Frankenstein Webliography

From Frankenstein to the Visible Human Project, the body is continually reinterpreted as a limit to what it means to be human.

Feminists and technology theorists have continually redefined the body, alternatively accepting, hiding and controlling it. While some hope to embrace the entire body, others aim to control or even transcend it. The result is a continuing redefinition of the self and human identity. In discussing this area, we can draw upon a range of credible articles debating the future of the body and the motivations behind these redefinitions.

A useful point at which to begin exploring the psychological relationship that we have to our bodies is provided by Goldenberg et. al. [1] The authors use Terror Management Theory to suggest that changing, reinterpreting and hiding the body is what makes us human. Adopting Cartesian dualism, humans have consistently privileged the mind over the body in an attempt to distance ourselves from the vessel that is subject to death and decay, thus reminding us of our mortality. Additionally, most cultures place controls and regulations on the body, positioning it as a reification of beauty, spirituality and other abstract concepts. By adopting these cultural practices, the authors suggest, the human body becomes dissociated from other animal bodies, relieving us of our anxieties about our own mortality. One result of this is a stigmatisation of those whose bodies do not conform, who exhibit a lack of control and remind us of mortality. The other, suggest the authors, is that in rejecting our bodies we lose half of our identity as humans.

Shelley Jackson’s hypertext novel Patchwork Girl tells the story of Frankenstein’s female Creature, who is reanimated by Mary Shelley. In her speech ‘Stitch Bitch,’ [2] Jackson critically explores her work and explains how the narrative rejects society’s obsession with control and regulation of the body. Patchwork Girl normalises the self-as-assemblage, as the Creature is created from a variety of corpses, including that of a cow. ‘The body is a patchwork, though the stitches may not show,’ argues Jackson. [3] Indeed, she aims to reinstate the banished body and all its contradictions. In creating a new, multiple subjectivity, Jackson redefines the self:

I don’t want to lose the self, only to strip it of its claim to naturalness, its compulsion to protect its boundaries, its obsession with wholeness and its fear of infection. [4]

In embracing the body, Jackson aims to end marginalisation and reclaim our place as organic cyborgs, complete with mortality. In a similar vein to Mary Shelley before her, Jackson reinterprets the body as a limit to being human: the body is our strength and our weakness, not simply a vessel that we must strictly control.

In ‘Flickering Connectivities’ [5] Katherine Hayles provides further insight into Jackson’s claim that ‘Hypertext is the banished body.’ [6] Using medium theory, Hayles suggests that the hypertext medium demands cyborg reading practices by distributing cognition, and meaning making, between the author, designer, reader and computer. Further, the nature of digital texts allows easy copying, distribution and transformation, blurring identities of ownership and authorship. ‘Boundaries of texts are like boundaries of bodies,’ asserts Jackson, ‘and both stand in for the confusing and invisible boundary of the self.’ [7] Hypertext is not cohesive, sequential and unitary; rather, it overflows with choices and meaning. Similarly, the body is permeable and open to alteration. Hayles’ commentary provides a pertinent analysis of feminist reinterpretations of the body in the digital age. Jackson’s removing of these boundaries and limits on the body, Hayles suggests, will allow us to embrace our entire human identity.

Catherine Waldby’s analysis of the Visible Human Project (VHP) presents the body as moving in a different direction from that envisioned by Jackson and Hayles. [8] The scientific project scanned the bodies of two corpses, recreating them as digital code and virtual corpses. The result, contends Waldby, is greater control of the body and mortality. Because the bodies are built from binary code, they can be subjected to unlimited manipulation, allowing scientists to analyse the processes of life.

Unlike Dr. Frankenstein, who must suture together mismatched body parts in the clumsy world of physical space and material bodies, the VHP can clearly dismember and re-member its virtual bodies with a flick of the cursor. [9]

While the body is still not entirely banished, medical scientists have been able to use reproduction and simulation to overcome the barrier of death. Baudrillard argues that simulations make the real over in their own image. Waldby thus claims that the VHP allows scientists to make real flesh conform to the virtual model of the perfect, healthy body. Waldby’s article is enlightening when juxtaposed against Jackson and Hayles. Taking an opposing stance, Waldby pursues a vision of control over the body through technology.

Richardson and Harper provide a discussion of the body in cyberspace in ‘Corporeal Virtuality.’ [10] While some theorists present cyberspace as a Utopia, free from race, class, gender or bodily limitations, Richardson and Harper disagree. Instead, they use phenomenology to argue that our consciousness, perception and body are intrinsically linked, resulting in our corporeal schema. The way in which we perceive things is linked to our bodies. Our bodies, however, will adjust to, and include, modifications. Just as a blind man’s stick becomes part of his corporeal schema, technology will become part of ours. Virtual reality is reliant upon the body’s experience; cyberspace doesn’t lose the body, it just provides a new kind of embodiment. This is a useful alternative perspective on the role of the body in cyberspace; the body may be changed, but it is certainly not redundant.

