This is quite interesting have a look... Cyborgs in the Cinema. I was researching stuff about cyborgs and came across this. The site shows all different films which have a 'creator' and the 'created.' "Cyborgs are already among us. From the bionic to the bizarre, man/machine hybrids have been part of Hollywood’s repertoire for over 40 years. And as our engineering technology improves, particularly in the CGI part of Hollywood, so, too, does the quality and believability of the new cyborgs gracing our movie theaters."(online schools, 2009) CHECK IT OUT!!!!!!!
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
webliography
3. ‘The machine/organism relationships are obsolete, unnecessary’ writes Haraway. In what ways have our relations to machines been theorised?
Exploring the positions defining what is mechanical and what is organic is a good way to start answering this question. Haraway is proposing that something that once was described as a “machine/organism relationship” has changed or ceased to exist, such that the phrase is no longer useful, and the first task is to report on the ways that this may have happened. Max More, responding to the statement “man and machine are diametric opposites”, provides a useful account of this process.
The thesis of his article “Beyond the Machine” is that humans can and should extend their control of consciousness and of self (what More designates as 'humanity'), and that this process is contingent on recognising our mechanical origins and contrivance. He begins be describing the more obvious flaws in the opposing position, in which humans are endowed of some property, substance or force that fundamentally differentiates the human from the mechanical: that everything of the physical world is comprised of the same stuff, that there is no evidence for the existence of some vital force, that humans have created machines that appear to behave increasingly like humans, and that humans are demonstrably the incredibly complex sum of their mechanical parts.
The point here is not to devalue human complexity and creativity, but to force our acknowledgement that “whether a creature or an organ is made of carbon-based organic material, or of silicon or other inorganic materials does not matter. What is important is the complexity of the result: is the structure able to learn, to self-modify, to respond dynamically to changing input?”. More does not propose that humans are machines. However, he does maintain that discrete biological systems are. So, because humans are made from mechanical (biological) components, and yet “we think of ourselves as free, responsible, moral, rational beings”, More proposes that other systems may cease to be 'machine' at some point of complexity.
With these arguments in mind, and thinking of the way 'organic' and 'machine' can be defined and explored, we can take a closer look at some of the ways the relationship between these two categories is theorised.
One approach looks at the psychological and neurological implications of human relationships with machines. Professor Susan Greenfield, a neuroscientist at Oxford University has written about this with a particular emphasis on the way identity is generated, and some of her findings are summarised in an approachable article written for the online edition of the UK's Daily Mail newspaper.
Although Greenfield adopts an alarmist tone in this article, the dramatised conclusions (in which human identity is erased, “neuro-chip technology” dictates our every thought, and crying for loved ones is somehow lost to the past) don't decrease the validity of her evidence. Which is, briefly, that “electronic devices and pharmaceutical drugs all have an impact on the micro-cellular structure and complex biochemistry of our brains.” She describes the ways that neuroplasticity responds to machine interaction, and explores the changing boundaries of individuality as personal information and meaningful experience moves online. Although her arguments don't hold water, theorising psychology and identity as a machine/human relationship does.
The Nobel Laureate Herbert Simon provides an account of literary theory that reads almost as the inverse of Greenfield's article. Published online in five parts, “Literary Criticism: A Cognitive Approach” proposes a structuralist approach to meaning whereby rather than human psychology being reshaped by interactions with machines, 'human' is a paradigm applied to machine psychology to produce a particular textual syntagm (from part five):
Another way of theorising the organic/human relationship is to look at the spaces in which we move and the ways that we negotiate them. In his summary and review of Mark Nunes' book Cyberspaces of Everyday Life, Paul Youngman comments that “we have come to accept the foregrounded nature of the network in everyday life” and that “a great many of us in the Western world, not just students, are cyborg in nature.” This is a consequence, in Youngman's reading of Nunes, of the inception of “relational space”, where material and conceptual processes (infrastructure and superstructure) “produce the virtual topographies we navigate in our everyday (lived) existence.” This is a vision of true obsolescence, where the machine/organism interface cedes all relevance to the cyborgs that traverse it.
The last resource that I have chosen deals with the way that ethics might be able to account for machine/human relations by applying what is called the 'capabilities approach'. Extending a theory that was first usually applied to comparative studies of international development, Mark Coeckelbergh proposes that ethical judgements about freedom or equality should be based on the things that persons can actually do, not on supposedly natural or intrinsic human characteristics. He says that assessing capabilities “allows us to talk at a sufficiently high level of abstraction and organisation, thus avoiding atomistic and reductionist views of humans” and, earlier, that “technology is not a mere ‘condition’ for human being in the sense of a means that can be used to achieve human ends; rather, human existence is already a human-technological existence.” By avoiding an “instrumentalist” view of technology in this way, Coeckelbergh says we can make more consistent and helpful ethical decisions.
Exploring the positions defining what is mechanical and what is organic is a good way to start answering this question. Haraway is proposing that something that once was described as a “machine/organism relationship” has changed or ceased to exist, such that the phrase is no longer useful, and the first task is to report on the ways that this may have happened. Max More, responding to the statement “man and machine are diametric opposites”, provides a useful account of this process.
The thesis of his article “Beyond the Machine” is that humans can and should extend their control of consciousness and of self (what More designates as 'humanity'), and that this process is contingent on recognising our mechanical origins and contrivance. He begins be describing the more obvious flaws in the opposing position, in which humans are endowed of some property, substance or force that fundamentally differentiates the human from the mechanical: that everything of the physical world is comprised of the same stuff, that there is no evidence for the existence of some vital force, that humans have created machines that appear to behave increasingly like humans, and that humans are demonstrably the incredibly complex sum of their mechanical parts.
The point here is not to devalue human complexity and creativity, but to force our acknowledgement that “whether a creature or an organ is made of carbon-based organic material, or of silicon or other inorganic materials does not matter. What is important is the complexity of the result: is the structure able to learn, to self-modify, to respond dynamically to changing input?”. More does not propose that humans are machines. However, he does maintain that discrete biological systems are. So, because humans are made from mechanical (biological) components, and yet “we think of ourselves as free, responsible, moral, rational beings”, More proposes that other systems may cease to be 'machine' at some point of complexity.
With these arguments in mind, and thinking of the way 'organic' and 'machine' can be defined and explored, we can take a closer look at some of the ways the relationship between these two categories is theorised.
