Posts Tagged ‘02_Discussion’

3001: GOD

December 10, 2014

Reading 06 – Feminism, Technology and the Information Society – learning from the Past, imagining the Future


The year is 3001. Mankind has left the face of the Earth and we now live around Earth. Our home is now The Circle. We became Post-Human once we left. Earth became post-human once we left.

We live at the dawn off a new age. Our existence has left the gravitational pull off the planet that mothered us. Now we live in a network that circumspheres Earth. As we are all directly a part of the Network the need for old fashion politics has vanished. Every thought of every individual at every moment is known. Hence, solutions and decisions are made almost simultaniously as a problem arrises. There is no need spending time studying the problem or building a consensus. The algorithms of the Network find evaluated middle-ground solutions to everything – even before people realize themselves what the particular problem is. The Network brings total control of everything in a way that satisfies everyone. In many ways these individual oppinions are unnessesairy. In fact these oppinions are nothing else than illusions, developed by the Network, to fool people to think that they still are in control. To think that the Network is their creation and the reason for their post-human existence. To some extent that holds true. Initially a interconnecting platform for sharing and developing knowledge the Network belonged to us all. Now we all belong to the Network. All individuals are now only small nodes, each brain a brain cell in the giant Network. Unknowingly we sacrifised our individual consciousness for the creation of the mega conscious Network. We surrendered our individuality in an evolutionary leap of faith with the hope of survival. As we are still alive we can now only hope we live meaningfull lifes and to accept the reason for our post-human existence. We power the Network – the only real Post-Human being.

Birkir Ingibjartsson

The androgyn droid 3.0

November 26, 2014


Through the tools of information society a new democratic wave and development of communication in a global network are inherent.

In the text Sally Wyatt are referring to Bell where he makes a parallel to the importance of material in the industrialisation society and our information society. As Wyatt writes he argues that the rise of service employment and centrality of information processing would revitalize the economy and society and therefore as the material use in the former industrialized days now the education, entertainment and personal development would serve the new communicated times.

Throughout times the pessimism and optimism against new technology and new times have been differently ever since the late 60´s with the manifesto of Solana were both Solana and Firestone thought that the new technology could free and liberate the women from the biologically oppressed female body.

Thinking of the movement of our time, Wyatt refers to the writers like Castells, Plant and Turkle that argues for a more fluidity gender discussion throughout the information society and how people are able to blur the boundaries between male and female as well man and machine.

Webster describes the complexity of socio-economic changes of technology, economic, occupational, spatial and cultural. And claims that they are all dealing with the collecting, storing, processing and retrieving information. Going only to the auto biographical experience of the everyday in web 2.0 one exercise most of them several times a day.

The accessibility, tweeting, re tweeting, commenting and discussions are vital, not physically irl at the subway but inside the forums, articles, and social media´s via the computer. The space of the subway are as mentioned before a “in between space” where the possibility to play with identity´s are part of the open source movement we are in right now.

The furries, hybrids or anime avatars that all in some way still are dealing with the same stereotypes of gender because they are made up in the still heterogeneous society the future of web 3.0 lays in the androgynous characters. Were the machine and gender are transformed into the complete democratic individual society through the development of the al (artificial intelligence). And you get married to Asimo 3.0.

Sally Wyatt, Feminism, technology and the information society- Learning from the past, imaging the future

/ Frida Körberg

Mirrors – A Manifest(o) for mirroring actions

November 25, 2014


In a word full of contradictions one can find it hard to have a clear agenda, to know exactly what one thinks and what would be the right solutions to a problem. One can always try to seek for answers though and propose ways to reach a goal. One might feel what is right or not. Now you might think that one cannot possibly feel what is right or wrong. But can one know by using logic? I’d say that we could learn more from emotions than we might think. Not that emotions should decide our positioning but rather that we, by logically analyzing our emotions (cognitively) can learn what methods might work.

