Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How to write a textual analysis essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Shaping Identity in William Gibson's Neuromancer
The number “one” is not a thing. Math has no definitive reality. Numbers are a social construct, a system of symbols designed to express the abstractions through which properly developed societies explain aspects of reality. It follows that, as humanity seeks to understand more of what it is to exist, bigger numbers are needed. Soon, we need machines to understand the numbers. Society plants a base on information technology, efficiency, and a mechanical precision that is startling. What is desirable in a product is distilled to a formulaic essence and packaged neatly. Humans, too, are boiled down to science. Glossy shots, red lipstick, concrete biceps, and an ever-decreasing waistline set the standard. People are reduced to little more than the sum of their parts, a pair of matchstick legs, a rippled midsection, the right shoes and right make-up. Information technology makes the dissimilation of these trends mercilessly easy: In response to the Atkins Diet, tens of thousands of Americans strike carbohydrates from their diets. A cell phone that simply calls someone is archaic at best; people need infinite text messaging and a built-in digital camera (with no roaming charges) so that they can e-mail pictures of their new car to their friends in California, New York, or Antarctica. Jessica Simpson mistakes canned tuna for chicken and millions of viewers laugh at her in unison. Still, “one” is not a thing. These societal constructs chip away at the very humanity of the people who live amidst them. In William Gibson’s Neuromancer, a motley cast of characters face this cold steel reality, that their humanity is being systematically stripped, and that even attempts to take advantage...
... middle of paper ...
... as perceived in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and William Gibson's Neuromancer.” 1996. Retrieved November 16th, 2004. http://www.geocities.com/Paris/5972/gibson.html.
Meyer, Chuck. ”Human Identity in the Age of Computers: Cyberpunk Identity.” April 1997. Retrieved November 20th, 2004. http://fragment.nl/mirror/Meyer/CyberpunkIdentity.htm.
Myers, Tony. ”The Postmodern Imaginary In William Gibson's Neuromancer.” 2001. Retrieved November 20th, 2004. http://www.postanarki.net/myers.htm.
Saffo, Paul. ”Consensual Realities in Cyberspace.” Phrack Magazine. 1989. Retrieved November 16th, 2004. http://www.phrack.org/show.php?p=30&a=8.
Shaw, Debbie. ”THEREFORE I AM - TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN IDENTITY.” Updated January 1997. Retrieved November 16th, 2004. http://learning.unl.ac.uk/humanIT/cybersf/ident.htm
People all around agree that technology is changing how we think, but is it changing us for the better? Clive Thompson definitely thinks so and this book is his collection of why that is. As an avid fiction reader I wasn’t sure this book would captivate me, but the 352 pages seemingly flew past me. The book is a whirlwind of interesting ideas, captivating people, and fascinating thoughts on how technology is changing how we work and think.
In summary, both the article and the novel critique the public’s reliance on technology. This topic is relevant today because Feed because it may be how frightening the future society may look like.
My life, although not without surprises and unusual events, is dictated by predictable and ordinary elements. However, through fiction I am transported into a world of boundless imagination and extraordinary themes. One such example is evident in my response to Mary Shelley’s gothic novel Frankenstein. Through fiction, Shelley invites the reader to accept the extraordinary. Firstly, we are led to believe that Victor Frankenstein is able to create life by shocking it with electricity, and to this I responded with an imaginative curiosity. But it was the consequences of the creation provoked a stronger response from me. The element of horror Victor experiences and his reaction to the ‘god like’ qualities bestowed upon him as creator is truly extraordinary. Victor, like no other man, experiences the feeling of immense power and responsibility as creator of man, and this provoked a sympathetic response from me. Finally I also accepted and responded to the extraordinary concept of the monster, who, unlike to the majority of humanity, is created without a sense of cultural identity. Additionally, what is extraordinary to me as a reader is the humanity and intelligence the monster displays, despite the disadvantageous of his creation. This made me have sympathy for monster and served to blotch the credibility of Victor. Throughout the novel I was inclined to accept Shelley’s invitation and to explore a deeper view of humanity.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a nineteenth century literary work that delves into the world of science and the plausible outcomes of morally insensitive technological research. Although the novel brings to the forefront several issues about knowledge and sublime nature, the novel mostly explores the psychological and physical journey of two complex characters. While each character exhibits several interesting traits that range from passive and contemplative to rash and impulsive, their most attractive quality is their monstrosity. Their monstrosities, however, differ in the way each of the character’s act and respond to their environment.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus, explores the monstrous and destructive affects of obsession, guilt, fate, and man’s attempt to control nature. Victor Frankenstein, the novel’s protagonist and antihero, attempts to transcend the barriers of scientific knowledge and application in creating a life. His determination in bringing to life a dead body consequently renders him ill, both mentally and physically. His endeavors alone consume all his time and effort until he becomes fixated on his success. The reason for his success is perhaps to be considered the greatest scientist ever known, but in his obsessive toil, he loses sight of the ethical motivation of science. His production would ultimately grieve him throughout his life, and the consequences of his undertaking would prove disastrous and deadly. Frankenstein illustrates the creation of a monster both literally and figuratively, and sheds light on the dangers of man’s desire to play God.
Gibson, William. "Johnny Mnemonic." Writing About Cyberpunk. Ed. Tonya Browning. The University of Texas at Austin, Fall 1995.
