We appear to have the same position on the value of the cyborg, and I am not
dismissing the revolutionary potential that the concept of technology
proposed by Donna Haraway has. You stress very well with your example what
the economic connotations of 'who can be a cyborg' are.
Technology has a possibility of empowering in the West and the lack of
technology in other areas of the world generates a divide.
I think this divide between rich and poor cyborgs (latest prosthetics vs.
wood prosthetics) is only one of the possible divisions that could be
enforced upon the cyborg. For example is there a difference between
prosthetics' aesthetic perceptions according to ethnicity? Is it a case of
Western cyborgs vs. Eastern cyborgs and Christian cyborgs vs. Muslim
cyborgs?
Perhaps Ekmel is right when he says that if the cyborg is a utopian concept
then utopia is homogenous. My utopian thought was that the cyborg is a
diverse but not hierarchical and conflicting being.
I have been doing research with a student, Valentina Sessa, at Birkbeck
College on the aesthetic perception of prosthetics and one interesting
finding was that young men interviewed in the UK found the prosthetic
beautiful and empowering while women perceived it as a mutilation. We
presented this issue at the conference
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/encap/newsandevents/events/conferences/globalrisk.html
This area can be interesting, albeit controversial, particularly if we look
at how aesthetic perceptions of beauty influence the interpretation of the
prosthetic and therefore the definition of the cyborg.
All my best,
Lanfranco
http://www.lanfrancoaceti.com
Dr. Lanfranco Aceti
Associate Professor in Contemporary Art & Digital Culture
Sabanci University
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
Room 2082
Orhanli/Tuzla
34956 Istanbul, Turkey
Tel: +90 (216) 483 9292
Email: aceti@sabanciuniv.edu
=============================================
Honorary Lecturer
Department of Computer Science, Virtual Reality Environments
University College London
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:04 PM, fmarineo@libero.it <fmarineo@libero.it>wrote:
> Dear all, since the "we" of "we are all cyborgs" appears as a highly
> problematic pronoun for all of us participating in this discussion, I'd
> like to
> add something more about it, and I draw on Haraway again.
>
> › Dicle writes "how
> do we theorize or at least talk about the inequalities in the status of
> becoming cyborgs. can we come up with norms for all cyborgs without
> discussing
> the unequal ontological status of these and different ways of becoming
> cyborgs? and the hierachies in the ways in which we see and judge them?"
>
> In a
> interview with Constance Penley and Andrew Ross ("Cyborgs at Large" -
> 1991),
> Haraway appears well aware of the risks that the assumption of every
> theoretical and linguistic system of classification (every protocol?)
> implies,
> specifically the risk of essentializating and making pantheistic claims
> ("we
> all"), or the reinstatement of binary distinctions (such as we/they,
> subject/object). That is why she proposes a system of figures (and the
> cyborg
> works first of all as figuration, which is something very different from a
> metaphor) that allow us to establish connections beyond those
> Euro-American-
> centric technologies of description (something which, often, the cyborg has
> become) that still rely on the othering of the other.
>
> The encounters among
> cyborgs happen on a different level: cyborgs share what Haraway calls "the
> possibility of being accountable to each other" without taking (even
> discursively) the place of the other (or the place of the self). Cyborgs
> tell
> stories of relationality, made of commonalities as well as differences (a
> more
> complex and layered vision of connectivity), in order to imagine a
> different
> kind of politics. Thus, "we" can even stop talking about cyborgs, if we use
> it
> as an identity/identificatory fetishizing category in the traditional
> sense.
> Since, according to Haraway, the inappropratedness (see Minh-ha again) of
> cyborgs does not reside in their taxonomical difference, but in their
> continuous practice of dislocation, that creates connections "that exceed
> domination".
>
> Above all, cyborgs' dislocation is also a movement of self-
> difference (we can call it self-reflexivity, maybe) that constantly
> dislocate
> their same privileged location (if they are given one). I would insist on
> this:
> the harawaian cyborg practices a politics of location and dislocation, so
> it
> would be better intended as a mode of articulation rather than as a
> representation.
