Self.Net -- Tuesday, 3pm Tutorial

The End of the Course as we know it...

2004-11-12T14:49:00.000+08:00

Okay, the major essays are all marked and can be collected from me in room G.07. I'll be in my office most of next week (Nov 15th - 19th), so please do come and pick your essays up.

Also, can I take this opportunity to thank you all: firstly, for your reflective posts which will be very useful in evaluating the course (and thanks for the kinds words about your tutor, too!); and, secondly, and most importantly, can I thank you all for your participation in the many facets of Self.Net. It has been a real pleasure running this course and being your tutor and participating in some fascinating conversations about all things digital which, I'm sure, will continue long after the course has faded in your memories!

I hope your increased critical awareness of digital culture serves you all well in the future, and with any luck I'll see a number of you in other courses, or doing Honours (since so many of you are writing at a level which would see you do very well in an honours program).

Byebye.

Reflective Post

2004-10-26T13:19:00.000+08:00

Hi everyone! Well this is my reflective post and it looks like I'm the last to do it (as usual!). On reflection of the course, I can actually say that I am glad to have been introduced to blogs and blogging. I think it proved to be quite useful for learning purposes, especially as it linked strongly to one of the course sections on blogging. Having actually experienced it gives a deeper understanding of readings and makes the learning process more fun. Its also good to get critical feedback on tutorial posts (especially when everyone is so nice) as it makes you continue to think about tute topics after we've finished them. On the question of the cyborg, I now do consider myself to be one as i've realised that you cannot ever separate yourself from technology. I think it is a part of human nature to continually advance in society through applications of technology. When I know I've enjoyed a unit, is when I find myself applying things discussed and learnt in class to my everyday experiences. I think its important to have some connection with what you study to your own life, it makes new ideas and theories easier to relate to and comprehend. Two of the things I liked most about the course are firstly, the lectures, they were intellectually stimulating and its good that Tama's not afraid to have a giggle. The second thing is the relaxed atmosphere of our tute. I always felt challenged to think things through and view them from different perspectives.
Thanks Tama and the tuesday 3pm tute!!

My Reflective Post

2004-10-25T11:46:00.001+08:00

well well well....I would have to say that all in all the Self.net unit was a good one. Being a slacker single major in the face of crazy people doing triple majors and combined/double degrees, I wanted to choose a unit for the semester that i thought to be totally out of my comfort zone as as well- behaved, stick in the mud commerce marketing student. Out of all electives i've done, Self.net has proven to be the most engaging in terms of the sheer number of times its made me feel like i was in waaaay over my head, but in a good way. Maybe its because i'm a marketing student or maybe because i'm just silly, but throughout the course there was definitely many a time where i would read a reading, listen to Tama's lectures or even the comments by fellow tute group peeps and think to myself "WHAT THE...??!?!?"

But in a fabulous kind of way, thats what made this unit rock, the fact that it forced me to think and draw conclusions about things that i would not have previously have, and on that note, i would have to say that i do indeed believe that i too am a cyborg. Prior to the unit, my definition of cyborg would have been strictly limited to fantasy machines a la Arnie in terminator, yet now i realise that i do see the cyberworld and perhaps also my own personal dependence on it to an extent as the defining part of my newfound cyborgian status ( is that even a word or did i make it up??).

I believe Tama also mentioned being a pioneer in the weblogs for learning movement ( tee hee) and to that i say, bloody good job!!! I have done many a computer based commerce unit and none of them were as fun as this one because they never actually required us to physically get online and do stuff like blogging or chatting- it was all theoretical. When u're forced to put it into practice through things like blogging i think there is definitely a greater sense of understanding and more of an impetus to think about the theory part of the subject is presented ( as supposed to sitting in a class staring blankly at the tutor/ lecturer with the yesof course i'm paying attention look..). I really enjoyed the blogging and other tutors should take a hint and get cracking on it!!

And finally i guess one of the best parts of the unit was having fun lectures and workshops with Tama ( it always makes me laugh hearing my friends whinge when they hear that we got to watch movies for workshops : P losers....)and also the fabulous people in the tute group- a mish mosh of people that rocked and through all our class discussions and lack of( tee hee... i myself am prone to the deer in headlights look and silence when asked a question..), was the icing on the cake for a truly wonderful unit. Dare i say i'll miss it..... i think so!!!!

My Reflective Post

2004-10-25T11:46:00.000+08:00

Reflective Post

2004-10-22T23:26:00.000+08:00

I have really enjoyed doing this unit. Especially because of the blogging expereince. Prior to the unit, I was unaware of the potential of blogs. Within the course framework however, it was difficult to use the weblog for learning purposes. I attribute this in part to my inability to access the internet from home. This meant that to read the blog I had to specifically designate time to do so. Thus it wasn't integrated into part of my everyday activities. Personally, my blogging activities on my own personal blog have changed. It used to be filled mainly with journal-style teenaged angst type enteries but now it has more 'worthy' material. Also in the midst of doing this course, I have witnessed a blogging revolution amongst my circle of friends. I think it would be interesting to study how blogs are contributing to social networks. (Why would you read the blog of someone you see almost every day?)

Initially, accepting that I was a cyborg was difficult. The rejection was like a knee-jerk reflex. I wanted to believe that I was 'natural'. However, what I have learnt in this course has proved me wrong. I am now fully convinced that I am a cyborg.

I take away from this course an enhanced view on digital culture and my own place within it. Thanks Tama and all of you in the tute group!

XXX Hot Sex Sex Sex (Reflecting Post)

2004-10-22T07:21:00.000+08:00

I really enjoyed Self.net. It taught me lots of useful things. Like how to use titles that may be slightly misleading to attract people to visit my blog. And that chocolate and candy truly are good motivators to get students (adults?) to do work. :)

Before starting Self.net I had read Harraway's Cyborg Manifesto and pursued the idea of the cyborg in other English units in films and text. However, I had not explored the logical extension of these themes, that the cyborg is a part of who i am. Yet as I sit here downloading my goldie lookin' chain and moldy peaches through the peer to peer file sharing program soulseek, reviewing my sales on eBay and checking my e-mail, I can't help but think that there was a rather obvious link, perhaps too obvious, that I had been missing in my previous readings of Harraway and the manifesto.

I enjoyed the format of the course, though I wish I had utilisd the blog a lot more. I think a blog has a lot of potential to further learning. It was a novel concept to me and I've never really come across blogs or live journals before, always assuming they were for geeks, freaks, Manson-ite goths and angst-ridden smiths loving depressive persons. However, as I probably fit into maybe just more than one of these categories, Self.net has offered me a great crash course in bloggging, its educational outlets, and the combination of fun and learning. Brilliant. So thanks Tama! and all the others in the self.net tuesday 3pm tutorial massive, big respec!

reflective post

2004-10-21T17:21:00.000+08:00

My favourite thing about Self.Net was the varying ways in which the course work was presented. The different learning styles of the lecture, workshop, tute and blog always kept things interesting and the concepts brought up in class were always kept in mind outside of the official learning sphere.
Personally I didn’t like posting on the blog but that is because I am a dinosaur re:technology that relates to Jeremy’s parents in ‘Zits.’ However, my outlook has inevitably changed since the course. But blogging as part of the course learning experience was essential. The ongoing interactivity encouraged constant engagement with the unit and also provided a forum for sharing ideas with the other students.

Reflective Post

2004-10-20T21:43:00.000+08:00

I personally found the use of blogs for educational purposes quite an enjoyable exercise, and it was one of the reasons I chose the course to begin with. It was good to read other people's views, especially in an english unit where opinions are essential for provoking discussion and debate. The webliography was a new experience, as well as being able to see other people’s submissions.

Before reading Harraway’s manifesto I did not believe myself to be a cyborg, but under her extended definition and the discussion we had in the first tutorial I believe that nearly everybody is a cyborg under her definition. Especially considering the fact we are using a web log that is hosted in another country to communicate with our own tutorial group, and anyone in the world interested enough to view it, we are most definitely cyborgs.

The wide range of topics covered by the course ensured that the unit was interesting, and I looked forward to the lectures, workshops and tutorials because of the interesting discussions (and Tama’s videos during the lectures). The section on video game theory and reflections of society was particularly fascinating.

Reflective Post

2004-10-19T17:22:00.000+08:00

Well, for the first time in three years of uni I'm actually really sad to reach the end of a unit! I can't decide whether it's the content of the unit, or the fact that I'm just a geek, but I really enjoyed this class. The Blog was an excellent idea; although I'd encountered blogging before, having the Blog for the whole class to post on meant that not only was everyone clued up on what was being discussed when someone said "blog" or "online community", but we actually got a feel for what we were talking about. I don't think the class would have been nearly as effective without the practical element. Perhaps, though, the success of blogging is particular to this unit; it's hard to say whether the same format would work well in an Ancient History unit, for example.

Do I believe myself to be a cyborg? I don't know. I suppose according to Haraway, we all are, but I certainly don't wake up in the morning and identify myself as a cyborg. Perhaps that means I am one, though - I don't wake up and identify as female or as Australian either, but I am. Maybe that's part of the beauty of it - perhaps our "cyborgness" is just as invisible as most other technology. Fourteen weeks ago I never would've asked whether I was a cyborg, but now maybe I will; as was mentioned in the tute today, there's an irreversibility of identity that I'm sure I will reflect upon for a while to come.

I loved the challenge this course provided - there are certainly a lot of issues that have confronted me and inspired me to further research them and seek other's opinions. The Visible Human Project simultaneously repulsed and fascinated me, whereas a molecular genetics student friend of mine didn't find the VHP to be confronting at all. Notions of life and corporeality will certainly never be as clear-cut as they once were; it will be interesting to see the path cyber theory takes in the future, and the role it will play in the determination of identity for people who 'grow up' online.

Most likely my last post!

2004-10-19T16:41:00.000+08:00

Although I genuinely didn't enjoy posting to our weblog this semester, I see the purpose of having them and believe that they played a beneficial role in the course. Through the weblog, I was able to learn what a weblog is and also see how the can play a role in creating interactive societies online. I most likely will not participate in a weblog again anytime soon (unless I have to) but I can see that using them for this course broadened my knowledge of ways the internet (digital culture) plays a role in people's lives.

As I said the first week of class after reading Donna Haraway's article, I did believe and still do believe that I am a cyborg. However, after taking this course, I am now able to see the numerous ways in which I am constantly interacting with technology and digital culture. Now I am able to back up my reasoning for saying that I am a cyborg with specific examples instead of just claiming "I am because I use technology a lot".

I really enjoyed our tutorial discussions because we were able to really discuss and argue our own opinions regarding information that we read. Through these discussions, I was really forced to contemplate issues that I had never taken the time to think about. For example, many times we discussed the question of "what is life"? That single question has made me think and question my beliefs and the possibilities for many definitions of life. Who is to say what life is anyway? My favorite part of this class was the many discussions that we had in tutorials.

And I guess I have just finished my last required weblog post! (-:

Ending Response

2004-10-19T15:57:00.000+08:00

As a final post, I would like to say that I really enjoyed this class. Although at first I was a bit reticent at the idea of a class talking about internet life, I realize how important it is to actually have the discussions and existancial questions about what is life? what do we consider alive? are we cyborgs? The digital age is not something we can ignore and put aside anymore. It has become part of us and before we get too attached, it is important to question the way we use it. The class could have only been structured around readings and technical knowledge, but Tama did a great job in integrating weblogs to the class. Imagine, we could have spent the entire class talking about internet, without participating in this virtual community and for my part I would have never known what a blog or virtual reality was! I also found the readings interesting and the worshops were challenging. I prefered having the workshop online because it made me surf (otherwise I would not have done it). finally, I wish everyone good luck with their essays.

Artificial Life & Blogs

2004-10-19T14:03:00.000+08:00

I came across Darwin's Pond. It's an Artificial Life simulation game much like Creatures in last week's tute. I haven't yet played the game, (given the limited bandwidth the uni provides, it's impossible to do anything) but it seems relevant so I thought I'd share it.

On the blogging front...
Purely by accident, I stumbled upon Blogstickers which is a website of bumper stickers for blogs. I particularly liked this one:

You can also make your own blogstickers at The Blogsticker Factory.
I think this page has evidence of culture jamming but I could be wrong.

Playing Politics Workshop Response

2004-10-15T17:06:00.000+08:00

I examined Kabul Kaboom! and September 12th for this workshop, and whilst I think they would have been effective in communicating with people via the Internet, their communication would have been limited to those who sought such media. In my opinion, the majority of the people who would’ve experienced the games would have been knowledgeable on the topics in the first place, thus perhaps limiting the effect of the game.

Kabul Kaboom! in particular had a fairly obvious message – you die if you’re hit by a bomb, but get no score if you’re hit by a burger, suggesting that no matter what, you’re doomed – either the violence kills you, or violation by your “saviours” (i.e. America and company) does.

September 12th was kind of frustrating to play at first, but I suppose that is part of the message – terrorism is ongoing, there is no winner or loser. All that happens is civilian lives are lost and terrorism increases. It was less immediately obvious than Kabul Kaboom!, but still effective.

If I wrote a similar game, it would be a commentary on the recent torture of inmates in Iraq. Just as in games such as September 12th, my game would have no end. The point is to prove that, although the size and strength of the prison in the game could go on improving forever, it is, in reality, bound to fail eventually, as it becomes more and more corrupt.

In a The Sims meets Civilisation extravaganza, you (God, also known as George W. Bush) have an objective to build up the efficiency of Iraqi prisons. Using the inmates, you have to improve and expand prisons. But remember, your inmates will not work unless they are tortured! They will increase in number exponentially as you reach certain points of the game – eg, you will get a second prisoner when the first has built shelter, and the more efficiently your prisoners work, the faster you will expand your work force. Your funding is based upon your interrogation and torture skills. Bonus points for capturing and silencing members of the media, breaking human rights conventions and trading information with Iraqi “traitors”!

Playing Politics Online Workshop

2004-10-15T15:49:00.000+08:00

EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNICATION IN POLITICAL SIMULATION GAMES

The extent to which the two online political simulation games, “September 12th” and “Kabul Kaboom” have been effective in communicating with people via the internet seems to be fairly limited.
Although the underlying messages of the games are expressed in an interesting way, the people that access them are likely to already be aware of the circumstances that the games are attempting to comment on. For example, the critique of the US government’s tactics of eliminating terrorists contained in September 12th was easily identifiable. Thus it feels futile to continually reiterate the ideas suggested by playing the game. However, and more positively, the act of playing the game is one way to motivate and encourage further thought and action on the issue.
However, for those who come across the game and are initially interested by merely the gaming aspect of it would probably further enquire about the ideas that underlie the game. Although this may not be an active process, such as by reading articles that articulate theories behind the game, the views offered by the games act as an alternative means of communicating critiques to a wider audience.

Playing Politics Workshop response

2004-10-15T15:46:00.000+08:00

For the purposes of this workshop, I played September 12 and Donkey John.
In September 12, the political message was explicitly stated. However, I felt that the message of the game had be lost through the gameplay. Although the message was stated in the introduction, there was no reminder of it afterwards. After awhile, I found myself concentrating more on trying to shoot the terrorists than thinking about the message. Having the civilians change into terrorists after mourning their dead was an interesting feature of the game. But unfortunately, that made it only easier to shoot the terrorists, defeating the purpose of the game. The game thus degenerated into purely entertainment.
For Donkey John, the message is also explicitly stated. I felt that this game communicated its message better. Especially in the instructions for the game, players are encouraged to respond to the political message of the game by voting John Howard out. I found it amusing that in the bottom at the bottom of the game where the brand "Nintendo" ought to be, was "Negotiate" instead. This served as a constant visual reminder throughout the game that it was more that 'just a game'. Although, personally, the message was communicated effectively to me, it may not be the case for other players. Upon examining the high scores, it is obvious that they have be dominated by 2 individuals. Having achieved that score range in the game would require repeated playing, an activity that I would imagine to be very time-consuming. In concentrating on developing the skills to play the game, the message of the game could become less important. On the other hand another high score reads "Justice for East Timor" by "www.greenleft.org.au", suggesting perhaps that acquiring skill at the game and knowing its message are not mutually exclusive. Nevertheless, I feel that the score system distracts one from the message. In this aspect, I think September 12 has the advantage of one not being able to win (or lose) the game at all.
I think the Internet is an effective medium for communicating political messages because of the potential number of people it could reach. However, using games for this may dilute the message. Conversely, the game medium could mean that the political message would reach a wider audience as people circulate it. On the other hand, it's function would be lost if the mass number of people playing it do not realise its political message.

If I had to write a politcal simulation game, I would focus on the political climate in Singapore. Singapore would be repserented by the outline of the island, coloured in with the flag. The icons of the ruling party, the PAP (People's Action Party) would toss this island/flag representaion to and fro to one another. They are all dressed in white, white shirt, white pants. The player's avatar (a figure dressed in a coral coloured shirt) is to attempt to "snatch" this island/flag representation. This will be difficult to do so because the speed of the island/flag will be faster than that of the player's avatar.
This game would be intended as a critique against the government that declares as "democratic" but in reality is an authoritrian one. The opposition, represented by the player's avatar, is forever destined to be unable to catch up with them. (The coral coloured shirt represents a member of the opposition whose credability was ruined after he was a questioned by the police for nude picutres. A move he claimed was enginnerred by the PAP. The white is representative of the PAP because they pride themselves on the "squeak clean" image of its members. It is also the offical dress code worn at functions such as the National Day Parade.)

Playing Politics Workshop response

2004-10-15T11:27:00.000+08:00

The two political simulation games I looked at were September 12 and New York Defender. I understood New Yoerk DEfender immediately as a game you could not win as the more you played it, the more planes flew in. September 12 wasnt as obvious to me as I didnt realise it was the civilians turning into terrorists. Yet in saying this I did want to find out the purpose and definite meaning behind each game. Reflecting on September 12 as I now understand the intent of it, I think this was a more intellectual view and efficient way of questioning the United States' current strategy against terrorism.
In answer to the first question, I do think that it is an effective medium in communicating via the internet as the simplicity of the games equals easy no fuss access, it is not incredibly time consuming to play the game and the internet can reach a variety of ages, gender and nationalities. I also agree with the notion that political game simulations are equal to, or at least on the same level as traditional print cartoons.
If I were to create a political simulation of my own I would perhaps look at the advertising campaigns of Mark Latham and John Howard from the recent election. Concentrating on how an emphasis is placed on bagging the opposition whilst the message of what they can do for you is lost. I'm unsure exactly how to make that point but I would stick to simplicity and use a cartoon design in order to accentuate the childlike nature of the situation.