One approach looks at the psychological and neurological implications of human relationships with machines. Professor Susan Greenfield, a neuroscientist at Oxford University has written about this with a particular emphasis on the way identity is generated, and some of her findings are summarised in an approachable article written for the online edition of the UK's Daily Mail newspaper.
Although Greenfield adopts an alarmist tone in this article, the dramatised conclusions (in which human identity is erased, “neuro-chip technology” dictates our every thought, and crying for loved ones is somehow lost to the past) don't decrease the validity of her evidence. Which is, briefly, that “electronic devices and pharmaceutical drugs all have an impact on the micro-cellular structure and complex biochemistry of our brains.” She describes the ways that neuroplasticity responds to machine interaction, and explores the changing boundaries of individuality as personal information and meaningful experience moves online. Although her arguments don't hold water, theorising psychology and identity as a machine/human relationship does.
The Nobel Laureate Herbert Simon provides an account of literary theory that reads almost as the inverse of Greenfield's article. Published online in five parts, “Literary Criticism: A Cognitive Approach” proposes a structuralist approach to meaning whereby rather than human psychology being reshaped by interactions with machines, 'human' is a paradigm applied to machine psychology to produce a particular textual syntagm (from part five):
Neurons or symbols, they are simply patterns. And the patterns have meanings because they can refer (point) to each other and especially because some of them can denote (through perceptual tests of the kind I described earlier) things, relations, and events outside the head.Building on this interpretation of meaning and of texts, Herbert theorises that our relationships with machines can help us explore our own mechanical consciousness and that this is fertile ground for a new field of literary criticism. Simon's article was the focus piece for an entire issue of the Stanford Humanities Review, so there is extensive response to and exploration of this idea on the website, for example N. Katherine Hayles' response “the embodiment of meaning”.
Another way of theorising the organic/human relationship is to look at the spaces in which we move and the ways that we negotiate them. In his summary and review of Mark Nunes' book Cyberspaces of Everyday Life, Paul Youngman comments that “we have come to accept the foregrounded nature of the network in everyday life” and that “a great many of us in the Western world, not just students, are cyborg in nature.” This is a consequence, in Youngman's reading of Nunes, of the inception of “relational space”, where material and conceptual processes (infrastructure and superstructure) “produce the virtual topographies we navigate in our everyday (lived) existence.” This is a vision of true obsolescence, where the machine/organism interface cedes all relevance to the cyborgs that traverse it.
The last resource that I have chosen deals with the way that ethics might be able to account for machine/human relations by applying what is called the 'capabilities approach'. Extending a theory that was first usually applied to comparative studies of international development, Mark Coeckelbergh proposes that ethical judgements about freedom or equality should be based on the things that persons can actually do, not on supposedly natural or intrinsic human characteristics. He says that assessing capabilities “allows us to talk at a sufficiently high level of abstraction and organisation, thus avoiding atomistic and reductionist views of humans” and, earlier, that “technology is not a mere ‘condition’ for human being in the sense of a means that can be used to achieve human ends; rather, human existence is already a human-technological existence.” By avoiding an “instrumentalist” view of technology in this way, Coeckelbergh says we can make more consistent and helpful ethical decisions.
Adbusters summary and questions for the tute group
Adbusters is a website opposed to consumerism, marketing and corporate influence.
It has a variety of content, in standard format of presentation, click, subscribe:
* Magazine of various submissions, articles, opinion pieces, art and poetry. Some emotive, some research-based. Some excerpts available for free, subscribe and pay for the rest.
* Articles on side: calls for sexual liberation, critiques on gender inequality, “consumerism is the new patriarchy. the beauty industry is the beast,” criticism of clicktivism (online activism) as being watered down in pursuit of list quantity, experiences of economics students and professors.
* Links to running campaigns, eg. buy nothing day.
* Products for sale - blackspot shoes, remotes for turning off public TVs
It proposes a variety of alternative options:
* buy more ethically (grassroots capitalism)
* curriculum change in universities (education)
* true-cost pricing (regulation)
* buy nothing for a day (anti-consumerist separatism)
* community engagement (word of mouth)
* graffiti/blocking of advertising (civil disobedience)
AB uncritically embeds itself in the narrative of other cultural revolutions such as feminism and civil rights, using the tools of mass media and marketing, in order to reach its audience. It claims to be changing the way information flows, but is arguably not actually providing content in an innovative way.
Questions for this weeks tute (co-developed with Jeremy Hill):
* What is the aim of culture jamming?
* Nealon contends that pranking neglects the importance of reinscribing oppositions into a larger textual field, and perpetuates the rhetorical binary. Do you agree?
* Which of the adbusters campaigns did you think was most effective?
* AB works on a pretty recognizable distribution and content production model. So what, if anything, are they changing?
* Do viewers and distributors of pranks, alternative media and parody actually want change, or is it just entertaining?
* Can we compare these pranksters to comedians like The Chaser's Craig Reucastle, Gruen Transfer's Wil Anderson and The Comedy Channel's Jon Stewart?
* Skaggs:
* Skaggs: “You’re already being pranked everyday. If you think I’m the prankster, you are sadly mistaken ”
It has a variety of content, in standard format of presentation, click, subscribe:
* Magazine of various submissions, articles, opinion pieces, art and poetry. Some emotive, some research-based. Some excerpts available for free, subscribe and pay for the rest.
* Articles on side: calls for sexual liberation, critiques on gender inequality, “consumerism is the new patriarchy. the beauty industry is the beast,” criticism of clicktivism (online activism) as being watered down in pursuit of list quantity, experiences of economics students and professors.
* Links to running campaigns, eg. buy nothing day.
* Products for sale - blackspot shoes, remotes for turning off public TVs
It proposes a variety of alternative options:
* buy more ethically (grassroots capitalism)
* curriculum change in universities (education)
* true-cost pricing (regulation)
* buy nothing for a day (anti-consumerist separatism)
* community engagement (word of mouth)
* graffiti/blocking of advertising (civil disobedience)
AB uncritically embeds itself in the narrative of other cultural revolutions such as feminism and civil rights, using the tools of mass media and marketing, in order to reach its audience. It claims to be changing the way information flows, but is arguably not actually providing content in an innovative way.
Questions for this weeks tute (co-developed with Jeremy Hill):
* What is the aim of culture jamming?
Does pranking work to achieve these aims?