>
> Federica Timeto
> Ph.D candidate
> University of Plymouth, UK
>
> Planetary Collegium/M-Node
>
> fmarineo@libero.it
> federica.timeto@plymouth.ac.uk
>
> http://plymouth.academia.edu/FedericaTimeto
>
> >----Messaggio originale----
> >Da:
> nanelikek@gmail.com
> >Data: 12/07/2009 17.03
> >A: "YASMIN DISCUSSIONS"
> <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> >Cc: "fmarineo@libero.it"
> <fmarineo@libero.it>
> >Ogg: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Ethnic Cyborg - the
> harawaian cyborg
> >
> >maybe it is because i am a bit foreign to the art scene and
> all. but
> >reading haraway i constantly feel like asking whom do we call cyborgs
>
> >and who remains outside of it?
> >
> >whether the cyborgs wear burkas or not i
> agree with roger in that what
> >matters is what becomes visible. and in what
> becomes vsibile i guess
> >what matters is what federica calls ontological
> status. I agree with
> >her when she writes: 'if "we are all cyborgs", this doesn'
> t mean that
> >we all share the same ontological status, but that we are non
> unitary,
> >hybrid formations experiencing multiple connections across different
>
> >boundaries.'
> >
> >what matters then for instance building on ekmel's suggestion
> to think
> >on protocols may be the ontological status of that connectivity. our
>
> >constant inclination to think of a totally integrated cyborg and the
>
> >invisibility of (to put it simply) poorer cyborgs. a kurdish or
> >afghani kid
> who is the victim of a landmine but is left out of our
> >digital protocols as
> well as our social proptocols to see her as such.
> >or a child who cannot become
> a cyborg because does not have the money
> >for the prothesis. our dream of all
> those who need to become cyborgs
> >must be becoming one.
> >
> > our constant
> thinking in lines such as ' it cannot be that bad, there
> >must be internet
> cafes down there too' in a world where one in seven
> >people are sturggling with
> hunger ( according to UN numbers) our dream
> >of an all encompassing
> connectivity. constant neglect of the fact that
> >one in seven people is reduced
> to the status of a hungry animal
> >spending her life searchign for food. and
> this together with
> >forgetting about all the violence. our dream of equation of
> violences.
> >big armies that turn soldiers into cyborgs, soldiers wearing
> seventy
> >pounds of tehcnology and covering themselves with technology, becomign
>
> >cyborgs vis-avis guerillas and civilians. documentaries shot in green
> >light.
> is it a surprise to see what these cyborgs are doing to the
> >civilians? yes
> guerillas have arms too but is this really the way it
> >needs to be?
> >
> >
> children with stones facing israeli tanks or turkish combat cars.
> >maybe the
> soldier in the tank or the combat car at that moment when he
> >is scanning the
> street with that long-range lens is a cyborg and the
> >child not. What do we
> say about that? when one is so vulnerable and
> >the other hyper-invulnerable.
> when the existing legality adjudicates
> >them as is the case in Turkey by making
> up a crime as 'acting for the
> >purposes of helping the aim of the organization'
> . throwing a stone to
> >the police in a city where there is dirt level poverty
> and an
> >undending war and unkept promises for eighty years. chronic poverty
>
> >feeling of no hope. and a rising racism. and a child throwing a stone
> >. the
> law recognizes that they are not helping the organization. but
> >still these
> children who are rebelling probably against the poverty
> >around them more than
> all else- are adjudicated in terror related ways
> >so this strange article is
> used. how do we judge them when
> >situations where cyborgs meet non-cyborgs are
> often also sites of
> >unfair legalities?
> >
> >
> >how do we theorize or at least
> talk about the ineqaulities in the
> >status of becoming cyborgs. can we come up
> with norms for all cyborgs
> >without discussing the unequal ontological status
> of these and
> >different ways of becoming cyborgs? and the hierachies in the
> ways in
> >which we see and judge them?