Playing Politics Workshop response

2004-10-15T10:48:00.000+08:00

I found the game 'New York Defender' very confronting due its use of the NYC backdrop featuring the twin towers. After 9/11, the twin towers and the attack on them has entered into the discourse of postmodern media, receiving saturation coverage, becoming a symbol without (authentic?) referent. That is to say, the twin towers have become a written space. My initial reaction upon seeing the twin towers is a feeling of sickness and uneasiness. This was my reaction to the tragedy, as i watched the footage of the terroist planes crash into the buildings. Upon seeing the footage for the millionth time later that week, I still felt the sickness, but I began to feel a sense of helplessness too, as all I could do was but watch once again as the planes crashed and the buildings set on fire. Since then, pictures of the twin towers, on television, in movies or in magazines or newspapers, that may or may not have any relation to the events of 9/11, have made me experience these same feelings. 'New York Defender' mimics the experience of 9/11 for me, as even though this time I am able to interact, I can't help but 'lose' as the towers always fall. I think people may miss the political message of 'New York Defender' as it may be used as pure entertainment. Yet our mediated experience in the postmodern era and the use of the twin towers, a symbol that represents horror, terrorism, attack, George W. Bush, Osama Bin Laden, war, will draw an emotive response from all visitors to the site.

I think the political commentary is stronger in the game 'September 12th'. Due its imitation of genre of strategic computer games, a source of entertainment, it immediately appeals to the browser. Yet as it becomes clear that the game has no 'goal', (there is no score panel and no reward for your actions), the user can't help but think - What is happening here? Why is this game different? What am I meant to do? The representation of war in Iraq as lose-lose is very effective. The user must accept that no matter how good they were to get at the game they will always affect the 'goodies', (the civillians), or the buildings and houses, as they attempt to eradicate the 'baddies' (the terroists). By portraying itself in a familiar format yet with a unique twist, 'September 12th' draws upon Freud's idea of the uncanny. It presents a space that is known, yet not quite right - a knowledge that there is something wrong or unusual in an otherwise familiar context.

My own idea for a video game would satirise John Howard's eyebrows. The game would utilise Flash and feature the alarming picture of John Howard's head as a background. As audio snippets of media questioning are played, such as Australia's role in the war against terrorism or Howard's refusal to say 'sorry' to Aboriginal people, his rather prominent eyebrows would rise as a sign of anxiety. The game would be over when his eyebrows reached their uppermost possible point and fell off. The aim of the game would be to stop John Howard suffering from too much anxiety and guilt by clicking on his eyebrows to make them stay down. Ultimately however, the eyebrows would always fall off, no matter how good a player would become.

Playing Politics workshop response

2004-10-15T03:08:00.000+08:00

I inevitably ended up having a go at all four of the games put up, and i found that the most effective in terms of delivering the political message across to people via the videogame format was 'September 12' and ' New York Defender'. I came to this conclusion by trying to play each game without any biased- that is, without having read any of the notes linked to each game. The two games mentioned were easy to understand and the poignancy of the message they were putting forth was far more quickly established than that of the other two games.

The most engaging for me was ' New York Defender', and as i played the game and more and more planes kept flying towards the twin towers, i found myself getting more and more frantic, and actually felt my heart start to thump in my chest, faster and faster. It was almost as though the game had become real, like it was up to me to save the towers. It was a surreal experience because in all honesty, i have never been one to play videogames and have always thought they were dumb and pointless, but trying to shoot down those plans suddenly brought back the horrors of September 11. I remembered what i was doing when i found out about the situation watching in horror as the events unfolded throughout the day and seeing the now infamous footage of the planes hitting the towers and sending them crashing down. Prior to playing the game, i would never have believed that a videogame could have that powerful an impact on individuals in terms of delivering such a meaningful political message. With the ' Donkey John' game however, i personally didn't really feel convinced of the political message it was trying to put across and i don't think i would have bothered going further and doing any research to find out the actual meaning of the game.

Unfortunately, i am not political nor am i brainy or particularly imaginative or wearing my video game- creating hat so i can't really give a witty example on a politically- inspired videogame of my own.... sigh

Playing Politics Workshop Response

2004-10-14T10:21:00.000+08:00

While experimenting with these simulation games, I decided to let the kid I was babysitting try the games. Well, he is just 11, but he did quickly understand how to play, without even reading the instruction or understanding what the buttons said (New York defender has the buttons in French, but that did not bother him at all!). Of course, he is a bit young to know much about politics, but when he mentioned the games he had played to his older cousin, she did understand what it truly was about and so did I when I first saw the game.

New York Defender has a clear message and basically anyone around the world would understand that it is concerned with the September 11 attacks, but would they really get the message? I do believe that both games, New York Defender and Donkey John are effective at a certain degree. Most people over a certain age (maybe 15, since before that young kids rarely know anything about politics) can guess what it is about, but they also will not necessarily take it seriously and will just play for the fun of it. However, once you discover that those games never end and you can actually never win (this is the case for New York Defender), people might start to think about what this is really saying. ‘This is not just a game, it also represents the current situation’, then maybe they would get interested in the true meaning of the characters. I am not sure if I would have read the instruction or anything about the game. It does depend on the political contain. I can relate to certain political issues such as New York Defender, but at first, I did not see who Donkey John represented nor what the purpose of this oil trajectory was. If this game had been sent to me via email, I would have read the context, because I know it would have been sent with a purpose, but if it just had appeared while I was researching, I would not have paid as much attention. This is just to conclude that those simulation games are more complex than we think and the level of effectiveness depends on the person who plays them.

Recently I have learnt that there exist a lot of refugee camps in Australia, where the conditions are terrible. I knew those camps existed in the 80s, but I thought common sense would have made them disappear. So if I had to write a political simulation game, I would take up this issue and it would look like this: a member of the United Nations would realize these camps are unhuman and would come rescue all the refugees by opening the gate. Each person would have a description of their past including the reason why they are still in the camps. Then the winner would have let out every refugee before the Australian government catches them.

Playing Politics Workshop

2004-10-13T17:37:00.000+08:00

For this workshop I tested the games “September 12th” and “Kabul Kaboom”. Since these two games have no winning state and no scoreboard present in other impossible to win games, it circumvents the "viral marketing" effect which would spread them across the internet via word of mouth. I feel that outside of political reasons, the average internet user would not bother passing the link to the game on to their friends once they had tired of it. However, putting a win state into a no win situation (i.e.: the war on terrorism) would possibly cause outrage from the community, which ironically would create more publicity for the game and its creator’s message. Were this the case, I feel the creators would possibly qualify as “effectively” communicating with people, in terms of raw numbers.

With the games “September 12th” and “Kabul Kaboom”, the political message behind them was clearly evident. However the concept of the “no-win game” was not entirely clear until after reading the article. Since the concepts were quite familiar anti-war sentiments that have been raised numerous times, the message of “war breeding more terrorists”, or the juxtaposition of dropping food and bombs on a country were not so much conveyed as repeated. Thus one of the problems with having a political message hidden inside a game is that people may ignore it or miss it altogether if it is too complex.

If I were making a game similar to the ones examined, I would make one concerning John Howard’s rather spotty record regarding telling the truth. It would work by having a John Howard avatar having to cover up ‘truths’ (for example, the ones listed at http://www.johnhowardlies.com) that resurface with media sound bytes/quotes. The more the player tries to cover up, the more resurface.

Playing Politics Workshop Response

2004-10-12T17:39:00.000+08:00

For this workshop, I played “New York Defender” and “September 12th”. Unfortunately, I believe many people play such games as these without truly thinking about them. In the “New York Defender” game, one can become obsessed with trying to shoot down all the planes and not consider the implications of this obsession and inability to complete the task of saving the twin towers. These games might communicate ideas to people but they do not create communication between people because the games are played by an individual. And I do not think these games are effective communication tools because I do not think they are popular enough to raise questions and start the questioning of politics in society.
While I was playing “New York Defender”, I wasn’t so much thinking of a purpose or a meaning to it, but was trying to stop the world trade centers from falling. In this game, I didn’t find the political message obvious until I read the article provided. However, with the “September 12th” game the political message was much more obvious and I believe this simulation would have been more effective in communication with people than the “New York Defender”. In “September 12th”, the idea that terrorism kills innocent people and breeds more terrorism is very apparent and effectively portrayed. But in “New York Defender”, I didn’t see the political message and, most likely, would not have pursued knowledge of this message outside of the course. However, because this workshop got me thinking about political messages in these games, and since it was the second game I played, I was curious to read the article containing the political message and the point of “New York Defender”.
If I were to write a political simulation game I would focus on the issue of hate and “othering” and how the United States aids in continuing these problematic cycles. My game would be similar to the “September 12th” game in that I would have “terrorists” and civilians running around and the object of the game would be for the player to find the terrorists and to shoot them down. The way to decipher a terrorist would not be explicitly given and I would have people of all races running around. This might prove the point that our culture has “othered” people of brown skin and that because of this, all people with brown skin are considered dangerous and affected by the way our society treats these people even though most of them are innocent and unrelated to terrorism. There would be no effective way for the player to know who is a terrorist or not, and through this, the point would be to demonstrate the ways in which our society has labeled terrorists. I do not know if this would work and I am not sure that I have clearly explained it but I think the idea is clear and it could be executed effectively with a little work.

Mia Consalvo: Hot Dates and Fairy-Tale Romances - Studying Sexuality in Video Games

2004-10-12T13:00:00.000+08:00

Mia Consalvo’s essay explores the construction of sexuality in the world of video games, drawing on Final Fantasy IX and The Sims as case studies. In doing so, she highlights the problems associated with the portrayal of heterosexuality as the “norm”, even in the virtual world, and deconstructs some of these issues by exploring a number of themes, including erotic triangles, gay-window advertising, abstract characterisation and identification, idealised heterosexuality and the concepts of “game” and “play”.

Just as they position players differently (Final Fantasy IX positions the player as the main character, whereas The Sims positions the player as “God”), the games treat sexuality differently. In Final Fantasy IX, the player-character identification is blurred as the player steps into the shoes of Zidane, the (somewhat feminine) male of no specific race, on a quest to protect the princess Garnet. Final Fantasy IX assumes that the player is a heterosexual male; if not, the player is alienated. Consalvo highlights how problematic this concept is, however, by exploring the “erotic triangle” concept (the notion that in a power struggle between two males and a female, the males are really interested in each other, but direct their interests onto the female in order to reassert their heterosexuality and thus avoid negative social stigmas). Final Fantasy IX, however, positions the character and the player in such a way that they are the same person; the risk of male homosocial desire is eliminated, and yet again heterosexuality is confirmed as “normal”.

Likewise, The Sims presents problems regarding the sexuality of characters. The default Sim is a professional white male – not only making a statement about the “norm” for Sims, but also assuming that the player will most identify with this character. While initially The Sims comes across as a more culturally sensitive game than Final Fantasy IX, what with the ability to portray characters as homosexual, a minority, or indeed a woman, it is still just as inherently flawed as Final Fantasy IX. For starters, player cannot program the sexuality of characters, thus positioning heterosexuality not only as the norm, but suggesting that homosexuality (or bisexuality, or trans-sexuality, etc) is not implicit, but rather a choice the individual makes – an assertion that would no doubt have sexual minorities up in arms. Reflecting the state of the “real world”, same-sex couplings can occur, but they cannot be married, and nor can they produce a child (although the option of to adopt is present, but cannot be planned, suggesting a lack of possible commitment, perhaps). Furthermore, not all Sim situations involve homosexual characters; if a homophobic player, for example, doesn’t want homosexual characters, he or she simply neglects to construct characters as such.

These are just a handful of the issues Consalvo raises, more of which will be discussed in the tutorial. I find it interesting that even where an attempt is made to assert the sexual diversity of society, it is riddled with problems; is it simply that society isn’t yet ready to acknowledge the fact that there just might not be a “norm” when it comes to sexuality? Furthermore, assumptions of player sexuality and the ability to avoid homosexual encounters on the part of players in both games is concerning, and a topic I believe requires further discussion.

More culture jamming

2004-10-10T17:39:00.001+08:00

This is the latest release from the Jib Jab people (who did that "Our Land" video played in the lecture), I believe it came out just a few days ago

A Rape in Cyberspace by Julian Dibbell

2004-10-05T11:54:00.000+08:00

Julian Dibbell's piece has been one that has been commonly brought up in regards to the subject of cyberculture. He manages to portray the complex individual and social negotiations existing within LambdaMOO, negotiations which, when viewed together, constitute very real identities and communities. I found it to be highly amusing, insightful as well as thought- provoking.

The main issue that the piece seemed to tackle was the notion of the blurring of lines between the virtual world and the real world in present society. We are living in a world where, in Dibbell's words, " human life may find itself as tightly enveloped in digital environments as it is today in the architectural kind." The advent of online communities such as weblogging, livejournals, common interest sites, web forums, message boards, etc have in all respects allowed for a whole new dimension in communication, one that transcends physical boundaries in a way like never before.

Participating in an online community can involve either the retention of one's own real identity, but in many cases, digital worlds can also be seen as an escape. The anonymity of the online world in terms of the lack of physical face to face contact allows for people to take on not only different identities but also to carry out perhaps even their deepest darkest fantasies, a prime example in the person behind the character of Mr Bungle.

It is understandable in the case of an online community of webloggers, web forum enthusiasts, or other such communities where more real identities are used, ie, the identities people portray are the same in the virtual world as they are in the real world, that certain rules and boundaries must be in place. These could be both written or unwritten,and could perhaps include basic netiquette rules like no flaming, no blocking of people, being polite, etc. In short, it is similar to the unwritten rules of a real life society in which members are expected to treat each other with respect and courtesy, and there is also a certain level of trust amongst each other to do so. If not, then the offending members are likely to be ostracised or experience other negative repercussions by members of the community. Yet in the virtual world of MUDS and MOOs, the characters are all make believe- so are the situations and scenarios. Therefore, in a fantasy world such as that, boundaries and rules are significantly harder to be drawn. The 'rape' that was carried out by Mr Bungle did indeed offend many, however at the end of the day it occured on an online communal virtual space- no real/ physical rape was created. Yet, the real life people behind the characters who were 'raped' were noted to be highly upset by it. Was this warranted? Hopefully, we'll get some opinions in today's tute : ).

The Virtual Community by Howard Rheingold (Tutorial Introduction)

2004-10-04T22:40:00.000+08:00

Howard Rheingold, an original member of WELL (one of the first online communities) discusses the operation, origins and potentials of online communities and the internet during the early nineties in “The Virtual Community.” As the article was actually written in (thus not merely a reflection of) 1993; it offers a ‘historical’ perspective to the rapid growth of online communities / internet use. It is also interesting to compare Rheingold’s predictions for online communities to the current situation.

A. Rapid Growth and Adoption of Online Communities
Rheingold suggests to“…think of cyberspace as a social petridish, the Net as the agar medium and virtual communities…as the colonies of microorganisms that grow in petridishes. Each of the small colonies of microorganisms- the communities on the Net - is a social experiment that nobody planned but that is happeneing nevertheless…” Other biological analogies of internet growth to bacterial growth and online communitiy interconnectivity to an entanglement of grass roots are also employed. Rheingold’s fondness of biological metaphors predicts a rapid, uncontrolled but inevitable use of the system. While this rapid growth has undeniably occurred, the sense of anarchy and arbitrary development that Rheingold alludes to is not entirely accurate.

B. A Utopic Outlook
The multiple potentials of the internet that are now part of everyday behaviour for us are enthusiastically described by Rheingold. For example, engaging with people from overseas whilst simultaneously planning a local activity and reading the news. He optimistically writes that “people in virtual communities do just about everything people do in real life, but we leave our bodies behind.” Whilst all such activities are possible, issues of (dis)embodiment still require assessment.

Rheingold has an almost naïve outlook for online community regarding unity of participation. Employing imagery of “joining voices” and “visions” he feels a strong sense of urgency to collectively engineer the development of online communities. His expectation of the general public to actively engage in the political aspects of internet use is not fulfilled. However, he also believes that “the future of the new has become too important to leave to the specialists and special interests,” suggesting that there may be an increased focus on the public voice, as illustrated today through blogging.

Thirdly, Rheingold’s utopic view that “the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it” in terms of its lack of a central, all-commanding control, has become both a problem and potential of the internet today. While the dissemination of information and discussion is encouraged, so too is irritating / abusive / offensive material.

C. Potential Problems
The more complex issues concerning online communities such as representations of gender, race, sexuality and also ideas of embodiment and identity were not discussed by Rheingold. Instead, he focuses on the more immediate issue of corporate / commercial abuse, urging that the ‘everyday’ user must exercise control over the development of the internet to avoid this. He warns that we must avoid against when “the political and economic big boys seize it, sensor it, meter it and sell it back to us.”

Time magazine: A Blogger's Creed

2004-09-25T11:29:00.000+08:00

The latest issue of Time has an article on blogging that covers a number of the points raised during the semester. Be quick to read it however, because I believe you need a subscription if you want to see past issues once a new edition comes out.

There is also a second article in the same issue concerning the Bush guard service scandal

Tute Presentation Week 9: Matthew Soar Article

2004-09-13T22:59:00.000+08:00

Matthew Soar's article "The First Things First Manifesto And The Politics of Cultural Jamming" takes a look at the agency of graphic designers in the digital age. Soar comes from a Cultural Studies persepective that recognises advertising as an important cultural force, and as an 'expert' form of communication. Advertising is monitored from creation, via its capitalist origins, to the design table, and then onto the public. As Angela McRobbie, who Soar calls upon in his article, argues advertising is the most important form of communication in terms of power in the cultural logic of the late capitalism (an extension formed on the basis of Frederic Jameson's theory) that exists in the western world today.

