Ambivalent Animal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AMBIVALENT ANIMAL A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Geoffrey Thomas In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree PhD, Digital Media in the School of Literature, Communication & Culture Georgia Institute of Technology May 2010 AMBIVALENT ANIMAL Approved by: Dr. Jay Bolter, Advisor Dr. Yi-Luen Ellen Do School of Literature, Communication & School of Architecture Culture Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Eugene Thacker Dr. Jane Prophet School of Literature, Communication & Department of Computing Culture Goldsmiths, University of London Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Carl DiSalvo School of Literature, Communication & Culture Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: March 30, 2010 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank Jay Bolter for his help and feedback with my research during my time at Georgia Tech. I would like to thank Eugene Thacker, Carl DiSalvo, Ellen Do, Ali Mazalek and Jane Prophet for their insights and inspiration. I would also like to thank the LCC community for providing a rich environment of scholarship and creativity. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii LIST OF FIGURES iv SUMMARY x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Human, Animal and Machine Interactions 1 1.2 The Ambivalent Animal 3 1.3 The Dialectics of the Ambivalent Animal Project 5 1.3.1 Irreducibility & Procedurality 5 1.3.2 Autonomy & Integration 6 1.3.3 Aura & Abjection 7 1.4 Ambivalent Aesthetic 7 1.5 Ambivalent Alba 10 2 CYBORG 20 2.1 Irreducibility & Procedurality 21 2.1.1 Cybernetic Totalism 21 2.1.2 Cyborg Animals 24 2.1.2.1 Wild Cyborgs 24 2.1.2.2 Domesticated Cyborgs 27 2.2 Autonomy & Integration 31 2.3 Aura & Abjection 36 2.3.1 Auratic Cyborg 36 2.3.2 Abject Cyborg 40 iv 2.4 Conclusion 46 3 CLONE 54 3.1 Irreducibility & Procedurality 54 3.1.1 Genetic Essentialism and Material Variation 55 3.1.2 Biotech’s Transcendence and Immanence 59 3.2 Autonomy & Integration 63 3.2.1 Human, Nonhuman Subjectivity 63 3.3 Aura & Abjection: Multiplicity 69 3.4 Conclusion 75 4 CHIMERA 83 4.1 Irreducibility & Procedurality: Informational Bodies 84 4.1.1 Informational Biology’s Alliance with Cybernetics 86 4.1.2 Platonic Forehand 87 4.1.3 Synthetic Biology 90 4.1.4 Biopower 93 4.2 Autonomy & Integration 98 4.3 Aura & Abjection 108 5 SHAPESHIFTER 126 5.1 Irreducibility & Procedurality 127 5.1.1 Multiple Worlds 128 5.1.2 False Sense of Understanding 130 5.1.3 Alterity as a New Form of Regulation 133 5.2 Autonomy & Integration 134 5.2.1 The Animal’s New Status 135 5.2.2 Complications of Anthropomorphism 139 5.2.3 The Animal’s Diminished World 143 v 5.3 Aura & Abjection 155 5.3.1 Affirmative Alterity 156 5.3.2 New Forms of Alienation 158 5.4 Conclusion 166 6 THEORY & PRACTICE 173 6.1 Writing & Making 173 6.1.1 Methods 174 6.1.1.1 Personal Perspective 174 6.1.1.2 Eclecticism 175 6.1.1.3 Aesthestic Framework 176 6.1.1.4 Repetition 176 6.1.2 Speculative Creative Research 177 6.2 Irreducibility & Procedurality 182 6.2.1 Language Games 182 6.2.2 Ways of Knowing 184 6.2.3 Interactions of Theory and Practice 189 6.3 Autonomy & Integration: Transgressed Divisions 194 6.3.1 Complicity and Critique 198 6.3.2 The Importance of Difference & Division 207 6.4 Aura & Abjection 215 6.4.1 Identity and Materiality 218 6.5 Conclusion 222 7 CONCLUSION 227 7.1 Combining Theory and Practice 229 7.1.1 Zoocentrix & Petite Charm 229 7.2 Three Dialectics 233 vi 7.2.1 Irreducibility & Procedurality 235 7.2.2 Autonomy & Integration 237 7.2.3 Aura & Abjection 238 7.3 Central Themes 240 APPENDIX A: ZOOCENTRIX & PETITE CHARM DOCUMENTATION 246 A.1 Zoocentrix: Purrplex Documentation 246 A.1.1 Cutomized CatTV 246 A.1.1.1 Customized CatTV Arduino Code 247 A.1.1.2 Customized CatTV Processing Code 249 A.1.2 Meat Mobile 254 A.1.2.1 Meat Mobile Arduino Code 255 A.1.3 OutsideIn 258 A.1.3.1 OutsideIn Arduino Code 259 A.1.3.2 OutsideIn Processing Code 262 A.1.4 Tail Twitcher 280 A.1.4.1 Tail Twitcher Arduino Code 281 A.2 Petite Charm Documentation 284 A.2.1 Petite Charm Stuffed Animal Prototypes 284 A.2.2 Petite Charm Web Site 285 A.2.3 Petite Charm Parafernalia 290 BIBLIOGRAPHY 295 vii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1.1: Diagram of the Dialectics of Ambivalence 5 Figure 1.2: IRNA transgenic rabbit 12 Figure 2.1: Lely’s Austronaut 29 Figure 2.2: James Auger and Jimmy Loizeua, Augmented Animal 38 Figure 2:3: Boredom Research, Real Snail Mail 41 Figure 2:4: Cellborg humidity sensor 44 Figure 2:5: Augmented monkey, University of Pittsburgh 45 Figure 2:6: Preemptive Media, Zapped! 