“From Frankenstein to the Visible Human Project, the body is continually reinterpreted as a limit to what it means to be human.” Discuss critically.
Typing the line ‘What it means to be human’ into the Google search engine yields a plethora of results, as most Google searches do. On the top of the list however is a religious database whose entry on the topic of what it means to be human focuses on utilising those tools which the “creator” has bestowed upon us and vilifying any form of technology that may aid in altering the “natural” function of the human being[1]. The significance of this is apparent as it was originally through religious point of view that humankind had a mode through which to understand the human body and what it might mean to be human. Of course with the advent and acceptance of science came a change in humankind’s perspective of the body and the specifics of anatomy. With the emergence of technology as central to a vast majority of the human population, critical literature that seeks to understand and theorise its (technology’s) importance to our functioning has become abundant. Much of the literature included in this webliography concludes with the notion that technology has become central to who we are and what we are.
Sterlac (1994) Sterlac. http://www.stelarc.va.com.au/ (accessed 25/08/08)
The home page of Sterlac, a somewhat radical Australian artist, provides a space that serves to display his work and ideas that centre on the combination of the human body and such technologies as “medical instruments, prosthetics, robotics, Virtual Reality systems and the Internet”[2]. Although not maintained by the artist himself, the site is comprehensive and forward about how the artist envisages the current and future roles/functions of the human body. From the homepage of Sterlac’s site where the words ‘THE BODY IS OBSOLETE’ flash on screen, a user can navigate to various summaries of experiments and ideologies held by the artist. For example selecting the link ‘Obsolete Body’ a small paragraph articulates notions of the body as technophobic and ill-designed to cope with malfunctions and the “new extraterrestrial environment”[3]. Through Sterlac’s visions of radical post-humanism we are presented with a view that impresses upon us the weakness of the body and the need to embrace the possibility of immortality through technological modification.
Vita-More, Natasha (2005) “The New [human] Genre – Primo Posthuman”. http://www.natasha.cc/paper.htm (accessed 25/08/08)
Vita-More’s article situates the body or the human form as one of the principal subjects throughout art history and it is through this medium of art that she looks at prospects for the evolution of the human body. Vita-More suggests that so far there have been three dominant expressions of the human body in art; “the classical image, the cyborg, and the transcendental entity”, and with these comes a progression in the concept of the human body. The reader is then presented with the purpose of her article – “I suggest a fourth approach to the artistic search for a new image, founded on scientific probability and inspired by technological prowess.” Vita-More then uses a discourse of technological design to describe the “Primo-Posthuman” for her reader. The figure of the Primo-Posthuman relies on a change in human perspective or an embracing of a different human nature and suggests that through collaboration, an artistic approach to the seemingly inevitable Posthuman revolution can be achieved. A table included at the end of the article offers a contrast between the human body and the “21st Century Primo Prototype” revealing an undoubtedly optimistic look at the future of the human body.
Taylor, T.L (2002) “Living Digitally: Embodiment in Virtual Worlds”. http://www.itu.dk/~tltaylor/papers/Taylor-LivingDigitally.pdf (accessed 23/08/08)
Taylor’s article makes a case for the avatar – a digital body that inhabits online, virtual worlds. Through interviews with online participants Taylor has been able to gauge some understanding of what ‘living digitally’ entails and the potentials it offers a user. Those functions that are largely considered traits of the physical world such as presence, social life, communication, socialisation and sexuality are all examined. Of particular interest (to myself) was the idea of the hybrid avatar. Here the human head can be supplemented with that of an animal’s if a user so desires and for some this has the effect of making them feel far more comfortable in engaging socially than if they were to have a “normal” human head. Limitations of the avatar body are also explored and can manifest in the form of inadequate software design which prevent a full range of functions. Taylor also points out that virtual worlds will often “reflect deep links with particular worldviews and value systems”[4] and therefore they are not suited to all persons.
Thomas, Angela (2004) “Digital Literacies of the Cybergirl”. http://www.wwwords.co.uk/pdf/viewpdf.asp?j=elea&vol=1&issue=3&year=2004&article=3_Thomas_ELEA_1_3_web&id=203.24.97.5 (accessed 25/08/08)
The initial part of Angela Thomas’ article uses the theories of Lacan, Foucault and Freud to situate the body as a product of linguistic discourse and ideas about the way the self can be viewed as the “other” in a mythical and fantastical sense. Such contextualising of the body then proceeds to correspond with her findings of interviews with teenagers (mostly girls) in an online chat forum and the association of online identity and self. What she suggests is that through the careful selection of language use, specific personas can be generated purely through words, as she says, “To not speak is to not have a visible presence in this context.”[5] Thomas also considers the use of avatars by the teenagers. Of most interest is the way that the girl’s (and again she refers back to those ideas she initiated in the beginning of her paper) self identify with the digital bodies they have created. The avatars appeared to allow a safe and private tool with which they could perform fantasies of the sort they cannot or do not want to perform ‘in the real world’.
Fausto-Sterling, Anne (1999) “Sexing the Body: How Biologists Construct Human Sexuality” http://www.symposion.com/ijt/gilbert/sterling.htm (accessed 28/08/08)
The premise of this article leans on the highly problematic and controversial employment of dualisms when trying to understand human sexuality, in particular the nature/nurture and real/constructed dichotomies. Discussing ideas explored by well known feminists such as Judith Butler and Emily Grosz, Fausto-Sterling articulates the problems that continually arise when aiming to isolate the body from a specific gender – thus, the body becomes a site of debate and confusion for modern thought on where our sexuality might originate or develop. Quoting from Butler the author’s main argument can be summarised as such; “we must look at the body as a system that simultaneously produces and is produced by social meanings, just as any biological organism always results from the combined and simultaneous actions of nature and nurture.” And it is with caution that we continue to understand and define the body, avoiding categories that seek to condense the complexities of anatomy and self.
As previously stated, these online sources lay their central claim in the rapidly consuming importance of technology and corporal developments and understanding. The last article however is an attempt to demonstrate the way philosophical perspectives and contentions are still very much bound up in our perception of the bodies of the self and others. The sources attempt to convey a variety of interpretations of the body, mainly through modes of present and future thought.
[1] “One big error that can never be allowed is that of a primary sacrifice. For example, in our day, scientists, out of pride try to play God, and create test tube babies.” Sistare, John (1999) “What It Means To Be Human!” http://www.cfpeople.org/SeminarianWritings/Sem006.html (accessed 25/08/08)
[2] Sterlac (1994) Sterlac. http://www.stelarc.va.com.au/biog/biog.html (25/08/08)
[3] Sterlac (1994) Sterlac. http://www.stelarc.va.com.au/obsolete/obsolete.html (25/08/08)
[4] Taylor, p. 58
[5]Thomas, p. 366
No comments:
Post a Comment