* Nealon contends that pranking neglects the importance of reinscribing oppositions into a larger textual field, and perpetuates the rhetorical binary. Do you agree?
Can you imagine an effective form of anti-consumerism resistance?
* Which of the adbusters campaigns did you think was most effective?
Eg digital detox week, buy nothing day
* AB works on a pretty recognizable distribution and content production model. So what, if anything, are they changing?
* Do viewers and distributors of pranks, alternative media and parody actually want change, or is it just entertaining?
* Can we compare these pranksters to comedians like The Chaser's Craig Reucastle, Gruen Transfer's Wil Anderson and The Comedy Channel's Jon Stewart?
* Skaggs:
- hook: do the performance
- line: document the miscommunication
- sinker: talk about the serious issues underlying the performance
How are pranksters reliant on the main stream media?
Does this lessen the impact/value/project of their pranks?
* Skaggs: “You’re already being pranked everyday. If you think I’m the prankster, you are sadly mistaken ”
Do people feel that they are being pranked (taken advantage of, hoodwinked, folded) everyday?
Is the impact of mainstream media and advertising different to that of a hoax?
Collaborative Post: Pranking Rhetoric
Christine HaroldDefinitions and key terms
Sabotage, from “Sabot” or clog, to clog the machine with clogs, to disrupt an employer’s property, by dissatisfied workers. p190 “However, in the word’s second sense, as a launching tube, sabotage also implies a channeling, or a transmission of energy or resources through a conduit.” p197
“Culture jamming is usually described as a kind of “glutting” of the system; it is an amping up of contradictory rhetorical messages in an effort to engender a qualitative change.” p192
“Prank, in this sense, is an augmentation of dominant modes of communication that interrupts their conventional patterns. In the second alternative sense, a prank is a wrinkle, or a fold. Like a fold, a prank can render a qualitative change by turning and doubling a material or text.” p196
Response
In this article, Christine Harold does a good job of defining the terms of the genre of “pranking”, and also elaborates on the features of pranking to construct (or appropriate) a rhetorical form thereof. She distinguishes in her introduction between parody and prank, remarking that “parody becomes one of many social codes” (p191) and that “whereas parodists attempt to change things in the name of a presupposed value, comedians diagnose a specific situation, and try something to see what responses they can provoke.” (p194) To assist with the dissection of these rhetorics, Harold also refers to the theoretical conversation between Deleuze and Foucault, in which they conceive of a shift in late capitalist societies from “disciplinarity to control” (p193) and Harold suggests that the corresponding responses to this shift are from sabotage to appropriation.
So what is the difference? My understanding is that sabotage (and this includes simple parody in this genre of resistance) is didactic; that it tries to teach explicit lessons to its supposedly ignorant audience. Part of the motivation is revenge, part is revolution, but ultimately the intent is to bring about a state of knowing in the audience that will undermine sources of discipline. On the other hand, appropriation is the realm of the prankster or comedian. In this mode, the intent is playful rather than spiteful. The result is one in which mass mediated communication (and sources of control) are redirected and “folded” (p196) as an ends of itself:
“The mass-mediated pranks and hoaxes discussed here do not oppose traditional notions of rhetoric, but they do repattern them in interesting ways.” p207This reflexive aspect of pranking is the central conflict that Harold is exploring. That is, the fact that for these mass-mediated pranks to have their intended effect, they do have to take place within the medium, that is, within an existing scheme of mass distributed information that in turn, enforces the types of control that Deleuze is identifying.
Harold does acknowledge that “culture jamming should not be seen as supplanting other, more traditional modes of engagement” (p209). However, I’m still not sure that pranking and culture jamming does much more than entertain a mass-mediated audience, given that it is so reliant on these forms of distribution. The rhetoric may well offer some folding and a destabilising voice (seeing as we’re talking theorists, this brings to mind Derrida’s notion of ‘play’ and the ‘centre’) but nonetheless, my thought is that modern media audiences are not so hoodwinked as the jammers want to make out. A pie in the face is entertaining, and I think people understand the motive of the BBB, but to some extent this is just so much a funny picture of a cat with some added fury.
This criticism is pretty glib, particularly seeing as “Capitalism sucks, but it’s the only game in town” as Adbusters puts it, and because the stated aim of pranking and culture jamming is to expose the patterns of mass media through by augmenting and hijacking those same patterns. To my mind, Joey Skaggs does this best. As a counterpart to the ‘cathouse’ prank that is mentioned in the article, he subsequently performed a ‘dog soup' prank that effectively exposed the shortcuts, amplification, and predictability of the mass media production line, without implying any conclusions at all. Perhaps this is how pranking can be most effective: by divorcing the hijack from any preachy ideological message, the audience can appreciate the absurdity of the pattern that has been hijacked, without being asked to swallow the red pill.
Links to the Pranks
Harold offers a variety of examples of pranks in her exploration of their rhetorical style and modus operandi. These examples vary in their complexity, the pranksters who are carrying them out and in their intended level of mass mediation, and I think in this respect there is a good range of rhetorical technique for analysis.
Adbusters
Harold mentions their straightforward parody ads taking off campaigns by Calvin Klein and others. The blackspot sneaker is a bit more involved, seeing as you can actually buy the parody product. Despite the stated target, it seems like the shoe is not in fact the type of product that Nike would produce; rather it is styled after canvas All-Stars. (And perhaps more appealing to Adbusters’ audience?)
Joey Skaggs
This fellow is a veteran prankster and performance artist. The prank that Harold mentions is Cathouse for Dogs, but another good one to read about is Kea So Joo a.k.a. Dog Meat Soup.
Rtmark and the Barbie Liberation Organisation
As Harold points out, Rtmark is a kind of clearing-house for pranks. They will help fund and organise pranks that are suggested by members, and in so doing make use of the idea of corporate “limited liability”.
Biotic Baking Brigade
Sorry, the original link is down for this one so I’ve linked to the wiki. You can see pies thrown in the face of “pompous people” here.
American Legacy Foundation
The Truth anti-smoking campaign; I think this website is worth checking out if only for the design.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
MORALITY IS DEAD (to me)
Here are some thoughts and questions on Kath Albury’s article...