47 Figure 6.1: Illustration for the Lovely Monster project 183 Figure 6.2: Illustration for Petite Charm project 184 Figure 6.3: Petite Charm coloring books, Puff Petite rings, and badge 186 Figure 6.4: Customized Cat-TV 203 Figure 6.5: OutsideIn’s interface 204 Figure 6.6: Fall 2009, LCC Demo Day 205 Figure 6.7: Tail Twitcher: mice tails that twitch when a cat approaches 206 Figure 6.8: Meat Mobile 212 Figure 6.9: Petite Charm dogs 213 Figure 6.10: Fall 2009, LCC Demo Day 215 Figure A.1: Customized CatTV 246 Figure A.2 Customized CatTV Circuit Diagram 247 Figure A.3 Meat Mobile 254 Figure A.4 Meat Mobile Circuit Diagram 255 Figure A.5 OutsideIn 258 Figure A.6 OutsideIn Circuit Diagram 259 viii Figure A.7 Tail Twitcher 280 Figure A.8 Tail Twitcher Circuit Diagram 281 Figure A.9 Zoocentrix Poster 283 Figure A.10 Petite Charm Dogs 284 Figure A.11 Petite Charm web site: Home page 285 Figure A.12 Petite Charm web site: Profile page 286 Figure A.13 Petite Charm web site: Petite Care page 287 Figure A.14 Petite Charm web site: Shop page 288 Figure A.15 Petite Charm web site: Play page 289 Figure A.16 Petite Charm Stickers & Badges 290 Figure A.17 Petite Charm Coloring Book 291 Figure A.18 Petite Charm Poster One 292 Figure A.19 Petite Charm Poster Two 293 Figure A.20 Petite Charm Poster Three 294 ix SUMMARY The Ambivalent Animal project explores the interactions of animals, culture and technology. The project employs both artistic practice and critical theory, each in ways that inspire the other. My creative practice centers around two projects that focus on domestic pets. These projects highlight the animal's uncertain status as they explore the overlapping ontologies of animal, human and machine. They provide concrete artifacts that engage with theoretical issues of anthropocentrism, animality and alterity. My theoretical work navigates between the fields of animal studies, art and design, media and culture studies, and philosophy. My dissertation explores animality through four real and imagined animal roles: cyborg, clone, chimera and shapeshifter. Each animal role is considered in relation to three dialectics: irreducibility and procedurality, autonomy and integration, aura and abjection. These dialectics do not seek full synthesis but instead embrace the oscillations of irresolvable debates and desires. The dialectics bring into focus issues of epistemology, ontology, corporeality and subjectivity. When the four animal roles engage the three dialectics, connected yet varied themes emerge. The cyborgian animal is simultaneously liberated and regulated, assisted and restricted, integrated and isolated. The cloned animal is an emblem of renewal and loss; she is both idealized code and material flesh and finds herself caught in the battles of nature and nurture. The chimera is both rebel and conformist; his unusual juxtapositions pioneer radical corporeal transgressions but also conform to the mechanisms of global capital. And the shapeshifter explores the thrill and anxiety of an altered phenomenology; she gains new perceptions though unstable subjectivity. These roles x reveal corporeal adjustments and unfamiliar subjectivities that inspire the creative practice. Both my writing and making employ an ambivalent aesthetic—an aesthetic approach that evokes two or more incompatible sensibilities. The animal's uncertain status contributes to this aesthetic: some animals enjoy remarkable care and attention, while others are routinely exploited, abused and discarded. Ambivalence acknowledges the complexity of lived experience, philosophical and political debate, and academic inquiry. My approach recognizes the light and dark of these complex ambivalences—it privileges paradox and embraces the confusion and wonder of creative research. Rather than erase, conceal or resolve ambiguity, an ambivalent aesthetic foregrounds the limits of language and representation and highlights contradiction and irresolution. xi CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Human, Animal and Machine Interactions Contemporary cybernetic systems mingle hardware and software in complex digital ecologies. These responsive systems were once inspired by biological mechanisms.1 After developing into sophisticated hardware-software configurations, cybernetic systems have returned to their biological roots. The methods and tools of information technology now underpin the fields of molecular biology and biotechnology. The most idealized biotech projects perceive biological materials as something similar to digital media. Organic matter becomes plastic and replicable2 and flesh is programmable. Donna Haraway notes: …communication sciences and modern biologies are constructed by a common move—the translation of the world into a problem of coding, a search for a common language in which all resistance to instrumental control disappears and all heterogeneity can be submitted to disassembly, reassembly, investment, and exchange.3 For the body to become a medium, its internal mechanisms need to be defined as fundamentally informational.