Soar declares graphic designers as "cultural intermediaries" who can be "potent agents of social change". He positions graphic designers between two binary oppositions, pure creativity and art for art's sake on one corner versus the commercial constraints of the capitalist market on the other. The article attempts to delineate these two sides, and find a middle ground in the moral dilemma of designers and their ethics. Soar states designers "play an important role in lending traction to the contemporary routines of capital accumulation by articulating these values and tastes to the promotion of ideas and events, services and products. The privileged position the intermediaries hold in the 'circuit of culture' (Johnson, 1986/7) has recently been expressed through the notion of an attenuated, or 'short', circuit. (Soar, 2000)"

The two materials that Soar draws on in the article are the First Things First manifesto and the ideology of culture jamming, as present on websites such as adbusters.org. The First Things First manifesto was written in 1963 by British designer Ken Garland. The manifesto was rekindled in the mid 1990s, which served as a precursor to revised edition in 2000, relevant to the designers of our present digital era. The manifesto proclaims that designers hold social responsibility and is a radical and political call for designers to 'stay true' to their creative ethics. In the field of advertising for example, designers are asked to pursue a what i'll term ethical capitalism, acknowledging and being self-aware of the power they hold as communicators to popular culture.

The revised edition of the First Things First was displayed on Soar's second source, adbusters.org web-site. The adbusters.org site is an organisation dedicated to the subversion of popular capitalist culture, and its signs and signifiers, in particular that of advertising. The site advocates 'culture jamming', a viable form made possible by the advent of digital culture and the internet to provide a critique of/or anti-commercialism.

anyone going to buy a pair?

2004-09-13T21:28:00.000+08:00

wondering what the opinion was on adbusters's BLACKSPOT SNEAKERS.

"Be part of the experiment in grassroots capitalism. No more hype. No more sweatshops. No more corporate cool. Step into blackspot sneakers and kick Nike's ass. (Organic hemp, 100% vegan, hand-drawn anti-logo.)"

do these sneakers encourge conformity and acceptance of capitalist modes?
are the sneakers represented as 'cool'?do they provide a true alternative to the likes of nike or converse?
can a non-profit organisation still be essentially capitalist in orientation? (ie. require the use of capitalist design & advertising to advertise its message?
is this what 'subverts'(subversions of traditional iconic adverts) do?

Mark Poster: Consumption and Digital Commodities in the Everyday

2004-09-07T13:40:00.000+08:00

Mark Poster begins his discussion on consumption and digital commodities by first offering a critique of Michel de Certeau’s early theory of consumption. He doesn’t dismiss any of de Certeau’s ideas, agreeing that consumption is an active and valued practice. He points out some of de Certeau’s ideas that have not been reflected in today’s society, namely his thoughts on the place of computers and information in contemporary society, but provides reasons for this. From here, Poster moves on to establishing his own framework that directly addresses the relation of media to everyday consumption.

The article then outlines the various varieties of consumer and also the differences between modern and postmodern consumption. It is interesting to note also the changing consumer patterns which culminate in Poster’s discussion on digital media and consumption, where once again the activity of consumption is changed along with the technology of the day. Poster covers the important details regarding cultural objects and the effects of their digitization in relation to the media and associated large corporations.

The article’s latter sections cover the effects new technologies have on the music, film and television industries, and how consumers are able to resist forms of media control through use of these technologies. Poster concludes by questioning the function of copyright law as it currently exists, in relation to the development of post-postmodern culture.

Poster’s article, as was his lecture, is full of information. It feels like there is an excess of detail at times, but the article remains easy to follow. It could be that the latter section was easier to understand after his lecture, hearing him outline and explain his own thoughts on digital consumption. In general, I found the article to be both helpful and interesting reading.

Margo Kingston's 'Dairy of a Webdiarist: Ethics Goes Online'

2004-09-07T10:27:00.000+08:00

This article is about the changing nature of ethics on the web. Kingston begins writing for “Web Diary”, a blog with the Sydney Morning Herald. It changes the writer from being just the writer to being the writer and publisher. Besides her own writing, Kingston also includes replies and comments from readers. This in turn changes the writer-reader dichotomy. She calls this “trust ethics” in that the writer and readers must develop a relationship of mutual trust. This trust breeds demands for greater accountability. Kingston also deals with the issue of anonymity. For herself, she has allowed readers to contribute under nom de plumes so that they can express themselves without fear of censorship or a backlash.

There is also the question of offensive material, for which Kingston was questioned about when a link she provided directed readers to a racist site. In her defense, Kingston maintains that she still would have provided the link because it acknowledges the different perspectives and allows readers to explore them for themselves.

While this article has been insightful, I feel that it lacks depth. The issues discussed seem to be glossed over in the narrative. Instead of a real discussion about the issues involved in the ethics of the blog, she mainly relates her own experiences. This article suggests that ethical systems are medium specific without locating the blog in a larger field of the Internet.

Critical Annotated Webliography

2004-09-07T07:33:00.000+08:00

Q2: Catherine Waldby argues that contemporary society is gripped by a sense of ‘technogenesis’, ‘the loss of an origin securely located in nature’ wherein the boundary between the natural and technological cannot be easily or concretely positioned. How is this reflected in digital culture?

ABSTRACT
The definition of the term ‘technogenesis’ is taken from Catherine Waldby’s essay “The Instruments of Life: Frankenstein and Cyberculture.” Using Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein as a running example, Waldby traces early explorations into the potentials of science to create new forms of life[1]. She also raises issues concerned with the anxieties and ethics of such potentials, anticipating today’s cultural studies in relation to digital culture.

Waldby links her own studies with those of Donna Haraway’s “Cyborg Manifesto” by supposing that Frankenstein’s monster and Haraway’s cyborg are both ways to think about human becoming. Both are ways to speculate about the potential modes of becoming, about possible worlds of life[2]. Waldby describes Haraway’s “Manifesto” as a call for an end to the privileging of a putatively natural origin[3]. [As] such a privileging merely perpetuates unserviceable ways of thinking that are unable to deal with the ethical complexity of human indebtedness to technogenic processes and the imprecision of the distinction between organic and technologic life[4].

In attempting to answer the guiding question, I would begin by searching for online resources that discuss topics such as the Visible Human Project and artificial life, and how they both relate to this idea of “technogenesis,” the questioning of boundaries between the natural and the technological. In the course of background reading I would also come up with academic names whose articles I would also search for. I offer some examples of keywords to search for online, before presenting an annotated webliography of possible sources. Multiple searches using different combinations of these keywords is helpful in limiting search results.

KEYWORDS
Artificial life, culture and technology, digital culture, identity, Kember, technogenesis, Visible Human Project, Waldby.

ONLINE RESOURCES
Catherine Waldby’s paper[5] gives a concise outline of the Visible Human Project (VHP) and investigates public fascination and anxiety surrounding this project. Waldby acknowledges her own fascination with the VHP, explaining also that it is a “fascination with the uses and meanings of this new social and representational space … whose ramifications and possibilities are only just now being explored and elaborated.” Ideas relevant for research include one section that deals with the “indeterminacy between life and death, between living and dead bodies.” This leads to the idea of biotechnology’s aim of “making the living body more productive, more manipulable, more transparent, to manage and intensify the forces of life.” Waldby argues for a fluid boundary between nature and technology in this case.

In another article[6], Waldby presents a workshop on the Human Genome Project (HGP) discussing the ways projects such as these “rhetorically shore up, yet materially undermine, the privileging of human species-being.” This is another clearly written paper that critiques two opposing positions, which she admits are simplified ones. She says initially, “Each of these positions, the scientific and the cultural/philosophical, characterise the relationship between human embodiment and technology in ways I find inadequate for thinking what might be going on in bioinformatics, of which the HGP is only a subset.” I found her discussion of the two approaches very balanced, and the article in general to be a useful companion to the first Waldby paper.

One article dealing with the changing boundaries between the ‘real’ world and the ‘digital’ world, comes from Darren Tofts[7]. Tofts discusses the ideas of embodied identities, and those to do with life and death in the age of cyberculture. Part of his paper refers to the early-1990s computer game Doom and how constant playing brought about in him “a sudden recognition of the speed with which it had become second nature to think of life as artificial.” He notes also that the notion of artificial life had even less of a public profile then than it does now, and how electronic games were tampering with our understanding of what it means to be alive in an age of advanced cybernetic technology. In terms of relevance to research, this paper also provides examples of technology already being substituted for ‘real life’ objects such as artificial pets in place of real ones.

Bernd Herzogenrath[8] writes an essay further exploring the anxieties of a breakdown of boundaries between the natural and the technological. “The question concerning technology and its relation to 'the human' is more often than not posed in the simple, mostly vulgarized alternative "Does technology liberate or enslave us?" This site was perhaps one of the most useful in terms of the questions it asks. Herzogenrath offers another alternative reading of the merging of man and machinic, the relation between human and technology, that does not explore machines as merely prosthetics. He then suggests a set of theoretical approaches in dealing with this relation, along with a machinic metaphor in reference to the question of the human subject. The article is highly detailed, but written in an understandable manner.

Pat Goon[9] explores the idea that “the blurring of enforceable or regulatable parameters certainly offers a type of freedom from traditional spaces,” using Haraway’s “Cyborg Manifesto” as a basis for his paper. This leads to an investigation into the claim that violence in virtual interactions lead to increasing violence in the ‘real world’ among today’s youth. He draws examples from game/Internet cultures and the manga genre. Much of the paper deals with the potential for an increased rate of violence due to the nature of how information and its access operates in the digital age. However, this paper retains its relevance for research as it engages with Haraway’s “Manifesto” throughout the article, touching on concepts of identity and artificial life.

Finally, Eugene Thacker[10] provides historical background and procedural information on the Visible Human Project. Compared to the writings of Waldby, Thacker presents a more positive discussion in relation to the aims of the project. Part of the article addresses some of the ethics involved in the VHP and touches upon interesting points related to the boundary between the real and imagined body. He also addresses the anxieties surrounding the creation of a virtual body only by a seeming violation of the ‘real’ one. His CV[11] also points to other possible sources of research.

CONCLUSION
These online resources offer an opportunity to investigate the anxieties surrounding the use of technology and its potentials for representing the world. There is also potential for much discussion on the ambiguity of boundaries between such dichotomies as living/dead, and, the natural/the technological. Artificial life may be one topic that encompasses all of these concepts. Although difficult to find at first, after experimenting with search terms, sites that are useful and relevant to research do begin to surface.

NOTES
1. Catherine Waldby, “The Instruments of Life: Frankenstein and Cyberculture,” in Prefiguring Cybercultures: An Intellectual History, Eds. Darren Tofts, Annemarie Jonson and Alessio Cavalaro (Sydney: Power Publications, 2002), p. 28.
2. Waldby, p.36.
3. Waldby, p.37.
4. Waldby, p.37.
5. Catherine Waldby, “Revenants: The Visible Human Project and the Digital Uncanny,” School of Humanities, Murdoch University, http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/Uncanny.html (Accessed 02/09/04).
6. Catherine Waldby, “The Human Genome Project: Information, Embodiment and Experience,” Sociology Department, Brunel University, http://www.ssn.flinders.edu.au/soci/staff/riaz/genomeproject/8.htm (Accessed 02/09/04).
7. Darren Tofts, “Avatars of the tortoise: life, longevity and simulation,” Digital Creativity 14.01 (January 2003), pp. 54-63.
http://www.swin.edu.au/sbs/media/staff/tofts/essays/dc141-Tofts.pdf (Accessed 03/09/04).
8. Bernd Herzogenrath, “The Question Concerning Humanity: Obsolete Bodies and (Post) Digital Flesh,” Enculturation, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Fall 2000).
http://enculturation.gmu.edu/3_1/herzogenrath/index.html (Accessed 01/09/04).
9. Pat Goon, “Violent Cyborgs: Youth in a Virtual World,” Southern Review Vol. 32, No. 3 (1999), pp. 313-323.
http://cmo.library.uwa.edu.au/04154.pdf (Accessed 04/09/04).
10. Eugene Thacker, “The Visible Human Project, Impossible Anatomies, and the Loss of Corporeal Comprehension,” Culture Machine, Issue 3 (2001).
http://web.archive.org/web/20030510181251/http://culturemachine.tees.ac.uk/Cmach/Backissues/j003/Articles/Thacker/impossible.htm (Accessed 01/09/04).
11. Eugene Thacker, Curriculum Vitae
School of Literature, Communication & Culture, Georgia Institute of Technology,
http://www.lcc.gatech.edu/~ethacker/info/cv.html (Accessed 03/09/04).

A Critical Annotated Webliography - Donna Haraway

2004-09-06T20:42:00.000+08:00

Abstract

Donna Haraway argues for the disruption of traditional notions of lived reality through the advent of digital culture. Her quote “the boundary between science fiction and social reality is an optical illusion” dictates a re-analysis of the interaction between reality, society and technology as their spheres of play intertwine. Static dichotomies of the traditional western world are left behind as the omnipresence of technology within western society engulfs our lived social realities. Thus our conception of reality now takes place not only in the world of authentic sociality, but also within the technological world. The interaction of one’s self with technology adds a new dimension to reality, a dimension that displaces traditional concepts of individuality. New questions evolve as the search for self and the grounds on which it is played are challenged: ‘Are we Cyborgs?’, as Haraway suggests; ‘What are the Implications of being a ‘Cyborg’?’; ‘How Does Our Interaction with Technology Alter Our Reality?’; ‘What in Fact has Changed?’; and most importantly, ‘What Are The Repercussions of these Changes?’. Thus my major focus of discussion would rest upon the utility of Haraway’s cyborg, and how the cyborg can be used to de-construct traditional dichotomies of western culture, in particular that of the male/female split.

Searching Online

To find information on the internet, I broke down these questions to key words I could enter into the search engine Google. The search-strings I chose were ‘Cyborg Reality Haraway’ and ‘Haraway Feminism’. The first search string produced 282 results, whilst the second produced just over 500. About a quarter of all sites found would have been of some use to my topic, the rest were mainly found due to their use of quotations of Haraway or the reproduction of her work online.

As a starting point, I found many resources for Donna Haraway at Erratic Impact’s Feminism Web. This site features hyperlinks to online resources that provide easy access to many topics of interest in the discussion of Haraway. Each link has a short brief next to it making it easy for the reader to decide whether or not the link will be useful without having to actually visit the page and scan the document for one’s self.

Online Sources

Carolyn Keen's page on Haraway’s ‘Cyborg Manifesto’ provides an easy-to-understand guide to the terms and theoretical frameworks that Haraway interacts and positions herself within. Keen states in layman’s terms how Haraway finds the traditional notions of gender problematic, as well as the theoretical understandings of feminism. By using Keen’s website I was able to take into consideration a much broader range of ideas and theories that are associated with and can be used to understand the work of Haraway and the position from which she is writing.

Gary A. Olson has a very interesting page that features an interview with Donna Haraway. Olson is intrigued by Haraway’s “intersections of language, discourse, and ideology” and his questions reflect this. Topics of note include the significance of writing to political autonomy and the digression of boundaries that the cyborg presents. Olson’s line of questioning towards the end of the page extends to Haraway’s ‘mapped bodies’ and their relation as members of the workforce and consumers in the process of globalisation.

A page titled Attack of the Fembots by Eva Shoop, a student of Auburn University in the United States, I found very intriguing. Despite its basic display, Shoop provides definitions and examples of cyberfeminism, useful to a gendered analysis of contemporary digital culture. The page utilises the internet’s ability to present information in multimedia and challenges the boundary of traditional ‘textual’ writing by varying fonts and colours.

Continuing on my path of cyberfeminism, I found William Grassie’s article entitled Cyborgs, Trickster, and Hermes: Donna Haraway's Metatheory of Science and Religion for the June 1996 edition of Zygon. The realm of cyberfeminism by this point has redirected my topic question. I now wish to not only position Haraway in a feminist stance with relation to technology, but use techno-fused feminism, indebted to Haraway, as a basis for analysing gender within the realm of digital culture. Grassie’s article is very long and particularly wordy, but is integral to a theoretical analysis of Haraway.

My final site of reference I chose was the product of digital culture. Titled Harraway (ed.) article discussion 4-12-99 , it is the transcript of an IRC meet on Haraway and feminism. I found it an amazing read, as I was able to follow the unfolding of a discussion. It enabled me to expand my thoughts and ideas on Haraway and examine points of discussion that I had never considered prior to my reading. In particular, I took note of Haraway’s ideas on feminism, as united but multiple-faced, which helped me to place her in the context of a cyberfeminism ‘canon’.

Essay Outline

Social reality is defined in Donna Haraway’s ‘The Cyborg Manifesto’ as lived social relations, the play of interaction between people, a constantly changing and dynamic operation of organisation within society. That lived social relations are dynamic disrupts traditional assumptions that relations between people are static and are ahistorically fixed. The traditional meta-narrative of the western world dictates that social organisation can be reduced to a system of binaries. Thus every subject is bounded to an opposition, from which it not only differentiates itself but also derives its meaning. For example, the patriarchy defines male as not female. The term male is therefore transformed from a descriptive noun of the biological differentiation of sex to an adjective that is linked to formations and structure within western society. Male is associated with power, work, strength and the public world, hence the female is the opposite of these: domesticated, passive and without power. There is no middle ground, or space to play with the subjects under this formation.

Haraway is intrigued by the possibility of the disruption of power offered by feminists of the 1970s women’s movement. Drawing on socialist feminist ideology, which validates female consciousness and provides a space for the lived realities and narratives of women, Haraway argues that the disruption of the male/female dichotomy can be advanced by the notion of the cyborg. Social feminism argues that the personal is political, and thus if we find new modes of communicating from person to person, the dynamics of the interaction and its subsequent politics will be changed.

In ‘The Cyborg Manifesto’, Haraway argues that the rise of digital culture and the advent of the cyborg as lived social reality disrupt traditional dichotomies. Digital culture disregards the boundary between organic and artificial. The cyborg, a fictional creation such as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, is the (dis)embodiment of organic and machine co-existing within one being. Therefore, the cyborg disrupts the distinction of what is natural and what is artificial.

The cyborg however has further implications. By disrupting one of the traditional dichotomies of western society, the split of natural and artificial, others are drawn into question. Hence, with the birth of digital culture, the merging of digital with social reality, there is a blurring of the real and the imagined and the possibility of subjectivism that is conducted and lived by through technology.