I found the most shocking things in this article not to be revelations of kinky hairy sex, but rather casual omissions of facts like some people believe that sex should only be for procreation. Isn’t it shocking how many people such a simple statement excludes from the realms of ‘morality’ and condemns to the fires of hell? The same goes for the belief that masturbation is ‘immoral’. Mainstream porn and media is one thing, particularly in its one directional flow: certainly women are objectified and every second advertisement we see on TV is sexualised in some way, but we can’t just say “hey, I don’t think that sexy woman selling Cherry Ripes represents what I want to see in an ad for my favourite chocolate bar, so I’ll just make my own and put it on the TV, billboards and in magazines.” The internet, whilst not representing utopian possibility, allows for a more active involvement in what we consume, and if we so desire, produce and share. As we learnt, particularly from Jennicam, the internet poses tricky new (or new formulations of old) ethical problems. However, having read Kath Albury’s article, I find it hard to see how anyone, feminist, Marxist or otherwise, could be opposed to internet pornography. Anyone, that is, who is outside the blanket rules of morality. So- morals: in an age where people are racist, homophobic, sexist and condescending to people who enjoy a sexuality different to their own, should there be any place for morals? Do they facilitate othering? Or, like race, is it a concept we are idealistically better off without, considering we still have ethics?
“Of course, there are those who will argue that women in particular are not (and should not) consider themselves free to choose to enjoy pornography.” Who are these people? Are they extreme feminists like Andrea Dworkin who believe that women who participate in pornography are effectively prostitutes? Or simply people who believe that any representation of a woman’s sexuality, regardless of her wishes, is wrong because of the way that social trends have operated in the past? Are they the subscribers to Judeo-Christian morality? If a woman desires to participate in pornography, is it not anti-feminism for anyone to say that she should not, because of her gender?
Whether the ‘mainstream’ likes it or not, there are people out there who don’t have straightforward, heterosexual, procreative vaginal intercourse, and this is highlighted wonderfully in the article as people who had thought they were “the only one” find a community, and support if they need it. If sexuality is a private thing, should it not be a person’s private decision how they wish to express theirs, even if it is alone, homosexually or over the internet, as ‘kinkily’ as they like? What gives anybody the right to condemn another for their sexual preference, as long as it is not harming another? Does this bring us back to morals (again)?
What happens to gender and race in SF?
Sex, Work and Motherhood: The Impossible Triangle
As indicated by the title, The Impossible Triangle notes the oft impossible nature of combining these three components of life, facilitated by a society that does not provide adequate facilities for doing so, and notes that the poor, single, recently divorced, gay parents or members of any other minority groups are even more disadvantaged. The article then looks at manifestations of this in literature, beginning with film and then more specifically science fiction literature and film. It notes early utopian stories in which women are “no longer oppressed by their biological and nurturing functions" (p. 419). Important also were representations of women’s sexual freedom, including lesbian and multiple partners, and of women as being equal to and working alongside men. Following backlashes to feminism and challenging of rights to abortion, feminist science fiction turned dystopian and arguably “postmodern” (p. 420), acting as a warning against patriarchal oppression of women. A vast array of films are analysed from a feminist perspective, giving weight to the article.
Written by well-known feminist academic, author and Ph.D. E. Ann Kaplan, the nature, intention and authority of the article is clear.
The Space Machine: Baraka and Science Fiction
Dissecting blackness in science fiction, The Space Machine begins by questioning the nature of the relationship between space and race, and also noting the imaginative potential of science fiction for influencing real world change. The article takes the stance of examining particularly ‘black science fiction’, a subgenre in itself, as well as the white dominated beginnings of science fiction, reminiscent of colonial narratives with the difference being that the white “space cowboys" (p. 335) were exploring and claiming for themselves the frontier of space. This similarity to colonial narrative can be seen again as the white astronauts, champions of the “wonders of science” (p. 335), do battle with “nasty” (p. 335) space natives. The article also explores ‘black music’ as a literary device in black science fiction, one that has traditionally “reconfigured social space” (p.336) and so should have the potential to do so in science fiction as well.
Written by Paul Youngquist, an associate professor of English at The Pennsylvania State University, and a writer of “science fiction, black music and British romanticism” (p. 333) the reader is told at the beginning of the article, the article featured in African American Review, an established and esteemed site, in 2003. The ideas engaged with are nonetheless current and the author speaks with authority as an academic and with the intention of engaging with connections between blackness, music, science fiction and real social space. A list of sources is provided.
Race, Science and a Novel: an Interdisciplinary Dialogue
This article analyses a science fiction book, Racists, by Kunal Basu, from four different academic perspectives: a feminist political philosopher, a microbiologist, a continental philosopher and a registered nurse. In the book, two scientists, one black and one white, compete against each other to prove the superiority of their race. The article deals with the concept of “racial genealogy" (p. 228) in science fiction, and also the capacity for this in real life, with reference to racial influence on medical research. The authors recognise the capacity of science fiction to provoke discussion in different fields, from healthcare and biology to feminism and philosophy, always drawing parallels and using real-life examples in a thorough discussion.
Reviewing the book from which this article takes its name, it deals with the presence and meaning of blackness and science fiction film. An engaging review, it details the provocative nature of the book in its analysis of well known and also little before critically explored film, and notes that whilst the book does not offer new theory, analysis stems from “canonical African-American" (p. 271) academia. The first source in this webliography to engage with the trope of ‘blood’ in science fiction, particularly with the idea of white blood being pure and black being deviant, it also analyses “interracial dynamics” (p. 272) and oscillating race relations in contemporary society. The article denotes many useful frameworks provided by the book with which to analyse the representation of race in film. It seems a very different approach from the one taken by Baraka toward analysing blackness in science fiction was taken here, however neither are rendered invalid by these extreme differences.
Afro-Future Females: Black Writers Chart Science Fiction’s Newest New-Wave Trajectory/ Feminist Philosophy and Science Fiction: Utopias and Dystopias/ Bodies of Tomorrow: Technology, Subjectivity, Science Fiction/ Galactic Suburbia: Recovering Women’s Science Fiction
This review was particularly rich in information as it looks at four different scholarly texts all engaging with science fiction from a feminist perspective, but with a variety of different approaches. The relevance and interconnectedness between feminist philosophy, biology and technology is discussed and reflects well on Race, Science and a Novel in the authors’ multidisciplinary discussion of science fiction literature. Again the idea of gendered utopias and dystopias arises, as the article provides a strong argument that neither “feminism or SF has had its day" (p. 1011). The author notes the recurring idea that “the textual practices of reading and writing science fiction have been invested with great hope by feminists... [for] the liberatory possibilities offered” (p.1013) in all the books reviewed.
