A couple of weeks ago, I spent a few hours swinging in my hammock by the creek in a local park. I spoke with my sister, read a book, tried to solve a NYT crossword puzzle. . . It was incredibly relaxing, especially as spring has arrived in full force to Boulder. Then I got in my car, synced up my phone to the speakers and drove home with Sia as my soundtrack. 

Driving home, I was struck by the range of mediation experiences that saturated my afternoon, especially the stark contrast between my experience of the world in the hammock versus my experience of the world from the driver’s seat. Let me quickly back up here and explain what I mean by mediation. I’m a media scholar, but what I mean by media is not limited merely to the news media or forms of entertainment media–the things people tend to associate with the term media. Rather I study this concept of mediation, the idea that our experiences of the world are always being mediated through tangible means. Our senses play a role in mediation. Our bodies themselves mediate our experiences. And then the objects we use and surround ourselves with also participate in mediation. This is mediation at its most fundamental level. News media and popular media are more complex and tertiary forms of mediation that are built and constructed upon these more basic ways of experiencing the world.

Leaving the park that afternoon.

Let me try to illustrate what I mean by returning to my afternoon. As I lay in my hammock, its gentle sway and the taut fabric underneath my back came between me and my experience of that area of the park. I experienced the park through my specific position and through my experience within that hammock. The young man across the creek from me, not more than a few hundred feet away, had a completely different experience of the park sitting on his blanket with firm ground under his body. Yet there undoubtedly were overlaps: we likely could both smell the keen scent of earthy spring after a weekend of rain. We could both hear the distant chortles of infant laughter. But perhaps my stranger had a history in the military and as a result his hearing attuned him to very different things to me. Perhaps he didn’t hear the laughter but instead heard a distant parent calling for their child, their frantic cries drifting on the wind. Or perhaps he wore a hearing aid, and his park didn’t sound nearly as full and robust as my park did.

This is what I mean by mediation at its most fundamental.

But, as I mentioned earlier, it was the contrast between my experience of the world from the hammock versus from the driver’s seat that struck me most. Since I moved to Boulder, I very rarely drive anymore. I take the bus to and from school every day. I walk to local shops and eateries. I walk down the big hill to my favorite coffee shop (Trident) to read and write. Even though I often listen to podcasts while I’m moving from point A to point B, the absence of a steering wheel and windshield has dramatically altered my experience of the world.

Without a steering wheel to grip tightly, I have less of a sense of control and power as I move through the world. Without the frame, I am more vulnerable to the world. As a woman, that sometimes makes me anxious when I’m walking home after nightfall, but for the most part, it has opened me up to the world in beautiful ways. On the bus, I meet fascinating fellow passengers and I get to cheerfully greet and thank the driver. I see people whose lives are dramatically different to mine, and I get to briefly imagine how their days might unfold unlike mine.

As I walk, I can stop to watch the now-skinny squirrels happily bounce along newly budding branches, or catch my raccoon neighbor sneakily eyeing me from behind his bush. As each iteration of spring has arrived, I haven’t just seen it—I’ve smelled it and heard it, as new blossoms release pungent fragrances and the birds emerge and call excitedly to each other. I make new dog friends everyday, and when it rains, I splash from puddle to puddle in my rainboots. (I lived in desert LA for too long…) In the winter, there is nothing more magical than trudging through soft, white ankle-deep snow in fleece-lined snow boots, woolen beanie and thick scarf as dainty flakes fall silently through the air. With every breath of crisp mountain air, I am reminded that my lungs are growing stronger at this altitude.

Without the mediation of the vehicle shell extending from my body, I am freed to relax and experience the world–to relinquish my desire for control and domination.

In today’s age, we talk a lot about the troublesome role that media like phones and computers have in our lives. We talk about digital fasts, and the need to slow down. We discuss how to develop more reflexive usage of devices in our lives and how to hold each other accountable.

Well this summer, I encourage you to take this a step further and think about your daily life in terms of mediation.

  • What mediates your experience of the world on a daily basis, whether digital or analog?
  • Through this form of mediation, what experiences of the world do you perhaps miss out on?
  • What alternatives to mediation might you consider?

Maybe start with the car, like I did. What would it look like to walk or take public transport for a few days a week? Even if you need your car to get to work, contemplate scheduling walks into your lunch break, after dinner, or first thing in the morning.

Let me know your experience or if you do any interesting mediation experiments. I’d love to share some other stories here on the blog.
You can always email me at rachel@highandlowblog.com, leave a comment below, or tweet @highandlowblog.