Bibliography

Donna Haraway, ‘A Manifesto for Cyborgs’ in The Haraway Reader, London, New York, Routledge, 1984.

Donna J. Haraway resources at Erratic Impact Feminism, http://www.erraticimpact.com/~feminism/html/women_haraway.htm (accessed 31st August, 2004)

Carolyn Keen, English 571: Keen on Haraway, http://www.english.upenn.edu/~jenglish/Courses/keen2.html (accessed 1 September, 2004)

Gary A. Olson, Writing Literacy and Technology, Toward a Cyborg Writing, http://jac.gsu.edu/jac/16.1/Articles/1.htm (accessed 1 September, 2004)

Eva Shoop, Attack of the Fembots, http://www.auburn.edu/~shoopej/attackofthefembot.htm (accessed 31st August, 2004)

William Grassie, Cyborgs, Trickster, and Hermes: Donna Haraway's Metatheory of Science and Religion, http://www.voicenet.com/~grassie/Fldr.Articles/Cyborgs.html (accessed 4th September, 2004)

Harraway (ed.) article discussion 4-12-99, http://moo.hawaii.edu:7000/3629 (accessed 5th September, 2004)

Critical Annotated Webliography

2004-09-06T15:23:00.000+08:00

English 252: Self.Net
Critical Annotated Webliography
Elizabeth Goodwin
Guiding Question 4: "From Frankenstein to the Visible Human Project, technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to re-evaluate the meaning of ‘life’." Discuss critically

In discussing the assertion that ‘from Frankenstein to the Visible Human Project, technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to re-evaluate the meaning of ‘life’’, I found that it would be useful to initially clarify the terms and assumptions put forward by such a statement. In doing this I formed a list of keywords which I hoped would aid in this clarification. They were as follows ‘Frankenstein’, the Visible Human Project’ and ‘technological progress and the meaning of life’. From these searches I extracted four articles that proved to be useful in interpretation and analysis of the above statement. In a fresh search I included the name of academic Catherine Waldby which I had gained from my prior readings on the subjects of Frankenstein and the Visible human Project. From this I found several essays with relevance to the topic but chose to include only two prominent ones in my discussion.

Source One: National Library of Medicine: The Visible Human Project www.nlm.nih.gov/research/visible/visible_human.html
The National Library of Medicine serves as the home web page for the Visible Human Project. It provided adequate detail in establishing what the Visible Human Project is and in this sense was able to grant an accurate definition and clarification in the technical vocabulary. The source also provided the long-term goal of the project, its applications, as well as the ways and means one needs to access the data set. In providing links to various related programs and issues it is interesting to note that I was unable to find a connection to the ethics of the program as well as the public’s response to it inception and operation. Overall this source was a perfect way to begin my research in so far as it epitomises the far-reaching abilities of technological progress of the late twentieth century.

Source Two: Opitomize: Redefining Progress
http://www.optimizemag.com/article/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=17700634
Alan Lightman’s article[1] on the idea of progress extracts key points from society’s common and assumed definitions of the term. He states that ‘for at least the last 200 years, our society has operated under the assumption that all developments in technology constitute progress’[2]. In his redefining of progress Lightman asserts that just because the ability to advance technology may be available does not mean it should necessarily be performed. Another interesting point that Lightman made was that ‘technology itself does not contain human values. It is we humans that bestow values’[3]. These points tie in with the idea of the ethics surrounding technological progress and the way in which society reacts to it. Thus it is worth noting and exploring alternative ways of thinking about common ideas such as technological progress.

Source Three: Copenhagen Institute for Future Studies: The Meaning of Life
http://www.cifs.dk/scripts/artikel.asp?id=348&lng=2
Anne Nielsen’s article, ‘The Meaning of Life’[4], deals largely with the idea put forth in the guiding question. She suggests and in turn agrees with the statement that changing technology does cause human beings and thus society to question the meaning of life. She states that ‘the technologies of the future…make us question our normal conceptions of nature, humanity and reality…they move or breakdown boundaries’[5]. The article proves to be very useful as Nielsen poses questions such as ‘what is life? What is natural? What is artificial? Where lies the boundary between life and death?’[6] These questions can be seen to relate directly to my discussion on the meaning of life and perhaps can be seen to emphasise the fact that depending on one’s own context, not all questions can be answered with a universal definition

Source Four: Beliefnet: Do We Really Want to Live Forever?
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/147/story_14779_1.html
The article by Bill Mckibben combines the ideas of progressive technology, life and death. Mckibben argues that in the advancing world of technology death appears to be becoming unacceptable. He asserts that ‘revolutionary technologies are being driven by people with…immortality on their minds’[7]. This brings into the equation the question of what the meaning of life will amount to if the future does not bring the certainty of death. Life and death are inherent factors in discussing the meaning of life and Mckibben’s article can be seen to bring a different angle to the issue at hand.

Source Five: Murdoch University: Revenants: The Visible Human Project and the Digital Uncanny
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/Uncanny.html
The discussion within Catherine Waldby’s article centres on the subject of the Visible Human Project. From this, the processes and applications of the program are again and perhaps in more detail discussed. In her section on ‘Simulating Life’[8], Waldby makes an interesting distinction between ‘real’ space and ‘virtual’ space. In ‘real’ space bodies live and die but in the ‘virtual’ space of the Visible Human Project ‘these bodies are eternal’[9]. As Waldby then goes on to suggest, ‘their ambiguous state is one of indeterminacy between life and death’[10]. This idea brings a different interpretation to the meaning of life that could be discussed more thoroughly. It is also in this article that Waldby asserts ‘medicine’s attempts to master the forces of life through the technical reproduction of bodies’[11]. This bid to control life can be seen to echoes the ideas of immortality and eternal life. Which again raises the question of where does the meaning of life fit in? Or doesn’t it?

Source six: Murdoch University: The Visible Human Project: Data into Flesh, Flesh into Data
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/wildbiol1.html
The article, again by Catherine Waldby, also details several aspects on the Visible Human Project but in focusing on one section on ‘Techno-Life’[12] in particular, "life" is discussed in terms of data and ‘informational code’[13]. Waldby believes that in the creation of the visible human, it has led ‘to biomedical fantasisation about human life and Life in general…which can be animated, reproduced, written and rewritten’[14]. Here, she sees the project as a simulation of life. This again reiterates the point of control over life.

In combining the six sources provided here, an extensive discussion could be produced on the idea that technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to re-evaluate the meaning of life. In searching for solid definitions of keywords I have managed to establish a context for what questions relating to technological progress, the Visible Human Project and the meaning of life. It is important to take into consideration the variety of angles and arguments that are contained within this research, as there is the possibility that ‘meaning of life’ means something different to every human being.

[1]Alan Lightman. ‘Redefining Progress’, Optimize, Issue 2, (December 2001)
http://www.optimizemag.com/article/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=17700634 (accessed 31st August 2004)
[2]Ibid
[3]Ibid
[4]Anne Skare Nielson. ‘The Meaning of Life’, Copenhagen Institute for Future Studies, (19th May , (2001)
http://www.cifs.dk/scripts/artikel.asp?id=348&lng=2 (accessed 31st August 2004)
[5]Ibid
[6]Ibid
[7]Bill Mckibben. ‘Do We Really Want To Live Forever?’, Beliefnet, (2004)
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/147/story_14779_1.html (accessed 1st September 2004)
[8]Catherine Waldby. ‘Revenants: The Visible Human Project and the Digital Uncanny’, Murdoch University, (30th August 1996)
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/Uncanny.html (accessed 31st August 2004)
[9]Ibid
[10]Ibid
[11]Ibid
[12]Catherine Waldby. ‘The Visible Human Project: Data into Flesh, Flesh into Data’, Communication Studies, Murdoch university, (15th May 1996)
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/wildbiol1.html (accessed 31st August 2004)
[13]Ibid
[14]Ibid

Bibliography
Lightman, Alan, ‘Redefining Progress’, Optimize, Issue 2, (December 2001)
http://www.optimizemag.com/article/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=17700634 (accessed 31st August 2004)
Mckibben, Bill, ‘Do We Really Want To Live Forever?’, Beliefnet, (2004)
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/147/story_14779_1.html (accessed 1st September 2004)
Nielson, Anne ‘The Meaning of Life’, Copenhagen Institute for Future Studies, (19th May 2001)
http://www.cifs.dk/scripts/artikel.asp?id=348&lng=2 (accessed 31st August 2004)
The Visible Human Project, National Library of Medicine (11th September 2003)
www.nlm.nih.gov/research/visible/visible_human.html (accessed 1st September 2004)
Waldby, Catherine ‘Revenants: The Visible Human Project and the Digital Uncanny’, Murdoch University, (30th August 1996)
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/Uncanny.html (accessed 31st August 2004)
Waldby, Catherine ‘The Visible Human Project: Data into Flesh, Flesh into Data’, Communication Studies, Murdoch university, (15th May 1996)
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/wildbiol1.html (accessed 31st August 2004)

critical annotated webliography

2004-09-06T09:12:00.000+08:00

Guiding Question:
“From Frankenstein to the Visible Human Project, technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to reevaluate the meaning of ‘life’,” Discuss critically.
________________________________________________________________________

Introduction:

The advent of what can be termed the ‘technological revolution’ of the late twentieth to early twenty-first century has brought about unmistakable changes to society as we have known it. Yet, humans are no strangers to such changes. Technological developments in earlier centuries resulted in similar consequences; boundaries constantly being stretched, rules broken. In recent times, humans have been able to make use of their rapidly evolving technology to allow them far more control of their surroundings than ever before. More specifically, they are now, more than ever, far better equipped to play almost god-like figures. This is most apparent in the manner in which technology has enabled humans to create, recreate and even prolong life at will. As such, the main areas I would discuss would be classic definitions of life, and the ways in which these must be redefined in order to accommodate technology and its effect on life in the present. Also useful would be to look at the course of technological development over the years, with respect to how it has revolutionized society. Processes like cloning and artificial intelligence and their implications on beliefs about life will also be included. The most important question of all will, however, have to remain unanswered: How can life and the meaning of life then be defined, if at all? Google searches were conducted, using main terms like ‘technology and life’, ‘the meaning of life’, ‘cloning’, ‘artificial intelligence’ and ‘designer babies’, amongst others.

Annotation for the first source:

The article by Vishwas Purohit did not relate specifically to technology, but rather to science. Purohit notes that “the issue of an unequivocal distinction between living and non-living, animate and inanimate……. is still unresolved”. In the same way that science cannot answer these questions, technology, often combined with science as such, is questionable. A number of scientifically deduced definitions, layman definitions, as well as dictionary definitions of the meaning of life are mentioned. These serve to make one think about the possibilities of an entity that would not previously have been defined as alive or having life, but now could be considered otherwise, as a result of technology. Was Frankenstein’s monster alive? Is artificial intelligence a life form as such? The definitions put forth facilitate discussions for the answers to these questions, amongst others.

Annotation for the second source:

Orlin Damyanov focuses on Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and William Gibson’s Neuromancer as the two main examples in his discussion regarding technology and life. The paper leans towards one common view of the developments of technology as a perversion to nature and ‘dehumanization’, with reference to using technology to create life, as well as the advent of computers taking a vital, indispensable role in life. This is a jumping off point to again question the abilities of humans aided by technology to achieve ‘unparalleled knowledge and power over nature’, and the effect this has on their beliefs about life. With technology allowing for the ‘manipulation’ of life by humans instead of leaving life up to ‘nature and chance’, where does one draw the line before the creation of life becomes unsanctified and meaningless?

Annotation for the third source:

Shannon Brownlee’s piece details several baby-making techniques, including the now common Invitro- Fertilization method. The article is both informative and peppered with themes of creating human life and the implications on society. I found this article to be different from others in the manner in which it presented both positive and negative sides to the debate of whether humans had the right to create life as such, or alter it. (Again to do with the sanctity of life and what this means to the individual). The piece was notably journalistic, but its subjectiveness presented a good opinion of a member of society affected by such technological ‘progress’.

Annotation for the fourth source:

The significance of this article was obvious straight away, its heading: “What Is Life?...... life is — literally — just what you make it”. And that is indeed what may be, perhaps, the only conclusion to my discussion. The article details of the inventions of Briton Steve Grand that incorporate neural networks and make for some very life-like technological creations. Also, it mentions Grand’s intentions to make his wooden glider come alive with ‘senses’ and ‘emotions’ that he will engineer. Once again, where is the line drawn between what is a life or otherwise. It is almost chilling when the parallel is made by Grand to humans now being in a position “ready to return to the Garden of Eden,” however “not be mere produce of the garden, but gardeners ourselves.”

Annotation for the fifth source:

The official website for Artificial Intelligence (AI) research proved a useful resource and was also highly interesting. It recognized that society did indeed present different and sometimes opposing views to AI and its implications on redefining human life, however, notably, it took a positive stance towards the argument. Aside from detailing processes of AI, the site also contained a number of forums, enabling the collection of candid opinions of its participants regarding questions pertaining to AI and its effects. Additionally, it also listed a number of movies with corresponding hyperlinks that were released in the last century, all revolving around such technology. This proves that society has indeed had to grapple with the notion of technology and its effects; as such movies are often products of human fears arising when their beliefs are challenged.

Annotation for the sixth source:

Dr Patrick Dixon presents the cons of human cloning, including health and emotional risks, as well as the notion of abusing technology. This article also contained links to other similar subjects that could have also been utilized to further the discussion on how technology used in cloning could change perceptions of life and its consequences.

Possible Conclusion:

The only conclusion that can be made is that there is no real answer to the definition of life, as the boundaries of what it is and is not are constantly being stretched by technology. We can hold true to the beliefs that we have inherent within us, but may indeed be forced to widen our perspectives as the technological advancements in this area do not seem to be coming to a halt any time soon. As long as technology evolves, then we will be forced to constantly question ourselves as well as its creations.

References

Purohit, V. (2004), ‘What is life? Can you define it through science?’[Online], Available from:< http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-29-2004-52307.asp> [28 September 2004].

Damyanov, O. (1996),’Technology and its dangerous effects on nature and human life as perceived in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and William Gibson's Neuromancer,’[Online], Available from:<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/5972/gibson.html>[29 September 2004].

Brownlee,S.(2002),‘DesignerBabies,’[Online],Available from:
<http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0203.brownlee.html> [ 30 September 2004].

Geary, J.(2000), ‘ London Eye’, Time Europe, [Online] Available from:
<http://www.time.com/time/europe/webonly/londoneye/2000/04/grandintvu.html>
[28 September 2004].

Dr Dixon, P., ‘Ethics: Human Cloning,’ [Online], Available from:
< http://www.globalchange.com/cloneethics.htm > [30 September 2004].

AI Research ( 2001) [Online] Available from:< http://www.a-i.com/ > [ 30 September 2004]

Webliography Responses

2004-09-06T08:43:00.000+08:00

For guidelines on making your Responses to your peer's Critical Annotated Webliographies, please see details here.

Critical Annotated Webliography

2004-09-05T23:03:00.000+08:00

From Frankenstein to the Visible Human Project, technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to re-evaluate the meaning of ‘life’. Discuss critically.

In examining the assertion that technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to re-evaluate the meaning of life, I began with a closer reading of Waldby’s two articles. I started with some keywords and theorists in Google. This search produced many results and I browsed through them. I also entered similar search terms in Jstor and ProQuest. For articles I found relevant, I browsed through their list of references and checked out online ones.

Putnam tosses up the scenarios of robots as artificial intelligences and what philosophical conversations they might have. She argues that robots have a psychology similar to humans and therefore engages in a dialogue about the civil liberties of robots. However, she discusses issues of possibility not of reality. But asserts that unless we accept robots as “fellow members of our linguistic community” we cannot ascertain if they are ‘conscious’ or ‘alive’ because if they were rejected then nothing would count as a robot being ‘alive’ or ‘conscious’. Although this article was written 40 years ago, its arguments still have currency. Shows that in the last 40 years, although we have ‘progressed’ technologically, our thoughts regarding artificial life have remained more or less the same.

Gunderson examines the relationship between consciousness and behaviour and the explanatory limits of computer simulation of cognitive processes. He makes the comparison of programming a robot and predicting its behaviours to a husband who can control and predict the behaviours of his wife. He concludes that just because the mind is wholly programme does not necessarily mean that it does not have a mind at all. Maintains that asserting that psychological predicates can be applied to robots, does not blur the line between robots and humans except with respect to the predicate in question. I find this argument contradictory and myopic in maintaining the distinction between human and machine, the natural and the artificial. However, like Putnam’s article, this is dated and the thinking was before its time when it was written.

Banham provides a simple definition of artificial life in quoting from Christopher Langton: “Artificial Life is the study of man-made systems that exhibit behaviours characteristic of natural living systems.” He discusses how we refer to ourselves “transcendentally” meaning that we are “aware of ourselves, and of ourselves as ourselves, to ascribe things to ourselves”. He argues that Artificial Life form lack the organisation because its logical interactions govern their operation. This article takes a philosophical stance with regards to artificial life and concludes that the perspective of artificial life as being truly concerned with life is self-limiting. Instead should be taken as the future of transcendental philosophy.

Tofts examines the category of ‘life’ in the age of digital simulation. He investigates computer games, such as Doom, and their representation of our “real” selves as avatars in digital spaces. (He figures avatars as a kind of transubstantiation, the incarnation of life in a different form.) He then goes on to discuss the tamagotchi claiming that such games have come to shape our perception of such ‘artificial’ life as “expandable and cheap”. Because the artificial life can be reanimated upon death, it is not really alive, but only plays at being alive and it is never really dead because it reanimates indefinitely. In the game context, feedback is a memory system, the retention of information that facilitates different outcomes when similar conditions are encountered. This enables the artificial life to ‘learn’ about its environment via interacting with their surroundings, responding when needed and adapting to changed conditions. Tofts then presents the possibility that from this, artificial life could develop a will of its own to survive. This article is comprehensive in its examination of the digital phenomena that causes us to re-evaluate the meaning of ‘life’.