Published by international journal Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society in 2009, the article is current and was written by Dr Joan Haran, a researcher of social sciences. The material is relevant, and made more interesting for us by the fact the Joan is a blogger herself.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Gender and Race in Science-Fiction Films
1. Sybille Lammes, "Moving Science: Science, Gender and Science Fiction", The European Association for the Study of Science and Technology (March 1997)
Lammes' article focuses on the relationship between science and fiction, largely in regards to gender. She writes that it is important to see that gender is embedded in fiction film and television and thus that these representations should be taken seriously, rather than simply assuming that science is fact and fiction fancy. Audio-visual media is traditionally seen as being essentially male (through voyeurism and observation) and this tradition of gendering still exists in film and television today. Lammes writes of philosopher Sandra Harding's analysis of scientific metaphors of gender throughout history, in which "the female body is the passive locus of scrutiny". according to Harding, this idea of passivity associated with the female body can be traced back to Copernican theory, in which the Earth-centred universed metamorphosed into a sun-centred universe from the fifteenth century onwards. The female body and the passive Earth have been coupled ever since, from which evolved the idea of the environment and the woman, of "wild nature/the woman (having) to be tamed in man's struggle to control his fate". Lammes then examines two science fiction texts - Metropolis (1926-27) and The X-Files (1993-2002) - to illustrate the scientific scrutinising of bodies in audiovisual media, and in doing so further supports her claim that fiction does produce elements of scientific fact through the area of gender.
2. Fiona Barnett, "Race, Ethnicity and Diaspora in the Digital Age", Humanities, Arts, Science, and Technology Advanced Collaboratory (January 2010)
This website is a forum for people wanting to explore race, ethnicity and diaspora in cyberspace. It observes the ways in which these issues are presented in new technologies (the Internet, television and film etc) and how race and ethnicity are still "other" in these spaces (despite the fact that we believe we are moving forward to a "post-racial age"). The introduction describes how the issue of race is seen as a social construct, yet still affects individual identity, prejudices and social relations. Both the negative and positive aspects of these constructions have followed us into the cybersphere, with difference and individual opinion being celebrated but prejudices and methods of "othering" persevering as well.Barnett writes that we are "far from being post-racial, if that is even a plausible or desirable goal".
3.Mikhail Lyubansky, "The Racial Politics of Avatar (part 1)", Between the Lines: Perspectives on Race, Culture and Community (December 2009)
In his article, Lyubansky observes the ways in which the issues of race and (to a lesser extent) gender are portrayed in the 2010 science fiction movie Avatar. In part 1 of the article he makes a few points regarding race in the film, three of which I have listed below.
- That Jake Sully serves a vital role (to allow "us" - humans - to experience the world of Pandora with him
- That Jake is more than just a (white) outsider
- That the Na'vi rescue themselves, rather than being saved by a 'white saviour' in the form of Jake
This article assumes that the white male lead is generally still regarded as the norm in science fiction films - the level-headed lead character with whom the audience can relate - while those represented as a different race (the Na'vi) are unfamiliar and unknown. In regards to gender in sci-fi films, the white male of the future is more technologically driven, and it is generally up to the woman, she who is eternally in touch with the environment, to "bring him back down to earth"; to the desirable world of nature. This view is apparent in Avatar, and also The Fifth Element, in which both female lead characters are of an alien race, further emphasising their "otherness".
4. Michael Peterson, Laurie-Beth Clark and Lisa Nakamura, "I See You?": Gender and Disability in Avatar", FlowTV (February 2010)
This article is an observation of the representations of gender and disabillity in Avatar. In relation to gender, Peterson, Clark and Nakamura describe how although at the beginning of the movie Jake Sully is "hypermasculinised", he steadily becomes more "feminised" as the film goes on, with the help of the alien Neytiri and his closeness to nature. The "smokin' hot" Neytiri is a highly sexualised character; the article proclaims that James Cameron himself said in an interview that "Right from the beginning (he) said, 'She's got to have tits,' even though that makes no sense because her race aren't placental mammals". The feminism of the other main female roles in the film - Grace, the intelligent and savvy xenobotanist, and Trudy the butch tomboy helicopter pilot - is "narrow and generalised to the point of meaninglessness". The female characters represented in Avatar, this article says, are therefore still either reinforcing traditional sex roles or "progressive" in a very narrow-minded way.
5. Eloriane, "Final Paper Analysis of The Fifth Element", Gender Goggles (December 2009)
The writer of this article claims that Besson's The Fifth Element is supporting an anti-technology ideology. What is relevant to the topic question in this article, however, is the fact that the technology side of the future is represented by the ex-militant white male, Korbin Dallas, and the calm, 'romantic' side represented by the beautiful alien female Leeloo. (It is interesting to note the similarities of these representations to those of Avatar - ex-militant Jake Sully versus beautiful alien Neytiri.) By examining such aspects as camera angle and colour scheme, the writer show how the film endorses Leeloo's natural and peaceful way of thinking over Korbin's, which is 'cluttered' and sterile. Korbin gradually begins to identify with Leeloo's way of thinking as the film progresses. She also observes that sex is represented by the alien character. At the end of the film, as the article explains, Korbin has sex with Leeloo, symbolising him totally giving in to her philosophy (similarly to how Jake gave in to Neytiri's world).
Lammes' article focuses on the relationship between science and fiction, largely in regards to gender. She writes that it is important to see that gender is embedded in fiction film and television and thus that these representations should be taken seriously, rather than simply assuming that science is fact and fiction fancy. Audio-visual media is traditionally seen as being essentially male (through voyeurism and observation) and this tradition of gendering still exists in film and television today. Lammes writes of philosopher Sandra Harding's analysis of scientific metaphors of gender throughout history, in which "the female body is the passive locus of scrutiny". according to Harding, this idea of passivity associated with the female body can be traced back to Copernican theory, in which the Earth-centred universed metamorphosed into a sun-centred universe from the fifteenth century onwards. The female body and the passive Earth have been coupled ever since, from which evolved the idea of the environment and the woman, of "wild nature/the woman (having) to be tamed in man's struggle to control his fate". Lammes then examines two science fiction texts - Metropolis (1926-27) and The X-Files (1993-2002) - to illustrate the scientific scrutinising of bodies in audiovisual media, and in doing so further supports her claim that fiction does produce elements of scientific fact through the area of gender.