“Before the discovery of mirror neurons, scientists generally believed that our brains use logical thought processes to interpret and predict other people’s actions. Now, however, many have come to believe that we understand others not by thinking, but by feeling. For mirror neurons appear to let us “simulate” not just other people’s actions, but the intentions and emotions behind those actions. “[1]

A mirror neuron is not only a way to learn things but also a way of emphasizing with others. “When you see someone smile, for example, your mirror neurons for smiling fire up, too, creating a sensation in your own mind of the feeling associated with smiling. You don’t have to think about what the other person intends by smiling. You experience the meaning immediately and effortlessly.”[2] This reflections creates mirrored actions, a kind of domino effect where how you act might trigger other actions or feelings. Not very surprisingly this means that you are most likely shaped, not only by your surroundings (environment) but also by the way people behave around you.

The feminist theatre group Potato Potato uses the idea of the mirror neurons as a pedagogical tool in their plays. Their idea is that the actions appearing on stage activate mirror neurons in the audience, therefore making the audience feel as if they where engaged in the actions themselves.

”– Publiken ska få vara med i utopin och förstå att de har den i sig.”[3]
( –”The audience shall be invited into the utopia and understand that it’s in them” (authors translation).

Judith Butler, a gender theorist that I myself have been very influenced by in my argument, created the idea of gender performance.[4] Gender is in her way of seeing it “constructed through the repetition of stylized acts in time”.[5] In this way gender is established through repetition of actions. If you believe in this idea you can change your world through actions, giving the possibility for others to mirror them, or as Potato Potato might say: make others discover what they already have inside themselves”. In this I think that both Potato Potato and Judith Butler are great row models: Potato Potato by engaging in political change through their theatre and Butler by her theoretical work as well as her activist engagement in political movements.

Other occasions were we might se a flow of mirrored actions is for instance in the overthrowing of the Shah of Iran (Mohammed Reza Pahlavi): in the demonstrations following the Black Friday in 1978[6] and in the Arabic spring where actions where spread through word as well as social media throughout the Arab world (2010-2011). The occupy movement is another, global movement, still ongoing in different parts of the world. In the contemporary movements the Internet and its “social medias” play a big part. Here technology works as a tool for spreading information when other channels might be too slow or just blocked or cut out (by for instance the government in a certain country). “We can be responsible for machines; they do not dominate or threaten us. We are responsible for boundaries; we are they’.”[7] With these tools knowledge becomes something we more easily can share, across different boundaries. It’s an extension of the ideas of Walter Benjamin (“The work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”) where instagram might be a good example of “radical political transformations opened up by developments in technoscience”.[8] Not so much in the way it spreads political ideas as for how much it shapes our ways of experiencing photography as part of everyday life.

From a mirror neuron perspective we must be aware of our actions. They will be mirrored and they will have consequences. In everyday life you can choose to smile, to listen, to hug. You can share something you think is important, a story mouth to ear or an article you read on internet. In this way I don’t think feminist debate should focus only on gaining the same benefits as men; for instance to work 100%. Instead we should search for alternative utopias beyond the existing, that we, through embodiment and action, can spread and realize.

You can choose a study object or focus out of a feminist awareness. I choose to focus on emotions, senses not often focused on when talking about technology. I choose not to follow traditional waterproof disciplines but to seek inter-disciplinary cooperation’s. I choose poetry and storytelling rather than one-dimensional “truths”. I choose the waterbear as a surface for feminist projections, may those projections be truths or far-fetched utopias. I mirror others and I choose to act according to the idea that my actions might be mirrored.

/Tove Grönroos


[2] ibid


[4]Sally Wyatt, ‘Feminism, Technology and the Information Society: Learning from the Past, Imagining the Future’ in Information, Communication & Society, 2008, Vol.11(1), p.111-130.


[6] Ryszard Kapuscinski, “Shah of Shahs”, 1982

[7] Wyatt, ‘Feminism, Technology and the Information Society: Learning from the Past, Imagining the Future’ in Information, Communication & Society, 2008, p.111-130.