Herzogenrath discusses a marriage between the human and the machinic, a ‘primordial synthesis’. He invokes Deleuze’s analysis of desire machines and social machines, that social production is purely and simply a desiring-production. This perspective does not claim nature and machinic as oppositions but the machinic is our most natural condition. He asserts that bodies are in a continual state of “becoming” because of their interactions with the environment and the bodies around them. Machines and humans affect each other and thus are not separate entities but connected in their mutual phase of “becoming”. He concludes by with the challenge that we need to accept that machines are part of our lives, and that we should not be attempting to master ‘the machine’ because in doing so we fail to “become-ourselves”. While he has good points, his writing is haphazard and is not explained well. Many terms are used without definition or explanation, making it hard to understand and know the boundaries of his argument.

Lange examines the distinction between life and non-life and the relation between life and the “signs of life”. He quotes Langton in saying that artificial life will force us to rethink what it means to be “alive”. Pointing out that there is no ubiquitous definition of the living state and biologists’ definition of this is usually a list of behavioural criteria. Thus asking the question whether the display of “the signs of life” by artificial life would constitute it as life. He also points out that there is a continuum between “living” and “non-living” entities as such the distinction is not as common sense as previously thought. Uses the example of fungi, when initially discovered was not thought of as life because it did not display the characteristic “signs of life”. However, now after research into fungi has proven that it is indeed life, we do not question it at all. He places the burden on proving that artificial life as life on science to discover. I feel that this article complements the other readings because it has a more scientific slant. It adds an analytical edge to the argument.

Without debate, technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to re-evaluate the meaning of ‘life’. I have shown that the concept of ‘life’ itself is not as clear-cut as it is often imagined to be. Our technological ‘progress’ has been constantly re-evaluating the meaning ‘life’ even before the artificial life was created. As Frankenstein, the Visible Human Project and other examples have shown, society has been always asking question of our ontology. In today’s sense, it has to recognise that the boundaries between natural and artificial are now collapsed and with it the human and machine binary.

Bibliography

Banham, Gary. “Transcendental Philosophy and Artificial Life.” Culture Machine, Iss.3 http://culturemachine.tees.ac.uk/Cmach/Backissues/j003/Articles/banham.htm [30-08-04].

Gunderson, Keith. “Robots, Consciousness, and Programmed Behaviour.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol.19, No.2 (Aug 1968): 109-122. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0007-0882%28196808%2919%3A2%3C109%3ARCAPB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M [24-08-04].

Herzogenrath, Bernd. “The Question Concerning Humanity: Obsolete Bodies and (Post)Digital Flesh.” Enculturation, Vol.3, No.1 (Fall 2000) http://enculturation.gmu.edu/3_1/herzogenrath/index.html [31-08-04].

Joy, Bill. “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us.” Wired, Iss.8.04 (Apr 2000)
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html [30-08-04].

Lange, Marc. “Life, ‘Arificial Life,’ and Scientific Explanation” Philosophy of Science, Vol.63, No.2 (Jun 1996): 225-244. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0031-8248%28199606%2963%3A2%3C225%3AL%22LASE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P [24-08-04].

Maher, Jane. “Reproductive Meaning: Shelley, Visuality and Pregnancy.” Outskirts,Vol.9 (2002) http://www.chloe.uwa.edu.au/outskirts/archive/VOL9/article5.html [24-08-04].

Putnam, Hilary. “Robots: Machines or Artificially Created Life.” The Journal of Philosophy, Vol.61, No.21 (Nov 1964): 668-691. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-362X%2819641112%2961%3A21%3C668%3ARMOACL%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U [24-08-04].

Thacker, Eugene. “Lacerations: The Visible Human Project, Impossible Anatomies, and the Loss of Corporeal Comprehension.” Culture Machine, Iss.3 http://web.archive.org/web/20030510181251/http://culturemachine.tees.ac.uk/Cmach/Backissues/j003/Articles/Thacker/impossible.htm [30-08-04].

Thacker, Eugene. “Redefining Bioinformatics: A Critical Analysis of Technoscientific Bodies” Enculturation, Vol.3, No.1 (Spring 2000) http://enculturation.gmu.edu/3_1/thacker.html [31-08-04].

Tofts, Darren. “Avatars of the Tortoise: Life, Longevity and Simulation.” Digital Creativity, Vol.14, No.1 (2003): 54-63. http://www.swin.edu.au/sbs/media/staff/tofts/essays/dc141-Tofts.pdf [30-08-04].

Critically Annoted Webliography

2004-09-05T21:11:00.000+08:00

“From Frankenstein to the Visible Human Project, technological ‘progress’ has always forced society to re-evaluate the meaning of ‘life’”. Discuss critically.

‘Life’ has never been as ambiguous a concept as presently, in an age where so-called technological ‘progress’ commands constant re-evaluation of human existence. Taking Frankenstein and the Visible Human Project as cautions against the exploitative ability of science and technology, a number of questions arise, including: ‘Why is technology regarded synonymous with progress?’ and ‘What constitutes “life” in the age of Artificial Intelligence?’ After re-reading Catherine Waldby’s articles in the Self.Net course reader, I conducted a number of keyword searches on Google and ProQuest for ‘Frankenstein technology progress life’, ‘Visible Human Project meaning of life’ and ‘cyborg life machine’. Below are seven of the more useful results of that search.

John J. Compton investigates the inherent problems associated with technological “progress”. Though the paper is brief, Compton raises a number of useful points regarding technology’s impact on humanity and the environment, providing a useful starting point for questioning the juxtaposition of ‘technology’ and ‘progress’, as well as ethical issues relevant to present and future development. He makes the astute assertion that although we now have a greater opportunity than ever to use technology to the benefit of humanity, it is not without monumental risk.

The risks associated with technology proved to be a recurring theme throughout the research process. Alan Lightman offers his perception of technology’s impact upon the meaning of ‘life’ by reflecting on the commonly accepted notion that “whatever is technologically possible will find an application and improve us” (the language here perhaps indicative of the acceptance of our cyborg future). Lightman is cautious of technology affecting our quality of life, equating the haste applied to labelling technology as “progress” with the process of dehumanisation – a sentiment certainly echoed in the work of many authors, and an issue I believe to be central to discussion of the machine/life paradigm.

Conversely, Steve Mizrach draws on Haraway’s cyborg theory in proposing that computers are the key to the growth of human beings. He simultaneously highlights the dangers of technology, whilst admitting that bio-electrics research is promoting a kinship between humans and technology. Whilst questioning the future of humanity, Mizrach raises a challenging issue regarding attributes considered distinctly “human”, such as free will, emotions and a soul, as he proposes that it is only a matter of time before machines too possess these characteristics. His ideas are quite futurist, and the paper rather amateur, but regardless, Mizrach succeeds in providing a thesis that challenges many in cyberspace.

Life’s corporeal boundaries and the impact of technology on said boundaries are discussed particularly well by Eugene Thacker in his article on the Visible Human Project. Giving a detailed history of the VHP, Thacker proceeds to discuss the project in the context of Bataille’s The Impossible, presenting it in a more positive light than many of his counterparts. Thacker claims that the VHP does not attempt to violate the corporeal boundaries of the human body, nor reinstates life to a corpse, but rather attempts to create only a replication of human anatomy in a virtual space. At times, Thacker’s article does seem contradictory (he also claims that the VHP is a ‘cadaver that does not decay’, and a ‘body lifeless yet animated’); however, it is one of the more convincing papers out there for the cause of the Visible Human Project.

In light of this, perhaps the greatest claim of the Human Genome Project is that it would unlock “what it means to be human”. This claim is particularly controversial; an ethical exploration of the human genome project questions the ability for human life to be reduced to data (a recurring theme in the work of Catherine Waldby, as I shall go on to discuss). Bhardwaj’s paper emphasises the necessity to explore the meaning of “human” beyond genes and scientific research. The paper discusses both ethical issues and concerns that must be considered when approaching such a topic rather comprehensively, providing a useful starting point for ethical investigations in a clear, concise manner.

Catherine Waldby is one of the most prolific writers on the topic of the Visible Human Project and other technological developments of late, having published extensively regarding issues such as the violation of the sacred space of the human anatomy in order to render visible its most mysterious depths. In this particular reading, Waldby indirectly challenges Thacker’s thesis, exploring the perhaps perverse necessity of the VHP to use a corpse in order to collect the data for its virtual ‘subject’; the meaning of ‘life’ is again challenged, as a lifeless, dismembered corpse is reassembled and animated in the virtual sphere. In line with Bhardwaj’s discussion, Waldby questions the action of “decomposing the body’s fleshy complexity into the simple on/off of binary logic”, suggesting that there is more to human life than mere binaries.

On a final note, “The Meaning of Life – in the Laboratory”, a paper by Leon R. Kass, deals with the “humanness” of life, such as embodiment, reproduction and relations with others. Kass discusses ethical, moral and humanitarian responsibilities facing society in the age of IVF, stem-cell research and other extra-corporeal life. Providing an in-depth analysis of such issues, Kass successfully places life back into the body, suggesting that if nothing else, there is a physical edge required to constitute human life – admittedly a factor that may be cast aside in the age of such technologies as artificial intelligence and the Visible Human Project.

In conclusion, I must say that I found it quite difficult to find useful resources on the world-wide web. The most useful information I have found on the topic so far has come from journals and print anthologies, providing an interesting commentary about the alignment of technology and ‘progress’. One would think the Internet would be an optimum place to source information for such a project as this. Furthermore, even in an avenue as broad as the Web, there lacked a range of viewpoints on the topic of technological ‘progress’ and the meaning of ‘life’. The websites reviewed above certainly provide adequate starting points for researching this topic; however, for a truly critical analysis of the question, I believe consultation of offline sources would also be necessary.

REFERENCES

BHARDWAJ, M. 2000, Ethical Issues of the Human Genome Project [Online]. Tokyo, Japan: United Nations University. Available from: http://vulab.ias.unu.edu/GlobalEthos/papers/minakshi.html [accessed 29.08.04]

COMPTON, JJ. 2002. “Knowledge and Power: Some Social Consequences of Scientific Technological Progress”. Wooster Magazine [Online]. Fall (2002). Available from: http://www.wooster.edu/magazine/fall2002/progress.html [Accessed 18.08.04]

KASS, L.R. 2002. “The Meaning of Life – in the Laboratory”, The Public Interest [Online]. Issue 146 (Winter 2002). Available from: http://www.thepublicinterest.com/archives/2002winter/article3.html [Accessed 18.08.04]

LIGHTMAN, A. 1995. “Life Studies: Rethinking Progress”. Inc. Magazine [Online]. (September 15 1995) Available from: http://www.inc.com/magazine/19950915/2614.html [Accessed 18.08.04]

MIZRACH, S. 1996. Should there be a limit placed on the integration of humans and computers and electronic technology? [Online]. Available from: http://www.limmat.ch/koni/texte/cyborg-ethics.html [Accessed 28.08.04]

THACKER, E 2001, “Lacerations: The Visible Human Project, Impossible Anatomies, and the Loss of Corporeal Comprehension” [Online]. Culture Machine 3 (2001). Available from: http://web.archive.org/web/20030510181251/http://culturemachine.tees.ac.uk/Cmach/Backissues/j003/Articles/Thacker/impossible.htm [accessed 20.08.04]

WALDBY, C. 1996, The Visible Human Project: Data Into Flesh, Flesh Into Data [Online]. Perth, Western Australia: Communications Studies Department, Murdoch University. Available from: http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/VID/wildbiol1.html [Accessed 24.08.04]

Critically Annotated Webliography

2004-09-04T19:38:00.001+08:00

There are a multitude of ways in which constructions of identity have been extended and altered by communication and information technologies. I will be focusing on the dissolution of the mind / body binary and how this change in constructions of human identity is reflected in digital and technologically mediated visual and performance art. To critically assess this idea it was necessary to evaluate readings that discussed constructions of mind and body. Searching for various permutations of the phrases, “human subjectivity” and “constructions of identity” with “digital culture” and “cyberspace,” produced many results in Google[1], Project Muse Journal[2] and JCMC[3]. Google searches of the visual artists Stelarc and Orlan produced many results for sites that not only evaluated their work, but also revealed how ‘robotic art’ developed.

ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF ROBOTIC ART[4]
This article was useful in providing a history of the way robotics featured in performance / visual art. The movements in art reflected understandings of human identity, especially in terms of the mind / body binary. The earlier robots of the 1960’s were unquestionably distinct from their human creator / controllers. The large divide in the mind / body binary was still evident in human identity as reflected through visual arts. However, by the late 1970’s, this divide had narrowed. Robotic technology in art became much more interesting and progressive as technology was inseparable from its creator and thus could be incorporated into the creator’s body. Although this article lacks critical evaluation of the links between constructions of identity as reflected in art, it provides a substantial information regarding robotics in art which can be used for further analysis.

VISIBLE HUMAN PROJECT[5]
This article was a detailed summary, with some assessment of the ideas suggested in the book The Visible Human Project[6]. I found this article useful as it offered an overview of the concepts contained in her book which would be a necessary inclusion in my analysis of constructions of identity resultant from communication / information technologies. For example, an overview of the ideas on technogenesis, biological assemblage and the ways in which bodily tissues are represented on the screen are included. Although it would be necessary to consult Waldby’s original text directly, this article is a useful guide for locating sections for further reading.

THE CYBORG’S DILEMMA[7]
This article had a long, detailed and technical / scientific approach to ideas on cybertechnology, thus not all of the information would be applied to my essay. However, many of the ideas discussed in the article are applicable to the development of technologically mediated art. The article elaborates on Waldby’s ideas and reveals unavoidable relationship between tools and organs. Biocca terms this as the ‘tighter coupling of the body to the interface.’ The discussion also turns to the way that senses act as channels to the mind and also how the body is a communication / display device for the mind. These concepts are imperative to my discussion on the two artists, Stelarc and Orlan. Furthermore, the article deals with the concepts of the sense of physical presence in cyberspace. This links back to the contemporary art works discussed in Origin and Development of Robotic Art.

STELARC[8]
Stelarc is a highly significant visual artist whose work primarily concerns technology, the body and their inseparability. The two articles included on this site both begin with an introduction of the premises and theories of his work followed by descriptions of past works and exhibitions. Though these lack theoretical detail and assessment, all of the works have application in the other articles used. For example, the work entitled “Ping Body” highlights that “what becomes important is not merely the body’s identity but its connectivity. Not is mobility or location but its interface[9].”

ORLAN[10]
Orlan is another significant visual artist whose work is concerned with technology and the human body. This article is a review and overview of her exhibition, “This is my body…This is my software.” Although the review is not detailed and further readings on a wider range of Orlan’s work is required, this particular exhibition discussed can be compared to the metaphor of ‘software’ with Culture in the Disk Drive. Furthermore, Orlan’s work is based on the idea of the obsolete body. That is, viewing the body as a “badly adapted machine that can no longer keep up with its own creative software.” Technology enables her to use her body as a way of ‘upgrading’ information. Thus there is no longer a distinction between the ‘roles’ of mind and body.

CULTURE IN THE DISK DRIVE[11]
The metaphor of software used in this article refers primarily to ontological issues of culture. Culture is likened to a software program that can be run by our metaphorical ‘disk drives.’ The article goes further to analyse the problems with this analogy and uncover the extent to which it actually challenges the mind / body binary. Although this article is not imperative to my essay as it largely focuses on memetic theory, it acts as a useful contrast to Orlan’s ideas of ‘software.’

Technology in visual and performance art originated with the fairly simplistic ‘robot on stage.’ The binaries between mind / brain and human / technology remained distinct. However, by the 1970’s such boundaries became increasingly blurred. Visual and performance art also reflected these changes in the views of ‘human’ identity. The advent of the technologically mediated works of artists such as Stelarc and Orlan reveals the inevitable collapse of these boundaries.

________________________________________________________________

FOOTNOTES

[1] http://www.google.com
[2] http://muse.uq.edu.au/journals
[3] http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc
[4] Eduardo Kac ‘Origin and Development of Robotic Art’ (1997) http://www.ekac.org/roboticart.html (accessed 28 August 2004)
[5] Stuart Murray “The Visible Human Project: Informatic Bodies and the Posthuman Medicine Review” in Reconstructions (2002) http://www.reconstruction.ws/021/revVisibleHP.htm (accessed 27 August 2004)
[6] Catherine Waldby The Visible Human Project: Informatic Bodies and Posthuman Medicine Routledge, New York and London 2000
[7] Frank Biocca “The Cyborg’s Dilemma: progressive embodiment in virtual environments” JCMC (Sept 1997) http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue2/biocca2.html (accessed 27 August 2004)
[8] Stelarc “Parasite Visions: alternate, intimate, involuntary experiences” and “The Involuntary, The Alien & The Automated” (2003) http://www.stelarc.va.com.au/articles/index.html (accessed 28 August 2004)
[9] From “Parasite Visions”
[10] Unspecified author “This is my body…This is my software review” (1996) http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~as0kan/orlan.htm (accessed 28 August 2004)
[11] Stephen Dougherty “Culture in the Disk Drive: computatonalism, memetics and the rise of posthumanism” Diatrics 31.4 (2001) http://must.uq.edu.au/journals/diacritics/v031/31.4dougherty.html (accessed 28 August 2004)

A Critical Annotated Webliography

2004-09-02T18:32:00.000+08:00

What is the Meaning of Life?
A Critical Annotated Webliography

Technological advances require society to constantly evaluate the meaning of ‘life’. What does it mean to be alive? In our digital cultures today, one where, as Donna Haraway argues, we are all cyborgs, this question must be asked frequently.[1] This question seems so simple, as if a short sentence like “Something is alive if it breathes and can think.” could answer this monumental issue. However, in today’s digital age, due to such projects as the Visible Human Project (VHP) and the Human Genome project, a concise answer like that will never suffice. Quite frankly, an answer like that would never have sufficed after the publication of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. In the first lecture of our Self.Net class, “information” was given as a possible definition for life which would render the human body unnecessary. All in all, we have been forced to re-evaluate the meaning of life numerous times in history and it is fascinating to look at the ways in which we, currently, are forced to re-evaluate this meaning. My initial Google search was “nature technology boundary” and proved futile except in leading me to a few names which I used in later searches. My search for “Artificial Intelligence” provided over three million sites, which I was able to narrow down in order to find relevant ones. Through searching bibliographies of articles I found, I was able to find names of authors to search.

