Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Haunted by My Digital Ghosts

The Internet. The final frontier. OK, not really. I still think space is the final frontier. I'm old fashioned like that -- more interested in physical than virtual adventures. Yet the Internet does offer the opportunity for self-invention. Nothing like the self free of the constraints of the body, able to engage in relationships that would be impossible or at least difficult in physical space. Good stuff. Yet the online multiplicity of identity can go awry.

In my case, I have an old online profile on the vegan artists' site Veganica.com. "Vegan?" you ask? "Artist?" you inquire. Indeed. Once upon a time my primary form of writing was poetry, and I was a veggie activist. I've since mellowed on the whole vegan thing. (I'm simply an ovo-lacto vegetarian these days.) And I write far more essays than poetry.

Anyway, a friend I haven't seen in 10 years discovered this profile and contacted me through Veganica. I was overjoyed to hear from him, but somewhat chagrined at the inaccurate version of Erika he found online (see visual manifestation left versus newer photo below right).
I experienced a miniature time warp viewing the profile again, having not updated it for years. (With apologies to site creator Derek Goodwin.) Who was this person Erika who talks about her poetry and enthusiastically calls herself a baby vegan?

This is my digital ghost, metaphorically speaking. An NPR report this week warned against the presence of ghost images online. Ghosts are potential leftovers which remain in the Interwebs even after being removed, say, from social networking sites to make profiles more appropriate to ever-curious employers. I enjoy this term and think it should be expanded to lost online selves, frozen in time, forgotten or ignored by their creators. I suppose we all have a number of digital ghosts. I certainly do. After the Veganica Incident, I started searching the Web for my other/former selves. Finding old bios (Friendster!) and photos strikes the same chord as finding an old diary in a closet. My own personal self-haunting.

Buffy's Stalker Revenge

OK, my whole Luddite thing sometimes backfires. I'm apparently the last person in the universe to see the Buffy vs. Edward vid. If in fact I'm the second to last, do check it out:

video

I enjoy this not only because I love Buffy and hate Twilight, but because Jonathan McIntosh has used adept editing to create an awesome feminist stalker revenge story. Of course, Buffy has some good stalker revenge stories within the source text, but this one is a pleasant addition to her ongoing hobby of putting male vamps in their place.

The vid prompts this comment from Charlie Jane Anders on io9: "Here's what's cool about vampires: They're evil. Here's what's not cool about vampires: They're emo." Regarding Buffy, Anders argues that vampires being emotional and tortured (witness Spike and Angel) was the least desirable part of the series. While I did enjoy both these characters and their fraught relationships with Buffy, I do get the point about too much melodrama and not enough evil in the vamp department.

This is why I enjoyed Let the Right One In so much. The vampire is cruel and manipulative; a cool, calculating, emotionally unknowable character. The ambiguously gay adolescent love affair between the human boy Oskar and Eli, the vampire girl-who's-not-really-a-girl, is more disturbing than sexy. Eli's primary concern is her own survival. S/he isn't weak or tortured like Angel or Spike. S/he's a scary, bloodthirsty vamp in classic style. The monster who looks like a cute little girl. Eli romances Oskar and protects him, but all in the service of having a human caretaker who will clearly be doomed by the relationship. Abusive affair much? Tickets to that film should have come with a voucher for free psychotherapy.

So, yeah. The scary vamps are still out there. In Sweden, apparently. Now if only someone would do an Eli v. Buffy vid. That's a matchup I'd pay to see.

P.S. Vidding has only recently caught my interest, via the SF film and TV course I took at the CUNY grad center last semester with Heather Hendershot, and an excellent WisCon session called "Vidding as Feminist Critique." In the latter, the panel showed several vids and discussed their appropriation of popular texts for the vast international feminist conspiracy. Good times. One of the panelists, Lila Futuransky, has been kind enough to post links to the vids on her blog. I recommend "One Girl Revolution."

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Where I Become a Nostalgic, Misguided Luddite


There is something a little off about a science fiction fan who shuns technology. Yet I fear this is what I have become. Demographically speaking, I should be a tech savvy early adopter, perhaps reclusive in person but reliant on online social networks. And yet. While my friends are engrossed in FaceBook, Kindle and Twitter, I seem to become less interested in the digital world as I get older. And it’s not for lack of trying. I’ve written long, possibly tedious academic papers about the future of digital publishing and the impact of online social networking on individuality. I have written in praise of Haraway’s metaphorical cyborg, the networked self of the future that, theoretically, has the potential to bring humanity together ... so the optimists say. Yet I own a rather expensive MacBook whose myriad programs I rarely use. I have a blog I largely ignore. I set up a MySpace account which I fail to update. I dread my e-mail. What is wrong with me?