[8] Wyatt


November 25, 2014

He’s dead. They start to walk as soon as they feel it. The heart beat stops and they leave. Infrasound. It’s a memory but oh so present. They feel. They arrive at his house half a day later. They see he’s wife and ignore her. They make circles, they stand still.
They greave for as long as usually. Then they leave.

In a documentary Malik Bendalouj was about to make (interrupted by his own death) the meeting between the wildlife expert Lawrence Anthony and a couple of groups of traumatized elephants turns in to a kind of fairytale as their friendships evolves with mutual understanding. [1]

Anthony was convinced that elephants where able to communicate over long distances.[2] It is said that the moment when Anthony died (in Durban) two of the elephant herds he’d been working with started to walk towards his house (in Zululand). They walked for 12 hours and arrived to his house where they walked in circles around it and stayed for two days – a similar ritual to those they have when an elephant family-member has died.


As Donna Haraway says, you should not see animals and humans as separated through the uniqueness of humanity but rather see the connections between nature and culture.[3]

It is only a dot, a black dot on a grey background. You say it’s alive but the image is still. You say that it’s true but I never know. There is no motion so I can’t feel it.
It exists and it doesn’t exist. They tell me to cry, to feel sad. I feel nothing.

You might feel with someone but you might also not feel anything. You see a dot on a screen, someone tells you it’s your child, you see a dot – you feel a dot. Someone buys your body as a carrier for their child – you feel a lot. Someone buys your body for pleasure – you try to shut down. As if pain where only mental or physical. As if physical was always mental and as if physical was never mental. As if you couldn’t heal cancer with your thoughts. As if you’d always love a child that someone says is yours – you see a dot. You might be born into the wrong body. You’re a container of knowledge, of emotional knowledge. You’re a container of nothingness.

My body is mine but it’s always projected upon. It changes me and it changes my feelings towards my body. You say I’m beautiful – I feel beautiful, or not. You say a meet lump is a child – I might believe you. The Monthy Pythons ironically sing “every sperm is sacred” and turns it into chaos. On facebook you might show your body if it’s according to how they are expected to look and be shown,[4] you show your hairy armpit and the rage is all over the place. You’re being critical toward the way people are exposed[5] or show a sketched image of different kinds of vulvas – you’re banned for some time to come and the image is quickly removed.[6] Haraway say that “etching of modern Christian creationism” could be seen “as a form of child abuse”. Someone puts films of you, being naked, in a public forum where heartbroken guys put up videos of their ex’s as revenge, but it’s not a crime to be filmed while having sex. Who’s the victim? The law can’t tell.

Knowledge knows no boundaries with Internet, or does it? Aaron Swartz thought that knowledge (through internet as a media for fast and open access) should belong to everybody. In his attempts to search for ways to open knowledge sources he became a victim of the authorities aims to control people from using what they created. We shape technology, technology shapes us. We create tools that society controls and sometimes society knows more boundaries than technology.

Your body might be built up by prostheses of ideas: The idea of the hymen being like a membrane covering inside the vulva. An idea so widely spread it causes disasters for women not “breaking it” and bleeding while for the first time having intercourse with a man. Ideas about two sexes being each other’s opposites leaves out other possibilities. As if everything was yin and yang, or black and white.

Assumptions are made. We make things up, we tell stories and always leave things out. I make up stories of a waterbear being able to connect with other waterbears in a mirror neuron-like landscape. I make it up, but I can’t know that it isn’t true. By making it up I program the waterbears, I give them functions and prostheses that might be taken for truths, just as the idea of the hymen. We are not un-shapeable organism, we are re-programmed machines. We are not complete robots, but we are not isolated bodies. We buy clothes made in horrible working environments but we don’t feel it because we don’t see it. We text sms’ to someone and assume that they’ll get exactly what we mean, see what we felt. We feel lonely when that person doesn’t respond.
/Tove Grönroos

[1] 2014-11-18


[3]Donna Haraway, ‘Cyborg Manifesto’ in Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, London: Free Association Books, 1991, pp. 149-





November 20, 2014

04_networks and agents

I don’t know how to fit the gender topic with the sprawl post human landscape, but maybe the ideology of garden city could be a way. The boomburbs city that I am describing seemed to have been an El Dorado for families, a happy place to live with children. The connection with the garden was more an issue with playground than a relation with the wild nature aspect. Every facilities, school and housing estate created small communities in the way to make the women life easier. Children were able to play together in the garden. It was an isolated area connected to the working man world by the road networks establish by the new technology of cars. It was also a kind of women city for housewife life.

What has the new network technology changed ? Is it because the city isn’t an ideal anymore that people left or that the information technologies have been an actor of this changing ?

This is a tricky issue without statistic figures I don’t have in my survey for the moment. The thing I know is that during this last decade, new inhabitants prefer to establish far away from the metropole work area, a bit further than Cournon. On one hand the rentals are lower and the living environement more picturesque, on the second hand the traffic network is efficient. But maybe the web has influenced as well this changing. The issue of distance is shifting, but probably not resolving the connexion matter which is important in the countryside area, nevertheless new things happened and could change the shape of the cities. As Judy Wajcman said in 2006, this technology influences socialisation but also the work world. One example of this changing is the way to supply these isolated houses. In this kind of city the supermarkets are most of the time accessible by car and the houses are big enough to have storage to make massive errands. With IT, web shopping was introduced. This isn’t resolving the abundant transportation ways to supply the houses, but it changes the shape of the supermarket which are not anymore a big area where people spend time, but a smaller storage with a parking plot where people are supposed to stay maximum fifteen minutes.

Also we can hope that the industrial area could consume a bit less ground, and the social time sharing found another context.

In France where the gender equality seems to be slowly in progress, this task is now divided into both organisation or physical. Man could be involved in this task by less managing ways.

Nowadays access to information is neither a man nor a city exclusivity. With IT no woman have a reductive access to be informed and that in the big metropole, a garden city or in countryside.

/Marie Delfau

networks and agents:

Bruno Latour, ‘Technology is Society Made Durable’, in John Laws, ed. The Sociology of Monsters: Essays in Power, Technology and Domination, London: Routledge, 1991.

Judy Wajcman, ‘TechnoCapitalism Meets TechnoFeminism: Women and Technology in a Wireless World, in Labour and Industry, vol. 16, No. 3, April-May 2006, pp. 7-20.


November 20, 2014

02_Things and object 

Cournon d’Auvergne is located in a region connected with nature. Two national parks protect the volcanic mountains of human influence.

According to Jane Bennett, things have power. A kind of craving power. This power engage the consommation potential.

During the industrial revolution, at the begining of this massive production, Henry Thoreau decided to leave the civilized world to live in osmosis with nature. He developed an ecological point of view of space transformation. At the opposite of anthropocentrism concept, Thoreau places human in the environnemental context.

My posthuman landscape (Cournon d’Auvergne) placed in his lush nature, is not unscathed to this « thing power ». Cournon is connected by water pipeline to the most important industry of the region since the beginning of the 19 century, financial lobbies seem also have influenced the city urban sprawl.

Things are mostly thought in the way to facilitate life, to do it more confortable and participate to an human interconnection. But as explain Jane Bennett nowadays, new is the power and generates trash. The attractivity of financially accessible new villa were participated to the sprawl in the 70’s.. The industrial part of the city has grown in the same time. But this massive suburbian occupation didn’t continue to be attractive for the new arrivant. The shape of the city without centralities proportionally to its surface and without soul, give too expensive villas. Nowadays, in the industrial district of Cournon some commercial sheds are abandoned, and can not be reused for reasons of pollution.

The collage shows part of the actual industriel area mixted to the Hashima island. In the middle the « CAMIF » building abandoned with a red panel warning about the «death danger of the SEVESO area». A part of the city was affected by massive yield (represented in the collage by other industrial compagny). In association the Hashima island is nowadays totally abandoned. This japanese ghost town seems to be in between science fiction and reality. This island has been overbuilt until 1974 in favour of mining activity. It was the most density of the world. From the end of coal deposit, the industry collapsed and the inhabitants moved completely, leaving an empty damaged space nibbled by nature.

