners may benefit from understanding how cultural and social expectations shape perceptions of VR as a device for simulating reality. Originality/value: This study is the first to examine VR through the lens of the simulation of reality topos, situating it within a historical trajectory rarely considered in previous research.

Özet

Amaç (Purpose): Bu çalışma, çağdaş VR (sanal gerçeklik) teknolojisinin, medyada uzun süredir var olan bir toposu—gerçekliğin simülasyonunu—yansıttığını ileri sürmektedir. Bu iddiayı desteklemek amacıyla, VR teknolojisinin tarihsel gelişimi 19. yüzyıl panoramalarından günümüz VR uygulamalarına kadar uzanan sekiz aşama üzerinden izlenmektedir. Tasarım/Yöntem (Design/methodology/approach): Çalışma, VR üzerine temel kabul edilen akademik eserlerin incelenmesine dayanmaktadır. Bu inceleme sonucunda, gerçekliğin simülasyonu toposunun gelişim çizgisini oluşturan sekiz aşama belirlenmiştir. Erkki Huhtamo’nun medya arkeolojisi yaklaşımından hareketle, topos kavramı medya teknolojilerinin nasıl algılandığını şekillendiren tekrar eden kültürel bir örüntü olarak ele alınmaktadır. Her bir aşamada, patentler, yenilikçi araştırmacıların teknik çalışmaları ve tanıtım materyalleri gibi mevcut kaynaklar kullanılarak temel teknolojik gelişmeler incelenmiştir. Bulgular (Findings): Fiziksel gerçekliğin yeniden yaratılması ve simüle edilmesi çoğu zaman VR’ın bir yeniliği olarak sunulmuş ve temel imkânı (affordance) olarak tanıtılmıştır. Ancak bu analiz, VR’ın aslında yüzyıllara yayılan bir çabanın 21. yüzyıldaki bir tezahürü olduğunu göstermektedir. Buna göre VR teknolojisi bütünüyle yeni bir gelişim değil; belirli bir sosyo-teknik tahayyül ve topos tarafından şekillendirilen önceki teknolojik ve söylemsel çabaların bir devamıdır. Araştırma sınırlılıkları/çıkarımlar (Research limitations/implications): Çalışmanın bir sınırlılığı, kanonik metinlere ve ana akım teknolojilere odaklanması nedeniyle çevresel (peripheral) formları kapsam dışı bırakmasıdır. Gelecek çalışmalar bu alanlara yönelerek daha kapsamlı bir değerlendirme sunabilir. Uygulamalı çıkarımlar (Practical implications): Uygulayıcılar, VR’ın gerçekliği simüle eden bir araç olarak algılanmasının kültürel ve toplumsal beklentiler tarafından nasıl şekillendiğini anlamaktan fayda sağlayabilirler. Özgünlük/değer (Originality/value): Bu çalışma, VR’ı gerçekliğin simülasyonu toposu perspektifinden ele alan ilk araştırmadır ve onu daha önceki çalışmalarda nadiren dikkate alınan tarihsel bir süreklilik içinde konumlandırmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hüsmen, A. H., Dikmen, E. Ş. (2026). “The Simulation of Reality” as a Media Topos: Tracing the Historical Trajectory of VR. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, Issue: 51, 25–43. https://doi.org/10.31123/akil.1789511

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (59)

  1. Bown, J., White, E., & Boopalan, A. (2017). Looking for the Ultimate Display. In J. Gackenbach & J. Bown (Eds.), Boundaries of Self and Reality Online (pp. 239–259). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804157-4.00012-8
  2. Brooker, W. (2009). Camera-Eye, CG-Eye: Videogames and the “Cinematic.” Cinema Journal, 122–128.
  3. Calculus. (1995, February). No Deposit Buy Now Pay Later. Edge (UK Edition). https://archive.org/details/Edge_Gaming/Edge%20Gaming%20Magazine%20017/page/42/mode/2up?q=cybermaxx
  4. Campbell-Kelly, M., Aspray, W. F., Yost, J. R., Tinn, H., & Con Díaz, G. (2014). Computer: A history of the information machine (3rd ed.). Westview Press.