I am interested in technology in theory but rarely in practice. I recognize the culture shift it’s wreaked on humanity, and the potential it has for positive and negative transformation. Yet in my own life, I find the management of a digital self unfulfilling, new technology only temporarily absorbing. When it comes down to it, I’d rather get cozy with the tomato plants growing on my fire escape, or lay in Carl Schurz Park tanning with the smell of the river and the gardens, ideally with a good book. This is in no way a self-righteous stance. My life would be a lot easier, as far as both professional and personal networking are concerned, were I more a child of the digital age.

I am beginning to wonder if it is actually science fiction fandom and study that is making me increasingly technophobic. I have become nostalgic for face-to-face interaction and green growing things. I find myself fantasizing more and more about abandoning this city and returning to rural New England ... the better to grow my tomatoes. Maybe I have just seen too many apocalyptic films, and they've either made me paranoid about the singularity or made me long for the fresh start of the post-apocalyptic wilderness survivor, a la Butler's Parable books. Isn't that the draw of the apocalypse? That we've mucked things up so badly that what we really need is to get back to the land! Revive the ways of our ancestors! Get some good old traditional American values going again. My inner scary conservative resurfaces.

But perhaps, all too typically, this is not an either/or choice. I do love my Mac and my cell phone, not to mention my running water and electricity and all those good things. My real fantasy is to live like my mother and step father, who have a Green house on 40 acres in Spokane County, Washington. They chop wood and scrape snow off their solar panels. They also have wireless Internet. Mom works on her laptop with a VPN connection and enjoys a view of the mountains from her porch.

This blog calls for confessions and this is mine: I want a world where I get the things I like about the digital age without the virtual and real-world rat race. And while we're at it, without the violence and waste. I want to use technology without having it interfere with my life, without feeling like I need to use it all the time because it's there, or because it's required. I want the best of both worlds -- where I don't have to live in a cave, but I also don't have to live in a tiny Manhattan apartment glued to my computer screen. My personal utopia.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

Notes From a First-Time WisCon Attendee

Why would a grad student with an overdue term paper spend money she doesn’t have to fly from New York to Wisconsin over Memorial Day weekend? Because she heard it was the time and place where geeky females and their other-gendered fellows gathered to drink wine and talk about feminist science fiction. Thankfully, it turns out to be a true rumor.

This was my first WisCon. I knew a whole two people when I boarded my flight. To my great joy, no one attempted to draw a big ‘V’ on my forehead with lipstick. Folks were happy to welcome me into the fold. The first fellow attendee I met befriended me on the flight from La Guardia to Madison. Several others soon joined us at the airport. This was unlike my previous (limited) convention experience. (Say, the recent New York Comic Con, in which I languished in a sea of pop-culture aficionados feeling isolated among hordes, like I usually do in New York City.) WisCon people scoop you right up and make you one of their own. Witness the intimacy created by a 1,000-person membership cap.

It’s nice to blend for a change. I was by far not the only girl in the room with very short bright red hair and geeky glasses. Amusing T-shirt slogans were in abundance (“My Marxist Feminist Dialectic Brings All the Boys to the Yard”?). Common ground was rightly assumed. Spontaneous arguments about the BSG finale were followed by conversations about bodies as sites of liberation/imprisonment in Octavia Butler’s fiction. Ice breakers unnecessary. You can’t normally do this with strangers. They give you funny looks.

WisCon is largely a family reunion with some folk festival, book fair, art show and academic exchange thrown in. Guests of Honor Ellen Klages and Geoff Ryman were by turns hilarious and touching in their opening readings. Their repeat appearances at the conference didn’t disappoint – it was like being at a never-ending stand-up comic show. The convention’s big opener is known as The Gathering, in which I had my face painted for the first time in 20 years (below right), enjoyed a tarot card reading, got free perfume, bought zines and met so many people I was grateful for the name tags. I declined to join either the knitting circle or the shape note singing group, but they certainly added to the milieu. There was no shortage of parties to attend. Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog sing along was a highlight. Ah, geeks in harmony.


There were plenty of academic papers and panels to keep me busy. The folks who presented “Vidding as Feminist Critique” were particularly impressive – a nice combination of gleeful fandom and analysis. I moderated a panel on science fiction and fantasy in academia and presented a paper on Invasion of the Body Snatchers (four versions spanning 50 years in 20 minutes. Go!). Nobody threw tomatoes.

My only complaint is that, in WisCon’s noble effort to be inclusive, I find them too permissive in their programming policies. This results in some repetitive programming and some inexperienced presenters. I was hoping for a heftier academic track, in particular, although there were some excellent papers presented. If scholarly criticism floats your boat, keep an eye on Andrea Hairston and Erin Rapft. As a master’s student focusing in SF, it was awesome to meet both established and emerging scholars in the genre.