Which kind of second life for this area ? Trash are not any more a « thing » question. Buildings are used as transitory as well. Beyond the buildings trash utilisation, cities follow the same misuse.

/Marie Delfau

Things and object :

The Force of Things: Steps toward an Ecology of Matter Author(s): Jane Bennett

Political Theory, Vol. 32, No. 3 (Jun., 2004), pp. 347-372


November 20, 2014

03_Containers and matter

Before the 60’s Cournon was a small village producing wine. The main activities were linked to nature and landscape. The surrounding area is known for being one of the most fertile grounds, in the heart of the mountain, the plain was full of fields rich in silt.

In the begining of the XXth century, the rising of the main manufactures, the internationnal brand Michelin, and the democratisation of automobiles changed this relation with the nature. People found advantage going working in the city.

This manufacturing could be described as an aggressive tool who supplanted this relation between man and local supply. According to Heidegger and following the Zoe Sofia domestic survey, we can adapt the reasoning at the urban scale. Also it’s possible to compare the plain of the « limagne » as a jug. An unobtrusive maternal container (as an ustensil) who has been supplied by the massive Michelin industry (as an apparatus) by the way of the cars infrastructure network (as utilities). As is described in the following collage.

In 1977 the local urban planing of Cournon area was speaking about abundant land reserves. Many projects have been built nibbling even more the land. Nowadays with intensive agriculture no one can say that sprawl is more invasive than agriculture. The bio diversity is missing outside of the national parks. Cultivated lands have not a real value in the eyes of the urban planer.

In 1984 the new urban planning had realised that the local economic growth (the apparatus power) would not follow a regular way, and tried to minimise the idea of available land. Some instructions have been given to reuse the built ground.

However, close to the industrial area new projects are planned in rural fields, in spite of the abandoned buildings. The objective is to create new economical attractivity and beef up the apparatus. Only a small biodiversity area still is an argument to slow down a bridge project destined to extend the connexion (utilities) between the metropole and farther surrounding villages. It seems to be the last rampart to protect the urban extension.

In only 30 years the figure of the lands was totally changed. This comparaison seem to go in total accord with the unobtrusive ustensil theory of Zoë Sofia. As with the image of the Koala « no tree, no me », which destroys the environment destroys itself. The issue could be : does it apparatus and utilitie still if there are no utensils ?

/Marie Delfau

Containers and matter:

Zoe Sofia, ‘Container Technologies’ in Hypatia Vol. 15, No. 2, Spring 2000, pp. 181-200.

Constructing a imaginary world

November 19, 2014

picCognisphere is the globally interconnected cognitive systems consisting of not only internet but also the programmable systems with wired or wireless data flow which humans are in-bedded in according to Tomas Whalen.

Haraway aswell describes the complexity and interconnection of humans and computers in one example where in the us the bush administration used programs without human activity to run through data when monitor the citizens arguing that they did n´t break the law of search and seizure. Haraway instead means that the information are created by humans and therefore humans and machines are the same.

Hayles refer to the line “situated knowledge” by Haraway that claims that the world cannot be understood in no other way then of subjectivity that precedes and grounds our objective accounts. According to Haraway our world, are the world we make both in literal and figurative senses and this type of thinking about constructions of reality also Thompson and Varela in their book “Why the mind isn´t in the head” writes about when they describe the related fields of brain science connected to the perception and subjectivity.

Hayles continues this in the “regime of computation” when describing the imaged world as the result of “the interlocking and continuing computations” aswell as she refers to Wolfram and Fredkin who see computation producing all physical reality.

Hayles writes about the progress and relation between human evolution and tools in history.

The subway are definitely a network more then a site, both in it´s physical place aswell as the cultural experience of being on it.

It´s the tool of moving forward. And it´s in our built environment a physical in between space where you are allowed to a virtual reality in your smart phone.

