(contains spoilers about Sherlock, “A Scandal in Belgravia”)

The theme was “Bodies, Interrupted;”  the objects of analysis were N. Katherine Hayles How I Became Posthuman, chapter 2, Donna Haraway’s “Cyborg Manifesto,” and “A Scandal in Belgravia” from the TV series Sherlock.  The quote that Ryn Silverstein posted at the beginning of her blog post, “We are living through a movement from an organic, industrial society to a polymorphous, information system–from all work to all play, a deadly game” (Haraway 161) seemed like a fitting introduction to a discussion of the story of Sherlock Holmes and Irene Adler posthumanized.

The erotization of the “camera phone” owned by Adler is such a rich topic for discussions of the character as a cyborg (“a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction” –Haraway) as well as a pattern of information: “Identifying information with both pattern and randomness proved to be a powerful paradox, leading to the realization that in some instances, an infusion of noise into a system can cause it to reorganize at a higher level of complexity.  Within such a system, pattern and randomness are bound together in a complex dialectic that makes them not so much opposites as complements or supplements to one another. Each helps to define the other, and each contributes to the flow of information through the system” (Hayles 25).

The ending of the Sherlock episode raised a few of our feminist eyebrows, as the 21st-century Adler loses the game with Sherlock, unlike the original Irene Adler in “A Scandal in Bohemia.”  Sherlock beats Irene in the final round of the “game,” and she becomes a target of terrorists as her protection is taken away.  Vulnerable and about to be killed, Irene texts Sherlock for a final time.  From the vantage of Sherlock’s memory, we see that he somehow managed to pose as her executioner and saved her at the last second.  She smiles (gratefully?) as the episode ends.  The whole thing looked very much like Prince “Charming” saving the princess.  However, if you read it as a text on posthumanism using Hayles as a guide, it’s more interesting than that, to me.  Perhaps Adler was the noise that caused Sherlock’s pattern-making machine (cyborg self?) to reorganize at a higher level complexity, and that was how he was savvy enough to save her.  She certainly will no longer contribute to the flow of information through his system if she’s dead (erased).

Also, we had some postings and discussions about whether the authors are utopian (Haraway) or apocalyptic (Hayles).  This is probably intensified by the fact that both writers use science-fiction works as examples in their theory-making.  I remember reading Haraway years ago and being rather turned-off by the idea that nature was socially constructed. The very word “posthuman” raises anxiety in readers, for perhaps we fear that something is being taken away from us.  What is it that makes these writers seem to be throwing down a gauntlet?  What do they have at stake for you?

Ways in which technology is improving human life were also discussed, especially in relationship to Wagner James Au’s “Nine Souls of Wilde Cunningham” and the video that Scott shared with us about a teenage girl with autism who broke out of the prison of her own body.