The body has continually been reinterpreted as a limit to what it means to be human. In the digital age, this reinterpretation has taken divergent paths. Jackson and Hayles embrace the possibilities of the body and hypertext. Releasing the body from regulations will allow us to be truly human, they argue. In contrast, the Visible Human Project provides the means to further control our bodies. Here, being human is about transcending immortality. It appears that the future of the body is in our hands.

Notes

[1] Goldenberg, Jamie L., Tom Pyszczynski, Jeff Greenberg & Sheldon Solomon (2000) ‘Fleeing the Body: A Terror Management Perspective on the Problem of Human Corporeality.’ Personality and Social Psychology Review. 4 (3) pp. 200-218 http://psr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/3/200 (accessed 22 August 2008)

[2] Shelley Jackson (4 November 1997) ‘Stitch Bitch: the patchwork girl.’ http://web.mit.edu/m-i-t/articles/index_jackson.html (accessed 22 August 2008)

[3] ibid.

[4] ibid.

[5] Katherine Hayles (2000) ‘Flickering Connectivities in Shelley Jackson’s Patchwork Girl: The Importance of Media-Specific Analysis.’ http://www.iath.virginia.edu/pmc/text-only/issue.100/10.2hayles.txt (accessed 22 August 2008)

[6] Jackson, op. cit.

[7] ibid.

[8] Catherine Waldby (1996) ‘The Visible Human Project: Data into Flesh, Flesh into Data.’ http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/Readingroom/VID/wildbiol1.html (accessed 18 August 2008)

[9] ibid..

[10] Ingrid Richardson & Carly Harper (post-2000) ‘Corporeal Virtuality: The Impossibility of a Fleshless Ontology.’ http://wwwmmc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/corporeal.html (accessed 18 August 2008)

Webliography

The two most ironic words in the movie Frankenstein (1931) are “Its Alive!”. This passing exclamation implies a variety of problematic issues when dealing with cyborgs. Firstly, is it really alive? Is it alive as much as my laptop is alive? The fact that Frankenstein looks fairly human from the outside persuades us to believe that he is some kind of organism, just like us, and in that case, he is either alive or dead. But Frankenstein is half man, half machine, like many cyborgs that have come and gone, so technically, he can die and he cannot die. It is my understanding that all these problematic definitions between human and machine stem from one complex obsession, rather simplistic in its origins, the body. Issues such as death, biology, gender and the transcendental self, which are for the most part complete with clear limits and boundaries, are all multifaceted challenges that are redefined with each technological advance. It is the blurring of these boundaries, the pushing of these “limits”, the reinterpretation of the body itself that leads us to re-evaluate what it means to be human.

The first problem I encountered when thinking about how the body is reinterpreted as a limit to what it means to be human was a linguistic one. What exactly is a limit by nature? To my understanding I see a limit as a boundary, something beyond a limit is essentially unattainable. However, limits can be redefined and extended. But when one does come across a limit that has been extended one must also realise that fundamentally, the limit still exists. Advances in medical science and human biology have given us the means to extend many limits. The New Scientist clip [1] demonstrates how every tendon, artery and muscle in the arm can be replicated virtually. It can be deconstructed and reconfigured to show human movement as naturally as it would occur in a natural arm. Similar to the Human Visible Project [2] both of these experiments reinterpret the body as a sum of the parts. That is, to present the body as a congruent system of organs, arteries, electrical signals to the nth degree. It would be controversial to say that both of these expressions of the body have nothing to do with being human. But if one were to agree with this statement to a point, then one would have to assume that perhaps the transcendental self is what is socially and cultural agreed upon as giving us our humanness.

Alternatively, in the Cyborg Citizen [3] Grey attempts to address this question further by proposing that we view the body as a commodity. Using examples such as DNA deconstruction and the human genome project, along with the blood trade he draws similarities between the ownership of the parts of the body with the human slave trade. This is an interesting argument and one that would suggest again that we see the body as something to be owned, dissected, and fractional by nature. There are distinct ideological differences between the organic human body and the body can be assembled and dissected much like a machine.