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 2:29 AM,
> ekmel ertan<eertan@forumist.com> wrote:
> >> Federica says:
> >> "Thus, I believe
> that
> >> speaking about ethnic cyborgs makes sense as soon as ethnicity is seen
> as
> >> tactically articulating the boundary condition of cyborg bodies together
>
> >> with
> >> other differences, rather than being considered as an essential
> property
> >> used
> >> to perpetuate discriminatory as well as neocolonizing
> strategies."
> >>
> >> Yes, I believe this is why we come with this topic.
> >> But,
> when we repeat the phrase that "we are all cyborgs" , we point out
> >> another
> ethnicity
> >> above all the existing / -politically-accepted ones. I now
> realized that
> >> this was an
> >> attempt to omit the differences and re-unite
> in another definition (another
> >> ethnicity).
> >> Hence the core problem exist
> in such sayings, which starts with "we are all
> >> ...".
> >> Therefore as
> Federica referred to Anna Munster's approach 'engagement with
> >> differences
> inside connectivity' is opening a new door...
> >> This made me think on
> protocols. Even if we take the differences positively
> >> and try to
> >>
> eliminate them, we still use the same 'protocols' to communicate. May be
> not
> >>
> our perceptions
> >> but the protocols are forcing us to create the
> 'other'. Hence can we
> >> think on "ethnic cyborg"
> >> -ethnicity and cyborgs-
> in relation with protocols and -furthermore-
> >> interfaces?
> >>
> >>
> >> ekmel
> ertan
> >> eertan@forumist.com
> >> +90.532.4738971
> >> www.forumist.com
> >> skype
> id: ekmelertan
> >>
> >> On Jul 6, 2009, at 6:12 PM, fmarineo@libero.it wrote:
> >>
>
> >> Although I am usually in the position of a reader of the posts on this
> list,
>
> >> this time I really feel the need to take part in this extremely
> interesting
>
> >> discussion, since I have been working very much on feminist cyborg
> theory
>
> >> for
> >> my research.
> >> I think that if we want to "properly" talk about the
> cyborg -
> >> that is as the "inappropriate/d other" -, we need to retrieve the
> political
> >> and
> >> ethical implications of the cyborg figuration in Donna
> Haraway's theory, as
> >> well as to consider the recent developments of
> cyberfeminist theory and
> >> practice in their encounter with postcolonial
> theory and transcultural
> >> feminism.
> >>
> >> The figuration of the cyborg
> emerges from Haraway's situated
> >> critique of technoscience. In fact, the
> cyborg is a situated and political
> >> figuration, whose articulation happens to
> be linked with the very
> >> possibility
> >> of a politics of location. The
> harawaian cyborg can be seen as a figure of
> >> connection and connectivity, but
> only inasmuch as it is also considered as a
> >> figure of partiality.
> Technofeminist connection is partiality, since it
> >> implies
> >> the encounter
> with otherness, in/appropriatedness, differentiality.
> >> Connectivity, in this
> context, is not a inclusive, inevitable or
> >> "evolutionary"
> >> process of
> trascendental communion of subjectivities eventually taking place
> >> in
> >>
> every corner of the planet, to paraphrase Raquel Paricio, but a situated
> >>
> practice of networking dealing with contradictions and disjunctures (and
> >>
> fighting against corporate powers' connections).
> >>
> >> Feminist search for
> >>
> commonalities has gradually been accompanied by the recognition and
> >>
> articulation of differences within and without, rather than their
> inclusion.
> >>
> Moreover, as Maria Fernandez points out, feminist incorporation is based on
> >>
> acknowledging the "power and the legacy of embodied practices", rather than
> >>
> overcoming them. For this reason, if "we are all cyborgs", this doesn't
> mean
> >>
> that we all share the same ontological status, but that we are non unitary,
> >>
> hybrid formations experiencing multiple connections across different
> >>
> boundaries.
> >>
> >> Lanfranco Aceti writes: "The new nature of the cyborg should
> have
> >> been that of revolutionizing the status quo, overcoming differences,
> >>
> surpassing
> >> and moving beyond human differences and even beyond human
> nature."
