nttmsdgstvsstm on Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:51:01 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> recombotechtance digest [ityn, griffis] |
ityn@gmx.net Biotech...but..."recombinant_resistance"? Ryan Griffis <grifray@yahoo.com> RE: biotech and architecture - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:09:49 +0200 (MEST) From: ityn@gmx.net Subject: Biotech...but..."recombinant_resistance"? > Put plainly, the interest is in building beyond the bodies we know. This is the future of the city. I have only these brief questions to pose, mr. Bratton. Whereas in the past a basis for resistence was found in an idea of the human, humanism, and the war against hegemonic Power continues to be waged from the ground of the human body— from where do we resist once we’ve lost our body (our bodies?). my provisory answer is from the world— or for the world— but i´m not sure what I mean by that. Perhaps you can help. second question. Where does one begin their research in the frightful and poetic field of recombinant architecture? yours, ityn (ps apologies if the first question seems curt, but... what does one say.) -- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ Bitte lächeln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:08:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Ryan Griffis <grifray@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: biotech and architecture "But I couldn't help feeling that it felt strangely like a piece of biotech marketing material in its imperial scope and through-going suppression of feminist and racial critiques of this kind of discourse." i think Danny brings up a very good point, and one Rosalyn Deutsche makes thoroughly regarding arhitectural discourse and authoritarian/masculine impulses in the theorization of public space. while i'm not sure about the "bricks and mortar" call for material proof, which can easily fall into "common sense" argumentation, it certainly seems appropriate to try to open up the dialogue for feminist and other theories of oppression given the histories. It's not like the voices aren't there - Faith Wilding (and subRosa) is a case in point. no criticism should be considered beyond criticism itself. this would be especially true for matters as far reaching as biotech and genetics for sure. [no position can be totalizing (if one tries it's time to be really wary), so criticism from other positions are needed, in my opinion.] this doesn't have to be essentialist. and i don't take Danny's comments as such, even though i didn't see the originating essay as "biotech marketing" myself. best, ryan __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net