Cyborg is the product of technology in recent decades obviously; they are supposed to help human being finishing the daily tasks, industrial processes or even maintaining our lives, all of the purposes are attempt to relief our workloads and bring conveniences for us. Yet, as the technology has been developing for so fast recently, it can be now disrupting the persistent dualisms and maybe also to refashion our thinking. It is because cyborg now is surprising or even challenging the traditional idea of dichotomies between man and machine, body and representation, organism and artifact. Therefore, in this webliography, it is attempted to find out whether cyborg is now still a transgressive figure through some scholarly writings.
According to the writing from William A. Covino, he thinks that cyborg is still a transgreesive figure in our society. “In this essay I will offer a reading of the golem tradition that stresses its relevance as both an alternative and analog to the new cyborg myth, noting that both the golem and the cyborg are products of an institutional grammar and of the urgency to transcend material conditions through majic. Both illustrate what Kenneth Burke calls “magic, verbal coercion, establishment or management by decree,” and as such, raise crucial questions of what we decree “in the name of”. In this connection the golem and cyborg myths involve coercive verbal magic that can be both subversive (uttered in the name of liberation) and conservative (uttered in the name of a status quo). Further, both creatures stand for the relationship of literacy to transgression, as they challenge the dominant linguistic code and its adepts.” (Covino, 1996) From his writing, it can be seen that Covino is basically agrees cyborg could still be a transgression figure in the field of literacy. Human always using languages to communicate with others, though we come from different places and the languages we speak are not the same, we are using verbal word or voice to send out our messages. Yet, robot does not use the same way as ours, what they are dealing with are the digital codes “
There is scholar who tries to comment on cyborg through commenting on the film, Terminator. Doran Larson wrote in his article “…I do not propose, however, simply to write a political gloss over a rich tradition of cyborg and android-film criticism that explores the ambiguous state of boundary wars between male and female, machines and humans, or human spontaneity and capitalist rationalization. Instead I want to suggest that with the introduction of the morphing LMM, we see not simply a rehearsal of older cultural or psychological dichotomies but a profound cultural shift……At the same time, in Terminaotr
Ksenija Bilbija shares a same way with the mentioned two scholars, according to his article, “These are societies that have produced the hybrid image of the machine and the organism, simply called the cyborg. It is the very final and rebellious offspring of the golem, the one that has completely rejected and overcome the Father, the Paradise Lost, the Oedipus complex, and also, the gender differences. The other possibility, definitely more utopian, is the creation of the context in which the exchange will be allowed, where speechlessness will be voluntary, where masters will vanish, and where values will be human. There, the doll would be only a doll.” (Bilbija 1994) He obviously treats the cyborg as something bad, who is the offspring that totally violating normal humans’ behaviors or even have no differences in the filed of gender. These kinds of concepts are totally different from what we learn from school or parents; we can conclude these concepts are new to us and according to Balsamo, it is a refashion to our thinking.
When we look into the article written by Andrew Ross, it’s not difficult to find out that he has a much all-around view towards cyborg. “It seems clear that there are good cyborgs and there are bad cyborgs, and that the cyborg itself is a contested location. The cyborgs dreamed up by the Artificial Intelligence boys, for example, tend to be technofascist celebrations of invulnerability, whereas your feminist cyborgs seem to be more semi-permeable constructio' , hybrid, almost makeshift attempts at counterrationality. How do you prevent, or how do you think about ways of preventing, cyborgism from being a myth that can swing both ways, especially when the picture of cyborg social relations that you present is so fractured and volatile and bereft of secure guarantees?” (Ross, 1990) This question is actually asking Donna Haraway by Ross during an interview, despite the answer he had got; it has illustrated his attitude towards cyborg. Ross thinks that there are two types of cyborg in the world, good and bad. Both of them could bring different impact towards our society, depends on which kind or cyborg is made, therefore, I would say that he is quite conservative on commenting whether cyborg is transgressive figure and does not have a strong standing ground.
“New concepts of body and identity are explored, revealing fluid and open forms. In literature, we find cyborgs and robots, multiple identities and virtual bodies, avatars and agents, transhumanists and extropians, all indicating the dissolution of classical differences. Such dissolution is often associated either with apocalyptic visions or with euphoric dreams.” (Barbara Becker, 2000) Becker is somehow having a more open-view on the exploration of cyborg, he does not reject cyborg as a transgressive figure at all, but agrees cyborg could bring a brighter future. He thinks that technology is good for human being, like a heart diseased patient could embed a heart pacer in order to maintain his life in the medical field. The patient should also be described as cyborg due to his body is now made up of both organic and technology. Therefore, it is obviously that, Becker does not agree that cyborg is still a transgressive figure anymore.
To conclude, after summarizing different writings from various scholars, it is found that their standing grounds are quite different, some agree that cyborg is still a transgressive figure but some don’t, even some think it is not really a matter. Writing this essay makes me read a lot about the idea of cyborg and I appreciate of that. In my own view, I do agree with cyborg is good but not a transgressive figure. It is because our daily lives nowadays cannot be separated from technology; technology not just brings us conveniences but also brings hopes to our lives, just likes what the heart pacers do. Originally, technology is developed for the purpose of bringing a better and brighter future for human being.
Reference:
1. Becker, Barbara. Cyborgs, Agents, and Transhumanists: Crossing Traditional Borders of Body and Identity in. 5th ed. Vol. 33. The MIT P. BarbaraB eckerC, yborgsA, gents,a nd Transhumani, pp.361-365. MYJSTOR. 6 Mar. 2009
2. Bilbija, Ksenija. "The Youngest Doll": On Women, Dolls, Golems and Cyborgs. 3rd ed. Vol. 17. The Johns
3. Covino, Willaim A. Grammars of Transgression: Golems, Cyborgs, and Mutants. Vol. 14. Lawerce Erlbaum Associates (Taylor & France Group). JSTOR: Rhetoric Review, Vol.14, No.2 (Spring 1996), pp.355-373. JSTOR. 4 Mar. 2009
<>.
4. Larson, Doran. Machine as Messiah: Cyborgs, Morphs, and the American Body Politic. 4th ed. Vol. 36.
5. Penley, Constance, Andrew Ross, and Donna Haraway. Cyborgs at Large: Interview with Donna Haraway. Duke UP. Constance Penleyand Andrew Ross, pp.8-23. MYJSTOR. 5 Mar. 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment