Skip to main content

The Cyborg, Its Friends and Feminist Theories of Materiality

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Discussing New Materialism

Abstract

Donna Haraway’s Cyborg lived between fiction and fact in a real and virtual world and in the 1980 s even ignited its own manifesto. Currently the ontology of the so called material turn is high on the feminist (and elsewhere) theoretical agenda. I argue that the material turn can benefit from insights from Haraway’s early work on the Cyborg that are often forgotten. The Cyborg opposed strongly the distinction between nature and culture, the social and the technological or sex and gender. The Cyborg Manifesto is a pointed warning against continuing to relate to meaning or culture as something distinct from nature. Moreover it means that the material-semiotic understands nature as something changeable and in movement. Today Karen Barad is often mentioned as central to the renewed interest in feminist theories of materiality. I discuss her concept of ‘agential realism’ in more detail to establish a conversation between ‘agential realism’ and the Cyborg. Barad’s ideas are heavily dependent on her new reading of Niels Bohr and quantum mechanics. The Cyborg solves questions of materiality in other ways, through the concept of the material-semiotic, a concept that explicitly includes politics/criticism and which could greatly contribute to feminist theory and research practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This contribution is a thoroughly revised version of “Hva skjedde med kyborgen?” which was published in Tidsskrift for kjønnsforskning in 2014, vol. 38.

  2. 2.

    My readings of these debates are located in a setting where translations from other languages, i.e. mostly Anglo-American concepts and theories, constitute a particular kind of work. Such work has its advantages as well as creating extra work and challenges. Thus it is important to consider location when dealing with conceptual understanding and methodology in relation to current debates on materiality. This constitutes a background for my text, yet, I will not explore further the issue of travelling concepts in the following.

  3. 3.

    The combination of technology and science into “technoscience” is an attempt to express a similar interwoven relationship between what we usually refer to as two separate categories.

  4. 4.

    Barad has an intriguing understanding of the concept “phenomenon.” In Barad’s understanding, a phenomenon includes the person who “sees” (the researcher), what is being “seen” (the object) and the measuring instrument (the method, technique or machine) by which it is “seen.” In other words, intra-action includes these three elements and the way/process through which they are entangled.

  5. 5.

    I hesitate to use the concept of “data” here as it is often narrowly understood as a particular type of information but could not find a better word for it.

References

  • Åsberg, C., R. Koobak, and E. Johnson. 2011. Beyond the Humanist Imagination. NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 19: 218–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbate, Janet. 2000. Inventing the Internet. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alaimo, S., and S. Hekman, eds. 2008. Material Feminisms. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asdal, K., and B. Brenna. 1998. “Samtaler over tid”. In Betatt av viten. Bruksanvisninger til Donna Haraway, eds. K. Asdal, A-J. Berg, B. Brenna, I. Moser and L. M. Rustad, p. 13–36. Oslo: Spartacus Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad, Karen. 1999. http://virtualsociety.sbs.ox.ac.uk/matcon/abstb.htm#How (the Virtualsociety website is no longer accessable).

