The Body from a Subjectivity of Progress in the New Anthropocene Epoch
Abstract
The evolution of the concept of the individual body / social body, specifically from modernity, industrialization and the current implementation of technologies, leads us to a vision of the human subject in a continuum of ‘egotistic’ progress as well as its corresponding repercussions in the totality of its natural environment. According to some scientific, it is necessary to consider the possibility of a new geology era:the Anthropocene.
The idea of the automaton body persists in our Western imaginary. It is also remarkable that the body is proposed as a machine and not as a natural object, an issue not without consequences, when exercising activities with / on the body and on its vital space. The new technologies offer the possibility of overcoming the limits imposed by our biological inheritance in a sort of explicit desire to accept neither our past, nor our natural-organic origin, in the face of self-improvement and modification in a system of progress Ad infinitum. In this sense, an important series of thinkers, scientists and artists have produced new approaches of the body as something completely obsolete, as an empty shell that must be abandoned to technologically give way to the next level in the human evolution: the Techno Sapiens or the Cyborg. It calls for the object of study of anthropology goes from human being to cyborg, considered as a more suitable representative of our present, and above all, of our future, with all its positive and negative consequences. At the same time in the realm of art, some figures who want to represent this techno-evolution have appeared such as Stelar, Marcel·lí Antúnez, Carlos Corpa, among others.
Downloads
References
Antúnez Roca, M. [online]. Recuperado el 08-11-2018 de www.marceliantunez.com
Antúnez Roca, M. (2003). AntuBots [online]. Recuperado el 08-11-2018 de http://marceliantunez.com/texts/antubots-marcelli-antunez-robots.
Arias Maldonado, M. (2018). Antropoceno. La política en la era humana. Barcelona: Taurus.
Atzori, P. y Kirk Woolford, K. (1997). Extended-Body: An Interview with Stelarc. En A. Kroker y M. Kroker (Eds.),
Digital Delirium(pp. 192-199). Nueva York: St. Martin’s Griffin Press.
Brent, B. (1987). Learn to Make Wings: Thoracobrachial Pterygoplasty Powered by Muscle Transposition Flaps. En B. Brent (Ed.), The Artistry of Reconstructive Surgery. (pp. 958-970). St. Louis: C. V. Mosby Company. [online]. Recuperado el 08-11-2018 de http://www.dartmouth.edu/~engs05/archive/engs05_2003/
syllabus/Making_Wings_2.pdf.
Bill, J. (2000). Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us. Wired Magazine. 8 abril. [online]. Recuperado el 08-11-2018 de
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html.
Broncano, F. (2006). Técnica y Política. En M.J. Bertomeu, E. di Castro y A. Velasco Gómez (Eds.), La vigencia del republicanismo(pp. 257-286). México: UNAM.
Crutzen, P.J. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 415(6867) 23-23. https://doi.org/10.1038/415023a.
Dery, M. (1998). Velocidad de Escape. La Cibercultura en el final del siglo. Madrid: Editorial Siruela.
Duque, F. (2003). De cyborgs, superhombres y otras exageraciones. En D. Hernández Sánchez (Ed.),
Arte, cuerpo, tecnología (pp. 167-188). Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad.
Finney. S.C. (2015). Estado actual de la definición del ‘Antropoceno’ como la última Época de la Tabla Cronoestratigráfica Internacional. Enseñanza de las Ciencias de la Tierra, 23(2), 256-257.
Hables Gray, C; Figueroa-Sarriera, H.; Mentor, S. (1995). The Cyborg Handbook. Londres/Nueva York: Routledge
Bibliografía113.
Haraway, D. Manifiesto para Cyborg. Ciencia, Tecnología y Feminismo Socialista Finales del S.XX.
[online]. Recuperado el 08-11-2018 de http://manifiestocyborg.blogspot.com.