Hi folks. This week I contributed a post to Third Spaces, which is the official blog of the Center for Media, Religion, and Culture at the University of Boulder, of which I am a research fellow. Of course I hope you will wander over to read my post, but I also encourage you to subscribe to Third Spaces and visit the CMRC website to read a little about what we do at the center. My involvement there has been one of the most rewarding aspects of my time at CU Boulder.

Click the image below to read my latest piece over at Third Spaces.A new piece for High and Low is currently in the works and should appear in your feed soon!

I just returned from presenting at my first academic conference at Arizona State University. Being my first, I was extremely nervous but I got to present in the panel directly after the keynote speaker, so I got it over and done with quickly. One down, two more to go for this academic year!
The conference was entitled “The Post-Human Network Conference”, and it brought together graduate students from as far as London and from disciplines ranging from physics to art. We spent the entire weekend discussing various elements of this term “the post-human,” a term that has taken on quite a range of different meanings. Add in the fact that each of us have been trained within different fields and are familiar with different theorists, and it makes for a conference that required each of us to roll up our sleeves and do the hard work of constantly listening, questioning, and translating.

The term post-human is one I first encountered a few years ago at the beginning of my master’s program. At that time, I was reading a lot of science fiction and studying both fiction and non-fiction about cyborgs and androids. (Quick primer: cyborgs are humans that have been “upgraded” with technology while androids are essentially robots modeled after humans.) Within this context, the post-human generally refers to some form of evolved human species, and it usually implies that we have used technology to take us to that place. To provide a contemporary example, the film Ghost in the Shell, based on a manga series of the same name, dives heavily into an imagined post-human realm.
The term post-human is often juxtaposed with the term trans-human. These too are words that have been inflected with many different meanings depending on their usage. Trans-human can refer to a human who is slowly experimenting with technology augmentation, on their way to becoming a full post-human. If you use it in philosophical contexts, however, trans-humanism refers to a profoundly modernist/Enlightenment approach to thinking about technology. What I mean by this is that trans-humanism views technology as providing steps towards humanity’s ever-exponential progress. Augmenting a human with technology is symbolic of humanity’s increasing domination and mastery of nature.

This is where the term post-humanism, as opposed to post-human, offers a new set of meanings. Post-humanism resists this kind of attitude towards both humanity and nature; it is fundamentally opposed to an Enlightenment perspective that privileges human reason and that justifies our exploitation of nature. Post-humanism argues for a decentering of humanity; i.e. to stop thinking about ourselves as the center of the universe, and start thinking about the non-human with greater intentionality–remembering we are not the only life in our world, even as we might be distinctly different.

Time for another term: “the anthropocene”. You may have seen this word thrown around in the news occasionally. This is a term that has been used to label the most recent epoch of human history. I’m going to pull from the Smithsonian Magazine here for some more details:

According to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), the professional organization in charge of defining Earth’s time scale, we are officially in the Holocene (“entirely recent”) epoch, which began 11,700 years ago after the last major ice age.
But that label is outdated, some experts say. They argue for “Anthropocene”—from anthropo, for “man,” and cene, for “new”—because human-kind has caused mass extinctions of plant and animal species, polluted the oceans and altered the atmosphere, among other lasting impacts.Smithsonian Magazine

While this is considered an environmentally-driven term, it is also a term used frequently within posthumanist circles, where there is a deep concern for the ways in which humanity has carelessly utilized Earth for our various civilization-building endeavors.

For myself personally, I am interested in two particular areas. At this conference, I gave a talk about singularity theories, which are a collection of scientifically-sourced theories suggesting that our earth will transition irrevocably in the coming century. These theories are taken with great seriousness in areas of the tech industry and with many scientists and mathematicians, but have been often ignored within the humanities. In my research, I temporarily suspend any disbelief, and try to fully engage with the philosophical and ethical implications of these theories. For my presentation at this conference, however, I challenged my fellow scholars to consider how we in society define “being human” because until we can address this question, we have no ground to stand on for any potential development or even evolution of humanity and indeed no ground to stand on as we try to treat our planet and our fellow tenants well.
More on this in a future post.

Second, I’ve been taking what could be described as a post-humanist approach to thinking about space exploration. Placing a settlement on Mars is becoming more and more of a serious consideration, but if and when we do so, what attitudes and ethics will we implement in such an endeavor? I’m working on a number of projects in this area currently, and I’ll be posting a blog piece on this topic soon too.

This is an interesting little area of academia with which I am becoming slowly more familiar. So please pardon my limited knowledge and do also recognize that I have barely scratched the surface in this post. But as always, I do want to make a point of sharing a bit of my own journey into research, and I will be building on the ideas of this post in many other posts to come. In the meantime, please let me know if you have any questions, or if you’d like to add to something I said above. What do you think about this idea of the post-human or post-humanism?

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...