In keeping with the transcendental self, one must consider art as something that is by nature a physical expression of a metaphysical self. Or is it? Australian artist Stelarc [4] uses the idea of the cyborg extensively in his body performance art. The most fascinating statement made on his website is simply “the body is obsolete”. This is a two part predicament when considering how Stelarc is reinterpreting the body as a limit to what it means to be human. Firstly it suggests the body is a type of machine, for we usually ascribe the world ‘obsolete’ to technological hardware or mechanisms. And secondly it implies that the body is outdated and its use has reached a limit. But what exactly are the limits that Stelarc sees in the human body? Surely one can recognise that the body as we know it, aside from evolution, has been similar structurally from the days of the hominid. Stelarc’s work includes use of a virtual arm, an exoskeleton and on a sensory level he has also wired his blood pressure and breathing patterns to audio frequencies. I believe that his work emphasis the limits of technology and the infinite ways that our body as a living, breathing organism is essentially a means to exploring the limits of technology. Instead of reinterpreting the limits that are present within the human body, Stelarc is showcasing the endless possibilities of our creative expression using a medium that most would regard as cold, dull and mechanical.

If we interpret the body as a sum of the parts where does gender lie? This is just one of the questions that Balsamo’s book [5] attempts to answer. She argues that if the body is deduced to fractional parts that can be replaced by machine or enhanced by machine what does this say about our concept of humanity and gender. I believe it also says a lot about the way we view technology, as a cold, genderless, unhuman medium. Balsamo proposes that through cultural and social means, we not only dictate the terms of sexuality and gender but that we also reinterpret them as times change. In this respect, the transgender person could possibly be interpreted as a cyborg of sorts. But does this not imply some kind of pseudo-humanness to the transgender person who would undoubtedly be human, as opposed to a cyborg whose humanness is unclear?

When considering the body as a limit to what it means to be human, one is posed with a logical proposition. All humans have bodies, but are all things with bodies human? If one answers this with a resounding ‘no’, then the question must be asked, how essential is the body to ones humanity at all?


Bibliography

[1] New Scientist (2008) ‘Virtual Arm Gets Under the Skin’ [video file] (14th August 2008) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLIBzkUR5l8&feature=user (23rd August 2008)

[2] National Library of Medicine (2003) The Visible Human Project® Available from: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/visible/visible_human.html (accessed 23rd August 2008)

[3] Grey, Chris Hables (2001) ‘The Rhetoric of life: DNA and Dr Frankenstein’s Dreams’ in Cyborg Citizen: Politics in the Posthuman Age. London: Routledge, pp 113-120. Available from http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2Mw5srL_bAUC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=cyborg+death&ots=Za4l9fB0xP&sig=Ph_Nqyp9omIPwSeadYdYqoPYYzc#PPA112-IA7,M1 [23rd August 2008]

[4] Stelarc (1994) Available from: http://www.stelarc.va.com.au (accessed 22nd August 2008).

[5] Balsamo, Anne Marie (1999) Technologies of the gendered body: Reading Cyborg Women. Duke University Press, pp 1-17. Available at http://books.google.com.au/books?id=lkr11mXPYKEC&pg=PA7&dq=cyborg+death&lr=&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=0_1&sig=ACfU3U1w8Lk-HLJx7bDKd1OTXw6PWmXqqQ#PPA7,M1

Critical Annotated Webliography

Karmela Smud
Question 2

In many cases such as Frankenstein and the Visible Human Project the boundaries between man and machine have grown increasingly thin as our society becomes more technologically advanced. Along with the improvements that these advances will bring forth there are also many negative impacts that will arise. The following sources provide an in depth view of the link between technology and humans and the implications that it has upon our society.


Hayles wrote a piece How We Became Posthuman which discusses the implications of posthumanism and the fears that are inevitably linked to the term. She confers the apprehension that is faced when presented with the idea of the human race becoming ‘displaced’ and in turn run by the very machines that man has created. Hayles also points out many human characteristics and complexities that cannot be attained through technological advances. Another issue throughout this piece is the human path of natural progression throughout history, which touches upon what makes a human human, and the biological evolution that makes society what it is today.

McCrackens article Cyborg Fictions is based on Donna Harraway’s ‘Cyborg Manifesto’. He discusses how the relationship between technology and human beings is growing increasingly complicated and the growing terror with the idea of human beings no longer being the dominant life form. Identity is a large issue in this text and he presents it as something that is very much intermingled with machines because practically every person is now, to some extent, a cyborg. Furthermore he states that our technological advances reflect the society in which we live while also, in a sense, creating many global and cultural effects upon us and changing the environment as we know it. McCracken also expresses his belief that the cyborg phenomenon has become both a socialist and economic movement. Our imaginations have grown as well as the possibilities we are presented with due to modern day technology, which in turn is making the barrier between the corporeal being and technology hazier as we speak.