The presentations were hit or miss, but all in all it was a good time and I think I’ll be back next year. My advice for first-time WisCon attendees? Here are a few tips:

1) Talk to lots of people. Right away. There is no reason to be shy at this con. Go to the first-time attendees dinner on Friday night. Have a beer and get mingly and you will have new best friends for the rest of the weekend and probably longer.

2) Help out! They always need volunteers. Consider doing some programming, too. Moderating and presenting helped me meet people and I felt like a contributing member of the community, even though I was a newbie. Plus they have good snacks in the Green Room.

3) Visit A Room of One’s Own, the local feminist bookstore for a strong selection, comfy chairs and good readings.

4) Hit the local restaurants. Madison does not disappoint. There’s also an excellent farmer’s market on Saturday morning.

5) Get tickets for the Sunday night dessert banquet ahead of time and bring something pretty to get dolled up in. And tissue for the Guest(s) of Honor speech(es) and Tiptree Award the same night.

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Muad'Dib's Moral Ambiguity


In Dune, published in 1965, Frank Herbert displays much of his young hero Paul Muad'Dib's gift of prescience. The 21st century reader is confronted with an adept allegory for the current global petroleum crisis, not to mention the rise of religious extremism as a political tool, and the increasing anxiety about a global water shortage. The Fremen struggle against an occupying power greedy for Arrakis' single export, the spice, the most valuable thing in the universe. Honed by an entirely arid planet, they've developed superior water-conservation technology, complex religious and kinship systems, and the strongest war-culture in the universe. The occupying power underestimates them, misunderstands their culture, labels them barbarians. In the face of extreme hardship, they draw on the their collective strength and religious fervor and attempt to smite their enemies. Sound familiar?

Longstanding relevance makes a classic, and Dune is certainly that. This fight for freedom can be seen in our so-called War on Terror, in the Palestinian independence struggle, in the American Revolution. We read, rooting for the underdog, feeling clear on who the villains and heroes are, only to have our alliance upset. The final scene is quite the tableau: Feyd-Rautha dead on the floor, Irulan taken as a war trophy, the emperor beaten at his own game, Alia off slitting the throats of wounded soldiers. Paul's increasing inhumanity, the seemingly inevitable jihad, and the evident creeping fascism blur the boundaries between Harkonnen/imperial scum and Paul's supposedly benevolent House Atreides. He is drawn on inexplicably by history/destiny, becoming increasingly single minded, god-like, and inscrutable. Paul's revolution will certainly change the empire, but ultimately, he's just another dictator, motivated by political gain and a sense of his own omnipotence. So what if the iron fist wears a different glove?

Like with my beloved Battlestar Galactica, the question is: Whose side are you on? Paul's Fremen look a lot like the terrorists we're supposed to hate, much like the humans on Cylon-occupied New Caprica, with their oh-so-politically-incorrect insurgency. There is no democracy for Paul Muad'Dib, nor for BSG's fleet. Our protagonists are tainted by bloody, manipulative politics, eventually linked to the antagonists physically and ideologically. Go ahead, choose sides. You're either an imperialist perpetrator of genocide (Harkonnens, Cylons) or a dictatorial, hero-worshiping collection of terrorists (Fremen, colonial fleet).

This ambivalence about right and wrong, of course, fills my dystopian soul with joy. My discomfort when I find myself identifying with terrorists and corrupt rulers is what science fiction is all about: displacement. Caught up in the fantasy, we are unwittingly shown our own fear and weakness, our own prejudice and unabashed self-righteousness. Before we can ask whose side we're on, we have to face ourselves. Because there is no cowboy with a white hat for our easy alliance. There is only our own unacknowledged combination of benevolence and cruelty. Like Paul, we can't claim to be blameless, and we're always barely staving off our own jihad.

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Interplanetary Manifest Destiny


In a country filled with desk jockeys, one can get nostalgic for an era when “pioneering spirit” meant more than an improved stock portfolio. This is the appeal of space opera: They don’t call it the final frontier for nothing. If the intrepid space explorer can win the alien blaster battle, we know we are still conquerors. Asimov, however, veers away from escapism in his robot novels (The Caves of Steel and The Naked Sun).

When Asimov was writing these books, the United States had just emerged from World War II as an international superpower. The Cold War settled in and the GIs got back to work. The man in the gray flannel suit emerged. Bereft of heroism, thrust into a new corporate world, he haunts the robot novels. Beneath Asimov’s story of a future Earth struggling under a burgeoning population and resisting robot integration, the decade’s new man struggles for identity and meaning.

