RhetoricofPosthumanism

TylerRingstad
English275

TOPIC
Thewordposthumananditsrhetorical(non)usesandproblems.

LITERATUREREVIEW
Thewordposthumanisanobjectofcriticalinquiryallbyitselffewsignifiersareasarbitrary,
noneasselfconsciouslyso.CaryWolfe,oneoftheleadingfiguresinposthumanism,titledhis
latestbookWhatisPosthumanism?Hetakesabout400pagestoapproachananswer.
StefanHerbrechterandIvanCallus,twooftheleadingEuropeanwritersinposthumanism,
wroteanarticlecalledWhatisaPosthumanistReading?inwhichtheyconfessthatthetitle
reallyasks,Whyarepeoplesayingsuchterriblethingsaboutposthumanism?(109).Inthe
article,theydisavowtheinherentlyuncomfortablenatureofposthumanism,instead
reassuringthecriticalcommunitythatitisinfactneitherradicallytransformativeofthehuman
norredefininginitsunderstandofwhatitistobehuman(109).Theworditselfdrawsire,and
CallusandHerbrechterkillthewordoratleastsmotherit.

InanintroductiontoaspecialposthumanistissueofSubjectivity,thesameauthorsarguethat
tospeakofepistemologicaltrendslikeposthumanismistoimposeaunityandcohesionthat
probablydonotobtain[sic](247).Thequestionisthereliabilityofaword,andtheir
discussiongrowsoutofthetitleoftheirintroduction,PosthumanSubjectivities,or,Coming
aftertheSubject.Astablegroundisbutanillusion,andtoapproachwhatwemeanbythe
word,wemustpluralizeit,andso,inthatsense,leaveitwhileweapproachit.(Iknowthis
personallyIoncepresentedaspartofapaneltitledPostmodernisms.)Torelyonawordthat
doesntdowhatawordusuallydoescreatesanxietyinboththewriterandthereader,andthe
authorssaythatthewordmustbeusedacknowledgingitsmultiplicitiesbutwithout
necessarilywantingtoresolveorsublatetheminadialecticform(248).Thewordcan
remain,butonlyifitswriterdoesnottrytodefineit.

Peterson,inhisarticleThePosthumanismtoCome,acknowledgestheproblemsof
posthumanaswell.Hewritesthatsimilartopastpoststhelanguageofposthumanism
promisesatemporalshiftorturn,ifnotacompleterupture,visvisthelegacyofhumanism.
Yetwhatexactlydoesitmeantoleavehumanismbehind?(127).Petersonpointsoutthis
quiteoftenironicrhetoricofposthumanism,withitssenseofprogressbeyondhumanism.To
solvethisproblem,PetersonusesJacquesDerridasnotionofdemocracytocometosay
thatposthumanismmustinfinitelypostdateitsarrivalinanypresent(129),whichistosay,
posthumanismisnotapositiveconditionintheworld.Rather,Petersoncontends,

Noposthumanistprojectworthyofthisname(andmypointispreciselythatno
scholarshiporpoliticswilleverbeworthyenoughtoclaimthistitle),couldeverattain
itsfinalselfcompletion.Thereis,andneverwillbe,apoliticsandethicsthatcould
legitimatelycallitselfposthuman,onlyapoliticsandethicsthatwillhavebeenmoreor
(onehopes)lesshumanist,moreorlessviolentinitstreatmentofbothhumanand
nonhumanothers.(138)
Ringstad1
RhetoricofPosthumanism


Petersontooattemptstokillthewordposthumanbecauseitnecessarilyinhabitshumanism.
Forhim,humanismisaparadigmwecannotpossiblyescapethequestionthenbecomes,
whatwashappeningbeforehumanismasweunderstandit?

IntimeandspiritprecedingPetersonsarticle,DavidWillsDorsality:ThinkingBackthrough
TechnologyandPoliticsdoesnotonceusethewordposthumanhowever,hisargumentis
decidedlywhatonemightcallposthumanist.ThisisperhapsbecauseWillsnoticedthe
confusionoftheterm,probablyinthesametermsofDerridaswritingsthatPetersonused.
Wills,anotedtranslatorofDerridaandascholarheavilyindebtedtohim,doesnotrelyonany
pre,post,orpresent.Hebelievesthat

Weshouldthinktechnologybeyondtheconfinesofatraditionalconceptofa
humanmechanicalrelation,asdevelopmentallyupstreamfromthearticulationofa
limb.Weshouldthinkofatechnologythatgrows,andofbiosingeneralasfollowing
thetechnologicalturn,asbendingoutsideitselfdeepwithinitself.(4,emphasismine)

Willscompletelydisavowsapre/postrelationthatunderliesanysortofepistemologicalbreak,
andinitsplaceheinsiststhatwhatonemightsignifyasposthuman(thehuman/technology
(inter)relation)hasalwaysbeenaslongasahumanhasbeen.Inthissense,ourdiscourse
privilegesaconceptionofpreandpostthatisntthere.Indenyingthishumancentered
conceptionoftime,Willscreatesaspacetomakeanargumentthat,whileposthuman,isnt
posthuman.Hegrappleswithposthumanbynotincludingitinhisbook,andheinfactdefiesit
bysimplyanalyzingthehuman.