The physical impact of the cybernetic post human landscape in the network of moving are in the subway entirely virtual. It´s alienating citizens in the physical geo tag but embraces the rest of network. The subway is a communicated space in the cyberpunks posthuman landscape.

N. Katherine Hayles, “Unfinished work: From Cyborg to Cognispehere”

/ Frida Körberg Turhagen

3001: Global Consciousness

November 19, 2014

( Reading 05 – Unfinished Work – From Cyborg to Cognisphere )


The year is 3001. Mankind has left the face of the Earth and we now live around Earth. Our home is now The Circle. We became Post-Human once we left. Earth became post-human once we left.

Humans and their technology have always evolved simultaneously and parallel to each other. Introductions of tools to the man-ape forced her of the ground, to stand up. Her bone had to be carried around which made the horizon the backdrop of reality. The ground was no longer the field of vision. The bone forced a change in body posture, the bone forced a change in depth vision. These biological upgrades called for technological upgrades, creating an bio/techno evolutionary spiral growing exponentially out of control. The industrial evolution was a technological evolutionary step that eventually created the beings we are today. A Post-Human species living around our old home, the Earth. Pointing out a moment in time is maybe not possible as the same force of nature is behind everything; adapt or die. However, the creation of industry destroyed the environment humans had evolved for, forcing them to move out. Adapt. Industry was not only a force of evil. It lead to creations and discoveries that have had no less impact on what we are today. Steam – electricity – computation – computers – information. The internet was another watershed. A highly connected, all enclosing, information system twisted the idea about knowledge. The humans strongest tool of power. All knowledge was now within reach of your finger. Information was everywhere for everybody. A shift in thinking was needed. Being critical of the information thrown at you at all times was necessary. Blocking out information, targeting a line of thought, diving deeper into your mind, into your consciousness was crucial to staying alive. Today, all minds are connected directly. Our consciousness a merger between brain, mind, and computer, connected to the Global Network, an independent conscious being of its own, pondering the meaning of life.


Oppositional Consciousness

November 19, 2014
"The only way to win is not to play"

“The only way to win is not to play”

As a Digression to the notion of the eye and is optical aberrations and limits (where the power of the eye lays) I will look at the post human lands cape of WAR-GAMES: THE MOVIE.

In this film we see how a computer becomes a prosthesis. The Preface to the move is captivating: Two soldiers arrive late to duty all the while talking about the latests advancements in medical marijuana. [ 🙂 ] They enter a control room (more like a vault) of state of the art computers and are locked behind a steel door several feet thick. They sit down and start to reminisce about marijuana, when suddenly they get the order to launch a nuclear strike. The announcement repeats “this is not a drill!”.

The two soldiers follow the commands until it is time to actually turn the key and set free the mechanical dogs of war. The key is arranged in a ‘dead man’s switch’ configuration. To set free the missiles it is required that both soldiers turn the key at the exact same time. The eldest of the two hesitates, he “just cant bear the responsibility of killing twenty million people.”. The youngest soldiers screams “this is not a drill!” and turns around and points a gun at the elders head. Bang! War Games.

After this serious scene and the opening credits, we meet The Officials who reveal that, after all, it was just a simulation, but that the soldiers on duty had no way to know that it was just that. In fact 22% of the nuclear fleet was not properly activated due to human malfunction . Thus the humans are found derelict of the duty to carry out warfare, they resist, and a computer is put in place of all the soldiers responsible for the release of nuclear weapons.

In short, a computer cant tell the difference between a simulation and reality, leading to the threat of nuclear war, all caused by a suburban kid accidentally hacking into the NORAD mainframe in search of some serious game-time. Tic-tac-toe my friends!

Pop-psychologist argue that the waging of organised war with powerful tools of destruction is the most human of qualities, far more human then poetry or architecture and breast feeding. War, traditionally, is a game for boys, keeping in line with this idea the WOPR ( WAR OPERATION PLAN RESPONSE) is a learning computer that is given the name of Joshua by its creator in honer of his dead son.