  5. Card, J. (1953). The Future of the Movies. Journal of the University Film Producers Association, 6(1), 4–8.
  6. Chesher, C. (1994). Colonizing Virtual Reality: Construction of the Discourse of Virtual Reality. Cultronix, 1(1), 1984–1992.
  7. Columbus Dispatch. (1960). See it! Hear it! Smell it! In Columbus Dispatch.
  8. Edge. (2013, June). The Real Thing. Edge, 74–81.
  9. Electronic Gaming Monthly. (1993, August). EGM Express. Electronic Gaming Monthly, 54–56. https://archive.org/details/ElectronicGamingMonthly_201902Electronic%20Gaming%20Monthly%20Issue%20049%20%28August%201993%29/page/n55/mode/2up
  10. Evans, L. (2019). The Re-Emergence of Virtual Reality. Routledge.
  11. Fisher, S. S. (2016). The NASA Ames VIEWlab Project—A Brief History. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 25(4), 339–348. https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00277
  12. Forte. (1996, February). VFX1 Headgear. PC Gamer, 1. https://archive.org/details/UneditedPCGamer_marktrade/PC_Gamer_021u/
  13. Gamereactor. (2012). E3 12: John Carmack’s VR Presentation. In YouTube. https://youtu.be/kw-DlWwlXHo?si=06TjLEKnCONvgK45
  14. Ganahl, S. (2016). From Media Archaeology to Media Genealogy: An Interview with Erkki Huhtamo. Le Foucaldien, 2(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.16995/lefou.17
  15. Grau, O. (1999). Into the Belly of the Image: Historical Aspects of Virtual Reality. Leonardo, 32(5), 365–371.
  16. Grau, O. (2002). Virtual Art. The MIT Press.
  17. Gunning, T. (1986). The Cinema of Attraction: Early Film, Its Spectator, and the Avant-Garde. Wide Angle, 8(3–4), 63–70.
  18. Harley, D. (2019). Palmer Luckey and the rise of contemporary virtual reality. Convergence, 26(5–6), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856519860237
  19. Hefele, J., R. (1953). I saw Cinerama. Movie Makers, 28(1), 13.
  20. Heilig, M. L. (1960). U.S. Patent No. 2,955,156. United States Patent Office.
  21. Heilig, M. L. (1962). U.S. Patent No. 3,050,870. United States Patent Office.
  22. Heilig, M. L. (1992). EL Cine del Futuro: The Cinema of the Future. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(3), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1992.1.3.279
  23. Holmes, O. W. (1864). Soundings from the Atlantic. Ticknor and Fields. https://archive.org/details/soundingsfromatl00holm/page/170/mode/2up?q=exaltation
  24. Horsman, M. (1995, March 17). Virtuality ties up Atari deal. Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/virtuality-ties-up-atari-deal-1611632.html
  25. Huhtamo, E. (2011). Dismantling the Fairy Engine Media Archeology as Topos Study. In E. Huhtamo & J. Parikka (Eds.), Media Archaeology (pp. 27–47). University of California Press.
  26. Huhtamo, E. (2013). Illusions in Motion. The MIT Press.
  27. Jasanoff, S. (2015). Future Imperfect: Science, Technology, and the Imaginations of Modernity. In S. Jasanoff & S.-H. Kim (Eds.), Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. University of Chicago Press.
  28. Jeon, C. (2015). The Virtual Flier: The Link Trainer, Flight Simulation, and Pilot Identity. Technology and Culture, 56(1), 28–53.
  29. Kinolibrary. (2017). 1990s Jaron Lanier Presents VPL Virtual Reality Glove. In Kinolibrary.
  30. Kool, H. (2016). The Ethics of Immersive Journalism: A rhetorical analysis of news storytelling with virtual reality. Intersect: The Stanford Journal of Science, Technology and Society, 9(3), 1–11.
  31. Krueger, M. W. (1991). W Industries. In B. Delaney (Ed.), Virtual Reality 1.0 – The 90’s: The Birth of VR in the pages of CyberEdge (pp. 61–62).