RESEARCHQUESTIONS
TouseHerbrechterandCallusswords,Whyarepeoplesayingsuchterriblethingsabout
posthumanism?Morespecifically,Iwillfocusontheserelatedlinesofinquiry:
Whataresomeoftherhetoricalissuesinposthumanism,andmorespecifically,the
wordposthuman?
Whatmightsomeofthesolutionsbeforwritersnavigatingthebroad,interdisciplinary
fieldofposthumanism?

HYPOTHESIS
Posthumanisarhetoricallydangerousterm,andinordertomakeatrulyepistemological
break,oneshoulddisavowthepre/postrelation.Inordertoaccomplishaposthumanist
project,onemustparadoxicallydisowntheword.Posthumanisaninheritancethathasdone
itsjobandcannowbeletgospecifically,itistobeletgo,notkilled.

STATEMENTOFSIGNIFICANCE
Posthumanismhasbeenahotpotatomakingtheroundsthroughvariousfieldswithinthelast
twodecades.Posthumanismhasinformedanimalstudies,technologystudies,technical
communication,andamyriadofliteraryworks.Withitsascendancecomemanyfrustrations,
confusions,andoutrightscoffsatwhatitattemptstodo.Manydonotunderstandits
underpinningsoncethewordposthumanisseen,shouldersbegintoshrugatitssupposedly
highandmightycomplexityandabstraction.Posthumanismisactuallyquitebanal.Thispaper
willattempttobegintomakesenseofthefieldandwhatitmustdotoberhetoricallyeffective.
Ringstad2
RhetoricofPosthumanism

METHODS
Iwillreadvariousarticlestoexaminehowthewritersare(orarenot)usingtheword
posthuman.Iwillbeusingbothbooklengthandshorterworks.Iwillattempttobeless
academicinmywritingtone,asIbelieveinstepwithposthumanistthoughtthattheone
observingthesystem(i.e.theonereadingavarietyofworks)mustbeselfconsciousoftheir
involvementinthesystem.Multiplewritersprecedemeinthis,includingHaylesinHowWe
BecamePosthuman,WillsinDorsality:ThinkingBackthroughTechnologyandPolitics,and
WolfeinWhatisPosthumanism?

SCHEDULE
Myscheduleincludestimeforresearch,drafting,andrevision.Thedateforinstructor
feedbackistentative,andIwilldetermineaspecificdatewhenthetimecomescloser.Iwill
alsoseekfeedbackthroughtheCenterforWriters.

WORKINGBIBLIOGRAPHY
Braidotti,Rosi.ThePosthuman.Cambridge,UK:PolityPress,2013.Print.
Callus,Ivan,andStefanHerbrechter.CriticalPosthumanismor,theInventioofa
PosthumanismwithoutTechnology.SubjectMatters3.2(2007):1529.Web.
Callus,Ivan,andStefanHerbrechter.Introduction:PosthumanistSubjectivities,or,Coming
aftertheSubject.Subjectivity5.3(2012):241264.Web.
Callus,Ivan,andStefanHerbrechter.WhatisaPosthumanistReading?Angelaki13.1
(2008):95111.Web.
Dinerstein,Joel.TechnologyandItsDiscontents:OntheVergeofthePosthuman.American
Quarterly58.3(2006):569595.ProjectMuse.Web.

Ringstad3
RhetoricofPosthumanism

Haraway,Donna.ACyborgManifesto:Science,Technology,andSocialistFeminisminthe
LateTwentiethCentury.Simians,CyborgsandWomen:TheReinventionofNature.
NewYork:Routledge,1991.149181.Web.
Hayles,N.Katherine.HowWeBecamePosthuman.Chicago:UofChicagoP,1999.Print.
Peterson,Christopher.ThePosthumanismtoCome.Angelaki16.2(2011):127141.Web.
Wills,David.Dorsality:ThinkingBackthroughTechnologyandPolitics.Minneapolis:Uof
MinnesotaP,2008.Print.
Wolfe,Cary.WhatisPosthumanism?Minneapolis:UofMinnesotaP,2010.Print.

Ringstad4
RhetoricofPosthumanism