2. Fiona Barnett, "Race, Ethnicity and Diaspora in the Digital Age", Humanities, Arts, Science, and Technology Advanced Collaboratory (January 2010)
This website is a forum for people wanting to explore race, ethnicity and diaspora in cyberspace. It observes the ways in which these issues are presented in new technologies (the Internet, television and film etc) and how race and ethnicity are still "other" in these spaces (despite the fact that we believe we are moving forward to a "post-racial age"). The introduction describes how the issue of race is seen as a social construct, yet still affects individual identity, prejudices and social relations. Both the negative and positive aspects of these constructions have followed us into the cybersphere, with difference and individual opinion being celebrated but prejudices and methods of "othering" persevering as well.Barnett writes that we are "far from being post-racial, if that is even a plausible or desirable goal".
3.Mikhail Lyubansky, "The Racial Politics of Avatar (part 1)", Between the Lines: Perspectives on Race, Culture and Community (December 2009)
In his article, Lyubansky observes the ways in which the issues of race and (to a lesser extent) gender are portrayed in the 2010 science fiction movie Avatar. In part 1 of the article he makes a few points regarding race in the film, three of which I have listed below.
- That Jake Sully serves a vital role (to allow "us" - humans - to experience the world of Pandora with him
- That Jake is more than just a (white) outsider
- That the Na'vi rescue themselves, rather than being saved by a 'white saviour' in the form of Jake
This article assumes that the white male lead is generally still regarded as the norm in science fiction films - the level-headed lead character with whom the audience can relate - while those represented as a different race (the Na'vi) are unfamiliar and unknown. In regards to gender in sci-fi films, the white male of the future is more technologically driven, and it is generally up to the woman, she who is eternally in touch with the environment, to "bring him back down to earth"; to the desirable world of nature. This view is apparent in Avatar, and also The Fifth Element, in which both female lead characters are of an alien race, further emphasising their "otherness".
4. Michael Peterson, Laurie-Beth Clark and Lisa Nakamura, "I See You?": Gender and Disability in Avatar", FlowTV (February 2010)
This article is an observation of the representations of gender and disabillity in Avatar. In relation to gender, Peterson, Clark and Nakamura describe how although at the beginning of the movie Jake Sully is "hypermasculinised", he steadily becomes more "feminised" as the film goes on, with the help of the alien Neytiri and his closeness to nature. The "smokin' hot" Neytiri is a highly sexualised character; the article proclaims that James Cameron himself said in an interview that "Right from the beginning (he) said, 'She's got to have tits,' even though that makes no sense because her race aren't placental mammals". The feminism of the other main female roles in the film - Grace, the intelligent and savvy xenobotanist, and Trudy the butch tomboy helicopter pilot - is "narrow and generalised to the point of meaninglessness". The female characters represented in Avatar, this article says, are therefore still either reinforcing traditional sex roles or "progressive" in a very narrow-minded way.
5. Eloriane, "Final Paper Analysis of The Fifth Element", Gender Goggles (December 2009)
The writer of this article claims that Besson's The Fifth Element is supporting an anti-technology ideology. What is relevant to the topic question in this article, however, is the fact that the technology side of the future is represented by the ex-militant white male, Korbin Dallas, and the calm, 'romantic' side represented by the beautiful alien female Leeloo. (It is interesting to note the similarities of these representations to those of Avatar - ex-militant Jake Sully versus beautiful alien Neytiri.) By examining such aspects as camera angle and colour scheme, the writer show how the film endorses Leeloo's natural and peaceful way of thinking over Korbin's, which is 'cluttered' and sterile. Korbin gradually begins to identify with Leeloo's way of thinking as the film progresses. She also observes that sex is represented by the alien character. At the end of the film, as the article explains, Korbin has sex with Leeloo, symbolising him totally giving in to her philosophy (similarly to how Jake gave in to Neytiri's world).
Is porn ethical??
So, this week its my turn to do the tute presentation, and I got the article "The Ethics Of Porn On The Internet" by Kath Albury. I thought I'd start my discussion with a clip from YouTube that seemed pertinent to the topic, its just a bit of fun, its from a musical called Avenue Q, which is hilarious. The first 4 or so minutes of the clip is the bit I'm showing- this was the best quality one I could find. Enjoy :) The Internet is for Porn... just a warning, don't watch this around people who might be offended, and if you're watching it in a library, wear some headphones hehe
On to more serious matters!
In her article, Albury highlights the pro's and con's, shall we say, of Porn on the internet. I found her distinction between ethics and morals particularly helpful and insightful. Her classification of "moral" sex within the Judeo-Christian view, and her subsequent description of porn and the way that it contradicts every notion of morality according to this ideal was important I think. She says "Pornography depicts non-reproductive sex acts, performed for profit between two or more unmarried, and not necessarily heterosexual, partners. Not only do these images depict immoral sex- they incite masturbation, which may in itself be an immoral act."
My first question for the class: Is this a fair judgment of the morality of porn? Do you think that porn would be viewed differently in countries where a Judeo-Christian ideology is not the prevailing ideology- perhaps in a country that is predominantly Muslim?
Albury also discusses the feminist views of pornography a few times. Her first description of it "[porn] is part of a general social tendency for men to view women as sexualised objects, who are only valued for their ability to service men - physically and emotionally." creates a fascinating tension in her dialogue with her statement a few paragraphs later where she says "pornography has, until recently, been the only form of media where women have been seen to experience strong sexual desire and sexual pleasure." This dialogue of women being used, manipulated and objectified in the porn industry, whilst being liberated and allowed sexual freedom and control over their own bodies in the porn industry, creates a bit of confusion for the reader, as well as the public at large, I would say. There seems to be this juxtaposition of women's roles; on one hand women are being used and objectified, and on the other hand it puts them in a position of power, allowing them to have control over their sexual expression in the same way some men have had in history. I say some, because there are always exceptions to the rule, like gay men being able to express themselves publicly (which has only moved into the realms of social acceptability relatively recently in the big scheme of things) etc.
Next question: Do you think pornography liberates women and their freedom of sexual expression, or do you think it is more accurately seen as women being forced into men's sexual desires?