Having a background on AI is critical to understanding the state of society today. This background and background for technological projects like the VHP is critical in understanding the issues that are testing our notions of ‘life’ today. The American Association for Artificial Intelligence’s (AAAI) website[2], led me to interesting articles and background information. The AAAI’s definition of AI is “the scientific understanding of the mechanisms underlying thought and intelligent behavior and their embodiment in machines.”[3] On this webpage, numerous links are available to different articles and websites that AI related issues. By reading the titles of the links, one can get a sense of the important issues in AI and I would use this information to form a detailed background on AI.

Eugene Thacker’s article discussing the Visible Human Project discusses the idea that the Visible Man and Visible Women are not just an “additive diagnostic aid” but “virtual bod[ies].”[4] Our new capability to produce virtual bodies creates newfound possibilities regarding virtual space. Through this project, the morphing of technology and the organic occurs. Although currently, the VHP has solely provided knowledge of the human body, the creation of these virtual bodies raises the question of where technology is headed concerning bodies in cyberspace. This information on the VHP is crucial to this essay as are the ideas raised by the virtual body.

Philip Agre writes about the history of ideas regarding AI and he discusses the connections between AI and philosophy. Rene Descartes argues that, “it is morally impossible that there should be sufficient diversity in any machine to allow it to act in all the events of life in the same way as our reason causes us to act.” [5] Descartes “partitioned functions between body and mind” which were used as a way to distinguish between a living human being and an “automata.” [6] Agre writes,
. . . the technical work of AI has nonetheless been engaged in an effort to domesticate the Cartesian soul into a technical order in which it does not belong. The problem is not that the individual operations of Cartesian reason cannot be mechanized-they can be-but that the role assigned to the soul in the larger architecture of cognition is untenable.[7]
Parts of the history and Agre’s conclusions would prove useful to this paper.

In an interview Hubert Dreyfus, a Professor of philosophy, stated,
A lot of what it is to have a body we know just by being one. So that we don't have to have a list of facts to know, for instance, that you can't whistle and chew gum at the same time . . . . Your body tells you whether you can do it.[8]
Dreyfus argues that AI needs to take into account the importance of having a body. This argument is interesting and controversial because if the definition of ‘life’ is “information” then the body is not essential. However, Dreyfus questions this idea and claims the body is essential to ‘life’.[9]

Susan Hawthorne’s article[10] is useful because she analyzes the idea of the ‘cyborg’. Hawthorne’s entire article is not necessary for my essay due to her in-depth look at feminist responses and oppression but the beginning is pertinent. She argues that the “definitions of cyborg are too inclusive to be useful”[11] and she quotes Hayles, a literary theorist, who says that the cyborg is “standing at the threshold separating the human from the posthuman . . .”[12] This is an interesting idea that raises the question of whether or not this posthuman form is alive.

Eventually, I would present and use Garth Kemerling’s information on Martin Heidegger.[13] Although this site is not a journal article, it is a useful because Heidegger’s ideas regarding human life are interesting and controversial. Kemerling summarizes Heidegger’s idea by saying, “Because we know that we will die, concern with our annihilation is an ever-present feature of human experience: Death is the key to life.”[14] Also, Heidegger’s idea of “Dasein” is important because Heidegger believed, as Kemerling summarizes, that “self-awareness leads to the authenticity of a life created out of nothing, in the face of dread, by reference only to one’s own deliberate purposes.”[15] Heidegger suggests that one is alive when one can die and fear death. This definition would be important in shaping the part of my essay regarding different views of what constitutes life.

In this digital age, the line between organic and technology has been blurred as numerous scholars point out, namely Haraway. If I were to continue and write this essay, I would head in the direction of demonstrating the ways in which we have been forced to re-evaluate the meaning of ‘life’ and proceed to my conclusion that there might never be one definite answer of the meaning of ‘life’. However, I would conclude that AI and such machines and “monsters” like Frankenstein do not constitute as living beings. My reasoning resides in my belief that life originates from nature, includes true feelings and self-awareness capabilities and ends in death, as Heidegger said. True, I would consider myself a cyborg but I would not consider all cyborgs, like the ones viewed in Star Trek, alive. With technological progress, we are forced, and have been forced for centuries, to reexamine this issue of what it means to be alive.

Footnotes
[1] Haraway, Donna, “A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s”, The Haraway Reader. (1984) London and New York: Routledge, 2003, pp. 7-45.
[2] American Association for Artificial Intelligence, “Welcome to the American Association for Artificial Intelligence”, http://www.aaai.org/, accessed 2 September 2004
[3] American Association for Artificial Intelligence, “AI Overview”, http://www.aaai.org/AITopics/html/overview.html, accessed 2 September 2004.
[4] Thacker, Eugene, “Lacerations: The Visible Human Project, Impossible Anatomies, and the Loss of Corporeal Comprehension”, http://web.archive.org/web/20030510181251/http:/culturemachine.tees.ac.uk/Cmach/Backissues/j003/Articles/Thacker/impossible.htm, accessed 2 September 2004.
[5] Agre, Philip E., “The Soul Gained and Lost: Artificial Intelligence as a Philosophical Project”, http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHR/4-2/text/agre.html, 4 June 1995, accessed 2 September 2004.
[6] Agre.
[7] Agre.
[8] Mars Hill Audio, “Segment Profile: Guest Hubert Dreyfus”, Mars Hill Audio Journal, Vol. 58, http://www.marshillaudio.org/resources/segment_detail.asp?ID=453054369, 2004, accessed 2 September 2004.
[9] Mars Hill Audio.
[10] Hawthorne, Susan, “Cyborgs, Virtual Bodies, and Organic Bodies: Theoretical Feminist Responses” in Cyberfeminism:Connectivitiy, Critique and Creativity, Ed. Susan Hawthorne and Renate Klein. North Melbourne: Spinifex Press, 1999, pp.213-249. http://cmo.library.uwa.edu.au.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/04155.pdf, accessed 1 September 2004.
[11] Hawthorne, 217.
[12] Hawthorne, 217.
[13] Kemerling, Garth, “Martin Heidegger”, http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/heid.htm, 7 August 2002, accessed 1 September 2004.
[14] Kemerling, Garth, “Heidegger: Being-There (or Nothing)”, http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/7b.htm#nothing, 27 October 2001, accessed 1 September 2004.
[15] Kemerling, Garth, “Heidegger: Being-There (or Nothing)”, http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/7b.htm#nothing, 27 October 2001, accessed 1 September 2004.

Works Cited
Agre, Philip E., “The Soul Gained and Lost: Artificial Intelligence as a Philosophical Project”, http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHR/4-2/text/agre.html, 4 June 1995, accessed 2 September 2004.

American Association for Artificial Intelligence, “AI Overview”, http://www.aaai.org/AITopics/html/overview.html, accessed 2 September 2004.

American Association for Artificial Intelligence, “Welcome to the American Association for Artificial Intelligence”, http://www.aaai.org/, accessed 2 September 2004

Haraway, Donna, “A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s”, The Haraway Reader. (1984) London and New York: Routledge, 2003, pp. 7-45.

Hawthorne, Susan, “Cyborgs, Virtual Bodies, and Organic Bodies: Theoretical Feminist Responses” in Cyberfeminism:Connectivitiy, Critique and Creativity, Ed. Susan Hawthorne and Renate Klein. North Melbourne: Spinifex Press, 1999, pp.213- 249. http://cmo.library.uwa.edu.au.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/04155.pdf, accessed 1 September 2004.

Kemerling, Garth, “Heidegger: Being-There (or Nothing)”, http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/7b.htm#nothing, 27 October 2001, accessed 1 September 2004.

Kemerling, Garth, “Martin Heidegger”, http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/heid.htm, 7 August 2002, accessed 1 September 2004.

Mars Hill Audio, “Segment Profile: Guest Hubert Dreyfus”, Mars Hill Audio Journal, Vol. 58, http://www.marshillaudio.org/resources/segment_detail.asp?ID=453054369, 2004, accessed 2 September 2004.

Thacker, Eugene, “Lacerations: The Visible Human Project, Impossible Anatomies, and the Loss of Corporeal Comprehension”, http://web.archive.org/web/20030510181251/http:/culturemachine.tees.ac.uk/Cmach/Backissues/j003/Articles/Thacker/impossible.htm, accessed 2 September 2004.

Critical Annotated Webliography

2004-09-02T17:25:00.000+08:00

Webliography on Identity in Regards to Information and Communication Technologies

The 20th century has been of great importance in the development of new information and communication technologies. Those technologies can be seen in the advents of telegrams, telephones, televisions, computers, electronic mail and the most commonly known; the World Wide Web. These new tools allow for information to be spread quickly and communication to occur between people around the world. The image of one’s self has been modified to fit the era of the digital age and this essay will focus on the construction of identity in respect to information and communication technologies. I will not be answering the question directly, but will rather give a detailed webliography using different terms as a focus for my sources. This would enable me to define identity and technologies, therefore creating a relation between these two terms. In order to find related sources, I first looked through a selection of authors and texts in our further reading directory. From this, I searched key words such as ‘Anne Balsamo’, ‘Susan Hawthorne’, ‘identity in cyberspace’ and ‘information and communication technologies’ on Google and Yahoo’s search engines, which presented a range of articles from which I selected the most useful and most appropriate to the subject.

After a few readings about Anne Balsamo’s articles, I came across a Women’s Studies graduate website. While researching for her master’s degree, Krista Scott summarized Anne Balsamo’s book, [1] which gave me a general idea of the content of Anne Balsamo’s writings. Divided into chapters, her analysis of the most interest for this topic was in regards to chapter five, ‘The Virtual Body in Cyberspace.’ Although the terms ‘body’ and ‘identity’ have separate meanings, they are strongly inter-related and can be used to define each other. Therefore, by acknowledging that there is a relationship between the body and identity, this site could provide quotes to explain the disappearance of the body as a construction of identity.

As a continuation of Anne Balsamo’s thinking, Mark Hodges’s essay reports on basic terms such as ‘cyberspace’ itself and ‘the virtual bodies.’ He uses Balsamo’s ideas to support his theory of self-identity in cyberspace. In addition to giving us a good review of Balsamo, he adds that the question related to identity is subjective and therefore difficult to answer clearly. Hodges examines the principle that a body is not the direct link to identity and that cyberspace is not a synonym for a free body. Also, he defines what Balsamo calls ‘Virtual Reality’, which relates directly to our essay question regarding identity extension. In his essay, Hodges first takes time to define his terms making it a great help for beginners in the domain. To summarize, this source can be trusted and Hodges even states at the end that he finds no harm in other people quoting him and using his ideas as long as we identify him as a source.

As a third source, I found an article, written by law students, related to digital identity in cyberspace, which raises the question of identity theft. It relates to our topic in the sense that the extent of identity in cyberspace can easily be doubted. These law students explain how information about identity can transport us to misleading sources and, therefore, problems surrounding secure identity raises. To prove their point, the students used William Gibson, making it possible for this topic to connect with the ideas seen in class regarding Neuromancer [2]. Although the essay employs a particular language related to law, it can still be easily interpreted.

On the same topic, Blanca Lopez-Martinez created a website describing identity in cyberspace. Even though the sources noted above all concern cyberspace, we can associate information and communication technologies with cyberspace and this particular website, although of short length, does explore the advantages of communication technology. She does a good job of presenting the topic of extended identity created by technology and the association to others. Her essay is more philosophical than scientific which could provide hints to broader discussions.

As it is important to include opinions in our sources when writing an essay, I found an interesting blog relating once again to digital identity. This source is different in that it argues against digital identity and criticizes William Gibson and his book Neuromancer [3]. Phil Wainewright introduces the concept of the Internet as being a simple tool to send data around the world, and nothing else. Therefore, this could help make the point that not everyone has the same concept of digital identity. Although he is against the principle of analysing digital identity, he does support the digital bank of information that governments and other important societies keep about us. He sees no point of having two digital identities when a society already created one for us. In this source, it becomes clear that digital identity is subjective.

As one of the last sources, I would use Felix Stalder's essay. This is a critical source because I did not entirely agree with his saying, but it can only help if I am able to balance his opinion and include it in an idea to prove my point. His ideas reflect those of the general public about the Internet. He argues that these new information and communication technologies can help us create a new identity, therefore allowing us to become who we really are or who we want to be. This gives us an idea of what people really think of their identity and helps to explain how they create their own personalized identity. He also brings up a point regarding future identity, which could be restrained and would therefore not allow for free creation.

Using these sources, I could formulate a strong conclusion related to the ideas found above. As a means of understanding the question, I also need to research the description of terms such as ‘construction of identity’ and ‘information and communication technology.’ By using sources that relate to the main term of the essay question, I am able to create links. In summary, I looked up terms such as identity and cyberspace and came up with enough information to deal with the creation of ideas, which would be: the reason for identity in cyberspace, the role of it and how we can personalize our own identity.

References:
[1] Anne Balsamo. Technologies of the Gendered Body: Reading Cyborg Women. Durham: Duke University Press, 1996.
[2] William Gibson, Neuromancer, 1984, pp. 67-73 & 313-317.
[3] William Gibson, Neuromancer, 1984, pp. 67-73 & 313-317.

Course Reader
Balsamo, Anne. “Forms of Technological Embodiment: Reading the Body in Contemporary Culture” Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk: Cultures of Technological Embodiment. Eds. Mike Featherstone and Roger Burrows. London: Sage, 1995
Scott, Krista. York University 1998
http://www.stumptuous.com/comps/balsamo.html (accessed 26 August 2004).
Balsamo, Anne. Technologies of the Gendered Body: Reading Cyborg Women. Durham: Duke University Press, 1996.
Hodges, Mark. ‘Virtual Reality and the Human Body. Research Horizons Magazine, (Summer 1993)
http://www.eff.org/Net_culture/Cyborg_anthropology/vr_and_human_body.article (accessed 28 August 2004)
Covell, Paul. Gordon, Steve. Hochberger, Alex. Kovacs, James. Krikorian, Raffi. Schneck, Melanie. ‘Digital Identity in Cyberspace,’Law of Cyberspace: Social Protocols, (December 1998)http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/6095/student-papers/fall98-papers/identity/white-paper.html (accessed 27 August 2004)
Lopez-Martinez, Blanca. ‘Identity in Cyberspace’ (spring 2001)
http://pt3.nmsu.edu/educ621/blanca2001.html (accessed 28 August 2004)
Wainewright, Phil. ‘Digital Identity and the Real World’, (18 October 2002) http://www.looselycoupled.com/blog/2002_10_13_lc.htm (accessed 27 August 2004)
Stalder, Felix. ‘Digital Identities’, (August 2002)
http://www.xcult.org/texte/stalder/identity.html (accessed 27 August 2004)

Critical Annotated Webliography

2004-09-01T20:42:00.000+08:00

If my question was:
“Critically assess the ways in which constructions of identity have been extended and/or altered by information and communication technologies.”

My introduction would read:
Since before the dawn of the World Wide Web as we know it, communications mediums such as radio or telephones have enabled people to construct different identities or personas. A Radio DJ’s on-air persona for instance is often more outrageous than his normal mannerisms, for entertainment and thus ratings. However, in radio and telephone the aural remnants are often enough to divulge gender, national heritage and sometimes even age. With the wide-spread use of the internet it is easier for a user to masquerade as whatever they wish, with the promise of as much anonymity as they desire to protect them.

The annotation for the first source would read:
Michael Maranda’s article argues the point that gender is a social relation, not a biological constant. In constant flux instead of fixed. He states that within LambdaMOO many female players are gendered male or neutral, as when playing female characters they are often harassed by the disproportionately large number of male players. This raises the question of whether this sort of behaviour (both the harassment and the gender-neutral form of avoiding unwanted attention) would be carried out in the offline world. He talks of the male players masquerading as female; often searching out sexual harassment and falling back onto stereotyping in the creation of their personas and brings a fascinating psychological analysis into it.

The annotation for the second source would read:
Byron Burkhalter’s article argues against the common notion that race is easily hidden online, and goes on to contend that once racial identity is discovered, it is often stereotyped to a great degree than what would occur offline. Another contrarian notion that Burkhalter brings up is that the anonymity of the internet that is promoted by so many may also disqualify the author’s contributions from being taken seriously. It is a useful article which is easily readable that uses Usenet postings to refute common conceptions about online identity and back up his assertions.

The annotation for the third source would read:
John Masterson’s article is presented in a very journalistic style, which enhances readability. It tackles the subject of cyber-identity while gaming from a gamer’s perspective, which may lend a bias towards the subject but at the same time provides a non-academic viewpoint. Although MUDs have decreased in popularity since the mid-90s, the themes of avatar creation still hold true today, and Masterson points out that the characters created by users are often the standard “beautiful people” as portrayed in the visual media. The promise of anonymity also brings up the concept of “shipboard syndrome”, where the player feels they will never encounter other players and thus believe normal social restrictions do not apply to them. This brings both negative (increased rates of insults) and positive (increased communication with strangers) communicative traits.

The annotation for the fourth source would read:
Amy S Bruckman’s article was extremely easy to read, and reinforced the notion that genders can be easily swapped on the internet (in MUDs, for this article). Her case study on Peter brought up an interesting conclusion, that after playing as a female character for so long, “The experience of gender swapping in MUDs defamiliarised Peter's real life gender role”. She argues that because of this, Peter has new tools and a fresh perspective to understand what being a “man” is about. In her conclusion she states how national identity can also be swapped with the case of Jack, a British student studying in America. It was a shame that this point was not further elaborated upon, as it would have gone towards further understanding the construction of identity online.

The annotation for the fifth source would read:
Haya Bechar-Israeli’s article covers IRC, which is similar to MUDs, except chat-oriented rather than fantasy role playing oriented. He brings up Freud’s assertion that names, even online pseudonyms in this case, form a primal part of a person’s identity. It is therefore quite fascinating to see which names people take for themselves, instead of being assigned them, when given the option (similarly as they are given the option to choose how they represent their race, age, gender, etc online). A noteworthy comment is raised about how although men’s CB-Radio handles often included their hobbies etc, while women often stuck to either “decent” or “indecent” women’s names. This could be indicative of the continued existence of the Madonna/Whore dichotomy, and arguably that identity construction has not been extended or altered at all.