This paper will concentrate on the definition of human nature, the controversy of morality and science, the limits to scientific inquiry, and how this novel ties in with today’s world. Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein expresses human nature specifically through the character of the “Creature” and its development. The Creature has an opportunity to explore his surroundings, and in doing so he learns that human nature is to run away from something so catastrophic in looks. The Creature discovers that he must limit himself in what he does due to the response of humans because of his deformities. I feel that Mary Shelley tries to depict human nature as running away from the abnormal, which results in alienation of the “abnormal.”
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or; The Modern Prometheus, published in 1818, is a product of its time. Written in a world of social, political, scientific and economic upheaval it highlights human desire to uncover the scientific secrets of our universe, yet also confirms the importance of emotions and individual relationships that define us as human, in contrast to the monstrous. Here we question what is meant by the terms ‘human’ and ‘monstrous’ as defined by the novel. Yet to fully understand how Frankenstein defines these terms we must look to the etymology of them. The novel however, defines the terms through its main characters, through the themes of language, nature versus nurture, forbidden knowledge, and the doppelganger motif. Shelley also shows us, in Frankenstein, that although juxtaposing terms, the monstrous being everything human is not, they are also intertwined, in that you can not have one without the other. There is also an overwhelming desire to know the monstrous, if only temporarily and this calls into question the influence the monstrous has on the human definition.
Whether it be their acceptance of jobs like the ones Theodor performs or it be their acceptance of the O.S.’s simply becoming a part of everyday life in an instant. When confronted with the opening statement that the O.S. manufacturer uses to sell their product, “We ask you a simple question: who are you?” it is made clear that Her has a large theme of identity embedded, however, with the very present implication that life without dictation by technology is somehow lesser or regressive. “Who are you?” without technology. The world attempts to subtly push its people towards a blanket acceptance of celebratory posthumanism. The world which Her presents is one of acceptance and excitement when it comes to technology, and further, when it comes to posthumanism. The posthuman is a term used to group anything that augments the human body through the use of technology, and according to Dow & Wright (2010) Celebratory posthumanism is buy and large a positive view of what they refer to as technoscience which is the globe’s combined research into technology through the use of the established scientific research in order to advance the world. Further it is a way of viewing technological advances as a system which creates more ways for humans to prosper, which are pointedly more beneficial than what is already available (p. 300). However, Her, through the showcasing of such viewpoints the film subtly asks audiences to analyse whether this approach and viewpoint is truly the correct one. Through understanding of Dow & Wright (2010)’s explanation of critical posthumanism ‘Her’ presents the “framework” for debate (p.301) that critical posthumanism attempts to foster. Through the lens of critical posthumanism, it is suggested by Spike Jones that perhaps the blind acceptance of such advances could indeed result in the opposite of a positive effect on society. At the ending in which
The human race’s complexity is so muddled with various desires, styles, and actions that even a substantial response could only explain a fragment of human nature, but, even with the intricacy of humanity, there is a barrier an ethical conscience held by the human race as a whole that separates actions human and inhuman. In Mary Shelly’s novel Frankenstein, the characters Dr. Frankenstein and the creature he reanimates walk along the separation line between human and inhuman. Shelly uses the idealisms like Promethean desire and existential questions to exemplify the natural yearnings that humans strive for as they search for their purpose and aspire for something greater. Frankenstein’s creature and Frankenstein illustrate both human and inhuman qualities as they exemplify natural human desires, but also simultaneously act in eerie and coldhearted ways that separate them from natural human society.
"Finding One's Own in Cyberspace." Composing Cyberspace. Richard Holeton. United States: McGraw-Hill, 1998. 171-178. SafeSurf. Press Release.
Multiple identities have been increased by the creation of cyberspace communications according to "Cyberspace and Identity" by Sherry Turkle. Turkle uses four main points to establish this argument. Her first point is that online identity is a textual construction. Secondly she states that online identity is a consequence-free moratorium. Turkle's third point is online identity expands real identity. Finally, her last point states that online identity illustrates a cultural concept of multiplicity. I disagree with many aspects of her argument and I have found flaws in her argument. Technology is an area that does not stand still and consequently outpaced Turkle's argument.
Before the internet, our characteristics such as style, identity, and values were primarily exposed by our materialistic properties which psychologists define as the extended self. But people’s inferences to the idea of online self vs. offline self insisted a translation to these signals into a personality profile. In today’s generation, many of our dear possessions have been demolished. Psychologist Russell W belk suggest that: “until we choose to call them forth, our information, communications, photos, videos, music, and more are now largely invisible and immaterial.” Yet in terms of psychology there is no difference between the meaning of our “online selves” and “offline selves. They both assist us in expressing important parts of our identity to others and provide the key elements of our online reputation. Numerous scientific research has emphasized the mobility of our analogue selves to the online world. The consistent themes to these studies is, even though the internet may have possibly created an escape from everyday life, it is in some ways impersonating
Humanity is threatened by the overwhelming growth of science and technology. People are expanding their knowledge through observation and experiment, oblivious to the consequences that result from improper motive. Isaac Asimov—author of The Life and Times of Multivac—uses the science of numbers, or mathematics, as a solution to the fear that arises in a world controlled by a human-like machine. What human beings are afraid of is losing the very word that separates them from everything else in the world—human, and they will do whatever they can to keep that title to themselves.
Technology is changing how we think and act at younger ages. The term “technology” doesn’t only mean manufacturing processes and equipment necessary for production, it also defines a social space and could be a social problem which makes a real impact on social reality. Different types of social software affect a variety of aspects and have both positive and negative impacts. It's important to be aware of how a digitally-driven life is changing our education, sense of self, relationships, social interaction, consumerism, and ways of doing business around the world.