Open Kula Dissertation Final.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the Liberal Arts TECHNICAL MEDIATION, SOCIAL ACCELERATION AND THE POLITICS OF HYPERMODERNITY A Dissertation in Political Science by Eric W. Kula © 2011 Eric W. Kula Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2011 The dissertation of Eric W. Kula was reviewed and approved* by the following: John Christman Associate Professor of Philosophy, Political Science and Women‘s Studies Dissertation Adviser Co-Chair of Committee Lee Ann Banaszak Associate Professor of Political Science Marie Hojnacki Associate Professor of Political Science Alan Sica Professor of Sociology Nancy S. Love Professor of Government and Justice Studies, Appalachian State University Co-Chair of Committee Special Member Scott Bennett Research Professor of Political Science Head of the Department of Political Science *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. ii ABSTRACT This project aims to describe the political implications of an emergent phenomenon that I call ―hypermodernity.‖ The primary assumption throughout this project is that the spread of electronic communication and surveillance techniques carries with it unique political significance when human-technological interactions are bounded spatially. Through an inductive investigation of specific technological spaces, I propose a form of social and political practice in which the spatial and technological have become inseparable, simultaneously united and problematized through the concept of information circulation. I call the proliferation of spaces predicated on the circulation of information hypermodernity. Rather than focusing on the ―construction‖ of these spaces (the construction of ―meaning‖ of the space), this project aims to describe the spatial and temporal experiences that are made possible (or restricted) by the relationship between humans and technology in spaces dominated by information flows. In later chapters, I detail a series of empirical examples found in commercial airports. Using a Heideggerean phenomenological method, I analyze full-body scanners and biometric identification documents and how these technological systems intertwine human bodies, technological capabilities and spatial practices. From these observations, I build an inductive theory of the hypermodern and its corresponding instrumental rational worldview. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION: HYPERMODERNITY………………………………….1 Chapter 2. DROMOLOGICAL RATIONALITY AND THE DEMANDS OF INSTANTANEITY………………………………………………………………………30 Chapter 3. SPEED-POLLUTED SPACES, SPEED-POLLUTED BODIES………………………………………………………………………………….59 Chapter 4. AIRPORTS, INFORMATION AND THE CONDITIONS OF EXPERIENCE…………………………………………………………………………..94 Chapter 5. STATIONARY SPEED MACHINES……………………………………...131 Chapter 6. BEING IN INFORMATION……………………………………………….164 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………182 iv Ch. 1 Introduction: Hypermodernity The focus of this project is what I call ―hypermodernity.‖ This investigation is a theoretical attempt to describe a set of increasingly common technological conditions in post- industrial urban and suburban society that allow, but also direct, the average person to be actively engaged in day to day life. The study of hypermodernity, as I frame it, is always the study of technology. Or, more specifically, it is the study of technological networks whose primary function is to circulate, not simply represent, information. I argue that this phenomenon that I call ―habitable circulation‖ forms a unique set of conditions of possible engagement with the world1. The technical conditions that generate hypermodern experience make possible a certain form of political engagement with the world. The hypermodern is characterized both by the types of technologies that connect spaces and also by the types of connected spaces that these technologies create. In a dialectical sense, the hypermodern is both a type of space that emerges and simultaneously the technical interconnectivity that makes the existence of that space possible. (Merrifield, 1993, p. 522) The first question one is likely to ask is ―What and when is the hypermodern?‖ This question wonders how a historical era (the hypermodern), which one may assume encompasses countless events and the proliferation of various thoughts and practices, can be reduced to the study of the technological infrastructure of that era. This question is misguided since I don‘t define hypermodernity as a time period or a historical era. To this question, I answer that the study of technological conditions of daily habits allows me to describe the emergence of ―technological spaces‖ (which are both spatially bound and temporally extensive) and to form a technologized interpretation of human behavior that occurs in and between such spaces. But, rather than focusing on the ―construction‖ of these spaces (the 1 I am using the term ―habitable circulation‖ in a similar sense as Benjamin Bratton used in his introductory chapter to Paul Virilio‘s Speed and Politics. (2006) Though it is important to note that my use of ―habitable‖ is meant to convey practical engagement in the electronic world, rather than a location for a hypermodern subject. 1 construction of ―meaning‖ of the space), this project aims to describe the spatial and temporal experiences that are made possible (or restricted) by the relationship between humans and technology in spaces dominated by information flows. These information spaces are obviously limited in number as technology, in the sense of artifacts, is not everywhere, all the time. Technical hardware doesn‘t act to circulate information in all contemporary spaces. Furthermore, not all technological artifacts are equally influential. A television can totally dominate a room by organizing attention and furniture layout towards it, and can create a certain mood through its programming. Meanwhile, a cup may sit by totally unnoticed. However, certain spaces (and certain social modes of spatial organization), unique to hypermodernity, are becoming increasingly common. These spaces are not dominated by any one particular technological object. Rather, these spaces are defined by the circulation of information, often relying on the presence of a person to provide the source for information gathering. The person, of course, provides information by taking on a social identity of a consumer, a traveler, a worker. The defining characteristic of the hypermodern is the proliferation of these types of spaces and, through electronic transmission, the way that these spaces are becoming constantly connected to one another through the speed of information. I argue a certain type of technological condition emerges that frames citizen activity in certain ways. The objective of this dissertation is to describe hypermodernity as an emergent phenomenon (not a historical period) of the proliferation of highly technical, digitized, interconnected, interactive spaces. As these spaces become more common, they increasingly constitute the (often unnoticed) conditions of possibility of many daily habits. To reiterate, my approach to the study of hypermodernity is necessarily a study of modern technology. To study the spaces of hypermodern life means to study both the people and 2 the technical objects that co-exist in social spaces, the way that they are brought into contact with each other and the conditions of possible action that emerge from these interactions. But, the ―space‖ of hypermodernity is not defined by its geographical or physical dimensions. Rather, the ―space‖ in question is defined by the conditions of possibility that are generated by the human- technical interaction within a physical infrastructure. Hypermodernity, therefore, isn‘t an era of time, nor is it a type of space. Hypermodernity is a mode of existing in the world, a certain type of condition generated, which manifests itself in particular temporal and spatial ways. It is crucial to remember that the conditions of hypermodernity are not universal, and they are not globally extensive or temporally ubiquitous. Since the hypermodern condition is generated by particular forms of techno-circulation, a space that is not hypermodern today can become hypermodern tomorrow. This all depends on the change of information flows and technical hardware that occupy an area, the legal rules and political customs that intersect in the space, the number of human subjects that pass through the space and the technical procedures that govern the space. The intensity (the level of technical connectivity) of the hypermodern experience is generated by the technical and social reproduction of the space itself, not imposed upon by external social structures or social norms (these structures and norms do play a part in the (re)production of the space). The spatialized practices of the hypermodern can be more or less intense over time, but they do not define our current historical era. To theorize the hypermodern is an effort to bring forth a clearer understanding of the consequences of certain contemporary forms of human-technical interactions. The analysis of these interactions is an exceedingly broad project. Therefore, in order to bring out the most salient aspects of this phenomenon and to show its political importance I will focus on certain sites that exemplify the main features of this emerging mode of experience. For this reason, I 3 repeatedly draw on the experience of travelers at contemporary, large scale, commercial airports