  • Barad, K. 2003. Posthumanist Performativity. Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter. SIGNS 28: 801–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway. Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, A.-J. 1997. Digital Feminism. NTNU Norwegian University for Science and Technology Trondheim, STS Report 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, A.-J. 1998. Begeistring og begjær. Vi stammer vel fra apene? In Betatt av viten. Bruksanvisninger til Donna Haraway, eds. K. Asdal, A.-J. Berg, B. Brenna, I. Moser and L. M. Rustad, p. 80–116. Oslo: Spartacus Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bijker, Wiebe, and J. Law. 1992. Shaping Technology/Building Society. Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge MA and London: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braidotti, Rosi. 2013. The Posthuman. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braverman, Harry. 1974. Labour and Monopoly Capital. The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York and London: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromseth, Janne, L. Folkmarson Käll, and K. Mattsson. 2009. Body Claims. Uppsala: Center for Gender Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, C., and R. Fürst-Dilic. 1994. Introduction: Looking for the Gender/Technology Relation. In Bringing Technology Home. Gender and Technology in a Changing Europe, eds. C. Cockburn and R. Fürst-Dilic,p. 1–22. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corea, Gena. 1988. The Mother Machine. Reproductive Technologies from Artificial Insemination to Artificial Wombs. London: The Women’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, Shulamit. 1973. Kjønnenes dialektikk. Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grey, C. H., ed. 1995. The Cyborg Handbook. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna. 1991. Simians, Cyborgs and Women. The Reinvention of Nature. London: Free Association Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna. 1992. Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science. London and New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna. 2003. Companion Species Manifesto: Dogs, People, and Significant Otherness. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna. 2008. When Species Meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna. 2016. Staying with the Trouble. Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna, and T. Goodeve. 2000. How Like a Leaf: An Interview with Donna Haraway. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, Sandra. 1986. The Science Question i Feminism. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hird, M. 2003. New Feminist Sociological Directions. The Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie 28: 447–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hird, M. 2004. Feminist Matters: New Materialist Considerations of Sexual Difference. Feminist Theory 5: 223–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hessen, Dag Olav. 2005. Hva er biologi? Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1984. A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1992. Secrets of Life, Secrets of Death. Essays on Language, Gender and Science. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, John, and J. Hassard. 1999. Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford and Malden: Sociological Review Monographs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, Bruno. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. 2004. Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry 30: 225–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. 2010. An Attempt at a ‘Compositionist Manifesto’. New Literary History 41: 471–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lykke, Nina. 2008. Kønsforskning. En guide til feministisk teori, metodologi og skrift. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lykke, N. 2011. The Timeliness of Post-Constructionism. NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 18: 131–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Donald. 1990. Inventing Accuracy: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile Guidance. Boston: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marres, Noortje. 2015. Material Participation. Technology, the Environment and Everyday Publics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mol, Annemarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Noble, David. 1984. Forces of Production: A Social History of Industrial Automation. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordal, Inge. 2008. Darwinisme – en fruktbar teori for å forstå ‘kvinnens natur’? In DarwinVerden ble aldri den samme, eds. D. O. Hessen, T. Lie and N. C. Stenseth, p. 335–349. Oslo: Gyldendal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nørretranders, Tor. 1986. Det udelelige. Niels Bohrs aktualitet i fysik, mystik og politik. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, G. A. 1996. Writing, Literacy and Technology: Toward a Cyborg Writing. Journal of Advanced Composition 16: 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, A., ed. 1992. Science as practice and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinch, T. 2011. Karen Barad, quantum mechanics, and the paradox of mutual exclusivity. Social Studies of Science 41: 431–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prins, B. 1995. The Ethics of Hybrid Subjects: Feminist Constructivism According to Donna Haraway. Science, Technolgy & Human Values 20: 352–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, A. 2001. Trafficking in Monstrosity: Conceptualizations of ‘Nature’ within Feminist Cyborg Discourses. Feminist Theory 3: 367–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. E. 1996. Telling the Truth after Postmodernism. Symbolic Interaction 19: 171–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, Charles Percy. 1960. De to kulturer. Oslo: J.W. Cappelens forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. 2011. Subject Objects. Feminist Theory 12: 119–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, Judy. 1991. Feminism Confronts Technology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, Judy. 2004. Techno-Feminism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Simon J., L. Birk, and G. A. Bendelow. 2003. Debating Biology. Sociological Reflections on Health, Medicine and Society. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winthereik, B. R., and H. Verran. 2012. Ethnographic Stories as Generalizations that Intervene. Science Studies 25: 37–51.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne-Jorunn Berg .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Berg, AJ. (2019). The Cyborg, Its Friends and Feminist Theories of Materiality. In: Kissmann, U., van Loon, J. (eds) Discussing New Materialism. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22300-7_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22300-7_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-22299-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-22300-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics