(no subject)
A modest proposal, in case anyone is intersted. Its for a course on Theoretical Approaches to Media and Culture: Theories of Identity and Subjectivity...
Problem Bodies on New Frontiers:
Floating Cyborgs and the Discursive Construction of Space Travel
Research Question:
In what ways is the body situated as problematic within the discourses constituting space travel as an object of knowledge? How does the cyborg ontology necessitated by the harsh environments of space advance, reproduce or disrupt the classic colonialist narratives that have tended to shape our imagination of space travel?
My work will begin with the premise that all objects of knowledge are socially constructed, and that the discourses which constitute these objects engage in continual processes of articulation and re-articulation, such that seemingly distinct objects will have deeply-embedded discursive interconnections. The objects of knowledge that are of particular interest for this project include space travel, the body and the cyborg. Each of these objects, in their relationships to one another, are constructed with a load of cultural “baggage”, including meanings of gender, race and sexuality.
Space travel, for instance, has a close discursive connection with themes of colonialism and frontier narratives. This is most evident in the language through we construct outer space and space travel as an object of knowledge. The classic colonialist narrative, as identified by its critics, generally looks something like this: the civilised (quasi-disembodied) white male adventurer sets out to explore (penetrate) and conquer a racialised and feminised nature, encountering within that nature the uncivilised (fully embodied) and feminised Other. Bryld and Lykke (2000), from a radical feminist perspective, argue that the space flight narrative is a
contemporary transformation or re-enactment of classic constructions of ambivalent self-other images… [which] reproduce or displace classic colonialist, patriarchal and ‘naturalist’ oppositions between ‘civilized’ selves and ‘wild’ others, as well as Enlightenment constructions of occult and spiritual thought systems as the reverse of ‘masculine’ ratio. (Bryld & Lykke, 2000, p. 8)
The importance of this re-enactment should not be underestimated, because if space travel is constituted by the stories that we tell about it, then the protagonist of these stories is not the universal human subject, but is gendered (as masculine) and racialised (as white).
These narratives have implications for the body also, as it is a primary site at which power is inscribed. Within this discursive milieu, meanings are transferred violently between nature (in the classic case, the unexplored dark regions of continents; in our case, the unexplored dark reaches of the cosmos) and the gendered body; nature becomes feminised and racialised while the feminine and raced body becomes naturalised. Simultaneously, boundaries are marked and protected: between mind and body, self and other, male and female, human and nature.
In discourses around space travel, the body is foregrounded and problematic. This occurs for several reasons, primary among which are the material realities of the physical body; the very incommensurability of human biological systems with the cold, irradiated vacuum of outer space tends to make the body a problem. The resulting primacy of medical and scientific discourses in the construction of space travel also has the effect of foregrounding the positioning of the body (1). Quite predictably, however, this is discursively accomplished in ways which are gendered. Analysing the construction of bodies across a range of discursive sites (including popular media, films and interviews with NASA personnel), Casper and Moore (1995) highlight three significant findings, consistent with long-standing feminist arguments about the medicalisation of the female body (2) and the normalisation of hetero-reproductive sex:
First… male bodies are equated with masculinity and are accepted as the norm, while female bodies are equated with femininity and are configured as problematic. Women astronauts are defined simultaneously as potential sexual partners for male astronauts and as potential reproducers in the interest of colonization. Second, sexual practices are framed exclusively within the heterosexual paradigm, which leaves few "spaces" for other sexualities. Third, sexuality is explicitly and invariably linked to reproduction, reflecting and reinforcing heterosexist assumptions about sexual behaviour (Section 1, para. 4).
The problematics of the body in space demand the use of technological augmentations in order to ensure its survival, and so we are faced with the spectre of the cyborg. Without such augmentation, the human body is completely inoperable in space; thus, all forms of human agency in space are directly implicated in a cyborg ontology. In her discussion about the iconic status of the space suit, Shaw (2004) argues that “the astronaut is inherently cyborg and the icon functions to establish the paradigm for recognizing that technoprosthetics have become part of the definition of our corporeality.” (p. 127)
The cyborg is itself a highly gendered concept. Haraway deployed it to feminist ends in such a way that
through the use of technology as the means or context for human hybridization, cyborgs come to represent unfamiliar ‘otherness,’ one that challenges the denotative stability of human identity… cyborg identity is predicated on transgressed boundaries.” (Balsamo, 1996, p. 129)
The collision between the destabilising effect of the cyborg and the essentialising and naturalising effect of the colonial narrative raises a number of interesting questions that need to be explored. In what ways does Haraway’s politico-theoretical cyborg resemble the real cyborgs of NASA and other space agencies? Could we read these cyborgs in such a way as to displace the narratives that have come to dominate space travel? In other words, could the uncertainty and fluidity of identity suggested by cyborg ontologies disrupt the narratives marked by a surety of identity (located in the aforementioned boundaries of self/other, male/female, etc.)? This reading might present one set of possibilities, but other (less optimistic) readings are viable. Perhaps the integration of the great, immense technologies of space travel into human agency signify primarily a testament to progress, a teleological push to “the future” made possible only by capitalist techno-innovation driven by the imperatives of profit and militarism? Surely there is something about these technologies, and the rhetoric used to deploy them, which suggests this. Where does the body stand (or float) in this unfolding zero-G narrative? Most importantly, what are the implications for identity in a future where space will become an increasingly important focus of collective human endeavour?
(1) Some hopeful space explorers, fortunately, are willing to put these problems aside. The Association of Autonomous Astronauts was an organisation whose mission was to build “a world-wide network of local, community-based groups dedicated to constructing their own spaceships”, utilising anacho-absurdist tactics to fight against the “state, corporate and military monopoly of space travel”, advocating such things as zero-g sex, raves in space, and “three-sided football”.