  32. Lanier, Jaron. (2018). Dawn of the new everything: Encounters with reality and virtual reality. Picador/Henry Holt and Company.
  33. LaValle, S. Michael. (2023). Virtual reality. Cambridge University Press.
  34. Link, E. A. (1931). U.S. Patent No. 1,825,462. United States Patent Office.
  35. Lowood, H. (2016). Game Engine. In Debugging Game History (pp. 203–210). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10087.003.0027
  36. Mascia, S. (2020). Fiat Looks at the Panoramic Cinema in the Sixties. International Panorama Council Journal, 4, 66–71.
  37. Meta. (2014). Facebook to Acquire Oculus. https://about.fb.com/news/2014/03/facebook-to-acquire-oculus/
  38. Meta Quest. (2012). Oculus Rift: Step into the Game. YouTube. https://youtu.be/DhcOMOWRMnA?si=5PY6_vF_mPSWSJEM
  39. Myers, B. A. (1998). A brief history of human-computer interaction technology. Interactions, 5(2), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1145/274430.274436
  40. Nakamura, L. (2020). Feeling good about feeling bad: Virtuous virtual reality and the automation of racial empathy. Journal of Visual Culture, 19(1), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470412920906259
  41. Nedelcu, M. (2013). Expanded Image Spaces. From Panoramic Image to Virtual Reality, Through Cinema. Close Up: Film and Media Studies, 44–53.
  42. Nintendo. (1995). I came from a new dimension a third dimension, a good dimension. https://archive.org/details/nintendo-virtual-boy-pamphlet/mode/2up
  43. Oculus. (2012, August 1). Oculus Rift: Step Into the Game. Kickstarter. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-step-into-the-game/description
  44. Page, R. L. (2000). Brief History of Flight Simulation. SimTecT 2000 Proc.11–17.
  45. Paul, P. S., Goon, S., & Bhattacharya, A. (2012). History and Comparative Study of Modern Game Engines. International Journal of Advanced Computer and Mathematical Sciences, 3(2), 245–249.
  46. Reeves, H. (1999). This is Cinerama. 11(1), 85–97.
  47. Rheingold, H. (1991). Virtual Reality. Summit Books.
  48. Rose, M. (2018). The immersive turn: Hype and hope in the emergence of virtual reality as a nonfiction platform. Studies in Documentary Film, 12(2), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/17503280.2018.1496055
  49. Sherman, W. R., & Craig, A. B. (2019). Understanding virtual reality: Interface, application, and design. Morgan Kaufmann.
  50. Spence, C. (2020). Scent and the Cinema. I-Perception, 11(6). https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669520969710
  51. Steuer, J. (1992). Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.x
  52. Stone, R. J. (1993). Virtual reality: Toys or tools of the trade? Aslib Proceedings, 45(6), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb051321
  53. StrasselStaff, K. A. (1997, March 13). Success Has Been Virtual for Many VR Companies. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB858211304171708000
  54. Sutherland, I. E. (1965). The Ultimate Display. Proceedings of IFIP Congress, 506–508.
  55. Sutherland, I. E. (1968). A head-mounted three dimensional display. Proceedings of the December 9-11, 1968, Fall Joint Computer Conference, Part I on - AFIPS ’68 (Fall, Part I), 757. https://doi.org/10.1145/1476589.1476686
  56. Taboada, J. A. F. (2020). The Search for the “View of the Totality”: From the First Panoramic Landscapes to Virtual Reality. In Connettere - Un Dısegno Per Annodare E Tessere · Connectıng - Drawıng For Weavıng Relatıonshıps. https://doi.org/10.3280/oa-548.203
  57. TED. (2015). Chris Milk: How virtual reality can create the ultimate empathy machine. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXHil1TPxvA&t=323s
  58. Wardyga, B. J. (2023). The video games textbook: History, business, technology. CRC Press.
  59. Zone, R. (2007). Stereoscopic Cinema and the Origins of 3-D Film, 1838-1952. University Press of Kentucky.