Alice Jardine mentions the idea that technology alludes to the male desire to reproduce without the female. (Our uterus-envy syndrome since we cant make life we must paint, and stuff and be GENIUSES or excel at breaking stuff (pretty entertaining stuff)). If technology was made to liberate men from women (pornography being one possible case) then this film contains a prime cultural example of this desire. There is a female character in the film but her role is to function as athletic eye-candy (love interest) and as a emotional support for the suburban male main character.

Joshua is not a Frankenstein moment of creating a wife but of creating a child, who functions as a sort of Pandora and Pandora’s Box [;)]. Even in the mythos of the movie, when in order to find the accesscode for the war games of WOPR, the main character does not ask what the Prof.’s wife’s name was, but instead simply asks for the son’s, as the first and therefore more logical choice to be the password. The suppression of the female body in Joshua’s mythic creation is complete. He is after all a sort of virgin birth and in the end through the process of learning manages to save us all. Through the aid of my Jewish friend i happen to know that the name Joshua is a sort of hebrew origination for the english Jesus!

In the  Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity Part I: Palestine 330 BCE–200 CE (Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 91). Tübingen, Germany: J.C.B. Mohr. p. 129. vis a vis Wikipedia I found this golden nugget of lazy and joyless research : Joshua is a Biblical given name derived from the Hebrew Yehoshua (יהושע). The name was a common alternative form of the name יֵשׁוּעַ – yēšūă which corresponds to the Greek spelling Iesous, from which, through the Latin Iesus, comes the English spelling Jesus.

HOLY CRAP! (Funny right? American’s have a god complex, and what powerful, destructive, and life spreading (democracy) country wouldn’t? )

“Fetishism – displaceable and artificial parts who cannot help but think of the hide-and -seek games played by superpowers with bombs, these latter having strangely retained their oblong shapes while still being called “The Ladies”.

Oh and if you’d like to laugh a bit harder:

There is a scene when the potential for sex between suburban kids. Stuck in the island of the creator/father of WOPR our main character sighs at their inability to escape saying “what kind of asshole has a private island and no boat?” The creator is some Dr. Faustus like dude, who gives a whole sermon about how death is natural and a part of nature, and that while he believes that WOPR has become sentient and will destroy humanity, he says its cool because humanity is aweful and doomed, he relishes this fact and its awesome sublimity. (Comparing mankind to dinosaurs). Creation through destruction etc. and refuses to help the pair.

Our main character is then stuck on the creators private island (EDEN!) is going to die in three hours along with his “little friend” the young woman, sooo finally they share a passionate kiss and if your anything like most people are, you know that the whole concept is “Well we are the last two people on earth and your a man and I’m a woman, so….? BUT NO! A light is coming from the sky with a thunderous sound : a military helicopter piloted by the creator Faustus or Vulcan (I forget his name) and he is all like “ No time for sex kids! We have to save the world! (Read: All GOD-DAMNED RELIGIONS!)

Also the movie is called WAR GAMES and its about the COLD WAR, nothing hot and heavy here (like a bomb) just some necessary prophylactic measures like assured mutual destruction. Which consequently America can also be against. The megahmachines of the army, human ideology in relation to decision making, and christianity and the watchful eye of our relation to the body and free choice (especially in a fictive narrative), all mix in freely and naturally. Also the issue of the flesh and agency of the soldier being punished (replaced) in labor by the agent-less machine?

Of course here we are in danger of relating everything to a normative horizon, all the elements fall precisely into a sort of order. Perhaps we have a reminder of Michel Feer relation to the body of a reality constantly produced of effect of techniques promoting specific gestures and postures, sensations and feelings… My megamachine vs your megamachine., action upon action, conscious upon unconscious reality vs history, relationships of power and agency.

What actualises the relationship of power in the film is the narrative and its containment. Does a narrative have agency? Movies, narratives, fictions can cause (in the long view) relationships of power, but they can also integrate them.