Este é o blog que esta a tratar dar umas ideias sobre as relações entre o corpo e a tecnologia.

Etymology of the word “Body”

O.E. bodig “trunk, chest” (of a man or animal); related to O.H.G. botah, of unknown origin. Not elsewhere in Germanic, and the word has died out in German, replaced by leib, originally “life,” and körper, from Latin.[1]

 



[1] Available From URL: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=bodig&searchmode=none, Access Date: (13.11.2010)

The Etymology of the word “Technology”

1610s, “discourse or treatise on an art or the arts,” from Gk. tekhnologia “systematic treatment of an art, craft, or technique,” originally referring to grammar, from tekhno- (see techno-) + -logia (see -logy).[1]



[1] Available From URL: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=technology&searchmode=none, Access Date: (13.11.2010)

sugaregina
vSide
www.vside.com

sugaregina

vSide

www.vside.com

Contemporary Definition of The Word “Avatar”

avatar

1. literary; a person or animal who is really a god in human or animal form

2. formal; a person who represents an idea or quality

3. a picture of a person or animal that represents you on a computer screen, for example in some chat rooms or when you are playing games over the Internet[1] 


[1] Avaible From (URL): http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/avatar, Access Date: (29.03.2009)

Concept: Neylan Ogutveren
Performance: Yigit Daldikler, Ezgi Didem Sozgoturmez
Choreography: Yigit Daldikler
Visuals: Candas Sisman
Sound Design: Mert Kizilay
Costume Design: Selim Baklaci
Catalogue Design: Fahri Ozdemir
Photography: Berna Esperanza Ogutveren
Light and Camera Operator: Nefes Polat


“I, Avatar” performance is questioning if “Is our body the avatar of our soul on earth?”

“I, Avatar” conveys the information of the human body into the avatar on the computer screen while it is in process of questioning it. The performance exposes some occasions such as “loading” and “disconnected” through its own way, while using the Internet.

Slavoj Zizek

Organs without Bodies

The Reality of The Virtual

The virtual reality is a miserable idea because people are reproducing in an artificial digital medium their experience of reality. To understand what is going on today, we must just examine the opposite, the reality of the virtual.

 

It is possible to examine The Reality of The Virtual with the Lacanian Triad:

- The Imaginary Virtual

- The Symbolic Virtual

- The Real Virtual

 

The Imaginary Virtual

When a person interacts with another person he / she dose not deal with the real person, is dealing with the virtual image of the person that he / she has in mind. The Imaginary Virtual is the virtual image that determines how we interact with other people.

 

The Symbolic Virtual

To understand The Symbolic Virtual let us think about the experiences authority, the paternal authority. This authority in order to be operative, in order to be experienced as actual it has to remain virtual in a sense of a thereat. Paternal authority is actual only as virtual. In this category also we have the belief. Democracy and Santa Claus are actual realities that in order to be operative has to remain virtual. 

 

The Real Virtual

Imaginary Real

These are images that are too strong to be confronted. Like monsters or aliens, things that we see in science fiction movies.

 

Symbolic Real

These are scientific discourse, formulas. Like Quantum Physics that has symbolic images of the real but the symbolic reality can not be understand by anyone because it dose not accord with our notion of reality.

 

Real Real

This reflects the shadow of the symbolic real in the reality. For example the army that has to accompany a military discourse.

 

To formulize the Virtual of The Real, Slavoj Zizek refers to the paradoxical statement by Donald Rumsfeld about;

 

The Known Knowns

The Known Unknowns

The Unknown Unknowns

 

But Slavoj Zizek thinks that the 4th part is missing “The Unknown Knows”. That are a thing that we don’t know we know them. This is what it is called in psychoanalysis the unconsciousness. These things that you don’t know you know them controls you but you cannot control them.[1]

 

 

 

 

 


[1] Zizek, Slavoj, 2004, Organs Without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences, Routledge, London.  

Deleuze and Guattari

A RHIZOME is a botanical term referring to a horizontal stem that is usually underground and sends out root and shoots. It is not possible to locate a rhizome’s source root. Rhizomatic thinking contrasts with arborescent thinking. ARBORESCENT modes of thought, according to Deleuze & Guattari, are specially characteristic of the grand narratives of modernist, capitalist thought. To disrupt arborescent thought is to question modern conceptions of human subjectivity.

 

Marc Ngui: A Thousand Plateus Drawings

http://www.bumblenut.com/drawing/art/plateaus/index.shtml

 

They don’t like hierarchical terminology of separate entities with distinct essences. They like to think about the interconnections, the point where individuality and essence break down. We have to look to the world in terms of relationship and heterogeneity, not like freely choosing, autonomous, individual entities.

 

Delauze and Guattari don’t agree with Freud and Marx because they told master narratives that ultimately limits the complexity of reality with their transcendent interpretations of human subjectivity and history. They propose an immanent mode of interpretation that allows complexity.

 

 “Fascism is all about transcendent interpretations.”

 

Deleuze and Guattari conceive human beings as DESIRING-MACHINES. Machines are reproductive, so the desire is too. Desire produces libidinal energy. The desiring machine is connected to a BODY WITHOUT ORGANS (BwO). This concept denies that the person is to be found inside the body, composed of autonomous, self-sustaining, and organized internal forms. Instead, it suggests the motion that the person / body is interconnected, exterior, open, multiple, fragmented, provisional and interpenetrated by other entities.

 

They also thought about the space where the body without organs occupie and they called it: DETERRITORALIZED.[1] (Contrary to territorialized / to totalize / religion / family / school)

 

 

 

 


[1] Auslander, Philip, 2008, Theory for Performance Studies: A Student’s Guide, Routledge, London

 

 

 

Antoin Artaud

The theatre should awake our heart and nerves. We need a theatre which will have within us deep resonance and which will dominate the instability of the times we live in. the theatre should act upon us in such a way that there will take place within us a therapy of the soul whose effects will not be forgotten.

 

“All action is cruelty. It is this idea of action pushed to its extreme limit that the theatre will renew itself.”

 

The Theatre of Cruelty proposes to have recourse to mass effects by being violent because only by this way the theatre can be a reality, not a carbon copy of reality. The theatre will be a total spectacle and will take back, which has always belonged to it from the movies, the music hall, the circus and the life itself.[1]

 

 



[1] Artaud, Antonin, 1958, The Theatre and Cruelty, The Tulane Drama Review, May 1958, p. 75-77

Likes
Following
Follow me