Steven Kurtz on Sun, 30 Aug 1998 14:20:19 +0200 (MET DST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Critical Art Ensemble: Links and Synchronisms on the Flesh Frontier |
Links and Synchronisms on the Flesh Frontier Critical Art Ensemble Two technological revolutions are currently taking place. The first, and most hyped, is the revolution in information and communications technologies (ICT). The second is the revolution in biotechnology. While the former seems to be rapidly enveloping the lives of more and more people, the latter appears to be progressing at a lower velocity in a specialized area outside of peoples' everyday lives. In one sense, this general perception is true; ICT is more developed and more pervasive. However, CAE would like to suggest that the developments in biotech are gaining velocity at a higher rate than those in ICT, and that biotechnology is having far greater impact on everyday life than it appears. The reason that ICT seems to be of such greater significance is less because of its material effect and more on account of its enveloping utopian spectacle. Everyone has heard the promises about new virtual markets, electronic communities, total convenience, maximum entertainment value, global linkage, and electronic liberty, just to name a few. Indeed, this hype has brought a lot of consumers to ICT; however, this explicit spectacularized relationship with the technology has also brought about much skepticism born of painful experience. Those who work with ICT on a daily basis are becoming increasingly aware of office health problems, work intensification, the production of invasive consumption and work spaces, electronic isolation, the collapse of public space, and so on. The problems being generated by ICT are as apparent as its alleged advantages, much as one can enjoy the transport advantages of an auto while at the same time suffering from the disadvantages of smogged-out urban sprawls. On the other hand, biotechnology has proceeded along a much different route. If ICT is representative of spectacular product deployment, biotechnology has been much more secretive about its progress and deployment. Its spectacle is limited to sporadic news reports on breakthroughs in some of the flagship projects, such as the unexpected rapidity of progress in the Human Genome Project, with the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep (and now her daughter, Polly, a recombinant lamb containing human DNA), or the birth of a donor-program baby to a 63-year-old mother. Each of these events is contextualized within the legitimizing mantles of science and medicine to keep the public calm; however, the biotech developers and researchers must walk a very fine line, because developments that go public can easily cause as much panic as they do elation (just as the aforementioned examples did). Consequently, the biotech revolution is a silent revolution; even its most mundane activities remain outside popular discourse and perception. For example, almost all people have eaten some kind of transgenic food (most likely without knowing it). Transgenic food production, while advantageous for producing industrial quantities and qualities of food, is not a big selling point that marketers want to promote, because there exists a deeply entrenched, historically founded popular suspicion (emerging from both secular and religious beliefs) of anything that could be construed as bio-engineering. Unfortunately, this very sort of research and development is progressing without contestation, and (to make matters more surprising) there are strong links between developments in bio-tech and ICT. Machine Code >From the opening salvos of the Enlightenment to the envelopment of the world in capital, the machinic model of systems has always held an important place in illustrating Western values. Machinic systems exemplify the manifest values that emerge from capitalist economy. When a state-of-the-art machine runs well, it produces at maximum efficiency, never strays from its task, and its engineering is completely intelligible. Is it any wonder that some people in the socio-economic context of pancapitalism desire to be machines, and cannot understand any phenomenon (the cosmos, society, the body, etc.) as being other than a machine? Machinic task orientation and the coordination and synchronization of machinic units into functioning systems require a means of "communication," and that system has come to be understood as coding. Among the legacies of late capital, with its fetish for instrumentality, is its obsession with the code. The common belief seems to be that if codes can be invented, streamlined, or cracked, ipso facto, humanity will be all the better for it. Consequently, an army of code builders and crackers have set to work to understand and/or control the world through the use of this model. Software programmers are perhaps the best known of these researchers, but the model extends to all things, not just machines proper, and so the code analysts, generators, and crackers have found their way into all areas of research. In culture there are those who work tirelessly to understand, develop, or break the codes of the social text in its many variations. Then there are the those who examine organic code. It has not been broken yet, but researchers have made progress. The DNA code has been isolated, and is now being analyzed and mapped (the Human Genome Project). While such knowledge is quite compelling in itself, one must wonder how that knowledge will be contextualized and applied after it leaves the sanctuary of the lab. If the reductive instrumental value system that accompanies the machinic model is applied to genetic codes (and one must assume it will be), the conflation of the organic and the machinic will be become more than just an ideological model; it will be a material construction. Like the computer, organic systems will be engineered to reflect the utilitarian values of pancapitalism. Using the model of the code as a link, one sees that the two ideologies key to the development of late capital are imploding. One is the machinic system just described, and the other is the ideology of social "evolution." This radically authoritarian ideology has found expression in mid-19th-century social Darwinism, in early 20th-century eugenics, in Kevin Kelly's neo-Spencerian global free markets, and in Richard Dawkin's memetic information culture. Now functioning in a magical moment of Orwellian doublethink, these two ideological pressures are directing research along a political trajectory toward a