Moravec speaks of the evolution of human beings in the text The Senses Have No Future and how the need to have senses is slowly becoming obsolete due to artificial prostheses and computerized enhancements as a result of mind boggling technological advances. He takes a scientific approach in explaining certain types of artificial implements which are now available to the public in its quest for perfection. Our world is becoming infiltrated by computers and digitized robots which in turn leave humans with one option: either become a type of ‘intelligent machine’ or be pushed into the outskirts of contemporary society and in the end become redundant. We live in an era of optimization and efficiency and this is due to the fact that our world is almost seamlessly linked to the cyber world and the division between man and computer is rapidly becoming harder to detect as time goes by. He emphasizes the decline in the amount of time humans spend actually experiencing life on their own without technological aid and how our senses have dulled as a result.

Simpson's article in the Harvard Human Rights Journal discusses Francis Fukuyama’s book ‘Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution.’ which mirrors his view that in this day and age biotechnology needs to be monitored and restrained so no harm is caused upon the human race as we know it. With all of the advancements in mechanical know-how many ethical questions have been raised as to where the boundary between man and machine lie and the problems that could arise if we are not careful in the way these inventions are implemented within our society. Fukuyama believes that human nature is at risk of being irrevocably altered and even goes as far as to say “We want to protect the full range of our complex, evolved natures against attempts at self-modification. We do not want to disrupt either the unity or the continuity of human nature, and thereby the human rights that are based on it.” The opinion expressed in this text focuses on how biotechnology has a new imaginative quality that could be very easily linked with science fiction since it has such an air of surrealism. It also delves into the repercussions biotechnology is having on today’s society and the consequences it will surely have if a system for regulation is not created.

Waldby's site on The Visible Human Project gives an overview of what exactly the Visible Human Project is and relates both technical aspects, such as the process used to record the cadaver, to more ethical issues concerning the morality of dissecting a corpse and transforming it entirely into data which can be manipulated and transformed an infinite number of times. This medical marvel, like many others, has created a great deal of controversy due to its inventive approach in understanding the human anatomy. Due to the Visible Human Project we are now able to view and maneuver flesh that has been turned into data as we see fit yet this raises many concerns regarding the relationship between ‘technology and the body’. To what extent we are willing to go, in contemporary society, is an issue with countless ramifications on civilization as we know it.



These sources enable one to grasp the technical side of the integration between humans and technology as well as the negative aspects that may come along with it. All in all in today’s society we are undeniably linked to the cyber world in an almost seamless manner and as humans we need to understand the implications of this phenomenon that has turned into a way of life.

Salutations!

Hiya everyone, 

Better late than never! I will blame the tardiness of my post on the vast array of technological distractions that abound the internet! And I have a feeling that this unit only gives me more links to clips and blogs than I could have ever organized on my lonesome. :) 

A little bit about myself, I play a lot of WoW so I guess I'm going to have to give a shout out to World of Workcraft which is my favourite clip of the minute. 

And on a self.net note, If you are interested in some infinitely freaky art that takes the term "wired bodies" to the extreme, check out Australian artist Stelarc (be warned, definitely NOT for the squeamish). But if you are into performance/digital art, you may find it as fascinating as I did. But perhaps refrain from eating your lunch whilst checking out his suspension art, and I'm not saying anymore than that! 

Looking forward to getting to know everyone and seeing some much needed substance in the blog realm. 

Cheers, 

Katie  

Late as usual!

Hey everyone!
Sorry this is soooooo late! I made it on here finally - I am a totally new blogger but quite like the idea so this could be a new obsession for me...maybe.
I don't really have a favourite website - I use facebook a lot and generally just waste time on useless things on the net. I'm one of those people who realises it's 2o'clock in the morning and I've spent the last four hours wasting time when i should probably have been doing something else.
I spend quite a lot of time on youtube searching for episodes of One Tree Hill - don't know if any of you are fans? Most of them get removed though.... :(

Looking forward to blogging instead of a tute! Something different and new for me!!
Speak soon
Lauryn
xxx

:)

Hello class :)
Good to finally join everyone! I know I'm a little bit late getting on the intros bandwagon, but...
My name is Ellery- long time blog reader, first time blogger.

Here is a cute and local blog, which is always quite visually appealing.
You will probably recognise at least one person on it, as it is such a small world (i.e. perth is such a small place)

And something adorable !

Looking forward to the blog tutes very much

--Ellery





PS. Sarah, last week I went on a font downloading mission too! So good!

And Bek, one of the watches on the site you linked is a perfect gift, as my boyfriend's teaching himself japanese...but it seems to say that they only ship to USA. Have you ever bought anything from them and gotten it successfully mailed to Australia? Thaaanks!

Hi!

Hello everyone. Sorry that my first post is late but I had joined the weblog for the tutorial at 5 instead of the one at 4. My computer is abou tto run out of battery do I'm not going to post my favorite link right now but if you want to know I posted them on the 5 o'clock tut's page. See you all in the tut.

Karmela