Rationality v. Disruption

The current text of choice is The Social Life of Information by John Seely Brown and Paul Deguid. I picked it up at the recommendation of previous students of the School of Information bc I thought I was a bit lacking in tech knowledge -- and this book focuses on how recent technology relates to society, which is always a subject I'm interested in (society, I mean).

Anyway, what I find particularly fascinating about this book is what it reveals about this particular subset of society: those who deal with computers, who design programs. There seems to be an implicit belief in the rationality and in the strict rules that govern computer-centered structures.

Ex: in Ch. 2 entitled "Agents and Angels" (why the impulse to give good/evil values to objects that have no knowledge of such distinctions?), the authors speak of the "antisocial bots" that go around deleting emails, spamming sites, spying on users, attacking websites until they crash.

Okay, I can understand that this is highly disruptive behavior. But the authors seem to have an unrational horror of this sort of behavior, something that goes beyond mere annoyance at having their work undone. And it seems to me, that this horror is related to the dominant impulse of human philosophy and logic-centered behavior throughout the ages. We are primarily an unstable breed of animals, acting on our impulses, our emotions and our biological drives. But we abhor this aspect of ourselves and desire to repress the illogical for the beautiful symmetry of reason, rational, and logic because it would indicate our control of an unstable world that teases us and taunts us and destroys us at will.

Ex: critical theory in the last century and a half (when did Saussure live?) has shown that our society is dominated by rules and structures that seek to establish an overriding order onto our society. Anyone that acts outside the established rules is automatically shunned from the society or punished in an (in)appropriate manner.

But yet, if we allow Rationality to Reign and if we begin to mimic the ways of the machines we have created, we are enabling the loss of everything that makes our human existence beautiful and exciting: intuition, art, creativity, chance. We become no more than an ordered system that functions without error and without deviation. Okay, I understand that some ppl find this vision beautiful and desirable. But not me. I've always had a liking for anarchist elements, for the moments of chaos that disrupt our society. It's necessary. It allows us to learn, to grow, to become experienced.

Even Brown and Deguid unconsciously acknowledge this, slipping up and writing after a generalized description of the destructive bots: "As rapidly as the diligent bots find ways to see through their ruses and overcome these tactics, others find new ways to produce mayhem." They are aware that their "good" bots become more efficient, more advanced through interactions with the "bad" bots.

This is why I'm fascinated by human sexuality -- especially deviations in "normal" human sexuality. The sex drive is the most disruptive element within each of us. Some of us manage to repress it more than others, but no one can manage to escape it. It shakes us up out of our dreams of order and rationality -- dreams that are fueled by our need to control our entire universe (the quest for knowledge also can be classified as an attempt to control. We think if we know how it functions, then we can control the functions.)

Anyway, this is why it's good to add a little variety to one's reading list. Even tho it has still come back to the same subject that has absorbed my attention for the last year. Ah well...we can never escape our biology.

Thus endeth the lesson.

GAYGAYGAY!!!

I realized, while reading book 2, Quid Pro Quo (unfortunately, Amazon has it cheaper by about $5 but you'll have to find your own way there), of Manna Francis' Administration Series (follow the link to FREE wonders!!!), why I love the gay scifi sub-genre so much. In male-female couplings, no matter how enlightened both individuals are, there is always a measure of inequality. It simply can't be avoided. It's a matter of biology (and differing biologies) and instinct: the woman will usually long for the strong, protective male who would protect her offspring, and the man will usually desire that element of...my idea falls apart here bc I'm not sure which single element of the "fairer sex" (and god, how I hate that cliché) appeals the most to the largest number of males. Suffice it to say, from the perspective of the woman, there is always (usually) the possibility of inequality in her disfavor. However, with the gay male relationship, it's two equals attempting to find happiness. It's basically the closest attempt to a truly equitable relationship, where the power is based on individual characteristics rather than traditional expectations of each gender. Sort of like something Anais Nin wrote in her Henry and June diaries: "The love between women is a refuge and an escape into harmony. In the love between man and woman there is resistance and conflict. Two women do not judge each other, brutalize each other, or find anything to ridicule. They surrender to sentimentality, mutual understanding, romanticism." And she finishes very negatively (tho not incorrectly), "Such love is death, I'll admit." (Why isn't there more spec fic about lesbians? Or am I just missing it?)

Oh, plus, it helps that I get titillated by reading these sexy scenes, because I know that society doesn't approve, and so there's that flavor of the "forbidden", but yet, it's not forbidden cause it's ghastly, like say, in the case of incest.

Techno-philosophical question of the day: is the internet still just a tool to humanity or has it become a world in its own right? And if it's the latter, is it just another part of the human experience or is it a separate, alternate world, much as seen in episode 5 of Mnemosyne? (I'm not that big of an anime fan. But it occasionally proves my points.) Warning: Mnemosyne is EXTREMELY violent and might be a bit much for your American sensibilities.

the Sensualist v. the Intellectual

One of my fascinations is eroticism, sexual perversions, sensuality and anything else you can lump in there with a vast disregard for the nuances. This is partially due to my belief that the biological dominates our actions/reactions more than most ppl like to think -- and of course the most pressing biological demand is the sexual one. I suppose I'm a little bit Freud in that sense, except that I'm not a woman-hating/fearing man. Also, the fascination stems partially from the conflict between the sensual and the intellectual aspects of my personality (see D.H. Lawrence for more about that).