totalizing utilitarianism that will give rise to a fully disenchanted cyborg society of the "fittest." Organic Platforms When imagining the cyborg society of the near future, considering the rapidity of ICT development within the context of pancapitalism is only half the task. The question, Who is going to use the technology? becomes increasingly significant. ICT has pushed the velocity of market vectors to such an extreme that humans immersed in technoculture can no longer sustain organic equilibrium. Given the pathological conditions of the electronic workspace, the body often fails to meet the demands of its technological interface or the ideological imperatives of socio-economic space. Feelings of stress, tension, and alienation can compel the organic platform to act out nonrational behavior patterns that are perceived by power vectors to be useless, counterproductive, and even dangerous to the technological superstructure. In addition, the body can only interact with ICT for a limited period of time before exhaustion, and work is constantly disrupted by libidinal impulses. Many strategies have been used by pancapitalist institutions in an attempt to keep the body producing and consuming at maximum intensity, but most fail. One strategy of control is the use of legitimized drugs. Sedatives, antidepressants, and mood stabilizers are used to bring the body back to a normalized state of being and to prevent disruption of collective activity. (For example, 600,000 new prescriptions were written in the US for Prozac in 1993 and this number has continued to advance throughout the decade, ending in a grand total of 22.8 million in 1998). Unfortunately, social control drugs often rapidly lose their effectiveness, and can damage the platform before it completes its expected productive life span. In order to bring the body up to code and prepare it for the rapidly changing, pathological social conditions of technoculture, a pancapitalist institutional subapparatus with knowledge specializations in genetics, cell biology, neurology, biochemistry, pharmacology, embryology, and so on have begun an aggressive body invasion. Their intention is to map and rationalize the body in a manner that will allow the extention of authoritarian policies of fiscal and social control into organic space. We know this network as the Flesh Machine.* Its primary mandate is eventually to design and engineer organic constellations with predispositions toward certain task-oriented activities, and to create bodies better suited to extreme technological interaction. The need to redesign the body to meet dromological imperatives (whether in warfare, business, or communications) has been prompted by the ICT revolution. ICT developers must now wait for the engineering gap between ICT and its organic complement to close; because of this, ICT development is slowing down (the WWW was the last high velocity moment in the popular ICT revolution) compared to the rate at which investment and research in biotechnological processes and products for humans is growing. CAE believes that while we will continue to see ICT upgrades (such as in bandwidth) and further technological development in domestic space, radically significant change in the communication and information technology of everyday life will not take place until the gap between the technology and its organic platform is closed. Capital's Engine Given the entrenched skepticism about bio-engineering, what would make an individual embrace reproductive technologies (the most extreme form of biotech)? For the same reasons people rushed to embrace new ICT. In the predatory, antiwelfare market of pancapitalism, a belief has been constructed and promoted that one must seek any advantage to survive its pathological socio-economic environment. The extremes that function in the best interest of pancapitalist power vectors instantly transform into the common in a society that only profits from perpetual increases in economic velocity. At the same time, the institutional foundation that produces the desire for bio-engineering has blossomed in late capital. The eugenic visionary Frederick Osborn recognized that more hospitable conditions for eugenic policy were emerging in capitalist nations as early as the 1930s. Osborn argued that the people would never accept eugenics if it were forced on them by militarized directives; rather, eugenic practices would have to structurally emerge from capitalist economy. The primary social components that would make eugenic behavior voluntary are the dominance of the nuclear family within a rationalized economy of surplus. Under these conditions, Osborn predicted, familial reproduction would become a matter of quality rather than a matter of quantity (as with the extended family). Quality of offspring would be defined by the child's potential for economic success. To assure success, breeders (particularly of the middle class) would be willing to purchase any legitimized medical goods and services to increase the probability of "high quality" offspring. The economy would recognize this market, and provide goods and services for it. These conditions have come to pass, and the development of these goods and services is well underway. Of course, they only appear when one searches for them. Without question, there is a strong intersection between the technology of the Sight Machine (ICT) and the technology of the Flesh Machine, much as the organic and the synthetic are necessary complements. Development in one machine system has a profound influence on development in the other. They merge under the value system of instrumentality. So in spite of the cyberhype claims that the body is obsolete, and about to give way to posthuman virtualization, it seems the body is here to stay. Why should capital refuse this opportunity--the greatest market bonanza since colonization, and the best method of self-policing since Catholic guilt? Unfortunately, the body of the future will not be the liquid, free-forming body that yields to individual desire; rather, it will be a solid entity whose behaviors are fortified by task-oriented technological armor interfacing with ideologically engineered flesh. Notes * For further development of this argument and narrative, please see _Flesh Machine: Cyborgs, Designer Babies, and New Eugenic Consciousness_, New York: Autonomedia/Semiotext(e), 1997; or for the short version, see "The Coming of Age of the Flesh Machine," _Electronic Culture_. Tim Druckrey, ed., New York: Aperture, 1997. --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: [email protected]