The annotation for the sixth source would read:
John Suler takes a journalistic approach in his “Gender Swapping” chapter, and raises a good point with his question why so many men want to experiment with the female identity and offers many explanations along with questions that may be used to “catch out” gender swappers, something that does not appear in many other articles. Interestingly, all of the suggested questions revolve around female biology and products. Along with this, he lists possible reasons for females masquerading as males online based on the experiences of one woman player. Overall, this was an excellent article and the rest of the chapters in the book would be quite useful for research.

My conclusion would read:
Online identity is logically more fluid than in the real world given the separation of mental and physical attributes, although as demonstrated it is still prone to the same problems that face identity swappers offline. A sense of “fraud” or “betrayal” is often reported once a person’s “true” identity is discovered. While the internet offers the possibility to radically alter your identity, there is always the underlying reason as to why that is even necessary.

REFERENCES

• Michael Maranda (1994) "Faking it in Cyberspace: Boys will be Girls will be Boys." [On-line] Available from: http://www.usyd.edu.au/su/social/papers/maranda.txt[Accessed August 29 2004]
• Byron Burkhalter. (1999), “Reading Race Online: Burkhalter” [On-line] Available from: http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/kollock/papers/communities_03.htm [Accessed August 29 2004]
• John Masterson. (1994), "Ethnography of a Virtual Society" [On-line] Available from: http://ftp.game.org/pub/mud/text/research/ethno.txt [Accessed August 29 2004]
• Amy S Bruckman. (1993), “Gender Swapping on the Internet” [On-line] Available from: http://www.mith2.umd.edu/WomensStudies/Computing/Articles+ResearchPapers/gender-swapping [Accessed August 29 2004]
• Haya Bechar-Israeli. (1995) “From Bonehead to cLoNehEAd. Nicknames, Play, and Identity on Internet Relay Chat” [On-line] Available from: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol1/issue2/bechar.html [Accessed August 29 2004]
• John Suler. (2002). “Do Boys (and Girls) Just Wanna Have Fun?” in “The Psychology of Cyberspace”, http://www.rider.edu/~suler/psycyber/genderswap.html (article orig. pub. 1996)
• Chris Kimble. (2001). "MUDS, MOOS and Chat Lines: Identity and gender in cyberspace" [On-line] Available from http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~kimble/teaching/hi-2/topic_7.html [Accessed August 29 2004]
• Marj Kibby. (2001). "Gender Issues on the Internet" [On-Line] Available from http://www.newcastle.edu.au/discipline/sociol-anthrop/staff/kibbymarj/gender.html [Accessed August 29 2004]
• Frank Schaap. (2003). "Fragment.nl :: Cyberculture, Identity and Gender Resources" [On-Line] Available from http://fragment.nl/resources/online_articles.html [Accessed August 29 2004]

Menu-Driven Identities Workshop Response

2004-08-31T23:18:00.000+08:00

It interesting to note that on the Yahoo! sign-up page, there is an option for "Language & content" in which several options are given to users as to what kind of language variation they speak. For example for English, there is "English-United States", "English-United Kingdom", "English-Australia" and much more. What I find problematic about these given options is that it conflates language with geographical boundaries and therefore is limiting. For example in the Chinese language options, there is one called "Chinese- US & others", as if the Chinese spoken within US and a myraid of other countires are the same.
Second life sign-up page has no questions about location or language at all. However it does ask for a a Second Life last name, of which, the website provides a set list of choices. What I noted about these last names is that they seem to be all Germanic and Romanic last names. Specifically I was looking out for last names that might sound Chinese but there were none. Perhaps this suggests gameworld identity is assumed to be white. Since there are no language questions and the interface is in English, it appears that they have assumed their users to be speakers of the English language.
The abscenes in the options of the three websites imply a sort of racism in which minorities are excluded from the possibility of identity selection, as if they didn't exsist at all.
The default options for Lavalife presumes that the majority of their users are males, looking for females, above the age of 18. When I clicked "Search" without putting a region, it assumed that I was looking for a partner in USA. The configurations of the descriptions are generally in this order: age, gender, location, 'race', star-sign (western), religion, height, body type, smoke?, drink?.
The question of star-sign completely omit the Chinese horroscpopes that are increasingly becoming more popular. It seems to support the idea that people can be attracted to each other based only on these categorical descriptions (pun intended). Additionally, the website uses the binary categories of "White", "Black", or "Asian". There is no breakdown as to what these categories actually mean. What does "Asian" mean? There are so many Asian nations and cultures that it is barely descriptive to say that one is Asian. Additionally, it has no hybrid identities for people of mixed parentage. While I do not know whether this is a structural problem, there were no hybrid identities present in the profiles of those I viewed.
To end with what we began, I would like to say that the MCI advertisement was grossly over-idealisitic. It is evident from these 3 websites that the internet is not a world where there is no race, genders and age. In fact from the questions these websites ask, these 3 coordinates still seem to dictate online interaction.

Menu-Driven Identity Workshop Response

2004-08-27T16:46:00.000+08:00

I’m focusing my comment on the idea of mixed-raced identity, one part of a seemingly large group or minority groups commonly labeled as “other” when registering for many online services. Each of the websites we’ve looked at deal with this differently, or not at all. So are the websites we’ve visited inherently racist?

Microsoft asks users for their language and location separately, whereas Yahoo joins language and location into one choice in order to match content to specific regions. I actually find Yahoo’s selection to be very limiting, as users who speak certain languages are automatically assumed to be from a specific region. For example, if a French speaker were based in Australia, would they be disadvantaged by local content not being in their primary language?

If one trait of racism is exclusion, then the fact that so many potential choices for identity, especially in a time where inter-racial marriage and multi-racial children are increasingly common, then their identities are not considered to even exist at all by online services. It’s ironic that the western world loves to describe models that have a rich racial background/make-up as “exotic,” but fail to provide these many combinations of race as choices for the online users. Someone with mixed heritage, who is often proudly so, is forced to choose “the closest fit” when it comes to “race.” Where Microsoft and Yahoo focus only on language and location, Lavalife seems to place great importance on “race,” and is the main offender in terms of my argument.

Upon first visiting the “Second Life” registration page, the absence of categories such as language, race and nationality may lead to the conclusion that THIS is a site of potential utopian online harmony, a place where your race has no importance placed on it. However, as Desmond pointed out, it is extremely exclusive to users of languages other than English. As this is a virtual world, it seems “real world” identity has no importance. Microsoft and Yahoo rely on “real world” identity due to issues of security and legality. But at Second Life, you can theoretically be anyone and anything (as long as you speak “decent” English) until it’s time to pay the bill via your authorized credit card at least… It is then, that your identity will already have been confirmed (location, language, and perhaps even race) through the methods used by such websites as the other 3 we’ve looked at.

Menu-Driven Identity Workshop Response

2004-08-26T22:51:00.000+08:00

"I have long suspected that the much vaunted "freedom" to shed the "limiting" markers of race and gender on the Internet is illusory..." (From an article by Kalí Tal)

I think an interesting place to start concerns the Hotmail email services, known broadly as the Microsoft "passport". The notion of a passport implies some sort of fluidity and mobility for the user; however, just as in real life, online passports are restricted. In this case, users are limited to an identity selected from a menu of options - a menu that often disregards many languages, ethnicities or places of origin. The categories of identity offered by Hotmail are not exclusive to this program; it is true for many online application forms, including Yahoo and Lavalife. Although all three of these websites offer the option for users to select a nationality and language, the languages offered are more often than not incredibly limited (with English the default language, creating problems for non-English users before they even sign up for an account), and users may often only be able to select one nationality. Second Life does not even offer a language other than English to its users - presumably, not all Second Life users speak English as their first language. A common trait across the board with the websites studied for this response was the fact that users must elect their gender to be either Male or Female; this is particularly poignant given the increasingly PC world in which we live, as users not identifying with either gender (or with both, as the case may be) are further restricted to pigeon-holing themselves into inappropriate categories.

Moving on to the identities offered to users of Lavalife, it is interesting to note what browsers of the site are first witness to. Asides from factors such as age, location, star sign and religion, Lavalife seems to play upon the 'importance' of physical appearance to dating and relationships. The order in which the Lavalife program has elected to display physical attributes is particularly poignant - skin colour is the first physical descriptor listed in a user's profile. Interestingly, of the 100 or so profiles I browsed, only 5 were not White. Of these, 2 were "black" (though whether of African original, Aboriginal origin or otherwise is not noted), one was Hispanic-Latino and one was the vague category of 'Other'. This is perhaps not suprising, given that the Internet is perceived as a White space; what is suprising is that only one user of one hundred elected not to include their race as an element of their profile. Furthermore, the initial profile of Lavalife clients does not offer one personal statement about the user, though it does offer three pieces of information about their physical appearance (race, height and build) and one regarding their religious beliefs (incidentally, of the 100 profiles, approximately one quarter were non-religious, one half Christian and one quarter Anglican - not one Muslim, Buddhist or Hindu (or any other religion not traditionally practiced in the West) in sight.

Though I'm sure Lavalife does not intend to be racist, I believe it is fair to say that it is inherently so. The fact that a user's age and location is followed immediately by their race assumes that skin colour is still massively important, even on the Internet - a space incorrectly regarded as raceless and genderless. The design of the Lavalife website restricts users to selecting their profiles from a menu; they have no say in the order in which elements of their profiles are displayed. Why should race be the first physical attribute listed in a profile? Surely one's interests are more important than their skin colour. Furthermore, and this is not a criticism limited to Lavalife but indeed to all four of the websites studied today, the limitations imposed on language and nationality imply that the internet is a space conditioned to be white; people of mixed race, or those who speak more than one language, are often just as restricted as those whose language or nationality are not offered as an option from which to choose.

Menu-Driven Identity Workshop Response

2004-08-25T21:36:00.000+08:00

It is interesting to note the number of categories a potential user's identity is split up into for Hotmail and Yahoo mail, especially with Hotmail wanting to know not only what country you live in, but what time zone, state and zip code you reside in. Yahoo also offers the option for zip codes, but it is assumed that the Zip Code function only works with US addresses. Interestingly, Yahoo lumps Language and Location into one common field, which is incidentally narrower than Hotmail’s selection. For example, Yahoo does not provide options for Arabic, Dutch, Hebrew, Indian or Japanese speakers (Hotmail also doesn't support Arabic, Hebrew or Indian). Hotmail’s choice of languages support a larger number of languages, but for some reason limits Portuguese to people living in Brazil.

Yahoo’s language selection is particularly biased with English (US) and English (UK) being privileged at the top of its list with US English preselected. This then marginalises all languages outside of the US and UK, even English speakers in other countries. Hotmail also preselects English (although not specifically US English), but sorts it alphabetically among the other languages.

Yahoo seeks incredibly detailed data for user’s job details, narrowing even further than industry into job title and even specialisation. This is explicitly stated as a way to better target ads to you. Interestingly, there is no option for Unemployed/None in the Industry drop down, with ‘Other’ only having another ‘Other’ as the closest for this option. This incredible specialisation also makes you wonder why the same could not have been done for Language and Location on their sign up. Second Life’s sign up omits nearly all of the options available in Hotmail and Yahoo, with only Gender and Date of Birth being the personal information requested. There is no option for occupation, location or even language. This could be interpreted as an assumption that all users will be the stereotypical white middle class English-as-a-first-language speakers.

Second Life’s complete lack of language selection is fairly racist, limiting the game experience to only English speakers, and as mentioned above, Yahoo’s odd combination of Language and Location is discriminatory, especially with the slim language selection available. Hotmail’s selection is also discriminatory, but less than Yahoo. Its separation of language and country acknowledges that all people within a country do not speak one language. However its selection is still lacking in a number of major languages.

Menu-Driven Identity Workshop Response

2004-08-24T10:18:00.000+08:00

First of all, I will compare Hotmail and Yahoo's mail registration. Interestingly, both have options for occupation, language, country and secret question. The secret questions are simple and I do not think anyone would get offended by them. The country/language, on the other hand, might attract negative comments. Hotmail has a larger variety of options because we can mix them together therefore our identity can be more complex and it does not assume that we necessarily speak the language of the country. For example I could choose japanese and Venezuela. I see this as a good thing because it allows for more categories, however the language range is very limited and only includes languages of countries which are bound to have internet access, therefore as stated in Nakamura's article, the minorities are once again not well represented since there is no africaan languages or any chinese language (chinese is not a language by itself, cantonese, mandarin... are). As for yahoo, the selection is so limited that it could create racial discrimination. They only use language that are assumed to be spoken in a country. As for the occupation details, I do not see the importance of letting other people know what domain you work in on an email census. The categories are general, but it is hard to create such categories with all the different jobs available. Yahoo offers even more specific details of the occupation by creating links to each domain of work. As for the gameworld website, it assumes that people will use english. but gives the option to identify with another race by the family name you will choose.
As for Lavalife, the main point of the descriptions are to recreate an image of yourself using words. People using these tools for dating fall into categories and accept to know people on the basis of a brief description. Although the little comments at the beginning can give a brief idea of the personality of the person, I do not think the description is enough to attract people, but it seems to work so it just shows how important physical description in dating system is.

Jerry Kang - Ruminations on Cyber-Race

2004-08-21T20:38:00.000+08:00

Since the birth of the World Wide Web, there have been many utopian predictions about equality and the tearing down of barriers. While in the real world we subconsciously "profile" people we see due to visible characteristics such as gender, age and race to form our own opinions based on pre-existing notions, the web supposedly strips that option away and allows people to communicate from an anonymous or at least pseudonymous standpoint. As Kang correctly points out, however, there are still explicit and implicit ways to determine race online, such as outright declaration or particular grammatical cues. While cyberspace has the potential to abolish or at least hide race, mandatory abolishment would be quite “ham-fisted”, as many people do indeed find their racial identity important. I found this particular point reminiscent of another article about Asian identity on the internet - Korean gamers who do not “blend in” easily with english-speaking players, creating a (sometimes racist) backlash from many white American players mirroring common arguments and notions, such as the perpetual foreigner who refuses to integrate, or that Korean gamers should only stick to Korean servers, an electronic segregation.

Kang goes on to highlight the issue of the ‘digital divide’. While the internet has removed geographic segregation, allowing people from all over the world to communicate, this doesn’t necessarily mean that all racial minorities have access to the internet. The article then continues to point out the potential for the internet to disconfirm prevailing stereotypes as perpetrated by the media. He outlines the idea of a “short term delay in racial disclosure”, delaying the triggering of racial meaning until after the initial interaction and thus preventing an early bias from forming. Following this theme he puts forth how easy “racial masking” is, and how it can be used to further disconfirm stereotypes but points out how it can also fall back into familiar stereotyping, given that transmutation requires a large investment of time that many people may not be able to commit themselves to. Kang raises an interesting point about what race you would choose were the option available.

I would be inclined to agree with Kang’s article, particularly the note he made about using abolition, integration and transmutation in different zones when perceived as necessary, not just applying one broad ideology to all facets of life. However, the latter part of his article seems to wander back to the early utopian view of the internet, comparing its possibilities with television, the same medium he is blaming for perpetuating racial stereotypes two pages past.

Menu-Driven Identities: Making Race Happen Online

2004-08-19T18:59:00.000+08:00

Dear class,
As you read the article written by Lisa Nakamura, I would like you to do a little research on Excite's search engine and look up your names. As I will explained latter on, Lisa states that this search engine allows you to look up your race just by entering your name in the searching field. I have done a search myself and you will find the results of your search conclusive in a textbox on the left side of the page results. Please have this prepared before entering the tutorial next week, as I will be discussing this. (this is also a way to find how many people will actually have read my blog!).
Nakamura's main theme relates to proving race is a present concept online and that it is often discriminating, therefore we should question what we see online as racial categories in order to change and challenge the stereotypes of race. At the beginning of the article, Nakamura introduces us to the concept that the Internet is made and accessed mostly by white, middle-class male. She then goes on by explaining that most search engines, lists and textboxes relating to race do not allow multiraces as a choice. They also assume white to be a default option. By not allowing for multirace to take place, the Internet becomes racial and creates categories which are not accurate with the real life. In her opinion, minorities (of gender, class, race...) are not represented since their access to Internet is limited. However, she does point out that there are websites for non-white such as Latino Link and NetNoir, but they are mostly created by individuals. She states Generation D which tried to show diversified background people in the United States to advertise how global and international they are. Race is happening online (through texts, portals, pictures, personal websites...) and is showed in a way to attract vulnerable people to buy their products, but also to reinforce the stereotypes.
After reading this, I began questioning how identities and race are really presented online. I do agree with her that minorities are less represented online, but this will change as soon as Internet becomes accessible for everyone. I also agreed with her quote: 'web portals function in a similarly double way; they encourage tolerance by acknowledging "diverse" identities, yet create ambiguities about identities that fall between the cracks of hierarchical lists' (p.112). Internet is a free for all of information and what we can find is diversified. It all depends on us to choose the right websites.

Changes to this tutorial blog

2004-08-19T14:19:00.000+08:00

Hi Everyone,

New Link
A couple of changes to your tutorial blog. Firstly, you will notice I've added a link to the main Self.Net blog; this contains occassional posts from myself or Karen focusing on items which may be of interest for all students. Also, a number of curious people have found my own personal blog. Since some of you have found it, I may as put a link here, so if anyone else wants a read, you're most welcome (but do keep in mind, this is my personal blog, so isn't always 100% academically orientated!).

Blog Navigation Bar
I'm sure you've all noticed this new Navigation Bar at the top of the blog:

This adds some functions which might make using the tutorial blog easier:

The orange Blogger button will take you directly to Blogger.com.

Entering a search into the empty form box (the white box) and hitting search will search this blog (or whatever blog you are viewing). This should make finding earlier material much easier (only 15 posts remain on the front page, the rest go into the archive, accessible via the links on the side).

Finally, the BlogThis! button will automatically open a window to let you write a blog post.

FollowUp Comments for those Introducing Readings
Just a quick note: most of you who have already introduced readings this week in tutorials have gone back and published your reflection upon the tutorial after it finished. Those who haven't (and those presenting in the coming weeks) please remember that part of your tutorial presentation is to go back to the post you made before the tute and reflect on how well your presentation went (how well the ideas were received; what sort of conversation happened; any ways your ideas about the reading might have changed/expaned). Ideally, this should be done as soon as possible after your tutorial presentation (but really should be before the next meeting of your tutorial). Others are reminded, that they are always welcome to comment on any posts in their tutorial blog and are also welcome to post relevant links/ideas whenever you find things! (oh, and for those of you who've never read other people's comments, give it a go; there are some really interesting dialogues taking place in the comments!).