Why am I bothering to mention this? I just discovered Anaïs Nin who is aware enough of herself to say to a man in the prelude to potential sex: "I'm going now -- for me it can't be without love." Smart woman, refusing to obey mindlessly the demands of her body. And yet, not a prude either.

Don't know precisely why I thought to mention all this, except that I was just writing in my journal, in a very self-satisfied tone, how lately I've been attempting to portray myself to others with honesty, especially on the internet. It's not odd how so many ppl have made the internet into their little fantasy playground where they can be whomever they chose to be, say what they please without fear of the repurcussions, be as racist or sexist or asshole as they've always wanted but which society had taught them to repress in public(this societal repression has only occured in the decades from the 60s to about the mid-80s. Before that, of course, ppl said whatever the hell they pleased.). But is there the other aspect as well, where ppl reveal themselves more honestly on the internet than they do otherwise in their lives? Their opinions in this realm are not nullified by their appearance, by their dress and their manner of self-presentation. (I'm also saying that ppl are never who they appear to be in "the real world" but are as they choose to present themselves to others. An old idea but perhaps not a common one.) Is the cyber realm the honest realm? You choose your avatar, an image that resounds within you and thus can be seen as being a manifestation of your psyche; you interact with other avatars whose true forms are hidden from you and of which you know only what they reveal; the primary form of communication is TEXT (which I, as a one-time comp lit student, may be prejudiced to favor above all other mediums), the use of words and emoticons (which are essentially symbols of text) which reveal only the basic essence of speach with none of the nuances of physical gestures, of mixed signals and the like. In effect, I'm saying that the internet can allow us to finally be who we truly are.

Of course, I see this as a positive thing, but perhaps it is negative as well as it allows us to anonymously express the monstrous aspects of our personalities as well. (Thus: the success of porn and snuff films.) We more enlightened folk blame the assholes who flame our attempts at discussion and say ridiculous things that automatically raise our ire. We attribute it, in some measure, to the desire in ppl to cause mischief (I think specifically of the Smith Dailyjolt which could once be counted on to have the most ridiculous discussions. Is it still like that? I've avoided it since I officially declared that I would no more have anything to do with "drama."). But is it not actually the true expression of these ppl? (As I try to form my argument in favor of anonymity, I'm finding myself conflicted with my vast dislike of idiotic opinions and prejudices.) And I rather believe that ppl should be able to express the aspects of themselves that they usually repress (because repression can end dangerously), and the internet can be a safer outlet than most, as it does not (usually) end in physical altercations (but then you have to consider the psychological trauma that can occur when idiocy is allowed to run unchecked). Gah. This got hell of a lot more complicated than it was in my head. Remind me that I write too much.

Anyway, a tangential thought: All these 40 yr old men pretending to be 13 yr old girls: maybe they're deviant not because they're 40 yr old pedophiles but bc they really are 13 yr old girls, their minds trapped in an alternate existence at odds with their bodies. What if one day these perverts could do as trans-gendered ppl do (and I apologize for mentioning trans-ppl in this hypothetical scenario. Trans-ppl are in no way perverts but are simply and courageously trying to be who they truly are, in the face of society's vast disapproval. I thought of trans-ppl, though, because it's a real-world example that makes my hypothetical scenario not so improbable) and switch their minds into 13 year old female bodies (tho I see now that this hypothetical situation is actually unrelated to trans-ppl and has more resemblance to Ghost in the Shell), would they still be perverts? Bc they are now living the lives of these 13 yr old girls, complete with hormones and society's expectations/judgments.

Anyway, here's Ghost in the Shell for you. The first movie. Can't quite remember how well it relates to the themes above. Haven't watched it in a while.

This is for the fellow Smithies...

Check out the proposed plan to cut spending over the next few years. It might make you concerned and a bit anxious. Oh, Carol Christ....I know you were hired specifically to improve Smith's financial status, but really?

"Reducing operating expenses for Smith's four Junior Year Abroad programs, including such changes as discontinuing the lease of an under-utilized space in Paris and seeking a more reasonably priced location in Florence when our lease expires"

--> They're getting rid of Reid Hall!!! But I loved Reid Hall!! It was beautiful and had a garden courtyard and you could interact with other American college students (not that I did). :(

"Consolidating one of three branch libraries, the Josten Library (music, dance, theatre), into Neilson Library"

--> Does this mean they're moving the Josten Library collection into Nielson? Isn't that going to be expensive, relocating all those materials?

"Eliminate the not-for-credit Interterm program."

--> Waaaaaiiiit. They're getting rid of Interterm ALL TOGETHER?? I mean, I never did it (bc I didn't do much of anything at Smith but study and work), but it seemed like an awesome opportunity. And one of those things that set Smith apart from the others.

A little bit troubled. However, I am continuing to remain optimistic bc I assume that these are all just temporary measures until the economy improves and Smith can again afford to increase its spending (without, of course, increasing its tuition -- by the way, what does it cost now? $50,000?).

Sociopaths & Erotica

The heroine of my fantasy novel is a sociopath. I'm a little concerned. And surprised. What does that say about me, since she is a creation of my mind?

Last night I also started reading Anais Nin's Delta of Venus. Excellent and rather hot. Although some of the stories are a leeeetle bit disturbing (pedophilia? Really?). Anyway, I'm fascinated by her so I've gone and ordered Henry and June. We'll see how it goes.

I'm also starting to think that this blogger.com is rather limited in options...