Cyborg Nature/ Nature Cyborgs

          Is ‘cyborgianism,’ if you follow my terminology, human specific? Can humans be the only true cyborgs? As the term manifests itself in a vast amount of literature (both fiction and non) and in popular culture, one could come to the assessment that it is a condition that only humans can experience. The definition itself, however, suggests otherwise. A cybernetic organism, part biology and part machine, can be anything that follows those guidelines. It could be a plant with the mechanical ability to store solar energy so that it may digest during the night, to grow twice as fast.  Humans have largely used the term to our own anthropocentric ends, but it is more than something human. Of course, this may not be news to everyone (or anyone), since examples of non-humanoid cyborgs do exist. However, the purpose of this blog is to show that they are a little more common than one may think, and that society tends to view animal cyborg as devoid of organic-ness.

          In Donna Haraway’s “A Manifesto for Cyborgs,” she references the possibility of an animal (other than human) based cyborg. She cites the breakdown of the boundary between human and animal organisms as pleasurable for “many branches of feminist culture,” (29) and states that in her ironically created late twentieth century, “the boundary between human and animal is thoroughly breached.” (29) Although she is not directly referencing the cyborg as it is most popularly known, but rather she uses it as a jumping off point for larger political issues. Her willingness and need to make the distinction is representative of the fact that the society that she is writing in does not. She is attempting to break existing boundaries. Humanity sees animals as other. Humanity sees technology as other. In our anthropocentric sensibility we (humanity) tend to see ourselves as central. Nature and technology, thus subject to our control and influence.

          Accordingly most cyborgs of fiction are human in their origin. Blade Runner, Star Trek, Robocop, Terminator, Battlestar Galactica; these are the cyborg works that we perhaps know best.  However, there exist cyborgs in fiction and in real life that are not human. There are animal/machine combos, but we somehow see them as less than cyborg because of their animal nature. Kevin Warwick’s desire for transformation is to some a frightening thing. However, perhaps more frightening are the recent developments for the U.S military from D.A.R.P.A (Defence Advanced Research Project Agency), who plan to develop the technology to control the movements of sharks and decode their perceptions (http://www.livescience.com/technology/060307_shark_implant.html). This will allow the military to gain recognisance by remotely controlling the sharks’ movements, and accessing their sensory experiences. Since sharks have the ability to sense electro-magnetic pulses this will open up many possibilities to the military. Researchers have also used implants to explore the brain of a cat, to experience what it sees, and implanted chips in birds to warn of Avian flu. Because Warwick is human however, his experiments are somehow viewed as more significant. For example, “Kevin’s work is frequently referred to by other authors,” (http://www.kevinwarwick.com/index.asp) which is something missing from the shark experiments. He sees himself as the future. Then what of the sharks? The sharks, once fully ‘cyborgianized,’ will be used by the military, completely controlled, as if they were little more than machines. They will be devoid of their biology in the eyes of the military, exploited for their machine features. They will not be cyborgs, but rather simple machines.

          We3 (Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely, 2005) is an excellent graphic novel that serves as a fictional example, not only of cyborg animals, but of the anthropocentric, patriarchal interest in them. In it animal cyborgs are represented as more human than the humans. Although this technique could be read as anthropocentric, since the animals are given the ability to speak through their machinery and are made much more sympathetic than any human character, it also helps to detract from the assumed importance and centrality of humanity’s role in the story, and in the mythology of cyborgs. The protagonists, a dog, a cat and a rabbit, are given sophisticated exoskeletons by the military. They are jacked in to the animals’ brains, giving the animals the ability to control complex weaponry, speak, and understand sophisticated mission assignments. The 3, like the plans that the military has for sharks, are exploited by the U.S and viewed as nothing more than weapons in themselves. In other words, they are stripped by the patriarchy, which the military represents (as it so often does), of their organic nature. They are seen as disposable machines. Not as cyborgs, but as spare parts. Once the 3 realize this however, as the military does eventually attempt to dispose of them, they flee. In their journey to be free, they experience connection with each other, sadness, and loss, and the reader is meant to experience it with them (I did). We get a glimpse of their past (through ‘flash back’ type techniques), their victimization, and finally their rescue. They are saved by a kind homeless man. Significantly, the character that is the least representative of society, and of patriarchy, is the one who is most able to recognize the animals not as machines, but as sentient and loving creatures; a happy ending after all. (If you haven’t read We3, treat yourself.)

          Not only does humanity strip technology of significance until it directly alters our lives, as a society we also often strip the animal world of their biological significance. They are living creatures, and they can be cyborgs too. An animal cyborg doesn’t transform the animal into machine, and it is no less biological than a humanoid cyborg. Animals are not disposable, and cyborgs certainly aren’t.

This weeks’ food for thought:

 Does using a machine (laptop) to express my thoughts make me a momentary cyborg?