Detective Elijah Baley’s greatest fear is being “declassified”: stripped of his rank and put out of a job; made redundant, as the British say. Elijah’s story begins with the insipid and submissive robot that replaces his young human coworker. The presence of robots - in city hall, waiting on customers at a shoe store, serving in homes - has the tightly-packed human population on edge, resentful of the machines and the wealthy Spacers (residents of Earth’s former colonies) who brought them. Earth’s struggle, as a former imperialist power outstripped by the Spacers, is the struggle of workers to retain their livelihoods in the face of higher technology and an uncaring elite. Replaceability, that great human terror of the industrial age, is at the fore of the robot novels.

To solve a murder in the Spacer community in New York City, Elijah has to work with Daneel, a humanoid robot. Elijah’s unqualified bigotry is rapidly replaced by respect, and eventually admiration for his new colleague. Renouncing his devotion to Earth’s self-destructive status quo, and shunning the police commissioner’s nostalgia for Earth’s idealized past, Elijah begins to advocate for a balance: C/Fe. Carbon/Iron – an alliance of humanity and machine. Our hardboiled individualist detective comes to symbolize blending and balance, the alliance of organic and technological, cooperation and individualism.

Earth has burrowed into itself, shunning space exploration for centuries, walling itself away from nature and other planets in enclosed cities that people are terrified to leave. Asimov repeatedly likens this to a return to the womb, a refusal to grow into an adult, the infantilization of humanity. The solution, Elijah decides, is joint human/robot colonization of new worlds, a fulfillment of the masculine ideal – Manifest Destiny writ large. Elijah is an old-fashioned, rugged individualist living in a society whose greatest value is quasi-socialist civic duty. Elijah can be read as a return of the cowboy or the war hero, emerging from the womb-like city that crushes his individuality and venturing forth into the unspoiled wilderness of the stars.

Except that Elijah never actually conquers anything. His dreams of human escape from Earth are reserved for his son. He has to deal with the messy realities of interstellar politics, a reluctant Earth government, and a couple nasty murders that bring the tensions between Spacers, Earthmen and robots to a head. Asimov’s story is not one of conquest, but of compromise. Elijah begins confident in his closed-mindedness, then falters and changes his worldview over the course of the novels, based on alliances he’s forged with his natural enemies, aliens and machines. He advocates for change and progress. The human apes have to leave their caves of steel – the enclosed, womb-like cities – in order to find their destiny among the stars, but they can’t do it without help. This is no self-contained hero. This cowboy needs the Indians or he’ll never make it.

Elijah is perhaps the unlikeliest of heroes. He spends both books violating Spacer customs, embarrassing himself by misunderstanding his cases, and revealing his weaknesses. For example, in The Naked Sun, he has to learn to endure the open sky of the planet Solaria, after a lifetime of living under a dome in New York. His reactions are neurotic, frequently causing him to black out and panic, requiring rescue by Daneel.

Risk, Asimov argues, is a requirement of our humanity. As Earth declines through overpopulation and galactic isolation, the Solarians decay through leisure. Robots have removed all obstacles from their lives, so that they become a weak and isolated elite. (This is similar to the Eloi in H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine – where a leisure class is so coddled by the working class that they evolve into cheerful little fools, incapable of intellectual or artistic pursuits.) The populations of both planets have become stagnant, afraid and unwilling to change. At one point a Solarian sociologist tells Elijah that humanity having all its needs fulfilled represents the “end of human history.” Our ambition and struggle define us. Robots threaten to replace humanity not through uprising, but by humanity's quiet descent into irrelevance.

[This post joins recent others as part of this semester's independent study in SF literature, guided by my adviser, Cyrus Patell. He's addressed Asimov's depiction of NYC as a hive city on his blog Patell and Waterman's History of New York.]

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Steroids and the Malleable Human Body

I am a baseball fan, which is generally incidental to my ruminations on the future of humanity. Occasionally, however, the two connect. A-Rod's recent steroid confession has reinvigorated conversation about the loss of tradition and justice in the game, the sullying of the record books, asterisks in the Hall of Fame, etc. Some of this I feel, but I also wonder if there is no going back for baseball. In what realm of society is there competition without artificial enhancement? As a friend pointed out, there's nothing like money to inspire one to bend the rules. Consider diet pills, Ritalin, Prozac. We have drugs to help us focus, drugs to make us prettier, drugs that supposedly make us smarter, drugs to help us stay up all night studying. We are a fully enhanced society. Drugs make us more competitive. More competitive means more money, attention, success. I'm not saying it's right, but it's unavoidable. I wonder if it's too late for baseball, and if any attempt to reign in steroid use is just a fragile and temporary solution. Fact is: The way we think about our bodies has changed. Artificial hips, artificial heart valves, in vitro fertilization, Botox, pacemakers, perpetual medication ... these are the realities of our cyborg society. Outcry about the phenomena reflects our anxiety about our bodies' relationship to new technology and science, and our unwillingness to admit that we are not the same human race we were when Hammerin' Hank crushed the home run record.