Albury discusses the communities surrounding the amateur porn industry quite extensively. I found the idea of them quite fascinating. It seems it has moved the sharing and viewing of porn out from under the bed (so to speak) and into the open. I was amazed by the fact that these people create friendships and discuss personal details of their lives (outside of sex) on there. And that the producers of the sites go out of their way to answer questions, put up useful links (other than links to other porn websites) and provide chat rooms and forums for these people to meet on was also pretty impressive.It makes the whole online porn industry seem a lot more human than we are lead to believe. That idea of human-ness and normal-ness in an industry that is plagued by so many preconceived ideas leads me to my next question.
Question 3: Albury puts it well when she quotes one of the websites "600 000 visitors every day can't be wrong". Is porn actually a very normal part of life, that we all pretend isn't happening? Or is it really the taboo topic that only a sparse minority choose to view?
Alas, I feel as if my post is getting excessively long, but I will just make a few more points.
Albury talks about socially acceptable sexual practices. She looks at the way that within the professional porn industry, all the women are late teens to early twenties, taut, toned and devoid of body hair. It does seem to be socially unacceptable to lust after hairy women, fat women and men, old women and men etc, but clearly, there are people who do, because websites specialising in those types of porn exist. It is argued so often that porn promotes a very limited perspective on sexual practice, but really, the amateur porn industry is allowing so many different people the chance to get their own preferences out there- if not themselves as well. Why must we view it all with such distaste? Perhaps this is societies way of screaming out that they feel like their sexual preferences and their sexuality is being repressed and that they want it to be more out there and out in the open.
A few closing questions:
Should we allow ourselves to make judgements on the acceptability of other peoples sexual preferences and practices? How far is too far with unusual choices? If we draw a line somewhere, then aren't we still discriminating? But, having said that, hairy women are one thing, but child pornography is a whole other matter. I can be open minded, but only to an extent. Unfortunately, I realise that where my open mindedness reaches its limit at child pornography, perhaps some other people reach theirs at amputees, or fat women and men, or any porn altogether. So, where do we draw the line? Or, alternatively, do we need to draw a line at all?
Is the trading of porn for money wrong? In what ways is it ok/not ok? Photographers sell pictures of nature, and people all the time, it has been argued that sex is just another part of life that deserves to be photographed and shared- what do you think?
There is so much more to say on this, but I think I should leave it there for now. See you all on Wednesday!
On to more serious matters!
In her article, Albury highlights the pro's and con's, shall we say, of Porn on the internet. I found her distinction between ethics and morals particularly helpful and insightful. Her classification of "moral" sex within the Judeo-Christian view, and her subsequent description of porn and the way that it contradicts every notion of morality according to this ideal was important I think. She says "Pornography depicts non-reproductive sex acts, performed for profit between two or more unmarried, and not necessarily heterosexual, partners. Not only do these images depict immoral sex- they incite masturbation, which may in itself be an immoral act."
My first question for the class: Is this a fair judgment of the morality of porn? Do you think that porn would be viewed differently in countries where a Judeo-Christian ideology is not the prevailing ideology- perhaps in a country that is predominantly Muslim?
Albury also discusses the feminist views of pornography a few times. Her first description of it "[porn] is part of a general social tendency for men to view women as sexualised objects, who are only valued for their ability to service men - physically and emotionally." creates a fascinating tension in her dialogue with her statement a few paragraphs later where she says "pornography has, until recently, been the only form of media where women have been seen to experience strong sexual desire and sexual pleasure." This dialogue of women being used, manipulated and objectified in the porn industry, whilst being liberated and allowed sexual freedom and control over their own bodies in the porn industry, creates a bit of confusion for the reader, as well as the public at large, I would say. There seems to be this juxtaposition of women's roles; on one hand women are being used and objectified, and on the other hand it puts them in a position of power, allowing them to have control over their sexual expression in the same way some men have had in history. I say some, because there are always exceptions to the rule, like gay men being able to express themselves publicly (which has only moved into the realms of social acceptability relatively recently in the big scheme of things) etc.
Next question: Do you think pornography liberates women and their freedom of sexual expression, or do you think it is more accurately seen as women being forced into men's sexual desires?
Albury discusses the communities surrounding the amateur porn industry quite extensively. I found the idea of them quite fascinating. It seems it has moved the sharing and viewing of porn out from under the bed (so to speak) and into the open. I was amazed by the fact that these people create friendships and discuss personal details of their lives (outside of sex) on there. And that the producers of the sites go out of their way to answer questions, put up useful links (other than links to other porn websites) and provide chat rooms and forums for these people to meet on was also pretty impressive.It makes the whole online porn industry seem a lot more human than we are lead to believe. That idea of human-ness and normal-ness in an industry that is plagued by so many preconceived ideas leads me to my next question.
Question 3: Albury puts it well when she quotes one of the websites "600 000 visitors every day can't be wrong". Is porn actually a very normal part of life, that we all pretend isn't happening? Or is it really the taboo topic that only a sparse minority choose to view?
Alas, I feel as if my post is getting excessively long, but I will just make a few more points.
Albury talks about socially acceptable sexual practices. She looks at the way that within the professional porn industry, all the women are late teens to early twenties, taut, toned and devoid of body hair. It does seem to be socially unacceptable to lust after hairy women, fat women and men, old women and men etc, but clearly, there are people who do, because websites specialising in those types of porn exist. It is argued so often that porn promotes a very limited perspective on sexual practice, but really, the amateur porn industry is allowing so many different people the chance to get their own preferences out there- if not themselves as well. Why must we view it all with such distaste? Perhaps this is societies way of screaming out that they feel like their sexual preferences and their sexuality is being repressed and that they want it to be more out there and out in the open.
A few closing questions:
Should we allow ourselves to make judgements on the acceptability of other peoples sexual preferences and practices? How far is too far with unusual choices? If we draw a line somewhere, then aren't we still discriminating? But, having said that, hairy women are one thing, but child pornography is a whole other matter. I can be open minded, but only to an extent. Unfortunately, I realise that where my open mindedness reaches its limit at child pornography, perhaps some other people reach theirs at amputees, or fat women and men, or any porn altogether. So, where do we draw the line? Or, alternatively, do we need to draw a line at all?
Is the trading of porn for money wrong? In what ways is it ok/not ok? Photographers sell pictures of nature, and people all the time, it has been argued that sex is just another part of life that deserves to be photographed and shared- what do you think?
There is so much more to say on this, but I think I should leave it there for now. See you all on Wednesday!
Cyborg Month!
