From a Biopolitical ‘Will to Life’ to a Noopolitical Ethos of Death in the Aesthetics of Digital Code

In a range of digital creative productions and digital culture, questions of how to deal with finitude are on the rise. On the one hand, sectors of the digital entertainment industry – specifically computer games developers – are concerned with the question of how to manage `death' digitally. On the other hand, death and suicide have become the impetus for humorous artistic expression. This article tracks the emergence of a digital ethos that is cognizant of consequence, finitude and even death. Rather than pit a 1990s `will to life' against an emerging `death drive', I argue that the shift to an ethos in which dark consequences ensue from digital actions must be understood by working through digital code's technicity and unfolding this relation of technics to both ethics and politics. Although Bernard Stiegler's analysis of technicity goes some way toward unfolding a political analysis of the aesthetics of digital code, his articulation of noopolitics fails to provide us with a way to conduct ourselves digitally in an era of cognitive capitalism. I look to critical software practices and their provisional networked publics, with potential lines of flight for contemporary technoculture via novel digital `codings'.

[1]  F. H. Adler Cybernetics, or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. , 1949 .

[2]  J. Avery,et al.  The long tail. , 1995, Journal of the Tennessee Medical Association.

[3]  John Arquilla,et al.  The Emergence of Noopolitik: Toward an American Information Strategy , 1999 .

[4]  Lily E. Kay,et al.  Who Wrote the Book of Life?: A History of the Genetic Code , 2000 .

[5]  M. Lazzarato From Biopower to Biopolitics , 2000 .

[6]  Nikolas Rose,et al.  The Politics of Life Itself , 2001, The New Social Theory Reader.

[7]  Varvara Mitliaga,et al.  Networks and Netwars - The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy , 2002, Int. J. Law Inf. Technol..

[8]  J. Durlak The Language of New Media , 2002 .

[9]  Adrian Mackenzie,et al.  Transductions: Bodies and Machines at Speed , 2002 .

[10]  Matthew Fuller,et al.  Behind the Blip: Essays on the Culture of Software , 2003 .

[11]  Russell Shilling,et al.  Researching America’s Army , 2003 .

[12]  Andrew Murphie Electronicas: Differential Media and Proliferating, Transient Worlds , 2003 .

[13]  Ernest A. Edmonds,et al.  On physiological computing with an application in interactive art , 2004, Interact. Comput..

[14]  A. Galloway,et al.  Gaming: Essays On Algorithmic Culture , 2006 .

[15]  Tiziana Terranova ‘Futurepublic: on information warfare, bio-racism and hegemony as noopolitics” , 2007 .

[16]  N. K. Hayles Hyper and Deep Attention: The Generational Divide in Cognitive Modes , 2007 .

[17]  F. Popper From Technological to Virtual Art , 2007 .

[18]  G. Lovink Zero comments: blogging and critical internet culture , 2008 .

[19]  Paul Rabinow,et al.  Artificiality and Enlightenment: From Sociobiology to Biosociality , 2008, The Ethics of Biotechnology.

[20]  M. Cooper Life as Surplus: Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era , 2008 .

[21]  G. Lovink,et al.  Zero comments : Elemente einer kritischen Internetkultur , 2008 .

[22]  H. Chad Lane,et al.  UrbanSim: A Game-based Simulation for Counterinsurgency and Stability-focused Operations , 2009 .

[23]  N. Shukin Animal Capital: Rendering Life in Biopolitical Times , 2009 .

[24]  Stephen Graham,et al.  The Urban ‘Battlespace’ , 2009 .

[25]  A. Vaccari Unweaving the program: Stiegler and the hegemony of technics , 2009 .

[26]  B. Stiegler Taking Care of Youth and the Generations , 2010 .