Haraway, D.(2016). Antropoceno, Capitaloceno, Plantacionoceno, Chthuluceno: generando relaciones de parentesco. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Críticos Animales. año III, vol. 1, junio, 15-26. https://www.revistaleca.org.
Hayles, C. (1999). How we Became Posthuman. Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Hills, D., cofundador de la Corporación de Máquinas Pensantes. Citado en Turner, C.; Virilio, P. (2002)
Ground zero. Londres: Verso.
Iglesias García, R. (2012) La robótica como experimentación artística. Barcelona, Tesis doctoral (inédita).
Iglesias García, R.(2013) Carlos Corpa. Por una estética crítica robótica. Estúdio. Artistas sobre outras, 4(7), 43-49.
Iglesias García, R.(2016) Arte y robótica. La tecnología como experimentación estética.Madrid: Casimiro.
Informe Planeta Vivo (2018). WWF World Wild Fund for Nature. Recuperado el 08-11-2018 de
https://www.wwf.es/nuestro_trabajo_/informe_planeta_vivo/informe_planeta_vivo_2018/
Jagodzinski, J. (2018). Interrogating the Anthropocene. Interrogating the Anthropocene: Ecology, Aesthetics, Pedagogy, and the Future in Question. Alberta: Palgrave MacMillan.
Koval, S. (2008).
La Condición Poshumana. Buenos Aires: Editorial Cinema.
McLuhan, M.; McLuhan, E. (2009). Las leyes de los medios. CIC. Cuadernos de Información y Comunicación, 14
(2) 285-316.
Mejía, I. (2014). El cuerpo post-humano: en el arte y la cultura contemporánea. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Saumell, M. (1999). Cuerpos, máquinas y ritmos. En C. Giannetti (Ed.), Marcel·lí Antúnez Roca. Epifanía
(pp. 123-138). Madrid: Fundación Telefónica.
Stelarc (1998). Visiones parásitas. Experiencias alternantes, íntimas e involuntarias. En C. Giannetti (Ed.),
Ars Telemática-Telecomunicación, Internet y Ciberespacio (pp. 125-132). Barcelona: L’Angelot.
Swenson, G.S. (2018) ‘What is Pop Art?’ A Revised Transcript of Gene Swenson’s 1963 Interview with Andy Warhol. Oxford Art Journal, 41(1), 85-100. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxartj/kcy001.
Suárez, V. (2016). Cuerpos: utopías de lo real. Cuaderno 58 | Centro de Estudios en Diseño y Comunicación
. Año 16 (58), 267-284.
Trischler, H (2017). El Antropoceno, ¿un concepto geológico o cultural, o ambos? Desacatos: Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 54. 40-57.
Yehya, N. (2001). El Cuerpo Transformado. Cyborgs y nuestra descendencia tecnológica en la realidad y en la ciencia ficción. México: Paidós.
Wiener, N. (1967). Dios y Golem, S. A. Comentario sobre ciertos puntos en que chocan Cibernética y Religión. México: Siglo Veintiuno.
III Simposio Internacional: Ecologías mutantes en el arte contemporáneo: devenires posthumanos (2019). Barcelona: MACBA. https://artglobalizationinterculturality.com/es/simposios/ecologias-mutantes-en-el-arte-contemporaneo-2019/
Works published in this journal are subject to the following terms:
- The Service of Publications from the University of Murcia (publishing house) keeps the published works’ copyrights, and favors and allows the reuse of these works under the license indicated in point 2.
- Works are published in the journal’s online edition under the license Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 España(texto legal). They can be copied, used, disseminated, transmitted and publicly exhibited, as long as: i) the author and original source of publication are cited (journal, publishing house and work’s URL); ii) they are not used for commercial purposes; iii) the existence and specifications of this license are mentioned.
3. Conditions for auto-file. It is allowed and encouraged that authors share electronically their pre-print version (the pre-reviewed version) and /or post-print version (the reviewed and accepted version) of their Works before the publication, since it promotes its circulation and dissemination. RoMEO color: green.
