Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fall 2009 A Hermeneutic Exploration of the Literature of Technology: Prometheus Bound, Frankenstein and Battlestar Galactica William Blais Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Recommended Citation Blais, W. (2009). A Hermeneutic Exploration of the Literature of Technology: Prometheus Bound, Frankenstein and Battlestar Galactica (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/327 This Immediate Access is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A HERMENEUTIC EXPLORATION OF THE LITERATURE OF TECHNOLOGY: PROMETHEUS BOUND, FRANKENSTEIN AND BATTLESTAR GALACTICA A Dissertation Submitted to the McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By William P. Blais December 2009 Copyright by William P. Blais 2009 A HERMENEUTIC EXPLORATION OF THE LITERATURE OF TECHNOLOGY: PROMETHEUS BOUND, FRANKENSTEIN AND BATTLESTAR GALACTICA By William P. Blais Approved November 17, 2009 ________________________________ ________________________________ Michael Sipiora, Ph.D. Eva Simms, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Professor of Psychology (Committee Chair) (Committee Member) ________________________________ ________________________________ Stanton Marlan, Ph.D., ABPP Daniel Burston, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Professor of Psychology (Committee Member) (Department Chair) ________________________________ Christopher M. Duncan, Ph.D. Dean, McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts iii ABSTRACT A HERMENEUTIC EXPLORATION OF THE LITERATURE OF TECHNOLOGY: PROMETHEUS BOUND, FRANKENSTEIN AND BATTLESTAR GALACTICA By William P. Blais December 2009 Dissertation supervised by Michael Sipiora There are few phenomena in contemporary culture that are more dynamic and impactful than technology. That said the understanding of technology held by most therapists is overly simple or, at best, based on one-dimensional critiques of technological life. The present study endeavors to build a broader understanding of technology that allows for both a robust critique and a more accepting recognition of its potential contributions. The present study explores the archetypally invariant structure of technology as well as the more culturally and historically contingent elements of several of its historically specific expressions. It engages this material through a series of three exceptional artistic works: Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound, Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, and Ronald Moore’s Battlestar Galactica. Furthermore, in order to broaden the exploration, the present work takes as a forestructure the late work of philosopher Martin Heidegger, the Freudian- iv Marxist and aesthetic sensibilities of Herbert Marcuse, and the metabletic analysis of psychologist Robert Romanyshyn. By bringing the thinking of these three into the analysis, the work claims a breadth that exceeds a simple literary analysis. Each of the literary sources of this work represents concerns about technology as well as its ongoing promise. For instance, the myth of Prometheus as it is represented in Prometheus Bound reflects technology as a force that supports humankind in an ongoing struggle against the harshness of the world as well as the need to maintain sensitivity to the broader natural world to engage in the full range of human possibilities. In contrast, Frankenstein struggles explicitly with the issues of control and a modernistic agenda of narcissistic control over the natural world. Finally, Battlestar Galactica captures a postmodern world and attends in particular to issues of fluid identity, plurivocality, and the integration of difference. Common areas of concern, including the place of hope, the role of community, the narcissistic structure of technology, and the relationship to figures of the maternal and the feminine are key to each piece of literature and reflect archetypal dimensions of the phenomenon. In contrast, the specific content and attitude reflected in each work varies, showing the gradual progress of technology from its balanced position with respect to broader meanings in the Ancient world, toward a program of command and control in the Modern milieu and finally toward a recognition and integration of multiplicity and aesthetic richness in the post-modern context. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank my dear wife, Natalie Arnold-Blais, whose support and love truly enabled me to make space for the work represented in this dissertation. Without her ongoing faith in my ability and encouragement I would have been far more daunted with the task, and far less likely to have completed it. Her poetic soul has provided many key insights in this work, and her presence nourished my own, fostering the unfolding of my thoughts over the years. Alongside, I wish to thank my daughter, Hazel, who has provided me with a constant reminder of the reasons to pursue the deeper possibilities of life, regardless of how impractical they might seem at times. My work was smilingly encouraged by her insistent demand, even as a two year old, to “finish your dissertation!” In this work, I also need to recognize the faculty of the Duquesne University Department of Psychology who have introduced me to a variety of perspectives, and encouraged the growth of my thinking over the years. Special thanks goes to Michael Sipiora, my director, whose patience and diligence, especially in the last stages of the work, facilitated the completion of the project and his philosophical midwifery of some of my original formulations improved and enriched the work substantively from what it would have been otherwise. I also would like to thank my committee members, both of whom I feel very privileged to have had the opportunity to work with. Stanton Marlan, whose hospitality, generosity and perpetual willingness to talk with me as a peer about the material or anything else has been key to supporting my ongoing interest in the richness of alchemical and archetypal thinking. Eva Simms, who provided my initial vi introduction to the practice of a poetic and phenomenological way of being and “thinking”, has made suggestions have encouraged me to stretch my world and been key to keeping the poetic soul of the work alive. Also, I would like to thank Will Adams both for his wonderful work on Frankenstein which informed my own approach heavily, as well as for being a kindred seeker and an inspiration on the spiritual path which has run in close parallel to the present work. Thanks to Fred Evans of the Duquesne University Department of Philosophy who allowed me to work for two years as the assistant to the Center for Interpretive and Qualitative Research. In addition to providing me with much needed time to digest theoretical materials, this work exposed me to a wide variety of qualitative explorations in virtually every field of the humanities and social science, and was tremendously helpful in forming my interest in qualitative methodologies in general. Fred’s generous spirit also served as a model of the kind of openness to possibilities that is truly worthy of emulation. Further thanks goes to several members of the University of Pittsburgh Department of Public Health who were willing to support the efforts of a hapless graduate student in a separate university in spite of their own demanding academic schedules: Patricia Documet, who was willing to harass me into ever greater efforts with great humor and a persistence, and John Marx, who read several early chapters and whose positive reviews buoyed my spirit at a difficult time. In addition, a very special thanks is due to several of my classmates, Ryan Underwood and Mike Melczak, both of whom provided just-in-time edits as well as much needed morale boosts in the last several months of the project. vii There are innumerable others who have provided tangible and intangible support along the way. In particular, I would like to thank Dave and Kathie Keller who allowed me to use their beautiful rural retreat in order to make rapid progress on tangible writing in a natural atmosphere that served to remind me, again, of the possibilities of human experience that sometimes fades from view after days of working in front of a computer screen. Thanks to A Ritter who volunteered a great deal of her time to provide the everyday, tangible help that allowed for uninterrupted time to be with the material. Finally, the work might not have been completed without the ongoing interest and encouragement of friends such as Tammy Thomas, April Carman, Nathan and Julia Mesnikoff, Neil Banas, Wilson Howe, Alina and Tibi Bodea, Joe and Cathie Hadju. In the spirit of the current work, there is always more room for gratitude. There are countless individuals with whom I discussed this material over the years, and to whom I owe much. There are those under-acknowledged contributions of administrative staff such as Norma Coleman and Marilyn Henline who have supported my oblivious journey through the bureaucratic maze with patience and fortitude. There is no way of enumerating the countless contributors to the work, and so I thank the unlisted crowd of kind hearted and sharp-witted friends who have