A reminder:
Before clicking the 'Publish Post' button, if you place the cursor inside the window where you have written your post press either Ctrl+A to select all and then Ctrl+C (on a PC) or Apple+A to select all and then Apple+C (on a Mac), this will place the text you have written in the memory of the computer (this is referred to as placing text on the clipboard). If something goes wrong during the attempt to publish, all you need to do to make the post a second time is place the cursor in the post window and press either Ctrl+V (PC) or Apple+V (Mac) to paste the text from the clipboard into that text box. (Occassionally blogger does 'hang' [which means not finishing the posting function], so it is useful to make this quick backup in order to avoid typing out the entry a second time!)

Gattaca

2004-08-18T17:22:00.000+08:00

Genetic screening and manipulation that is presented in Gattaca definately evokes a new eugenics. Although not shown in the clip, those whose genes are not manipulated are termed "invalids". By virtue of this, those who have the manipulated 'superior' genes are the only ones that are 'vaild' in this futuristic world. (This sets up a class debate as well.) The "invalids" have no access to education, as evidenced in the rejection of the child by the school. They are also subject to discrimition in terms of employment, eventhough the practice is not legal. In the process of 'perfecting human offspring', invalids are denied access to basic things. Without education and employment, it would not be possible for the invalids to survive. This is akin to killing them off, as parents wanting the best opportunites for their child will increasingly chose genetic manipulation as a means of ensuring their survival in the world.
In current scientific trends, this scenerio seems credible. Particularly with the reserach in the Human Genome Project. However, one of the stated goals of the Project is to "address the ethical, legal, and social issues that may arise". Perhaps if the boundaires for the ethical isuues invovled are set up, we could avoid creating our own Gattaca. Already researchers are close to discovering the genes that cause cancer but because they don't know enough about them (and what else they might eliminate) they have not yet manipulated the genetic codes that they think are responsible.

Class, race and gender in Gattaca

2004-08-18T16:19:00.000+08:00

Class: Gattaca explores the problematic pipedream of a genetically engineered society of perfected citizens, devoid of the problems associated with the classed society with which we are familiar. With the ability to breed out such conditions as alcoholism and to encourage maximum intellectual ability, eugenics-based breeding programs [theoretically] endorse a classless society. Whilst alcoholism is certainly not a trait limited to the lower classes, and whilst intellectual agility is not a marker of achievement limited to the upper classes, one could argue that they are characteristics more apparent in certain classes in society. Though Gattaca does not press on the issue of class, it did make me question whether even the most perfectly classless of societies experience animosity on a class-like basis. Like the adage of Animal Farm, even if all are created equal, some are more equal (and thus "able") than others.

Race: The problems associated with eugenics are most apparent when discussed in relation to issues of race. Of course, the most famous misuse of eugenics in history was witnessed during the Holocaust with the attempted eradication of the Jewish population of Europe; one has to question whether this would not happen again, in the present day, if eugenics programs were in place. The world is still a hugely racist place, and perhaps the only thing that has prevented a proliferation of eugenics-based genocide is the application of ethics-based laws preventing its misuse. Though Gattaca does not make a huge issue of race in the ten minutes shown yesterday, it almost goes without saying that it is incredibly problematic and susceptable to exploitation. Interestingly, the doctor whom the prospective parents in the film go to see is African American; he scoffs when noting that the parents have requested a child with "fair skin".

Gender: Eugenics is also problematic when related to issues of gender. The reason that males and females are fairly evenly proportioned in the world isn't because an equal number of parents chose to have boys, as those who chose to have girls. The problems associated with parents being able to choose the gender of their child is echoed in the Chinese one-child program, where illegal abortion proliferates amongst women desperate to have sons, but pregnant with girls. Gattaca further explores traditional gender issues in the scene of Vincent's birth; his father, knowing that this naturally produced son of his is not perfect, refuses to pass on his name (Anton) to his firstborn. It is a privilege reserved for his second child, born of eugenics - presumably, the marker of perfection. On the other hand, the mother of the child deems Anton a fine name for her first child, creating an interesting binary between male/science and female/nature, reflecting the perception that science is a male-dominated field. The somewhat maternal, feminine aspect of reproduction is consumed by a mechanical, scientific application of producing, rather than reproducing, a child.

Genetic discrimination

2004-08-18T13:51:00.000+08:00

Gattaca illustrates that scientific manipulations of genetics will have many implications for the way in which class operates.
Determinants of class become primarily located in genetics / DNA rather than through the multitude of traditional factors such as family history, social interests, education, career and financial status.
In the world of Gattaca, a person’s class rests on whether they are naturally born or a product of genetic selection. A divide between those who are natural but ‘flawed’ and those who are genetically superior and closer to perfection is created, which will later determine what they are entitled to in their life.
The nature of discrimination in the workforce also becomes focused on a person’s genetic class. (Rather than racial / gender inequality) Although genetic discrimination is supposedly illegal, it is still largely practiced. Vincent appears to be crossing a vast social barrier by applying for a career in space despite the fact he is not genetically ‘superior.’

Gattaca's Genes

2004-08-17T22:25:00.000+08:00

Gattaca depicts a new form of eugenics enabled by futuristic technological advances in the field of genetics. The science utilised is not that far from the reality of today’s scientific world and genetic engineering is no longer a fictional concept. The film disrupts the concept of what is and what is not organic within the realm of humankind, as genes can be displaced and interchanged to create a healthier, smarter, stronger and aesthetically pleasing child. Identity markers, such as race, class and gender can also be manipulated through genetic modification, which draws into question who would use such technology, why and how. In Gattaca the technology is utilised by a white middle class couple who wish to have a healthy (read: perfect) boy. Genetic engineering is now, and in the foreseeable future, an expensive business, thus would be exclusive to those of higher socio-economic circles. The advantaged norm of the white male in our patriarchal western late-capitalist society essentially means gene technology would be utilised to meet their desires. Employers would be able to judge humankind in terms of labour resources, efficiency and knowledge, and result in a Darwinian survival of the fittest. Genetic engineering also allows for a re-definition of reproduction and the possible release of child rearing as an exclusively female responsibility, upsetting the boundary of the traditional norm of the heterosexual nuclear family.

Gattaca and new eugenics

2004-08-17T18:25:00.000+08:00

Following on from the history of eugenics (although not using that word specifically due to its negative connotations) and an ever more competitive world, the future presented by Gattaca seem altogether too likely. Some parents are already screening their embryos for genetically inherited diseases like Down's Syndrome or Cystic Fibrosis and given the opportunity to give their children a "head start" it's hard to imagine them resisting, particularly if many other parents are doing the same thing. The genetic screening and manipulation presented in Gattaca is most definitely eugenics, attempting to "breed out" all negative genetic traits in the human race. If human beings were to stop reproducing without the aid of scientific help, then eventually afflictions such as schizophrenia or myopia may indeed be wiped out over time. The key issue is whether this would be ethical, as without challenges to overcome, individuals may not reach their full potential or indeed be born at all.

Eugenics and Gattaca

2004-08-17T14:14:00.000+08:00

According to the definition of Eugenics that we have been given (the science of 'perfecting human offspring') I would have to argue that the genetic screening and manipulation that we see in the film Gattaca does evoke a new kind of eugenics. It seems that the difference between the "new" and "old" kind, is the pre-natal decisions to erradicate (or introduce) certain elements of humanity into an unborn child. This eliminates the elements of chance or perhaps even fate and replaces it with choice or "perfection". This in turn brings about the question of what is perfection? Is there a universal definition or does everyone have different opinions? The "old" eugenics leans more towards the idea of erradication of "imperfect" (in the eyes of the dictator perhaps) human being but this occurs usually much later in life, it is not a pre-birth decision by the creators (parents or scientists). It does seem in today's society that we are moving closer to the possibilities of manipulation of humanity but just how far it will get is difficult to determine.

Eugenics in regards to Gattaca

2004-08-17T13:18:00.000+08:00

In Gattaca, the new eugenics form is meant to control the perfectness of one human being before its birth, therefore it can live to the expectations of the parents. This new way of reproduction can be seen as dangerous since perfectness is relative and can create racist or sexist behavior. By selecting what a child is going to look like, how it is going to live, we interfere with the destiny or natural reproduction of human beings. Is this scenario credible? I believe it is since we have seen sheeps being cloned, why could we not modify genes as well? I believe scientists have discovered a way of dealing with genetics, but moral ethics defend them of putting it on the market. Therefore this scenario could be possible or the question of this scenario could be debated in a few years.

Gattaca -exploring a new eugenics

2004-08-17T11:32:00.000+08:00

The clip from Gattaca presents a terrifying look at, what I believe, to be a credible scenario of the future given the way science is at the moment. There is definitely a new eugenics presented in this clip that science today is already exploring with such things as cloning and the idea of changing the genes of an embryo to better suit what the parents want. In my opinion, this is very troubling because in this movie, Doctors are messing with the natural way of the world. Darwin's survival of the fittest is key here in that some species are not supposed to make it, only the strong are supposed to survive and by eliminating what we consider "weak" traits, we are disenabling the natural way of survival of the fittest. There are reasons for the diseases we have and tampering with nature can be detrimental to society. Once I decided to come to Australia this semester, I started reading about Australia and learned about how, for example, the rabbit was brought here for game and now has created problems throughout the country. I think that toying with genetics will have detrimental effects in the future. However, unfortunately, I believe that the direction science is currently moving is towards genetic screening and manipulation.

Post on David Silver's "Margin in the Wires: Looking for Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Blacksburg Electronic Village"

2004-08-17T10:58:00.000+08:00

David Silver's article is a close look at a specific online community to see how "marginality is manifested online" (134). Silver divides his article into three sections: a look at other articles concerning marginality online, the history of the Blacksburg Electronic Village (BEV) and an evaluation of the BEV web community (134). The definition of an community network is a place that "incorporates internet technologies to connect residens of a specific place- a town, a city, or a municipality-with one another and with local institutions, services, and businesses" (138) and the BEV is such a place.
Silver presents the "Anthem" which is an MCI televison commercial. It says, "There is no race. There is no gender. There is no age. There are no infirmities. There are only minds. Utopia? No, Internet" (134). This quote raises many questions like whether or not there really is no race online. Is this a true statement? Or is the reason there is no race, gender and age online because of the neglect of these different categories of people. Is the internet further marginalizing already marginalized groups by neglecting to include them specifically. Is the fact that on internet sites although people are often asked their gender, "Race is not only not a required choice, it is not ever on the menu" (135)? In his first section, Silver points out that 1) "many online environments contain technological barriers that route around race", 2) "feelings of online marginality can be challenged by establishing self-defined, self-determined online communities" and 3) "to insure diverse online participation, virtual spaces must be technologically accessible, socially relevent, and subject to reinvention by the more diverse of users" (138).
From here, Silver proceeds to examine the history and the present of the BEV. He points out that " . . . communities-geographic and online-are defined not only by who and what are included but also by who and what are excluded" (143). Silver reveals the lack of links and groups pertaining to race, gender or sexuality on the BEV. Because of this lack of gender, race, and sexuality links, the BEV appears to center around the "white, male, and heterosexual" participant (143) . And Silver claims that this lack of links is a "missd opportunity to foster a more diverse community network" (145) and that these types of communities need to do more to reach out to marginalized groups. Silver's conclusion is that "Indeed, to insure diverse community networks [the developers and participants] must not only acknowledge the presence of users' races, genders, and sexualities, but also build that presence directly into the networks" (148).
Although the idea of providing these types of links and forums for marginalized groups seems positive, one must wonder whether these special places encourage segregation in some ways. Do specialized spaces encourage marginalized groups to stay in those spaces? Also, the actual demographics of Blacksburg would be interesting to know and Siver never gave that specific information. This articles raises many important issues about the internet today; is the MCI commercial correct to claim that online one does not have a gender, race and age? Or are gender, racial and sexuality groups marginalized even more through the internet? Is the internet a safe-haven for these people or is the internet just another way that they are marginalized?

Week 5 Tutorial Paper

2004-08-16T17:04:00.000+08:00

In the article "Nobody Lives Only in Cyberspace": Gendered Subjectivities and Domestic Use of the Internet, Lisa-Jane McGerty states that minimal research and investigation has been done into the way in which information and communication technologies impact and form a part of our everyday lives. In particular she argues that it would be most useful to focus on the domestic sphere of the home and women’s relationship with the use of the Internet. This in turn may help to establish more clearly the gender processes involved in the use of this relatively recent technology.
McGerty argues that the reason behind the lack of research in this area is due to the common assumptions of an online/offline dichotomy. This dichotomy centres on the idea that the Internet is a space in which a "virtual" identity can be created by a user that is as similar or as different to that person’s "real" identity. In this context the online and offline spaces are completely separate. Also inherent in this dichotomy is the idea that ‘the "virtual" self is eminently performative while the real self is something immutable and enduringly rooted within the wider context of structured relations of gender, race and class’(McGerty p.339). McGerty, along with other scholars disagrees with this notion, and rather asserts that online and offline are in fact a part of the same space. She argues that gender, class and race do in fact have an impact upon cyberspace and also that offline identities can have the capacity to be performative as well. Therefore, as McGerty suggests, the line between the two supposedly opposing realms blur and perhaps even become irrelevant. Although McGerty does not include hard evidence within her argument regarding the debunking of the online/offline dichotomy, I tend to agree with the idea that "virtuality" can maintain inclusive or exclusive spaces in relation to gender, class and race, just as "reality" does.
In proposing wider research into the use of the Internet in the domestic sphere, McGerty expects to find results affirming the existence of gender dynamics in this technology as (she states) have been found in the use of almost all technologies to date. It is here that she fails to provide the reader with any examples of such gendered processes and thus does not expand upon her initial assertion. From this article it is clear that McGerty raises valid questions regarding the ideas of gender processes within cyberspace ( such as "why do people go online? What do they do online? and how does it fit in with their offline lives?") but she also largely relies on previous scholars ideas to establish the main themes of her argument. Yet even in doing this there appears to be a lack of supporting evidence to maintain the ideas discussed. In hindsight, this may be because of (as McGerty states herself) the fact that there is little material on the subject of gendered subjectivitites and domestic use of the Internet.

"There are only minds"

2004-08-15T16:16:00.000+08:00

Hi Self.Netters!

I managed to locate a copy of MCI's ad that Tama was talking about previously, it can be viewed here, but you might need quicktime to see it correctly.

The page also has a brief (but good) discussion on the ad's presentation and the effects it has

So blogging isn't journalism, hey?

2004-08-10T22:39:00.000+08:00

Not wanting to look over-eager or anything, I thought I'd post a link to an article I found this evening while researching for another unit...

It was apparently covered on Foreign Correspondent this evening also, and I thought the whole topic tied in nicely with what we talked about in the tute today.

For those who can't be bothered checking the link/have no care for it and have better things to do, basically, the Iranian authorities are in the process of establishing a legal basis for cracking down on bloggers who post anti-government content in their blogs, to the point that many may end up in jail. It just goes to show that although these so-called "cyber dissidents" may not be considered journalists by those in the business, they do have the power to scare the bejesus out of authority.

You can all go back to enjoying your evenings, now :P

A-Wah

2004-08-10T15:02:00.000+08:00

Hello Self.netters

It's 3pm and I'm still at home in my pyjamas.

This is not a good a thing as our tute has just started,

but it's still a better option than to be sneezing / phlegming / passing out on ppl in class. (maybe)

It is always important to know whether there will be sun or rain.

And always entertaining to read McSweeneys.Net

Seeya nxt week!

Sex and the City

2004-08-10T13:09:00.000+08:00

Hi everyone. Just writing because I have to! (-: My favorite website is my family website; however, only my family members can access that and so I will just say that I like the HBO website because one of my absolute favorite shows is Sex and the City and you can access that through the HBO website.

Ah choo

2004-08-10T11:30:00.000+08:00

Hi gang,

I disappeared last week because of the flu. I caught it from someone at uni so I thought I 'd break the trend and NOT pass it on... :P

Some of my fave websites:

Comingsoon.net
--> yay for movie geeks

Comic Book Resources
--> when is UWA going to have a literature course with comics in it? They ARE books!!! :P

All Music Guide
--> yay for music stuff

Yours geekily,
JT

I like pineapple

2004-08-10T11:10:00.000+08:00

Hey all :)

My favourite websites:
Lonely Planet's Thorntree (travel stuff)
Maddox (quite possibly the angriest and funniest guy in the world..though that link might not work, I can't remember if it's the right address...)
Triple J (music, funnily enough)

Okay.. go geek now :P

-Erin

Bunnies and Balloons

2004-08-10T10:18:00.000+08:00

hello tute group people!!! Blogging for class? excellent! much better than financial accounting any day! My favourite website is.... a tie between the Xpress Magazine Online and The World's Best Bars. 100% informative and super user friendly- check them out!! : )

Hey All...

2004-08-10T10:14:00.000+08:00

Hello tute group! =) I've been a blogger for the last for the four years, on livejournal. It's so simple to use that even I can manage. But, sorry, I'm not about to give you my blog address!

my first blog! ooh aah

2004-08-10T10:10:00.000+08:00

Hi everyone,
my favourite website is mullets.com (ok so i made that up but i'm sure it exists)

my first post, you knows it!

2004-08-09T15:19:00.000+08:00

blogger is well wicked, as is the self.net unit. respect. this is a page to my band's (cough) very primitive (cough cough) website - check it out - morrissey's love children

Greeting Message

2004-08-09T15:15:00.000+08:00

Hello fellow mates! this is my first time as a blogger and it looks interesting! I do not actually have a favorite website, but my university website from back home which is McGill University is interesting!

First post

2004-08-09T15:10:00.000+08:00

Hi all, this is is my first post, and here is a url

Welcome!

2004-07-12T17:18:00.000+08:00

This (we)blog is intended for the Tuesday, 3pm tutorial group in the unit Self.Net: Communicating Identity in the Digital Age.