Well, according to this site, "September 2010 is the 50th Anniversary of the coining of the term 'cyborg'". To celebrate, they'll be posting 50 links to material about cyborgs. It may be worth a look if you're interested :).
Via Slashdot.org.
Via Slashdot.org.
Moral Issues with Copyright
The moral questions that arise out of issues of copyright, downloading music &c. are interesting and complex. So it would be a shame to leave the discussion at the point it ended in today’s workshop. In particular, it worries me that many seem to hold the view that we can make no clear moral distinctions between different cases of copyright violation (i.e. violation from the point of view of copyright law).
Consider two (rather caricatured) cases of potential copyright violation:
Person X, who is rather well off, downloads music by a little-know and financially struggling artist, who has expressed disapproval of people downloading their music.
Person Y, a student with no source of income, is lent a copy of an album by a popular and financially successful artist who has endorsed download of their music.
Now both of these may count as copyright violation. This is surely a problem; the copyright law may be unjust. But there are moral problems on all sides – for the artists, for the law, and for the fan/consumer. If we cannot see any moral differences between the actions of persons X and Y, we are not looking hard enough.
Gender and Race in Science Fiction
- Burcar, Jillian (2009) Living Appendages of the Machine: Reproducing Sex and Gender in Cyborg and Zombie Narratives from Battlestar Galactica to The Walking Dead (in progress). (accessed 7 September 2010)
This paper examines cyborgs and zombies in television and comic books respectively, and their links to gender and sexuality. Through analysis of teleivision series Battlestar Galactica and comic book series The Walking Dead, Burclar makes references to Donna Haraway’s A Cyborg Manifesto (1985) to explore concepts of sex and gender reconfiguration in a post-industrial world. She argues that a cyborgian future concerning gender and sexuality offers a message of hope; ‘that once cyborgs become “more human than a human,” … the “right” posthuman knowledge here has the potential to build an androgynous/post-gender world, where gender is no longer a discriminating characteristic in the dominant cultural programming.’ She then compares this to zombie narratives, which do not offer a hopeful or positive outlook, instead calling ‘for the destruction of the old order by rethinking the ways post-industrial economies conceive of gender and sexuality today.’ Though the zombie comparisons do not draw relevance to this essay, the paper does offer some insightful views on cyborg sexuality and gender in science fiction, though examples other than Battlestar Galactica should be researched.
- Knowles, Alison Michelle (2000) The Cyborg Other: Japan’s Animated Images of Sex, Gender and Race. University of British Columbia (accessed 7 September 2010)
This is an in-depth thesis on the cyborg as represented in Japanese animated films. This paper uses a semiotic reading of gender codes and Donna Haraway’s cyborg theory, exploring the cyborg image as a reflection of Japan. In doing so, Knowles discusses popular culture in Japan, giving us a brief background on anime and cyberpunk, explores cyborg theory as described in Haraway’s A Manifesto for Cyborgs (1985), discussing gender and race boundaries, and analyses several Japanese animated films, including Ghost in the Shell (Oshii Mamoru, 1995), Battle Angel (Fukutomi Hiroshi, 1993), and Neon Genesis Evangelion (Anno Hideaki, 1996). Knowles argues that the cyborg destroys the boundary between human and machine by its very definition, and other boundaries, i.e. sex, gender and race, by its use and interpretation. Though this paper gives us an in-depth look into Japanese popular culture and the image of cyborgs represented in certain Japanese animated films, further reading will need to be done in order to explore and compare the representation of cyborgs in other cultures.
- McGinnis, Katie (2010) Gender Performance, Transgression and the Cyborg in Battlestar Galactica. (accessed 6 September 2010)
This article explores science fiction series Battlestar Galactica and its genre’s potential for social commentary and gender re-identification. Using cyborg theory from Haraway’s A Cyborg Manifesto (1985), McGinnis demonstrates how Battlestar Galactica is able to navigate between gender transgression and technology’s impact on gender. She argues that despite a tumultuous past with gender portrayal and erasure, science fiction can be a genre that represents the female body in liberated ways. In doing so, she discusses gender, science fiction, the spectator, cyborg theory, feminism, and technology, before providing a close reading of Battlestar Galactica, exploring how female characters of the series challenge and deconstruct long-standing gendered binaries. Though the article is well structured and easy to read, it does not provide examples other than Battlestar Galactica. It also does not discuss race representation in the series, thus further reading needs to be done.
- Senft, Theresa M. (2001) Reading Notes on Donna Haraway's 'Cyborg Manifesto. (accessed 6 September 2010)
This article provides an in-depth breakdown of Donna Haraway’s A Manifesto for Cyborgs (1985), which would be particularly helpful for this essay as Haraway’s cyborg theory is extensively used and referred to in other sources. Senft provides some background information on Haraway’s cyborg manifesto, followed by a six-part breakdown of the theory and concepts. Included is a structured breakdown of Haraway’s theories on identity and cyborg politics, including those on gender and race. It should be noted that the author writes in her disclaimer, ‘While you read, please keep in mind that this is my interpretation of Haraway's text … Other scholars read her work differently than I do, and I encourage you to examine a variety of secondary interpretations before coming to your own conclusions about Haraway and her work.’ Although the article consists merely of reading notes and should not be directly cited, it is nonetheless a beneficial source.
- Shaviro, Steven (2005) Supa Dupa Fly: Black Women as Cyborgs in Hip Hop Videos. Quarterly Review of Film and Video. 22, pp. 169-179, (accessed 7 September 2010)
This paper looks at the cyborg represented in hip-hop culture, specifically, African-American women as cyborgs in hip-hop music videos. Shaviro analyses Missy Elliott’s “The Rain (Supa Dupa Fly)” (directed by Hype Williams, 1997) and Lil’ Kim’s “How Many Licks” (directed by Francis Lawrence, 2000), as works of science fiction in both form and content. Looking at cyborg theory described in Haraway’s A Manifesto for Cyborgs (1985), Shaviro discusses how these videos raise questions about identity and embodiment, as well as ascriptions of gender and race. As Haraway argues, in cyborg politics, it is not identity, but affinity that comes as a result of "otherness, difference, and specificity." Thus, Shaviro explores how Missy Elliott and Lil' Kim’s videos tell stories of black female empowerment, in the face of deeply engrained racism and sexism, by fully embracing and becoming cyborgs. This paper gives us an extensive insight into gender and racial issues present today, and the social implications surrounding the female African-American cyborg.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)