> >> But
> >> according to Haraway, cyborg bodies move across
> differences, rather than
> >> overcoming them. Here is what Trinh T. Minh-ha
> >>
> interviewed by Marina Gržinić
> >> affirms in this respect:
> >> "For me, the
> question of hybridity or of cultural
> >> difference has never been a question of
> blurred boundaries. We constantly
> >> devise boundaries, but these boundaries,
> which are political, strategical or
> >> tactical-whatever the circumstance
> requires, and each circumstance generates
> >> a
> >> different kind of boundary-
> need not be taken as an end in itself. The notion
> >> of
> >> the migrant self,
> which has taken on a new lease in our times, is very
> >> relevant
> >> here. The
> self-in-displacement or the self-in-creation is one through which
> >> changes
> and discontinuities are accounted for in the making and unmaking of
> >>
> identity, and for which one needs specific, but mobile boundaries. For
> >>
> example,
> >> when do you call yourself a feminist, when you do not call yourself
> a
> >> feminist,
> >> when do you see yourself as part of the East, and when do you
> when you tell
> >> people the West is also in me? When I am speaking about the
> West I am not
> >> speaking about a reality outside myself. It is not a question
> of blurring
> >> boundaries or of rendering them invisible. It is a question of
> shifting them
> >> as
> >> soon as they tend to become ending lines."
> (Inappropriate/d Artificiality,
> >> 1998, http://arch.ced.berkeley.
> >>
> edu/people/faculty/bourdier/trinh/TTMHInterviews002.htm).
> >>
> >> Thus, I believe
> that
> >> speaking about ethnic cyborgs makes sense as soon as ethnicity is seen
> as
> >> tactically articulating the boundary condition of cyborg bodies together
>
> >> with
> >> other differences, rather than being considered as an essential
> property
> >> used
> >> to perpetuate discriminatory as well as neocolonizing
> strategies. Combining
> >> cyborg feminism and Thirld World feminism, for
> instance, Chela Sandoval sees
> >> connectivity as a "crossing network of
> consciousness", based on the
> >> traversing
> >> of sexual, cultural and national
> boundaries, rather than on their erasure;
> >> her
> >> approach allows both the
> dominant and the oppositional power forces that
> >> flow
> >> through the networks
> to be dealt with. Anna Munster also adopts an ethico-
> >> aesthetic approach to
> digitality; reading the digital through the social,
> >> she
> >> foregrounds the
> engagement with differences inside connectivity, rather than
> >> the elision of
> differences through it.
> >> I agree with Ekmel Ertan's statement
> >> that "there
> is no place for ethnicity in utopias because utopias are
> >> uniform".
> >> That
> is why I rather consider the cyborg as a techno-topic - neither utopic
> >> nor
>
> >> dystopic - figuration that combines imagination and responsible praxis,
> >>
> allowing to account for the contradictions and fragmentations of networks
> >>
> from
> >> the inside and, at the same time, to produce alternative forms of
> >>
> technopoiesis.
> >>
> >> Federica Timeto
> >>
> >> Ph.D. Candidate
> >> University of
> Plymouth, UK
> >>
> >> Planetary Collegium/M-Node
> >>
> >> fmarineo@libero.it
> >>
> federica.timeto@plymouth.ac.uk
> >>
> >> http://plymouth.academia.
> edu/FedericaTimeto
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
>
> >> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> >> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> >>
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
> >>
> >> Yasmin URL:
> http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
> >>
> >> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the
> list you wish to subscribe to. In
> >> the page that will appear ("info page"),
> enter e-mail address, name, and
> >> password in the fields found further down
> the page.
> >>
> >> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down
> and enter your
> >> e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked.
> Click on the
> >> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options
> page").
> >>
> >> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find
> the "Set
> >> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> >>
> >>
> _______________________________________________
> >> Yasmin_discussions mailing
> list
> >> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> >> http://estia.media.uoa.
> gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
> >>
> >> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.
> gr/yasmin
> >>
> >> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to
> subscribe to. In
> >> the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail
> address, name, and
> >> password in the fields found further down the page.
> >>
> >>
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your
> >>
> e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
> >>
> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> >>
> >> HOW TO
> ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
> >> Digest
> Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to.
> In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
>
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>
> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