(2) See, for examples, Balsamo (1996).
Problem Bodies on New Frontiers:
Floating Cyborgs and the Discursive Construction of Space Travel
Research Question:
In what ways is the body situated as problematic within the discourses constituting space travel as an object of knowledge? How does the cyborg ontology necessitated by the harsh environments of space advance, reproduce or disrupt the classic colonialist narratives that have tended to shape our imagination of space travel?
My work will begin with the premise that all objects of knowledge are socially constructed, and that the discourses which constitute these objects engage in continual processes of articulation and re-articulation, such that seemingly distinct objects will have deeply-embedded discursive interconnections. The objects of knowledge that are of particular interest for this project include space travel, the body and the cyborg. Each of these objects, in their relationships to one another, are constructed with a load of cultural “baggage”, including meanings of gender, race and sexuality.
Space travel, for instance, has a close discursive connection with themes of colonialism and frontier narratives. This is most evident in the language through we construct outer space and space travel as an object of knowledge. The classic colonialist narrative, as identified by its critics, generally looks something like this: the civilised (quasi-disembodied) white male adventurer sets out to explore (penetrate) and conquer a racialised and feminised nature, encountering within that nature the uncivilised (fully embodied) and feminised Other. Bryld and Lykke (2000), from a radical feminist perspective, argue that the space flight narrative is a
contemporary transformation or re-enactment of classic constructions of ambivalent self-other images… [which] reproduce or displace classic colonialist, patriarchal and ‘naturalist’ oppositions between ‘civilized’ selves and ‘wild’ others, as well as Enlightenment constructions of occult and spiritual thought systems as the reverse of ‘masculine’ ratio. (Bryld & Lykke, 2000, p. 8)
The importance of this re-enactment should not be underestimated, because if space travel is constituted by the stories that we tell about it, then the protagonist of these stories is not the universal human subject, but is gendered (as masculine) and racialised (as white).
These narratives have implications for the body also, as it is a primary site at which power is inscribed. Within this discursive milieu, meanings are transferred violently between nature (in the classic case, the unexplored dark regions of continents; in our case, the unexplored dark reaches of the cosmos) and the gendered body; nature becomes feminised and racialised while the feminine and raced body becomes naturalised. Simultaneously, boundaries are marked and protected: between mind and body, self and other, male and female, human and nature.
In discourses around space travel, the body is foregrounded and problematic. This occurs for several reasons, primary among which are the material realities of the physical body; the very incommensurability of human biological systems with the cold, irradiated vacuum of outer space tends to make the body a problem. The resulting primacy of medical and scientific discourses in the construction of space travel also has the effect of foregrounding the positioning of the body (1). Quite predictably, however, this is discursively accomplished in ways which are gendered. Analysing the construction of bodies across a range of discursive sites (including popular media, films and interviews with NASA personnel), Casper and Moore (1995) highlight three significant findings, consistent with long-standing feminist arguments about the medicalisation of the female body (2) and the normalisation of hetero-reproductive sex:
First… male bodies are equated with masculinity and are accepted as the norm, while female bodies are equated with femininity and are configured as problematic. Women astronauts are defined simultaneously as potential sexual partners for male astronauts and as potential reproducers in the interest of colonization. Second, sexual practices are framed exclusively within the heterosexual paradigm, which leaves few "spaces" for other sexualities. Third, sexuality is explicitly and invariably linked to reproduction, reflecting and reinforcing heterosexist assumptions about sexual behaviour (Section 1, para. 4).
The problematics of the body in space demand the use of technological augmentations in order to ensure its survival, and so we are faced with the spectre of the cyborg. Without such augmentation, the human body is completely inoperable in space; thus, all forms of human agency in space are directly implicated in a cyborg ontology. In her discussion about the iconic status of the space suit, Shaw (2004) argues that “the astronaut is inherently cyborg and the icon functions to establish the paradigm for recognizing that technoprosthetics have become part of the definition of our corporeality.” (p. 127)
The cyborg is itself a highly gendered concept. Haraway deployed it to feminist ends in such a way that
through the use of technology as the means or context for human hybridization, cyborgs come to represent unfamiliar ‘otherness,’ one that challenges the denotative stability of human identity… cyborg identity is predicated on transgressed boundaries.” (Balsamo, 1996, p. 129)
The collision between the destabilising effect of the cyborg and the essentialising and naturalising effect of the colonial narrative raises a number of interesting questions that need to be explored. In what ways does Haraway’s politico-theoretical cyborg resemble the real cyborgs of NASA and other space agencies? Could we read these cyborgs in such a way as to displace the narratives that have come to dominate space travel? In other words, could the uncertainty and fluidity of identity suggested by cyborg ontologies disrupt the narratives marked by a surety of identity (located in the aforementioned boundaries of self/other, male/female, etc.)? This reading might present one set of possibilities, but other (less optimistic) readings are viable. Perhaps the integration of the great, immense technologies of space travel into human agency signify primarily a testament to progress, a teleological push to “the future” made possible only by capitalist techno-innovation driven by the imperatives of profit and militarism? Surely there is something about these technologies, and the rhetoric used to deploy them, which suggests this. Where does the body stand (or float) in this unfolding zero-G narrative? Most importantly, what are the implications for identity in a future where space will become an increasingly important focus of collective human endeavour?
(1) Some hopeful space explorers, fortunately, are willing to put these problems aside. The Association of Autonomous Astronauts was an organisation whose mission was to build “a world-wide network of local, community-based groups dedicated to constructing their own spaceships”, utilising anacho-absurdist tactics to fight against the “state, corporate and military monopoly of space travel”, advocating such things as zero-g sex, raves in space, and “three-sided football”.
(2) See, for examples, Balsamo (1996).