What Is Posthumanism?

by Cary Wolfe

What does it mean to think beyond humanism? Is it possible to craft a mode of philosophy, ethics, and interpretation that rejects the classic humanist divisions of self and other, mind and body, society and nature, human and animal, organic and technological? Can a new kind of humanities-posthumanities-respond to the redefinition of humanity's place in the world by both the technological and the biological or "green" continuum in which the "human" is but one life form among many?

Exploring how both critical thought along with cultural practice have reacted to this radical repositioning, Cary Wolfe-one of the founding figures in the field of animal studies and posthumanist theory-ranges across bioethics, cognitive science, animal ethics, gender, and disability to develop a theoretical and philosophical approach responsive to our changing understanding of ourselves and our world. Then, in performing posthumanist readings of such diverse works as Temple Grandin's writings, Wallace Stevens's poetry, Lars von Trier's Dancer in the Dark, the architecture of Diller+Scofidio, and David Byrne and Brian Eno's My Life in the Bush of Ghosts, he shows how this philosophical sensibility can transform art and culture.

For Wolfe, a vibrant, rigorous posthumanism is vital for addressing questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems and their inclusions and exclusions, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. In What Is Posthumanism? he carefully distinguishes posthumanism from transhumanism (the biotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality. In doing so, Wolfe reveals that it is humanism, not the human in all its embodied and prosthetic complexity, that is left behind in posthumanist thought.

Genres: Philosophy, Theory, Nonfiction, Animals, Academic, Criticism, Research

357 pages, Paperback

First published December 31, 2009

Reviews

[Karl Steel · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you've been reading Wolfe, you've already read this. Comprising articles on Bjork and psychoanalytic theory, systems theory, critical animal theory, Wallace Stevens, and Emerson, What is Posthumanism never quite gelled into a book for me. Instead of this collection, I would have welcomed an entire, brief book collecting the critical animal theory material Wolfe has published since Animal Rites and a separate, somewhat longer book on systems theory.

The imagined systems theory book would have had a more sustained and careful treatment of N. Katherine Hayles, surely, as I understand things, the big name in systems theory and cultural studies. On her, in the book as actually published, Wolfe writes:

my sense of posthumanism does not partake of the fantasy of the posthuman described by N. Katherine Hayles, which imagines a triumphant transcendence of embodiment and 'privileges informational pattern over material instantiation, so that embodiment in a biological substrate is seen as an accident of history rather than an inevitability of life.' On the contrary...[posthumananism:] requires us to attend to that thing called 'the human' with greater specificity, greater attention to its embodiment, embeddedness, and materiality, and how these are in turn shaped by etc.

I'm surprised that anyone who's read How We Became Posthuman could believe Hayles promotes a transcendent model of transhumanism (but some do! see Wolfe xv, n10); I'm sure Wolfe doesn't believe Hayles believes such a thing (note, again, xv, where the critique of Hayles, thick with words like "net effect and critical ground tone," "associate," "tends," finally eats its own tail by tending to admit that Hayles made the very points Wolfe makes); but this graph above--one of very, very few that engage with Hayles in a volume thick with systems theory--sort of implies Hayles is herself a transcendent liberal humanist systems theorist with its "on the contrary." But she's not.

Perhaps a quibble? At any rate, the book is more than worth the price of entrance for its chart on 125.

[The Awdude · Rating 4 out of 5]

Derrida plus Luhmann equals be nice to animals or shame on you. Some good ideas in here. Finally systems theory seems to be catching on, which is a good thing. But I'm still worried about this trend of de-centering the subject that seems to be never-ending. I mean, of course the subject isn't real, but if you take away agency then how do you hold anyone responsible for anything? Anyway, I dug it overall. Definitely got the ole wheels a-turnin'.

[Mjhancock · Rating 3 out of 5]

In just under 300 pages, Wolfe argues for a new articulation of what posthumanism can and should mean. I may attempt a longer review of this book later, but for now, I'll just spread all of my immediate responses out on the table, and you can decide what picture resulting collage forms. Wolfe's argument begins with a basic disgruntlement with current versions of posthumanism, especially that of N. Katherine Hayles. He thinks that these arguments fail in that they attempt to create a posthuman way of thinking, but can't escape humanism because they just recreate the subject position from a different perspective. His solution to the problem is to apply systems theory, which focuses on a system/environment distinction over more traditional approaches that necessitate an outside observer. The book, roughly, is about applying this new posthumanism to various other theories and artifacts. The first half is a focus on theory, and it's rather slow going. Wolfe's first act with the new posthumanism is to explain system theory by how it fits with deconstructionism, and if you don't have a firm grasp on your Derrida, then you're likely to find yourself at sea (like me). Later chapters in this section, such as the one on posthumanism and disability theory and the one on posthumanism and animal theory, work better, but still assume a fairly high level of familiarity with the respective latter element of focus. The second half focuses on artifacts and examples that already employ the posthumanism that Wolfe is arguing for, and it's a lot more accessible (or at least easier to read). And Wolfe has assembled a truly diverse set of artifacts, from bio-engineered art projects to the musical Dancer in the Dark to Waldo Emerson--and that's not even counting the building that was manufactured with its own cloud. The second section adds clarity to the earlier arguments, to the point where a second reading is very much prompted, if not necessitated. Unfortunately, it's not just a matter of familiarity with arguments that held me back. In a discipline known for its obfuscating sentence construction, Wolfe justifies his own membership with some sentences that are so convoluted that they can only be said in a single breath by professional divers. Ultimately, the book seems almost more a rehabilitation of systems theory than a book on posthumanism per se, but it would be essential reading for anyone commenting on the topics it touches on extensively (deconstructionism, posthumanism, animal theory, disabilities theory).

[Margaryta · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is me giving up on the book. Cary Wolfe is definitely not the theorist for me. I know he is difficult and I know that posthumanism and adjacent fields are difficult, but there is something about Wolfe that adds an extra layer of obstruction to reading. Maybe it's because I had not studied systems theory before. I understood that Wolfe objects to the current (at least at the time of writing) definition of posthumanism and also liked his connection to disability studies, but what felt like the more important, theoretical first half of the book was difficult to orient myself in. Although the second half if primarily case studies meant to elaborate on the theory and put it into practice, the fact that I did not recognize the objects/texts of study made his analysis and continued close reading of theory difficult to follow. I know this is a seminal text in posthumanism, but it felt hard to see why. What Wolfe seems to offer can be summarized quite neatly in a short chapter, or in his PMLA article "The Changing Profession: 'Animal Studies', Disciplinarity, and the Posthumanities," which touches upon many of the key ideas in a more accessible fashion.

[CëRïSë · Rating 2 out of 5]

Cary Wolfe is brilliant, and the themes he presents here are dear to my own heart, but I can't say I enjoyed this at all. I think I also still resent him for prompting me to watch Dancer in the Dark , which I thought was offensively dreadful, but which he seemed to find wonderful.

Actually, the book and film have some things in common that way: both are smart, but require a lot of work on the part of the audience, which may not ultimately feel worth it; the bits of brilliance are densely hidden (in Dancer, this felt willfully obtuse); and experiencing each is frequently painful (although I made it through Posthumanism, I couldn't finish Dancer).

If the themes interest you, I'd suggest skimming, reading only chapters that interest you, and/or just reading N. Katherine Hayles (whom Wolfe seems generally to dislike)!

[in8 · Rating 4 out of 5]

http://www.5cense.com/16/496.htm

[Mira · Rating 1 out of 5]

Having read for Hayles, Badmington and Bolter, Wolfe comes across as trying too much! The topic is complicated enough as it is, there's no reason to make it even more so with an inaccessible style...

[Stephen Kelly · Rating 5 out of 5]

The introduction and the first chapter are a nearly impenetrable doozy, but the following chapters are more lucid, stirring, and quite important. I'm glad I stuck with it. The chapter that utilizes Temple Grandin's memoirs to connect disability studies, animal studies, and posthumanist paradigms is especially fascinating and inspiring.

[Giovanni Gregory · Rating 4 out of 5]

"One striking example of this new philosophical practice that Cavell finds in Emerson--this time in relation not to Kant but to Desartes--occurs in "Self-Reliance," when Emerson writes, "Man is timid and apologetic; he is no longer upright; he dares not say 'I think,' 'I am,' but quotes some saint or sage."

No ironies here.

[Feral Academic · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really liked some chapters, but ended up skimming or very half-heartedly plodding through about 50% of it.

[Alice · Rating 3 out of 5]

ก็น่าสนใจดีมั้ง แต่เบื่อสำนวนการเขียน